Consuming the Gospel

A few weeks ago, I asked the question if it was possible to turn The Gospel into an idol. You can read that post HERE.

What prompted that post was a negative conversation that occurred by someone saying that they didn't hear "their gospel." This statement has at its root many layers of problems that are facing the church today.

Is the gospel personal? Absolutely.
Is the gospel social? Absolutely.

But when we make it one over the other, we have changed the transformative power of the gospel and made it into a commodity of religion. We are of course a consumer culture. But the gospel is never something to be consumed.

As soon as the gospel has its limits, the transformational power of the resurrection has been co-opted for personal interest, comfort, tradition, power, and consumption.

Consider this very real scenario...what is emerging in Christianity is the church of the global South. Primarily, the global South is made up of developing nations and third world nation states. The church and Christianity is exploding in the global South, whereas it is disappearing in the West. The version of Christianity however, looks very different. Its very tribal in its existence. It appears much more pentecostal in nature, as the spiritual aspect of faith is heightened in these parts of the world. The notion of prosperity is also gaining ground. And even though much of the West does not participate in these "types" of Christianity, does it mean that the global South isn't teaching gospel? Is it possible that the gospel is JUST THAT BIG?

Gospel is defined:
1. The proclamation of the redemption preached by Jesus and the Apostles, which is the central content of Christian revelation.
2. A similar narrative.
3. a doctrine maintained to be of great importance

So lets go back to the initial argument... is the gospel ours to claim, and ours to define when its not heard (as we prefer it heard)?

In the particular case I'm referring to, there was not a liturgical time set aside where the gospel (text from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John) was read. What did occur was a narrative approach to show how the gospel is interlaced throughout the totality of scripture.

The argument defined what equals gospel, and what does not equal gospel. The argument makes the gospel totally liturgical in its methodology and practice. The argument denies God's ability to speak gospel outside of the liturgical hour and outside of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. The argument limits God and is dangerous. The argument was made from the standpoint of something to be consumed during the liturgical hour.

That's my two cents anyway...

Peace,
Ross

Can the Gospel become an Idol?

Can the Gospel become an idol?

I know, I know. I'm treading heretical waters with this post, but I heard a story yesterday that got me thinking about the idea of worship, gospel, and idolatry.

First, I must say that the Gospel is the single most liberating, reconciling, redemptive and transformative article known to man. It is the story and words of Jesus - His life, death, and resurrection.

Having said that, I'll bring you into the story...

In many mainline/traditional worship settings, the reading of the Gospel is a weekly occurrence. And over time, I suppose that the routine of reading the Gospel becomes almost worshiped, as part of the assumed liturgy.

This particular church was changing things up however. For the next year, they were going to be approaching the Bible through a narrative lectionary - showing how God's narrative from Genesis through Revelation points to Jesus and prepares the way for His kingdom (that the Gospel is present from creation - that is God's narrative).

Last Sunday was focusing on a story from Genesis; the story of Abraham and Sarah - two unlikely and impossible candidates to usher in God's kingdom as a foretaste of God's economy embracing the unlikely and impossible (i.e. Jesus - a baby, non-military or government, born of a virgin).

The connection was impeccable and showcased the methodology of the Gospel even in the earliest parts of the Bible.

Following the service a number of people complained that "I don't like it...I didn't get MY Gospel!"

Depending on how you read that statement, there's a number of problems. First of all, the singular nature of the Gospel. But that's a whole other post. What I took from it was the complete disregard for the worship experience - the leading up to the message, which pointed to the Gospel, and the message itself that was devoid of actual text coming from Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, but which was clearly explained to point to the Gospel - that's the whole point of this year's narrative lectionary approach.

These people have made their Gospel reading an idol. This lifetime of routine has created a singular method capable of acceptable worship. And that, in my opinion, is idolatry.

Idolatry is a pejorative term for the worship of an idol, a physical object such as a cult image, as a god, or practices believed to verge on worship, such as giving undue honour and regard to created forms other than God, or the worship of a particular method...Man commits idolatry whenever he honours and reveres a creature, practice, or experience, in place of God.

Whenever we fool ourselves into the notion that only a particular liturgy is acceptable worship, we are in essence worshiping that particular style, method, or liturgy. If worship exists only with pipe organs, or rock bands, or the reading of the Gospel, or on Sunday, or any other accouterments of worship, we become slaves to the idols of what points us toward God.

The argument was purely based on a missed method. And when the method equals worship, the method has become an idol.

My prayer is that we would learn to see God in everything: Old Testament, New Testament, pipe organs, rock bands, church, and the world. God's kingdom is being unveiled before our eyes, and if we continue to commodify where God can be, and is present, we will surely miss God and become idolators of even truly great things, like the Gospel.

Peace,
Ross