CM: the reluctant bride

While postmodern Christ followers may condemn inherited church people of being Borg-ish (see last entry), modernist church leaders condemn emerging church people of being a reluctant brides.

Last year I team taught a course entitled, “Guiding Principles for the people of God in a postmodern world.” The most FAQ was how to make disciples — people who obey Jesus from a heart of love — among people between the ages of 20-30. Here is how participants expressed their frustration:

“Here is one general frustration I have: A lack of genuine commitment. Not just to spiritual things (church, personal study, etc.) but a lack of commitment in general. Commitment to work, to relationships and family.”

“Frustrations: They have a lack of commitment.”

“Frustrations [from a pastor under age thirty]… HIGHLY CAPABLE…yet low overall commitment… My frustration is in connecting with this group of people. Not just seeing them connecting for a while then disappear then re-appearing…they are a fluid group…which is cool and frustrating!!”
So can the Bride remain uncommitted?
Would that not frustrate the Groom?!

Marriage involves commitment that leads to greater depth of relationship and birth of society. Marriage represents the ultimate unity of spirit and soul, culminating in bodily oneness. From this union children are born.

Oneness requires the security of righteous acceptance, selfless encouragement, fidelity (no competitors) and unconditional love that “always protects, always trusts, always hopes, [and] always perseveres” (1 Cor. 13:7). Such security requires commitment.

One’s wedding day represents the ultimate commitment in human life, a decision of total partnership and sharing “for better or worse.” But for postmodernists, commitment and submission have resulted in the worst.

Translation: "You are divorcing dad. Why can't I divorce my brother? I can't stand him either!"

Many young people fear commitment because they have seen vows broken by their parents. Rampant divorce has hindered them from understanding the value of commitment, submission and sacrificial love—necessary ingredients to enter into the deepest of all relationships.

Invariably in the definitions of church that I have seen, some variation of the word “commit” shows up.

“believers who are committed to being a church…”
“committed to the authority of the Word of God…”

I attempted to define the church once (see Sept.8, 06 entry “homework assignment”). And quite frankly, the definition was not bad (as I unabashedly pat myself on the back). Yet, it was singularly unhelpful (as I slap myself on the back of the head) because it was unwieldy and uninspiring to me and incomprehensible to others.
As I reflected on this dilemma, it occurred to me that the apostle Paul described the church as a “she,” as a woman, a bride (Ephesians 5:22-33).

I realized that asking for a definition of the church would be like someone asking, “Paul, could you define your wife for me please?” The question just doesn’t sound right. Now, “Tell me about your wife,” that’s completely different.


You see, woman is the apex of creation—the beauty that reflects and appreciates God’s beauty, the holistic personality, the completion of all that was lacking in Man. Who will deny that women are not more beautiful, more complex and mysterious than men?!

The perfect woman…
And woman, specifically a bride, is what Paul uses to help us understand the complex nature and beauty of the Church. This metaphor challenges both the modernist tendency toward an institutional church and the postmodernist tendency toward an ephemeral church.
Jesus’ Church is not a business (contra some modernist views). Though the bride’s beautiful body is highly organized with organic systems, I cannot say that internal medicine has ever been the focal point of my relationship with my wife.
Jesus’ Church is not amorphous (contra some postmodernist views). As any groom will appreciate, the bride’s beautiful body has form!

And for local church to be Church, the postmodern allergy to commitment must be overcome so that the story can have the proper French ending, ils vécurent heureux et eurent beaucoup d'enfants jusqu'à la fin de leurs jours. (And they lived happily ever after and had many children)!

CM: Borg or bride?

“Every few hundred years in Western history there occurs a sharp transformation…. Within a few short decades, society rearranges itself—its worldview, its basic values, its social and political structure, its arts, its key institutions. Fifty years later, there is a new world. And the people born then cannot even imagine the world into which their own parents were born. We are currently living through just such a transformation.”
Peter Drucker, in Postmission, 74.

Drucker is in essence saying that fifty years from now we could be facing a world as starkly different to us as the Enlightenment would have been to the Middle Age monk. The West is undergoing tectonic cultural change. While these changes are fundamentally the same in Europe as in North America, the ramifications and outworkings can nonetheless be dissimilar.
A mentor of mine, Tom, would here interject his refrain, “You realize that we are living in significant times!” Indeed, and we church leaders therefore have a tremendous responsibility in guiding the people of God through the vicissitudes of the postmodern period into the pre-whatever-it-may-be future.

So let’s take a look into the future, and specifically, at the Tendara Colony in the year 2348…

This is story of Annika Hansen. Annika's parents were unconventional scientists who left Federation space, in their vessel the Raven, to perform experiments in pursuit of some unique secret theories. On Annika’s sixth birthday, they encounter a Borg vessel.



(Note: The Borg are a race of humanoids in Star Trek. The Borg claim to seek to "improve the quality of life for all species" as they pursue their quest for perfection. The Borg function as automatons, their minds are collectively connected to the Borg Queen. They are characterized by relentless pursuit of targets for assimilation, thus the show describes the Borg as "the ultimate consumer" against whom "resistance is futile.")



Annika’s parents studied the Borg ship for a long while, but Annika didn’t have a good feeling about all of this. With reason, because the Hansen’s scientific curiosity pulled them in to a trap! (add your own scary music here)

They are detected. Annika’s parents appear to have been killed. She is assimilated and raised as a Borg. Her Borg name becomes "Seven-of-Nine."



So, when she was very young, Annika lost touch with her human side. Seven-of-Nine has had no experience of socializing as part of an adult group. In fact, any individual characteristics she once possessed are now suppressed.


Many postmodern people feel this is what has happened to the Church, a beautiful young girl, the bride of Christ, has been assimilated by a sinister culture—modernism. Today, they feel, the church is more Borg than bride, more machine (read institution) than woman. She is emotionless, without community, and in the collective only one way of thinking is allowed.

But there is hope!


When the Borg are compelled to form an alliance with the crew of Star Fleet's U.S.S. Voyager, Captain Janeway requests that a single Borg act as a representative of the collective. Guess who is chosen?!

During a conflict, the Voyager crew is forced to sever Seven-of-Nine’s link to the Borg collective. She goes into shock and her human side starts to reassert itself, rejecting her Borg implants. With her human and Borg elements in constant conflict, Seven-of-Nine is in physical danger!

Her first instinct is to return to the Borg, but the Captain won't allow it. So the Doctor replaces many of her Borg components, making her far more human than she has been for nearly 20 years.

THE END (play your own happy music here)


To be continued…