Comments on: After SVS 2010: Jason Clark: Consumerism, Social Imagination, & Ecclesiology http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology Welcome. I'm a husband, a father, an ordained minister, and a postmodern pilgrim. You can check out some of the projects I'm involved with below. In this space I mostly write about the intersections of Christianity and culture. Wed, 16 May 2012 14:35:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Jason Clark http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1333 Jason Clark Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:30:46 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1333 Sorry guys, still on the road and unable to reply to your comments yet.... Sorry guys, still on the road and unable to reply to your comments yet….

]]> By: Pastoralia – Tales from the future of Christendom » New Series: Dialoging With The Society of Vineyard Scholars http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1321 Pastoralia – Tales from the future of Christendom » New Series: Dialoging With The Society of Vineyard Scholars Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:15:10 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1321 [...] Steve Hamilton: “Signs & Wonders: Wisdom & and the Reign of God” 3/10 – Jason Clark: “Consumerism, Social Imagination, and Ecclesiology” 3/11 – Jason Coker: “The Begging Bowl: Toward a Kingdom Economy of Gifts, Power, and [...] [...] Steve Hamilton: “Signs & Wonders: Wisdom & and the Reign of God” 3/10 – Jason Clark: “Consumerism, Social Imagination, and Ecclesiology” 3/11 – Jason Coker: “The Begging Bowl: Toward a Kingdom Economy of Gifts, Power, and [...]

]]> By: Jason Clark http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1314 Jason Clark Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:18:50 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1314 Hi guys, I'm on the road at the minute and will reply when I can later this week! Jason Hi guys,

I’m on the road at the minute and will reply when I can later this week!

Jason

]]> By: Jamie WIlson http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1312 Jamie WIlson Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:18:48 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1312 Hi Jason, I love the call for an articulate institutional imagination. Reading James K.A. Smith lately, I've been really thinking about pedagogy and how we might hep form the hearts of emerging leaders. What practices have you experimented with to help shape articulate institutional imaginations? How does your training on the ground level reflect this aim? Do we need an entirely new methodology if we identify the imagination as perhaps the primary arena of contest? Jamie Hi Jason,

I love the call for an articulate institutional imagination. Reading James K.A. Smith lately, I’ve been really thinking about pedagogy and how we might hep form the hearts of emerging leaders.
What practices have you experimented with to help shape articulate institutional imaginations?
How does your training on the ground level reflect this aim?
Do we need an entirely new methodology if we identify the imagination as perhaps the primary arena of contest?

Jamie

]]> By: Yet another Steve http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1309 Yet another Steve Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:14:06 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1309 Jason - can you further exppand on these two statements and, if possible, how they relate to one another? (I wish I could read your whole paper!): * Your point #3: "what is needed is not the absence of institutions, but an articulate institutional imagination" AND * "I began to ask: Was there anything in theology and church history to help respond to this problem?" Jason – can you further exppand on these two statements and, if possible, how they relate to one another? (I wish I could read your whole paper!):

* Your point #3: “what is needed is not the absence of institutions, but an articulate institutional imagination”
AND
* “I began to ask: Was there anything in theology and church history to help respond to this problem?”

]]> By: Steven Schenk http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1307 Steven Schenk Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:59:46 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1307 Seems like great minds think alike ...and even have the same name! Seems like great minds think alike …and even have the same name!

]]> By: Steven Schenk http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1306 Steven Schenk Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:57:17 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1306 <i>"In this way, you might have Oprah, but I have Jesus and he trumps Oprah to get me the life we are both trying to pursue: that is, the consumer dream."</i> This is one of the deepest frustrations we have in planting. We feel as though we are intentionally setting our faces against this 'consumer dream,' and so are fostering a church culture that many people (Christians and non) find unfamiliar and are unwilling to participate in. It is a struggle. I think I would ask for your encouragement more than your insight! The 'givenness' you speak of is a deep commitment for us, but is hard for many to even comprehend. It seems that 'givenness' is not a strategy for undermining consumerism so much as the opposite of consumerism; this makes it hard for people to even grasp the concept. They just hear 'church as I understand it,' no matter how hard we try to communicate vision for a life wrapped around the Kingdom instead of self. What are some of the ways you guys have navigated the tension (in attempting to reach people from a culture with a message that calls that culture in to serious question) in your planting experience? “In this way, you might have Oprah, but I have Jesus and he trumps Oprah to get me the life we are both trying to pursue: that is, the consumer dream.”

This is one of the deepest frustrations we have in planting. We feel as though we are intentionally setting our faces against this ‘consumer dream,’ and so are fostering a church culture that many people (Christians and non) find unfamiliar and are unwilling to participate in.

It is a struggle.

I think I would ask for your encouragement more than your insight!

The ‘givenness’ you speak of is a deep commitment for us, but is hard for many to even comprehend. It seems that ‘givenness’ is not a strategy for undermining consumerism so much as the opposite of consumerism; this makes it hard for people to even grasp the concept. They just hear ‘church as I understand it,’ no matter how hard we try to communicate vision for a life wrapped around the Kingdom instead of self.

What are some of the ways you guys have navigated the tension (in attempting to reach people from a culture with a message that calls that culture in to serious question) in your planting experience?

]]> By: steven hamilton http://pastoralia.org/church/after-svs-2010-jason-clark-consumerism-social-immagination-ecclesiology/comment-page-1#comment-1305 steven hamilton Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:56:29 +0000 http://pastoralia.org/?p=1567#comment-1305 one thing that has been resonating with me is that perhaps we have made relevance an ecclesial end in itself (perhaps an idol), so much so that we are cultivating affinity groups rather than being inclusive and invitational and expnasive regarding our identity as Church (perhaps this is merely further down the road of denominational-ism playing a part in this also). it's not that i think relevance cannot be distinctive and good, it can; as opposed to a much more - and easier - shallow relevance or at least one that is lost in the tapestry of relevant culture or "buying in" to a look/identity that is merely a facade, because i want to foster a church that can be a free and safe place to 'come as you really are, not as you pretend to be'; my tendencies are towar the missional-incarnational end of "doing church", which can be so entwined with culture that they lose a separate communal identity and rely only on personal identifications, thus what i like is that when we are incarnational (being embodied: 'coming from within') and missional (relating to or connecting with the mission of Christ in this now-and-not-yet age), i think we can be both relevant and peculiar at the same time...and that makes it significant...and i think i would rather be deeply significant than merely relevant. Perhaps it's the word-nerd in me, but i like significance rather than just relevance. do i need to become a skater-dude to reach out and love skater dudes and dudettes as Christ loves them? (if i tried to be a skater-dude, i might be relevantly silly to them) or can i, middle-class white male that i am, reach out in the love of Christ to poorer hispanic women or or wealthy black men or beanie-wearing skater-dudes with significance? thus the challenge to me seems to be: how can i cultivate space that invites and includes all of the above in the space i call church? this has me wondering very practically, based on your experience, how are you building essence in your community in SW London - given that is your context - that counters the prevailing consumer and individualistic identity markers that so many of us bear? one thing that has been resonating with me is that perhaps we have made relevance an ecclesial end in itself (perhaps an idol), so much so that we are cultivating affinity groups rather than being inclusive and invitational and expnasive regarding our identity as Church (perhaps this is merely further down the road of denominational-ism playing a part in this also). it’s not that i think relevance cannot be distinctive and good, it can; as opposed to a much more – and easier – shallow relevance or at least one that is lost in the tapestry of relevant culture or “buying in” to a look/identity that is merely a facade, because i want to foster a church that can be a free and safe place to ‘come as you really are, not as you pretend to be’; my tendencies are towar the missional-incarnational end of “doing church”, which can be so entwined with culture that they lose a separate communal identity and rely only on personal identifications, thus what i like is that when we are incarnational (being embodied: ‘coming from within’) and missional (relating to or connecting with the mission of Christ in this now-and-not-yet age), i think we can be both relevant and peculiar at the same time…and that makes it significant…and i think i would rather be deeply significant than merely relevant. Perhaps it’s the word-nerd in me, but i like significance rather than just relevance.

do i need to become a skater-dude to reach out and love skater dudes and dudettes as Christ loves them? (if i tried to be a skater-dude, i might be relevantly silly to them) or can i, middle-class white male that i am, reach out in the love of Christ to poorer hispanic women or or wealthy black men or beanie-wearing skater-dudes with significance?

thus the challenge to me seems to be: how can i cultivate space that invites and includes all of the above in the space i call church? this has me wondering very practically, based on your experience, how are you building essence in your community in SW London – given that is your context – that counters the prevailing consumer and individualistic identity markers that so many of us bear?

]]>