:: Forget post-modernism ::

I'd be happy with "post-bs" ...

Because "the Gospel" has quite a different cultural flavor from one denomination to the other, I think the challenge is to make it so that people are informed quickly as to what is culturally variable, local flavor, and what is intrinsically relevant to Jesus' message, as well as the Holy Spirit's work in us. Because from embracing the simplicity and depth of that work will flow "the works." Jesus didn't succeed in changing His generation while He was alive. Paul did much better. And then Constantin came around. Then Luther. And then global awakenings poured all over the planet. Still, we debate as to what the church should look like. We're tired of the inhumanity of most of our churches when measured against ministry to the poor, including the poor in spirit which might not be so easily spotted in the crowd.

We're polarized between a need to protect the integrity of our own denomational values (after all it is difficult to know everything and we need to trust our teachers if we're to graduate), and the need to be relevant to our generation, which puts us at odds with some of the inherited dynamics we have become routinely comfortable with. But how many of us truly embrace the Gospel only in our formative years of salvation, and then come back to it years later when finally realizing that God's work is often silent, but really foundational and takes time, real time and real efforts.

I vote to elect a new expression: post-bs: post-barely_significant. That's the only "post" that can resist the test of time. When believers travail to articulate socially the living and beating heart of God's work through redemption, they will come up with something relevant and significant. But it can never become what we need to protect against the onslaught of a miraculous harvest. As soul pour into the kingdom, the kingdom should also pour in them from those who have been walking this path for a longer time.

As long as we hold to our denominational traditions without reserve, we express that the form is more important than the content, we reveal that the grid is actually for us the world, and not the worldview it was supposed to articulate through liturgical means.

I believe the only enduring value of liturgy is when it recreates the movement of approaching God with total transparence, with uncontrived fear and awe, and when it expresses the beauty and immediacy of God's response to us, but not only as a doctrinal assessment, but as an actual experience.

Just some thoughts...