David E Fitch. I am reading your book and listening too. I will say this. I 100% agree with the distinction of the two powers and I believe this distinction is very helpful. I agree that when authors like Crouch and Langberg don't see this distinction, their analyses are very clumsy. Your two powers, as a tool to build an ecclesiology, is 100% helpful. An ecclesiology that protects leaders from wielding worldly power is far less prone to abuse. The language is helpful.
I think you are making a dichotomy that separates worldly power (government) and godly power that is far too rigid. What I mean by this is secular institutions funded by the coercive power of the state (taxes) DON'T necessarily run on coercion and power. If everyone was holy and loving and good, I think we would still agree to systems exactly like we have requiring taxes and big collaborative efforts. For example, public education or the interstate highway system or traffic lights are means to the common good. Most of the good in the world is created by these human inventions / institutions. So to articulate two categories with humanity, sin, and secularism on one side and Christians, church, and relational healing on the other, I think, is not helpful and actually harmful.
bro... cool ... you and I disagree - it's the Reformed/Anabaptist difference. ... And I also think you're not allowing for the fact that I see education as possible apart from worldly legislation, or enforced disciplines ... i.e. worldly power. Even in the world, where sin reigns.. space can be opened where such Godly power can 'rule' and organize education. But having said that ... you have (what I began to describe int he post as) a Reformed view of those powers. So feel to disagree with my (neo-Anabaptist flavor) theology of power... but in the book and elsewhere I have gone in great depth to outline the danger of such Reformed views of power, what I call the blurring ... and what the dangers lie are therein.
sure agree to disagree....but....I would not call my view reformed that is for sure. I would label my view "humanist." I like to say I am 99% human and 1% christian. In other words, I find collaboration with people enjoyable and meaningful. I certainly do not align with the idea "in the world, where sin reigns." That is just not my experience of people. So here in Durham, I hang with folks doing restorative justice work for all kinds of harms. I just finished a project with Duke pediatrics on how the city can serve victims of gun violence and brainstorm with victims on solutions. One of the solutions is to do restorative justice circles in schools and teach non-violent conflict resolution. I am on the board of a fentanyl crisis non-profit...etc etc. A friend of mine teaches critical thinking in the most depressed schools in the country. Here is my point. My life has meaning via things outside the church and I think the language you use tells people "ya, shouldn't be doing this work. The world is sinful and they can't bring real healing." That is neither my worldview nor my experience.
we're coming from 2 different narratives... and I'm not the least bit interested in condemning, judging your narrative... and I also applaud your work ... we may classify it differently,and see different value in that, we may see the way God works or if God works differently, based on our commitments within or from without Christian understandings, and so we interpret things differently... but before you say "the language you use tells people "ya, shouldn't be doing this work. The world is sinful and they can't bring real healing." .. give a read to the book. If you have no interest ... I nonetheless pray blessing on your work.
Yeah I have the audible version. I will listen this week. Personally, I find working within the church almost impossible and working in secular institutions easier.
This post is a great example of what it speaks of! I read it for information, but by the time I had finished reading, the “with of God’s way had seeped into my being to guide me toward the clarity I needed at this particular moment in time! Thank you, David! It wasn’t about what I was doing that was wrong, but inspiration toward The Adventure of following Jesus! The only temporal voice was quietly saying, “Get that book! Get that book! Get that book or I’ll :$&;!
“The metaphor of the traffic light is fantastic!!!
David E Fitch. I am reading your book and listening too. I will say this. I 100% agree with the distinction of the two powers and I believe this distinction is very helpful. I agree that when authors like Crouch and Langberg don't see this distinction, their analyses are very clumsy. Your two powers, as a tool to build an ecclesiology, is 100% helpful. An ecclesiology that protects leaders from wielding worldly power is far less prone to abuse. The language is helpful.
I think you are making a dichotomy that separates worldly power (government) and godly power that is far too rigid. What I mean by this is secular institutions funded by the coercive power of the state (taxes) DON'T necessarily run on coercion and power. If everyone was holy and loving and good, I think we would still agree to systems exactly like we have requiring taxes and big collaborative efforts. For example, public education or the interstate highway system or traffic lights are means to the common good. Most of the good in the world is created by these human inventions / institutions. So to articulate two categories with humanity, sin, and secularism on one side and Christians, church, and relational healing on the other, I think, is not helpful and actually harmful.
bro... cool ... you and I disagree - it's the Reformed/Anabaptist difference. ... And I also think you're not allowing for the fact that I see education as possible apart from worldly legislation, or enforced disciplines ... i.e. worldly power. Even in the world, where sin reigns.. space can be opened where such Godly power can 'rule' and organize education. But having said that ... you have (what I began to describe int he post as) a Reformed view of those powers. So feel to disagree with my (neo-Anabaptist flavor) theology of power... but in the book and elsewhere I have gone in great depth to outline the danger of such Reformed views of power, what I call the blurring ... and what the dangers lie are therein.
sure agree to disagree....but....I would not call my view reformed that is for sure. I would label my view "humanist." I like to say I am 99% human and 1% christian. In other words, I find collaboration with people enjoyable and meaningful. I certainly do not align with the idea "in the world, where sin reigns." That is just not my experience of people. So here in Durham, I hang with folks doing restorative justice work for all kinds of harms. I just finished a project with Duke pediatrics on how the city can serve victims of gun violence and brainstorm with victims on solutions. One of the solutions is to do restorative justice circles in schools and teach non-violent conflict resolution. I am on the board of a fentanyl crisis non-profit...etc etc. A friend of mine teaches critical thinking in the most depressed schools in the country. Here is my point. My life has meaning via things outside the church and I think the language you use tells people "ya, shouldn't be doing this work. The world is sinful and they can't bring real healing." That is neither my worldview nor my experience.
Brad,
we're coming from 2 different narratives... and I'm not the least bit interested in condemning, judging your narrative... and I also applaud your work ... we may classify it differently,and see different value in that, we may see the way God works or if God works differently, based on our commitments within or from without Christian understandings, and so we interpret things differently... but before you say "the language you use tells people "ya, shouldn't be doing this work. The world is sinful and they can't bring real healing." .. give a read to the book. If you have no interest ... I nonetheless pray blessing on your work.
Yeah I have the audible version. I will listen this week. Personally, I find working within the church almost impossible and working in secular institutions easier.
Looking forward to reading the new book, Dave, as soon as the Kindle edition is available in the Great White North.
thank you Bill!! for all your support in my life the past 20 years!!
You’re a good friend, Dave. Book is now in our Kindle Library and Imbi is busy reading it.
If I misused the word “temporal”, just shift it to “worldly”!😎
This post is a great example of what it speaks of! I read it for information, but by the time I had finished reading, the “with of God’s way had seeped into my being to guide me toward the clarity I needed at this particular moment in time! Thank you, David! It wasn’t about what I was doing that was wrong, but inspiration toward The Adventure of following Jesus! The only temporal voice was quietly saying, “Get that book! Get that book! Get that book or I’ll :$&;!
“The metaphor of the traffic light is fantastic!!!