Aj Schwanz

It’s no surprise to regular blog readers (if there are any out there:  hello?  is this thing still on?) that I’m struggling with a direction to write.  Initially I blogged about the emerging church, but I connected mostly with Quakers (and funny enough, Quakers from “the other side” of our denominational spectrum).  Connections were forged, thoughts were shared, relationships were built.

And then a lull came.  It coincided with having my second child, so I figured it was just “adjustments to not having enough limbs or detachable ears” (with which to ignore the yowling) syndrome.  But it’s been a while, and I’m still unsettled.

The idea of writing about or studying Quakerism has no draw.  Talking about Quaker Distinctives makes my face scrunch up in a not-so-pretty way.  Likewise with the Emerging Church Conversation.  Yes, culture is changing; yes, young people don’t relate; yes, we need to come up with a new language; yes, this culture values discussion and talking about Relative Truth and lauding the independence of Doing Church When and Where I Feel Like It, Preferably St. Arbucks, And Don’t Tell Me That’s Not Right (see the aforementioned Relative Truth element).

I used to think of denominations more as manifestations of personality types:  more contemplative folks are drawn to Quakerism; extroverts bound with glee in the Charismatic movement; Nazarenes serve as the busy little bees that they are.  And I’ve gotten into trouble for saying that, folks saying, “I don’t fit in that mold!”  Of course not, not everyone does.  But at some point somewhere at some time it has to be okay to make a generality, yes?  Self Talk people say not to talk in absolutes, that they usually aren’t true:  “You *always* do this!”  “I *never* say that!”  But I’m talking *generally*:  if you know me at all, there’s almost always a loop hole that I can wiggle my way out of (even in that sentence, note the wiggle room).

I’ve been reading a really challenging biography:  The Heavenly Man - the Remarkable True Story of Chinese Christian Brother Yun.  He’s a contemporary that shares stories and thoughts and revelations and truth in a way that seems so relevant, so timeless.  I enjoy reading other authors such as McLaren, Claibourne, Campolo, Kimball, and have resonated with their ability to try and bridge the cultural gap; to note how culture is changing; to challenge complacent, birthright/inbred Christians to action.  I say inbred because our complacency reminds me of how DNA seems to become weak and flawed when continually mixed in the same pot.

Yun has been imprisoned, tortured, starved, all in present day China because of his faith.  He quotes scripture thoughout his stories, and it relates dead-on to his situations because he pretty much lived out the persecution of first century Christ followers!  So many times I read the Bible and wonder why the writers wrote what they did:  it makes so much sense in his life story.

At one point he mentioned that the house church movement was unified doctrinally until government rules were easing up some and other countries were able more easily to smuggle Bibles in.  Instead of just Bibles, they would put in denominational/doctrinal literature, and soon the house churches were aligning themselves with certain theology rather than being Christ/Bible followers.  These organizations also started sending other supplies to “help” the ministry - cameras, money, etc; and then the house churches started dividing over who got what and why they were “entitled”.  Yun does not blame the other organizations; he states that the house churches “succumbed to tempation”.

Yun shares how the Lord placed the call towards unification on Yun’s heart.  He and other house church leaders gathered together, disagreeing though they were.  One of the brothers, the leader of the largest house church movement in China, had a message from God that he needed to wash the feel of another brother whom he had had significant disagreements.  Before he got the chance, folks started arguing, nitpicking, taking sides.  As they were praying and getting ready to leave, abandoning hope for unification, the brother jumped up and started washing the man’s feet.  The man was amazed that such a respected individual would do such an act that he cried out and embraced him.  This started a movement of unifcation within the house church movement in China, with leaders being convinced that being united in Christ and forgiving one another and confessing sin was so much more important than the other quibbly stuff.

“We don’t want to follow our own pet doctrines any more.  We want to learn from one another’s strengths and change in whatever way the Lord wants, in order to make us stronger and closer to Jesus.”

“Although not all differences were ironed out, the leaders got to know each other for the first time, and saw how they had for more in common than they had reasons to remain separate.  They also found their theological differences centered upon issues that weren’t essential to the faith.”

He closes the chapter noting that the house church networks have joined a unity movement titled “Sinim” (although they’ve since dropped the name) and that the estimated number of believers in the network is 58 million.

!!!!

Now, what do I do with that?  It’s so beyond emerging church or Quakerism or anything like that:  it’s essential and core and fundamental (but not Fundamental).  And *that’s* what I want to blog about.  But I don’t quite know where to look  . . . .