Add new comment

Helge | Thu, 11/11/2021 - 18:37 | Permalink

Thx for collaborating, Andrew. I am pleased and blessed.

my option will underline your approach, but for me the hook for the „creative hope“ could be the interesting term „a future goodness!“ we can not imagine…

Consequences for our theology:
Ending denial: The end of the world (as we knew it) is just around the corner = an inner-worldly apocalypse
Theology’s blind spot: the end of the church is more likely, the resurrection less likely
 — The new hope (so far always theocratically constructed in the “imperial paradigm”, which does not help, since the “imperial Jesus has ridden us in the shit and we cannot be redeemed by the imperial him”): “a future goodness” (= quality of human coexistence) is not to be generated / hoped for theocratically, but only to be invented together in a “sociocratic” paradigm (creative hope).
 — A path with great courage, faith and trust without becoming blind to the catastrophe.
Perriman’s thesis:
Paul’s ecclesiology was based on the “apocalypse capacity” of his “ecclesia”. They have to survive the firestorm and try out the signs of goodness in their group (models of a post-apocalyptic world).
That is only possible together
 — charismatic (variety of gifts) sociocratic
 — subversive (anti-imperial-political)
 — with letting go of the old identities (the formula at that time: “the new man in Christ”) in order to create a new individual / community identity.

Referring to Bendells: The Concept of the 2 Denials (Foster) and the Church

I would interpret them as following: 
1 interpretative denial (cognitive dissonance)
When we accept certain facts, but interpret them in such a way that they do not destroy our need for psychological security.
Example: Yes, the church is shrinking, but the rest of the organization will remain, it is qualitatively strong / effective and that is the hip “small flock”.
Position of the OMEGAEKKLESIA:
The church will die out, not only as an organization, but also in its theological plausibility check: We live in a post-biblical era, i.e. we have to accept and address our Apocaypses with new revelation.
2 implicit denial (activist dissonance)
If we acknowledge the factual situation, but work on it with “blind” activism in individual contexts, without taking the truth of the overly complex factual situation seriously.
Example: The hectic restructuring of the large institution church always with the priority of the possible preservation of the organization (impossibility of thinking about one’s own extinction).
Position of the OMEGAEKKLESIA:
Abandonment of the maintenance mode at any cost: We are not building, but we are starting with the new building of the future on the basis of an ideological-pragmatic paradigm shift.
3 emotional denial (repression)
The truth of the facts is generally not accepted because it would disturb the person or society. Therefore it is “unethical” or “irresponsible” to preach the hard truth, to proclaim it with pressure / authority. The fear of apathy (= one stage of the mourning process) is too great, we must not take the risk.
Example church: Everything is done to deny the extinction signals, with overactivity or interpretative denial …: FreshX is the new sign of hope … There is still something going on …

My Plan and Position of the OMEGAEKKLESIA = the ecclesiastical of the new apocalyptic times: 
We should create Ausrottung of OMEGA course „as is the EXIT from “Christianity” as we know it: A new identity has to be found, postcolonial ekklesisa: We have to save the valuable remains such as “the idea of ​​future goodness”. We have to give up all imperial logics (Stefan Paas helps us). We have to recapture or recreate the idea of ​​the messianic process from old times (pre-imperial) without imperial attitudes, to describe the new „messianic hope“.

letting go the alpha-Course of false adaptation, letting come the more realistic (apocalyptic) omega-Course :-)

happy paradigm-shift!

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.