Planetary conviviality, human flourishing...

You may casually dismiss this stuff, but this is the future of Evangelical religion. It will be toned down, somewhat, when it's taken out there to the hinterlands, and localized, but this sort of pantheistic, radically subjective, mystical ad copy is not transparently evil to people acclimated to Christian religion by men like Tim Keller. They're good prep for emotive blather such as "planetary conviviality."

Again, from Union Theological Seminary's e-mail update:

FORREST CHURCH MEMORIAL LECTURE: Dr. Keller [not Tim] develops the relational potential of a theology of becoming. Her books reconfigure ancient symbols of divinity for the sake of a planetary conviviality—a life together, across vast webs of difference...

THE ART OF INCLUSION; A Collaborative Art Project: Layered on multiple panels of hand made paper from recycled Bibles, the Art of Inclusion is an interactive, multimedia installation that weaves together imagination, emotion, and thought about a subject most often encountered in the context of inherited settings and weighted by the past experience of others: 'God'. Using social media as a microphone, the artist, Diana Doherty, invites us, regardless of age, race, religion, gender identity, color, disability, sexual orientation, or national origin, to respond to the question, "What is God to you?” Responses will be collected, recorded, and embedded directly as a sound feed in the visual installation.

Tim Bayly

Tim serves Clearnote Church, Bloomington, Indiana. He and Mary Lee have five children and fifteen grandchildren.


Uhg...This is why we are in desperate need of objectivity in the pulpit.

Thanks for the posts!


For lots of examples of how this sort of stuff has already gotten a solid beach head within broadly evangelical American Protestantism, see the Facebook page for Voddie Bauchman Ministries:

He aptly summarizes the apologetic for this sort of stuff this way:

This [liturgical mimes] is an example of what I like to call the "Affective Principle" of worship. The Regulative Principle views worship as being limited to ONLY those elements revealed explicitly in Scripture (prayer, songs, preaching, sacraments, etc.). The Normative Principle views worship as being limited to those elements revealed in Scripture AND those elements not forbidden (as long as they are 'consistent with' the revealed elements).

The "Affective Principle" says, "If ANYONE finds it worshipful (i.e., it makes them FEEL God's love, presence, or power as THEY understand it), then, it is acceptable worship. In essence, the only limiting factor in the Affective Principle is the individual... ANY individual. For example, if YOU feel worshipful, but your neighbor objects, then your neighbor is guilty of "putting God in a box," or "judging" YOUR worship experience. In any case, he's wrong. Why? Because YOU felt close to God, and that's ALL that matters!

This has given us prayer labyrinths, sandboxes, interpretive painting, and now... MIMES! There are virtually NO BOUNDARIES! Worship is in the 'heart' of the beholder. Gone is any understanding of the danger of Nadab and Abihu's "strange fire" (Lev 10:1; Num 3:4; 26:61), or Uzzah's mishandling of the Ark (2 Sam 6:6–7). Worshiping the Lord in "Spirit and Truth" (John 4:23–24) has given way to worshiping the Lord in the "Spirit of the Age."

This is not the question of "Contemporary versus Traditional" with which so many are familiar (and fed up!). This is a much more fundamental question about the very nature of worship. Who is God? How do we worship him? Are there limits? What are those limits? How do we know? Why does it matter? These are just a few of the questions we must answer when considering things like this.

Hey, man, you are disturbing my vast webs of difference...

Add new comment