I read Liquid Church by Pete Ward and it is an interesting and thought provoking book on the future of the Church. His distinctions between Liquid Church and Solid Church are fascinating. Although I think the book was somewhat lacking in historical context and at times I found the theological arguments wanting (he could have flushed these out further), it was well worth my time.

There is so much I liked about the book and the concept of the fluid church. Unlike the solid church of modernity (indicating a concept that the church of modernity was often defined by a building, organizational structure or institution), Ward suggests that the emerging church will be based more on a network of relationship that is harder to identify and impossible to solidify.

Although I agreed with Ward through most of the book, I found myself questioning a couple of his proposals and concepts. First, he repeatedly talks about the fact that the emerging church will be less build around the common regular assembly (church worship service). Although I don’t believe that a church has to be a set number of people who meet every Sunday at 11:00am, there have throughout history beginning with the early church, been some kind of regular meeting/gathering for the local church. I am not saying that this has to be as “solid” as the modern church but it can’t be so “liquid” as not to exist. I also found the idea that the liquid/emerging church needs to embrace consumerism troubling. He is not referring to materialism (he makes that distinction clear), which we would all say is problematic, but the idea that humanity at its core are consumers and it is that driving desire we need to get to as the church. He has some great ideas and theories in this area but I struggle with any concept that says we need to give people what they are looking for just because they are looking for it and embrace that part of our culture. What happens when what someone is looking for is wrong or mistaken?

Once again, I found this book to be intriguing and stimulating. What I really appreciated is what I see in many emergent writings, the commitment to historic Christianity and orthodoxy (something often missed by its critics). To quote Ward: “A commitment to orthodoxy provides assurance in the midst of the flow.” (page 71)

Well off to Bolivia and hours of travel which hopefully will allow me amble time to catch up on my delinquent reading schedule.

I just finished The Search to Belong by Joseph Myers. It isn’t so much a book specifically on small groups (although its implications for small groups is fascinating) as much as it is a book on community and belonging. Myers uses the work of Edward T. Hall (four spaces: public, social, personal, and intimate) to discuss the concept of community and belonging with specific attention to its impact on the church.

I found his critique of the modern small group movement thought provoking and insightful with potentially radical implications for the church. I also found Myers’ use of Emergence theory (his slime mold analogy) within small group structures to be intriguing. It isn’t that I agree with everything that Myers proposes or that I will fundamentally change the ministry to which I give oversight and direction but it has impacted the way I look at community and belonging. It may not lead to radical change but I won’t look at my role in the same way again or have the same concept of what community and belonging is and isn’t.

This is one of those books that needs to percolate in my thoughts and it will no doubt ultimately lead to some interesting conversations in the future.

My next book: Liquid Church by Pete Ward.

I just finished the New York bestseller Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores The Hidden Side Of Everything by Levitt and Dubner. Much like my experience with Shane Hipps book, I was about a quarter through before I had to take a necessary reading detour with school last semester. After refreshing myself on the first 50 pages, I dove in and it was fascinating. This is one of those unique books that I found entering into a plethora of conversations on many different levels. Like a water drenched sponge, it saturated my thinking to the extent that I found it distilling into various areas of my thinking, reflections and conversations – coercing me to ask deeper questions about seemingly ordinary things.

Freakonomics may not have a solidifying theme but it does have a common thread as it discusses and critiques conventional wisdom from an economist point of view. I found myself repeatedly and verbally saying “fascinating” and “interesting” or “You’ve go to be kidding me” to the point where I was sure that others around me thought I was going crazy. All in all, it is an intriguing read and one that has made me question “conventional wisdom” and the fears and agendas it often feeds from.

If you haven’t read it yet…it is worth your time and money.

Well off to my next book: The Search to Belong by Joseph R. Myers.