I’m still mulling thru my response to Liquid Church.

I reallly like Pete Ward’s bold imagining and his attempt to earth things in both their theological and sociolgical setings.

Probably the only thing I am really pondering is his lack of emphasis on the need for regular gatherings which we would call church.

I re-read Acts last night to check out how the ‘ecclesia’ is expressed there and I have a feeling that it depends a bit on how you read it as to what you see. Was the ‘church in Jerusalem’ a group that all met together or were they a conglomerate of believers with some form of leadership / apostolic oversight who met spontaneously and regularly but without a set pattern?

Have we read Acts thru the eyes of our own ecclesiology?

I’m not sure but I sense we need to explore what Ward is saying and ask if we have had blind spots because of our conditioning, or if the church really needs to be a weekly gathering.

I feel uncomfortable messing with that idea – I feel uncomfortable with church as a network of communications – but is that just my prejudice?

I am so deeply conditioned that it is hard to imagine Ward’s ideas could be allowable let alone the way the church may function optimally in a missional context.

Still chewing!