Comments on: Posts I’m Following http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/ Matt Wiebe's blog about faith and life. Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:51:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jac http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-434 Jac Thu, 07 Dec 2006 21:28:46 +0000 http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-434 I think this type of restriction should not be put on an existing church body. It would put pressure on people from 'without' to move when they may not be ready to, causing much division and general badness. Instead, the "no commuters" guideline may be more viable for an intentional community just being formed. Like Erika's church, it needs to be in place from day one. I also don't think that communities like Erika's are trying to be exclusive. They want to promote a whole life where the lines between church and home are blurred. Church communities like <a href="http://thesimpleway.org" rel="nofollow">The Simple Way</a> welcome anyone to "come and see". And seriously, how would an intentional community work if all it's members commuted from all over the city? Commuting facilitates a fragmented lifestyle, compartmentalizing church into just another appointment in the weekly schedule. --And it is a relatively new phenomena. Over the history of the church, commuting has not been possible until the mid- 1900's. ...and perhaps we have not yet examined the effects of this new-found mobility on the Church.... Overall, I think this also has to do with personal perspectives on what is community. I suppose it is safe to say that community <i>can</i> be formed in any context, regardless of distance. But what type of living arrangement would actually <i>encourage</i> the development and sustaining of community? Do we hold people at arm's length? ...or do we live and serve amongst our brothers and sisters? And most importantly, how would Jesus have done it? I think this type of restriction should not be put on an existing church body. It would put pressure on people from ‘without’ to move when they may not be ready to, causing much division and general badness.

Instead, the “no commuters” guideline may be more viable for an intentional community just being formed. Like Erika’s church, it needs to be in place from day one.

I also don’t think that communities like Erika’s are trying to be exclusive. They want to promote a whole life where the lines between church and home are blurred.
Church communities like The Simple Way welcome anyone to “come and see”.

And seriously, how would an intentional community work if all it’s members commuted from all over the city?
Commuting facilitates a fragmented lifestyle, compartmentalizing church into just another appointment in the weekly schedule. — And it is a relatively new phenomena. Over the history of the church, commuting has not been possible until the mid- 1900’s. …and perhaps we have not yet examined the effects of this new-found mobility on the Church….

Overall, I think this also has to do with personal perspectives on what is community.
I suppose it is safe to say that community can be formed in any context, regardless of distance.
But what type of living arrangement would actually encourage the development and sustaining of community?

Do we hold people at arm’s length? …or do we live and serve amongst our brothers and sisters? And most importantly, how would Jesus have done it?

]]> By: Matt http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-428 Matt Wed, 06 Dec 2006 01:28:24 +0000 http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-428 I hear ya bro. I'm attracted to the idealism of a missional community like this, but I wonder if it necessitates some kind of idealism that I don't like. Good feedback bro. The wrestle continues... I hear ya bro. I’m attracted to the idealism of a missional community like this, but I wonder if it necessitates some kind of idealism that I don’t like.

Good feedback bro.

The wrestle continues…

]]> By: Anthony Wiebe http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-427 Anthony Wiebe Tue, 05 Dec 2006 22:34:50 +0000 http://mattwiebe.com/2006/12/posts-im-following/#comment-427 I don't like (I know it shouldn't be reduced to my preference, but...) rules like the ones in this urban missional church. I respect and see where they're coming from with requiring people to live in the neighborhood, but grace and love don't have conditions - neither should a church. That's one of the things I like about WCV. At the vision night last month, Nathan adamantly denounced any notion that those moving into the church were of any higher rank in the church community. To him it is just another component of the community. I don’t like (I know it shouldn’t be reduced to my preference, but…) rules like the ones in this urban missional church. I respect and see where they’re coming from with requiring people to live in the neighborhood, but grace and love don’t have conditions - neither should a church. That’s one of the things I like about WCV. At the vision night last month, Nathan adamantly denounced any notion that those moving into the church were of any higher rank in the church community. To him it is just another component of the community.

]]>