From Jenny Lyus :
I don't have any particularly developed ideas about the next Big Service, but I think that the last service was so powerful that it should follow on in some way, rather than being on a randomly different theme. I think that aspects of the last section of the previous service could be developed to explore what can be gained from mystery. Underneath the experiences of the presence/absence of God there is often a lot to do with certainty vs uncertainty as well. It seemed to me that the narrative of what people were saying last time in their testimonies was generally that they had initially experienced a very real faith, with experiences of the presence of God and then events in their lives turned all this on its head, to move into a time of absence and uncertainty. However, Tim's story's ending (and the hinted endings of the other stories) was that he had found a way to live out his faith in a way that held both absence/presence and certainty/uncertainty in tension. I think that this could be developed a lot more in a further service, as a positive progression in our faith journey.
The feeling of such a service would probably be mystic with aspects of neo-monasticism which we talked a lot about a while ago. Does anyone know much about negative theology/ via negativa as this sounds interesting? I've read things which touch on it, and would like to find out more about it. The basic idea is that we can only know what we don't know about God/ God is incomprehensible and the only thing that is comprehensible about God is His incomprehensibility. I think it's associated a lot with Thomas Aquinas and the Greek Orthodox church, but I'm sure there are people in the group who will know a lot more about it than me!
"
Dionysios the Areopagitis taught that we should enter the 'Divine Darkness' by way of the apophatic or 'negative' theology. This is " the perfect way" - the only way that is fitting in regard to God. For God, of His very nature, is unknowable. Therefore this 'way' leads us finally to total ignorance. All knowledge has as its object that which is. Now God is beyond all that exists. So in order to approach Him it is necessary to deny all that is inferior to Him, that is to say, all that which is. If in seeing God one can know what one sees, then one has not seen God in Himself but something intelligible, something that is inferior to God. It is by unknowing that one may 'know' Him (should we say 'live Him'?) Who is above every possible object of knowledge. Proceeding by negations one then ascends from the inferior degrees of being to the highest, by progressively setting aside all that can be known, in order to draw near to the Unknown in the darkness of absolute ignorance. For even as light…and especially, an abundance of light, renders darkness invisible; even so the knowledge of created things, and especially excess of knowledge, destroys the ignorance which is the only way by which one can attain to God Himself.4"
This obviously is very related to the previous service, but I think could be developed in different ways to celebrate the mystery and unknowing, rather than trying to overcome it. e.g. I liked the envelopes last time - perhaps this time we could ask the congregation to write down something which they have gained from mystery/unknowing and to place them in envelopes for other people to find? I was thinking of lots of Byzantine style icons and mystic quotes (we could also touch on issues of idolatry in religion if people wanted).
Alternatively, if people don't like this idea, what about exploring Weak Theology? Again this is something I know very little about, but it sounds very interesting:
"Weak theology is a manner of thinking about theology from a
deconstructive point of view. The style of thought owes a debt to
Jacques Derrida, especially in light of his idea of a "weak force." Weak theology is weak because it takes a non-dogmatic, perspectival approach to theology. Proponents of weak theology believe that dominant contemporary explications of theology are inherently ideological, totalizing, and militant. In response, weak theology expresses itself through acts of interpretation.
According to
Caputo , the distinctive reinterpretive act of weak theology has resulted in the notion of the weakness of God. In the body of thought, the paradigm of God as an overwhelming
physical or
metaphysical force is regarded as mistaken. The old God-of-power is displaced with the idea of God as an unconditional claim without force. As a claim without force, the God of weak theology does not physically or metaphysically intervene in nature. Weak theology emphasizes the responsibility of humans to act in this world here and now. Because God is thought of as weak and as a call, weak theology places an emphasis on the "weak" human virtues of
forgiveness ,
hospitality ,
openness , and receptivity. In each of these virtues, a
metaphoric "power of powerlessness" is at work.
Gianni Vattimo ,
John D Caputo , and
Jeffrey W. Robbins have recently completed works that further develop the idea of a weak theology." see
http://www.answers.com/topic/postmodern-christianitywhere this quote was from.
A service on Weak Theology could explore issues around power in the church, and our conceptions of the power of God. It could also be quite outward looking as there would be an emphasis on personal responsibility (although we would have to be careful about how we handled this).
What do people think about these ideas?
