I'm reminded of an American novel I once read, I think 'Chasing Francis' may have been the title.
It was recommended to me by an evangelical vicar who knew I was interested in more small c Catholic stuff and a more sacramental approach to things.
Apologies for the spoiler, but essentially it was about an American pastor who becomes interested in St Francis of Assisi and Franciscan spirituality.
He goes to Italy and knocks around with Franciscan friars and visits places associated with his hero.
He then returns to the US and tries to introduce the Franciscan way into his Protestant congregation. Some families leave. People object. Others take it on board. He ends up leaving with a small but committed coterie of followers nervous but excited about pioneering a new 'Franciscan' way of being church...
I imagine if the novel had been written a few years later the protagonist would have set up a YouTube channel, marketed podcasts and become some kind of online Franciscan 'influencer'.
What struck me was how the novel's protagonist didn't actually become Franciscan but sought to vire Franciscan principles into his non-denominational US context.
More than that, he became a religious entrepreneur taking his 'Franciscan' project (product?) out into the open market.
Don't get me wrong. I can think of RC and Orthodox 'ministries' that do the same.
The way John Mark Comer writes his marketing blurb reminds me f that, but then that's the milieu he comes from and the one that most of us now swim in given the nature of late capitalism.
There are Orthodox thinkers and writers who decry capitalism, but I do worry about those who seem to want to promote a kind of feudal Tsarist model as an alternative.
I don't know to what extent John Mark Comer's practice is Christ-centred or otherwise, but he does seem to be commodifying it in the way that many contemporary religious activists or influencers do.
On evangelicalism and sanctification... well, the Wesleyan tradition which gave rise to the Holiness and Pentecostal movements emphasised sanctification very strongly.
It's one of the reasons why many Orthodox can feel comparatively 'warmer' towards the Wesleyan strand within some Protestant movements than they are towards the more Calvinistic traditions (and we can argue to what extent those traditions are actually 'Calvinistic' of course).
Orthodox tend to see parallels, but not an exact equivalence, between Wesleyan 'sanctification' and 'theosis'.
We'd also feel no need to separate 'salvation' from 'sanctification' as if they are somehow seperate.
I imagine if the novel had been written a few years later the protagonist would have set up a YouTube channel, marketed podcasts and become some kind of online Franciscan 'influencer'.
The author of the book (Ian Morgan Cron) did in fact set up a podcast very much in the same vein as the book, and then later another podcast centred around the Enneagram (which at that point was experiencing something of a revival in certain Episcopal circles).
What struck me was how the novel's protagonist didn't actually become Franciscan but sought to vire Franciscan principles into his non-denominational US context.
Absent the commodifying aspect is that necessarily always a bad thing? There's quite a lot of this in evangelical circles - the cynical view would be that its an attempt to make up for the lack of an evangelical mind - the more positive version would be that at least evangelicals are open to learning from outside their own tradition (lectio divina was similarly popular a few years ago).
I'd say that evangelicals absorbing practices such as lectio divina or contemplative prayer wouldn't so much be compensating for the lack of an evangelical 'mind' so much as the adoption of a more holistic approach.
Which sounds terribly patronising of course.
I think there is an 'evangelical mind' and some sections of evangelicalism can be very cerebral, in a somewhat brittle sense.
But no, I don't think that evangelicals adopting or adapting practices or emphases from other Christian traditions or Big T Tradition is necessarily a bad thing.
Generally, I'd regard it in a positive light.
Equally, if the rest of us took a leaf out of the evangelicals' book and actually did some evangelism that would be a positive development too.
You've highlighted something though, in using terms like 'was similarly popular a few years ago.'
Evangelicalism is prone to fads.
They'll be getting into 'spiritual accompaniment' at one stage, then lectio divina a year or two later, without necessarily working these things into their modus operandi more permanently.
I've noted before how the late Dr Andrew Walker noted that no sooner had he completed a chapter of his seminal book on the UK restorationist movement than it was already out of date.
The evangelical scene is enterprising and responsive and that's a source of strength. The flip-side is that there's often a lack of continuity and the 'market' determines the direction of travel.
On a personal note, I adopted various Orthodox practices in my personal devotions for many years before becoming Orthodox.
Eventually I decided to become Orthodox rather than try to fuse selective or ersatz elements into my evangelical/post-evangelical practice.
I'm still evangelical of course in the broader sense of a commitment to the Gospel.
I wouldn't be so prescriptive as to say that because someone is into Ignatian or Franciscan spirituality they ought to become RC or if they 'speak in tongues' they should become a Pentecostal.
Far from it.
But I do think that there is something about going ad fontes rather than picking and choosing from a selective menu.
Which is why I said that if people use John Mark Comer's writings as a spring-board into exploring the older traditions from which his practices seem to derive - be they RC, Orthodox or whatever else - then that's all to the good.
None of these practices are ends in themselves, of course. They should draw us closer to Christ and to our neighbours.
You've highlighted something though, in using terms like 'was similarly popular a few years ago.'
Evangelicalism is prone to fads.
Popular in terms of books published, I'm not sure how well that maps to books consumed, as these things tend to stick around for longer, but equally I'm not sure that other movements aren't completely immune from that.
This makes me think of café church and bijou café church. And to wonder if or how the niche market premium is made manifest
Sorry to go back a few days. I've been quite busy recently and have been trying to catch up with this thread. @pease or somebody else, could you please explain what the different is between 'cafè church' and this rather more arcane variety, 'bijou café church'? How would I recognise which one I was encountering? Which of the two is being commended as better or worse, or alternatively less or more reprehensible?
My apologies further, I have not been able to reproduce the quotation that was responding to as I could not work out which or whose previous post was being referenced.
Ah. It was a somewhat frivolously imagined take on commodification in mass v niche markets. (Echoing an earlier reference to boutique café by chrisstiles, only with my hazy recollection of the word used. Not that I think it makes much difference for this purpose whether it's bijou café or boutique café.)
I have no idea if anyone has tried running a boutique café church for real. The concept was itself a somewhat satirical take on the commercialism (etc) suggested by the idea of "café church", back when café church first became a thing. (In the sense that if "café church" proved a success, we might soon start to see a market for more exclusive "boutique café church".)
My apologies for any misleading that might have resulted.
Comments
It was recommended to me by an evangelical vicar who knew I was interested in more small c Catholic stuff and a more sacramental approach to things.
Apologies for the spoiler, but essentially it was about an American pastor who becomes interested in St Francis of Assisi and Franciscan spirituality.
He goes to Italy and knocks around with Franciscan friars and visits places associated with his hero.
He then returns to the US and tries to introduce the Franciscan way into his Protestant congregation. Some families leave. People object. Others take it on board. He ends up leaving with a small but committed coterie of followers nervous but excited about pioneering a new 'Franciscan' way of being church...
I imagine if the novel had been written a few years later the protagonist would have set up a YouTube channel, marketed podcasts and become some kind of online Franciscan 'influencer'.
What struck me was how the novel's protagonist didn't actually become Franciscan but sought to vire Franciscan principles into his non-denominational US context.
More than that, he became a religious entrepreneur taking his 'Franciscan' project (product?) out into the open market.
Don't get me wrong. I can think of RC and Orthodox 'ministries' that do the same.
The way John Mark Comer writes his marketing blurb reminds me f that, but then that's the milieu he comes from and the one that most of us now swim in given the nature of late capitalism.
There are Orthodox thinkers and writers who decry capitalism, but I do worry about those who seem to want to promote a kind of feudal Tsarist model as an alternative.
I don't know to what extent John Mark Comer's practice is Christ-centred or otherwise, but he does seem to be commodifying it in the way that many contemporary religious activists or influencers do.
On evangelicalism and sanctification... well, the Wesleyan tradition which gave rise to the Holiness and Pentecostal movements emphasised sanctification very strongly.
It's one of the reasons why many Orthodox can feel comparatively 'warmer' towards the Wesleyan strand within some Protestant movements than they are towards the more Calvinistic traditions (and we can argue to what extent those traditions are actually 'Calvinistic' of course).
Orthodox tend to see parallels, but not an exact equivalence, between Wesleyan 'sanctification' and 'theosis'.
We'd also feel no need to separate 'salvation' from 'sanctification' as if they are somehow seperate.
The author of the book (Ian Morgan Cron) did in fact set up a podcast very much in the same vein as the book, and then later another podcast centred around the Enneagram (which at that point was experiencing something of a revival in certain Episcopal circles).
Absent the commodifying aspect is that necessarily always a bad thing? There's quite a lot of this in evangelical circles - the cynical view would be that its an attempt to make up for the lack of an evangelical mind - the more positive version would be that at least evangelicals are open to learning from outside their own tradition (lectio divina was similarly popular a few years ago).
Which sounds terribly patronising of course.
I think there is an 'evangelical mind' and some sections of evangelicalism can be very cerebral, in a somewhat brittle sense.
But no, I don't think that evangelicals adopting or adapting practices or emphases from other Christian traditions or Big T Tradition is necessarily a bad thing.
Generally, I'd regard it in a positive light.
Equally, if the rest of us took a leaf out of the evangelicals' book and actually did some evangelism that would be a positive development too.
You've highlighted something though, in using terms like 'was similarly popular a few years ago.'
Evangelicalism is prone to fads.
They'll be getting into 'spiritual accompaniment' at one stage, then lectio divina a year or two later, without necessarily working these things into their modus operandi more permanently.
I've noted before how the late Dr Andrew Walker noted that no sooner had he completed a chapter of his seminal book on the UK restorationist movement than it was already out of date.
The evangelical scene is enterprising and responsive and that's a source of strength. The flip-side is that there's often a lack of continuity and the 'market' determines the direction of travel.
On a personal note, I adopted various Orthodox practices in my personal devotions for many years before becoming Orthodox.
Eventually I decided to become Orthodox rather than try to fuse selective or ersatz elements into my evangelical/post-evangelical practice.
I'm still evangelical of course in the broader sense of a commitment to the Gospel.
I wouldn't be so prescriptive as to say that because someone is into Ignatian or Franciscan spirituality they ought to become RC or if they 'speak in tongues' they should become a Pentecostal.
Far from it.
But I do think that there is something about going ad fontes rather than picking and choosing from a selective menu.
Which is why I said that if people use John Mark Comer's writings as a spring-board into exploring the older traditions from which his practices seem to derive - be they RC, Orthodox or whatever else - then that's all to the good.
None of these practices are ends in themselves, of course. They should draw us closer to Christ and to our neighbours.
Popular in terms of books published, I'm not sure how well that maps to books consumed, as these things tend to stick around for longer, but equally I'm not sure that other movements aren't completely immune from that.
I tend to think though, that there's an accelerated form of this within contemporary evangelicalism though.
But 'The Market' spreads its tentacles everywhere.
My apologies further, I have not been able to reproduce the quotation that was responding to as I could not work out which or whose previous post was being referenced.
I have no idea if anyone has tried running a boutique café church for real. The concept was itself a somewhat satirical take on the commercialism (etc) suggested by the idea of "café church", back when café church first became a thing. (In the sense that if "café church" proved a success, we might soon start to see a market for more exclusive "boutique café church".)
My apologies for any misleading that might have resulted.