You’ve anticipated my next post (when I get a chance to write it). In my mind your questions lie at the very heart of what drives us as ‘church’ – our imperative, if you like. It’s also why I think our eschatology is absolutely crucial (as I’ve written about in the past). If we don’t know where we are going, how do we hope to get there?

I confess a strong affinity with NT Wright and his recent exploration of inaugurated eschatology. From what I’ve read of some expressions of EC, despite the claimed attachment to NT Wright, I think they may be misreading him and have ‘overly-realised’ their eschatology (at least in terms of NT Wright).

One might argue that such a position is a ‘middle ground’ and therefore a compromise. I suppose it does explain my sympathy for EC but with a desire to see them ‘firm up’ their theology. It also means I full sympathise with the apparent dualism found in, perhaps the more evangelical, parts of established church. However, I remain sceptical about EC as a ‘branding exercise’ as Nelu terms it. I do wonder if it is simply a ‘re-balancing’ of the missiological scales with established church a bit behind the curve, as it always will be.

a few quick thoughts.

you seem rooted in mission tightly coupled with salvation.  and you’ve expressed a ‘right-here-right-now’ eschaton for ec.  a few questions:

how is salvation determined, expressed, moved toward, and realized in a ‘right-here-right-now’ eschaton?

how is salvation determined, expressed, moved toward, and realized in a ‘jesus has not yet returned but will some day’ eschaton?

how is salvation determined, expressed, moved toward, and realized in a ‘there really isn’t any future event like the parousia ever going to happen’ (lack of) eschaton?

because i think how you choose to engage the world and each other (works)in (or not in, as the case may be)  intentional faith communites will be different depending on what you perceive salvation to be in each of these types of eschaton, and how much weight salvation carries in your mission.

scott

Thanks for commenting.

Yes, you’re correct – that particular presentation of mission is not exclusive to EC, but where established church has come to encompass both missio Dei and missio ecclesia, EC still has that narrow focus. I’m not sure it is simply a ‘branding exercise’ though (but I suspect it is in many cases) and I think that it has much to offer the established church. If nothing else it forces established church to re-evaluate its practices. But I think it can do more than that as well if the church doesn’t get sucked in to its ‘trendiness’ and uses it to fulfil aspects of its mission and ministry where it is, sadly, failing.