"What kind of literature and what kind of life is the same question," Tom Stoppard The Coast of Utopia

Warnings

"In it's use of signs that move through time and space and which imitate the world beyond performance, seen and unseen, the theatre may well bear a likeness to that sensory mode of divine self-revelation attested in the classic texts of Christian faith. But, at least for the Christian, the theatre will not move beyond likeness to rival, claiming to emulate the Incarnation by summoning spirit or universal will to inhabit it's material signs" Max Harris. Theatre and Incarnation

Artaud on Theatre

The spectator must approach as they might a surgeon
"knowing, of course, that he will not die, but that it is a serious thing and he will not come out of it unscathed...He must be totally convinced that we are capable of making him scream" Antonin Artaud

Could we say the same of a sermon?

Shults and Zizoulas on the future

"The truth of history lies in the future, and this is to be understood in an ontological sense: history is true, despite change and decay, not just because it is a movement towards and end, but mainly because it is a movement from the end, since it is the end that gives it meaning." This is revealed not through analysis of cause and effect, but through the manifestation of the openness of the Father to the Son in the Spirit, which is the basis of the Christian claim that ontology must be understood in terms of communion. For human creatures, this means that being is oriented toward a future in which they share in this communion. This shapes Zizioulas's anthropology and ecclesiology. "The truth and the ontology of the person belong to the future, are images of the future." The church "has it's roots in the future and it's branches in the present."
John Zizioulas in LeRon Shults- Reforming the Doctrine of God (194)

What does this mean for the personhood of people outside the church?

Given our focus on the cross, isn’t it ironic that we are so afraid of one word or event representing many meanings and aspects of reality, that we feel the need to nail one absolute and perfect meaning down.

Heretic by omission

A Sydney rag had a “brief” piece recently, on studies of Jesus that don’t include Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Their main target was those putting forward a Christus Victor model, in which Jesus is victorious over the powers of evil. Which, as a theme, sounds reasonably biblical. Not to our mag
“This is not heresy by denial. It is heresy by omission.”
Apparently those who say anything about Jesus without PSA are heretics. The question has to be asked though, are those who omit Christus Victor heretics by omission too? It certainly seems to be a biblical theme.
Don Carson mentions in this very article “Christians are not at liberty to pick and choose which of the Bible’s teachings are to be treasured”.
Yet unless we are able to entirely plumb the depths of the bible’s teachings, to perfectly encapsulate everything in the entire word of God, every time we speak or write, then surely we will be labelled heretics by omission.
Perhaps this is the claim of those who push an exclusively PSA model, that they have everything wrapped up, and can express the entire truth, completely and fully, all the time.
Ironically a few articles later, the same writer is wondering why he is often called arrogant.

limited tastes of eternity

Over the weekend I was chatting with an Anglican bishop about the town I grew up in. At the moment the Anglican church there is fairly small and without a Rector. The strongest church in the town is the Baptist church (which I also grew up in). Thinking about the strengths of this church, the key one seems to be continuity. There are multiple families in the church who have lived in the community and ministered in the church for years. The people running the youth ministry have been there a long time. The church has plenty of newcomers, but seems to be able to retain people. Whether this is planned, or whether the church happens to attract the kind of people who stay in the area, the people there have history. They are a community that has ministered and lived, laughed, cried and forgiven together. They are a foretaste of the kingdom.
So, how can we be a foretaste of the eternal kingdom, when many in our church are 'just passing through'? Is it possible? I hope so, since I'm only going to be at my current church for another year and a half (the diocese moves you on). Still, I'd love your suggestions, since the temporary commitment thing is quite new to me.
My second question is, what would you do, going in as a new rector in this town? What do you do when there is a reasonably strong church (that isn't too dodgy) in your area? Obviously you don't want to undermine their work, but you probably do want some bums on pews too!