Nonetheless, predicting the future is a worthwhile
enterprise. The genre of science/speculative fiction in its hard and soft forms
predicts in order to prophesy, to comment on the failings or the strengths of
our contemporary lives. Novels such as Brave
New World and Nineteen Eighty-Four
(classics, and for good reason), despite their age, continue to stamp on the
cosmetically enhanced face of contemporary narcissism-in-conformity. The future
will always prove to be an unintelligible puzzle, but pieces can be arranged to
present some kind picture of what it might be like, even if ultimately they do
not fit together perfectly.
Is the Christian Church a piece of this jigsaw? Of course.
But the future of the Church (or the Church of the future), like everything
else, can only be scripted on the basis of what is present and what is past.
The history of the Church provides clues for what could unfold because the
history of the Church is the framework from which it will unfold.
Craig Borlase’s 2159AD: A History of Christianity (DLT, 2009) is an interesting read because it
assumes the importance of the past for the future. It is a history of
Christianity written from the perspective of a Christian living in the year
2159. It is at once entertaining and curious to see Christianity past from the imagined
perspective of Christian future. The Church is alive and very well in China and
India; the evangelical wing of the Church morphs into the self-sufficient Hidden
Church; and the Independent Republic of the Latter Day Saints (formerly Utah)
eventually develops a cure for ageing and the military potency to strike lesser
nations who stand against its geopolitical and technological expansion. These
predictions are surely little more than present concerns recontextualised or taken
to extremes. Even some of the language Borlase uses perhaps betrays his own
assumptions: ‘Was there really quite so much fuss made over the ordination of
women and gays?’ (p. 11); and there is a House Church movement resulting from
the fall of Christendom, one that can ‘evolve’ and has ‘different expressions’
(p. 242), echoing for me the language of ‘fresh expressions’ and championing
the desirability of the novel rather than the stability of the traditional. These
things—post-Christendom, women in ecclesial leadership, LGBTI+ issues—are present
concerns; they might not be so in a century or two due to sociopolitical
developments that we simply cannot anticipate due to our historical
situatedness.
We cannot breathe out the future until we have first inhaled
the past. The future of the Church (or the Church of the future) grows from seeds
sown in the past, but only God knows which ones will actually germinate. Only
God knows how and in what directions the body of Christ will grow. Any prediction
about the Church of the future is a commentary on the Church of the present and
thus the Church of the past.
A most startling 'prediction' of the future is found in E.M. Forster's The Machine Stops. He basically predicted the internet (and the ramifications thereof) about 90 years before it happened.
ReplyDeleteI think the past is the only lens through which we can view the future. A knowledge of history, and history of the church and of theology is important. A basic knowledge of the history of the bible would also be useful, as a Christian, but that would probably get in the way of some people's agenda.
Yes, I read The Machine Stops for the first time not so long ago . . . but I think I read it too quickly, as it didn't leave much of an impression on me. But one of my plans for 2017 is to re-read a lot of the books on my 'non-academic' shelves, so I'll be giving it another look.
Delete