Email a copy of 'Gone Canopy' to a friend

* Required Field

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...    Send article as PDF   

10 Responses to “Gone Canopy”

  1. Barnabas says:

    The issue is the priority of desires and their satisfaction.As you conclude maintenance of the light in the appropriate way, is healthier than seeking to impose a canopy not acknowledged.Idolatry of various shades seeking coverage of convenience.Sadly, the pain of false contact, connection and communication can birth unhealthy fruits.The depersonalisation of individuals by institutional and structural thinking(vested interest politics of the public and personal), that abstracts and encapsulates creates an inheritance than can morph in various ways. Casual peacemaking and conflict resolution increasing the dissonance.Wilberforce’s journey of enlightenment towards the evils of market thinking, giving slavery its justification, being an example from non communist camp.Attitudes that influence behaviours.Spirit as well as Truth. Women at the well comes to mind. Thirsting for …. ?

  2. Hank says:

    Can you give some actionable examples of what churches should be doing to “get their own house in order”?

  3. Mike Metzger says:

    Hank: Yes. Google Christopher West and sign up for one of his “Theology of the Body” immersion courses.

    On the home front, I am planning on doing a similar set of weekends, reminding Christians as to: 1) why we have a physical body, 2) what physical sensations (erection and orgasm) point toward, 3) what nuptial union represents, 4) and why marriage is one of – if not the central – metaphor for the gospel.

    These sorts of candid discussion are too rare in today’s church. Too often, Christians are prudish or Puritanical. Prudish Christians are afraid to candidly discuss sex, trying to shield their kids from it as though it is evil. The backlash is kids experimenting – as well as marriages characterized by frigid wives and frustrated husbands (I know this from my days as a counselor). Puritanical churches teach “Thou Shalt Not,” failing to recognize they are calling on a canopy that most listeners cannot see. Neither works. There is a better way.

    Christopher and I are essentially translating the work of Pope John Paul II who, in the late 1970s, reminded the church of why human beings have a body in the first place. Might be the best example out there.

  4. George says:


    Interesting you mention Lincoln. I fear a civil war in the making. Not necessarily the same as in the 1850’s–1860’s. But one never the less where a polarizing set of differences in social mores creates a gap in two sects that no longer will be able to live together in harmony. Whether that makes for war or isolation between the two opposing groups is yet to be seen.

    It’s difficult to see how the United States can remain united when divisions in the basic fundamentals of living become solidified in two opposing cultural mandates.

  5. Barnabas says:

    Thanks 4 the prompt Mike.

  6. Scotty Greene says:

    Ahhh, the “gone canopy” that as, described here, also included mysogeny and slavery. It will not be missed. A reminder: virtually all legal definitions of marriage omit the word “Love.” As did this reflection.

  7. Barnabas says:

    Any observations on and 7M ?

  8. Barnabas says:

    A clearer link

  9. Mike Metzger says:

    Barnabas: Interesting work (Lance Wallnau). Never heard of it, however. Of course, I haven’t heard of 99.999999999% of the stuff out there!

  10. Barnabas says:

    OK.Thanks 4 flag.

Leave a Reply