Abnormal Normalities

What is normal? We measure normalness by comparison to some other relative thing, person, place, or idea. By contrast to another object or person, normalness changes, which would make normal not normal. Such a topic could appear to be merely philosophical in nature but has drastic implications to faith and life:
Was Jesus normal? Most of my contemporaries "normally" reply "no." But what if Jesus was normal? What if it is everyone else that is not normal? If that is the case then why do we say things like, "That is perfectly normal (for someone to speak, act, or behave in a certain manner)?" Maybe it's not perfectly normal and we need to strive toward the normality of Jesus. We would be outcasts for being "unnormal" but yet might achieve genuine "normalness."
Is what is normal always right? We all screw up and make mistakes or in a more biblical sense, "sin," therefore it may seem normal to possess flaws. The ideas of "total depravity" and "original sin" begin here. So if we are depraved and sinful then we cannot be right. So "normal" cannot be right unless "normal" is really right and we are genuinely not normal in our transgressions. So why don't we quit saying that it is normal to fall short of the glory of God and seek the normality of Christlikeness? Is it because it costs us something and sacrifices our "normality?"

An Unclear Painting

I've been disenchanted for some time now about the "institutional church." I was disillusioned enough to even be a part of such. Something different is happening now. I have "criticized the current consciousness" (as Walter Brueggemann would say) of the institutional church and am beginning to see an ever-so-unclear and fluid painting of who we are to be as a church. If I must speak within the constrains of modernism and provide a mission statement or definitive explanation of who we are as the church, it would go something like this:
If we have to call ourselves something, we’ll call ourselves "the church" – not because we are so full of ourselves that we think we are THE church, but because that’s simply who we are collectively. We are the church. There is no need to distinguish ourselves as a separated entity or place. We are not a “local congregation” (whatever that means). The only reason any label such as “the church” is necessary is because we have been set apart by God as His people for His service. We are the ekklesia - the community of Christ-followers. We do not attend church because we are the church. We are not a place. We are a people. We worship - but not as most Western, "conservative" evangelical Christians may perceive worship. We worship together everyday.
The word "we" does not distinguish us as a tribe, clan, exclusive club that requires membership. The "we" only continues to exist if the "we" live with the "they" in order that the "they" may encounter the very love of God. "We" and "they" are distincly different but live in community one with the other. From what is aforesomentioned, the church looks unclear. It is indeed unclear yet it is clear. Like air - One cannot see air yet the air is so very clear. The church may be intangible and immeasureable but participates so intricately in the formation process of people that it secondarily becomes distinctively recognizable.