the new tribalism (part II)
Taking up where we left off in the last blog in this subject, we now stand in what has been called the postmodern period. And with the demise of the modern and the rise of the postmodern, the whole missionary deal has gone and shifted on us; we are now back on genuinely missional ground. And it is this that is forcing us towards a re-think on our idea/conception of ecclesia.
In the contemporary situation, the vast majority of people around us (certainly in Australia, UK, Europe and increasing the U.S.) range between m1 and m3 distant to where the church generally stands. In this situation the average church’s attractional outreach is going to cut it any more. Alpha (evangelistic groups), evangelistic services, and friendship evangelism will reach within our own cultural framework (m0 - m1), but are seldom, if ever, effective beyond it.. To reach beyond significant cultural barriers we are going to have to adapt a missionary stance in relation to the culture. And partly that will mean adopting a sending approach rather than an attractional one, and partly it will mean that we have to adopt best practice in cross-cultural mission methodology. Whatever, it will necessitate a much more sophisticated approach than the ones generally in use at present and it will require that we readjust our paradigm of church to meet this challenge. It is time for the missional church to arise and the sleeping giant to wake up.
Speaking of the Alpha Course, this remarkable evangelistic tool has been used to bring many to the faith. I understand that up to 3 million people have participated in Alpha courses in the UK alone. But the way it is generally used by churches is as an evangelistic tool to contribute to the church’s numerical growth. The interesting thing is that in the UK, Alpha is most successful among what has been called the ‘dechurched’ rather than the genuinely unchurched—in other words those that came within m0 – m1 framework. And in spite of its evangelistic power, viewed from a broader perspective it has not substantially added to church growth. There are certainly not three million new church members in the UK as a result of Alpha. In fact, in the church there is still in serious decline. As such Alpha, far from being an effective missionary tool actually serves as a good example of how we don’t reach very far beyond ourselves at all.
How can this be? A major part of the problem is that although largely dechurched people do come to faith in Jesus through Alpha, it seems that they still don’t want to ‘go to church.’ It’s that darn ‘Jesus, yes, Church no” phenomenon again! People will come to faith in small intimate communities of friends but generally don’t want the organized religion part of the deal. This swapping of agendas has sometimes been perceived as a ‘bait and switch’ strategy is generally considered unethical in the commercial world. So we have now reached the vexing situation that the prevailing expression of church (Christendom) has become a major stumbling block to the spread of Christianity in the West. Applying the grid of Apostolic Genius, I find myself asking the question “what if instead of just being a church growth tool, Alpha became a church multiplication movement—a new church emerging out of the original Alpha group and reproducing itself from there?” My guess is that with a different paradigm driving it, things could really take off. It has so many elements of Apostolic Genius latent in its structure but is hindered by a Christendom understanding of church.
Here we see the clash of the paradigms in stark form.
Comments
40 Responses to “the new tribalism (part II)”
Leave a Reply
The Books
Affiliates
Recent Blog Entries
Recent Comments
-
we are explorers
- Alan Hirsch said: Shades of U2's song "I... shapevine v.2
- Frank Viola said: Looks great, Alan. Lance...
- preacherman said: Wonderful post. I... fundamentalism: a true expression of Christianity or not?
- Janet said: Well, at the risk of...
- Matt Stone said: I think its more than...
- Andrew said: Thanks Matt for that...
- Andrew said: A reason I find US...
- Matt Stone said: Andrew, see http://en...
- Matt Stone said: See http://en.wikipedia...
- Andrew said: Matt, I don't understand...
i think a re-integration of Alpha around a missional approach would help immensely. it will also take a significant amount of effort to review, revision, and revise - even with our sincere desires to be missional/multiplicational.
Alpha’s overall instructional approach is the singular issue i have found most especially difficult to address - it requires doing a comprehensive (if often subtle) overhaul of the Alpha material, from text and charts, to questions and stories. [sidenote: and it won't be 'fixed' merely by making it more multimediated for the tech-savvy generations. but that is another related learning style issue ...]
for the past 10 years, Alpha has been an integral part of the church i attend. whole relational networks of friends and family have become disciples through the influence of Alpha. at several points in the past 5 years, i’ve worked with several people who have multiplication ministry paradigms to critique the Alpha course and attempt to re-contextualize it for a wider range of people, in terms of how they process information.
it seems to me that the pervasive presentation approach is geared for skeptics (e.g., agnostics, atheists), which is Nicky Gumbel’s own background. skepticism is the essence of modern information processing and construction of philosophies. so it makes sense that Alpha would appeal to dechurched people who are used to “modernist” approaches - stand off from the info, analyze it, debate, become convinced or leave it be. it’s primarily about information gathering (which is a good thing, and I’m not against it!). in this regard, a standard Alpha quote is: “No question is too simple.” people are freely given information and the wonderful opportunity to sift it, test it, and decide what they want to believe/do about it.
however, in 15 years of living in what is apparently the most UNchurched (probably not very DEchurched) county in the U.S., i have had exactly three conversations with those from primarily skeptic paradigms. the rest have been with people who already embrace, taste, and experience spirituality! they are more likely to synthesize, discuss, emote, take it for a trial run - the polar opposite of skepticism. my counterpart Alpha-type question for people with this learning approach is: “No question is too complex.”
so, is it possible to revision and revise Alpha to reach both major categories of processing styles at the same time? i think so. shifting the related paradigm from missionary to missional will help motivate us. i suspect the deeper paradigm work involves both systematic and systemic consideration of the material and infrastructures to cover differences in learning styles. and i think this is one of the huge but necessary tasks involved in ANY contextualization work, as God seems to have distributed the skeptic and embrace-it options with equality worldwide, gender-wise, generation-wise, etc. - even if a specific culture is dominated by one or the other (or some paradoxical combination) …
I’m not following you guys on the Alpha as church multiplication - unless you are trying to reach modern or dechurched guys - it’s very heavy on the doctrine up front - I think the Alpha approach assumes too much commonality within the culture - another one size fits all approach - come on Alan certainly you can do better than that.
One friend of mine tried to run it in an Indian Restuarant. Paying for awesome Indian food. The first week about 90 Indians (mostly Hindu) showed up. The next week nearly none of them came back. Things brings to mind an excellent example of pluralism in India. Remember, doubting Thomas ran to India after seeing the wounds of our God and the church took root and flourished. However, 2000 years later the church is 3% of a nation that has a billion people. Western approaches to reaching India remain largely unsuccessful - sorry Nicky.
I think increase in serious creativity and perservance is called for now in the West. We are now nearly as pagan as India - everyone picks and chooses who God is and chooses how they want to worship that God. It is - Babylon.
It would make more sense to me that we dethrone the Anglican Gumbel, et al. and model ourselves after Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Jesus, Paul, Barnabus, the church fathers - to reach our culture - I like Alan’s earlier observation about God walking around the Nazareth village for 30 years without anyone realizing what he was up to!
Let’s see some kalos!
But Seeingkalos (and welcome back by the way) that is my point. Alpha is a good evangelistic tool (apparently according to your story, at least in the West) But it appears that it is not a particularly good missionary tool.
But let me say tht as an evangelistic tool I have great respect for Alpha. God has used it to bring many people to faith–and for this we must be thankful.
Alpha may indeed be a good evangelistic tool in the West. but actually, i’m not very interested in ‘evangelism’ or ‘missions’ per se, because i am interested in discipleship (which i believe covers communicating biblical truth to the personal/social contexts of whomever i’m in dialogue with, whether they consider themselves followers of Jesus or not, and whether they are m0 to m4 from Christianity).
i think of Alpha as a plausible discipleship framework, because it’s based on real questions that people ask. (and i do try to ask questions that people are actually asking, not questions i think they “should” be asking!) but Alpha is not a particularly comprehensive, contextual, or elegant framework *educationally.* that’s why i suggested it needs a complete overhaul of paradigm, infrastructure, and content presentation - even for use in societies that are modernist/skeptical in their current paradigm.
where i live reputedly has about the same percentage of Christians as you note for India - 3% - and it is highly spiritual and pluralistic (although frequently intolerant of anything much that is Christendom, though people are open to Jesus). in trying to contextualize ANY discipleship tools/material for this cultural space, you have to assume that the embracing of spiritual experience is the default, not skepticism. that’s a challenge - but it is our challenge as those being called to root ourselves into these communities.
i suspect we will always run into problems when we try to “import” someone else’s program, or worship songs, or tips and techniques instead of persevering in the long hard work required to develop our own.
i’m all for global perspectives and for the Kingdom. but what benefits there are when we go local! we stop emasculating local people who have Spirit-distributed gifts to develop. we stop externalizing our full identity by shipping it off to Holy Trinity Brompton or Hill Song or Kansas City or Saddleback Valley or Chicago or wherever/whatever, in exchange for absorbing what they produced for their own context but what is now considered to be the “universal church” standard even though it clashes with our local cultures/contexts. we appreciate the cultural contributions of others in the Kingdom without depreciating our own … and we enter into the elegance of creative flow that will only come to us as we wrestle with God about our own cultural contexts and people groups.
there may be some degree of order and beauty in improving existing programs incrementally, but this seems to be a time ripe for the kinds of extraordinary elegance that come through intuitive creativity from ground zero!
Good responses Brad.
I agree the Alpha has a very narrow evangelistic applicability - and praise God for the amount that it has - but in my Calvinistic tradition the default attitude when reaching unreached groups or when starting a new church is - lets take them through an Alpha course - what’s wrong with this? How do we inspire folks to appreciate Alpha when appropriate but be ready to persevere among a people group for a few years before any preaching can take place or be comprehended and think outside the Alpha box (or other default approaches, i.e. EE, FAITH, May I Ask You A Question, Way of the Master, etc.) when evangelism opportunity opens?
Enjoying the book Alan!
Alan, your ideas regarding Alpha are interesting in light of my experience. 2 years ago I facilitated 2 sessions of Alpha through a church here in Denver. By the time we were running the second one my mind was completely heading the directions of church multiplication using the Alpha principles. A group of 7 participants and myself ate together, shared our stories with one another and talked Jesus. After getting through about half the Alpha videos the participants wanted to stop watching the videos and simply begin discussing scripture. It totally felt like a new church could have been birthed out of that structure.
Now I’m doing the MCAP with Hugh and Matt through Adullam. I have a community of 15-20 that meet on Saturday nights that looks very similar to the Alpha stuff without the curriculum and agenda yet with even more intentionality. The Forgotten Ways has been great to read through while I’m doing the apprenticeship. Thanks a ton, bro, for allowing yourself to be God’s.
I think it’s worthwhile pointing out that the ‘Two Ways To Live” style of sharing the gospel, so loved by Sydney Anglicans, has a reach of M0 to M1 at best from the evangelical subculture. People who know no other way of sharing the gospel better wise up.
As for Alpha. Problem with Alpha for me is that it assumes that secularized citizens are atheist or agnostic. Duh. Loaded with ‘how can I be sure God exist?’ type questions. No appreciation for the questions of pantheists, like ‘how can you say only Jesus is god?’ How does Alpha, seriously, support that sort of engagement? In so far as leaders do they are generally going beyond what the Alpha framework prepares them for. Sorry, minor Tweeking wont cut it. Not when we’ve got adds on the TV urging women to ‘find the goddess within’ and 30% of Aussies affirm some degree of belief in reincarnation. Why try to make the model fit? Why not start with the context and let new models emerge that have a direct affinity with it?
Point well taken Mattie. I hope someone from Alpha is ‘listening in’. I think it would be useful for them.
i’m in agreement with the sentiments toward not attempting a mere tweak but meeting people where they ARE at, not where our ‘programme’ says they should be.
but those sentiments are bogged down with sediments. i work at a seminary (administrative assistant stuff, mind you, with no ‘power’ other than mere influence). for 10 years, i have not seen any courses on how to construct theology from the ground up, or much about developing disciples contextually, etc., other than a rare NON-required class, such as ’storying the gospel.’
understandly, i shouldn’t expect miracles. after all, this is a ‘modernist’ institution where most professors are never required to take a course in how to teach, as they do their doctoral work!
so, how do we get out of the bog anyway? who can equip us in person on such skills? is all the research and development and equipping work being done in decentralized fashion, and we’re only finding out about each other through blogs?
or perhaps it’s in TFW…
UPDATE ON THE TFW SAGA - This was week three since special ordering your book, Alan. it arrived at the store, but there is a techno-prob which prevents it from being scanned into the register and therefore it cannot be sold until it is logged into the inventory. thus my forthcoming book spent the entire week gathering dust on the shelf. go figure … maybe next week …
While I’m not quite finished with TFW, Brad, I believe it provides more of the “why” to do “what” while giving examples of “who” is working on it right now rather than rolling out a model for implementation.
And I must say I was slightly amused at your musings about “all the research and development and equipping work being done in decentralized fashion.” Perhaps these blogs are part of the “Divine Dominoes”, eh?
Besides, in the end, what I think I’m hearing all around this blog is that one size will not fit all anyway. We are all going to have to get to work and take these tools (and whatever training seems appropriate/available) and allow the Holy Spirit to guide us into proper, contextual, effective ministry to those we have been called to serve in Christ’s name.
That’s the apostolic missional part, right?
Didn’t mean to speak for Alan…just my perception.
Besides, would this group accept anything that wasn’t decentralized? Are we not the eclectic ecclesia? I think it is wonderful to see the networks being forged around the world and across the denominations–that have to strip all this down to the essentials and cut to the chase.
I think I’ve mentioned this before on this blog but I approach a lot of this through Hiebert’s model of critical contextualization. See Mike Frost’s article on Risky Negotiation for the breakdown. I start by: (1) embedding myself within my tribes of choice so that it’s more than an armchair exercise, (2) reading up on what missiologists have done in cross cultural contexts overseas and how the bible might speak to my own neotribes, (3) start testing out different approaches with real people, and (4) only then start to think about what programs / new practices may emerge.
There are a lot of useful books on missiology, on how to approach contextualization, it’s just they’re generally geared for an overseas context and EC bloggers generally miss them because they’re (1) searching for the wrong metatags and (2) don’t always want to do the hard yards of translating it for our context. To be honest one of the most useful books Ive ever read was “Understanding Folk Religions” by Hiebert but it escapes most people’s attention because it says very little about the west. It does however say heaps about cross cultural missions.
I think Peggy is on the ball though. Each neotribe has to be approached individually. We need to detox from the search for the golden solution.
Did you guys catch Anderson Cooper CNN segment on What is a Christian?
I have run Alpha twice and feel that while it has its place for some people in some contexts, it is really doctrine 101 - starting from the lovely problematic place of sin to the solution, in a systematic manner that anticipates a certain natural line of questioning. It is apologetic, and assumes that by the end of it one will have an aha moment because it all makes complete logical sense. It assumes we can accept seeing ourselves as sinful and needing redemption. I am not sure this is a great starting premise to introduce people to Jesus. I am listening to lectures by Baxter Kruger at the moment, and agree with him that people will be drawn to Jesus as they encounter his love - this will be as much (if not more) through who we are and what we do as through what we say or what program we run. I did find Alpha useful for those in the groups who were already believers, but not sure what they believed and why. I prefer (but have not tested yet) Neil Cole’s suggestions of working through the miracles of Jesus as recorded in the book of John - looking at what it says about Jesus, people, and the interplay between them. I guess one can interact with the stories of Jesus and ponder them without having to have a set of concrete beliefs that provide a neat framework. Er, let Jesus speak for himself… or is that taking it too far!
But is it doctrine 101? That’s my whole point.
IMO it’s only doctrine 101 for moderns, it’s not doctrine 101 for post-moderns. Doctrine 101 for someone with a pantheist background would start with the Spirit immanent in creation rather than the Father transcendent over creation, and with our original blessedness rather than original sin.
A postmodern approach might be equally apologetic, but would approach the task of giving a “reason for the hope we have” from a different direction, with experiential and pragmatic reasons being a lot more prominant, and different questions being addressed first. It would approach theodicy differently, it would approach atonement differently.
I say all this as a former pantheist. What moderns call doctrine 101 is not doctrine 101 for everyone. One of the implications of the M scale is that doctrine 101 starts in different places for different cultures.
Continuing on from the last point - we make a mistake when we think our theology, even our theology 101, is transcultural.
All theology is culturally conditioned, situational, subjective even as it strives for objectivity.
One of the best ways to get over the perceived objectiveness of our theology is to read some African and Asiatic theologies.
I was influenced by Zen masters during my late teens and early twenties so I have internalized eastern philosophy as much as western philosophy. I suppose it makes it easier for me. Do you really realize how much of western theology is framed within the terms of western Greco-Roman philosophy? Pagan Greco-Roman philosophy? What is Jesus had grown up on the edges of the Han empire rather than Roman Empire? Would John have introduced his gospel with Jesus as the ‘Logos’ or Jesus as the ‘Tao’? How might that effect your theology 101?
I agree that it is a modernist perspective of doctrine 101 - just didn’t say it!
I suppose what I want to say is, don’t be dismissive of doctrine in contextualizing for post-moderns.
The conventional wisdom seems to be they aren’t interested. My experience is that they just aren’t interested in conventional approaches. Give them an alternative that resonates with their worldview and their interest levels can shift drastically.
This is backed up by research of alt spirituality texts. Though there is a much greater emphasis on mystery and personal experience in them, many still spend chapters articulating their author’s personal understanding of sacred doctrine. Read any western buddhist text and you’re bound to read something on the four noble truths, read any wiccan text and you’re bound to read some comments on the threefold law, read A Course in Miracles and you’ll read stuff ad nausium on the auther’s personal theodicy. They do care about articulating worldview, they just don’t care for conventional evangelical styles of doing it.
this whole line of thinking makes a lot of sense to me, and i appreciate the comments.
also - in terms of Alpha as one illustration of modernistic programism - i’ve been thinking this week about the difference between ‘facts’ and ‘concepts.’ i suspect western theologizing in recent centuries moves too quickly from the facts in Scripture to concepts and patterns perceived from Scripture. and in perpetuating our theological concepts, we start acting as if they are the facts themselves. but it wasn’t always so … what must it have been like for theologians in the early church when there was little historical theology backstory to rely on, and they had to hammer everything out from scratch? not saying we have to go back to that,
but shouldn’t we look with fresh eyes at old frameworks? otherwise, we’ll see exactly what we have before, and won’t (for instance) be able to perceive in Scripture both bridges for people from guilt-based cultures (who do care about sin and consequences) and for people from shame-based cultures (who care more about how falling short creates separation in relationships).
I think one of the strengths of alpha is that it brings someone with a strong gift of teaching and evangelism into your lounge room, so to speak. It’s usable by “ordinary” people who want others to know about Jesus.
At the moment I’m toying with the idea of developing simple training modules on skills areas required by Christians “on the ground”… things like active listening skills, mentoring, small group leadership skills… this conversation is making me think about developing modules that help people in communicating their faith…
Anyone want to help?
Read “Humble Apologetics” by John G. Stackhouse.
I did a two page summary once to train up some of our local people. I could pass that on. But leaders should read the book first.
But the reason I mentioned “Understanding Folk Religion” before is that it goes beyond “conversations” to explore missional engagement with symbol and ritual and a whole bunch of other stuff. One of the main handicaps of evangelicals is their symbolic illiteracy [seriously!]. This is evident with post-moderns in general but particularly when dealing with serious practitioners of alt religions. Active listening training needs to incorporate skilling in drawing out other’s symbol systems. Even things as simple as chair arrangements and colour can communicate for better or worse. But there’s a whole lot more too it than that. The iconoclasm of evangelicalism leaves the average evangelical unprepared for the non-verbal communication that goes on. And remember what language experts tell us about non-verbal communication.
I should mention that we used to do some basic grounding in body language and dress symbolism with volunteers for the Community of Hope stall at the Mind Body Spirit Festival each year before letting them loose. Those that showed no aptitude for sensitive engagement were screened out.
Here in UK, I moved to Cornwall, from Manchester a few months ago, and immediately wondered if there was an Alpha running locally and how it was going. After six months here, I’ve the abiding impression Alpha is really not right for this context, as so many of those around me are ’spiritual butterflies’ who have gone from one source to another in exploring their spiritual lives. They come in precisely where Matt identifies - ‘how can you say only Jesus is God’- and many are wounded in their past from life experiences. Many are negative about the church even if they have never experienced it. Talking to a local therapist offering alternative health care, she commented how many who come to her and who she knows socially are asking what kind of inner healings each religious/spiritual path offers, and another friend added that it struck her how many flit from one thing to another, New Age, Wicca, Pagan, Buddha, etc etc without ever really encountering anything in any depth. Many remain frustrated, looking for relevance to their inner lives, as well as something that is credible to believe.
It struck me that sometimes, by going so far back to where people ‘are’ and beginning to introduce Christian faith very slowly, there is a danger that we may fail to show them the richness of a mature Christian faith - what it ‘looks’ like, and ‘feels’ like, how it heals, integrates, and transforms, and how the pieces of the puzzle fit together. So what we present if we are not careful can be so ‘where they are’ that it is completely fragmented. Notice how people were drawn to watch the TV programmes here on monastic life? I sense a curiousity to know what a mature and integrated faith is like to live, rather than just being introduced to basic concepts. Hence the draw of the experiential TV shows that put ordinary people into monastic communities for a period of time. With them, I felt it was a shame that the monastic routine got in the way of them seeing what a Christian life might be like in a context less withdrawn from the outside world.
I remain disatisfied with Alpha, convinced that the replication model is the best, and that it is daft to try to integrate Alpha incomers into existing church forms - by all means attach them via bonds of friendship and fellowship to local existing congregations, and let each nourish the other, but expecting people to turn up on Sundays is too much of a leap.
Eleanor, I appreciate your intuition concerning providing a mature and integrated faith community as an example of what could be. Some will respond better to the irresistable fragrance of The Bread of Life being fresly baked in the lives of fully devoted disciples…. This is precisely where God is leading me to walk by faith into liminality in order to foster the resulting communitas, both of which Alan describes so well in his book.
This is where I find it invaluable to be able to talk meaningfully about faith heroes - about people whom have served as mentors for us and whom are living examples of what it means to live the mature Christian life. Hindus to point to their Yogis, Western Buddhists may point to the Dali Lama, but whom can we point to as Christians - Benny Hinn? [Agggghhh! Where's a razor!] When postmoderns get the message that this is a Christian hero is it any wonder that they run in the other direction?
My call is essentially one to revisit the tradition of mentoring and pre-Christian discipleship. It is a call for Christian to be living examples of Christ in alien contexts. I don’t invite NeoPagans and Wiccans to Alpha programs, I live amongst them and try to live out what a ‘messianic occultist’ should live like and love like and worship like. My faith heroes are guys like William Carey and Bede Griffiths. It is only by deeply embedding yourself within a tribe that you can truly come to appreciate the perspective of the tribe, the symbols of the tribe, the questions of the tribe.
What a rich interchange, this, and a wondrous thing to see the Holy Spirit at work in such diversity, busy bringing God’s will into existence…even in our steps.
Reminds me of a tune; here are a few fresh verses:
To everything…there is a season…
a time to learn, a time to do…
a time to stay, a time to go…
a time to speak, a time to refrain from speaking…
May you, Matt and Elenor and Janet and Brad and Christina and Alan and everyone on this blog, continue to be that which God is even now using to be the Jesus-with-skin-on heroes to those whom you are called to influence. Amen.
Matt’s words: ‘It is only by deeply embedding yourself within a tribe that you can truly come to appreciate the perspective of the tribe, the symbols of the tribe, the questions of the tribe.’ This is at the heart of it, and I am acutely aware of this having lived in another faith/culture/world for twenty years before returning to the Christian faith I grew up in. Indeed the only people we could honestly invite to Alpha here are those who are already close to returning to church. But where ever you are on the theological spectrum in the church there are boundaries beyond which you cannot go in entering into another faith/cultural community. The understanding and exploration of these boundaries, these sensitive areas, these points where we have to say no in conversation or action, requires an inner security and a security in Christian identity which we do not seem to foster very successfully in one another in the church, particularly in our present situation in the UK where people seem either to embrace universalism or be too fearful of the journey into understanding the ‘other’ to engage beyond a superficial level. The Orthodox Jewish world recognises this situation and responds with an attitude of fear that the ideas of the non-Jewish world around them will ‘leak into’ the minds and mindset of the faithful, hence the barriers they put up to mixing. Gateshead Yeshiva does not admit Jewish adults who have been to university as their minds are no longer that pure white piece of blank paper. The ideas within them will dilute the intensity of the Torah education the yeshiva tries to offer, and distract the other students! There is not just fear in us, there is fear in the ‘other’.
The points emerging most strongly in the above discussion for me are the one that we need role models we can describe confidently! And also that we need to understand how to preserve our inner rootedness and stability in faith even while we journey in genuine friendships into the other worlds of our next door neighbours. Our concepts of ‘A Christian home/house/small community’ perhaps needs to become as rich and deep as the Jewish equivalent if we are to be able to form Christian community beyond church buildings. I argue this because to understand orthodox Jews, you enter their homes and meet their families, and there is the heart of it. In family life we meet each other when the chips are down, and there are the real encounters. Christian communities that meet only in cafes or pubs (or even giving hot meals to the homeless) are in danger of re-creating the shallowness of the Sunday-attendance focussed church simply because of their limited shared expression. Perhaps we need to come to understand better not just the endless change around us, but what it is in our faith that is a healthy stability. Role models would help in this as well.
Thanks guys… this is a rich conversation. I’ll follow up those books Matt… if you could email your summary to Alan to pass on to me that would be cool!
I think those called to leadership need to think through and seek to live this stuff… then work out ways to help others do this too. It’s an exciting journey… and a liminal one!
Well said, Eleanor!
Eleanor, when you say: “But where ever you are on the theological spectrum in the church there are boundaries beyond which you cannot go in entering into another faith/cultural community. The understanding and exploration of these boundaries, these sensitive areas, these points where we have to say no in conversation or action, requires an inner security and a security in Christian identity which we do not seem to foster very successfully in one another in the church, particularly in our present situation in the UK where people seem either to embrace universalism or be too fearful of the journey into understanding the ‘other’ to engage beyond a superficial level.” you are identifying the real tension point for me, as well.
I have been asking theses same kind of fear/security/maturity questions for many years…but have found few willing to even engage in the conversation…until just recently. Through the different thread discussion here (particularly on Cultural Distance concerning culture shock) and on Matt’s and Brad’s blogs I have heard some voices of discernment, courage and balance.
Persevere–and welcome to the conversation!
Alan
Be blessed in you reflection on Alpha and how we reach the dechurch. this is trough in Norway to. The major majoity of the popultion is untuched of the gospel especialy in the cities. Thanks for your good work. Be blessed in the conference, and send greetings to wolfgang (if he is there after their car excident - we have prayed for him and his family) Im in florida and enyoing the 14 days holliday with my family. Looking forward to be together with you in september. Øivind
Oivind, get off the computer and go to be beach. Hope you avoind the hurricanes and tornadoes!!
And if you happen to experience one, make sure you enjoy it. Its a holiday after all!
Eleanor, your comments resonate very deeply with me as they touch very close to the heart of my own experience. In engaging with Wiccans for instance, direct participation in circles was a boundary I could not go beyond. I’ve observed as a guest but going any further would be idolatrous for me, so I’ve explored community participation from more oblique angles, tribal drumming groups being one of them. It does require a very ‘centered’ Christian identity - one centered very firmly in the man and not so much church expectations, even emerging church expectations. Didn’t you write something about Jesus is Lord Alan?
He may have been here already… for a busy man he has an amazing reach.. or you may already know Todd Hunter, ex director of Vineyard USA and now head of Alpha USA. Todd is missional emergent and last I heard was aiming at reimagining Alpha as a church planting tool. My guess is that he is sensitive to many of these issues. I’ll drop him a note in case he hasn’t been here yet.
Anytime you program it, it ends up dying for a second. I’m not for Alpha because it ends up being a poor excuse for not living it daily.
Come on, let’s release our Christ community to serve in the areas of their passion and watch Alpha go out the window. You cannot program the intended results of ALPHA. It needs to be birthed out of passion and when it is, look out for the out of control movement that will follow.
When we do what man can do we get man sized results. When we do what only God can do we get God sized results. I’m tired of what man can do and I long for what only God can do. For me, this is a no brain-er.
Can (dump it) Alpha and engage the mission of Jesus for us all. If we can own the mission of Jesus given to us all we will see no need for a programmed Alpha!
It’s open fire season. Let me have if it you have the courage.
I wouldn’t go far as to say can Alpha. It would still seem to have some level of effectiveness at an M0 - M1 distance. Instead I would argue for a diversified approach; one that includes stuff like Alpha but don’t fixate on it as a universal cure. That’s when it starts to look like snake oil. But in its proper context its ok. As I’ve said before, the problem is not these techniques in and of themselves but our fixations on finding a golden one-size-fits-all approach in a pluralistic context. Let’s not swap one cure all for another.
My turn to agree with you, Matt..the only fixation we are allowed is of our eyes on Christ. Let’s allow the Holy Spirit to use the diversity of the Christ-fixated to reach out to the diversity of the not-yet-Christ fixated.
I’m certain that the Holy Spirit is using you and your “shock value” style to bridge cultural gaps and bring the lost to Christ, Bob. But it just doesn’t work for me…and I am “shocked” by different things.
Does this mean, to you, that I have no courage because I don’t want to come out blazing in “open fire season”?
Thank You
distance learning mba
…
http://user.aol.com/finhelpfinusa/distancemba distance learning mba
…