not my precioussss
We have been analyzing the passing of the Christendom period and the accompanying demise of the Christendom imagination of ecclesia that has basically entwined itself in a more institutional idea of what it means to be God’s people. We are soon coming to the point where we will begin to present a positive vision of the future based on the recovery of our most ancient impulse/s. But a few more things need be said about Christendom and what is emerging. Before we do, I just want to reiterate the basic thesis of The Forgotten Ways once again.
It is easy to say that we who hold to another imagination of church are just being arrogant and that we are dismissing what God has done in history. I would not want to be read this way. I am not saying that God does not, and has not, used this mode of church. And that the people within its structures are not sincere and genuine Christians. Most of us have found God in it. He has obviously used it and continues to be found in it today. What is being said is that it is because of the drastically changed conditions, this configuration of church is literally out-moded. It will simply not be sufficient for the challenges of the 21st Century: statistics and trends bear this out in every western cultural context. It is no use simply re-arranging aspects of the same model without going to the roots of the paradigm. We must not merely abandon Christendom for in it are God’s people, but it needs a fundamental change, a conversion if you like, if it is to become genuinely missional. This change is possible, but not without major realignment of our current thinking and resources. And because Christendom is so deeply entrenched in our imaginations and practices, this shift will certainly not happen without significant political will to change. It will be resisted by those with the most significant vested interests in the current system.
“Now that the long Constantinian age has passed, we Christians find ourselves in a situation much more analogous to that of the New Testament Christians than to the Christendom for which some nostalgically long” (Rodney Clapp). Episcopalian theologian Robert Webber calls on evangelicals to return to a more pre-Constantinian understanding and experience of Church.’ In order to renew ourselves, we need to touch base with our deepest roots. In order to invoke and access the power of Apostolic Genius, we must be willing to take a journey of discovery, and therefore be willing to walk away from what we think is secure and safe and take some risks. If it helps, the truly liberating thing to realize is that Christendom was not the original mode of the church, and hopefully it will not be the final one. So we need not be too touchy about it. It is high time for us to dethrone Constantine; because as far as matters of church go it seems he is still the emperor of our imaginations.
Comments
91 Responses to “not my precioussss”
Very nice review, Alan. You’ve done a great job of taking the many “touchy” concerns we’ve been blogging about and framing the conversation for moving forward. I look forward to what’s next…
One of my favorite quotes about risk comes from Kierkegaard: “To venture causes anxiety, but not to venture is to lose one’s self.”
At this point, my futurist nature also kicks in, and sees the call to revitalized imagination as a call to prayer, for I consider prayer (in part) as imagining with God a future that is different from what is inevitable if He does not providentially act and we do not perseveringly seek and obey.
This becomes all the more poignant in the face of just having resigned my role at a Christendom-oriented institution, partly so I can pursue what I see as better stewardship of giftings and perspectives that seem a much better fit with the tribal/post-Christendom world than with the traditional and transitional I have working in. These other perspectives have their places, and I helped as long as it seemed to fit with what I understood of God’s direction for me. So … for me and for ecclesiology, what’s next, don’t know …
Alan I know this is not what you are doing and you are far more nuanced but I do worry when I hear people say that the end of Christendom means we are back in the pre-Christian era in Western culture. It was Newbigin who pointed out that post-christendom Western culture may well be the most difficult mission field the church has ever faced because it is the only culture which has been born out of a perceived rejection of Christianity. Stuart Murray’s recent books have been very good at flagging this up.
What I appreciate about what you have written above is the call to return to our deepest roots, the primal form of church. I also sometimes worry when I hear all the talk of Ancient/Future stuff in the emerging church which means in reality often just going back to the church around the commencement of Christendom which was beginning to develop the institutional forms and perspectives we are trying to escapes from. We can, do need to, learn from the church of that era, but as you say let’s not stop there, lets get back to the primal expressions of church that spread like a virus across the ancient world through the power of love rather than later expressions of the church which were often spread at the tip of a sword by those who had a love of power.
James, fully agree. There is no way back to a kind of second naivete. But the way forward is to invoke in the name of Jesus, the same power and function that energized the primitive church as well as other significant expressions of Jesus movements. And I fully agree with Newbigin on this issue. Our situation is much harder than any before.
In thinking about being missional, over at Signposts Wayne has posed a question about why we talk about… or in particular, “push” to be missional. If mission naturally emerges from who we are in Christ, why do we need to “push” it at all? (I’d have a lurking suspicion some denominations start talking about being missional out of a primal fear of survival… is that harsh?)
This struck me as a very sincere question and it would be interesting to have a variety of responses, so if discussing this takes your fancy the thread is here.
And here we go to the place of Jesus. Its a big “if” Jan. I believe that loving Jesus truly is a difficult thing for any church or denomination to do. There is something in the church that in the end works against what it was established for (CS Lewis).
Do you know… I think there are plenty of people within the institutional church who love Jesus at least a little… but the only way they know how to do mission is to bring people to church… and most people out there don’t want to come to church. So… maybe in some churches people are whipped and guilted to trying harder to bring people to church…
This is where I had a lot of resonance with what Wolfgang Simpson was saying at Dangerous Stories. It’s a whole different dynamic to have people in your home for meals as it is to attempting to drag people to a religious service in an institution they mistrust. Wolfgang argued that house church revolving around sharing life and meals together is the most primitive (and therefore) most authentic expression of church… and that where people are taking home based church seriously the whole thing starts multiplying like mad… there are enough examples in diverse cultural settings to suggest spiritual power is unlocked through “simple” church. Lots of parallels in his talks with your work in TFW.
I suppose my personal answer to the question of “why do mission” is because that is on God’s heart… and because people need Jesus… and because if we live in love and obedience to God you would think mission would be a natural result.
I think at the heart of Wayne’s concern was that mission in some places might be driven by blokey ego: “my church plant is more missional than yours… nah, nah, nah.”
It’s always good to test our heart motivations. I think God calls us to love and obedience and faithfulness full stop. (or period, as our American friends would say). Being “successful” is up to God.
I understand the need to be missional in terms of Paul’s contrast between walking in the flesh and walking in the Spirit. To walk in the flesh is quite literally to be self centred, self focused, self serving. From my experience of pastoring of over 10 years this is exactly what the established church is like. The struggle to be missional is the desire to walk in the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is a centrifugal being and so will always send the church outwards and because He is the Spirit of Jesus He will also send the church downward in servanthood. So to walk in the Spirit will mean being missional as well as moral.
You know James, there is a massive gap in the emerging missional church’s teachings on the Holy Spirit. I don’t know of one book that fills this gap. Time to write brother.
picking up from your post above al and james’follow on - i think that the “something” in the church that works against its original purpose is humans/falleness (no surprises there)! hence, the importance of being mindful of the flesh vs. spirit idea! as long as we are trying to humanly manufacture a sense of mission we aren’t really letting the spirit do his thing. our need to control what happens is at odds with us living under the submission of christ. it is sometimes easy to slip into the legalistic mindset of trying to become like christ whilst forgetting that he gave us his spirit to help us do that!
Hullo-o-o all…
I am scarce in Blogland these days, not because of a lack of interest (nor because I don’t love the debate, or you, anymore), but a difficult season of life has shifted priorities. If I hadn’t booked to get to Dangerous Stories Two (DS2) in advance I would probably have chosen not to go, so I’m glad it was booked already… it would have been good to meet Janet and others, though in all honesty even though I was there in body, I was a bit disengaged from the discussion and reflecting on other things! This means I’m belatedly processing some of the DS2 materials.
My wife and I are in the midst of supporting a number of people going through extreme experiences at present - we’ve often found ourselves in this role, but never with so many people at the same time. The extremity of circumstances finds us dealing with psych wards, prison and legal situations and the trauma associated for families and friends. I have time at the computer at present, as I await a call from a friend who’s been kicked out of rehab for repeated return to addictions! (One of the reasons that I use a pseudonym in blogspaces is that it enables me to obliquely share life experience, without people I refer to being embarrassed or feeling like all they are to me is a useful “illustration.”)
There is so much going on in the lives of people around us - and shared with me by other church leaders too - that I am convinced it is not co-incidental, that shifts are taking place in the spiritual realm that are creating havoc in the natural… I encourage all who are called out into Christ, particularly those involved in leadership, to consider whether something significantly different is underway in the areas of the spiritual realms, principalities and powers…
Getting back to the issues in this blog… there is a lot of great thinking going on - and I’m grateful for some quiet moments to contribute some of my own thoughts. One of the key elemental issues for me, which continues to develop as a response to some of the input from DS2, is a conviction that although “missional” is identified as a root issue in the way ahead (via backwards!) for Christianity in the 21st century, I suspect it is - at least in some senses - a fruit rather than a root. The church has definitely lost focus on the missional impulse, but there is an even deeper root issue, which is vital to resolve first. It is partly identified by Al’s comments to James Petticrew, about the lack of work on the role of the Holy Spirit in emerging missional church. While it is invaluable to recover mission Dei, there is an overall lack of comprehension of imago Dei – which lies at the root of the missional impulse.
I’d concur with Janet’s identification of Wayne’s concern that being missional can be an activity that comes “out of a primal fear of survival…” This is possible because it is a fruit issue rather than a root issue… Being missional is certainly part of our spiritual DNA so when churches “do” missional things people get a buzz and they feel good… but if it’s just about the buzz it can fade with the inevitable increasing human tolerance to intoxicating substances… Or if it’s just about blokey ego, the energy of “nah, nah, nah, nah, nah” eventually disipates as the blokes’ balls drop and they grow up, or the venture fails from its inherent lack of integrity and they pack up and shut up!
When we see missio Dei as a fruit of imago Dei - particularly from the perspective of Karl Barth’s concepts of human relationality being a consequence of humanity created in the image of God - we see that the image of God in humanity is a fundamental root issue. The motivation for mission comes from the response of being created in the image of God, it needs to be pushed because we have not recovered our “image” either individually or together.
In Genesis 1
and 2 the image of God is the vital issue, humanity is spoken into being by the Word of God - male and female - blessed and generated (genesised!?) as beings who, like the relational, communal, fruitful God whose image they bear, will be relational, communal, fruitful and multiply. Their initial mission is simply being who they are created to be…
Genesis 3
identifies the breaking of relationship, which leads to a re-evaluating of the deal… blessing becomes dependent on humanity’s obedience. God incarnates in Jesus the Christ, to regenerate (Heb 8:13
Koine “kainos”) the original deal, where humanity is caught up again into the relationship in/of the Godhead. Rather than dependent on our own obedience, we are caught up into Christ and we participate in His obedience…
In Genesis 1
and 2 there is no outward moving missional impulse, that form of missional activity is not in operation until humanity breaks relationship and heads away from God. The evangelical version of the good news tends to begin with the fall in Genesis 3
- it declares it “sin” and states God’s response is punishment - I remain unsure how this is good news!
The response by humans to their “sin,” is awareness of a change in relationship, and the impulse is to hide. There is a physical covering up that identifies a recognition of shame, a desire to avoid confronting the brokenness and therefore to pass the buck, ultimately the receiving of the consequence of their actions.
The response by God to their “sin,” is handling the situation with integrity and responding to humanity’s hiding, shame and withdrawal, not so much in punishment as in mission. Mission is God’s primal response to our brokenness. Prior to the brokenness we can argue for a mission of sorts, but there is no outward missional focus …
The motivation for mission is the love of God for His creation, particularly humanity, created in God’s image, when they depart He pursues… Our pursuit of His mission is hardwired into us as a consequence of imago Dei. When we recover who we truly are in Christ, when we are regenerated (re-genesised?) as part of the image of God in us, we recover His heart for His creation and the missional impulse is part of our spiritual DNA.
God does not so much call us “to love and obedience and faithfulness” per se, as He calls us to be truly ourselves - beings who are loving, obedient and faithful, since we are created in the image of a loving, obedient and faithful God. In eclessia we are called out to know God and love God, know who we are in Christ and truly be who He created us to be, individually together… in thought, word and deed. Die to self, get self out of the way, allow the Spirit to lead, be transformed by renewing the mind… living in community (communitas)
When the root is right the fruit will be healthy, when the fruit is unhealthy, check out the root! The root issue is imago Dei - which involves us in relationship in the Godhead - Father, Son (Word) and Holy Spirit - as we nurture the root, missio Dei is one fruit that naturally develops.
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
Welcome back o Celtic one! thanks for the stimulating comment.
alan I think the book will have to wait till after my dissertation.
I have just got a book that I would highly recommend its Chris Wright’s THE MISSION OF GOD. Wright is attempting a missional reading of scripture. The great strength of the book is the OT material. this is the most in depth and insightful discussion of the OT and its implications for mission I have come across. Its a must read
Glad for your thoughts and update, Celtic Son. Just yesterday I was inquiring about you…how very timely of you to pop in. I am moving into another stage, as well, and will get scarce in Blogland myself.
I resonated with your thinking…I am reminded of the section in TFW when Alan is talking about acting our way into proper thinking. The only way that makes sense to me is if we can reconnect with our forgotten identity. If we remember who/whose we are, then our actions will reorient and our thinking will follow. Another simplex moment…certainly connects with where the Spirit has been leading me.
Do you think that the void of balanced understanding or focus on the work of the Holy Spirit is a consequence of a kind of spiritual/relational amnesia? Or is it more a form of schizophrenia? Multiple personality disorder? Certainly, we too often fracture God and his Imago into pieces to scrutinize…or should I say dissect…no wonder there is no life.
Hmmm…..
A Royal Daughter
Great to hear your musings again CS… you’re a wonderful theological / spiritual voice.
Your story has actually pushed a few buttons for me out of an experience last year… and that is concern for the risk of burnout for you and your wife.
I’d feel better if you could tick some of the following boxes for me:
There’s a person to whom you’re accountable who’ll ask hard questions about your self-care and the priority of your family time, to whom you respect and submit.
You are not doing this alone… you are supporting needy people in the context of a community of believers working with this together and supporting one another in prayer and practically.
You are day by day listening to the Holy Spirit as to what/who you should say yes to and what/who you should say no to. Jesus said “no” to totally legitimate human need and certainly to human demands. If you are this tuned in to God’s spirit you can say “no” without beating yourself up and withstand the manipulation attempts you’ll cop.
You are finding ways to manage stress and taking time out.
I was badly, badly burnt with this issue last year… I never thought burn out and anxiety could happen to me, being a pretty laid back personality… but it can happen to anyone… and then you’re actually no use to anyone!
If you’re not sharing the load and setting firm boundaries you’re creating dependency… and in the end, doing no favours at all.
This is my issue, not yours, but I do feel concerned for you.
Hi Al,
It’s Wayne here. I hope you and Deb are well!
I have had a growing concern about the ambition of mission that is portrayed in our churches. Maybe it is just me and my journey, or maybe there is something more to it. Anyway, this is what I posted over at Signposts the other day…
“I guess the question I’m really asking is about the whole push for mission at all. Whenever I hear people talking about mission, changing the world, that it’s all about “them”, being missional, I get an uneasiness in my gut. Perhaps it is just where I’m at in my journey, but I also suspect there’s something more to it.
Why do we feel the need to push mission? Why do we even create an ambition for it? And before people start throwing verses at me, I am well aware of the great commission, etc… But somehow I think in our culture we are missing the point with mission. Mission isn’t something we need to strive for, it is an expression of who we are….”
Then I followed this with a further comment…
“Just adding to this discussion, I have often heard, especially in emerging church circles, the whole concept of removing the “us” and “them” polarity. In otherwords, there are Christians in the world and non-Christians (I hate that term). As soon as there is an “us” and “them” divide, there is a need to push mission, because the “them” or non-Christians need to be missionalised.
Mission can then very easily become an ambition to strive for, a performance-based achievement, and can give us status and significance.
But if there is truly no divide between “us” and “them”, then what is mission? There is no “them” to missionalise, only people to love. It doesn’t matter whether those people give verbal assent to a following of Jesus or not, because there is no divide.
In this kind of thinking, no-one needs to be missionalised, and everyone does. Mission then becomes an expression of who we are and an act of love - no matter who you are.
So why do our churches push mission so much?”
I found I resonated Celtic Son with your comments too…..
Hi Janet…
I tend to wear my heart on my sleeve in life as well as blogspace, your concern is one that others have raised with us and we are aware of, it is nonetheless much appreciated. I am grateful for people who care enough to take the risk to speak up. Thank you… the issue is not yours alone - I do have a tendency to be a “rescuer” with the corresponding pathology of becoming co-dependent/creating dependency. I have been there in the past and it is always helpful to be reminded.
We do have boundaries in place and accountable relationships - I meet with a partner every second Saturday for two to three hours, my wife meets for an hour weekly with her accountability partner. We also have two couples we meet with, each a couple of times a year - who are mature couples in ministry, with adult children, who challenge us about the priority of family. I also meet with the men from those couples, on another couple of occasions, just to talk through any personal issues.
Although we do have leadership responsibility in these situations, we also have a growing community of people around us, and a developing leadership team who support in serving people who are in need. Some of those facing challenges are part of the leadership team, so have other leaders around to support them too. The girl I mentioned yesterday who has had to leave rehab, has stayed in our home on prior occasions, but this time, with the additional pressure of supporting others, we did feel that we needed to say no. I do appreciate the encouragement though to resist the manipulation that can come, thanks.
My wife and I have lunch together two or three times a month and we have a family evening weekly, after we pick our kids up from school. I have a day off each week - though I must admit I have slipped back into the bad habit of working at least part of my day off! Being in Melbourne for the DS2 conference did afford me some time detached from our immediate context, and did provide some refreshing and opportunity for uninterrupted sleep.
We aim to spend time daily in quietness and meditation before God and although we don’t always achieve it, we pray together frequently, and challenge one another on where we are at! Most of the people facing challenges are people in our church family, several relatively new believers with limited knowledge and awareness of spiritual issues, undergoing severe stresses that are significant. As the key leaders in our church, there is a tendency for them to look to us for direction, especially in the initial stages.
This present season is significantly different, I am aware of a far greater level of spiritual activity and a number of other key leaders, in other churches and faith based communities have said the same to me. It is definitely a season to be looking out for one another and I am grateful that you are prepared to extend your pastoral gift at this time. I’d encourage you to keep an eye out for other leaders that you are in contact with too.
I am convinced that we are called into community in Christ, and that the questions you raise are entirely consitent with God’s calling out. It is refreshing to be cared for on the basis of our relationality in Him, feel free to exercise your gifts in the same manner when you detect potential issues in the future. Even responding to your questions like this reminds me of the support network around us and encourages me not to hold on too tightly to the problems… blogging as therapy!
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
Thanks for your reassurance CS!
“This present season is significantly different, I am aware of a far greater level of spiritual activity and a number of other key leaders, in other churches and faith based communities have said the same to me.”
I think this is part of what we need to be conscious of actually… to connect with others who are also working in your local community for networking, sharing resources and prayer… importantly prayer!!!
I think some well meaning Christians (and I count myself in this) can find themselves out of their depth with mental illness and addiction issues… if Christian (Salvos, Wesley, Anglicare, etc.) organisations and government / social work / medical agencies, plus local churches, plus advocacy groups, plus can work together… this offers both those who struggle with life, and those who care for them, the best chance to become (and stay) whole.
As you’ve discerned, it’s a huge social / spiritual issue and getting bigger… this is much bigger than individual people and individual churches can manage alone.
Gotta luv TFW bloggers…
Good thoughts, challenges, questions, pastoral care and accountability… how did Alan define “church?”
My “theological / spiritual voice” is not developed in isolation but in dialogue and in active participation in community. I have previously aired my concerns about “purely academic theology” and there’s no need to continually voice criticism - however one of the things I have appreciate about Alan is that his theology is reaped from the field of praxis. My theological foundations and my spirituality have to be able to be applied to the circumstances that I find myself in day by day. So I tend to include the issues of everday life as I reflect how I have seen God at work there. This community of bloggers has become a field of praxis and I pray that there is much sowing and reaping that will continue from these blogalogues…
My response to a number of the issues raised in the last few posts…
Janet re: burn-out, mental illness, addiction etc.
Wayne re: motivation for being missional?
Royal Daughter’s observations and questions
…involves some observations about the nature of imago Dei
I hope that what follows, unlike prior posts, is not too confusing… This gets to the root of some of the things I have tried to explain in the past, it is one of the primal keys in my understanding of life and mission. There are spiritual keys in the understanding of imago Dei, as a root issue for health and wholeness, and as the foundational issue that mission is a response to… however I am struggling to frame my thinking in intelligible language (what’s new!) Whatever is froth and bubble may well be… please add your thoughts, comments, questions and requests for clarification…
My sense of imago Dei is that the image of God is created in a framework of plurality. In our culture we impose an individualistic misinterpretation (as I re-read my own prior comment I realised that by noting “we have not recovered our “image” either individually or together,” I contributed to this dislocation.) The image cannot be recovered individually, as the image is not individual, in the human sense. What we are recovering – the image of God – is a relational plurality.
My processing of Barth’s writing (I don’t want to blame Barth for any development that is mine and flawed!) is that the image of God exists in relationality - the image of God IS the reality of the relationship that exists within the community (communitas might be the more appropriate term, but I haven’t given time to consider that issue just yet!) of the Godhead. As human beings, we are created in God’s image, this is the reality that is invested in relationship between God and humanity - so in Genesis we read that God created humanity in “their” image, male and female together - the image of God is not the human body/soul/spirit per se, but the reality of the relationship that subsequently exists between God and people and between people themselves, in community with God. God pursues creation to restore it and us to relationship within the Godhead. We who have encountered the revelation that, in Christ, we have already been included in that relationship, in response, pursue that relationship with others and pursue others in that relationship – and should also respond by seeking the welfare of all that the Creator has created.
Wayne’s concern, over the possibility of attempting mission from the wrong motivation is valid, unless mission is initiated from uncovering the incompleteness of relationship – people are missing from the community God has already established from prior to human history. We know this relationally, someone is missing from the family, and are moved out of the communal relationship of love to seek them out – the missional approach is a fruit that arises from recovering the image of God at the root. This kind of missional approach can look like the typical evangelistic activity, but founded in imago Dei, it has a completely different motivation.
Understanding of God is a community response - not the work of individuals. That’s not to say that there is not also a need for individual thought, reflection, meditation and personal worship, but that this takes place as a connection with the community of the Godhead. We connect in personal relationship in the Godhead, in order that we might consider and reshape our piece of the jigsaw, and subsequently lay our piece again on the table alongside others, to develop a more complete picture. Each piece is incomprehensible outside of the whole, and the piece we each have is not just a concept held in the human mind. Each piece is relationship with God, which we subsequently bring to bear in our relationship in community. It is also important to recognise that the status of our relationship is the reality of Christ’s relationship, since we have been called out into Him. Relationship develops as I apply the convictions and revelation of God the Father, through the Son, by the Holy Spirit in my life, alongside others.
When we consider the vitality of the root, we recognise that theology cannot be separated from ecclesia or praxis, as they each are fruits on the vine – the root being the fertile soil of imago Dei. I encounter the image of God in relationship in the Godhead and in relationship in His community; authentic ecclesia. As relationship develops authentically, the image is clarified – acts of religion that are not inspired from a relational foundation are revealed as pointless – even “being missional” can become idolatry when authentic focus is lost…
The fracturing of the image, that the Royal Daughter raises, comes in our brokenness, firstly from our finite inability to comprehend the infinite, and also in assertions of our individualistic concepts over the relational reality of the community. In our inability to accept our place in community, instead asserting our rights as individuals, we present a particular aspect of God as dominant. We idolise that aspect and deny the whole… so “denominationalism,” and certain ways of doing church, reading the Bible etc become idolatry, as an aspect is exalted above the whole. The consequence is a God recreated in the image of humanity - frail and finite God, incapable of fulfilling the Words of Promise we read… our God made of straw is not the God who is seeking out His creation.
Individually we are not destined or designed to comprehend the reality of God. It is only potentially possible in community because, it is only in relationship within community that we can begin to represent the image of our communal relational God. For example in Matthew 18
Jesus says “where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them” the image of God exists in the reality of the relationship. The insistence of two or three withesses throughout Scripture is God’s insistence on community relationships. The key to healthy life is found in relationship that reflects imago Dei.
If the mark of the Godhead is communal relationship, the mark of the enemy is individualism and isolation. We need to include in the equation of life an opposing force who continually seeks to distract and dissuade us, to confuse and intimidate, to have us focus on things other than the centrality of God… The focus on self, individualism, consumerism, personal rights over communal relationality and so on… are all marks of the beast that are prevalent in our society and in forms of the “church” that are not birthed out of imago Dei…
I realise that this blogalogue is neither concise nor clear, but I’m still wrestling with the limitation of my finite mind, in trying to sort my thinking out in this area. I hope some of it makes some sense and I look forward to wrestling further as the flaws and absurdities are revealed in the reflections of others…
Slainte mhor agus a h-uile beannachd duibh
(Good health and every good blessing to you)
A Celtic Son
But we love wrestling with you in this space, CS, and even in your long silence were not far from you in the Spirit.
One day we will have a chance to talk more about the spiritual reality of the church gathered in heaven now…
But our willingness to be transparent in our various current vulnerabilities is that essential liminality that “spurs us on to love and good deeds” and helps us mature…and as we move toward each other, each one bringing our own gifts and observations concerning our environment and the challenge ahead, we cling to each other as we find out way home together…and we forge communitas…and we are all stronger for the struggle.
What an amazing, frightening, chaotic, exhilarating life-and-death adventure Jesus invites us to share…together!
Be blessed,
Love your encouragement Royal Daughter… many thanks
A Celtic Son
May I suggest… this is a profoundly important topic… our fundamental beliefs actually do shape our behaviours… and our health and wholeness.
Is there the germ of a book in this discussion… a theology for the emerging missional church?
This goes out to anyone wishing to respond but mainly to Alan,
I have been thinking very seriously about ecclesiology ever since I attended a Forge intensive earlier this year. I want to ask you a question about the very premise of your Forgotten Ways “thesis”, that is, why we even need to change the way church is done.
(I’m sure some have just read the sentences above and written me off as institutional Christian in denial but please understand that I want to be effective for Christ just as I know you do too)
Your “premise” as I am defining it is that the current model of church has been out-moded by culture and because of this cultural “gap” the world and the church cannot relate and you point to the statistics as evidence for this hypothesis. – I call it a premise simply because this is the very reason for your “thesis” and book.
However, I wonder if this is truly the case. Is it at all possible that the reason the church is shrinking in the West (or Western context) is less to do with a miss-match of cultures and more to do with the fact that less than 2% of Christians ever witness about the faith that they have to non-Christians?
Please think about this question, I have, and I would much appreciate this question to be taken in the spirit it was intended - as an honest question. Let’s leave semantics aside as much as possible.
A book on the theology of the missional church would of course include much on the nature of ecclesiology!!!! Maybe CS, Al and others could whack in chapters. (sorry… my mad idea for the day)
Hi Isaac,
your question is a valid one and one that we do always need to bear in mind - change for change sake is seldom a sufficient reason - however change for God sake is! Your question is the same question that has led me on the quest I am on. I have concluded that the institutional/ attractional model does have a weak ecclesiology, however we are in a season of transition and it continues to have a place in methodology. If we continue to do this as our only way of church, we are doomed to continue in the downward spiral we are in. So even from a pragmatic perspective it would be foolish to continue to carry all of our eggs in this basket.
Although Alan does point to statistics as a significant premise for the thesis behind “The Forgotten Ways,” the root issues are a comprehension of what is biblical, in terms of ecclesiology, and whether the dominant Christendom/ attractional/ institutional model actually complies with the biblical model. I have found Alan’s thinking provocative and rather than simply a reaction to a cultural impetus, I sense a prophetic call to the church.
When I first connected with Christ 18 years ago I joined a thriving institutional/ attractional church, over the years I rose in leadership joining the staff. Over time I began to discover elements of the practice of church that were inconsistent with my comprehension of the biblical basis of church. Ten years ago I resigned, and have been on a quest to try to develop church life in a western suburban context that is closer to biblical ecclesiology. I’m a long way from getting it right, but working through the issues, in a community that has joined with me over the last seven years on that journey.
The nature of your question “why we even need to change the way church is DONE” betrays part of the concern that I share with Alan - in the biblical term “ecclesia,” church is not something we DO, but it is clearly a people that we are and are becoming, a peaople called out into Christ. I don’t assume that people in the existing church culture are not for Christ - I lead a church that I have come to term “hybrid” - a term adopted from Janet via this blog. Our church gathering on a Sunday looks in many ways like a typical Sunday service, and there are a number of people for whom Sunday is their only engagement. However at the heart of the leadership team is an impulse towards mission, that comes from a heart for the things that mobe the heart of God and underlies how we see ourselves as a church. We have various missional elements in the weekly life of our church - and have more missional groups in development that are connected to the hub of church leadership.
Your concern that “less than 2% of Christians ever witness about the faith that they have to non-Christians” is valid - though I would point to the fact that the basis of your thesis is from a statistical position, which you question in Alan’s thesis - the fundamental question is what is the root that determines this lack of motivation to mission? Alan would suggest - and I would concur - that an attractional model of church, itself not a biblical model, feeds this lack of motivation and is an unhealthy root which results in lack of fruit. My conclusion is that “church” as we know it in the west does not reflect the image of God, which is God’s primal purpose for humanity and which Christ came to restore. Because we have moved from a vibrant God-led life to institutionalising the legal aspects of how we “do” church we have lost the heart of mission that is a fruit of the heart of God.
My concern, contrary to your conclusion, is that what church has done in the past is actually engage with it’s cultural setting - that Christendom was integrally co-dependently linked with the dominant culture. What Alan is seeking to do is call us back to our biblical roots, to define church with an ecclesiology that is consistent with biblical rationale, to ways that have always existed but have been forgotten. Basically as I understand it he points to the early church and the Chinese church as models, with an ecclesiology that can withstand close scrutiny and measurement against Scripture.
Having raised the questions about Alan’s thesis, I wonder Isaac if you have an ecclesiology that provides biblical support for an attractional/ institutional model of church? I’d be interested in your thoughts it may be that you are on a similar journey to that which I’ve been travelling…
Slainte
A Celtic Son
P.S. Janet - your mad idea is an interesting thought. I’d be interested in more discussion and exploration on how the concept of imago Dei, as I’ve expressed it, sits with other missional thinkers - though I think it may constitute a distraction to the focus of Alan’s blog.
And I know our brother Brad is busy, but his voice would be a good one to include in the discussion and exploration, Celtic Son and Janet
(Did you read that, Brad 
)
Can I just say, that as a Scottish nationalist, I hate that flag beside my name, to me it is a symbol of repression
Ohh, what have we stirred up here, James? Sorry mate, we just installed this feature. Can you live with it for now, you must have lived with it for so long anyhow.
Isaac, I think that is a valid question.
Some very fundamental questions in return that I have been wrestling with are ones like, what makes someone a “christian” and another not? Why do we have to label people as “non-Christians” and therefore see the need to “witness” or “missionalise” such people? What agendas does that place in my own relationship with such people?
I also agree with Celtic Son about church being something that we “do” versus something that we are. The church is the people - not a building, an organisation, a Sunday gathering, or even mission. It is people. It is life and living and the Kingdom of God. Methodology takes on a much lower priority when we truly come to a deep understanding that you and I are the church. I don’t “go” to church, I “am” the church….
Just some thoughts….
God desires that all come to know him and be reconciled to him and other humans. So, I have appreciated the way Alan and Michael have used the term “not-yet-Christian” in their books…it is a more hopeful phrase.
The Chinese house churches feel strongly that, if they are diligent to obey, that all of China will one day be Christian. This is a good frame of mind…not to talk about all the time, but to inform one’s actions.
I’m much less interested in “witnessing” or “missionalising” folks than I am in loving them the way God loves them…the same way God loves me. Words are only helpful to the not-yet-Christian…when they’re helpful and consistent with actions…which is not as often as one would think!
Blessings,
Thanks Celtic Son for your in-depth reply and others for your contributions.
By way of explanation: My wife and I, a month and a half ago, left our church of many years and I know many of you have probably done this and know that it is a painful thing to do - especially when you are leaving because of problems with leadership! CS – I imagine your departure was very painful and I appreciate your commitment to being a good and faithful servant of Christ.
Since leaving I have both attended a Forge intensive and visited a “institutional” and mainly “attractional” church congregation. This whole process, while being painful, has left my wife and I in the most interesting position of not having any real ties to the doctrine of church itself. So to clarify, though I attend an attractional church at the moment this by no means limits me in the consideration of other church models.
As for “church is what we are, not what we do” (not a verbatim quote) I entirely agree. Suffice it to say that despite semantics, you knew what I meant and responded accordingly – thank you.
You said, “the fundamental question is what is the root that determines this lack of motivation to mission? Alan would suggest - and I would concur - that an attractional model of church, itself not a biblical model, feeds this lack of motivation and is an unhealthy root which results in lack of fruit.” If you could I would like it if you explained how the model itself feeds a lack of motivation in the individual.
I’m sure everyone here agrees that we don’t need to throw out the baby with the bathwater and abolish all organised forms of church, but instead be implementing whatever style of meeting that will encourage and build up the saints for works of service.
Dear Wayne, can I challenge you with scripture? “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” [HEB 10:14] I reckon you to be a person who sincerely wants people to be saved but I think the attitude you are revealing is a treacherous one. This ties into the “not-yet-Christian” idea. While it’s a very “nice” little phrase, it suggests that if left to their own devices an unregenerate individual (as unpalatable as that term has become) will become a Christian. “How can the hear without someone preaching to them?”
Yes, over the years God has divinely and sovereignly revealed himself to individuals and effectively said (audibly) “I am Jesus, believe in me and read the Bible.” But this has historically been very limited and I believe a last-resort of God because of our slowness to witness. Wayne, your friends need you. Your family needs you. If they haven’t turned away from their sin and trusted in Jesus then when they die they will face judgement and will be punished. My friends and family need me too. You need to have an agenda with your friends if they are unsaved – they could die at any time. By no means should you be insincere or awkward but the gospel (the good news of Christ’s sacrifice that makes good our enmity with God) needs to be preached.
Institutional or Missional Cell?? If it encourages and teaches, trains and equips, worships and prays while maintaining genuine community then God can and will use it.
(Sorry for the length of reply)
Isaac,
Leaving the church that was my first home church was traumatic. My wife’s father was one of three men who pioneered the church 50 years before, I thought and prayed long and hard before making the decision. I don’t come to my conclusions about the nature of the attractional church lightly, or without pain. I love my God and I love His church… I love His church so much that it would be ungodly of me to keep silent, where I fear that the church is being led in ways that are opposed to God’s intention.
That doesn’t mean that I discredit God’s ability to operate within a system that is flawed, but that it’s foolishness to continue to do things that we are aware don’t work. Jesus used many agricultural parables to outline His thinking, a farmer cannot make crops grow, what he does do is try to create the best possible environment, to encourage the best yield from the seed he sows.
There are a number of levels at which the attractional model of church contributes to a lack of missional motivation in people. I’m not attempting to say that all people within the attractional models of church are ungodly, simply point out that we make it much more difficult to fulfil godly potential and calling, in a system that actually works against a number of principles of the Kingdom. In response to your question here are a few of the problem issues off the top of my head…
The attractional model continues to encourage people to hear from God via a professional priesthood, rather than develop a personal relationship and accountability. It is often the fuit of an unhealthy co-dependent relationship, where the “laity” can rest easy in their own lack of biblical knowledge and relationship with God, because that’s what they pay the pro’s for, and the pro’s (I am paid in a part-time capacity by my church) get the satisfaction of being needed by people!
The professional capability of this “priesthood,” tends to intimidate people and discourages them from exercising their own God-given gifts - because there is no way they could be as good as the professionals.
In the west, the attractional church tends to educate in the intellectual methodology of our education system, rather than the hands-on apprenticeship model that Jesus employed. This encourages people to consider that, if they have given mental assent to a particular issue, they have done something, when in fact they’ve not done anything and not grown themselves.
By its very nature the attractional model seeks to attract people to meetings, where we can sit and be fed, fattened and often fleeced, yet Jesus called His followers to go. The more one resembles a spiritual couch potato, absorbing increasing amounts of spiritual fat without exercising faith, the less likely one is to get off one’s backside and be Jesus in someone else’s backyard…
The attractional model tends to require significant financial and people resources simply to maintain its presence, buldings, staff, infra-structure etc., leaving a relatively small proportion of it’s finances for missional purposes.
The attractional model encourages people to replace their personal responsibility for mission, with a commitment to finance professionals who are employed to undertake mission on their behalf.
I could go on…
I’m also not making any claims that people in the emergent/emerging church environment are perfect either - simply that there is a real effort to create an environment that is more conducive to people being released to be the church that Jesus intended.
Isaac, I’d also suggest that your challenge to Wayne (from ROMANS 10 rather than Hebrews!) presents a very limited approach to Paul’s intention. There are a whole range of contextual challenges that lay the groundwork for the effectiveness of our preaching - that’s not to say we don’t preach, but that often what passes for preaching lacks the essential heart of God for His lost children and alienates people. Complying with the letter of the law and missing the heart behind it is the thing that Jesus was most opposed to. There were places He travelled with His followers and didn’t preach and others where He could do no miracles - like Him we need to listen to the voice of the Father and only do what He tells us to do.
Also the spirit behind my use of the terminology “not-yet-Christian” is not at all as you suggest - it is a statement of faith, believing that my God is sovereign and that He is capable of bringing every person into relationship with Him, even using me at times. We need to be open to direction by His Spirit as to what action to take in each given situation. I am reminded of words attributed to Francis of Assisi “preach the gospel at all times and if necessary use words.” I also see frequently in the New Testament that signs and wonders follow preaching of God’s Word and I think that should be as much of a concern as whether people are preaching!
God can certainly use any means, institutional or missional, however he has set certain principles in place. The ecclesiology He sets forth in His Word is much more likely to bear fruit, than for us to continue with methodology that has departed from His plan. We need to practice what we preach and speak the truth in love…
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
Isaac, I understand what you are saying, but how do you discern whether someone is a “christian” or not? Could people be rejecting an image of Jesus that is a misrepresentation of Him, but actually be following Him in their heart? It is up to God to judge.
The problem with having an agenda like the one you say above is that this will colour how you act towards such people. It is actually insulting and off-putting to be treated with an attitude like you are encouraging us to treat “non-Christians”. It usually drives people away from God and Jesus, not towards Him.
If I love people for who they are, not try and discern whether they are “saved” or not, and just be who I am, I will naturally talk about Jesus, because I just can’t help it! He is everything to me! But I don’t have to have any agenda or ambition to do it. It is an expression of who I am…..
Have to say CS… I think your writing does deserve a wider audience than TFG alone. Perhaps you’d better start pasting your past and present posts into word files for a chapter or two of this hypothetical book!!!!
I appreciate your confidence Janet and perhaps in time I will be disciplined enough - like Alan - to gather my thoughts more completely and publish!
Wayne you make a good point, that there are many images of Jesus and not all are the Christ!
Isaac, I once learned a lesson about speaking the truth in love - building the foundations of a loving relationship with someone is like building a bridge into their lives ( a healthy bridge is built in both directions, but that’s a deeper story for another time!) The weight of truth, that the bridge can carry, is directly related to the weight of love we’ve poured into building the foundations. All too often we try to carry a weighty truth across a flimsy bridge and it collapses, stranding us from the person we’ve been trying to reach and denying them access to significant truth. It has been said that people don’t care how much you know, until they know how much you care…
Preaching, without building relationship, often actually contributes to isolating people from the very truth we so passionately want them to hear… and removes them from the Jesus we so passionately want them to meet. The fact that people don’t share Jesus with others as speedily as we might like, does not necessarily make them guilty of not passionately loving Jesus or of not desperately wanting to share Jesus with their loved ones. It is more frequently a case of more haste less speed my friend!
Slainte
A Celtic Son
A little off topic but I thought I owed James an explantion!
So, sorry about the Union Jack James… your IP address is what determines the flag and yours is registered as the UK… sorry!
As a fellow with an ALBA sticker on my car I can sympathize!
Hi Wayne,
You said, “how do you discern whether someone is a “christian” or not?” Easily, by their fruit.
James said, “Faith without works is dead.” We know he didn’t mean that we are justified at all by our works but if we have no works then we have no faith.
Paul says,
“What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.” 1 Cor 5:12-13
You could say, “See Paul says, ‘don’t judge those outside…’” But Paul is indicating that it is possible to discern whether or not a believer is a true believer or not.
Ultimately God judges the heart. True, but a christian without fruit is no christian at all.
CS - your comments are great (thanks for the correction, Romans… of course) I’ll need more time to respond though
This is a great conversation folks. I am enjoying the insights. You know, there is so much wisdom in God’s people. Love it!
Yes, I agree that the fruit of one’s life give a good indication of where they stand. And I have seen fruit from people who deny Jesus with their lips (or a certain image or perception of Jesus), yet their fruit would almost indicate something different. Likewise, I have seen many people who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far from him, and there is little or no fruit to back up their claims.
What I have found though, is that when we have an ambition or agenda for mission, it actually pushes people away. The question I am asking myself is, why do I have any ambition or agenda for mission. Perhaps it says more about my own issues and ego than it does about a genuine love that I have for the people I am trying to “missionalise”. I can feel very good about myself when I’ve had a “Jesus conversation” with someone - almost like I can tick that box off, and now I can tell someone about it so that they can see how spiritual I am.
I’m exaggerating a little in all this just to make the point. The question still remains that I need to keep asking of myself - why do I have an ambition for mission? Where does this come from? Is this more about satisfying my own ego and desire for significance?
Perhaps if I can die to my own ambitions in this area, I might find that I actually start living it…..
While I do agree that fruit identifies the root, I’d add to Wayne’s comments my concerns about jumping too quickly into the “justification by fruit” argument…
From Jesus’ perspective, in John 15
, true fruit only comes from remaining in Him, and the outcome is not just “fruit” but “fruit that lasts.” It takes time to determine that we are bearing fruit that will last - people are all too quick to point to elements of fruit in life now, to give credibility to what they are doing… but will it last? Does it actually point people to God or towards myself - is it authentically serving others or thinly veiled self aggrandisement?
What about Jesus teaching in Matthew 7
, Eugene Peterson has Jesus express it this way;
“I can see it now—at the Final Judgment thousands strutting up to me and saying, ‘Master, we preached the Message, we bashed the demons, our God-sponsored projects had everyone talking.’ And do you know what I am going to say? ‘You missed the boat. All you did was use me to make yourselves important. You don’t impress me one bit. You’re out of here.’”
There’s more to “fruit” than just what meets the eye…
In 2 Corinthians 11
and Galatians 1
, Paul speaks to followers of Jesus, about being deceived and following a different Jesus or a different gospel. We must all take care that we are not being misled by people who claim to have fruit. There is a requirement for fruit that remains and for spiritual discernment - so often leaders who appeared to be godly have been toppled from their pedestal, while none of the other “godly” leaders around them discerned any problems.
A bowl of wax fruit manufactured as an ornament can look as real as the real thing… until you take a bite of it! God calls us as instruments not ornaments and in reality it calls for sacrifice and death. If our declarations of faith see people as targetrs to build our own reputation we are in grave danger - what is it that the Father would have you and I do… do that!
Predicting His death in John 12
Jesus says this; “unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.” The true fruit of an apple - the fruit that remains - is the orchard that grows from the seeds that are planted, from the seed in the apples that grow from the seed it planted. It may take generations to identify the fruit that remains from your life and mine…
I have heard it said, though I have not been able to verify it, that a young man in a farming community had a heart to share Jesus with his friends, but he was shy and ineffective. He had failed on occasion and was slow to share his faith… in all of his life he only saw one of his friends encounter relationship with Jesus… but his friend was Billy Graham.
More haste less speed my friends…
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
Well said Cs. May we die to our selves, our egos, and our own sense of significance so that we can truly live and be the person God created us to be….
Wayne,
I think you’ve identified something very important without necessarily knowing it. You said, “I have seen fruit from people who deny Jesus with their lips… yet their fruit would almost indicate something different. Likewise, I have seen many people who acknowledge Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far from him…”
You’ve highlighted two very important types of people. Mark 10:17-22
tells us about a man who had “kept all the commandments from birth” - someone who had exceptional outward fruit (he would have been giving to the poor etc.) yet was far from God and didn’t turn from his sin (love of money) and put his trust in Jesus. Despite his ‘goodness’ he was wicked at heart (Jeremiah 17:9
- The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?)
The second is like him. The ‘believer’ who says all the right things and may even believe the right things but doesn’t live like it. John 14:15
says that if we love Jesus we will obey his commands. Again James tells us faith without works is no faith at all. (Conversely works without faith are similarly useless – Isaiah 64:6
)
Wayne, you also said, “…and I have seen fruit from people who deny Jesus with their lips…” and I am sure that this person is a very nice person, but according to Matthew 10:32-33
If the deny Jesus before men, Jesus will deny them before our Father.
) and are deserving of his wrath John 3:36
. The only option is to fall upon God’s grace and accept Jesus as payment for our unrighteousness. Jesus says, “…no one comes to the Father except through me” John 14:6
.
“What I have found though, is that when we have an ambition or agenda for mission, it actually pushes people away.” – I would like to know if this is something you have personally experienced or is merely anti-confrontational evangelisms’ party-line. There are, I admit, many cases where the sincere but unreasonable and over-bearing believers have “shoved religion down other people’s throats”, so to speak, and haven’t spoken the truth in love. This has been very damaging and isolating for many unbelievers, pushing them further from God.
However when a person is confronted by God’s Holy standard (The Decalogue or “The Ten Commandments”) they know they have fallen short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23
I must also admit that I have been slow to witness too – and I wonder how many people was I “the only Jesus they would ever meet” for?
I throw it over to anyone for comment.
Blessings,
Isaac and Wayne, what about the parable Jesus tells of the two sons. The father asks the first son to go and work in the fields…the son refuses. The father then asks the second son, who says he will go…but doesn’t follow through. The first son, realizing his error, goes ahead and does what the father asked. Who was obedient?
Then, as A Celtic Son has said so well so many times before, the incarnational/missional impulse comes from the fact that God became flesh in Jesus in order to show us his love and truth relationally…not bang the tin drum of the sinner in the hands of an angry God.
Jesus said that the world will know we are his disciples by our love for one another. He said that loving God and loving each other essentially upholds the essence of God’s standard. When we get serious about our devotion to love, we will begin to see fruit…the first in the list of the fruit of the spirit happens to be love, then joy, peace, patience….
hmmm…I seem to remember that my first comment on this blog back in the end of January was talking about looking for fruit….
Blessings,
Isaac, it is definitely something I have personally experienced. I have been a pastor, a church planter, and very involved with Forge. For different reasons (some of them very painful), I am no longer involved in any of the above.
I have experienced what it’s like to have an ambition for mission and to preach it! I was never a person that was militant about it, but tended to wait for the right opportunity. I didn’t want to see people as a target - but even still, my ambition for mission meant that I still created a divide between “us” and “them”, and I didn’t completely love people as people, but there was definitely a hint of agenda.
Things are different now. I am not a pastor. I don’t have the pressure to be an “example”. My doing is being replaced by my being. I don’t need any of the above to be significant. I don’t see people as “us” and “them” any more. Hence, there is no agenda, ambition or need to have to missionalise a particular group of people.
The amazing thing is that somehow I think people sense this. My friends and neighbours relate to me differently, probably because I relate to them a little bit differently. It is very subtle. With no agenda to have to “witness”, strangely enough it seems that every conversation I have with people turns to God, spirituality and Jesus. I don’t plan it, look for it, aspire to it, it just happens.
I feel like I am transitioning from doing Christ-like things to being Christ-like. It is not my doing, but a dieing to myself, so that His Spirit can live in and through me and transform me into His likeness.
That’s a little of my story. I hope it sheds some light as to why I feel quite passionate about the things we have been talking about….
Hi Wayne,
thanks for your post. As a pastor, church planter and remotely connected to Forge I have an inkling of the pressure you refer to… The sources of my pressure may be unique, but I’m sure you identify with the pressure nonetheless.
There is a spiritual pressure, seeking to help me succumb to my weaknesses, as well as a soul-ish pressure to live up to the expectations of other people. There is a pressure built in the difference between what is true and what I want to be true, because I have an agenda in my heart that is for me and not for God… I encounter the pressure of the difference between developing an image of fruit and seeing the authentic fruit that lasts, which only comes through remaining in the vine and letting His nourishment flow through…
In my case there are a huge range of issues that I didn’t seem to have before - they were always there, it’s just that under pressure they’re revealed. It is an incredible challenge to resist the temptation to balance upon the pedestal that people love to help you up onto… do I love God or just the attention?
Fundamentally, I try to rest in the knowledge that I’m adopted and that I can follow the example of my big Brother… get out to parties and weddings… be moved for my community and my friends… know that not everyone will love me, agree with me or follow me in His steps. I don’t always live there, and when I’m not being who I’m meant to be that’s when the pressure builds…
Yet, my Father is always there when I do get over myself, my weaknesses and the temptations that face me, enough to drop into His presence… and that is enough. I pray that you know the reality of your acceptance in Him, your inclusion in the beauty of the relationship of the Godhead - your value in Him.
I pray that as your journey continues, the influence of His grace alive in you, continues to pervade the community around you, with the vibrant presence of God. May you live in the freedom of the gospel, the freedom to be completely who you are created to be, and may the blessing of God in your life, extend to bless the nations of the earth.
Slainte mhor agus a h-uile beannachd duibh
(Good health and every good blessing to you)
A Celtic Son
Thanks CS! That is a great prayer and one that I would totally agree with for myself and for you too…
You are right too about the pressure between what I want to be true and what actually is true, and between an image of fruit and authentic fruit. That is why Jesus says we must die to ourselves, for only then can we actually live out the difference….
Prior to planting, I was a staff pastor in a large pentecostal church… as much as I had come to disagree with the direction, prosperity, ecclesiology, it was my spiritual home… it broke my heart to leave - I had to get my wife to drive home.
It continues to upset me when people are separated from the opportunity to connect with Christ through a local church, because we are all so bloody-minded about our doctrines and denominations (now should that actually be spelled “deMoNi-machinations?”) that we’d miss Jesus Himself if He actually was in our gatherings! I do pray that I can receive the grace of that prayer and not be another statistic…
Slainte
A Celtic Son
Biblical High Noon…
There are few things that upset me quite like a churchactivity I have come to call “Biblical High Noon” - it involves believers launching scripture verses as bullets, attempting to kill another’s arguments… In the first instance IU must admit to occasionally being guilty of falling back into my own pre-conditioning. I acknowledge that it’s not necessarily my place to play Bible teacher on someone else’s blog, but this problem is rife in the “church,” it’s been carried out here and given the nature of this blog, I feel compelled to make a point.
To do justice requires a lengthy post and, though I’m prone to that, the typically excessive length of my posting has been challenged in the past and I accept that excessively lengthy posts can be tiresome. It may stir up a hornet’s nest (or a few fleas!) perhaps no concerns at all, however I look forward to your response to what follows…
I have given this post a title and introduction so that… if you have no interest in this issue, you can choose to ignore this lengthy monologue… if you do have interest you can consider and contribute to dialogue…
As a child, on occasion a treasured older relative would take me out for the day. They’d walk me into town and into Woolworths - it was a big store with wooden floors and an Aladdin’s cave for a child. In the centre were a couple of rows of wooden bins, each filled with a pile of brightly wrapped sweeties and lollies, above the area was a huge sign labelled “pick’n'mix.” Unlike Forrest Gump I was not limited to blindly choosing from the box, unaware of what I would get, instead I would be allowed to select a few of my favourites and avoid the ones I didn’t like. I could fill the bag with a different mixture or all of one favourite kind…
A few years ago it dawned on me that I had brought my childish “pick’n'mix” consumerism into my reading of the Bible. I realised that this is the way I had been taught to read the Bible, but it created problems when I tried to communicate with people who had a different type of favourite. I came to realise that some people actually like liquorice, some people like hard centres, some people like bitter sweets and, despite it not being my taste, they would gravitate towards those lollies in the Biblical selection.
The influence of consumerism pervades our western culture, invading our hearts and souls and minds. We have been taught to grab verses, like favourite sweetmeats, out of their context and use them as key texts to justify a position, that is often not consistent with the revelation of God across the whole counsel of the Word of God, and is certainly inconsistent with the spirit God intends us to approach His Word in.
That’s not an excuse to ignore the Word of God, but a challenge to get over our lazy consumerism and put time aside to get to know Him more intimately. I have grown to realise that my diet of soft centres and dark chocolate needs to be supported by others who have embraced liquorice, hard centres, bitter sweets (Okay - sweets and lollies are not a balanced diet… add fruit, vegies, greens etc., hopefully you recognise the point of the limited analogy!) The point is that it takes a community to develop any coherent and cogent understanding of the Word, we need to wrestle with aspects of the truth that don’t suit our personality, liking or experience, to determine if they are wrong or if we are wrong and need to be changed, by an encounter with the living Word of God.
We are justified by our faith and that faith is expressed in a loving response to the Word of God, already at work in our lives – in essence we are called into Christ and we are in the process together of becoming who we are. Our role as believers is to build relationship in God, to receive revelation from Him, to bring the revelation we have received from the Word, humbly before our community, that the whole community might be taught, corrected where we as a community are wrong and the Word can be applied to training us together in righteousness.
When our focus on the Scriptures is to wield them individually to make MY point over and against someone else’s - we do not have the spirit of the Word! We are to be FOR one another, not against, when I find myself angry on the inside at a brother or sister, I have often found a portion of my sinful humanity and have the opportunity to deal with it. I can choose to entertain my anger and give the devil a foothold, or I can to bring it to the subjection of the grace of God at work in my life, to submit to Him, to allow Him to lead, to die to self, to pick up my cross… Have you ever considered that when the devil tempts you, he opens up to your awareness a weakness that you can now choose to strengthen?
Placing emphasis on specific Scripture verses, when they are contradicted elsewhere in the canon of Scripture, is misrepresenting the nature and purpose of God - we have a name for it… heresy. The activity of throwing a seed here and there is not a way to intentionally grow fruit, much less fruit that lasts. The ability to toss an occasional scripture into an argument is no proof of God’s intention. Let me remind us all that, when He was tempted in the desert by the devil, the devil threw scripture verses at Jesus, He replied by framing them in the context of the intention of the Word of God.
Much of Jesus’ teaching corrected the dominant understanding of Old Covenant , as He who is the Word revealed the intention behind the Word – we live in the shadow of the Cross, in a New Covenant with a resurrected theology. We have a responsibility to take time to ensure - to the best of our ability - that the way we use the Bible is consistent with the intention of God - not just our own intention to prove a point. We must remain open to redirection by the Word as He speaks to us and reveals more of who He is.
Read Paul’s second letter to Timothy – especially 2 Timothy 2
. How we handle the Word is a fruit of our relationship with Him; a “pick’n’mix” relationship is neither God’s intention, nor – despite our own preferences – is it a spiritual reality. I have often met people who have fallen out with God, because they relied on the shallow teachings they received from a preacher and/or teacher, and discovered that what they were taught was not consistent with their life’s experience.
Some thoughts – firstly, if you are a teacher you should remember the people that Jesus challenged most were teachers, and James’s challenges in James 3
regarding use of the tongue and the responsibility of teachers. Secondly, if you are a disgruntled believer because of prior teachers, it’s time to take responsibility for your own relationship with God, to exercise that responsibility for the sake of the believing community that God designed you for, and get over using the deficient understanding or faith of another human being as an excuse – often the reason their faith is deficient is because no-one has bothered to raise the issue with them, maybe that’s what you’re supposed to do! Thirdly, life experience is not always an indicator of spiritual truth – there is much deception – believers in Christ are called to make Him, the Word of God, the foundation and review our experience in the light of that relationship – not value our experience higher than the foundation… though we often do! Fourthly - if you are someone who doesn’t have a relationship in Christ and it is primarily because of fruitless, forceful or faithless “Christians” I personally apologise - don’t judge the reality of who Jesus is based on a bunch of tossers like me who continually stuff it up!
According to the breadth of Scripture, Jesus IS the Word of God - all things were created and are sustained by Him, all things come through Him and in Him the Law is fulfilled. Read John 19
and consider how often the passage speaks of the “scriptures being fulfilled” and then Jesus declared “it is finished,” what is John revealing to us, by the Spirit of God? Jesus brought the Old Testament to its conclusion, it is inaccurate to simply throw Old Testament scriptures into any discussion without recognition of their fulfillment in Christ - it is tantamount to declaring that Christ’s fulfillment of the Law was irrelevant! We need to challenge ourselves, in the framework of community, when such deficiencies occur. The thoughts are not evil, nor are the people voicing thoughts that are not consistent with the intent of the Word – they present an opportunity for us to get to the truth of an issue.
No individual gets it right on their own – one of the reasons for engaging in this blog is that I have been caught up in a community that challenges me to rethink some of my preconceived notions of God, His nature, His church etc. We have a responsibility to one another to discern the truth together, but the motivation must always be love of others, and the building up of the witness of the community not just proving MY own point.
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
CS I resonate with this whole-heartedly. God’s Word is a revelation of God, His nature, His character and His interaction with His people and they with each other. It is not the only way that God reveals these things, as a written word is limited (as e-mails and sms messages can testify!).
I believe the Bible is not a book that is meant to be used to discern right from wrong, or which direction we should take in life. When it is read like this, it becomes a dead textbook. Instead it is a living revelation and tells us who God is and what He is like. Knowing the character and nature of God helps us in decisions regarding our life direction and discerning “right” from “wrong”….
CS I’d love to hear more of your story and journey if you were willing. If you like you can e-mail me at wayne_nebauer@hotmail.com All the best…
It is so nice to have you back, Celtic Son…I have missed your sharing here. In the time you were away, I wandered over to jesuscreed.com, where I found them blogging on TFW, of all things! There, as in other places, I have found evidence (not the preponderence, thankfully) of just what you described…brothers and sisters lobbing some warped “holy handgrenades” (HT to Monty Python…) at each other…
So, when I wonder whether anyone is really interested in honest, humble dialogue, I run across one of your posts — or others of like spirit — and I am grateful again.
And, CS, I have wondered whether it might be possible to “talk” with you off-line, as well. If so, would you please ask Neal T. to forward an e-mail on to me?
Your words echo in my heart…I treasure sharing in this space with you.
Your Royal Sister
To go back to a simple response Alan had way up there in this post’s conversation…
>You know James, there is a massive gap in the >emerging missional church’s teachings on the Holy >Spirit. I don’t know of one book that fills this >gap. Time to write brother.
I have to shout a sweaty “amen.” One can only hope that there are some wild ones out there with pen in hand right now.
Wayne and Peggy,
Even as I clicked “submit comment” after completing my last post I had a sense the “Biblical High Noon” was too flippant a description. Perhaps “Christian Jihad” or “hate thy neighbour” would be more appropriate, I’m sure with time I could come up with more but I’m really opposed to wasting creative energy in negativity!
I find the preponderence of that kind of behaviour disheartening and the excuses for it pathetic (in the literal rather than accusatory nature of the word!)Fortunately my own initial pathetic response to the anti-christ spirit in the church, is followed soon after by a rising in my spirit, in Christ, seeking after truth!
My initial experiences of blogging were not greatly sucessful and I gave up. I came across TFW blog unintentionally and had no expectations. Prior to engaging here I would have not believed that community could actually develop in a blogspace - I am glad to stand corrected and to be engaged in this form of community with you.
I’ve emailed Neal and asked him to forward my email address - I’m tied up over the weekend with prison visits and with church gathered, but I will get back to you.
Beannachd Dia dhuit
A Celtic Son
A warm fuzzy moment! Yay!
Seriously, its been a great journey with some soul mates.
And CS, your insights are vary welcome and hearty. You have scuha fine mind and spirit. We all loves you!
Wayne said:
“With no agenda to have to “witness”, strangely enough it seems that every conversation I have with people turns to God, spirituality and Jesus. I don’t plan it, look for it, aspire to it, it just happens… I feel like I am transitioning from doing Christ-like things to being Christ-like. It is not my doing, but a dieing to myself, so that His Spirit can live in and through me and transform me into His likeness.”
Wow… I feel this describes the nature of Spirit filled ministry… death to self… no agenda but obedience to the Father and the life and power of the Holy Spirit working through me… no idolatory of “ego” or “professional pride” or “acclaim” or “personal saintliness” or “status as a godly / inspirational leader” … just simplicity. Just seeking to love and live like Jesus. Just obedience. No agenda but love.
I want to be more like this… I sense the power and wonder of it all when all the glory goes to God and it’s not about me… when God actually starts to do amazing, transformational things in others. Sometimes that is so awesome it gets intoxicating… and it easily becomes about me again (”wow, isn’t God using ME in amazing ways?”) How easy it is to be seduced…
We struggle to keep “dying” to self and so the life of Christ and the power of the Spirit can resurrect in and through us…
Galatians 2
: 20 “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
John 14
: 15 “If you love me, you will obey what I command. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for HE LIVES WITH YOU AND WILL BE IN YOU. 18 I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. 19 Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 20 ON THAT DAY YOU WILL REALIZE THAT I AM IN MY FATHER, AND YOU ARE IN ME, AND I AM IN YOU. 21 Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.”
I really, really want this… but I paradoxically work against it all too often.
Very true Janet, very true. That’s why pain is often the pathway to this kind of transformed life. Interesting isn’t it that I’ve never experienced this kind of life more powerfully than I am now that pastoral leadership, and all other titles are no longer mine. A very worthwhile “trade” in my opinion.
I’m certainly still on the journey and by no way have I completely died to myself, and never will this side of eternity. But I find great joy when I sense God taking me on a journey rather than me dictating the terms to satisfy my own ego….
Celtic Son, I can’t help but feel your tome was aimed at me. This is sad, and I am sorry if you have felt that I have used scripture incorrectly, “pick’n'mixing” my way through scripture merely to satisfy my own agenda.
humph… what do I say?
May God be true, and every man a liar!
(That goes for me too)
May we all be in the light, as He is in the light
Isaac,
I just checked TFW site for a moment, I have emails to answer and work to complete and I intended to sort out a few other things but your post is important and I felt I should respond, rather than leave it till later. Your prior post was one element in a series of issues that raised the concern that I responded to… but my tome was not solely and squarely aimed AT you.
I don’t for a moment presume that I have all truth, or that somehow I am more important than anyone else. If I have come across as sitting in judgement then I apologise. I am simply passionate about things that I believe God is passionate about, and handling His Word is one of those concerns. This blog gives us all the opportunity to grow, but it never comes without challenge and being prepared to reconsider our own position.
From the beginning I acknowledged my own guilt in using the Scriptures inappropriately at times. The reality is that at times I still do - I make no claims to perfect knowledge. However, I try to bring my existing theology to the Word of God with the explicit expectation that He will reveal greater aspects of His truth, that His revelation will cause me to have to review my theology and be changed in the process. I’m more concerned to grow into Christ than to be right… when I’m right, based on what I already knew, I learn nothing new.
You wrote that my response made you feel sad, that’s not my intention… frankly I’d be happier if it made you mad. If it motivates you to review where you are at with the Word of God then that’s productive - because I believe that is God’s continual intention for His children. What you make of my comments or do with them is entirely your call… if you are happy with your existing position, that’s a choice we all have to make at times. I’m not sitting in judgement I’m just trying to make a contribution that helps us all to get closer to the truth - the person of Jesus Christ.
Challenge is not a sad thing to me, it is to be welcomed, it is simply an expectation of a limited human mind approaching the infinite Word of God - I speak of myself. The focus is Him, what changes is the person approaching the Word… in my case me. If I can contribute something of what God reveals to me, to the community He has called me to, in a way that contributes to us growing together, then I am grateful to God for His grace.
God’s self-revelation is never provided for me to exalt myself over anyone else… Yet I see that so often in the church (and fall into it by default at times). I do believe it is a symptom of the influence of consumerism in the western church, exposed in how we (mis)handle the Word of God.
Your comments to Wayne did prompt me to write my tome… but it was not aimed at you, rather at the spirit that lies behind that approach to the Bible, an approach that is prevalent in the western church and which you learned from another, possibly many other, teachers. Which is why I addressed the issue of that approach, rather than just having a go at you…
In response you wrote that I felt you “used scripture incorrectly, “pick’n’mixing” my way through scripture merely to satisfy my own agenda.” In my tome, I deliberately did not raise particular points from your posts to highlight my points - it is not about me exalting my knowledge over yours. It is about God’s heart for us to grow more like Christ together. I do believe that there is an agenda behind this approach to using the Scriptures in a pick’n'mix way - but the agenda belongs to a spirit much more sinister than either of us… though it is very easy for us all to get caught up in that spirit.
If you did want to follow up on this I’d be happy to dialogue via email. I could email specific points and your use of Scripture that raised concern for me. Perhaps you can shed some light on why you chose to make the response as you did and we’ll both learn from the experience. If you did want to dialogue off-line use the site Admin contact at the foot of each page on the blog and ask them to forward your email address to me and we can discuss this further.
In the meantime I’d appreciate if you simply consider whether there is any element of truth in my tome, anything you read there that resonates with you. Consider whether there are issues that you might change in bringing a fresh approach to the Word of God. If not there is nothing lost… if there is, perhaps there can be something gained.
Whether we agree or not is not the core issue - we are created in His image, recreated in Christ Jesus and He has eternal plans that include us both. In the meantime we can all learn from God, and sometimes through one another
Slainte mhor agus a h-uile beannachd duibh
(Good health and every good blessing to you)
A Celtic Son
Janet, I also resonate with your words…and those of us who struggle together here in the liminality of mission within and without the institutional church feel the Holy Spirit working his mystery in our midst.
And CS and Isaac and Wayne, this thread, as an earlier one did, has shown again that each ego blip that flits across the radar is an opportunity for each of us to lay down our lives, not just our egoes, for each other because we are part of each other as we are in Christ. So, I bring out for review the wonderful words CS wrote just the other day…that so resonated with me:
“The weight of truth, that the bridge can carry, is directly related to the weight of love we’ve poured into building the foundations. All too often we try to carry a weighty truth across a flimsy bridge and it collapses, stranding us from the person we’ve been trying to reach and denying them access to significant truth. It has been said that people don’t care how much you know, until they know how much you care…”
I choose to build these relational bridges on the foundation laid by Jesus’ death…and I choose to build with materials that will not burn up in flames of ego or ignorance…so that when the storms strike, I will stand because you all have helped me build better than I could have done alone…can I adapt scripture to say “unless the Lord builds the bridge, the builders build in vain…”??
I want to be someone who listens to understand, who asks questions to bring out the core issues, who let’s the Holy Spirit do the job of convicting the heart of sin…but without the help of my brothers and sisters, I will too easily fall back into listening for what I want to hear, rushing in with a quick “Answer Woman” strike, or usurp the Holy Spirit’s place.
I still need a lot of work, yet…I am so very grateful that God has brought me to this place where the Holy Spirit can speak h