Our next talk was given by Darrell Guder. If you have never heard of Guder then you should know that he was the forerunner of this whole Missional Theology Conversation. It all started with a book that he edited called Missional Church. I personall have not read this book yet, but it is on my desk and laudry list of "to read" books. I have read a book of Guder's in grad school called The Continuing Conversion of the Church and found it to be a great read.
On to Guder's talk. Guder began by talking through the reason for even needing a term like missional in the church. He reminded us that mission is the definitive of the church and that missional is not a noun. It is an action word. Guder then talked about our current North American context. He claimed that we are in one of the most difficult mission fields ever. This is so because Christendom was rooted in a Western mindset that left out mission as a priority in the church. Our mission focus has always been out there, instead of right here. Guder reminded us that the theology of the church should be rooted in the mission of God and that mission is the fundamental calling and action for the church today.
Now on to the promises. Guder claims that we stand closer to the pre-Constantinian church than ever. (For background on the Constantinian shift click here.) He claims that we have lost the power and prestige of Christendom which frees us to reengage our mission as servants of Christ. I loved a point that he made about how we do not take Christ anywhere but instead witness to what Christ is already doing in that particular place. Guder concluded on the promise of how missional theology will help us to view our Christendom legacy with integrity. He believes that we can address our theological divisions and ecclesiological divisions in a new light in this post-Christendom era and come to a point of landing where God would have us to be.
What are the threats you might ask? Guder believes that there are some who fail to see the need for the church's continual conversion. They are fine with the way things are now or have been for decades and centuries in the past. He also believes that the church could become a servant of culture which would cause it to lose sight of the very mission it is called to fulfill. He see the compartmentalization of theological disciplines as a threat as well. His call is for all of theology to be based on missional thinking even to the point that we view church history through the missional lens. Guder thinks that another threat is that we view Christendom as a problem that needs to be solved. His response is that missional theology seeks to move on as if Christendom had never existed. Lastly, Guder thinks that triumphalistic theology is another threat. Our confidence should be in God and not ourselves and in that we are called to live in solidarity with the world.
Where do you see missional theology in your current context and how radical would this be to those that you serve?
Showing posts with label Missional Conversation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Missional Conversation. Show all posts
Monday, November 3, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Leadership, the Local Church and the Crisis of Imagination
Tim Keel, the pastor at Jacob's Well in KC, was the next presenter and led a talk of this title. I had not previously heard anything by Tim other than his church's name, but that will change. (I recently purchased his book!) Keel makes the statement that the most significant crisis the church faces is the crisis of imagination. He defines imagination as the faculty or action of forming new ideas, images or concepts that are not yet there. Keel reminds us that Jesus proclaims that the Kingdom of God is near, but asks if we have the imagination to see it?
Imagination is going to be necessary if we (the people of God) are going to a place where we have never been before. Keel claims that our leadership imagination has been domesticated in three ways.
First, our commitment to modern epistemology. We want to strip things down to observable and applicable truths. Leadership becomes the art of executing the techniques and we depend more on experts than the people that we are journeying with. This can cause us to not see where God's Spirit is active around us.
Second, is through our American pragmatism and what he called the ministry of titillation. Ministry and leadership become a bag of tricks. The call is for us to seek God and listen to our narratives to discover what God is doing, instead of replicating what others may be doing.
Third, is through isolation which he claimed was Protestantisms dirty little secret. We in the West tend to distance ourself from those who think and act differently than us. Keel challenged that thinking and wants us to ask the question of what we could learn from other traditions.
In closing he brought our attention to John 15 and the organic process that is pictured there. This is the passage that talks about abiding in the vine. He said that trees do not strain to produce fruit. Instead it happens as a part of who/what they are. This same truth is true for us, if we abide in God, our fruit cannot help but to be produced.
So do you think about imagination and his thoughts on producing fruit?
Imagination is going to be necessary if we (the people of God) are going to a place where we have never been before. Keel claims that our leadership imagination has been domesticated in three ways.
First, our commitment to modern epistemology. We want to strip things down to observable and applicable truths. Leadership becomes the art of executing the techniques and we depend more on experts than the people that we are journeying with. This can cause us to not see where God's Spirit is active around us.
Second, is through our American pragmatism and what he called the ministry of titillation. Ministry and leadership become a bag of tricks. The call is for us to seek God and listen to our narratives to discover what God is doing, instead of replicating what others may be doing.
Third, is through isolation which he claimed was Protestantisms dirty little secret. We in the West tend to distance ourself from those who think and act differently than us. Keel challenged that thinking and wants us to ask the question of what we could learn from other traditions.
In closing he brought our attention to John 15 and the organic process that is pictured there. This is the passage that talks about abiding in the vine. He said that trees do not strain to produce fruit. Instead it happens as a part of who/what they are. This same truth is true for us, if we abide in God, our fruit cannot help but to be produced.
So do you think about imagination and his thoughts on producing fruit?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Coaching Established Churches for Missional Change
My next breakout was by a guy named Mick Noel. I was intrigued by this titled since I currently find myself in an established church and probably will again sometime down the road. As an associate pastor for the past 8 years this has been something that I've wrestled with for most of that time. Can an established church change? Too many times the answer is no but after hearing Mick's presentation I believe that it can happen. I appreciate the warnings that Mick gave about expecting this to be an overnight shift and how sometimes doing what we feel is good and right can be misconstrued in a negative way by those we are serving.
I think the best quote that Mick used was by a man named Alan Roxburgh in a book called The Missional Leader. "We need to lead in ways that are different from those of a CEO, an entrepreneur, a super leader with a wonderful plan for the congregation's life. Instead we need leaders with the capacity to cultivate an environment that releases the missional imagination of the people of God." I thought so much about this quote that I bought the book to read. I have had leadership principles shoved down my throat from the beginning of my vocation in the church and have always sensed that somehow we were missing the point on a few levels. Here is where I think we miss the point. Most of our talk on leadership is self focused. Because of this we gear our ministries around our ideas, our preferences, our perceived successes. But from what I think Roxburgh is saying here, is that missional leadership is about focusing on God. Our job as a missional leader is to point people to God and the possibility of us realizing the Kingdom of God in our everyday life. This is something that I can buy into and support. One big issue is that this kind of leadership is different than most of our congregations are looking for. So it seems like there are many shifts that need to take place in some of our established churches that center around mission and leadership.
There is so much more I could say but let's discuss this for now. What do you think?
I think the best quote that Mick used was by a man named Alan Roxburgh in a book called The Missional Leader. "We need to lead in ways that are different from those of a CEO, an entrepreneur, a super leader with a wonderful plan for the congregation's life. Instead we need leaders with the capacity to cultivate an environment that releases the missional imagination of the people of God." I thought so much about this quote that I bought the book to read. I have had leadership principles shoved down my throat from the beginning of my vocation in the church and have always sensed that somehow we were missing the point on a few levels. Here is where I think we miss the point. Most of our talk on leadership is self focused. Because of this we gear our ministries around our ideas, our preferences, our perceived successes. But from what I think Roxburgh is saying here, is that missional leadership is about focusing on God. Our job as a missional leader is to point people to God and the possibility of us realizing the Kingdom of God in our everyday life. This is something that I can buy into and support. One big issue is that this kind of leadership is different than most of our congregations are looking for. So it seems like there are many shifts that need to take place in some of our established churches that center around mission and leadership.
There is so much more I could say but let's discuss this for now. What do you think?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Missional Living in Suburbia
The first breakout that I attended at the Missional Theology conversation was titled, "Missional Living in Suburbia." It was taught by the co-pastors from The Well, an emergent church located in Feasterville, PA, Todd Hiestand and Gary Alloway. (You can find a link to Todd's blog on the right.) I chose this breakout because I currently find myself in the suburban context at a church who is trying to figure out what missional means. I had hoped that Todd and Gary would offer some great insight that would illuminate my thinking and help me be a catalyst in helping to shape my current context. While I did not walk away from their breakout a changed person, I did rather enjoy hearing the story of their church and what they have both discovered so far.
Here are a couple of things they said that got me thinking.
"Missional living begins with knowing where you are and having pride in it." This almost seems like a no brainer but upon hearing them explain this concept I find it to be very true. They both talked about their current context of Feasterville, PA. I have never been to Feasterville so I will just have to take them both at what they said about it. They both claimed that there is nothing special about Feasterville. In fact when people talk about Feasterville they usually talk about being from the Philly area or the Trenton area. A shift for them was figuring out what distinguished Feasterville from the surrounding area and celebrating it.
"Be careful not to structure your missional activities to places solely away from your context." Evidently they used to be really involved in various ministries in Philly which led to a disconnect there in Feasterville. This action in Philly, while noble and worthwhile, fed into the notion that mission work was done away from where we live. They combated this by partnering with many organizations in their context and making sure that there was a heavy focus of mission work in the same place where they lived.
"The challenge lies in figuring out the culture. It's hard and there are no shortcuts." I found this to be true in my own context. Before moving to the Philly area I would have claimed that I grew up in a suburban culture. The truth is that I grew up in a small town outside of a larger city. My town had a culture, based around high school football, and it was easy to spot. But upon moving to the Philly area, I encountered this strange anomaly called a township. For those of you who do not know what a township is, and I am one of them as well, it is essentially a land mass that is organized for tax and ridiculous governing purposes. Townships do not have anything like a town square, courthouse, etc to set up its center. There is usually some sort of building where the supervisors work from but that's about it. So this area in which I am a minister has nothing much to unite it. I have actually found out that not too long ago those who populated this area used to be considered hicks. (Albeit not like the hicks that I know!) If you were to look at the landscape now it is totally different. This is a very affluent area where most people are somewhat transient depending on what the drug companies are doing at the time. Because of that we are at a loss for truly understanding our current culture.
"Mission is not our work, it's our participation with God and what God is already doing." What a great reminder. We do not have to reinvent the wheel and try to do something that's never been done before. Our first priority is to find out where God is at work and join it. In some cases that may lead to new ministries but not in every case.
All in all Todd and Gary did a great job in their presentation. I especially liked their transparency in ways that they have changed and had to adapt to new ways of thinking. I believe God will honor their church and the choices they have made to become a missional church in suburbia.
Here are a couple of things they said that got me thinking.
"Missional living begins with knowing where you are and having pride in it." This almost seems like a no brainer but upon hearing them explain this concept I find it to be very true. They both talked about their current context of Feasterville, PA. I have never been to Feasterville so I will just have to take them both at what they said about it. They both claimed that there is nothing special about Feasterville. In fact when people talk about Feasterville they usually talk about being from the Philly area or the Trenton area. A shift for them was figuring out what distinguished Feasterville from the surrounding area and celebrating it.
"Be careful not to structure your missional activities to places solely away from your context." Evidently they used to be really involved in various ministries in Philly which led to a disconnect there in Feasterville. This action in Philly, while noble and worthwhile, fed into the notion that mission work was done away from where we live. They combated this by partnering with many organizations in their context and making sure that there was a heavy focus of mission work in the same place where they lived.
"The challenge lies in figuring out the culture. It's hard and there are no shortcuts." I found this to be true in my own context. Before moving to the Philly area I would have claimed that I grew up in a suburban culture. The truth is that I grew up in a small town outside of a larger city. My town had a culture, based around high school football, and it was easy to spot. But upon moving to the Philly area, I encountered this strange anomaly called a township. For those of you who do not know what a township is, and I am one of them as well, it is essentially a land mass that is organized for tax and ridiculous governing purposes. Townships do not have anything like a town square, courthouse, etc to set up its center. There is usually some sort of building where the supervisors work from but that's about it. So this area in which I am a minister has nothing much to unite it. I have actually found out that not too long ago those who populated this area used to be considered hicks. (Albeit not like the hicks that I know!) If you were to look at the landscape now it is totally different. This is a very affluent area where most people are somewhat transient depending on what the drug companies are doing at the time. Because of that we are at a loss for truly understanding our current culture.
"Mission is not our work, it's our participation with God and what God is already doing." What a great reminder. We do not have to reinvent the wheel and try to do something that's never been done before. Our first priority is to find out where God is at work and join it. In some cases that may lead to new ministries but not in every case.
All in all Todd and Gary did a great job in their presentation. I especially liked their transparency in ways that they have changed and had to adapt to new ways of thinking. I believe God will honor their church and the choices they have made to become a missional church in suburbia.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
The Bible and Missional Listening
This was the title of a talk that Scot McKnight gave at the Missional Theology Conversation gathering I attended last Friday. His main focus was for us to understand the Bible through a relational approach instead of an authority approach. I'll try my best to break down what he was talking about and hopefully it will spur some conversation among us as well.
McKnight set up two different approaches to the Bible that we can take. The first he called the authoritarian approach. This approach uses a flow that looks something like this. God-revelation-inspiration-inerrancy-truth-response-submission. This is an approach that many of us are very familiar with and have spent much of our time in ministry combating. "God said it, I believe it, and that's good enough for me." This approach leads to things being very black and white with no room for gray. McKnight says that the words inerrancy and submission are the most troubling with this approach. He used Psalm 119 as an example where scripture (or the law) is not for submission purposes but to be followed out of response. Vs 35, "Lead me in the path of your commandments, for I delight in it." (ESV) Notice that it doesn't say "your words are authoritative so therefore I submit", instead it's "your words are a delight therefore I will follow." This authoritarian approach is framed epistemically (knowledge is the desired outcome) and seems not to be what the God of the Bible is desiring.
The approach that McKnight was encouraging us to embrace is what he called the relational approach. This approach is framed by desiring to know the God of the Bible or the 'I' and 'You' behind the Bible. Here are a few tenets through which this approach flows. First, we need to understand that the Bible is God's spoken word to us. The Bible is not God but it points to God. The Bible is God's way of assuring us that God is there and is not silent. Second, we are invited to listen to God through the Bible and respond. Third, we enter into the Bible's own conversation and the conversation that has been going on throughout church history. There is a community focus to reading and understanding the Bible. It cannot be done in a vacuum.
McKnight's claim is that the relational approach leads to a better understanding of who God is and what God has called us to. The relational approach leads to us being able to respond to God in love and respect instead of fear and submission. One quote that I especailly loved is that "having the right view of the Bible is not the point, but having a relationship (or engaging) with the God of the Bible is the point."
McKnight then moved on to talking a bit about Missional Listening. He said that the biggest complaint that God has of the people is that they do not listen. His call is for us to be attentive enough to hear the words of God, allow them to sink in our very being and then to go and do what they say. When we engage in missional listening we will truly know God and follow God's desire for us to love and God and to love others. It is not about gathering information, but it's about how we are following what God has asked us to be about. Missional listening is inspired and it is a process.
I hope this is a fair summary of what McKnight was presenting to us. I did buy the DVD so when I get it I'll watch it again. What do you think? What is your understanding of the Bible? If you have shifted away from the authoritarian approach do you ever find yourself reverting back to the old ways? How can we help others to view the Bible in this way without pushing them over the edge or is that what needs to happen?
By the way, I just received McKnight's new book, The Blue Parakeet, where I believe most of this talk came from. I will let you know that later on as well.
McKnight set up two different approaches to the Bible that we can take. The first he called the authoritarian approach. This approach uses a flow that looks something like this. God-revelation-inspiration-inerrancy-truth-response-submission. This is an approach that many of us are very familiar with and have spent much of our time in ministry combating. "God said it, I believe it, and that's good enough for me." This approach leads to things being very black and white with no room for gray. McKnight says that the words inerrancy and submission are the most troubling with this approach. He used Psalm 119 as an example where scripture (or the law) is not for submission purposes but to be followed out of response. Vs 35, "Lead me in the path of your commandments, for I delight in it." (ESV) Notice that it doesn't say "your words are authoritative so therefore I submit", instead it's "your words are a delight therefore I will follow." This authoritarian approach is framed epistemically (knowledge is the desired outcome) and seems not to be what the God of the Bible is desiring.
The approach that McKnight was encouraging us to embrace is what he called the relational approach. This approach is framed by desiring to know the God of the Bible or the 'I' and 'You' behind the Bible. Here are a few tenets through which this approach flows. First, we need to understand that the Bible is God's spoken word to us. The Bible is not God but it points to God. The Bible is God's way of assuring us that God is there and is not silent. Second, we are invited to listen to God through the Bible and respond. Third, we enter into the Bible's own conversation and the conversation that has been going on throughout church history. There is a community focus to reading and understanding the Bible. It cannot be done in a vacuum.
McKnight's claim is that the relational approach leads to a better understanding of who God is and what God has called us to. The relational approach leads to us being able to respond to God in love and respect instead of fear and submission. One quote that I especailly loved is that "having the right view of the Bible is not the point, but having a relationship (or engaging) with the God of the Bible is the point."
McKnight then moved on to talking a bit about Missional Listening. He said that the biggest complaint that God has of the people is that they do not listen. His call is for us to be attentive enough to hear the words of God, allow them to sink in our very being and then to go and do what they say. When we engage in missional listening we will truly know God and follow God's desire for us to love and God and to love others. It is not about gathering information, but it's about how we are following what God has asked us to be about. Missional listening is inspired and it is a process.
I hope this is a fair summary of what McKnight was presenting to us. I did buy the DVD so when I get it I'll watch it again. What do you think? What is your understanding of the Bible? If you have shifted away from the authoritarian approach do you ever find yourself reverting back to the old ways? How can we help others to view the Bible in this way without pushing them over the edge or is that what needs to happen?
By the way, I just received McKnight's new book, The Blue Parakeet, where I believe most of this talk came from. I will let you know that later on as well.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Missional Theology
Last Friday, I and 3 others from my church went to Biblical Seminary to hear a conversation in Missional Theology. The occasion was in honor of one of their theology professors, John Franke, who was being installed as the Lester and Kay Clemens Professor of Missional Theology. I have read two of Franke's books and recommend them both, The Character of Theology and Beyond Foundationalism. The best part of the event was that Franke asked 4 presenters to come in and talk about Missional Theology. The presenters were Scot McKnight, Tim Keel, Darrell Guder and Brian McLaren with a few breakout sessions lead by some local leaders in our area.
I will spend the next few posts talking about the meat of what was covered, but I want to make one general point before I do that. I was totally blown away by the way a generous orthodoxy was embraced at this event. Having grown up in a denominational setting my whole life, I have trouble breaking out of a sectarian mindset. I am constantly fighting the desire to draw the battle lines between the other and myself, when in reality we are on the same team! I think that is in large part why Mission Theology is resonating within me. It is speaking a new language that seems so right to me. Missional Theology does not seek to further point out our differences, but instead to find commonality that will move towards uniting us as the people of God. Thank you Biblical Seminary for being courageous to live out this conviction. May God continue to build the Kingdom here among us all.
I will spend the next few posts talking about the meat of what was covered, but I want to make one general point before I do that. I was totally blown away by the way a generous orthodoxy was embraced at this event. Having grown up in a denominational setting my whole life, I have trouble breaking out of a sectarian mindset. I am constantly fighting the desire to draw the battle lines between the other and myself, when in reality we are on the same team! I think that is in large part why Mission Theology is resonating within me. It is speaking a new language that seems so right to me. Missional Theology does not seek to further point out our differences, but instead to find commonality that will move towards uniting us as the people of God. Thank you Biblical Seminary for being courageous to live out this conviction. May God continue to build the Kingdom here among us all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)