Dear Martin,
It’s the anniversary of your “I Have a Dream” speech. It’s eerie to hear that speech in today’s world. The only dreams on our horizons are nightmares. I say “our” because since your death the world has truly become a global community. And these nightmares trouble all of us.
At the root of much of it lies our continuing failure to judge one another by the “content of our character.” We still judge others by the “color of our skin,” that sadly has not gone away. But even more troubling is the pervasive presence and power of image. Image rules from the personal to the public to the global. It’s not who we are but who we present ourselves to be that counts. And the power of our communicational media (you wouldn’t believe the internet or today’s smart phones, Martin) allow us to project, change, and reinvent our image continuously.
On top of that, we live such fast paced lives with so many demands on us that we are tempted to project a different image of who we are for all the different worlds and roles we move in and out of. Consequently we are fragmented, with so little sense of a coherent “self” that the only sense of “character” we can imagine these days is the theatrical one of a person playing a role. For that is how we experience our life so much of the time these days. The old adage says “character” is who you are when no one is looking. We are lost when no one is looking, because when no one is looking we have no role to play, no one to whom we need to project an image and we face our own emptiness
The other side of our dilemma is related to image as well. You might say it’s the public side of our dilemma. If our sense of self and character lies submerged beneath the litter of images created, projected, reinvented, and discarded, our mind (personal and corporate) has been eroded by the avalanche of images bombarding us at every moment and the plethora of information now available to us. You spoke of the “paralysis of analysis” in your day. We need an “analysis of paralysis” in our own.
For we are mentally paralyzed these days. There is too much to know for anyone to know too much. But there’s always someone at our elbow to tell us what we need to know and think. Yet they do not give us grounds, warrants, evidence, and argument for their ideas, they give us images. And not images that might be icons leading us into the substance of the issues at hand. No, they give us images the divert us from the substance and reality of those matters and influence us by promoting images of the people involved or exploiting fears around possible consequences of actions taken about those issues.
Really, Martin, you would not believe the level of public and political conversation today. It consists in little bits of rhetoric carefully crafted to create a particular impression or evoke a certain feeling. We call them “sound bytes” today but you would know them as propaganda. And that’s about all public discussion is now. We hurl our “sound bytes” at each other or the television camera and hurry off to check our poll numbers. The noble ancient ideal of politics as discussing and ordering the life of the community for its citizens’ well-being is virtually non-existent.
We are so mentally paralyzed or impaired in our ability to critically assess the information and images that assault us that for us to make up our minds about these things is well neigh impossible. For at least in terms of our perception and processing of public issues, we scarcely have a mind worth making up!
Civility is a non sequitur these days, Martin. For civility requires a “civil” realm. One in which we must all live our lives and make our way together. A civil community, as you so eloquently reminded us again and again, requires a common good, or at least a common goal. Yet, by common consent we have neither at present. Each seeks their own good and uses whatever power they possess to enforce that good. Civility only prevails when it serves the individual goods of the people involved in any interaction. Otherwise, almost any kind of behavior, verbal or physical, goes. One member of congress actually interrupted the President’s State of the Union address to call him a liar!
Sad to say, things in the church are no better. One prominent theologian has said, “God is killing the mainline church in America, and we goddamn well deserve it.” I think he’s pretty much right, Martin. Only it’s not just the mainline church but the evangelical one too. We’re afflicted with “sound-byte” theology and a sentimentality named “tolerance,” that has robbed us our theological will and nerve. We also are committed to our nation and its interests in a way that in passion and practice precedes and supercedes our commitment to God.
And to top it all off, economics and our quest for economic security overrides everything else and has corrupted the priorities, passions, and practices of us all!
Yet, and I think you of all people will understand what I mean, it may be that God has us right where he wants us! It’s only when you’re dead that you can be raised to new life. And the God we know in Jesus Christ specializes in resurrection! Therefore, I cannot give up hope; I cannot escape that sense that God is not done with us yet, certainly as a church, and, who knows, even as a country. So I will keep on dreaming your dream with you, Martin, on this “I Have a Dream” anniversary day for you and I know that the God who has claimed us in Jesus Christ never ever fails to keep his promises.
Peace,
Lee Wyatt
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Friday, August 27, 2010
If Your Prayer Life is Good . . . You Don't Have to Read This
If Your Prayer Life is Good . . You Don’t Need To Read This!
If, however, like me, you struggle to start or sustain a life of prayer, the following thoughts might be worth considering.
1. Prayer and hope form a feedback loop with each other.
The practice of prayer strengthens hope; the practice of hope whets the desire for prayer. Maybe our problem is not with prayer but with the character of our hope!
-do we believe/know that God attends to and knows our prayers?
-do we believe/know that our input in prayer makes a difference to God?
-do we believe/know that God wants his best for us far more than we do?
-do we believe/know that God intends to use us in working out his purpose?
-in short, do we believe/know that God loves us, desires our friendship, and will keep all his promises to us?
2. We only learn to pray . . . by praying!
Put away all your books on prayer. Forget all the sermons you’ve heard on prayer. Put out of mind whatever formulas, patterns, or prescriptions on prayer you have learned. Prayer is simply talking to God and growing into a relationship, even a friendship, with him. So just start talking to God. Don’t be constrained by formality or form as you get started. Seek to develop your own pattern of conversation with God. When you’re struggling with prayer, the only wrong prayer is the one not spoken!
3. Spend some time reading and pondering Jesus’ great prayer for the church in John 17.
Did you know that Jesus prays for you specifically in this prayer? Do you see where he does this? See vv.20-24. Who is the “them” or “they” he prays for? What does he pray for “them”? Do you think the Father hears and answers Jesus’ prayers? What does that mean to you? Does that motivate you to want to talk to him?
4. Read, reflect on, and use the great prayers of the Bible.
Google “Prayers of the Bible” and I am sure you can find a list of them. Read them. How do they address God? What do they pray for? How do they integrate particular personal concerns with the larger concerns of God’s work in and for the world (see Hannah’s prayer in 1 Sam.2 in particular). What can we learn about praying for God’s people, the church, from Daniel’s great prayer for God’s people, Israel, in Dan.9? Paul’s prayers for his churches are rich in material to reflect on. Remember as you read them that they are his prayers for you here and now as well as for them then and there!
5. Use a Prayer Book or book of prayers by experienced and exemplary pray-ers.
There’s no particular virtue in spontaneous prayer. It may seem more “spiritual” than using the prayers of others or those prepared for us in prayer books. But that’s a false impression. In learning to pray or re-igniting our prayer life in particular, it is a mark of wisdom and humility (ever notice how often these two go together?) to apprentice ourselves to those who are better at it than we are. Prayer books typically use and contain many of the great prayers preserved for us through the history of the church. Most denominations have their own prayer books. The Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer is widely available and widely used by Christians of all traditions. The Divine Hours by Phyllis Tickle is also a great source for wonderful and classic prayers (it is available online at www.annarborvineyard.org/tdh/tdh.cfm).
If, however, like me, you struggle to start or sustain a life of prayer, the following thoughts might be worth considering.
1. Prayer and hope form a feedback loop with each other.
The practice of prayer strengthens hope; the practice of hope whets the desire for prayer. Maybe our problem is not with prayer but with the character of our hope!
-do we believe/know that God attends to and knows our prayers?
-do we believe/know that our input in prayer makes a difference to God?
-do we believe/know that God wants his best for us far more than we do?
-do we believe/know that God intends to use us in working out his purpose?
-in short, do we believe/know that God loves us, desires our friendship, and will keep all his promises to us?
2. We only learn to pray . . . by praying!
Put away all your books on prayer. Forget all the sermons you’ve heard on prayer. Put out of mind whatever formulas, patterns, or prescriptions on prayer you have learned. Prayer is simply talking to God and growing into a relationship, even a friendship, with him. So just start talking to God. Don’t be constrained by formality or form as you get started. Seek to develop your own pattern of conversation with God. When you’re struggling with prayer, the only wrong prayer is the one not spoken!
3. Spend some time reading and pondering Jesus’ great prayer for the church in John 17.
Did you know that Jesus prays for you specifically in this prayer? Do you see where he does this? See vv.20-24. Who is the “them” or “they” he prays for? What does he pray for “them”? Do you think the Father hears and answers Jesus’ prayers? What does that mean to you? Does that motivate you to want to talk to him?
4. Read, reflect on, and use the great prayers of the Bible.
Google “Prayers of the Bible” and I am sure you can find a list of them. Read them. How do they address God? What do they pray for? How do they integrate particular personal concerns with the larger concerns of God’s work in and for the world (see Hannah’s prayer in 1 Sam.2 in particular). What can we learn about praying for God’s people, the church, from Daniel’s great prayer for God’s people, Israel, in Dan.9? Paul’s prayers for his churches are rich in material to reflect on. Remember as you read them that they are his prayers for you here and now as well as for them then and there!
5. Use a Prayer Book or book of prayers by experienced and exemplary pray-ers.
There’s no particular virtue in spontaneous prayer. It may seem more “spiritual” than using the prayers of others or those prepared for us in prayer books. But that’s a false impression. In learning to pray or re-igniting our prayer life in particular, it is a mark of wisdom and humility (ever notice how often these two go together?) to apprentice ourselves to those who are better at it than we are. Prayer books typically use and contain many of the great prayers preserved for us through the history of the church. Most denominations have their own prayer books. The Episcopalian Book of Common Prayer is widely available and widely used by Christians of all traditions. The Divine Hours by Phyllis Tickle is also a great source for wonderful and classic prayers (it is available online at www.annarborvineyard.org/tdh/tdh.cfm).
Monday, August 16, 2010
What is the Missional Church (Part 9)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 9)
Revelation
Revelation brings the biblical story to a rousing climax with its strange but oddly compelling visions of God’s sovereign love finally reaching its rousing and exciting finale. All its weird and eccentric (to us) imagery and visions serve its fundamental gospel announcement :
“‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign forever and ever.’” (11:15)
The circle is now complete. The kingdom Jesus announced and inaugurated as recorded in the gospels reaches its glorious fulfillment in Revelation. The reality and centrality of this kingdom “bookends” (as it were) the whole New Testament. This reminds us that it’s God’s kingdom that finally and fully matters and that all the “church” stuff dealt with between the gospels and Revelation serves God’s kingdom agenda too!
We can develop a missional profile for the church out of Revelation in two ways. The first is to consider the way Revelation as a whole critiques and contests “The Roman Way of Life.” The Roman Empire was “the” empire in the world of the early church. They sought to export their way of life to the rest of the world, whether they wanted it or not! Their ideology had six key ideas, each of which the gospel contests and replaces with God and God’s kingdom.
1. Empire: Rome and its emperors claimed and celebrated worldwide dominion. They, and they alone, were the uncontested rulers of the world. John in Revelation makes the same claim on behalf of God’s “Empire.”
2. Peace: the Pax Romana (“peace of Rome”) blanketed and pacified her empire with its claim to benign rulership. It was, however, based on a strategy of “peace through strength” and enforced order. The Pax Divina of God, which John reveals, is in these and every other respect Rome’s opposite.
3. Victory: Rome claimed to be victorious over all. This claim is embodied in the emperors and based on their use of military, economic, and social force. God’s “Empire” also claims victory over all (including Rome). It is embodied in the Lamb who was slaughtered (Rev. 5:6) and based on his non-violent way of life and life-giving death for all.
4. Faith: Faith is the kind of exclusive and reciprocal loyalty of the citizenry that held the social fabric of the Empire and its way of life together. John likewise seeks to inculcate this “glue-like” faith in his counter-imperial communities.
5. Eternity: both empires, Rome’s and God’s claim to last forever.
John’s churches would be expected to share in his critique and contestation of “the Roman Way of Life” not only in word but in action. Indeed, they were called to live out the ethos and ethics of God’s Empire as they had seen it modeled for them in Jesus, the victorious Lamb. His non-violent, cruciform way of living was to become, through the Spirit, their own as they too shared in his sufferings for the sake of the world.
That’s a “macro”- look at what’s going on in Revelation to shape the profile of God’s missional people. Chs 2-3, the so-called “Letters to the Seven Churches” in
Asia Minor provide us with a “micro”- look into the life of seven actual congregations. In them the way the struggle to live out the ethos and ethics of God’s Empire is portrayed in ways that we can easily relate to in our own time and place. After all, that’s why there are “seven” letters – the number seven being the number of completeness. This sevenfold profile of faithfulness and unfaithfulness in these churches in Asia Minor offers a complete profile of the dynamics and difficulties that attend becoming and remaining a missional church.
The Risen Christ tells the church in Ephesus that they have “taken their eye off the ball” and forgotten or neglected the one that that makes and keeps them a loving and hospitable community – that intimate fellowship with Christ. They have allowed the good to crowd out the best, “lost that lovin’ feelin’” and consequently no longer practice either of the two great commandments (Mk.12:28-34)!
To the churches in Smyrna and Philadelphia, however, the risen One has only words of praise and comfort. Though slandered, rejected, poor, and soon to be imprisoned, both are alive in Christ and they serve him wholeheartedly, whatever the cost. They need only to “keep on keepin’ on.”
Pergamum and Thyatira faced related though not identical pressures and responded in similar though not identical ways. Pergamum reflected and reveled in the power of the Roman Empire and Thyatira was a thriving commercial center. Both are holding firm to the faith but within each of these churches false teachings were gaining traction that advised them “to give a little to get along.” In other words, try to reach some accommodation with the culture even if it meant trimming back full allegiance to God’s Empire.
The risen Christ pronounces the church in Sardis “dead”! Their works bear only a veneer of living faith (even though a few individuals there are faithful). He warns them to get back to basics and “just do it”! Start practicing what they know else they’ll forfeit their status as one of God’s churches.
Laodicea has the megachurch among these seven. Wealthy, productive, creative, both the citizenry and the church there had it all and were proud of it. And this prideful self-sufficiency robbed the church of any sensitivity to God, to their true spiritual state, and to the presence and needs of others. It was “lukewarm,” like the water it had to get from Hierapolis through six miles of clay pipes - good in that state only for inducing vomiting. Neither hot (like the hot springs of Hierapolis) nor cold (like the springs of Colossae). This church, says Christ, is neither healing and soothing nor fresh and vibrant in its ministry. Only lukewarm, which makes God sick at his stomach! They too must return in humble repentance to the Christ they have effectively excluded from their church!
In sum, if you’re going to be a “good Roman,” you can’t be a “good Christian,” and vice versa. This is where the battle for Empire is joined. In the daily discernments and decisions we make about where our significance and security comes from, the story we want our lives to tell, and whether we have something to live for that is also worth dying for. We are on mission from and with God to point to his Empire in everything and to everyone!
Revelation
Revelation brings the biblical story to a rousing climax with its strange but oddly compelling visions of God’s sovereign love finally reaching its rousing and exciting finale. All its weird and eccentric (to us) imagery and visions serve its fundamental gospel announcement :
“‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign forever and ever.’” (11:15)
The circle is now complete. The kingdom Jesus announced and inaugurated as recorded in the gospels reaches its glorious fulfillment in Revelation. The reality and centrality of this kingdom “bookends” (as it were) the whole New Testament. This reminds us that it’s God’s kingdom that finally and fully matters and that all the “church” stuff dealt with between the gospels and Revelation serves God’s kingdom agenda too!
We can develop a missional profile for the church out of Revelation in two ways. The first is to consider the way Revelation as a whole critiques and contests “The Roman Way of Life.” The Roman Empire was “the” empire in the world of the early church. They sought to export their way of life to the rest of the world, whether they wanted it or not! Their ideology had six key ideas, each of which the gospel contests and replaces with God and God’s kingdom.
1. Empire: Rome and its emperors claimed and celebrated worldwide dominion. They, and they alone, were the uncontested rulers of the world. John in Revelation makes the same claim on behalf of God’s “Empire.”
2. Peace: the Pax Romana (“peace of Rome”) blanketed and pacified her empire with its claim to benign rulership. It was, however, based on a strategy of “peace through strength” and enforced order. The Pax Divina of God, which John reveals, is in these and every other respect Rome’s opposite.
3. Victory: Rome claimed to be victorious over all. This claim is embodied in the emperors and based on their use of military, economic, and social force. God’s “Empire” also claims victory over all (including Rome). It is embodied in the Lamb who was slaughtered (Rev. 5:6) and based on his non-violent way of life and life-giving death for all.
4. Faith: Faith is the kind of exclusive and reciprocal loyalty of the citizenry that held the social fabric of the Empire and its way of life together. John likewise seeks to inculcate this “glue-like” faith in his counter-imperial communities.
5. Eternity: both empires, Rome’s and God’s claim to last forever.
John’s churches would be expected to share in his critique and contestation of “the Roman Way of Life” not only in word but in action. Indeed, they were called to live out the ethos and ethics of God’s Empire as they had seen it modeled for them in Jesus, the victorious Lamb. His non-violent, cruciform way of living was to become, through the Spirit, their own as they too shared in his sufferings for the sake of the world.
That’s a “macro”- look at what’s going on in Revelation to shape the profile of God’s missional people. Chs 2-3, the so-called “Letters to the Seven Churches” in
Asia Minor provide us with a “micro”- look into the life of seven actual congregations. In them the way the struggle to live out the ethos and ethics of God’s Empire is portrayed in ways that we can easily relate to in our own time and place. After all, that’s why there are “seven” letters – the number seven being the number of completeness. This sevenfold profile of faithfulness and unfaithfulness in these churches in Asia Minor offers a complete profile of the dynamics and difficulties that attend becoming and remaining a missional church.
The Risen Christ tells the church in Ephesus that they have “taken their eye off the ball” and forgotten or neglected the one that that makes and keeps them a loving and hospitable community – that intimate fellowship with Christ. They have allowed the good to crowd out the best, “lost that lovin’ feelin’” and consequently no longer practice either of the two great commandments (Mk.12:28-34)!
To the churches in Smyrna and Philadelphia, however, the risen One has only words of praise and comfort. Though slandered, rejected, poor, and soon to be imprisoned, both are alive in Christ and they serve him wholeheartedly, whatever the cost. They need only to “keep on keepin’ on.”
Pergamum and Thyatira faced related though not identical pressures and responded in similar though not identical ways. Pergamum reflected and reveled in the power of the Roman Empire and Thyatira was a thriving commercial center. Both are holding firm to the faith but within each of these churches false teachings were gaining traction that advised them “to give a little to get along.” In other words, try to reach some accommodation with the culture even if it meant trimming back full allegiance to God’s Empire.
The risen Christ pronounces the church in Sardis “dead”! Their works bear only a veneer of living faith (even though a few individuals there are faithful). He warns them to get back to basics and “just do it”! Start practicing what they know else they’ll forfeit their status as one of God’s churches.
Laodicea has the megachurch among these seven. Wealthy, productive, creative, both the citizenry and the church there had it all and were proud of it. And this prideful self-sufficiency robbed the church of any sensitivity to God, to their true spiritual state, and to the presence and needs of others. It was “lukewarm,” like the water it had to get from Hierapolis through six miles of clay pipes - good in that state only for inducing vomiting. Neither hot (like the hot springs of Hierapolis) nor cold (like the springs of Colossae). This church, says Christ, is neither healing and soothing nor fresh and vibrant in its ministry. Only lukewarm, which makes God sick at his stomach! They too must return in humble repentance to the Christ they have effectively excluded from their church!
In sum, if you’re going to be a “good Roman,” you can’t be a “good Christian,” and vice versa. This is where the battle for Empire is joined. In the daily discernments and decisions we make about where our significance and security comes from, the story we want our lives to tell, and whether we have something to live for that is also worth dying for. We are on mission from and with God to point to his Empire in everything and to everyone!
What is the Missional Church (Part 8)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 8)
Epistles: 1 Peter
1 Peter is a companion piece to Ephesians (see last post). The two letters share a number of similarities.
-both are disputed in terms of authorship. As in the case of Ephesians, though, I am not persuaded by the critics.
-both are circular letters to various churches in a region.
-both share a number of similarities in form and content, and
-both are tracts dealing directly with missional theology.
The difference between them, and what makes them companion pieces, is that whereas Paul addresses a group of churches that need an overview and introduction to missional theology, Peter’s churches are in the thick of the battle. They are living it out and some of are taking their lumps. Thus Peter writes to encourage, support, and nurture their continued commitment to the missional struggle. He offers them invaluable direction and insight to the nature and dynamics of what often happens when the rubber hits the road in missional living and witness.
Peter uses different language than Paul did in Ephesians to point to the great and gracious reality at the heart of our lives as God’s people and which captivates our hope as we live for Christ now. Paul named this “mystery” as God’s plan to gather everything up in Christ, the risen and victorious Christ, into that harmonious, interdependent abundance of generosity and well-being between all creatures, the creation itself, and the God whose very glory is “humanity fully alive”! Peter sees this reality too and he calls it our “living hope,” an “imperishable, undefiled and unfading” inheritance God holds for us in heaven (1:3-4), our “salvation” (1:5). This is the new world, the new creation opened up for us through Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. Like Paul’s “mystery,” Peter’s vision of our “inheritance” entails the union of Jew and Gentile in a new body of humanity, a new people, one that transcends all the old divisions and differences. The existence of this people, faithfully living out this new reality, is the chief mark of truth and credibility of the gospel.
This salvation we await is also the salvation we presently receive (1:8-9) as we live out our love for Jesus and endure the suffering such faithful witness generates (1:6-7) . Suffering in 1 Peter, it must be clearly understood, is suffering generated by living and loving as a follower of Jesus. It does not here refer to the various struggles and difficulties that befall each of us in our journey through life. No, the sufferings Peter addresses are those we would not have had except for following Jesus.
The Bible’s chief plot line stemming from God’s promise to Abraham and Sarah in Genesis 12:1-3 runs right to and through 1 Peter. Just prior to the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai God gives his people a new name befitting their coming nationhood. This people, whom God promised to Abraham and Sarah, the people he would use to bless the world, he now calls “my treasured possession . . . a priestly kingdom and a holy nation” (Ex.19:5-6). Peter applies just this passage to the church in 2:9! This gathering of Jew and Gentile into this new body of people in Christ is fulfillment of God’s ancient promise! And their mandate to bless the world is ours as well: “that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”
But the reality isn’t always as grand as the vision! We still fight with ourselves, you see, over whether we really want God to be in charge of our lives or not. This inner battle (Rom. 7:14-25), what Paul calls the struggle with our “flesh,” as one source of resistance to missional living. And then there’s the “world” ; it did not welcome Jesus and it does not will not always (or even often) welcome us either. Finally, there is the “devil.” And Peter assures us that this malignant power is still on the prowl, in its death throes (as it were), seeking to inflict whatever damage it can before the end. This unholy “trinity” – the flesh, the world, and the devil – are the missional menaces every church desiring to live faithful to Christ has to face.
And that is how Peter outlines the task facing missional churches. These communities will face continual temptations from “the desires of the flesh” (2:11-3:12). Following Jesus’ way will not likely enhance our reputations in the world or indulge our passion to assert ourselves, go our own way, and make our own mark. In other words, we might well not look good to others or “be all that we can be” because of Jesus. For like him, we too are called to “submit” – to God, for Jesus’ sake, and to others, for the sake of the world (2:20-25).
In the next section Peter addresses our temptation to want to set the world. We want fairness and justice to prevail. We want our good conduct to be rewarded and accept that our bad conduct ought to be punished. And when it isn’t, when we suffer some outrage or injustice, we seek redress and demand a hearing. Except if we follow Jesus, Peter says. In the new world of resurrection he calls us to bearing just injustice is “blessed” and often offers us an opportunity to bear witness to Jesus, with “gentleness and reverence” (3:14-16). Indeed, such miscarriages of justice and decency usher us into the “sharing of Christ’s sufferings” (4:13) and to glorifying God (4:16), chances we might never have if we insist on adjudicating our own settlements for this slights and burdens!
Finally, we meet the “devil” (5:1-11). Our enemy seeks to stir up our pride, our resentments, our sense of offense at outrage at one within the church as well as without, thus making hash of the quality of the church’s community and its credibility before a watching world. Nurturing genuine humility, turning all our anxieties over to God, and remaining vigilant in these disciplines are our only hope. When we do this we put a bulls-eye on ourselves and become targets for the devil’s wrath (5:8-9). Thus it is with the church everywhere, Peter tells us (5:9) and we join in solidarity with them in the hope of God’s promise to “restore, support, strengthen, and establish” us (5:10-11)!
Jesus died for us that we might die to ourselves and love and serve the world!
Epistles: 1 Peter
1 Peter is a companion piece to Ephesians (see last post). The two letters share a number of similarities.
-both are disputed in terms of authorship. As in the case of Ephesians, though, I am not persuaded by the critics.
-both are circular letters to various churches in a region.
-both share a number of similarities in form and content, and
-both are tracts dealing directly with missional theology.
The difference between them, and what makes them companion pieces, is that whereas Paul addresses a group of churches that need an overview and introduction to missional theology, Peter’s churches are in the thick of the battle. They are living it out and some of are taking their lumps. Thus Peter writes to encourage, support, and nurture their continued commitment to the missional struggle. He offers them invaluable direction and insight to the nature and dynamics of what often happens when the rubber hits the road in missional living and witness.
Peter uses different language than Paul did in Ephesians to point to the great and gracious reality at the heart of our lives as God’s people and which captivates our hope as we live for Christ now. Paul named this “mystery” as God’s plan to gather everything up in Christ, the risen and victorious Christ, into that harmonious, interdependent abundance of generosity and well-being between all creatures, the creation itself, and the God whose very glory is “humanity fully alive”! Peter sees this reality too and he calls it our “living hope,” an “imperishable, undefiled and unfading” inheritance God holds for us in heaven (1:3-4), our “salvation” (1:5). This is the new world, the new creation opened up for us through Jesus’ resurrection from the dead. Like Paul’s “mystery,” Peter’s vision of our “inheritance” entails the union of Jew and Gentile in a new body of humanity, a new people, one that transcends all the old divisions and differences. The existence of this people, faithfully living out this new reality, is the chief mark of truth and credibility of the gospel.
This salvation we await is also the salvation we presently receive (1:8-9) as we live out our love for Jesus and endure the suffering such faithful witness generates (1:6-7) . Suffering in 1 Peter, it must be clearly understood, is suffering generated by living and loving as a follower of Jesus. It does not here refer to the various struggles and difficulties that befall each of us in our journey through life. No, the sufferings Peter addresses are those we would not have had except for following Jesus.
The Bible’s chief plot line stemming from God’s promise to Abraham and Sarah in Genesis 12:1-3 runs right to and through 1 Peter. Just prior to the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai God gives his people a new name befitting their coming nationhood. This people, whom God promised to Abraham and Sarah, the people he would use to bless the world, he now calls “my treasured possession . . . a priestly kingdom and a holy nation” (Ex.19:5-6). Peter applies just this passage to the church in 2:9! This gathering of Jew and Gentile into this new body of people in Christ is fulfillment of God’s ancient promise! And their mandate to bless the world is ours as well: “that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”
But the reality isn’t always as grand as the vision! We still fight with ourselves, you see, over whether we really want God to be in charge of our lives or not. This inner battle (Rom. 7:14-25), what Paul calls the struggle with our “flesh,” as one source of resistance to missional living. And then there’s the “world” ; it did not welcome Jesus and it does not will not always (or even often) welcome us either. Finally, there is the “devil.” And Peter assures us that this malignant power is still on the prowl, in its death throes (as it were), seeking to inflict whatever damage it can before the end. This unholy “trinity” – the flesh, the world, and the devil – are the missional menaces every church desiring to live faithful to Christ has to face.
And that is how Peter outlines the task facing missional churches. These communities will face continual temptations from “the desires of the flesh” (2:11-3:12). Following Jesus’ way will not likely enhance our reputations in the world or indulge our passion to assert ourselves, go our own way, and make our own mark. In other words, we might well not look good to others or “be all that we can be” because of Jesus. For like him, we too are called to “submit” – to God, for Jesus’ sake, and to others, for the sake of the world (2:20-25).
In the next section Peter addresses our temptation to want to set the world. We want fairness and justice to prevail. We want our good conduct to be rewarded and accept that our bad conduct ought to be punished. And when it isn’t, when we suffer some outrage or injustice, we seek redress and demand a hearing. Except if we follow Jesus, Peter says. In the new world of resurrection he calls us to bearing just injustice is “blessed” and often offers us an opportunity to bear witness to Jesus, with “gentleness and reverence” (3:14-16). Indeed, such miscarriages of justice and decency usher us into the “sharing of Christ’s sufferings” (4:13) and to glorifying God (4:16), chances we might never have if we insist on adjudicating our own settlements for this slights and burdens!
Finally, we meet the “devil” (5:1-11). Our enemy seeks to stir up our pride, our resentments, our sense of offense at outrage at one within the church as well as without, thus making hash of the quality of the church’s community and its credibility before a watching world. Nurturing genuine humility, turning all our anxieties over to God, and remaining vigilant in these disciplines are our only hope. When we do this we put a bulls-eye on ourselves and become targets for the devil’s wrath (5:8-9). Thus it is with the church everywhere, Peter tells us (5:9) and we join in solidarity with them in the hope of God’s promise to “restore, support, strengthen, and establish” us (5:10-11)!
Jesus died for us that we might die to ourselves and love and serve the world!
Thursday, July 22, 2010
What is the Missional Church? (Part 7)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 7)
Epistles: Ephesians
The next three posts in this series will carry us on through the New Testament. Ephesians will give us a Pauline view, 1 Peter a Petrine view, and Revelation will afford us a last look at the missional church.
In Ephesians Paul gives us the most comprehensive, wide-angle, big picture view of God’s plan and the church’s role in that plan. God’s plan is, of course, his mission. This mission, God’s “eternal purpose” (3:11), Paul declares is “to gather all things up in (Christ), things in heaven and things on earth” (1:10). The resurrected, ascended, exalted, ruling Christ is the center point of everything God is doing. All things and people will find their place in and in relation to him. This “mystery” now to be made known to the world is that in and through this crucified and resurrected Jesus Jew and Gentile have found a unity beyond their ethnic, religious, social, political, and economic enmities (2:11-16), a unity that will ultimately be God’s eternal habitation (2:19-22).
Paul’s share in this divine mission is to make this “mystery” known everywhere and to everyone (3:7-9). Our share in this mission is, through the church’s living out of the “mystery,” this profound and profoundly counterintuitive unity of Jew and Gentile in Christ, to make known ”the wisdom of God in its rich variety” to “the rulers and authorities in heavenly places” (3:10). Somehow, someway our life together as the one new person in Christ (2:16) announces to the rebellious powers (unruly spiritual creations/creatures) that disorder our lives and creation itself that their reign of “discreation” is over, they have been defeated, and beginning with the church but ultimately encompassing all things order, harmony, beauty, and justice is and will be restored. Being this “announcement” of God’s plan and the fruit of its achievement is the mandate and ministry of the “missional” church! The remainder of Ephesians is Paul’s detailing of central dynamics and issues the church faces in being such a community.
Ephesians is governed by what I call a Pattern of Grace.” Paul articulates it in terms of three posture images: Sit (2:6), Walk (4:1), and Stand (6:11). Within the three posture images, Paul embeds what I call the “Missional Matrix,” the dynamics and structures that make and keep Christian existence missional. Each of these five elements of the Matrix begins with “M”: the Mystery of God’s gracious plan (ch.1), the Memory of God’s gracious work (ch.2), the Mission of God’s people (ch.3), the Milieu of Missional growth (4:1-6:9), and the Mode of God’s people’s work in the world (6:10-20).
To “Sit” is to assume a posture of receptivity. The first three chapters of Ephesians are governed by this image (2:6) along with the first three “M’s” of the Missional Matrix. In them we receive the gifts and calling of grace. Paul paints this divine grace, this “mystery,” in lavish, extravagant terms, spanning eternity past (1:4) to eternity future (2:7) and leaving no aspect of life unseasoned by his mercy, forgiveness, acceptance, and welcome (see especially the classic passage in 2:1-10). He dazzles us with an unveiling of God’s plan, a gracious and wise plan that none would have ever guessed or predicted. The means of our appropriation and participation in God’s plan is “memory” – the embracing and internalizing of what God has done and promises to do as the story of our lives (Ch.2). And we discover the “mission” that will henceforth claim all that we are and all that we have in its service (3:10) with Paul himself a chief example and mentor in living out this missional way of life 3:1-8). All this we must “receive,” that is, take it in, ponder it, reflect on it with others, “remember” it in study and worship, and internalize it as the new reality in which we live.
To “walk” is to actively live within the community of faith (4:1-6:9). Here we learn to share our gifts, receive the gifts of others; to be accountable to the community for growth in living out God’s mission; and preparing for the struggle of actually engaging that mission. This community of faith is the “milieu,” the only “milieu” in which we can grow into the kind of people who can announce and model the victory of God’s wisdom to the powers (3:10).
Finally, and this is where Paul has been leading us all along, the “mode” of our engaging the powers and the world is conflictual (6:10-20). We are in a battle and, thus, need proper equipping. Astonishingly, God’s gives us his very own “armor” so we might “stand” and “stand firm” in the struggle with the powers. For it is they who are behind human movements and their leaders that contest God’s will and way. The human beings caught up in these movements and practices, even if they lead them and think they are in charge, are in truth captives and slaves of these powers and do their bidding, wittingly or unwittingly. Therefore we seek to rescue them as well as resist the plans and pogroms of the powers.
The New Testament epistles give texture to the profile of a missional church. We can fine tune our grasp of its character through the guidance the author gives the particular community in light of the salient dynamics. structures, and values of the places where we live. For North Americans, I suggest that Ephesians teaches us that missional communities who incarnate the Pattern of Grace we identified will
-live a rhythm of “being/doing” in which each aspect feeds, leads to, and calls forth the other – a sort of continuous feedback loop with two foci. Thus neither “prayer” nor “practice” is at odds with each other, being two sides of the same coin.
-speak “Southern,” that is, will emphasize “Y’all” over “you” and “me.” A missional church will recognize that the community is the “incubator” for personal growth, that individuality only matures in interacting with others in pursuit of a common purpose Thus the ideology of individualism is ruled out as a way of life for such groups.
-exist in some measure of tension or conflict with their context. Any culture or society the church finds itself in will fall short of God’s intentions for it. While eager to affirm signs and traces of beauty, justice, and compassion in our communities, missional churches know they will have to resist and oppose the encroachments of the dehumanizing, divisive, destructive, and death-dealing ways they pursue.
Epistles: Ephesians
The next three posts in this series will carry us on through the New Testament. Ephesians will give us a Pauline view, 1 Peter a Petrine view, and Revelation will afford us a last look at the missional church.
In Ephesians Paul gives us the most comprehensive, wide-angle, big picture view of God’s plan and the church’s role in that plan. God’s plan is, of course, his mission. This mission, God’s “eternal purpose” (3:11), Paul declares is “to gather all things up in (Christ), things in heaven and things on earth” (1:10). The resurrected, ascended, exalted, ruling Christ is the center point of everything God is doing. All things and people will find their place in and in relation to him. This “mystery” now to be made known to the world is that in and through this crucified and resurrected Jesus Jew and Gentile have found a unity beyond their ethnic, religious, social, political, and economic enmities (2:11-16), a unity that will ultimately be God’s eternal habitation (2:19-22).
Paul’s share in this divine mission is to make this “mystery” known everywhere and to everyone (3:7-9). Our share in this mission is, through the church’s living out of the “mystery,” this profound and profoundly counterintuitive unity of Jew and Gentile in Christ, to make known ”the wisdom of God in its rich variety” to “the rulers and authorities in heavenly places” (3:10). Somehow, someway our life together as the one new person in Christ (2:16) announces to the rebellious powers (unruly spiritual creations/creatures) that disorder our lives and creation itself that their reign of “discreation” is over, they have been defeated, and beginning with the church but ultimately encompassing all things order, harmony, beauty, and justice is and will be restored. Being this “announcement” of God’s plan and the fruit of its achievement is the mandate and ministry of the “missional” church! The remainder of Ephesians is Paul’s detailing of central dynamics and issues the church faces in being such a community.
Ephesians is governed by what I call a Pattern of Grace.” Paul articulates it in terms of three posture images: Sit (2:6), Walk (4:1), and Stand (6:11). Within the three posture images, Paul embeds what I call the “Missional Matrix,” the dynamics and structures that make and keep Christian existence missional. Each of these five elements of the Matrix begins with “M”: the Mystery of God’s gracious plan (ch.1), the Memory of God’s gracious work (ch.2), the Mission of God’s people (ch.3), the Milieu of Missional growth (4:1-6:9), and the Mode of God’s people’s work in the world (6:10-20).
To “Sit” is to assume a posture of receptivity. The first three chapters of Ephesians are governed by this image (2:6) along with the first three “M’s” of the Missional Matrix. In them we receive the gifts and calling of grace. Paul paints this divine grace, this “mystery,” in lavish, extravagant terms, spanning eternity past (1:4) to eternity future (2:7) and leaving no aspect of life unseasoned by his mercy, forgiveness, acceptance, and welcome (see especially the classic passage in 2:1-10). He dazzles us with an unveiling of God’s plan, a gracious and wise plan that none would have ever guessed or predicted. The means of our appropriation and participation in God’s plan is “memory” – the embracing and internalizing of what God has done and promises to do as the story of our lives (Ch.2). And we discover the “mission” that will henceforth claim all that we are and all that we have in its service (3:10) with Paul himself a chief example and mentor in living out this missional way of life 3:1-8). All this we must “receive,” that is, take it in, ponder it, reflect on it with others, “remember” it in study and worship, and internalize it as the new reality in which we live.
To “walk” is to actively live within the community of faith (4:1-6:9). Here we learn to share our gifts, receive the gifts of others; to be accountable to the community for growth in living out God’s mission; and preparing for the struggle of actually engaging that mission. This community of faith is the “milieu,” the only “milieu” in which we can grow into the kind of people who can announce and model the victory of God’s wisdom to the powers (3:10).
Finally, and this is where Paul has been leading us all along, the “mode” of our engaging the powers and the world is conflictual (6:10-20). We are in a battle and, thus, need proper equipping. Astonishingly, God’s gives us his very own “armor” so we might “stand” and “stand firm” in the struggle with the powers. For it is they who are behind human movements and their leaders that contest God’s will and way. The human beings caught up in these movements and practices, even if they lead them and think they are in charge, are in truth captives and slaves of these powers and do their bidding, wittingly or unwittingly. Therefore we seek to rescue them as well as resist the plans and pogroms of the powers.
The New Testament epistles give texture to the profile of a missional church. We can fine tune our grasp of its character through the guidance the author gives the particular community in light of the salient dynamics. structures, and values of the places where we live. For North Americans, I suggest that Ephesians teaches us that missional communities who incarnate the Pattern of Grace we identified will
-live a rhythm of “being/doing” in which each aspect feeds, leads to, and calls forth the other – a sort of continuous feedback loop with two foci. Thus neither “prayer” nor “practice” is at odds with each other, being two sides of the same coin.
-speak “Southern,” that is, will emphasize “Y’all” over “you” and “me.” A missional church will recognize that the community is the “incubator” for personal growth, that individuality only matures in interacting with others in pursuit of a common purpose Thus the ideology of individualism is ruled out as a way of life for such groups.
-exist in some measure of tension or conflict with their context. Any culture or society the church finds itself in will fall short of God’s intentions for it. While eager to affirm signs and traces of beauty, justice, and compassion in our communities, missional churches know they will have to resist and oppose the encroachments of the dehumanizing, divisive, destructive, and death-dealing ways they pursue.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
What is the Missional Church? (Part 6)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 6)
The End of the Gospels: Summary
In the providence of God we have four stories recounting and interpreting the event of Jesus. They are best likened to four portraits of Jesus. Unlike photographs, portraits attempt to capture the substance or character of their subjects rather than striving simply for exact reproduction of likeness. Four artists portraying the same figure would produce works that are clearly of that figure yet each would have its peculiarities of setting, shading, perspective, and emphasis on certain features that would make each different from the other. The four portraits could not be homogenized into one yet, if they are each recognized as faithful renditions of their subject, they can all be recognized as true!
This, I suggest, is the case with our four “gospel” portraits of Jesus. They cohere with each other in that they are clearly about the same figure, on the one hand. And on the other hand, the church under the guidance of the Spirit has acknowledged that each in their differences from the others are faithful renditions of Jesus. Thus there is no need to homogenize them into one (as harmonies of the gospels try to do) or choose one over the others as “most true.” Instead we need to install all four in our “Gospel Gallery” and spend time mulling over each of them, both in their similarities and their difference to gain a fuller, more nuanced, and more adequate vision of this Jesus. We have seen this difference in similarity or similarity in difference in our brief surveys of the resurrection and commissioning stories in each gospel.
We will need a way of honoring both the similarities and uniqueness of each gospel’s “end” if we seek a well-rounded profile of the kind of community or church, what I have called the “Missional” church, that emerges from them. On an end table in our living room sits a decorative piece that I believe offers an apt image for this task. It is a Russian doll that comes apart in the middle revealing another, smaller doll inside. That second doll comes apart too and contains a third yet smaller one and so on. There are five dolls in total embedded in the one doll that sits on my end table. They bear images of key Russian leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev in chronological order. I believe we can helpfully conceive the profile of the “missional” church that emerges from the four gospels in a similar fashion.
The innermost figure in our “Gospel Doll” is Mark. In his unusual and provocative ending limns the basic, non-negotiable response to the resurrection that alone yields knowledge of and relationship to the risen Jesus – go and join him in cruciform, servant ministry in the world of suffering and need.
I would place Mark inside the next larger doll, Matthew. Thus we embed Mark’s radical call to action – “if you want to know, you’ve got to go” – at the very heart and core of any faithful profile the “missional” church. Matthew adds to this call another layer of meaning – “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” In our going, he shows us how through his risen presence and power, we are equipped and reconstituted as God’s people, a “new Israel” as it were, to fulfill than ancient purpose for which God’s people were first called – to be the vehicle through whom God would bless everyone else (Gen.12:3)!
Our Mark/Matthew doll would go in the next larger figure, that of Luke. As God’s people, heirs to the great promise to Abraham and Sarah, this promise is intended not just for us but for the world. Luke highlights that it is to all of Adam’s progeny that we must go if we are to be faithful to our commission. Especially, Luke emphasizes, the last, the least, and the lost.
Finally, Mark/Matthew/Luke is embedded in John. John reflects the most expansive horizon of meaning for the “missional” church – the cosmic. John tells us, “the Word made flesh – a world made fresh.” New creation has dawned in Jesus’ resurrection and the whole world, the cosmos, is remade. This is the bold announcement we make to the world, that “the hopes and fears of all the years” along with “groaning of creation in travail (Romans 8) are indeed met and resolved in Jesus, the Word who was God (1:1) made flesh! All the other layers of meaning are taken up and set in their largest context and each gains texture and meaning that none alone possesses. And this process moves both directions: from Mark to John and John to Mark.
A “missional” church then, will in a manner appropriate to its context, embody something of each of these features the gospel endings reveal to us. One aspect may be more prominent in one context and another in an different context. These churches will share the same “difference in similarity” or “similarity in difference” that the gospels themselves have. These features may be recurring “seasons” in a community’s life when the particular focus of each gospel needs to be revisited as the life and context for ministry changes. But “missional” churches will share this “family” resemblance. Their lives and ministries will be
-as wide-ranging and all-embracing as John’s ending,
-as pointed and prodding as Mark’s call to follow,
-as constitutive of the community’s identity as Matthew’s, and
-as expansive and inclusive as Luke’s.
In the next post we’ll look briefly at Acts as the sequel to Luke’s gospel.
The End of the Gospels: Summary
In the providence of God we have four stories recounting and interpreting the event of Jesus. They are best likened to four portraits of Jesus. Unlike photographs, portraits attempt to capture the substance or character of their subjects rather than striving simply for exact reproduction of likeness. Four artists portraying the same figure would produce works that are clearly of that figure yet each would have its peculiarities of setting, shading, perspective, and emphasis on certain features that would make each different from the other. The four portraits could not be homogenized into one yet, if they are each recognized as faithful renditions of their subject, they can all be recognized as true!
This, I suggest, is the case with our four “gospel” portraits of Jesus. They cohere with each other in that they are clearly about the same figure, on the one hand. And on the other hand, the church under the guidance of the Spirit has acknowledged that each in their differences from the others are faithful renditions of Jesus. Thus there is no need to homogenize them into one (as harmonies of the gospels try to do) or choose one over the others as “most true.” Instead we need to install all four in our “Gospel Gallery” and spend time mulling over each of them, both in their similarities and their difference to gain a fuller, more nuanced, and more adequate vision of this Jesus. We have seen this difference in similarity or similarity in difference in our brief surveys of the resurrection and commissioning stories in each gospel.
We will need a way of honoring both the similarities and uniqueness of each gospel’s “end” if we seek a well-rounded profile of the kind of community or church, what I have called the “Missional” church, that emerges from them. On an end table in our living room sits a decorative piece that I believe offers an apt image for this task. It is a Russian doll that comes apart in the middle revealing another, smaller doll inside. That second doll comes apart too and contains a third yet smaller one and so on. There are five dolls in total embedded in the one doll that sits on my end table. They bear images of key Russian leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev in chronological order. I believe we can helpfully conceive the profile of the “missional” church that emerges from the four gospels in a similar fashion.
The innermost figure in our “Gospel Doll” is Mark. In his unusual and provocative ending limns the basic, non-negotiable response to the resurrection that alone yields knowledge of and relationship to the risen Jesus – go and join him in cruciform, servant ministry in the world of suffering and need.
I would place Mark inside the next larger doll, Matthew. Thus we embed Mark’s radical call to action – “if you want to know, you’ve got to go” – at the very heart and core of any faithful profile the “missional” church. Matthew adds to this call another layer of meaning – “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” In our going, he shows us how through his risen presence and power, we are equipped and reconstituted as God’s people, a “new Israel” as it were, to fulfill than ancient purpose for which God’s people were first called – to be the vehicle through whom God would bless everyone else (Gen.12:3)!
Our Mark/Matthew doll would go in the next larger figure, that of Luke. As God’s people, heirs to the great promise to Abraham and Sarah, this promise is intended not just for us but for the world. Luke highlights that it is to all of Adam’s progeny that we must go if we are to be faithful to our commission. Especially, Luke emphasizes, the last, the least, and the lost.
Finally, Mark/Matthew/Luke is embedded in John. John reflects the most expansive horizon of meaning for the “missional” church – the cosmic. John tells us, “the Word made flesh – a world made fresh.” New creation has dawned in Jesus’ resurrection and the whole world, the cosmos, is remade. This is the bold announcement we make to the world, that “the hopes and fears of all the years” along with “groaning of creation in travail (Romans 8) are indeed met and resolved in Jesus, the Word who was God (1:1) made flesh! All the other layers of meaning are taken up and set in their largest context and each gains texture and meaning that none alone possesses. And this process moves both directions: from Mark to John and John to Mark.
A “missional” church then, will in a manner appropriate to its context, embody something of each of these features the gospel endings reveal to us. One aspect may be more prominent in one context and another in an different context. These churches will share the same “difference in similarity” or “similarity in difference” that the gospels themselves have. These features may be recurring “seasons” in a community’s life when the particular focus of each gospel needs to be revisited as the life and context for ministry changes. But “missional” churches will share this “family” resemblance. Their lives and ministries will be
-as wide-ranging and all-embracing as John’s ending,
-as pointed and prodding as Mark’s call to follow,
-as constitutive of the community’s identity as Matthew’s, and
-as expansive and inclusive as Luke’s.
In the next post we’ll look briefly at Acts as the sequel to Luke’s gospel.
What is the Missional Church? (part 5)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 5)
The End of the Gospels: John
As we might expect, the ending of the fourth gospel is similar yet different from the other three. Like the gospel as a whole, John’s ending places Jesus’ followers, the missional church, in the largest perspective possible.
-Mark places Jesus and his church in the prophetic tradition of Isaiah’s New Exodus, thus he begins his Jesus’ story with a quote from the prophets.
-Matthew places Jesus’ story within the great promise of God to Abraham and tells his story as the reconstitution of the new missional people of Abraham and stresses the formation and nurture of that people.
-Luke puts Jesus in the line of humanity going all the way back to Adam. He stresses the significance of Jesus for all humanity and sees the missional church going out to the world announcing God’s great of deliverance for the world and recruiting everyone to join the movement.
With John we move on to a whole different plane, a cosmic plane. The fourth evangelist reveals this in the very first verse: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” In dealing with Jesus, the world is dealing with God, God come in human flesh to dwell among us and live as one of us. Incomprehensible as this seems, nevertheless, this fundamental conviction of John’s that the God who works in, with, and through Jesus is the God who encounters us as Jesus, is the heart of the New Testament’s gospel.
Incarnation is the word we use for this claim that God has “moved into the neighborhood” and that in Jesus of Nazareth we come face to face with reality and discover in this human face the face of God’s own grace and truth. Straight from the heart of God (1:18) Jesus enters the heart of rebellious humanity (1:10-11). He becomes the focal point for a cosmic struggle for the world’s future (though John makes it clear that the outcome of this struggle is never in doubt). In the aftermath of his victory over the “ruler of this world (12:31) Jesus sends his people out to spread and implement his victory throughout the world (20:21).
The end of John (chs.20-21) unfolds in two stages. Jesus’ resurrection and appearances to his disciples occupy ch.20 while the mission of those disciples to the world occupies ch 21. In ch.20 John emphasizes that Jesus’ resurrection occurs on “the first day of the week” (vv.1,19). Combine this with the symbolism of the man (Jesus) and the woman (Mary Magdalene) in a garden and it is clear John evokes here Genesis creation imagery. He means us to see that with Jesus’ resurrection God’s New Creation has dawned. Everything has changed with this event. A cosmic reshaping has occurred. Nothing is the same as it was – for us personally and for us as part of God’s creation. This setting of New Creation, then, is the setting in which the ongoing work of the missional church is placed.
Let’s look back for a moment. Mark places the mission of God’s people within the setting of the New Exodus, the historical act of God to finally and fully deliver his people from slavery and restore them to their proper calling and vocation. Matthew places this mission in the context of God’s promise to Abraham to get a people through he and Sarah, to bless that people, and through them bless everyone else (Gen.12:1-3). Luke puts it in a universal context of outreach to all humanity, Adam, and all his posterity. John extends the horizon to cosmic dimensions with his setting of the missional church in the wake of the dawning of the New Creation in Jesus’ resurrection.
This breathtaking expansion of scope in which the church’s mission is set changes everything for us. God’s drive to enter fully into humanity and or experience becomes the sine qua non of our existence. This is henceforth what we live to do – enter into the life and lives of those around us as deeply and fully as possible.
This is not possible, of course, on our own power. We require and receive from the risen One the very breath of life (another creation image!) when he “breathed on them” and they were enlivened and energized by his Spirit. Thus we can go forth into the world “walking the talk” of the new life God has given us, forgiving and spreading Jesus’ “peace” as we go.
And such mission will not be fruitless! In fact, it will brim with abundance. Not because we are so “healthy, wealthy, and wise” that we can make it happen or project such success based on our own prowess. The disciples tried that and came up empty (21:5)! No, our mission to live the life of the New Creation in the midst of the old life that is passing away will bear fruit because Jesus promises it will. God is in control and God’s will will prevail!
In obedience to his command to cast their nets on the other side of the boat, the disciples are astonished at their catch – 153 fish. This seems to refer in some fashion or another to a full catch among the peoples of the earth. From nothing to fullness, from our own strength to the strength of Jesus’ promise, that’s the direction of faithfulness for Jesus’ missional church.
Jesus’ threefold restoration of Peter is a model example of the kind of evangelism we should practice. Jesus meets Peter where he is, in the bitter shame of his heinous betrayal of his Lord. Instead of judgment, however, Peter is offered the chance for restoration. He, whom Jesus addresses with his old name “Simon” (because that’s who and where he is at this moment) is called again to become “Peter,” the person God always intended him to be! And as such, Jesus’ evangelism of Peter ends not simply with the assurance that he has been reclaimed for God but that he is restored to the duty and dignity of his vocation to be one who “feeds” and “tends” Jesus’ sheep! Both reclamation and restoration come together here in Jesus’ practice of evangelism but with a decided emphasis on the latter.
So our profile of the missional church that emerges from the ends of the gospels looks like this. Mark tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go.” Matthew’s ending adds: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” Luke’s more involved story provides a triple focus for our discernment of the missional church: “If you know the plan, you’ll know the man”/”To know the man, you’ve got to know the plan,” “Don’t just talk the talk or walk the walk, walk the talk,” and “If you don’t wait, you’re going to be late.” John’s chief contribution is this: “The Word made flesh – a world made fresh.”
The End of the Gospels: John
As we might expect, the ending of the fourth gospel is similar yet different from the other three. Like the gospel as a whole, John’s ending places Jesus’ followers, the missional church, in the largest perspective possible.
-Mark places Jesus and his church in the prophetic tradition of Isaiah’s New Exodus, thus he begins his Jesus’ story with a quote from the prophets.
-Matthew places Jesus’ story within the great promise of God to Abraham and tells his story as the reconstitution of the new missional people of Abraham and stresses the formation and nurture of that people.
-Luke puts Jesus in the line of humanity going all the way back to Adam. He stresses the significance of Jesus for all humanity and sees the missional church going out to the world announcing God’s great of deliverance for the world and recruiting everyone to join the movement.
With John we move on to a whole different plane, a cosmic plane. The fourth evangelist reveals this in the very first verse: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” In dealing with Jesus, the world is dealing with God, God come in human flesh to dwell among us and live as one of us. Incomprehensible as this seems, nevertheless, this fundamental conviction of John’s that the God who works in, with, and through Jesus is the God who encounters us as Jesus, is the heart of the New Testament’s gospel.
Incarnation is the word we use for this claim that God has “moved into the neighborhood” and that in Jesus of Nazareth we come face to face with reality and discover in this human face the face of God’s own grace and truth. Straight from the heart of God (1:18) Jesus enters the heart of rebellious humanity (1:10-11). He becomes the focal point for a cosmic struggle for the world’s future (though John makes it clear that the outcome of this struggle is never in doubt). In the aftermath of his victory over the “ruler of this world (12:31) Jesus sends his people out to spread and implement his victory throughout the world (20:21).
The end of John (chs.20-21) unfolds in two stages. Jesus’ resurrection and appearances to his disciples occupy ch.20 while the mission of those disciples to the world occupies ch 21. In ch.20 John emphasizes that Jesus’ resurrection occurs on “the first day of the week” (vv.1,19). Combine this with the symbolism of the man (Jesus) and the woman (Mary Magdalene) in a garden and it is clear John evokes here Genesis creation imagery. He means us to see that with Jesus’ resurrection God’s New Creation has dawned. Everything has changed with this event. A cosmic reshaping has occurred. Nothing is the same as it was – for us personally and for us as part of God’s creation. This setting of New Creation, then, is the setting in which the ongoing work of the missional church is placed.
Let’s look back for a moment. Mark places the mission of God’s people within the setting of the New Exodus, the historical act of God to finally and fully deliver his people from slavery and restore them to their proper calling and vocation. Matthew places this mission in the context of God’s promise to Abraham to get a people through he and Sarah, to bless that people, and through them bless everyone else (Gen.12:1-3). Luke puts it in a universal context of outreach to all humanity, Adam, and all his posterity. John extends the horizon to cosmic dimensions with his setting of the missional church in the wake of the dawning of the New Creation in Jesus’ resurrection.
This breathtaking expansion of scope in which the church’s mission is set changes everything for us. God’s drive to enter fully into humanity and or experience becomes the sine qua non of our existence. This is henceforth what we live to do – enter into the life and lives of those around us as deeply and fully as possible.
This is not possible, of course, on our own power. We require and receive from the risen One the very breath of life (another creation image!) when he “breathed on them” and they were enlivened and energized by his Spirit. Thus we can go forth into the world “walking the talk” of the new life God has given us, forgiving and spreading Jesus’ “peace” as we go.
And such mission will not be fruitless! In fact, it will brim with abundance. Not because we are so “healthy, wealthy, and wise” that we can make it happen or project such success based on our own prowess. The disciples tried that and came up empty (21:5)! No, our mission to live the life of the New Creation in the midst of the old life that is passing away will bear fruit because Jesus promises it will. God is in control and God’s will will prevail!
In obedience to his command to cast their nets on the other side of the boat, the disciples are astonished at their catch – 153 fish. This seems to refer in some fashion or another to a full catch among the peoples of the earth. From nothing to fullness, from our own strength to the strength of Jesus’ promise, that’s the direction of faithfulness for Jesus’ missional church.
Jesus’ threefold restoration of Peter is a model example of the kind of evangelism we should practice. Jesus meets Peter where he is, in the bitter shame of his heinous betrayal of his Lord. Instead of judgment, however, Peter is offered the chance for restoration. He, whom Jesus addresses with his old name “Simon” (because that’s who and where he is at this moment) is called again to become “Peter,” the person God always intended him to be! And as such, Jesus’ evangelism of Peter ends not simply with the assurance that he has been reclaimed for God but that he is restored to the duty and dignity of his vocation to be one who “feeds” and “tends” Jesus’ sheep! Both reclamation and restoration come together here in Jesus’ practice of evangelism but with a decided emphasis on the latter.
So our profile of the missional church that emerges from the ends of the gospels looks like this. Mark tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go.” Matthew’s ending adds: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” Luke’s more involved story provides a triple focus for our discernment of the missional church: “If you know the plan, you’ll know the man”/”To know the man, you’ve got to know the plan,” “Don’t just talk the talk or walk the walk, walk the talk,” and “If you don’t wait, you’re going to be late.” John’s chief contribution is this: “The Word made flesh – a world made fresh.”
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
What is the Missional Church? (Part 4)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 4)
The End of the Gospels: Luke
Have you ever noticed that each gospel begins as well as ends differently? Mark begins with the appearance of John the Baptist and jumps immediately into the ministry of Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promise of a new and definitive exodus for his people. It ends with the risen Jesus calling his people out of themselves and their past into the freedom of following him anew in risky cruciform service to the world. Matthew begins with a genealogy of Jesus, literally a new “Genesis.” He traces his family tree back to Abraham, who received the definitive promise from God of a (miraculous) people whom God who bless and use to bless everyone else (Gen.12:1-3). Matthew ends with the risen One mandating his people to form “all nations” into a people disciplined and prepared to be such a vehicle of blessing for the world.
Luke, today’s gospel, begins with a birth story and then proceeds to include his own genealogy that stretches all the way back to Adam (Lk.3:38). Matthew writes for a Jewish-Christian community and interprets Jesus’ story in light of the particular dynamics of their relationship with and calling by God to be that Abrahamic vehicle of blessing. Luke, a gentile writing a wider community interprets Jesus in light of Adam’s creation and calling to be the royal representative and steward for all creation. This was to be our common human duty and destiny under God. Though God has chosen to work his plan for salvation out through the Jews, it is always with the end in mind of reclaiming and restoring all humanity to their original divine role. Luke shows how Jesus carries out and represents this divine plan and is, thus, the Lord and Savior of the gentiles too!
When we turn to the end of Luke (ch.24) we find much more material than in either Mark or Matthew. In addition to the resurrection story we find the beautiful “Walk to Emmaus” story, Jesus’ appearances to the disciples and promise to them of divine power to fulfill their commission, and his ascension. The mode of the disciples’ new life in the world will be as “witnesses” (24:48). They are to tell the story of what they have seen and what has happened to and through Jesus of Nazareth. When we add this to what we have seen earlier, the profile of a missional church now includes
-a risking faith that follows Jesus in cruciform ministry (Mark),
-a gathering faith that welcomes and assimilates others throughout the world in the new order of Jesus’ people (Matthew), and
-a testifying faith that announces to the world that in and through Jesus God’s great act of deliverance, the new exodus has happened, humanity’s exile from God is ended, and the long-hoped for new age has begun.
Distinctive in Luke’s account is, first, the Emmaus story. Two disciples, dispirited over Jesus’ crucifixion, the hopes he aroused in them crushed, find themselves accosted by a third traveler as they trudge toward Emmaus. This stranger is, of course, Jesus. His identity is hidden by his companions’ ignorance and lack of faith. When he questions them about what they are talking about he hears his own story told only with his death being its decisive end (despite the wild tales some of the women were telling). Jesus begins their rehabilitation with a bible study about the divine necessity of Messiah’s death and how all scripture pointed to himself.
Remedying the two travelers’ ignorance is not enough however. They are intrigued by him and his exposition of the scriptures (v.32) but this is not enough to reveal his identity to them. That requires the desire for a relationship with Jesus. They invite him to stay with them and they share a meal together. At this meal a role reversal seems to occur and Jesus functions as the host. And as he takes, blesses, breaks, and gives bread to them, suddenly they know who is – Jesus, alive and raised from the dead! Now everything makes sense and they up and hot foot it back to Jerusalem to share their news with the rest of the disciples.
After they arrive, Jesus appears to the whole group and instructs them further about how everything in their Bible (our Old Testament) “must be fulfilled” (v.44). Included in this instruction is their mission: “that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in (Jesus’) name to all the nations” (v.47).
Repentance and forgiveness mean more than we tend to think. They are not simply about relieving an individual’s guilt and giving them a good conscience. After all, Israel’s sacrificial system did that! No, repentance and forgiveness are announced to the nation and the world as the news that God’s final and decisive triumphant victory over the powers and forces of evil and death has been achieved and that “now” is the time to embrace this good news, enlist among God’s people, and be a part of the future that is coming and indeed is making waves even now in the present. It is a call for Israel to turn away from its own stubborn and rebellious ways of being God’s people and take up Jesus’ newly defined and modeled way of being
“Israel”: suffering servanthood. So too for the world, for God’s way for Israel to be his people is also God’s way for “all nations” to be human!
As we learn from the Emmaus story, the way to take this good news to others is twofold: instruction and intimacy. The world needs to hear Jesus’ story faithfully recounted. But by itself this is not enough. Meeting Jesus, up close and personal, is also required. And that means incarnation – embodying the life of Jesus in the key of real so that through us others can and do truly encounter Jesus! This is the heart of missional living and ministry.
Finally, we learn from Luke that being a missional church is not our doing but God’s. Thus we must wait for the promise of the Father, the Spirit, before we launch into what we are called to do. Patient waiting on the Spirit and a discerning of his particular call to service is also a chief ingredient of missional living. This “waiting,” however is of a paradoxical sort, what the author of 2 Peter calls “waiting for and hastening”. This active waiting consists in attentive listening and watching for the Father’s word or the Spirit’s movement ready upon direction to spring into action. We might call it “Holy Saturday” waiting. Failure to practice active waiting renders us dull and insensitive to divine nudges and renders us captive to the parameters and perspectives of the age in which we live just as it did those first disciples. “But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel (but obviously, he was not).” So they thought; so they acted. Ditto for us way too much of the time!
At stake is our competency as “witnesses” to the grand climactic act in God’s whole plan for the salvation of both creature and creation!
The end of Mark tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go.” Matthew’s ending adds: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” Luke’s more involved story provides a triple focus for our discernment of the missional church: “If you know the plan, you’ll know the man”/”To know the man, you’ve got to know the plan,” “Don’t just talk the talk or walk the walk, walk the talk,” and “If you don’t wait, you’re going to be late.”
The End of the Gospels: Luke
Have you ever noticed that each gospel begins as well as ends differently? Mark begins with the appearance of John the Baptist and jumps immediately into the ministry of Jesus as the fulfillment of God’s promise of a new and definitive exodus for his people. It ends with the risen Jesus calling his people out of themselves and their past into the freedom of following him anew in risky cruciform service to the world. Matthew begins with a genealogy of Jesus, literally a new “Genesis.” He traces his family tree back to Abraham, who received the definitive promise from God of a (miraculous) people whom God who bless and use to bless everyone else (Gen.12:1-3). Matthew ends with the risen One mandating his people to form “all nations” into a people disciplined and prepared to be such a vehicle of blessing for the world.
Luke, today’s gospel, begins with a birth story and then proceeds to include his own genealogy that stretches all the way back to Adam (Lk.3:38). Matthew writes for a Jewish-Christian community and interprets Jesus’ story in light of the particular dynamics of their relationship with and calling by God to be that Abrahamic vehicle of blessing. Luke, a gentile writing a wider community interprets Jesus in light of Adam’s creation and calling to be the royal representative and steward for all creation. This was to be our common human duty and destiny under God. Though God has chosen to work his plan for salvation out through the Jews, it is always with the end in mind of reclaiming and restoring all humanity to their original divine role. Luke shows how Jesus carries out and represents this divine plan and is, thus, the Lord and Savior of the gentiles too!
When we turn to the end of Luke (ch.24) we find much more material than in either Mark or Matthew. In addition to the resurrection story we find the beautiful “Walk to Emmaus” story, Jesus’ appearances to the disciples and promise to them of divine power to fulfill their commission, and his ascension. The mode of the disciples’ new life in the world will be as “witnesses” (24:48). They are to tell the story of what they have seen and what has happened to and through Jesus of Nazareth. When we add this to what we have seen earlier, the profile of a missional church now includes
-a risking faith that follows Jesus in cruciform ministry (Mark),
-a gathering faith that welcomes and assimilates others throughout the world in the new order of Jesus’ people (Matthew), and
-a testifying faith that announces to the world that in and through Jesus God’s great act of deliverance, the new exodus has happened, humanity’s exile from God is ended, and the long-hoped for new age has begun.
Distinctive in Luke’s account is, first, the Emmaus story. Two disciples, dispirited over Jesus’ crucifixion, the hopes he aroused in them crushed, find themselves accosted by a third traveler as they trudge toward Emmaus. This stranger is, of course, Jesus. His identity is hidden by his companions’ ignorance and lack of faith. When he questions them about what they are talking about he hears his own story told only with his death being its decisive end (despite the wild tales some of the women were telling). Jesus begins their rehabilitation with a bible study about the divine necessity of Messiah’s death and how all scripture pointed to himself.
Remedying the two travelers’ ignorance is not enough however. They are intrigued by him and his exposition of the scriptures (v.32) but this is not enough to reveal his identity to them. That requires the desire for a relationship with Jesus. They invite him to stay with them and they share a meal together. At this meal a role reversal seems to occur and Jesus functions as the host. And as he takes, blesses, breaks, and gives bread to them, suddenly they know who is – Jesus, alive and raised from the dead! Now everything makes sense and they up and hot foot it back to Jerusalem to share their news with the rest of the disciples.
After they arrive, Jesus appears to the whole group and instructs them further about how everything in their Bible (our Old Testament) “must be fulfilled” (v.44). Included in this instruction is their mission: “that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in (Jesus’) name to all the nations” (v.47).
Repentance and forgiveness mean more than we tend to think. They are not simply about relieving an individual’s guilt and giving them a good conscience. After all, Israel’s sacrificial system did that! No, repentance and forgiveness are announced to the nation and the world as the news that God’s final and decisive triumphant victory over the powers and forces of evil and death has been achieved and that “now” is the time to embrace this good news, enlist among God’s people, and be a part of the future that is coming and indeed is making waves even now in the present. It is a call for Israel to turn away from its own stubborn and rebellious ways of being God’s people and take up Jesus’ newly defined and modeled way of being
“Israel”: suffering servanthood. So too for the world, for God’s way for Israel to be his people is also God’s way for “all nations” to be human!
As we learn from the Emmaus story, the way to take this good news to others is twofold: instruction and intimacy. The world needs to hear Jesus’ story faithfully recounted. But by itself this is not enough. Meeting Jesus, up close and personal, is also required. And that means incarnation – embodying the life of Jesus in the key of real so that through us others can and do truly encounter Jesus! This is the heart of missional living and ministry.
Finally, we learn from Luke that being a missional church is not our doing but God’s. Thus we must wait for the promise of the Father, the Spirit, before we launch into what we are called to do. Patient waiting on the Spirit and a discerning of his particular call to service is also a chief ingredient of missional living. This “waiting,” however is of a paradoxical sort, what the author of 2 Peter calls “waiting for and hastening”. This active waiting consists in attentive listening and watching for the Father’s word or the Spirit’s movement ready upon direction to spring into action. We might call it “Holy Saturday” waiting. Failure to practice active waiting renders us dull and insensitive to divine nudges and renders us captive to the parameters and perspectives of the age in which we live just as it did those first disciples. “But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel (but obviously, he was not).” So they thought; so they acted. Ditto for us way too much of the time!
At stake is our competency as “witnesses” to the grand climactic act in God’s whole plan for the salvation of both creature and creation!
The end of Mark tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go.” Matthew’s ending adds: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know.” Luke’s more involved story provides a triple focus for our discernment of the missional church: “If you know the plan, you’ll know the man”/”To know the man, you’ve got to know the plan,” “Don’t just talk the talk or walk the walk, walk the talk,” and “If you don’t wait, you’re going to be late.”
Sunday, July 11, 2010
What is the Missional Church ? (Part 3)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 3)
The End of the Gospels: Matthew
The end of Mark’s ending places the reader in the crisis of decision: will he or she shoulder the cross and go to Galilee and join the risen Jesus in his servant ministry to the world? Or, like the women at the tomb, otherwise faithful in following Jesus throughout Mark’s story, will they allow the magnitude of the claim and the immensity of the power involved to render them mute? Such is Mark’s intention by the way he crafts and concludes his gospel.
As the first gospel written, it seems fitting for Mark to lay out in stark fashion the challenge of resurrection faith as the call to cruciform living and loving in the imitation and power of the risen One. A missional church is one that risks taking up this challenge and lives restless and relentless in following Jesus wherever he sends them. The other gospel writers, who have the more traditional gospel endings with angels, appearances of the risen Jesus to the disciples, and formal commissioning stories, fill out the picture of what such missional, cruciform ministry entails. We’ll look at Matthew today.
Matthew’s resurrection story (ch.28) has its own peculiarities: the earthquake (v.2), the guards’ reaction (v.4), and the authorities cover up what happened that first Easter morning (vv.11-15). The astonishing and outrageous challenge highlighted by Mark remains in the note that doubt mingled with worship among the disciples on the mountain with the risen Jesus (v.17). Yet the Lord imparts to these believing/doubting disciples what we have comes to call the “Great Commission” (vv.18-20).
This latter is, I believe, Matthew’s pastoral acknowledgment of the place that most of us are in most of the time – “Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!” If the story of Jesus’ resurrection seems a tall tale hard for us to swallow, we are not alone! It seemed like that to the first disciples too! Yet Jesus called just this group of folks to carry on and carry out his ministry to the world!
In this commission Jesus responds to what he knows is our “mixed faith/doubt” condition. His fourfold “all” stresses the utter sufficiency of what he provides for our mission – “all authority” is his (v.18), “all nations” (v.19) belong to him, “all that I have commanded you” (v.20) assures us that have the resources necessary, and “all days” (v.20, usually translated “always” in English) means we are never, ever alone in our work.
In promising his ongoing presence with his people Jesus draws two Old Testament images of God together. And they make a powerful impression. “I am with you always,” he asserts. “I am” alludes to the divine name revealed to Moses at the burning bush in Ex.3. This God, this “I am what I am” (or perhaps better, “I will be what I will be”), also identifies himself as “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Ex.3:15). Jesus is telling us that God’s great drama of redemption and restoration, begun with his promise to Abraham and Sarah of a great and blessed people who will be the vehicle for spreading his blessings to everyone else in Gen.12:1-3, continues on. And Jesus commissions his followers to enlist in that movement and move out and bless the world! That’s the missional church in lock step with God’s mission of redeeming all creation.
If the “I am” is “with you” this can be nothing other than the great promise of “Immanuel” (“God with us”) with which Matthew began his story (1:23). Now this Immanuel has been identified as Jesus of Nazareth and as the risen and exalted One he himself accompanies on our way. Just as Moses knew his mission of leading the people of Israel to the promised land was futile if God did not go with them (Ex. 33:15-16), so we sense that if the risen Christ is not with us we too will fail. But he is! He is! And Matthew brings his gospel to its climactic conclusion with just this affirmation.
Matthew’s commissioning story also makes clear that “disciple-making” is the content of the work of the missional church. “Make disciples” is the main verb of this sentence. And this disciple-making involves a double-movement of baptism and teaching, “membering” and “mentoring,” we might say. Both aspects are crucial. A missional church will be intentional in seeing that “members” also get “mentored” (learning by apprenticeship and practice rather than in a class-room) into the lifestyle and ethos of God’s Kingdom.
So, from Mark we learn that a missional community is one that embraces the risky call to share in the risen Jesus cruciform (cross-shaped) ministry in the world. Matthew adds to this profile assurances of Jesus/God’s powerful presence with us. Indeed, only divine power could transform an instrument of humiliation, torture and death, the cross, into the very power of salvation! In the power of the cross and cruciform ministry we go out to invite others into God’s kingdom movement and habituate them to their new life as part of it. Knowing who accompanies us transforms our “doubt” into faith and enables us go!
Mark’s ending tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go!"
Matthew’s ending tells us: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know!
Next time we will see what Luke’s ending adds to our profile.
"What is required--what Jesus Christ continually requires--are rocks like this who are certainly not perfectly untainted people, who are perhaps seriously objectionable in many ways and will have much to answer for, but are nevertheless ready to do something quite specific, to render obedience to a specific word by undertaking a specific service." Karl Barth
The End of the Gospels: Matthew
The end of Mark’s ending places the reader in the crisis of decision: will he or she shoulder the cross and go to Galilee and join the risen Jesus in his servant ministry to the world? Or, like the women at the tomb, otherwise faithful in following Jesus throughout Mark’s story, will they allow the magnitude of the claim and the immensity of the power involved to render them mute? Such is Mark’s intention by the way he crafts and concludes his gospel.
As the first gospel written, it seems fitting for Mark to lay out in stark fashion the challenge of resurrection faith as the call to cruciform living and loving in the imitation and power of the risen One. A missional church is one that risks taking up this challenge and lives restless and relentless in following Jesus wherever he sends them. The other gospel writers, who have the more traditional gospel endings with angels, appearances of the risen Jesus to the disciples, and formal commissioning stories, fill out the picture of what such missional, cruciform ministry entails. We’ll look at Matthew today.
Matthew’s resurrection story (ch.28) has its own peculiarities: the earthquake (v.2), the guards’ reaction (v.4), and the authorities cover up what happened that first Easter morning (vv.11-15). The astonishing and outrageous challenge highlighted by Mark remains in the note that doubt mingled with worship among the disciples on the mountain with the risen Jesus (v.17). Yet the Lord imparts to these believing/doubting disciples what we have comes to call the “Great Commission” (vv.18-20).
This latter is, I believe, Matthew’s pastoral acknowledgment of the place that most of us are in most of the time – “Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!” If the story of Jesus’ resurrection seems a tall tale hard for us to swallow, we are not alone! It seemed like that to the first disciples too! Yet Jesus called just this group of folks to carry on and carry out his ministry to the world!
In this commission Jesus responds to what he knows is our “mixed faith/doubt” condition. His fourfold “all” stresses the utter sufficiency of what he provides for our mission – “all authority” is his (v.18), “all nations” (v.19) belong to him, “all that I have commanded you” (v.20) assures us that have the resources necessary, and “all days” (v.20, usually translated “always” in English) means we are never, ever alone in our work.
In promising his ongoing presence with his people Jesus draws two Old Testament images of God together. And they make a powerful impression. “I am with you always,” he asserts. “I am” alludes to the divine name revealed to Moses at the burning bush in Ex.3. This God, this “I am what I am” (or perhaps better, “I will be what I will be”), also identifies himself as “the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” (Ex.3:15). Jesus is telling us that God’s great drama of redemption and restoration, begun with his promise to Abraham and Sarah of a great and blessed people who will be the vehicle for spreading his blessings to everyone else in Gen.12:1-3, continues on. And Jesus commissions his followers to enlist in that movement and move out and bless the world! That’s the missional church in lock step with God’s mission of redeeming all creation.
If the “I am” is “with you” this can be nothing other than the great promise of “Immanuel” (“God with us”) with which Matthew began his story (1:23). Now this Immanuel has been identified as Jesus of Nazareth and as the risen and exalted One he himself accompanies on our way. Just as Moses knew his mission of leading the people of Israel to the promised land was futile if God did not go with them (Ex. 33:15-16), so we sense that if the risen Christ is not with us we too will fail. But he is! He is! And Matthew brings his gospel to its climactic conclusion with just this affirmation.
Matthew’s commissioning story also makes clear that “disciple-making” is the content of the work of the missional church. “Make disciples” is the main verb of this sentence. And this disciple-making involves a double-movement of baptism and teaching, “membering” and “mentoring,” we might say. Both aspects are crucial. A missional church will be intentional in seeing that “members” also get “mentored” (learning by apprenticeship and practice rather than in a class-room) into the lifestyle and ethos of God’s Kingdom.
So, from Mark we learn that a missional community is one that embraces the risky call to share in the risen Jesus cruciform (cross-shaped) ministry in the world. Matthew adds to this profile assurances of Jesus/God’s powerful presence with us. Indeed, only divine power could transform an instrument of humiliation, torture and death, the cross, into the very power of salvation! In the power of the cross and cruciform ministry we go out to invite others into God’s kingdom movement and habituate them to their new life as part of it. Knowing who accompanies us transforms our “doubt” into faith and enables us go!
Mark’s ending tells us: “If you want to know, you’ve got to go!"
Matthew’s ending tells us: “If you want to go, you’ve got to know!
Next time we will see what Luke’s ending adds to our profile.
"What is required--what Jesus Christ continually requires--are rocks like this who are certainly not perfectly untainted people, who are perhaps seriously objectionable in many ways and will have much to answer for, but are nevertheless ready to do something quite specific, to render obedience to a specific word by undertaking a specific service." Karl Barth
Thursday, July 8, 2010
What is the Missional Church (Part 2)
What is the Missional Church? (Part 2)
The End of the Gospels: Mark
In Part 1 of this series I claimed that the problem in North American Christianity is that the church is “missing.” I might say “missing in action” except that the church has never really been in the action. That is, the church as we have known it has seldom if ever truly functioned as a missional community whose very reason for being is to live out God’s mission as sign, foretaste, and instrument of God’s kingdom. So I will stick with simply “missing.”
The end is often a good place to begin to attain clarity on something. In our case, it’s the end of the four gospels we need to look to help us gain clarity on why what is today called “missional” church is the church Jesus envisioned.
We’ll begin today with the gospel of Mark because it is quite likely the earliest account of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection we have. Subsequent posts will follow on the other three gospels.
Each gospel narrates the story of Jesus’ resurrection and his mandate to his people to carry on with his work. Though each of them does this differently, they all leave the end of the story open, inviting the reader’s own decision to commit and follow the resurrected One. In the different ways the evangelists tell this same story we can develop a profile of the community living by the power of Jesus’ resurrection.
Mark’s gospel ending is found in 16:1-8. It’s rather an enigma. The two additional endings later copyists added to make Mark’s story more like the others confirms its strangeness. These readings are usually found in the footnotes in your Bible. Mark apparently intends to end his story at v.8: “So (the women) went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone.” Strange indeed!
No angels at the tomb (only a strange “young man), no appearances of Jesus to the disciples, no overt commissioning story, no passing on the wonderful news of Jesus’ resurrection by the women (who heretofore in Mark have been exemplars of faith in contrast to the male disciples) – just an unbelieving response (terror, amazement, fear) to the astonishing reality they encountered at the empty tomb. What’s Mark trying to tell us? What kind of people ought we to be in response to this story?
Now the women eventually did tell the disciples their story. Otherwise, how did it get out? Yet within Mark’s story even the faithful female disciples quail in the presence of God’s astounding resurrection power. And Mark leaves each of us with them at the empty tomb. With them we have heard the young man announce this glorious news and that the disciples should hasten to Galilee for that is where Jesus is and where he will meet them. And with them we are challenged to the outrageous risk of embracing this outlandish claim! Their example reminds us how difficult such faith is.
What does it mean to embrace the call of the resurrected Jesus to join him in Galilee? Galilee is the place of ministry for Jesus. The first half of Mark, the active ministry of Jesus, takes place there. After the passive ministry of his passion, crucifixion, and resurrection in the second half of the story, we start again in Galilee. Jesus’ active ministry of preaching, teaching, healing, exorcising, and evangelizing continues anew and his followers are called to join him. To rejoin Jesus in ministry in Galilee is to do so with a deepened sense that such following is cruciform (cross-shaped) all the way down. For Jesus lived such a cruciform following after God and by raising him from the dead God has validated and vindicated such a life. Now it is inescapable that “bearing the cross” and living fully in the risk and vulnerability that entails is the way of discipleship. There’s no triumphalism here! No other way to be faithful. No wonder the women drew back (at least initially). What about us?
Mark’s ending then reveals the non-negotiable mode of following the risen Christ in missional discipleship. The church of Jesus will be a radical, risk-taking community that makes itself available to and liable for the care and well-being of others, especially the last, the least, and the lost. The way of the cross, then, is inescapable for the missional church. To embrace this call means joining the risen Jesus again in Galilee. To embrace this call is the crucible for an authentic church. Indeed, it is the only way to know the truth of the resurrection. Karl Barth puts it succinctly: “The community is as such a missionary (what I am calling “missional”) community, or she is not the Christian community.” By posing this challenge at the end of his story, Mark pointedly and powerfully directs us to the “end” for which God created and redeemed us: to incarnate the cross of divine love in suffering servanthood as the way to the renewed and fulfilled creation which God has promised.
Perhaps we could say that the missional profile emerging from Mark’s gospel is this: If you want to know, you’ve got to go!
“The relationship between the obedience of God's people and the triumph of God's cause, is not one of cause and effect, but one of cross and resurrection.” John H. Yoder
The End of the Gospels: Mark
In Part 1 of this series I claimed that the problem in North American Christianity is that the church is “missing.” I might say “missing in action” except that the church has never really been in the action. That is, the church as we have known it has seldom if ever truly functioned as a missional community whose very reason for being is to live out God’s mission as sign, foretaste, and instrument of God’s kingdom. So I will stick with simply “missing.”
The end is often a good place to begin to attain clarity on something. In our case, it’s the end of the four gospels we need to look to help us gain clarity on why what is today called “missional” church is the church Jesus envisioned.
We’ll begin today with the gospel of Mark because it is quite likely the earliest account of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection we have. Subsequent posts will follow on the other three gospels.
Each gospel narrates the story of Jesus’ resurrection and his mandate to his people to carry on with his work. Though each of them does this differently, they all leave the end of the story open, inviting the reader’s own decision to commit and follow the resurrected One. In the different ways the evangelists tell this same story we can develop a profile of the community living by the power of Jesus’ resurrection.
Mark’s gospel ending is found in 16:1-8. It’s rather an enigma. The two additional endings later copyists added to make Mark’s story more like the others confirms its strangeness. These readings are usually found in the footnotes in your Bible. Mark apparently intends to end his story at v.8: “So (the women) went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone.” Strange indeed!
No angels at the tomb (only a strange “young man), no appearances of Jesus to the disciples, no overt commissioning story, no passing on the wonderful news of Jesus’ resurrection by the women (who heretofore in Mark have been exemplars of faith in contrast to the male disciples) – just an unbelieving response (terror, amazement, fear) to the astonishing reality they encountered at the empty tomb. What’s Mark trying to tell us? What kind of people ought we to be in response to this story?
Now the women eventually did tell the disciples their story. Otherwise, how did it get out? Yet within Mark’s story even the faithful female disciples quail in the presence of God’s astounding resurrection power. And Mark leaves each of us with them at the empty tomb. With them we have heard the young man announce this glorious news and that the disciples should hasten to Galilee for that is where Jesus is and where he will meet them. And with them we are challenged to the outrageous risk of embracing this outlandish claim! Their example reminds us how difficult such faith is.
What does it mean to embrace the call of the resurrected Jesus to join him in Galilee? Galilee is the place of ministry for Jesus. The first half of Mark, the active ministry of Jesus, takes place there. After the passive ministry of his passion, crucifixion, and resurrection in the second half of the story, we start again in Galilee. Jesus’ active ministry of preaching, teaching, healing, exorcising, and evangelizing continues anew and his followers are called to join him. To rejoin Jesus in ministry in Galilee is to do so with a deepened sense that such following is cruciform (cross-shaped) all the way down. For Jesus lived such a cruciform following after God and by raising him from the dead God has validated and vindicated such a life. Now it is inescapable that “bearing the cross” and living fully in the risk and vulnerability that entails is the way of discipleship. There’s no triumphalism here! No other way to be faithful. No wonder the women drew back (at least initially). What about us?
Mark’s ending then reveals the non-negotiable mode of following the risen Christ in missional discipleship. The church of Jesus will be a radical, risk-taking community that makes itself available to and liable for the care and well-being of others, especially the last, the least, and the lost. The way of the cross, then, is inescapable for the missional church. To embrace this call means joining the risen Jesus again in Galilee. To embrace this call is the crucible for an authentic church. Indeed, it is the only way to know the truth of the resurrection. Karl Barth puts it succinctly: “The community is as such a missionary (what I am calling “missional”) community, or she is not the Christian community.” By posing this challenge at the end of his story, Mark pointedly and powerfully directs us to the “end” for which God created and redeemed us: to incarnate the cross of divine love in suffering servanthood as the way to the renewed and fulfilled creation which God has promised.
Perhaps we could say that the missional profile emerging from Mark’s gospel is this: If you want to know, you’ve got to go!
“The relationship between the obedience of God's people and the triumph of God's cause, is not one of cause and effect, but one of cross and resurrection.” John H. Yoder
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
What is the Missional Church (Part 1)
WHAT IS THE MISSIONAL CHURCH? (Part 1)
The Strange Case of the Missing Church
North American Christianity has a big problem: the Church is missing! How can that be? There are church buildings all over the place! Yet it remains the case: the Church is missing. Not missing, of course, in the sense that there are no church buildings, or services, or programs. Rather, the Church is missing in that the body of people called into being by God and promised to be the people through whom God would bless the world (Gen.12:1-3) is scarcely to be found here. God intended a “missional” church yet we have only a “missing” church? Why?
Three reasons:
1. Our western view of reality is divided in two.
GOD spiritual realm
-immaterial, soul/spirit
-good, beautiful, desirable
______________________________________________________________________
material realm HUMANITY
-nature, bodies, "stuff"
-inferior or even evil
As a consequence, we Christians focus on the invisible, immaterial, inner spiritual realm with a goal to return at death to that good spiritual realm where God resides and from which we originally came.
Thus, the direction of spirituality under the influence of this divided, dualistic, view of reality is both inward (into ourselves, our heart, spirit, soul, etc.) and upward (to the realm of God and the spiritual). The material, physical realm, the world of space and time, is marginalized in our concern as much as possible.
2. We also have a (“billiard ball”) view of humanity. We consider individuals to be complete, whole, sufficient in and of themselves quite apart from relation to anyone or anything else. Thus we think of freedom primarily if not exclusively as “freedom from” any constraint or external influence. Other than family of origin (for most of us), our relationships must be “chosen” by us rather than given to us.
Thus, we view “church” as a “voluntary association of like minded individuals” with whom we associate for spiritual benefit. We might picture it like a billiard table with all the individual balls racked together.
3. We live in a “therapeutic culture” which inclines us to focus on getting our “felt needs” met and being happy. Thus the institutional church is seen primarily as a “vendor of religious services and goods.” This reflects the consumer mentality which saturates and shapes us in this society. We go to a “place” (Church) to get what we perceive we need for ourselves and our families.
When we mix our two-sided view of reality with our individualism and our view of the church as a “vendor of religious services and goods,” we have a formula for the “missing” church. The “church” as such has little or no intrinsic significance for growing in faith or doing God’s will. Its only value is instrumental. It is a convenient “place” for Christians to come to get what they perceive they need. In this way of viewing and practicing Christian faith the church (the “missional” church God always intended) is indeed no where to be found; it is “missing.”
A biblically conceived view of the church, a “missional” church, would have at least the following features.
1. It would be oriented to the “Sending” God. God “sends” forth his love to create a world “very good” (no two level, divided view of reality here!). But humanity rebels, sins, and falls. Then God “sends” Abraham’s family to heal and restore his creation, but they too fail. Undaunted, God “sends” Jesus to climactically and decisively fulfill Israel’s role (which is also Adam’s role) and heal and restore the creation. Jesus then “sends” his people into the world to implement and spread his victory. God and Jesus “send” the Spirit to the people to empower and equip them for this work.
The direction of spirituality in a “missional” church is centrifugal, always moving out from the center, Jesus Christ, to embrace and serve God’s wayward creation. Our focus rests on what we have been given (divine gifts and calling to sacrificial servanthood in the world) rather than what we can get.
2. It works out of a “molecule” model of humanity. We are created to need each other, to be connected or in “communion” with one another; to bear the “image of God” (Gen.1:26-28) together. To be without such relationships is the core of our sinful fallen condition. As God made us in creation, so he deals with us in history by making covenants, binding agreements with his called people to do his work in the world. In this sense and for this community, it is very definitely about “us”!
Orestes Brownson, a Catholic theologian, says it well:
“Herein is the distinction between an association and an organism. In the association, the body has no life but the aggregate life of the members, and therefore, none but what they impart to it; in the organism, it is precisely the reverse, the life of the members is in the body, and they have none but what they receive from it, through their intimate union with it…But now is the Church of Christ, not an association, but a body, an organism, and therefore, does not receive its life from its members, but imparts in them their life; and they can live only in their intimate union with it…In declaring the Church to be the body of Christ, we necessarily declare that Christ is the life of the Church.”
3. Viewing itself as God’s missional people implementing Christ’s victory of the restoration of creation rather than a place where people come to consume religious goods and services, a missional church will function as a “sign” (a prophetic pointer to), “foretaste” (a present experience of), and “instrument” (practitioner of) God’s kingdom work in the world. This means that the missional church, as the prototype of the kind of life God intends and is saving his creation for, is God’s mission. It does not have a mission, as if mission was something different and separable from what the church is, some piece or part of the larger work of the church. The restoration of creation, under the lordship and empowerment of the triune God is “the” thing, the “only” thing for which the church exists and to which it is to bend all its energies and efforts.
We have a “missing” Church; we (along with God and the world!) need a “missional” Church. Enough said!
The Strange Case of the Missing Church
North American Christianity has a big problem: the Church is missing! How can that be? There are church buildings all over the place! Yet it remains the case: the Church is missing. Not missing, of course, in the sense that there are no church buildings, or services, or programs. Rather, the Church is missing in that the body of people called into being by God and promised to be the people through whom God would bless the world (Gen.12:1-3) is scarcely to be found here. God intended a “missional” church yet we have only a “missing” church? Why?
Three reasons:
1. Our western view of reality is divided in two.
GOD spiritual realm
-immaterial, soul/spirit
-good, beautiful, desirable
______________________________________________________________________
material realm HUMANITY
-nature, bodies, "stuff"
-inferior or even evil
As a consequence, we Christians focus on the invisible, immaterial, inner spiritual realm with a goal to return at death to that good spiritual realm where God resides and from which we originally came.
Thus, the direction of spirituality under the influence of this divided, dualistic, view of reality is both inward (into ourselves, our heart, spirit, soul, etc.) and upward (to the realm of God and the spiritual). The material, physical realm, the world of space and time, is marginalized in our concern as much as possible.
2. We also have a (“billiard ball”) view of humanity. We consider individuals to be complete, whole, sufficient in and of themselves quite apart from relation to anyone or anything else. Thus we think of freedom primarily if not exclusively as “freedom from” any constraint or external influence. Other than family of origin (for most of us), our relationships must be “chosen” by us rather than given to us.
Thus, we view “church” as a “voluntary association of like minded individuals” with whom we associate for spiritual benefit. We might picture it like a billiard table with all the individual balls racked together.
3. We live in a “therapeutic culture” which inclines us to focus on getting our “felt needs” met and being happy. Thus the institutional church is seen primarily as a “vendor of religious services and goods.” This reflects the consumer mentality which saturates and shapes us in this society. We go to a “place” (Church) to get what we perceive we need for ourselves and our families.
When we mix our two-sided view of reality with our individualism and our view of the church as a “vendor of religious services and goods,” we have a formula for the “missing” church. The “church” as such has little or no intrinsic significance for growing in faith or doing God’s will. Its only value is instrumental. It is a convenient “place” for Christians to come to get what they perceive they need. In this way of viewing and practicing Christian faith the church (the “missional” church God always intended) is indeed no where to be found; it is “missing.”
A biblically conceived view of the church, a “missional” church, would have at least the following features.
1. It would be oriented to the “Sending” God. God “sends” forth his love to create a world “very good” (no two level, divided view of reality here!). But humanity rebels, sins, and falls. Then God “sends” Abraham’s family to heal and restore his creation, but they too fail. Undaunted, God “sends” Jesus to climactically and decisively fulfill Israel’s role (which is also Adam’s role) and heal and restore the creation. Jesus then “sends” his people into the world to implement and spread his victory. God and Jesus “send” the Spirit to the people to empower and equip them for this work.
The direction of spirituality in a “missional” church is centrifugal, always moving out from the center, Jesus Christ, to embrace and serve God’s wayward creation. Our focus rests on what we have been given (divine gifts and calling to sacrificial servanthood in the world) rather than what we can get.
2. It works out of a “molecule” model of humanity. We are created to need each other, to be connected or in “communion” with one another; to bear the “image of God” (Gen.1:26-28) together. To be without such relationships is the core of our sinful fallen condition. As God made us in creation, so he deals with us in history by making covenants, binding agreements with his called people to do his work in the world. In this sense and for this community, it is very definitely about “us”!
Orestes Brownson, a Catholic theologian, says it well:
“Herein is the distinction between an association and an organism. In the association, the body has no life but the aggregate life of the members, and therefore, none but what they impart to it; in the organism, it is precisely the reverse, the life of the members is in the body, and they have none but what they receive from it, through their intimate union with it…But now is the Church of Christ, not an association, but a body, an organism, and therefore, does not receive its life from its members, but imparts in them their life; and they can live only in their intimate union with it…In declaring the Church to be the body of Christ, we necessarily declare that Christ is the life of the Church.”
3. Viewing itself as God’s missional people implementing Christ’s victory of the restoration of creation rather than a place where people come to consume religious goods and services, a missional church will function as a “sign” (a prophetic pointer to), “foretaste” (a present experience of), and “instrument” (practitioner of) God’s kingdom work in the world. This means that the missional church, as the prototype of the kind of life God intends and is saving his creation for, is God’s mission. It does not have a mission, as if mission was something different and separable from what the church is, some piece or part of the larger work of the church. The restoration of creation, under the lordship and empowerment of the triune God is “the” thing, the “only” thing for which the church exists and to which it is to bend all its energies and efforts.
We have a “missing” Church; we (along with God and the world!) need a “missional” Church. Enough said!
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Lament over the BP Oil Spill
The Petition
As followers of Christ, creator and redeemer of all creation, we mourn the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe and the BP oil spill now polluting the Gulf of Mexico. We mourn the human and animal lives lost, the economies and ecosystems destroyed, and the gifts of God, created from and for his love, squandered and poisoned. Most of all we mourn our complicity and active participation in an economy based on toxic energy that has made such death inevitable.
We find our lives dependent upon the destructive forces that have been made visible in the oil spill, but which have been a sinful and deadly presence in creation for many decades now. We acknowledge that our current lifestyle of convenience and hyper-mobility, which is based on oil and oil-based products is at the root of the problem and that the irresponsibility and hubris of companies such as BP are only outgrowths of this deeper reality. As the prophets of old said, we hear the land witnessing and testifying against us.
Having acknowledged these realities we now make a public confession of the sins against God’s creation that we have committed and have been committed on our behalf. We pray for the grace of God to change our lives, and we invite all of our Christian sisters and brothers to join us in this acknowledgement of our sin and culpability, and in working toward a true repentance.
As a sign of this recognition of our sin we commit to:
•Fasting from all food on Fridays except that which has been locally grown with methods that do not rely on petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides.
•Making every effort to take each Friday as a day when we do not drive but rather walk, bike, ride public transit, or carpool to school or work.
•Praying for the transformation of our lives as individuals and churches toward freedom from fossil fuels and reconciliation with all God’s creation.
•Continuing these practices until the oil spill has been cleaned up and the work of restoration of God’s creation in the Gulf has begun.
On Sunday June 20, the two month anniversary of the beginning of the spill, we invite all Christians to lament the oil spill with a fast from oil. On that day, we will celebrate the Sabbath as we mourn: abstaining from driving motor vehicles of any kind, avoiding food that was grown and shipped great distances, and reflecting on the aspects of our lives that are so entrenched in the oil economy that we cannot even quit them for one day.
We commit to exploring other appropriate acts of lament in our own church communities.
We hope that on this national day of lament, church communities will gather together for meals prepared of local ingredients and begin to discuss a new future that honors God’s creation and seeks to love the world as God does. Out of these discussions we pray that communities will begin to organize farmers markets, encourage alternative modes of transportation, and build a creative hope in their communities.
We are confident in God’s grace to give us hope from our lament as we repent and turn from our sin. Now is the time for our turning.
Litany of Lament
We hope to join with our congregations in mourning this disaster by praying together this litany in our churches.
The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is in it. (Ps 24:1)
From the depths of our hearts, as from the depths of the seas, let lamentation pour forth over what we have made of this good earth.
In the garden, our first home, you planted two trees, O God: one to feed us, and one to limit us. (Gen 2:16-17)
As Adam and Eve ate what was forbidden to them, we have feasted on the bounty of your creation, but ignored the boundaries you ordained. Forgive us, we pray, and teach us proper restraint.
Oil pours into the sea, a judgment against our destructive pursuit of a life that is cheaper, faster, and easier.
For these sins, the land trembles and the people mourn. (Amos 8:8)
If the people of God are silent, the very stones will shout out! (Lk 19:40)
We confess our silence. This disaster leaves us speechless; Lord, give us the courage to repent with out lips, and with our actions.
The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is in it. Hear the cries of your servants, O Lord.
Deliver your creation from this peril, and put a new and right spirit within us. (Ps 51:10)
As followers of Christ, creator and redeemer of all creation, we mourn the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe and the BP oil spill now polluting the Gulf of Mexico. We mourn the human and animal lives lost, the economies and ecosystems destroyed, and the gifts of God, created from and for his love, squandered and poisoned. Most of all we mourn our complicity and active participation in an economy based on toxic energy that has made such death inevitable.
We find our lives dependent upon the destructive forces that have been made visible in the oil spill, but which have been a sinful and deadly presence in creation for many decades now. We acknowledge that our current lifestyle of convenience and hyper-mobility, which is based on oil and oil-based products is at the root of the problem and that the irresponsibility and hubris of companies such as BP are only outgrowths of this deeper reality. As the prophets of old said, we hear the land witnessing and testifying against us.
Having acknowledged these realities we now make a public confession of the sins against God’s creation that we have committed and have been committed on our behalf. We pray for the grace of God to change our lives, and we invite all of our Christian sisters and brothers to join us in this acknowledgement of our sin and culpability, and in working toward a true repentance.
As a sign of this recognition of our sin we commit to:
•Fasting from all food on Fridays except that which has been locally grown with methods that do not rely on petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides.
•Making every effort to take each Friday as a day when we do not drive but rather walk, bike, ride public transit, or carpool to school or work.
•Praying for the transformation of our lives as individuals and churches toward freedom from fossil fuels and reconciliation with all God’s creation.
•Continuing these practices until the oil spill has been cleaned up and the work of restoration of God’s creation in the Gulf has begun.
On Sunday June 20, the two month anniversary of the beginning of the spill, we invite all Christians to lament the oil spill with a fast from oil. On that day, we will celebrate the Sabbath as we mourn: abstaining from driving motor vehicles of any kind, avoiding food that was grown and shipped great distances, and reflecting on the aspects of our lives that are so entrenched in the oil economy that we cannot even quit them for one day.
We commit to exploring other appropriate acts of lament in our own church communities.
We hope that on this national day of lament, church communities will gather together for meals prepared of local ingredients and begin to discuss a new future that honors God’s creation and seeks to love the world as God does. Out of these discussions we pray that communities will begin to organize farmers markets, encourage alternative modes of transportation, and build a creative hope in their communities.
We are confident in God’s grace to give us hope from our lament as we repent and turn from our sin. Now is the time for our turning.
Litany of Lament
We hope to join with our congregations in mourning this disaster by praying together this litany in our churches.
The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is in it. (Ps 24:1)
From the depths of our hearts, as from the depths of the seas, let lamentation pour forth over what we have made of this good earth.
In the garden, our first home, you planted two trees, O God: one to feed us, and one to limit us. (Gen 2:16-17)
As Adam and Eve ate what was forbidden to them, we have feasted on the bounty of your creation, but ignored the boundaries you ordained. Forgive us, we pray, and teach us proper restraint.
Oil pours into the sea, a judgment against our destructive pursuit of a life that is cheaper, faster, and easier.
For these sins, the land trembles and the people mourn. (Amos 8:8)
If the people of God are silent, the very stones will shout out! (Lk 19:40)
We confess our silence. This disaster leaves us speechless; Lord, give us the courage to repent with out lips, and with our actions.
The earth is the LORD’s, and all that is in it. Hear the cries of your servants, O Lord.
Deliver your creation from this peril, and put a new and right spirit within us. (Ps 51:10)
Monday, June 7, 2010
Christ in the Oil Spills
The nauseating pictures of oil-soaked pelicans in the Gulf have haunted me all weekend. I can't get those images out of my mind. They spring to mind unbidden and refuse to leave on demand. Those poor creatures reduced to near immobility and gasping for breath in their black death robes - I can hardly bring myself to look at them. They are like they are today because I and my people are like we are and have been for a long time.
Last night I read these words from Jurgen Moltmann:
"Christian theology has recognized in Christ not just personal salvation
but also the cosmic Wisdom through which all things are, as the Epistle
to the Colossians shows. Christ is the divine mystery of the world. The
person who reverences Christ also reverences all created things in him,
and him in everything created. . .This means that what we do to the earth,
we do to Christ."(GOD FOR A SECULAR SOCIETY, 103.)
If that last line is right, and I am sure it is, well, I have something else to haunt me as well!
Peace,
Lee
Last night I read these words from Jurgen Moltmann:
"Christian theology has recognized in Christ not just personal salvation
but also the cosmic Wisdom through which all things are, as the Epistle
to the Colossians shows. Christ is the divine mystery of the world. The
person who reverences Christ also reverences all created things in him,
and him in everything created. . .This means that what we do to the earth,
we do to Christ."(GOD FOR A SECULAR SOCIETY, 103.)
If that last line is right, and I am sure it is, well, I have something else to haunt me as well!
Peace,
Lee
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Review of Trevin Wax's HOLY SUBVERSION
Review of Holy Subversion: Allegiance to Christ in an Age of Rivals by Trevin Wax (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2010)
Trevin Wax was written and outstanding primer to the Church’s task of bearing faithful and effective witness to the Lord Jesus Christ in North America. Lucid, brief, reflecting the best of contemporary scholarship, his book would be an excellent small group or study group resource. The issues he treats are precisely those we most need to face yet those that are among the difficult for us to face.
The root issue Wax is getting at is the Lordship of Jesus over all of life. He creatively gets our attention by eschewing the language of “Lordship,” an all too familiar piece of Christian lingo, and using the less but still accessible image of “Caesar” to make his point. Rooted in the first century world where Caesar was an omnipotent and omnipresent reality. Lordship is what Caesar is all about. We are rediscovering in our day that when Jesus is acclaimed as “Lord” this is a direct challenge to the pledge of allegiance of the Roman Empire, “Caesar is Lord.”
Thus the call to follow Jesus is a call to a subversive commitment and lifestyle.
Wax uses subversive to mean something that “undermines” (26) the existing structures rather than fomenting a revolution to overthrow them. Wax relentlessly and effectively presses home his key point: “true Christianity is not merely life-changing. It is world-changing” (24).
Wax makes it clear that following Jesus is much more than an inner life of the soul or heart (though it is that too). Rather, Jesus came to establish a group, a community, in the midst of the world who are distinguished from the surrounding world by observable behaviors – how and what they buy and sell, how they raise our children, ways they are involved in their neighborhoods and communities, who they invite home for meals and parties, how they handle our money, and so on. This visible, public community of faith is an evidence of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension to God. What is more, this community is an evidence of the credibility of the gospel itself! This is what makes books like Wax’s so important and helpful for us.
Seven Caesar’s receive their comeuppance at Wax’s hand. : self, success, money, leisure, sex, power, and evangelism. Each chapter provides a brief description and analysis of its particular Caesar followed by a set of practical and helpful reflections and practices designed to help the reader begin to engage that issue.
While the first six Caesar’s may be unsurprising, as they are perennial issues with which the Church is called to struggle, the seventh Caesar, evangelism, will likely be a surprise.
This is to me the best chapter in the book. Wax challenges cultural distorted practices of evangelism shaped by the prevailing orthodoxy of “tolerance” or the marketplace mentality of consumerism. The former warns against “imposing” one’s beliefs on anyone else and accepting the perspective of other’s as as valid as one’s own. The latter frames a gospel in terms of the benefits one can gain from following Christ while soft-pedaling or ignoring the cost entailed in such commitment.
Wax exhorts us to recover our proper theological nerve as prepare ourselves to proclaim Jesus as the Lord of all of life as well as the only source of salvation. Love, not tolerance, is what we owe others for Christ’s sake. And that means we find winsome and appropriate ways to share the truth of Christ, including the cost of commitment to him, with them. In conclusion, he again sounds the note of the necessity of a viable community of faith as a visible and tangible expression and evidence of the gospel being shared with them.
Inevitably, any reader will find something they wished the author would have discussed but didn’t. I would have liked Wax to offer his reflections on the value and witness of singleness in his chapter on sex. He rightly situates and praises sexual practice within the context of marriage. However, there is much ferment and thought be given now to the appropriateness and power of the witness of singleness to the gospel. In a sex-saturated world, folk who choose or learn to live peaceably and even joyfully without sexual expression are a quite subversive presence.
And a chapter on the Caesar of the Church would have been interesting, especially in day when we are recovering the stringent critique of religion delivered by Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer in the last century. Some of this is implicit in what Wax writes but a more explicit treatment would have been helpful.
Nevertheless, I whole-heartedly commend Holy Subversion to all readers and give thanks to God for its author, Trevin Wax, and pray God’s blessing on him in all that he does.
Trevin Wax was written and outstanding primer to the Church’s task of bearing faithful and effective witness to the Lord Jesus Christ in North America. Lucid, brief, reflecting the best of contemporary scholarship, his book would be an excellent small group or study group resource. The issues he treats are precisely those we most need to face yet those that are among the difficult for us to face.
The root issue Wax is getting at is the Lordship of Jesus over all of life. He creatively gets our attention by eschewing the language of “Lordship,” an all too familiar piece of Christian lingo, and using the less but still accessible image of “Caesar” to make his point. Rooted in the first century world where Caesar was an omnipotent and omnipresent reality. Lordship is what Caesar is all about. We are rediscovering in our day that when Jesus is acclaimed as “Lord” this is a direct challenge to the pledge of allegiance of the Roman Empire, “Caesar is Lord.”
Thus the call to follow Jesus is a call to a subversive commitment and lifestyle.
Wax uses subversive to mean something that “undermines” (26) the existing structures rather than fomenting a revolution to overthrow them. Wax relentlessly and effectively presses home his key point: “true Christianity is not merely life-changing. It is world-changing” (24).
Wax makes it clear that following Jesus is much more than an inner life of the soul or heart (though it is that too). Rather, Jesus came to establish a group, a community, in the midst of the world who are distinguished from the surrounding world by observable behaviors – how and what they buy and sell, how they raise our children, ways they are involved in their neighborhoods and communities, who they invite home for meals and parties, how they handle our money, and so on. This visible, public community of faith is an evidence of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension to God. What is more, this community is an evidence of the credibility of the gospel itself! This is what makes books like Wax’s so important and helpful for us.
Seven Caesar’s receive their comeuppance at Wax’s hand. : self, success, money, leisure, sex, power, and evangelism. Each chapter provides a brief description and analysis of its particular Caesar followed by a set of practical and helpful reflections and practices designed to help the reader begin to engage that issue.
While the first six Caesar’s may be unsurprising, as they are perennial issues with which the Church is called to struggle, the seventh Caesar, evangelism, will likely be a surprise.
This is to me the best chapter in the book. Wax challenges cultural distorted practices of evangelism shaped by the prevailing orthodoxy of “tolerance” or the marketplace mentality of consumerism. The former warns against “imposing” one’s beliefs on anyone else and accepting the perspective of other’s as as valid as one’s own. The latter frames a gospel in terms of the benefits one can gain from following Christ while soft-pedaling or ignoring the cost entailed in such commitment.
Wax exhorts us to recover our proper theological nerve as prepare ourselves to proclaim Jesus as the Lord of all of life as well as the only source of salvation. Love, not tolerance, is what we owe others for Christ’s sake. And that means we find winsome and appropriate ways to share the truth of Christ, including the cost of commitment to him, with them. In conclusion, he again sounds the note of the necessity of a viable community of faith as a visible and tangible expression and evidence of the gospel being shared with them.
Inevitably, any reader will find something they wished the author would have discussed but didn’t. I would have liked Wax to offer his reflections on the value and witness of singleness in his chapter on sex. He rightly situates and praises sexual practice within the context of marriage. However, there is much ferment and thought be given now to the appropriateness and power of the witness of singleness to the gospel. In a sex-saturated world, folk who choose or learn to live peaceably and even joyfully without sexual expression are a quite subversive presence.
And a chapter on the Caesar of the Church would have been interesting, especially in day when we are recovering the stringent critique of religion delivered by Karl Barth and Dietrich Bonhoeffer in the last century. Some of this is implicit in what Wax writes but a more explicit treatment would have been helpful.
Nevertheless, I whole-heartedly commend Holy Subversion to all readers and give thanks to God for its author, Trevin Wax, and pray God’s blessing on him in all that he does.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY - CH.5
A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY
Ch.5: Setting the Stage for the Biblical Narrative
McLaren begins constructing his alternative biblical story line at the beginning – with creation. This creation is not complete at the beginning, however. It is just beginning to unfold in “constantly evolving” stages. He takes the creation stories seriously but not literally. They are intended, he claims, to relate “a kind of compassionate coming-of-age story.” (49) God, the patient father, deals with his rebellious children with wisdom not law, punishment but not destruction (at least not for all his creatures). Instead the consequences of humanity’s punishment actually result in an ascent as they are forced by them to begin an evolutionary journey from hunter/gatherers in the garden, to nomadic herders to agriculturalists, to city dwellers, to empire dwellers. Ironically, however, this ascent provokes are corresponding “descent”: from (presumably) innocence, to shame/fear, to murder, to corruption/violence, to oppression/genocide.
The climax to this “ascent/descent” story line is the call of Abraham and Sarah. In their call God serves notice that he is not thereby rejecting or damning all those not called. No, rather those called are called on behalf of and for the sake of all those other peoples! Joseph is McLaren’s parade example - his life of terrible ups and downs, injustices, and harsh treatment. In the end though, God is with Joseph and thus Joseph is able to “forgive and forgo revenge” and “God creatively overcomes evil with good.” (54)
This biblical setting of the stage features not the Greco-Roman narrative of creation-fall-condemnation-salvation-heaven or hell. Rather, it’s a story about “the downside of ‘progress,’” a dance of human foolishness and divine faithfulness, “a story of goodness being created and re-created.”(54) God and good conquer in the end. Thus the story about God and that about Theos square off right here in the beginning.
McLaren’s emphasis on the dynamic, on-going nature of the creation story, as well as his recognition of the “grace trumps judgment” motif in Genesis 1-11 are helpful. Both reflect scholarly gains of more recent times. In general McLaren’s exposition, though rhetorically provocative (fall as ascent), is clear and headed in the right direction.
I do have two notes of concern. The first is McLaren’s use of the evolutionary paradigm. While not particularly troublesome in this chapter, we will meet more objectionable uses of it later on. For a postmodernist it is unusual to see such commitment to one of the chief “totalizing” narrative of modernity! The second concern is to watch the direction of McLaren’s hermeneutics. Does he allow the biblical story line to discipline the imagery he uses to explain it or does such imagery seem to press alien elements into it? His use of the “coming-of-age” imagery in this chapter seems to fit the cut of the narrative in this case. Will they always do so? We need to watch carefully as we read on.
Ch.5: Setting the Stage for the Biblical Narrative
McLaren begins constructing his alternative biblical story line at the beginning – with creation. This creation is not complete at the beginning, however. It is just beginning to unfold in “constantly evolving” stages. He takes the creation stories seriously but not literally. They are intended, he claims, to relate “a kind of compassionate coming-of-age story.” (49) God, the patient father, deals with his rebellious children with wisdom not law, punishment but not destruction (at least not for all his creatures). Instead the consequences of humanity’s punishment actually result in an ascent as they are forced by them to begin an evolutionary journey from hunter/gatherers in the garden, to nomadic herders to agriculturalists, to city dwellers, to empire dwellers. Ironically, however, this ascent provokes are corresponding “descent”: from (presumably) innocence, to shame/fear, to murder, to corruption/violence, to oppression/genocide.
The climax to this “ascent/descent” story line is the call of Abraham and Sarah. In their call God serves notice that he is not thereby rejecting or damning all those not called. No, rather those called are called on behalf of and for the sake of all those other peoples! Joseph is McLaren’s parade example - his life of terrible ups and downs, injustices, and harsh treatment. In the end though, God is with Joseph and thus Joseph is able to “forgive and forgo revenge” and “God creatively overcomes evil with good.” (54)
This biblical setting of the stage features not the Greco-Roman narrative of creation-fall-condemnation-salvation-heaven or hell. Rather, it’s a story about “the downside of ‘progress,’” a dance of human foolishness and divine faithfulness, “a story of goodness being created and re-created.”(54) God and good conquer in the end. Thus the story about God and that about Theos square off right here in the beginning.
McLaren’s emphasis on the dynamic, on-going nature of the creation story, as well as his recognition of the “grace trumps judgment” motif in Genesis 1-11 are helpful. Both reflect scholarly gains of more recent times. In general McLaren’s exposition, though rhetorically provocative (fall as ascent), is clear and headed in the right direction.
I do have two notes of concern. The first is McLaren’s use of the evolutionary paradigm. While not particularly troublesome in this chapter, we will meet more objectionable uses of it later on. For a postmodernist it is unusual to see such commitment to one of the chief “totalizing” narrative of modernity! The second concern is to watch the direction of McLaren’s hermeneutics. Does he allow the biblical story line to discipline the imagery he uses to explain it or does such imagery seem to press alien elements into it? His use of the “coming-of-age” imagery in this chapter seems to fit the cut of the narrative in this case. Will they always do so? We need to watch carefully as we read on.
Monday, March 1, 2010
A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY - CH.5
A NEW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY
“The Narrative Question” (Chs.4-6)
McLaren addresses the first of his Ten Questions in this section: The Narrative Question. It focuses on the Bible and the ways we read it. In ch.4 he asks if there is a story line in the Bible itself that should guide our reading of it. Before getting to that biblical story line, McLaren deconstructs what he understands to the default story line western culture has bequeathed us for reading the Bible. He calls it the “Greco-Roman narrative.” Six elements make up this narrative – creation (static perfection), Fall into sin (plunge into the world of becoming, change), condemnation (living in a fallen world), salvation through Jesus which has two results for humanity: heaven or hell. We imbibe this six-stage story line, according to McLaren, from our western heritage as we read the Bible backwards through lens fashioned for us by the likes of Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, or Pope Benedict, Calvin, Wesley or Newton, Luther or Erasmus, Aquinas, Augustine, Paul, finally arriving at and Jesus as he appears through the accumulated perspective of these predecessors.. He proposes an alternative, reading forward from Adam to Abraham to Moses to David to the prophets to John the Baptist, to Jesus.
If we read backwards, as we usually do, we read through a perspective formed by Greek philosophy and various strands of the ethos of the Roman Empire. Chief among the values of such a perspective are dualism (dividing reality into two types – material and spiritual – and valuing the latter and devaluating the former), energy and confidence (belief that the superiority of the Greek-Roman approach gave access to the real truth on which to act), and social dualism and superiority (the Empire was the real mover and shaker in world affairs, thus if we were not an elite of that empire you were inferior and on the outside of the social, economic, political status system.).
The deity of this narrative McLaren names Theos (English transliteration of the Greek word for “God”). Dissimilar from the Biblical God n every way, Theos values “spirit, state, and being and hates matter, story, and becoming, since . . . the latter involve change, and the only way to change or move from perfection is downward into decay” (41).
The upshot of reading the Bible backwards through all these filters is that traditional Christian theological terms, like Creation, Fall, Sin, Salvation, have been transformed/corrupted by this Greco-Roman narrative into a fundamentally different story than that of the Bible!
McLaren posits his program of “reading the Bible forward” as an antidote to the above fatally flawed Greco-Roman narrative. This way of proceeding is fleshed out in ch 5.
What of all of this? There is no question that in general McLaren is right! Our Greco-Roman/western/North American heritage certainly inclines us to read the Bible through a variety of lenses which, if unrecognized and corrected for, distort the Biblical story. Dualism is clearly the chief culprit in all this. Nothing has done more damage to western Christianity and its reading of the Bible than the splitting up of reality into two separate, unequal spheres, the material of which is inferior, the spiritual of which is superior. The invisible, immaterial sphere was identified as “spiritual” with its material counterpart as “worldly.” Obviously, Christians then ought to be concerned with the “spiritual” and eschew contact as far as possible with the “worldly.” This is a Pandora’s box that, once opened by Plato and his followers, unleashed a plethora of conceptual, social, and political ills.
That said, I do not think that the “being (static perfection) – becoming (change, history, impermanence) is as important as McLaren does. Nor do I think the people he is writing for would be able or even care to identify what they think in these terms. They just “know” that the “spiritual” is more important than the “worldly” or the material and that God and the things of God are identified with the former. This is what Nietzsche contemptuously called the watered-down “Platonism of the masses” of his time, for which he too largely blamed Christianity. Thus, I do not think it is helpful to use all the philosophical names and terms for the purpose of explaining to our contemporaries why they read the Bible the way they do. I fear it only befuddles the uninitiated and is too general and in some ways misleading for those trained in philosophy. I have tried in my own work to address this matter which Brian has rightly and forcefully identified as central to our dilemma and will say more about that in my post on ch.5.
In sum, what McLaren has done in this chapter needs to be done! Even though he has hit on the major points such a critique needs to address, I am not sure he has done so in the clearest and most effective way. He has raised the matter of the ways we are conditioned to read and understand the Bible (or any other literature for that matter) though, and for that he is to be thanked. This discussion needs to be had!
“The Narrative Question” (Chs.4-6)
McLaren addresses the first of his Ten Questions in this section: The Narrative Question. It focuses on the Bible and the ways we read it. In ch.4 he asks if there is a story line in the Bible itself that should guide our reading of it. Before getting to that biblical story line, McLaren deconstructs what he understands to the default story line western culture has bequeathed us for reading the Bible. He calls it the “Greco-Roman narrative.” Six elements make up this narrative – creation (static perfection), Fall into sin (plunge into the world of becoming, change), condemnation (living in a fallen world), salvation through Jesus which has two results for humanity: heaven or hell. We imbibe this six-stage story line, according to McLaren, from our western heritage as we read the Bible backwards through lens fashioned for us by the likes of Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, or Pope Benedict, Calvin, Wesley or Newton, Luther or Erasmus, Aquinas, Augustine, Paul, finally arriving at and Jesus as he appears through the accumulated perspective of these predecessors.. He proposes an alternative, reading forward from Adam to Abraham to Moses to David to the prophets to John the Baptist, to Jesus.
If we read backwards, as we usually do, we read through a perspective formed by Greek philosophy and various strands of the ethos of the Roman Empire. Chief among the values of such a perspective are dualism (dividing reality into two types – material and spiritual – and valuing the latter and devaluating the former), energy and confidence (belief that the superiority of the Greek-Roman approach gave access to the real truth on which to act), and social dualism and superiority (the Empire was the real mover and shaker in world affairs, thus if we were not an elite of that empire you were inferior and on the outside of the social, economic, political status system.).
The deity of this narrative McLaren names Theos (English transliteration of the Greek word for “God”). Dissimilar from the Biblical God n every way, Theos values “spirit, state, and being and hates matter, story, and becoming, since . . . the latter involve change, and the only way to change or move from perfection is downward into decay” (41).
The upshot of reading the Bible backwards through all these filters is that traditional Christian theological terms, like Creation, Fall, Sin, Salvation, have been transformed/corrupted by this Greco-Roman narrative into a fundamentally different story than that of the Bible!
McLaren posits his program of “reading the Bible forward” as an antidote to the above fatally flawed Greco-Roman narrative. This way of proceeding is fleshed out in ch 5.
What of all of this? There is no question that in general McLaren is right! Our Greco-Roman/western/North American heritage certainly inclines us to read the Bible through a variety of lenses which, if unrecognized and corrected for, distort the Biblical story. Dualism is clearly the chief culprit in all this. Nothing has done more damage to western Christianity and its reading of the Bible than the splitting up of reality into two separate, unequal spheres, the material of which is inferior, the spiritual of which is superior. The invisible, immaterial sphere was identified as “spiritual” with its material counterpart as “worldly.” Obviously, Christians then ought to be concerned with the “spiritual” and eschew contact as far as possible with the “worldly.” This is a Pandora’s box that, once opened by Plato and his followers, unleashed a plethora of conceptual, social, and political ills.
That said, I do not think that the “being (static perfection) – becoming (change, history, impermanence) is as important as McLaren does. Nor do I think the people he is writing for would be able or even care to identify what they think in these terms. They just “know” that the “spiritual” is more important than the “worldly” or the material and that God and the things of God are identified with the former. This is what Nietzsche contemptuously called the watered-down “Platonism of the masses” of his time, for which he too largely blamed Christianity. Thus, I do not think it is helpful to use all the philosophical names and terms for the purpose of explaining to our contemporaries why they read the Bible the way they do. I fear it only befuddles the uninitiated and is too general and in some ways misleading for those trained in philosophy. I have tried in my own work to address this matter which Brian has rightly and forcefully identified as central to our dilemma and will say more about that in my post on ch.5.
In sum, what McLaren has done in this chapter needs to be done! Even though he has hit on the major points such a critique needs to address, I am not sure he has done so in the clearest and most effective way. He has raised the matter of the ways we are conditioned to read and understand the Bible (or any other literature for that matter) though, and for that he is to be thanked. This discussion needs to be had!
Second Sunday in Lent
I was struck this week by a passage in 2 Samuel 14. Absalom, David's rebellious son, has fled the capital city, estranged from his father, King David. David agonized over Absalom and longed to have him back. Reasons of pride and state seemed to make that impossible, however. David's aide and friend, Joab, discerned the king's agony and strategized with a "wise woman" from Tekoa to convince David to effect the return home of his beloved Absalom.
The wise woman seeks and is granted an audience with the king. She tells him a story, purportedly about herself and her son. He has killed his brother in a fight in the fields. The rest of the family wants to avenge the death of the one brother with the death of his murderer. The old lady pleads with David for the life of her remaining son, even though he is a murderer. David grants her request with a promise of protection.
The wise woman speaks again. With Nathan-like acuity she charges the king with duplicity for he is planning to do to Absalom just what he has sworn himself to prevent in the case of the woman's remaining son. she says,"For in giving this decision (about her son) the king convicts himself, inasmuch as the king does not bring his banished one home again" (2 Samuel 14:13)!
David heard God's word in this woman's words and summoned Absalom back to Jerusalem, eventually forgiving him.
The potency of this passage for Lent lies in v.14 where the wise woman says: "we must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up. But God will not take away a life; he will devise plans so as not to keep an outcast banished forever from his presence."
what an astonishing saying. It is gospel if it is anything. As we move deeper into Lent our reflections turn away from ourselves and our disciplines of self-examination to intense reflections on the life and death of Jesus, Immanuel, God-with-us. What we see unfold in his life we have discovered are precisely the plans the Great King, God, has "devised" so as not to keep outsiders like us, like me, from his presence forever.
Herein lies the hidden hope of Lent. It is good, however - remembering that the Sundays in Lent are not themselves part of Lent but rather retain their character as "Little Easters" and thus invite us to acclaim and embrace the good news of the gospel even in the midst of Lent - it is good to allow this hope to surface so as to season of examinations and repentances with grace and gratitude. In other words, our Sunday celebrations of gospel in Lent transform the hard and painful work of examination and repentance into gifts. Such grace-seasoned gifts lead us not into condemnation and despair but rather deeper into the life and suffering of the One who blessed his tormentors at the cross with these words, which belong to us as well, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" (Luke 23:34).
May such a blessing resonate deep in our hearts this second Sunday in Lent and may we go forth with courage, vision, and humor into the Lenten work that lies ahead!
Peace,
Lee Wyatt
The wise woman seeks and is granted an audience with the king. She tells him a story, purportedly about herself and her son. He has killed his brother in a fight in the fields. The rest of the family wants to avenge the death of the one brother with the death of his murderer. The old lady pleads with David for the life of her remaining son, even though he is a murderer. David grants her request with a promise of protection.
The wise woman speaks again. With Nathan-like acuity she charges the king with duplicity for he is planning to do to Absalom just what he has sworn himself to prevent in the case of the woman's remaining son. she says,"For in giving this decision (about her son) the king convicts himself, inasmuch as the king does not bring his banished one home again" (2 Samuel 14:13)!
David heard God's word in this woman's words and summoned Absalom back to Jerusalem, eventually forgiving him.
The potency of this passage for Lent lies in v.14 where the wise woman says: "we must all die; we are like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be gathered up. But God will not take away a life; he will devise plans so as not to keep an outcast banished forever from his presence."
what an astonishing saying. It is gospel if it is anything. As we move deeper into Lent our reflections turn away from ourselves and our disciplines of self-examination to intense reflections on the life and death of Jesus, Immanuel, God-with-us. What we see unfold in his life we have discovered are precisely the plans the Great King, God, has "devised" so as not to keep outsiders like us, like me, from his presence forever.
Herein lies the hidden hope of Lent. It is good, however - remembering that the Sundays in Lent are not themselves part of Lent but rather retain their character as "Little Easters" and thus invite us to acclaim and embrace the good news of the gospel even in the midst of Lent - it is good to allow this hope to surface so as to season of examinations and repentances with grace and gratitude. In other words, our Sunday celebrations of gospel in Lent transform the hard and painful work of examination and repentance into gifts. Such grace-seasoned gifts lead us not into condemnation and despair but rather deeper into the life and suffering of the One who blessed his tormentors at the cross with these words, which belong to us as well, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" (Luke 23:34).
May such a blessing resonate deep in our hearts this second Sunday in Lent and may we go forth with courage, vision, and humor into the Lenten work that lies ahead!
Peace,
Lee Wyatt
Sunday, February 21, 2010
First Sunday in Lent
The First Sunday in Lent
In my post “Beginning Lent” I pointed to the very ordinariness of our daily lives as the place to look for Lenten treasures. For this first Sunday in Lent I want us to consider what is at stake in embracing this season as a season of repentance and suffering for the sake of growth in knowing and following our Lord Jesus Christ. We North Americans do not easily embrace suffering. Rather we run from it as fast as we can. A call to embrace suffering, then, will need a compelling rationale. I suggest that a conversation in Graham Greene’s "Dr. Fischer of Geneva or the Comb Party" offers such a rationale. Here it is for your reflection:
One character addresses another:
“Do you have a soul?”
“I think so,” the other answers.
“Well I’m sure you have a soul!”
“How do you know?”
“Because you’ve suffered.”
God bless!!
In my post “Beginning Lent” I pointed to the very ordinariness of our daily lives as the place to look for Lenten treasures. For this first Sunday in Lent I want us to consider what is at stake in embracing this season as a season of repentance and suffering for the sake of growth in knowing and following our Lord Jesus Christ. We North Americans do not easily embrace suffering. Rather we run from it as fast as we can. A call to embrace suffering, then, will need a compelling rationale. I suggest that a conversation in Graham Greene’s "Dr. Fischer of Geneva or the Comb Party" offers such a rationale. Here it is for your reflection:
One character addresses another:
“Do you have a soul?”
“I think so,” the other answers.
“Well I’m sure you have a soul!”
“How do you know?”
“Because you’ve suffered.”
God bless!!
Saturday, February 20, 2010
A New Christianity - Ch.3
McLaren writes ch.3 in a confessional mode. Drawing on Puritan pastor John Robinson's certainty that we await more light from God's Word, McLaren finds freedom to confess ecclesiastical missteps.
-"We acknowledge that we have made a mess of what Jesus started."
-"We affirm that we are wrong and Jesus is right."
-"We choose not to defend what we have done and what we have become.
-"We understand that many good Christians will not want to participate in our quest, and we welcome their charitable critique."
-"We acknowledge that we have created many Christianities up to this point, and they call for reassessement and, in many cacses, repentance."
-"We choose to seek a better path into the future than the one we have been on!"
-"We desirre to be born again as disciples of Jesus Christ."
-"We pray that God will create something new and beautiful in and among us for the good of all creation and to the glory of the living God."
These "confessions" and "hopes" for the future of the Christian movement are salutary.I hope we would all embrace them. They seem especially pertinent as we now enter Lent.
I find it interesting that in my own reworking of evangelism appropriate for the 21st century I concluded that a credible witness in our time must also begin with a confession. This seems to me a part of reading accurately the context in which we live. In short, I find ch.3 a quite helpful and genuine beginning on the "quest" Brian sees us needing to take.
My one reservation is the same one I noted in the first post on this book. I do not think the image of a "quest" is bears the "gravitas" needed to galvanize a "new kind of Christianity." Nor do I think it best captures the nature of the movement JEsus started, what I have come to call God's Counter-Revolutionary movement to re-establish God's reign over the world. More on this in later posts.
-"We acknowledge that we have made a mess of what Jesus started."
-"We affirm that we are wrong and Jesus is right."
-"We choose not to defend what we have done and what we have become.
-"We understand that many good Christians will not want to participate in our quest, and we welcome their charitable critique."
-"We acknowledge that we have created many Christianities up to this point, and they call for reassessement and, in many cacses, repentance."
-"We choose to seek a better path into the future than the one we have been on!"
-"We desirre to be born again as disciples of Jesus Christ."
-"We pray that God will create something new and beautiful in and among us for the good of all creation and to the glory of the living God."
These "confessions" and "hopes" for the future of the Christian movement are salutary.I hope we would all embrace them. They seem especially pertinent as we now enter Lent.
I find it interesting that in my own reworking of evangelism appropriate for the 21st century I concluded that a credible witness in our time must also begin with a confession. This seems to me a part of reading accurately the context in which we live. In short, I find ch.3 a quite helpful and genuine beginning on the "quest" Brian sees us needing to take.
My one reservation is the same one I noted in the first post on this book. I do not think the image of a "quest" is bears the "gravitas" needed to galvanize a "new kind of Christianity." Nor do I think it best captures the nature of the movement JEsus started, what I have come to call God's Counter-Revolutionary movement to re-establish God's reign over the world. More on this in later posts.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Beginning Lent
Beginning Lent
“Blessed are the poor in S/spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
Lent is the season when the church says “Stop!” We are all so addicted to hurry in our 24/7 wired and connected world that it might better be said, “Unplug!” And once unplugged, Lent advises us to “count the cost” of our participation, willed or not, in a world that moves at such a pace seeking an ever elusive “Holy Grail” of we know not quite what. Among the costs, we might well discover, the emptiness of which Jesus’ Beatitude speaks. And in such discovery, Lent truly begins for us.
In our hurried quest for whatever it is we think (or are told) we seek, we grow blind to the pace and grace of the ordinary. We forget God’s expressed desire to be “Immanuel,” God with us, God in human flesh, Jesus of Nazareth. We buy the illusion that the important, the significant, the meaningful are never where we are, rather, they exist, if at all, somewhere else and are accessed by something other than our ordinary, day-in-and-day-out lives. Thus we seek, especially in Lent, to find some new means to hurry to the end of the rainbow. There, so we believe, an intrepid seeker can find a pot full of spiritual benefits.
So some of us give up something for Lent; others add some kind of spiritual discipline. Some take on a “Forty Day” program of renewal and enrichment for Lent. Others attend regular and special worship services more often. Many go on some kind of retreat or conference. What is common is all these responses to Lent is that all involve doing something or going somewhere different than we do in the normal course of life.
Consider this Hasidic tale (as told by John Westerhoff in A Pilgrim People, 74):
“A poor Jew named Isaac lived in a hovel far from the city. One night Isaac dreamed that if he made a long difficult journey to a far-off place he would find a bag of gold underneath a bridge leading to the main gate. It seemed foolish, but he made his way painfully and slowly to that place. He arrived weary, hungry, tired and sore, and found the bridge heavily guarded. Forlorn, he told the guard of his dream, but the guard only laughed. “You old fool! Only last night I had a dream that if I were to journey to a small village, I would find a treasure behind the fireplace in the miserable home of an old Jew named Isaac. Be off, old man!” Isaac made his way home and so at last found the treasure.”
Where will your Lenten “treasure” be found this year?
“Blessed are the poor in S/spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”
Lent is the season when the church says “Stop!” We are all so addicted to hurry in our 24/7 wired and connected world that it might better be said, “Unplug!” And once unplugged, Lent advises us to “count the cost” of our participation, willed or not, in a world that moves at such a pace seeking an ever elusive “Holy Grail” of we know not quite what. Among the costs, we might well discover, the emptiness of which Jesus’ Beatitude speaks. And in such discovery, Lent truly begins for us.
In our hurried quest for whatever it is we think (or are told) we seek, we grow blind to the pace and grace of the ordinary. We forget God’s expressed desire to be “Immanuel,” God with us, God in human flesh, Jesus of Nazareth. We buy the illusion that the important, the significant, the meaningful are never where we are, rather, they exist, if at all, somewhere else and are accessed by something other than our ordinary, day-in-and-day-out lives. Thus we seek, especially in Lent, to find some new means to hurry to the end of the rainbow. There, so we believe, an intrepid seeker can find a pot full of spiritual benefits.
So some of us give up something for Lent; others add some kind of spiritual discipline. Some take on a “Forty Day” program of renewal and enrichment for Lent. Others attend regular and special worship services more often. Many go on some kind of retreat or conference. What is common is all these responses to Lent is that all involve doing something or going somewhere different than we do in the normal course of life.
Consider this Hasidic tale (as told by John Westerhoff in A Pilgrim People, 74):
“A poor Jew named Isaac lived in a hovel far from the city. One night Isaac dreamed that if he made a long difficult journey to a far-off place he would find a bag of gold underneath a bridge leading to the main gate. It seemed foolish, but he made his way painfully and slowly to that place. He arrived weary, hungry, tired and sore, and found the bridge heavily guarded. Forlorn, he told the guard of his dream, but the guard only laughed. “You old fool! Only last night I had a dream that if I were to journey to a small village, I would find a treasure behind the fireplace in the miserable home of an old Jew named Isaac. Be off, old man!” Isaac made his way home and so at last found the treasure.”
Where will your Lenten “treasure” be found this year?
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Review of McLaren's A N EW KIND OF CHRISTIANITY
Brian McLaren’s new book A New Kind of Christianity is now out. McLaren is now a veteran of what is called the “emerging church movement” (whatever exactly that is!). This book is a kind of consolidation of his questions, insights, and experiences of moving among many groups of people around the world who are disaffected with the church as they/we have experienced it. McLaren distills this wealth of “data” into ten questions he believes captures the spirit that’s “blowin’ in the wind” among these folk. Assured of a wide readership, A New Kind of Christianity is worth spending some time on in the next few days.
In the first chapter McLaren sets the table by recounting some of his own journey from evangelical certainty to awareness of “appearanccs” (a Medieval term for anomalies [discrepancies] in observing the movement of stars and planets to a deconstruction and reconstruction of his faith. Or, as he prefers to put it, “a new way of believing.”
If you are reading this book you probably do not need to be persuaded of the sins and follies of the church through the centuries and millennia. McLaren invokes the Woody Allen line that if Jesus were ever to see what his church has done in his name, he’d “never stop throwing up.” (12) And he’s right! The message of the risen Christ to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-22 suggests biblical precedent for such an image!
Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the “ten questions” Mclaren intends to raise for consideration and conversation. He prefaces these questions with a general statement:
“It’s time for a new quest, launched by new questions, a quest across denomin ations around the world, a quest for new ways to believe and new ways to live and serve faithfully in the way of Jesus, a quest for a new kind of Christian faith.” (18)
The ten questions follow:
1. What is the overarching story line of the Bible?
2. How should the Bible be understood?
3. Is God violent?
4. Who is Jesus and why is he important?
5. What is the gospel?
6. What do we do about the church?
7. Can we find a way to address human sexuality without fighting about it?
8. Can we find a better way of viewing the future?
9. How should followers of Jesus relate to people of other religions?
10. How can we translate our great quest into action?
Without having read more than these first two chapters, a couple of things struck me. First, there a basically two questions McLaren raises, questions 5 and 10. Questions 1-4 are sub-questions of question 5 while questions 6-9 are sub-questions of 10. I hope McLaren will work toward some integration around these central issues rather than simply treat each as discrete questions. Second, I dooubt if “quest” is the best image or metaphor for what we need?
I have just completed a manuscript entitled “The Incredible Shrinking Gospel: The Crisis of Evangelism in the 21st Century.” In it I have been occupied with many of the concerns and issues McLaren addresses. However, I am persuaded that it is not our quest for “a new kind of Christianity “which finally matters as it is our enlisting in God’s purposes and following God’s intentions. As I worked my way through what I believe is the central question for evangelism, “What is the Gospel?” (Brian’s question 5), I was led to the image of the church as God’s “Counter-Revolutionary” movement to re-establish God’s rule over his world. I find this dynamic and urgent imagery raises in an acute fashion issues of gospel and mission that need to be re-thought anew in North America. This image also suggests that the current structuring of the church in our land is not hospitable to this kind of gospel and self-understanding of the church. Thus, much needs to be re-imagined and configured differently for us to act faithfully on what the Bible calls the “good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).
I look forward, then, to reading McLaren’s work in tandem with my own and see what new insights or understandings emerge. I’ll be back in couple of days with some reflections on ch.3:”A Prayer on the Beach.”
In the first chapter McLaren sets the table by recounting some of his own journey from evangelical certainty to awareness of “appearanccs” (a Medieval term for anomalies [discrepancies] in observing the movement of stars and planets to a deconstruction and reconstruction of his faith. Or, as he prefers to put it, “a new way of believing.”
If you are reading this book you probably do not need to be persuaded of the sins and follies of the church through the centuries and millennia. McLaren invokes the Woody Allen line that if Jesus were ever to see what his church has done in his name, he’d “never stop throwing up.” (12) And he’s right! The message of the risen Christ to the church in Laodicea in Revelation 3:14-22 suggests biblical precedent for such an image!
Chapter 2 provides an introduction to the “ten questions” Mclaren intends to raise for consideration and conversation. He prefaces these questions with a general statement:
“It’s time for a new quest, launched by new questions, a quest across denomin ations around the world, a quest for new ways to believe and new ways to live and serve faithfully in the way of Jesus, a quest for a new kind of Christian faith.” (18)
The ten questions follow:
1. What is the overarching story line of the Bible?
2. How should the Bible be understood?
3. Is God violent?
4. Who is Jesus and why is he important?
5. What is the gospel?
6. What do we do about the church?
7. Can we find a way to address human sexuality without fighting about it?
8. Can we find a better way of viewing the future?
9. How should followers of Jesus relate to people of other religions?
10. How can we translate our great quest into action?
Without having read more than these first two chapters, a couple of things struck me. First, there a basically two questions McLaren raises, questions 5 and 10. Questions 1-4 are sub-questions of question 5 while questions 6-9 are sub-questions of 10. I hope McLaren will work toward some integration around these central issues rather than simply treat each as discrete questions. Second, I dooubt if “quest” is the best image or metaphor for what we need?
I have just completed a manuscript entitled “The Incredible Shrinking Gospel: The Crisis of Evangelism in the 21st Century.” In it I have been occupied with many of the concerns and issues McLaren addresses. However, I am persuaded that it is not our quest for “a new kind of Christianity “which finally matters as it is our enlisting in God’s purposes and following God’s intentions. As I worked my way through what I believe is the central question for evangelism, “What is the Gospel?” (Brian’s question 5), I was led to the image of the church as God’s “Counter-Revolutionary” movement to re-establish God’s rule over his world. I find this dynamic and urgent imagery raises in an acute fashion issues of gospel and mission that need to be re-thought anew in North America. This image also suggests that the current structuring of the church in our land is not hospitable to this kind of gospel and self-understanding of the church. Thus, much needs to be re-imagined and configured differently for us to act faithfully on what the Bible calls the “good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).
I look forward, then, to reading McLaren’s work in tandem with my own and see what new insights or understandings emerge. I’ll be back in couple of days with some reflections on ch.3:”A Prayer on the Beach.”
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Befriending Yourself
Prof.John Stackhouse quotes 18th century spiritual writer William Law: "Be your own good friend." I'm attracted to this exhortation. It makes me ask:
What is a good friend?
Are or can you befriend yourself like that?
If you can't, what hinders you?
How can you work towards befriending yourself?
Might be good material to reflect on in Lent (begins Feb.17)!
Peace,
Lee
What is a good friend?
Are or can you befriend yourself like that?
If you can't, what hinders you?
How can you work towards befriending yourself?
Might be good material to reflect on in Lent (begins Feb.17)!
Peace,
Lee
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Spiritual Affliction
At times of great spiritual affliction - attacks of feelings of guilt and unworthiness - Martin Luther would touch his head and cry out "Martin, you have been baptized!". Thus he resisted the assaults of the evil one - and so can we! May it please God that this be so for us this day.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Images of Church
Images of Church
North American Christianity/Missional
Museum/Mission Outpost
Memorial/Mental Health Center
Mausoleum/MASH Unit
Mall/Meeting Hall
Mystification/Mysticism
McDonalds/Monastery
Museum: Church is about the past, the ”good old days,” when things were supposedly better and God's presence and power more evident to all. The dominant dynamic is nostalgia, The primary Leadership posture is Curator. This person is responsible for preserving the relics and maintaining the memory which gives the people its identity.
Mission Outpost: Church is about the present in light of the future of God's coming Kingdom. It is forward/future oriented, honoring the past but moving on into the new and different future where God is already at work blazing trails and creating opportunities for his people. The dominant dynamic is hope. The primary Leadership posture is collegial, gift-based, and focuses on poetry – envisioning and discerning God's future, prophecy – declaring God's present will for a people on the move, and apostolicity – leading into the future without a set of maps.
Memorial: Church is about remembering Jesus, the Jesus who would set all things right . . . if he were only here! The church tries hard to do what Jesus would do and clings firmly to orthodox teaching about Jesus. The dominant dynamic here is the past. This is not the nostalgia of the Church as “Museum,” however; it is more of a confidence that if the church can get the earthly Jesus right historically, it will be able to forge ahead with confidence and strength. This is the churchly version of modernity's confidence in reason and history. The primary Leadership posture is Teacher/Scholar.
Mental Health Center: Church is indeed about the business of cognitive adjustment. But trusting in the presence of the living Jesus through his Spirit the church strives to discover what he is doing now in the world in order to join him in that work. There is a remembering of Jesus involved but it is in the Hebraic sense of re-encountering Jesus in his risen and living reality and thus being re-membered into his body. As one black preacher told Will Willimon, black worship takes so long because after a week in a world that routinely dismisses, demeans, and dehumanizes black people, it takes three hours for him to get their minds and heart reoriented and focused on Jesus and centered in the gospel affirmation of who they are in Christ. The dominant dynamic here is the present and the need to encounter the risen and living One. The primary Leadership posture is mentor.
Mausoleum: Church is the burial place of Jesus. He is dead and gone, a nobly tragic figure, a good example, perhaps the best person who ever lived, but that is all. Jesus is revered here, admired and acclaimed, but he is finally a human being. And like all human beings, death has claimed him. The church remembers Jesus as mourners. Low grade grief, lack of expectation, and even a silent despair like a fever runs through the life of these churches presenting as the dominant dynamic. The primary Leadership profile is that of therapist-caretaker.
M.A.S.H. Unit: the issue of health looms large here too. However, it is our health as followers of Jesus who bring to him our wounds, hurts, and struggles acquired in the journey. Jesus is the living One, the Great Physician, who will not the power of death and evil to reign over them. In the church he meets us with healing as we share with him all that ails us. Jesus heals us enough so that we may rejoin the fray and pick up with our journey of discipleship. Full healing and rest still await us but Jesus gives us the healing we need to continue on with the work. The dominant dynamic here is well-being. The primary Leadership posture is Spiritual Guide or Director.
Mall: Church is about meeting the “felt needs” of the congregation. Mega-churches have the resources to fully service their members and thus they illustrate this “Church as Mall” model well. They often identify themselves as “24/7” institutions which are “there” all day, every day, in every way for their people. The dominant dynamic is, to put it crassly, “Customer Service.” This becomes not only the programmatic baseline but the basis for its appeal to the community as well. “Join us and We Will Take Care of You and Your Family.” The primary Leadership posture is the C.E.O.
Meeting Hall: The Church here serves as a center for the community's missional deliberation. The Greek word for “church” means just that, a “town hall assembly” to take care of community business. The dominant dynamic is discernment – looking outward to discover where God is leading his people into ministry. The primary Leadership posture is facilitator.
Mystification: The end result of the models and methods embraced by most North American Christianity ends up by mystifying the church. That is, over its theology, worship, and work lies a pall of unreality and confusion. As Walker Percy puts it in The Thanatos Syndrome, the words of the church “no longer signify.” This mystification is the crisis of the North American church as we move on into the 21st century.
Mysticism: A missional church lives from its relation to its Lord. At the heart of this way of being church is a practical mysticism, that is, the ability to discern God's presence in daily life and come to experience life as prayer, that is, an ongoing conversation and companionship with God throughout their lives.
McDonalds: Church in North American has bought into the values of “McDonaldization” - efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. These values, central to North American culture, drive the sense of mystification that now pervades the church and allow the “mystery” at the heart of the church, the presence of the triune God, to atrophy.
Monastery: Missional church, by focusing on the relation to God in the midst of life, in other words, the Holy Spirit, takes the form of a monastery in the midst of the world. A “monastic” missional church seeks to reintegrate the experience of the living God at the heart of a people living and loving the world as God's missional people.
North American Christianity/Missional
Museum/Mission Outpost
Memorial/Mental Health Center
Mausoleum/MASH Unit
Mall/Meeting Hall
Mystification/Mysticism
McDonalds/Monastery
Museum: Church is about the past, the ”good old days,” when things were supposedly better and God's presence and power more evident to all. The dominant dynamic is nostalgia, The primary Leadership posture is Curator. This person is responsible for preserving the relics and maintaining the memory which gives the people its identity.
Mission Outpost: Church is about the present in light of the future of God's coming Kingdom. It is forward/future oriented, honoring the past but moving on into the new and different future where God is already at work blazing trails and creating opportunities for his people. The dominant dynamic is hope. The primary Leadership posture is collegial, gift-based, and focuses on poetry – envisioning and discerning God's future, prophecy – declaring God's present will for a people on the move, and apostolicity – leading into the future without a set of maps.
Memorial: Church is about remembering Jesus, the Jesus who would set all things right . . . if he were only here! The church tries hard to do what Jesus would do and clings firmly to orthodox teaching about Jesus. The dominant dynamic here is the past. This is not the nostalgia of the Church as “Museum,” however; it is more of a confidence that if the church can get the earthly Jesus right historically, it will be able to forge ahead with confidence and strength. This is the churchly version of modernity's confidence in reason and history. The primary Leadership posture is Teacher/Scholar.
Mental Health Center: Church is indeed about the business of cognitive adjustment. But trusting in the presence of the living Jesus through his Spirit the church strives to discover what he is doing now in the world in order to join him in that work. There is a remembering of Jesus involved but it is in the Hebraic sense of re-encountering Jesus in his risen and living reality and thus being re-membered into his body. As one black preacher told Will Willimon, black worship takes so long because after a week in a world that routinely dismisses, demeans, and dehumanizes black people, it takes three hours for him to get their minds and heart reoriented and focused on Jesus and centered in the gospel affirmation of who they are in Christ. The dominant dynamic here is the present and the need to encounter the risen and living One. The primary Leadership posture is mentor.
Mausoleum: Church is the burial place of Jesus. He is dead and gone, a nobly tragic figure, a good example, perhaps the best person who ever lived, but that is all. Jesus is revered here, admired and acclaimed, but he is finally a human being. And like all human beings, death has claimed him. The church remembers Jesus as mourners. Low grade grief, lack of expectation, and even a silent despair like a fever runs through the life of these churches presenting as the dominant dynamic. The primary Leadership profile is that of therapist-caretaker.
M.A.S.H. Unit: the issue of health looms large here too. However, it is our health as followers of Jesus who bring to him our wounds, hurts, and struggles acquired in the journey. Jesus is the living One, the Great Physician, who will not the power of death and evil to reign over them. In the church he meets us with healing as we share with him all that ails us. Jesus heals us enough so that we may rejoin the fray and pick up with our journey of discipleship. Full healing and rest still await us but Jesus gives us the healing we need to continue on with the work. The dominant dynamic here is well-being. The primary Leadership posture is Spiritual Guide or Director.
Mall: Church is about meeting the “felt needs” of the congregation. Mega-churches have the resources to fully service their members and thus they illustrate this “Church as Mall” model well. They often identify themselves as “24/7” institutions which are “there” all day, every day, in every way for their people. The dominant dynamic is, to put it crassly, “Customer Service.” This becomes not only the programmatic baseline but the basis for its appeal to the community as well. “Join us and We Will Take Care of You and Your Family.” The primary Leadership posture is the C.E.O.
Meeting Hall: The Church here serves as a center for the community's missional deliberation. The Greek word for “church” means just that, a “town hall assembly” to take care of community business. The dominant dynamic is discernment – looking outward to discover where God is leading his people into ministry. The primary Leadership posture is facilitator.
Mystification: The end result of the models and methods embraced by most North American Christianity ends up by mystifying the church. That is, over its theology, worship, and work lies a pall of unreality and confusion. As Walker Percy puts it in The Thanatos Syndrome, the words of the church “no longer signify.” This mystification is the crisis of the North American church as we move on into the 21st century.
Mysticism: A missional church lives from its relation to its Lord. At the heart of this way of being church is a practical mysticism, that is, the ability to discern God's presence in daily life and come to experience life as prayer, that is, an ongoing conversation and companionship with God throughout their lives.
McDonalds: Church in North American has bought into the values of “McDonaldization” - efficiency, calculability, predictability, and control. These values, central to North American culture, drive the sense of mystification that now pervades the church and allow the “mystery” at the heart of the church, the presence of the triune God, to atrophy.
Monastery: Missional church, by focusing on the relation to God in the midst of life, in other words, the Holy Spirit, takes the form of a monastery in the midst of the world. A “monastic” missional church seeks to reintegrate the experience of the living God at the heart of a people living and loving the world as God's missional people.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)