Missional Renaissance, Reggie McNeal
Similar forces are driving today’s missional renaissance. Elevated educational levels, heightened technology, and increased wealth have combined to create a huge pool of talented artists and sponsors. A growing number of people are willing and able to engage social issues with new solutions and the power to make a difference. The combination of wealth, talent and creativity is resulting in ideas and practices that are both disruptive and hopeful for the church. New ways of being church are being born every day. There is no putting this Humpty Dumpty back together. That’s the good news. Church will never be the same.
Reggie McNeal, Pg 3
The Renaissance marked a major shift in our culture and society, that paved the way for the Enlightenment, and Modernity. McNeal suggests that the same reasons the Renaissance found traction (Education, Technology, Wealth) are the same forces giving traction to a missional understanding of the church today; and the missional renaissance is no less radical than the Rennaisance shift was.
Church leaders are shifting to be less “religious” and more “community” and “kingdom impact” oriented. For this to work, we need what McN eal calls a new scorecard that will bring churches and leaders to the same page for knowing what we’re doing right.
God, Medicine, and Suffering. Stanley Hauerwas
Where does one begin when talking about suffering? We have all experienced it in our lives, yet what is defined as such by one person seems meaningless in light of the intensity of the suffering of another, who has experienced a greater calamity or crisis. Sometimes this comparison of suffering gives us a kind of perverse relief, as we think that no one has suffered as we do right now. Thus, to begin by talking about “if” there is suffering is foolish, for there are none who escape it in life. How then are we to make sense of this universal problem? That is exactly the question that Stanley Hauerwas addresses in his book God, Medicine, and Suffering.
Hauerwas deftly weaves all three topics throughout the book, so that we get a very balanced understanding of what he is trying to say. He further uses a number of examples of suffering from the lives of real people, and in doing so prevents the book from drifting into the theoretical, and useless. At first glance, all these examples, and the time he devotes to presenting them, makes the book seem to be less scholarly, and yet as you read further you recognise that his insights and conclusions are completely accurate, and nothing short of profound, because they mesh with what real people go through in their lives.
Hauerwas helps us appreciate suffering not as something that must be cured, for life is suffering and cannot so easily be removed from our narrative. We need help in order to make sense of suffering, and although medicine promises us wonderful cures and solutions, our faith is ill placed in the odds of recovery, and our human dignity can be ill served once we recognise that medicine is always thrusting its attacks sometimes longer than is practical, and may in fact prolong our illness as a means to postpone the inevitable grief. As Christians, we worship the God who sent His very Son to suffer and die, and because of this He is able to sympathise with our weakness. This might be a great spot to conclude, but Hauerwas makes sure to go one more step, and concludes the book with practical advice for those in community that are to come alongside and care for those who are suffering. He warns us against offering false or easy answers, as this is of no comfort:
If you think your task as comforter is to tell me that really, all things considered, it’s not so bad, you do not sit with me in my grief but place yourself off in the distance away from me. Over there you are of no help. What I need to hear from you is that you recognise how painful it is. I need to hear from you that you are with me in my desperation. To comfort me, you have to come close. Come sit beside me on my mourning bench.
This is what I appreciate most about Hauerwas. He tackles a very difficult topic that every single one of us must come to terms with, and he keeps it from being academic and theoretical. His desire is to impact us right where we are, and offer relevance in a world that offers only easy pat answers. Lest we think that this only relates to those who are suffering, he concludes reminding us of our role in the community to come near, and offer a depth of support that is only possible in our new found understanding of God, Medicine, and Suffering.
Blogger -> WordPress
Well, here I am. I suppose I am always where I am, but in this case I’m referring to the new location for the blog – WordPress. A little bit of tinkering and setup, and now the blog has a lot more functionality and interesting things that I can do with it. So, I hope you will be patient as I tweak the new look over the next little while.
Perhaps the best thing about WordPress is how easy it is to leave a comment… so please do!
A reflection on worship
My understanding of worship has been influenced by Dr. Robert Webber whom I had the opportunity to study under while at Tyndale Seminary. I appreciated his desire to engage people in worship, and he broadened my thinking on what constitutes worship. I don’t believe that one size fits all, because every church is different. Blended worship may work well in one church, while separate worship styled services work well in others. What is important is not the style but the content, and that the content engages and inspires people to respond to God.
Effective Pastoral Ministry
First and foremost, a Pastor’s ministry must be based on their personal relationship with Jesus Christ, and their response to the call of God into a life of service. Only on this foundation can effective Pastoral ministry be visibly worked out in the church. My key areas of effectiveness are:
1. Relationships. A Pastor must be approachable and be seen as a trusted member of the community, both inside the church and out in the neighbourhood. Our message is meaningless if we aren’t practicing what we preach, and only through deliberate relationships do we allow people to see that side of us. Jesus is the example of relational ministry as He was the friend of publicans and sinners. As Christians, we must be prepared to be where people are and be a part of their lives if we are to be salt and light in the world.
2. Teamwork. Pastoral ministry is only effective as part of a team, and each person on that leadership team must be prepared to work together and allow each person’s gifts to be exercised for the church. Teams also create opportunities for mentorship, and mutual encouragement and growth which every leader needs. Furthermore, team involvement is a mechanism of accountability for the leader which provides essential safeguards against the attacks that are an unfortunate part of public ministry.
3. Mentoring. The ministry of the church is made up of both Pastors and lay leaders who come together to work as one. A significant portion of my ministry at Richvale has been in empowering and equipping people in their areas of service in the church. A healthy church has broad participation from all sorts of sources, and Pastors must recognize that they cannot do it all themselves!
Living Missionally
I have been challenged personally by the idea of living missionally, and have been influenced in this area by Gary Nelson’s book, “Borderland Churches, A congregation’s guide to missional living”. I whole heartedly agree that we as Christians are called to live out our faith in those borderlands where our faith, “other faiths”, and “no faith” collide. I am challenged by how this mentality dovetails into the theology of End Times. If we look to Christ’s teaching, when asked about end times He shared 3 parables in Matt 24& 25 about the Thief in the night (24:43-44) The good and wicked servants (24:45-51) and the bridesmaids (25:1-13) who kept their lamps trimmed and burning. We learn from these parables that Christ WILL return, that the timing will be unexpected, that we ought to be found working when He returns, that we will not have a second chance, and knowing that He could return anytime- we ought to be spurred on to greater work for the Kingdom. Simply put, we cannot take this teaching seriously and not live missionally.Ministry profile
Yup, its been a while again. I’ve been working hard at other things, and haven’t given a lot of thought to the blog. Recently, though, 2 of my mentors have encouraged me to take an inventory of my ministry, and asked me a series of questions that would come together to form a “Ministry Profile” that would help me understand both where I am, and where I’m going. As I work through the questions, I’ll share them here.
The process
This life, therefore, is not godliness but the process of becoming godly, not health but getting well, not being but becoming, not rest but exercise. We are not now what we shall be, but we are on the way. The process is not yet finished, but it is actively going on. This is not the goal but it is the right road. At present, everything does not gleam and sparkle, but everything is being cleansed.
- Martin Luther
On Pat Robertson, Haiti, and Walking in Love
Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.
Eph 5:1-2 (ESV)
I have been considering this passage recently, and it has challenged me in a number of ways. The Apostle Paul is speaking very directly to how Christians should live their life, and the verses that follow go into practical detail on how this should be accomplished which is where most sermons head straight to, but for myself, I had a hard time getting past verse 1.
We are to be immitators of God. There is no way to be an immitator and not be DOING. We are to WALK in Love which is another example of word choice that implies DOING. We are not told to consider God, and talk about love. It’s very clear that we are to be doing it daily.
Furthermore, we are to do this as beloved children. The opposite to this would be to do it as hired labour, or slaves. We are not forced to walk in love, but rather we are to do so with the simple freedom of a child, who lacks the cares (and fears?) of this world.
And why ought we be walking in love? Because Christ has so freely loved us and has given Himself as a sacrifice for us. If we have been loved so freely and completely as this, how dare we withold one ounce of love from others? How dare we keep it all to ourselves and not share it with others with reckless abandon?
If our actions and our message are the same, then we have a powerful message indeed! If, however, our actions do not match our words, we contradict ourselves, and reduce our Kingdom value to near zero. Of course, society at large doesn’t like to talk about consequences to our actions. ” I steal, but that doesn’t make me a thief!” ” I lied, but I’m no liar!” I cheated on my spouse a little, but I’m not an adulterer!” Yes, yes and yes. We are what we do. Its pretty simple that way, and no amout of rationalising can rid us of that simple truth. Paul challenges us to think positively, to use our actions as the proof of our words. To not just be talking about loving others, but to BE DOING IT! Wouldn’t it be great if Christians were simply known as lovers of others!
Two illustrations readily present themselvs today that have brought this passage to my mind again. First, is the opportunity to demonstrate love by giving aid to the crisis in Haiti. The recent earthquake has devastated the Western world’s poorest country, and estimates of the dead approach 100,000. Haitians are poor, with an “upper middle class” family earning around $500 a year. Full stop. I spent more than that on Christmas presents. I spend more than that for entertainment. Clearly, I have the capacity to help, and as a Christian- it’s the opportunity to love others in a practical way in their time of disasterous need. Its a no brainer.
Of course, speaking of “no brains”, there’s the other reason I’m thinking of this today. In responding to the crisis in Haiti, Pat Robertson is helping raise funds to send (which is great!) but in so doing he has gotten himself quoted saying that the disaster was caused because of their “deal with the devil” generations ago when they were fighting the French for autonomy. He went on to point out that their abject poverty is the fruit of this deal, and compares them to the prosperous other half of the island (Dominican Republic) that has prospered. Out of context? Possibly. But its now “out there” none-the-less.
First off, I had the opportunity to be in Haiti this year. I spoke face to face with Haitians and asked questions about their country, and they told be about the poverty, and the challenges they face. (Next time you’re on a cruiseship, think of the Haitian employees who consider themselves LUCKY to have a job that *might pay $1000 a year.) The poverty has far more to do with the unstable government than any pact with the devil. When governments change, companies risk losing their investment – no suprise then that few risk such “poor investments” then. At least companies like Royal Caribbean are doing things that help Haitians, helping to build some stability at least.
There will be consequences for Pat Robertson’s comments that will be felt by all Christians. His gaffe costs us all some of our credibility with our friends and neighbours. In the immediacy of the Internet age, it barely takes a moment and Christianity has a black eye. Again. Theres no shortage of people throwing stones at Pat Robertson today, and I’ll not join in that – only to say that in his presidency, Nixon struggled with the implications and immedfiacy of the new Media age, and today’s religious leaders have clearly not learned from those 40 year old mistakes.
Here’s the point for today… Helping Haiti is the right thing to do. Do it right now! For Christians it is more than just putting your money where your mouth is – it is an opportunity to live a life rooted in Jesus Christ in both word AND deed.
You can follow this link to give by credit card, or you can contact them at:
Propaganda, Ministry and Me
I have been captivated recently with discussion and reading on propaganda and the more I considered the topic, the bigger it got. To start, I had some preconceived notions about how propaganda is defined.
First was the WWII era propaganda where the government censored the news of war in order to shape and maintain the morale of the nation. The country, facing struggle and hardship needed news of victories, not news of body bags. Certainly, the government has the best interests of the people in mind, and although the propaganda is self serving, it is so in a way that benefits both the people and the politicians.
The second preconceived notion was that propaganda works because people are naive. I chuckle when I consider the original airing of the radio show, “War of the worlds” narrated by Orson Wells on Halloween 1938. The story was an adaptation of an H.G. Wells story about a supposed alien invasion that was presented in a newscast style. It was so convincing that many people believed it was a true newscast, and newspapers in the following days called the program “cruelly deceptive“ and Orson Wells was widely criticised.
Thus my position coming into this discussion was that propaganda was relatively harmless and without malice. It never really occurred to me that there was a dark side to propaganda, or at least I had never given that angle much thought.
As I began to read how Gabriel Marcel linked propaganda to degradation in the very same era that I thought it harmless, I was shocked! Shocked by how far that thought could go. It turns out that it`s quite a slippery slope when you start with propaganda as a malicious intention. It challenged my preconceived notions: leaders no longer just shape the news, they outright mislead and have an ulterior motive for everything. Society is no longer innocently naive, but sheep being led to slaughter, and easily deceived. Furthermore, in light of the degrading nature of propaganda, how can anyone trust anything a leader says? If people are so easily fooled, how can I trust my own judgment about what is true? A dilemma indeed!
The dilemma turned to offense when I began to apply this to the church. Is my leadership, or my preaching just propaganda? Sure, I have a purpose for saying and doing, but does that make it propaganda? I asked myself this, and wondered if I could honestly say that I had never sought to be manipulative in my position? Even with the best intentions, how can I communicate effectively, and in a way that people can respond to?
I stand firm that truth exists, regardless of what post modern thought teaches, and I am called to convey that truth of the Gospel to the world, to the neighbourhood, and my congregation. To call the church and preaching a tool of propaganda is to accuse God of the same. How has God communicated truth to us? He used relationships, and I think this is the answer for us today. The prophets spoke the message of God, often face to face with the most powerful rulers of the day. God’s truth was never better spoken than in the incarnation, and Jesus spoke truth by confronting the powers, and by pouring himself into relationships with His disciples. For us today, God’s truth is communicated in the pages of scripture, which was written under the inspiration (relationship) of the Holy Spirit.
In my ministry, if I desire to effectively communicate truth in a post modern world, I must not rely on spoken word, but must live out my message to others. In so doing, the example of my life rooted in Jesus Christ becomes the corroboration of my message, and in that way then it is certainly not a degradation of others.
