Missional Studies: Cultural Investment

Investment in the daily life of the community. – It’s not enough to be involved and work with people, a missionary (and anyone invested in community really) must be willing to interact on a personal level. In most cultures this is centered on mealtime, but it can play out in a variety of situations and venues. Intentional use of coffee shops, tea houses, and markets will greatly increase the opportunity to be a part of the culture and not simply an outside agent implanted in the culture.

Investment in developing relationships. – People matter. Individual relationships not only help us grow in our understanding of the world around us, they also give us insight into avenues to offer Christ  as well as illuminate the gospel within us. Growing closer to people in their lives, in their businesses, and in their own spiritual experiences isn’t just an exercise in evangelism it’s a direct pattern emulating Jesus’ ministry.

Open and Honest lifestyles and interactions. – To show others what Christianity is all about we must be committed to the truth, not only when it agrees with us but also when it chastises and rebukes us. (Daniel 9:6) This life is meant to be lived outward toward God for the sake of others. To live this way our conversations and actions must be open to ridicule and in the open not hidden or separated from inspection.


Investment in adaptation and growing with others. – A missionary needs to be flexible. Political climates, cultural norms, and levels of devotion cannot be predicted; therefore reaction and adaptability can be integral to the evangelistic efforts in any region or group. Assessment of the culture requires the integration of all these separate principles. Community, relationships, openness and sacrifice play into the fluidity of any response to culture. Growing with others involves separating from the pride of “having the truth” and being willing to grow in the context of the people surrounding you. (anti-pride?) A large hindrance to progress in relationships between where people live and where revelation of Christ can bring them is our inability to grow with them. Condescension and self-righteousness is hard to find internally but easily pointed out from the outside. Being willing to simply “be” with people instead of constantly teaching or presenting is vital to integrating into the surroundings.

An embrace of humility and sacrifice. – Finally, a commitment to engage and redeem those far from God is ultimately a commitment to the cross. The Cross in this instance isn’t a symbol of hope or religion but a literal symbol of the level of sacrifice we are called to. If we share in his suffering we will also share in his comfort. (Rom. 8:17) The life of people exposing their beliefs in such a raw and dependant way invites a high level of ridicule and sacrifice. This embrace is beneficial in two ways: (1) it portrays a realistic and honest picture of the Christian life presented in the New Testament so that converts are not tempted into a Christless Gospel full of blessing and far from any obligation or the clear call of Jesus to abandon this life and embrace the life offered by God, and (2) it prepares the way for others who follow into the work of evangelism, so hopefully they won’t have to be distracted by the weight of sacrifice and can focus more on the actual work of pouring into ministry and others.

Curiosity killed the cat, God brought the cat from death to life. . .

I feel the need to define what it is to be “missional” from a purely one-sided and personal viewpoint. Usually when we talk about missional attitudes or missional paradigms, the discussion leans heavily on the church as a whole and where we hope every disciple ends up (or at least a large community within). But today I just want to say what is pouring out of my heart as it applies to me.

I have inside of me an ever-increasing desire to see God move. And to be perfectly honest it’s 50% selfish ambition, 50% inspired. I’ve lived a life in service to a King, I’ve seen His power manifest through great movements and through the unexpected (maybe even mundane) events of everyday life. These experiences have continually brought me back to a place where I fully admit that I have no idea what He’s up to. And still I seek out His Hand. Now, it’s not my intention to wax poetic, on the contrary, I fully intend to show the practical application of this internal compass.

While I’m under no constraint or obligation to see God “do His thing”, I’m drawn to it. I’m always curious about what He is doing in the lives of others. Not in this monumentally overshadowing (often fictional) thing we’ve affectionately term a “calling”. No, I want to know what He is doing inside of others. For some it may be ministry but in most cases it’s a simple lesson that can be easily explained by open and honest communication. This is where community comes in. If I have truly connected with someone, this process is as natural as commenting on the weather. And I get excited about this stuff. To be more precise I get fueled by this “day-to-day” acting out of what God is doing in us. When I turn the spotlight around and place it on myself in this context I can see God doing the same type of thing in me. He’s teaching me (seemingly) simple lessons by the experiences I go through. In some cases I get it right away and move on to the next, at other [full disclosure=most]times I wrestle with the validity or truth of the thing that God is trying to reveal to me.

Now what does all that have to do with missional. Well, seeing the hand of God move in my own individual life (regardless of the enormity or commonality) births a greater desire to actively give myself to the community God has placed me in, which in turn fuels my passion to promote the Gospel which, of course, compels me to seek out the lost, to heal the broken, give to the poor, and love people. To me missional is this life lived toward others, giving myself away for the promotion of the Gospel. And not the Gospel as a formula, but as a redemptive story lived out by anyone turning away from darkness and embracing the light in any capacity.

That’s how I see it today, it will likely evolve. I’m curious about what it looks like in the actual lives of others.

A Calling Falling. . .

I don’t want to be unfair to those people who feel genuinely “called” to a specific task in the Kingdom. But often when we refer to a “calling” we really mean “the thing we ought to do”. While I fully believe that God has a path laid out for each of us; we are not called to a path we are called to Christ. Put another way Christ is our goal, our milestone, and foundation of the journey (put simpler still He “is the way the truth and the life”). Those things we should be doing are simply ways of getting to him, but even in those there is failure and dependence. In those areas His grace brings the Goal to us.

I feel like the more we over-emphasize the calling the more we exempt people from the things they ought to be doing regardless of calling. This is what brings on responses like:

                “I care about missions, but I’m not called to missions.”

Really? Seriously?!? You're not called to make disciples and give yourself away? My only floored response to that backwards materialistic [reason i rant in the first place] mentality is, “When did Jesus call you to watch TV 4 hours a day, or buy your fourth vehicle? And yet you still manage to accomplish those tasks, hmmm?"

James 4:17 is a serious indictment against this attitude.  Mistaking a calling for a ministry or a position is one of the leading causes of apathy and slothfulness in our modern churchscape. We must cry out, make clear, and teach sensibly that the Gospel frees us from seeking position and status and releases us to do His will and not please men.

The Call to Christ is foremost; everything else is fluxing between what we should do and what we were each individually created to do.

Missional Schmishinal. . .

Lots of stuff to process today, I’m currently wrapping my head around (sounds better than “reading”, huh) Alan Hirsch and the Brother’s Ferguson. Of course, the overall modernist approach to ministry is the missional model, but how in the world do we bring this idea to pass in our time? It’s difficult to place a model that works, especially in the more “doctrinated” circles that exist. So what are we to do? My first response is, “Start asking the questions.” Now is literally the time to put ourselves to the test. Are we seeing any redemptive change in society? Put another way: Is the power of redemption impacting us, those around us, and the world we interact with?

Now that’s where we start, here are some thoughts that are helping me build a framework (mindset) toward action.

-Small group –What’s the point? Jesus modeled building, pouring into, doing life with (whatever else ya wanna call it), 12 guys (there were others but they were all an extension of this initial troupe). Are we finding like minded, appropriate to our station, “others” to grow with? Or are we just going through the motions of intimacy with none of the investment, pain, and true joy of intimacy

-The New Testament does not solidify or ordain an official “form” of church; allowing Christianity to integration into all levels of society and become diverse enough to build a host of traditions without apostasy or ridicule. This may mean that what works for some will not work for all, and what works for most shouldn’t be pushed to all. “I became all things, to all men, that I might save some.”.

-I’m not looking/begging/trying/working/teaching for church growth (if that’s all I wanted there are proven models to get there). No, on the contrary (anti-growth), we are investing in impact. Impact in my personal life, impact in our faith communities, and impact in the social structure. That’s where the gospel matters, that’s where God wants to bring His power to save.

-There will be a point when we have to take a side between two subtly opposing mentalities that garner two opposing approaches and results.

(1)    I must do the best I can in spite of the evil that surrounds me and hopefully God can start to bring change and “fix” the problems here.

(2)    God placed me here with intent and purpose, orchestrated the circumstances and needs around me in such a way that would allow His glory and love to be fully given to the redemptive purposes of Jesus Christ.

I’m aware that in this context, with these words, it’s easy to pick which one we should believe, but just below the surface is the subtlety that so easily lulls us into inaction and “church routine. One is a stance that says “there isn’t much we can do”; the other says “only we can do it”!

There is more, so much more. . . 

Leadership: a review

The New Church Leadership: A Downward Trend

Thomas Hogan

April 6, 2011

 On Developing Lasting Leadership:

In the faith community over the last decade, a shift has grown toward communal living. Not in the strict sense of monastic living or moving to a compound outside of the city, but on a subtler plane resembling growing with others in a close knit, open minded and authentic way. As this transition has exploded in the postmodern Christian church and proven effective in reaching an ever skeptical generation, the church has been forced to question “older models” and modes of growth. This has led to countless books being written in the last few years of how to manage what has been coined as the “Missional Movement”. Building and sustaining long-lasting and invested leadership has become increasingly difficult in missional minded communities over the last several years. Youth and young-adult leaders alike have attempted to embrace this generation with its many quirks but have found it extremely hard to cultivate a sense of deep rooted commitment to a specific long-term purpose or set of goals. This in turn has made large growth and successful programs but not necessarily long lasting ones due to lack of focus on growing leaders. The obvious reasons are easy enough to assess, however, there are nuanced behaviors and attitudes heavily contributing to a lack of leader growth in current missional minded community focused churches.

There are many factors that contribute to this problem. From the outside looking in, the apparent growth in the missional trend seems like a natural high end of the church recruitment cycle, but a better perspective can be seen below the surface of the churches modern landscape. (Barna, 2009) The “Jesus Movement” of the late 60s early 70s culture had a lot of the same conditions that exist today, including: civil unrest, a deep mistrust of authority, declining employment (leading to an unengaged/unoccupied demographic of young people), and finally a spiritually starved sub-set that desired an alternative outlet of expression. The opportunity was the same but the end-result was far different, so why couldn’t that movement gain traction?. At this point a certain perspective must be defined carefully before proceeding. There are two Christian “churches” that weave the tale of church history; they are the “Church as-it-is” and the “transitory Church that challenges old ways and traditions”. Both are valid from a theological standpoint, but differ largely in their approach and appeal. During the hippy procession the status-quo church along with the still young, still deeply conservative movement against that status were completely unwilling to validate or assimilate the “Jesus Movement”. Those small circles of influence were unable to garner support and encouragement and ultimately died out or “grew out of it”. The case is different today mainly because of the interconnected disillusionment of postmodernism. It was easy to feel the energy created in small communities 40 years ago, but the potential impact was veiled from the larger culture. Today we have a far more effective network and view of discontent. That recent tide bubbled over into what eventually became the “Emerging church” and “Emergent movement” approaches to the future of the church. Both of which proposed a reworking of current practices (with the emergent movement pushing a more deconstructionist approach). And this time, the larger church was ready to listen (maybe not change but definitely listen).

Out of this “come let us reason together” atmosphere grew what came to be known as “seeker friendly churches”, and here is where the initial problem of leadership growth comes in. There is a base assumption among many sub-pastorate church leaders that all followers really need is the right amount of dedication coupled with the right amount of guidance and one has the making of a potential leader. There is another perception that is equally detrimental and that is focusing on and promoting natural giftedness. A common tendency of leaders is to identify who the crowd is gravitating around and assess that individual for possible mentorship. These assumptions, without adequate assessment, can lead quickly to dysfunctional personal and professional growth. These faults in the leadership approach have highly contributed to the rate of invested leadership decline in missional communities. The first assumption leads to an immediate result of not making the pool of potential leaders wide enough and the second makes that pool contagiously (relationally and figuratively) shallow. The effect can be a lack of leaders; over-burdened with the weight of progress and unprepared for furthering the ministry because of resource and/or personal inadequacies; or it could create incredibly selfish leaders who refuse to build other leaders that may infringe on their own influence/authority. Of Course, many have learned where to strike a balance somewhere between the two, but the argument here is that the approach is flawed long before it is applied. Either way new approaches may need to be considered.

Building a lasting impactful community can be hard enough without the added pressure of developing leaders to cultivate and populate the movement. So what can be done to fix this trend? Perhaps it’s time to start asking these questions before the movement becomes unsustainable from the base. To be sure there are vast reaching implications if gotten wrong. Many leaders have taken this task head on. Leaders like Stephen Furtick, pastor of Elevation Church who holds leadership workshops on communal movements. His counterparts, Pastors Matt Chandler and Mark Driscoll work on similar lines to help train and equip potential leaders and church planters. The goal being to create a counterbalance as momentum grows that dissipates some of the discontent that caused the movement to begin. This time using a networked and connected base to troubleshoot these larger issues from within in much of the same way it was presented, by using social networks and small group discussions in a very grass roots way across the country. (Stetzer, 2009) It remains to be seen what the outcome of these recent movements will mean for the larger Christian church on a global scale, but as of now the fastest growing area of Christianity is also the least equipped to lead itself into the future.

References

Barna Group, Ltd. (2009, December 7). Report examines the state of mainline protestant churches. Retrieved from http://www.barna.org/leadership-articles/323-report-examines-the-state-of-mainline-protestant-churches

Stetzer, E. (2009, January 19). State of church planting. Retrieved from http://www.edstetzer.com/2009/01/state-of-church-planting.html