I heard Billy Graham on the car radio last week and I got nostalgic. It was nostalgia for Christendom. The words by Billy Graham were verbatim as follows: (they were part of a radio spot by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association).

Too many think that you can go out and live the way you like. Go to church on Sunday, or perhaps go to some religious ritual that your church demands and everything will be all right, but it won’t. It’s wonderful to be a member of the church, it’s great to be baptized, it’s great to be confirmed, but that alone is not enough. Jesus said, “You must be born of the Spirit,” “you must be born again.”

The recording of these words can be found by clicking here and then scrolling down to the clip entitled “Church on Sunday.” I urge you to listen to these words. Feel the ethos. Wallow a little in the nostalgia for a time gone by. For these words reveal the by-gone age of protestant Christendom in North America, the golden years of evangelism (I realize some may not consider these years golden). These were the words as preached by Billy Graham in one of his many crusades (the very word ‘crusade’ bespeaks Christendom). I have no idea when the sermon was preached but, again, it played last week on the radio (it is ironic that the BGEA is playing this spot in Chicago in 2009). These words help us imagine the mindset of so many churches from the small Bible churches of the post WW1 generations all the way (I contend) to the current-day huge mega churches of evangelicalism. In virtually all evangelical people over the age of 60 there is this nostalgia for these feelings, this ethos, this world that was sure, so certain and grounded in the foundation of Christianity.

Of course, dramatic changes have taken place in our society. In just a short period of time we have gone from a Christendom North America during the Billy Graham crusade years of 1950’s to 1980’s to a post-Christendom where most of these words make little sense. Today, in many post-Christendom places in N America, THESE WORDS MAKE NO SENSE. Here, people in these post-Christendom contexts have not been baptized or confirmed. They receive no social benefits from going to church. They are not even looking for that. They do not believe going to church will save them.  They are oblivious to the notion of “being saved.” Unless the hearers of this message by Billy Graham live in Dallas Texas or Atlanta Georgia, these words fall on deaf ears.

There is a line of continuity between the Billy Graham crusades of that day and much of current day evangelicalism. Whether it is in the local Bible church congregation or the large mega church, they both rely on a cultural ethos that lies behind these words by Billy Graham. It is a world that respects the Bible, believes in one God, and sees church as viable cultural institution. Here converts are described as people (usually coming out of some former initiation to Christianity) who make a personal commitment to Christ and have a personal relationship. Church is organized so as to attract people into its doors. The mega churches merely seek to do the Billy Graham thing with more relevancy/production value (it is ironic to see how a Billy Graham crusade basically put on a typical evangelical worship service in an outdoor service - complete with congregational singing, choir, special music, a testimony and a sermon by Billy Graham- and thousands came time after time). Even though the Graham ministry had a much broader ministry than this brief sound clip would indicate, by and large the majority of Crusade converts were Christendom converts, born and initiated by the European heritage churches, and seeking a vital faith. This in itself was a worthy ministry.

The times however changed.  The last vestiges of Christendom lie in decay in large parts of the N American world. There are fewer and fewer people already initiated into Christianity needing to be “revived.” There are less and less Christendom pre-converts who need to be challenged to take their pre-disposed intellectual assent to a higher level of personal commitment. THE TIME OF CHRISTENDOM EVANGELISM HAS LARGELY PASSED. We must lead out of this nostalgia. It is the task of Missional leaders, authors, and seminary students to help lead what remains of the evangelical church (in the post Christendom contexts of N. America) out of the Christendom nostalgia.

Over the last two years, I have visited hundreds of pastors at gatherings of all kinds in the new territories of post Christendom. They are watching their churches dwindle, getting older and having less and less of a cultural relevance. They are watching the mega churches with bloated budget producing hyped-up programs steal any Christians that under the age of 40. Their single number one question is “how can I get young people to come to my church?” (obviously the wrong question for the context we are in). Many are just plain in shock. It is a post Christendom, post-attractional world.

I got to admit; I still get “goose bumps” listening to the dulcet tones of Billy Graham’s voice. The fruits of his many years of ministry are to be honored. I’m convinced however that this same nostalgia must somehow be addressed. Denominations that are closing churches faster than they can start them should read the writing on the wall. We should respect the Billy Graham generation. We should honor the dwindling churches for all their labors for Christ (and I am dead serious here). Then we should also transition our Christendom churches somehow (I have a few ideas for such a transition) into a missional disposition in the world. We need to lead past and out of the Christendom nostalgia. Perhaps playing this 60-second sound Billy Graham sound bite and talking about it in our congregations might be a beginning towards such ends.

P.S. I still hope to have my final post on Post Christendom evangelism up in the next few weeks.

Filed under: Evangelism, Missional, Missional Leadership, Post-Christendom | 9 Comments

This fall I am teaching a new course at Northern Seminary entitled “Missional Theology: Towards a Theology that Shapes a People for Mission.” It will meet Mondays 4-6:40 p.m. for the Fall quarter.

The premise for the course is that the ways we articulate our beliefs, and the ways we in turn practice them, shape us into a certain “kind of people” with a certain disposition in the world. Theology, in other words, is spiritual formation for the community of Christ. We need then to ask “how is our belief and practice shaping us into His Mission as the people of God.” “How is our belief and practice shaping us into a people whose very character is congruent with the gospel we proclaim?” There are missional theologies (both biblical and systematic) that have sought to articulate our beliefs according to the driving theme (rubric) of Missio Dei. What I am aiming for here is a little different. I am actually seeking a theology that, in its practice, shapes a people in disposition (hospitality, love, patience, rootedness, compassion, kindness, integrity, authenticity, justice,etc.) so as to embody the gospel in the world. So often the ways we have articulated and practiced the doctrines of Scripture, Church and Salvation have worked contra the gospel, to produce a people who are either judgmental or defensive or hypocritical or dispassionate. By opting out of some of our bad theological habits of the past, and without compromising one iota of orthodoxy, I contend we can articulate our basic beliefs concerning Scripture, the church in the world, and the salvation we have in Christ Jesus in a way that shapes us for Mission.

Here’s the course description from the syllabus.

TH 423 Missional Theology” explores the ways our belief and practice shape a people for Mission. Theology in the West has often erred by separating doctrine from life (praxis). A missional theology however is a belief (and a corresponding practice to that belief) that shapes a people for the social incarnational presence/ministry of the gospel in the world. Bringing to bear the fields of political theory and political theology, we will develop a method to explore this connection of belief to life, the shaping of a community into the Mission of God. We will specifically explore the ways we talk about and practice Scripture, the Church and Salvation and how each doctrinal expression shapes the very character of a community for Mission. We will focus heavily on traditional evangelical theology and practice as our test case for whether a theology is ‘missional’ or not (as I have defined it). We will then play off this exploration to draw on multiple sources to articulate a theology (and corresponding practices) for each of these three doctrines that is decidedly ‘Missional.’ The course will conclude with each student examining his/her own inherited doctrine and practice in the same manner with the goal of each student being capable of extending their theological practice towards the shaping a people for the Mission of God.

A pre-requisite for the course is having already passed/excelled in the  Christian Theology sequence of Northern or another seminary. This course requires the student be motivated to engage in some challenging reading material.

If anyone is interested in the course let me (e-mail me at fitchest@gmail.com) or admissions at Northern know. We’ll figure out a way to get you in.

Filed under: Ecclesiology, Missional, Missional Theology, Scripture, Soteriology | 9 Comments

Every month we have a gathering over at our house on the back deck. We call it “Missional Back Porch” and the goal is to gather, put something on the grill, and sit around together talking about what it means to live together into the Mission of God.

Last Friday, the question was “what is your biggest fear about getting up and moving to a new locale with 10-15 other people to seed a missional community (i.e. join a missional order)?” We’re getting ready to do this two or three times in the next two years. So the question of these “fears” is an important question for us. Some of the fears I suspect are derivative of the ways we planted churches back “in the days” of Christendom. I list only the three biggest fears mentioned? Here they are with a personal reflection on each one.

1. My life (or my family’s life) would be consumed if I went and planted a church with some other people.
I think we often see church planting along the lines of establishing of an organization. It is almost like we are starting a business. We will have to provide a list of goods and services right from the start (a first class worship service, a weekly Bible study class, children’s ministry, and evangelistic outreach program etc. etc.). This is traditional church-planting boot camp 101.

This way of planting churches is nigh impossible in post Christendom. This approach was nigh impossible even in Christendom when there were ready-made “consumers” for these services and an ingrained Christian readiness (by already existing Christians) towards volunteer service in the local church. Neither of these things exists in post Christendom for good reasons and other reason not so good. As a result, a church-planter-leader-participant who enters “community seeding” with this approach will burn out nine times out of ten in three years. Often leaders and their families will be severely injured.

Instead I plead with the community planters/leaders/participants to see community seeding as a way of life. We are simply moving into an “under-churched” place, in close proximity to one another, living simply and missionally, tending to the surrounding community relationally out of the vision of the Gospel. We worship simply and organically and it develops over time. We tend to our children, simply and organically partnering with others as available. The Holy Spirit enlivens the ministries with power. The gifts of the Spirit flourish. Ministries, and the organization that accompany these ministries, happens over time, as an post facto development.

The first sign that this is a “church plant of the flesh” is when families and leaders are exhausting themselves and their families to the point of destruction. There is just too much evidence that NT leaders (both men and women) were not allowed to lead if their families were in disorder.

2. I will be leaving behind my relationships and starting all over again.
We plant with 3 defined leaders (defined within an APEPT model). We take 12 to 15 people in all that have agreed to the common vision and mission for an extended period of time (no less than 5 years). These people will be by definition some of your closest friends already. Through this common agreement and move, you will find some of the most intense, God honoring, life flourishing relationship possible in this life.

3. There will be a leadership rift - people will not all be on the same page, they will get mad, and break-up the ministry - and we will be left hung out to dry.
It is very important that the three main leaders be mutually submissive to one another and in agreement on the main things/Vision of what we’re doing. It is important that they be able to grow and know each other’s limits. If this is not in place the community will fail. Far beyond all the assessment in search of the entrepreneurial personality type to start a church plant, we should evaluate the character of the three (or four or five) leaders in their ability to mutually submit to each other, to grow out of relationship one to another, and the compatibility of their giftedness in relation to each other (according to say the APEPT list of gifts in Eph 4:11 - Alan Hirsch offers this diagnostic tool here). As the leaders lead this community, they must be adaptable, capable of listening, incorporating criticism and changing with the movement of God in this community and neighborhood. If this is not already fleshed out. If there is not evidence of this. The “missional order” is not ready to move into a new neighborhood.

WHAT OTHER FEARS DO YOU HAVE? CONCERNING THIS MODE OF CHURCH-PLANTING”? HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THESE FEARS?

Filed under: Church Planting, Missional, Missional Leadership | 9 Comments

There can be no doubt, The Gospel Coalition (TGC) has been galvanizing many younger evangelicals to re-think their theology and practice (especially if it is of the Reformed variety.) I applaud this new theological energy. My question nonetheless is (given its moniker) will TGC be a force for coalition or expedition? “Coalition” describes the coalescing of a group of people or nations to agree on some understandings in order to defend some boundary or prepare for war (think Pres. Bush’s “coalition of the willing”). “Expedition” on the other hand, is the organizing of a group to adequately prepare for an exploration/adventure into unknown territory. Will TGC be a coalition for the hardening of some doctrinal lines in order to defend boundaries and/or launch an attack of some kind (say against others who don’t agree with its take on Reformed theology)? Or will TGC be a force for the preparation of missionaries (in doctrine and practice) to engage the unknown territories of the new cultures of post Christendom? Will TGC be a coalition or an expedition?

Ever since the publishing of Collin Hansen’s The Young, Restless, Reformed, a lot of attention has been drawn towards the revival of a Neo-Reformed theology among the younger evangelicals. In distinction from the pragmatic and the emerging responses (remember this) to the challenges of post Christendom/post modernity and the decline of evangelicalism in N America, the Neo Reformed groups have pressed for a return and renewal of protestant orthodoxy as the means towards renewal of the church. Main figures in this new push for a purer or more missional Reformed theology include David Wells, Al Mohler, John Piper, Don Carson, Mark Driscoll, Ed Stetzer and Tim Keller. Let me be explicit that I value and have learned much from each of these writers/thinkers/ preachers. I especially value what I have learned from Tim Keller and Ed Stetzer. Let me also say explicitly, I do not disavow the Reformation. We can no more write off the past 500 years any more than we can write off the patristic age and return to a purer “primitive” Christianity. Nonetheless, for the current cultural challenge - post Christendom/post modernity in the West - I am concerned that the approach of the Gospel Coalition is ill-suited to engage the cultural challenges of post-Christendom. Let me offer five statements that encapsulate what I think TGC might be implying in their work so far, even though they may not say it explicitly. I think, if true, each of these positions will inhibit, if not prohibit, TGC from being a cause for Christ in the engagement of the new post Christendom cultures of the West. TGC will then become more of a coalition than an expedition. So I am asking (with genuine concern) whether these statements are accurate to the positions as navigated by TGC or just the misconstrual of my Anabaptist fear laden projections?  Here are the statements:

1.) If We Purify Our Doctrine The Rest Will Follow. I have observed an impulse in the TGC that says if we just get our doctrine right (which means a certain version of Reformed orthodoxy), then mission and church renewal in post Christendom will follow. But at least in post Christendom (as it is in the N United States urban areas and Canada) this is not enough. This is not 16th century Europe where the majority Catholic population, under the influence of a corrupt Roman Catholicism, need doctrinal renewal. This is not the 1920’s N. America where the majority protestant mainline Christian population,  under the influence of a modernist liberalism, need doctrinal renewal. This is post Christendom territory where there are very few Christians of any kind left who have no doctrine to be renewed. If TGC then thinks doctrinal purity is the single issue, and leave it at that, they will be a coalition for retrenchment as opposed to an expedition for mission. (As some have suggested, this is already proving true in the SBC).

2.) We Must Return to the Reformation. Is the TGC seeking a return to the Reformation? The Reformation cannot be discounted, but neither can it be returned to. The Reformation was built on the back of Christendom. It gave birth to the Sola’s, especially Sola Scripture and Sola Fide which in their time called people to a renewed purity and personal commitment to the gospel. Today however, those same impulses, aligned with the Enlightenment, have given birth to a modernist individualism, Christian relativism, Cartesian rationalism and experientialism that later became modernity, protestant liberalism and indeed the current manifestations of evangelicalism that the TGC appears to be in critique of. We therefore must go beyond the Reformation, not back to it. We must be sober about the doctrinal problems of the Reformation that elevate the individual, isolate Scripture (as an authority and conceptual document) away from the church and a way of life. If TGC is only a call to a purer Reformed orthodoxy, it will be a coalition for retrenchment as opposed to an expedition for the advancement of the gospel into post Christendom.

3.) Woman Cannot Be Pastors. Is TGC seeking to enforce a particular reading of the NT that opposes the role of  women in authority within church ministry? I have observed the prominence of a particular view of women in ministry in the TGC. I would characterize this view as a.) based in an inerrancy view of the text, which b.) latches on to texts as if they were isolated units of universal teaching on women, which then c.) leads to a blindness to the NT’s overall elevation of women into ministerial authority in the church. To me, this robs the church of the new politic that was birthed in Jesus Christ. It robs our witness to the reconciled relationship born of Jesus Christ in the post-non-Christendom cultures. I personally have spoken against the egalitarian form of politics I believe has been adopted naively by some evangelical feminists at the expense of both women and Christian marriage. Nonetheless, I believe that the NT calls women into the full participation in the new authority of the Kingdom unleashed in the church (this means I affirm the full ordination of women). I believe the TGC will be impotent to engage the culture of post Christendom if it cannot give witness to the new new “politics of Jesus” in its gender politics. It will be a coalition for retrenchment versus an expedition for the advancement of Christ’s Mission in post Christendom.

4.) The New Perspective is Our Enemy. John Piper and Don Carson have energetically sought to dismantle the New Perspective on Paul (most notably here, here and here). I do not agree with everything written by Stendahl, Sanders, Dunn, Wright etc. Nonetheless, I believe it is a mistake to see the New Perspective as the enemy (it’s not even that new any more). I believe there is much to learn from it.(I recommend everyone start with ch. 11 of John Howard Yoder’s The Politics of Jesus and go from there).  The Reformation tendency has been to separate the justification of the individual in Christ (due to developments extending from the  Reformation) from the justice of God and the new social order God is inaugurating in the world thru Christ. As long as we keep doing this we will forever be conceptualizing the gospel and separating it from the life of the Triune God as worked out in His Mission. We then will be hindered from socially embodying the gospel in post-Christendom. Maybe even worse, emerging Christians will continue to make the error of separating social justice from the redemption of the individual in Christ. I think the New Perspective is not the enemy but a source of great insights for this much needed renewal of the gospel. If TGC makes the New Perspective the enemy, I believe this is another sign TGC is becoming a coalition for retrenchment not an expedition for Mission.

5.) The Mega Church Still Makes Sense. Because of the above mentioned Reformed tendencies (exacerbated by American pragmatic evangelicalism) to individualize the gospel, to individualize the reading of Scripture, to individualize salvation, to separate doctrine from “way of life,” the Neo-Reformed do not see the problem of mega church for the future of church engagement with post-Christendom. Mega churches have worked well within Christendom’s modernity. Here the individual reigned supreme and the remainder of Christian culture lingered long enough to provide a foundation for masses of individuals to become Christians within large servicing organizations. Now however, with the lingering remainder of Christian culture gone, the gospel must take root in a social communal embodiment. Here is where the gospel can be seen, heard, understood, experienced by those completely foreign to our faith in Christ. This kind of communal embodiment is nigh impossible in mega sized organizations (although I think I’ve seen it at least once). Still, I see the Neo-Reformed enamored that good solid preaching and culturally relative apologetics will gather post-non-Christendom into its churches. I fear TGC then becomes a force for coalescing mega size preaching churches that preach to the already initiated. We in essence become a church that preaches to ourselves and in the process retrench from being expedited for Mission into post Christendom. (P.S. I still strongly believe in preaching!! As my writings and “the college of preachers” at our church will attest to).

A Call to The Neo-Anabaptist Missional Vision

For the reasons stated above, and indeed some more reasons I have not posted, I suggest that the Neo-Anabaptist Missional impulse is a viable alternative to the Neo-Reformed groups including TGC. For both historical reasons and theological reasons, I believe the Anabaptist Missional impulse has much to offer the dwindling churches of N America in engaging the new post Christendom cultures of the West. I include in this camp Alan Hirsch, Alan Roxburgh, Shane Claiborne, Neil Cole, Scot McKnight. I myself have tried to write to contribute to the furtherance of this vision. Tim Keller has characterized the Neo Anabaptists on this blog as follows: “… As you know, I think that the neo-Anabaptist missionals are a bit too rigid in what they are putting forth for the future, but its emphasis on process over program, ecclesial liturgy over experientialism, deep community, concern for the poor and justice, and contextualization-are all quite right. and traditional mega churches don’t see this.” I agree with Tim Keller on his description, including the being “a bit too rigid” part. Such statements however encourage me to believe that Neo Reformed and Neo Anabaptist should be in dialogue together to further Christ’s Kingdom (some of my best friends are Neo-Reformed :)). So I am open to dialoguing and even being proven wrong on the five positional statements above that I suspect the Gospel Coalition of advocating. Where am I right? Where am I wrong?

Filed under: Missional, Neo-Anabaptist, Neo-Reformed | 46 Comments

When They Will Not Come” (WTWNC) names the social dilemma of the church in post Christendom when we can no longer assume non-Christians will come to church even when they are seeking God. This new cultural condition forces us to change the way we think about every aspect of the church. WTWNC is a series of posts that reflect on the ways the practice of being Christ’s church/church planting must change because of this new cultural dilemma.

Illustration by Ben Sternke of http://benjaminsternke.typepad.com.

In the West, especially within the N. American evangelical church, evangelism usually meant  “going out” from the church. We trained our church people to be individual agents of salvation “going out” to engage others in the ‘act’ of evangelism. I use quotation marks here however around the words “going out” because much of what we did went the way of “you will come to us on our terms.” We went out, yet it was still from a position of power, “that we already had the answer you need,” that we already knew what your problem is. We went out to them, yet we still presumed they would understand and learn our language - another indication of the Christendom mentality. We went out assuming we did not need a relationship. We could simply present the gospel, the one form of it that was true for all people. We went “out” - but the posture was still “you will come” … “once you hear what we have, you will come on these pre-conceived terms.” In this way, our strategies of evangelism in the West have been sorely dependent upon the social conditions of post Christendom. How must this all change, “when they will not come?” (I understand that in a totally different sense - everyone is either coming or walking away from the one true Incarnate Son - Jesus Christ 2 Cor 5).

Ever since I wrote this piece and this piece, and pointed out some of the problems of our evangelism, many have asked have you come up with an evangelistic tool for these new cultural conditions you call “post Christendom?” This week Scot McKnight and Michael Spencer have been blogging on the related problem of a reduced gospel. At Life on the Vine we have been thinking through these issues as a church group at 9 a.m. on Sunday mornings before we gather to worship. We have come to some insights. We have been discussing some practices we must learn if we are to truly to engage in post-Christendom evangelism.. Yet I cannot say we’ve come up with a new tool quite yet. Next post I’ll offer some of the practices. Here are a few insights we’ve learned (as I report them from my own perspective.)

1.) The old ways - Romans Road, Evangelism Explosion, The Four Spiritual Laws, The Bridge - approach the “lost person” from a position of power. They come to the lost person with a prepackaged message that assumes one gospel fits all. They assume the questions to be asked and the answers that shall be given before we have even listened. (intellectually, and more important attitudinally - we are saying with our posture that we already know what you need, what your problem is, and we’re right and you’re wrong - none-Christians come away feeling like “I’m one of your ‘cases’”).  I contend this is contrary to the gospel. For the gospel always comes incarnationally: i.e. humbly, entering in to hear each person/ culture in its own language. The one message fits all implies that everyone has the same problem. Only in Christendom, where everyone was already pre-initiated and where the cultural problems are homogenous, would this make sense. (The Romans Road BTW still makes sense ( and ‘works’) even to this day for the many families who go to large mega churches - offering a simple teaching tool for converting those already raised in the foundations of the Christian faith). If you read the New Testament however, the gospel is posed differently in each context, in each gospel or epistle. The problem the gospel addresses and the way in which the good news of Jesus Christ addresses it - differs between the gospel of John, Luke, the epistles of Romans, versus 1 and 2 Peter, versus James and Hebrews.
2.) The old ways assume the Christian language as a given. When the Romans Road has three words on either side of the chasm that is then bridged by the cross, it assumes these words are understandable. The average person however outside of Christ has no language by which to understand how the word “sin” (on the left side of the chasm) might make sense of their existence. When they hear the word ‘God’ (on the right side of the chasm) they ask “which one?” (co-pastor Matt Tebbe put the issue this way Sunday morning). We could do the Romans Road in Christendom, but not post Christendom. It is another way our evangelistic strategies are off putting … requiring non-believers to come to us on our terms.
3.) These evangelistic habits of Christendom separate the gospel from real life. They do this by “Cartesianizing” the gospel: i.e. they make the gospel into a mental concept separate from real life (the only place where people can really be reached). We could do this in Christendom, when people were largely still marrying, having children, maintaining domestic propriety, living within their means etc. and living a moral ethos still governed by the Roman Catholic and protestant worlds. In such a society, becoming a Christian means assent, or personal commitment. It’s about personal meaning and in some ways this works because one’s life is already habituated in Christian ways. These are the habits of Christendom. Yet they are reversed in post Christendom. In post Christendom, people generally (even among those rasied as Christian) come to God in Christ broken, often from homes of divorce, sexual abuse, places of despair. The gospel cannot be a concept, it must be the invitation into an entirely reordered way of life - the world of redeemed creation.

About a month ago, a man got up in our church in the gathering time and told a story about how he had been working at a Starbuck’s for over a year. He got to know some of the people there and about a month ago, a woman asked to talk. She poured out her grief over her life, the many misfortunes that had befallen here, and how she had lost all hope. As she looked towards the future, she could see no reason to live. This man said that he had a moment to respond with the “good news” but all he knew was to start charting the diagram of the Romans Road.  Yet this made no sense. This little episode speaks to the problem of evangelism in post Chrsitendom where the old ways do not make sense. We missionaries simply have to think about inhabiting our worlds differently for the gospel.

In my next post I talk about how we go “from presentation to invitation.” These are the brilliant words of (co-pastor at Life on the Vine) Matt Tebbe that describe so well the transition we must make if we would carry the gospel into the new worlds of post Christendom. We will learn that Biblically the gospel is never a set of “laws.” Rather it is a Story. We will learn that we always engage the world and “the Other” in the posture of listening (as a sign of our humility). This is the posture of servanthood. We will learn there is never a pre-conceived outcome. Salvation is a mystery, it happens in God’s moment not ours, it is always the work of God. He is already working, we are simply the servants, the very participants in what God is already doing. We will learn that salvation happens as an invitation into the relationship we have with God through Christ, always as a way of life, never a singular moment or transaction. We will learn the gospel is always contextualized, addressing the issue of lostness, separation, disorder, that each person is encountering personally, culturally and socially. We will learn that it is impossible to invite someone into such a life if you yourself are not authentically immersed into that very life with the Triune God yourself.

In the meantime, what other ways has our habits of evangelism been dependent upon Christendom cultural conditions?

Filed under: Evangelism, WTWNC | 10 Comments

When They Will Not Come” (WTWNC) names the social dilemma of the church in post Christendom when we can no longer assume non-Christians will come to church even when they are seeking God. This new cultural condition forces us to change the way we think about every aspect of the church. WTWNC is a series of posts that reflect on the ways the practice of being Christ’s church/church planting must change because of this new cultural dilemma.

Illustration by Ben Sternke of http://benjaminsternke.typepad.com.

All church leaders will recognize this situation. Some people, maybe a couple with children, come to the church and they attend a service or two. They don’t return. They tell someone that “they did not feel welcome,” or “they just did not feel like they fit in.”  This is never a positive and we lead so as to nurture hospitality as a practice of the church gathering. Yet there is a danger to this as well.

Sometimes these words from the visitor reflect a mistaken assumption about church: that they should somehow feel “warm.” comfortable and part of things in just a few short visits. Yet any community of any significant depth will present barriers to entry for the new person. The community will already know each other deeply, the visitor will not. The community will have shared a journey, struggles, pains, sorrows and joys. We will already understand deeply our purpose, our Mission as worked out for our context because we have spent months, maybe years, praying and listening to God. We should ALWAYS BE HOSPITABLE in inviting others into this great life we have been called to share. But frankly, it cannot be communicated or extended through the exchange of simple pleasantries after church gathering on Sunday morning. Unfortunately, there will always be these communal hurdles to becoming part of such a community of Mission.

I think it is a mistake to over react to the visitor and try to create a welcoming team that engenders a false sense of community to those visiting on any given Sunday. It may have an initial positive effect, but long term I think it raises false expectations. Community, formed around Mission, cannot be commoditized or made easily accessible ( Tim Keel says something like this). Community comes through understanding a common goal and becoming committed to it with other people of like mind and then struggling through the trials and pains of that journey together. It takes long-term commitment. I think that the Walmart-like greeters who wear a smile and have a system to greet you going into the large church are a sign of the loss of this community. It is false, a simulacrum, and it eventually breeds cynicism. I think it is better to have a pamphlet to give to visitors explaining that community is difficult and will take time and offering them helps on how to get connected.

In post Christendom, as I have often argued, the Sunday morning gathering is essential, buts its very character changes from the ways we met in Christendom. It is no longer structured to attract seekers or non-Christians and evangelize them. It is no longer put together to attract Christians wandering away from other churches. It is instead formational, it brings us corporately into the practice of encountering God and being transformed by that encounter for life and Mission in Christ. The very nature of what we do changes if we are not seeking to attract but instead to be trained into a Call-Response vital relationship with the Triune God of Mission. This time around the Word and the Table is certainly a powerful witness to the presence of our God in Christ, but it cannot always make sense and should not be tailored to the one who is outside of Christ.

Last Saturday, as a number of us sat around my back deck (talking Missional stuff at what I am now calling the “Missional Back Porch” meeting at my house on every first Saturday night), this issue came up. J R Rozko said that the shape of Sunday gathering changes in the Missional context. Instead of a place for strangers to feel immediately welcome, we would do better to understand it as a “family gathering.” We would not expect people to come to our family gatherings as strangers. More likely they come invited through a significant relationship. And when they do come, say when one’s new fiancé comes to the family thanksgiving meal for the first time (is J R expressing some personal anxiety here?), there is an unease and a feeling of unfamiliarity which out of commitment this “stranger” will work through.

It should be expected that new people get to know the community in social contexts outside the church, in the bar, at the house gathering, in friendships of many other ways. They come with someone they already know well and can rely on them to navigate “the family” for them.

I have made it a habit not to chase every Christian visitor to our church (this is different from when I was first starting the church and was seeking to gather a people). There are simply many Christians who are looking for something that we cannot and probably should not offer. I do not often chase Christians, who after a time with us, choose to leave. I think pastors/leaders have often spent inordinate amounts of time trying desperately to cater to Christians who have, for better or worse, a consumer mentality. (I know, this certainly does not apply to every Christian searching for a church). I think we are to spend our time searching out the lost however. And I think we should listen deeply to one another as COMMITTED MEMBERS of a community to the complaints, concerns, issues of our community. And I think we should nurture the practice of hospitality to all strangers. But there is no doubt, that in the new cultural conditions of post Christendom, the nature of this welcome has changed and we must be sensitive to it.

Some have said this is too harsh. Others have asked do you not want this church to grow? What do you think?

Filed under: Missional, Missional Leadership, WTWNC | 13 Comments

J R Woodward is a church planter in Virginia and now in L.A., with an apostolic gift who is ever pushing forth new ventures for the Kingdom. Just hanging with him for half a day last summer made me tired. He is also an innovator intellectually doing some great work for all of us missional leaders on his blog Dreamawakener (and other writings).

His most recent blog series on “The Good News” asks missional authors, bloggers, professors, and practitioners to answer the question “what is the good news?” for your context. If you were to write an announcement of the good news for your newspaper what would it look like? I urge you to read these 300-500 word posts.  You will hear perspectives from different ethnicities and different genders, as well as from Asia, South America, Europe and North America. I post the entire list of contributors below. Today is my contribution entitled “What is the Gospel to the massive subdivisions of the North West Chicago?: Life After Easter in the Suburbs”. Thanks J R for doing this. This is rich!

The Dreamawakener Good News Blog Series

April 13: Len Hjalmarson / The Good News post
April 14: J.R. Rozko / The Good News post
April 15: Brad Sargent / The Good News post
April 16: John Chandler / The Good News post
April 17: Sivin Kit / The Good News post
April 18: Brother Maynard / The Good News post
April 19: Danny Gutierrez / The Good News post
April 20: Dave Kludt / The Good News post
April 21: Kurt Fredrickson / The Good News post
April 22: Winn Collier / The Good News post
April 23: J.R. Briggs / The Good News post
April 24: Noel Heikkinen / The Good News post
April 25: Dustin James / The Good News post
April 26: Jim Pace / The Good News post
April 27: Erika Haub / The Good News post
April 28: AJ Sherrill / The Good News post
April 29: Andrew Perriman / The Good News post
April 30: Raffi Shahinian / The Good News post
May 1: Benjamin Sternke / The Good News post
May 2: Joey Tomassoni / The Good News post
May 3: Brian Hopper / The Good News post
May 4: David Fitch / The Good News post
May 5: Christine Sine
May 6: Jonathan Dodson
May 7: Kathy Hanson
May 8: Jason Clark
May 9: Alistair Johnson
May 10: Greg Larson
May 11: Brian Russell
May 12: Sonja Andrews
May 13: Jamie Arpin-Ricci
May 14: Nathan Colquhoun
May 15: Todd Hiestand
May 16: Doug Paul
May 17: Luis Fernando Batista
May 18: Evan Hansen
May 19: John Santic
May 20: Mark Van Steenwyk
May 21: Ryan Bell
May 22: Eugene Cho
May 23: Joe Racek
May 24: Audrey Blumber
May 25: Tony Stiff
May 26: Maria Drews
May 27: Jason Coker
May 28: Andy Bleyer
May 29: Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove
May 30: Jon Tyson
May 31: JR Woodward

Filed under: Uncategorized | 4 Comments

I spent last Friday and Saturday at Wesley Park United Methodist Church in Michigan leading their governing council through a discussion of the why’s and how’s of reorienting a church to the Mission of God in the world. It was a great time and thanks to all there who welcomed me and entered the dialogue with me. I spent yesterday and Monday at my own District Conference. Although I was one of the speakers, I got to listen to other pastors talk about changing from an “attractional” focus to a missional one. We heard some amazing stories and confessions of the temptations and failures of building a big church for (some of) the wrong reasons. Of course, I was one who had plenty of confessions of temptations and failures.

There was a theme in both of these meetings which can be summed up by what Will Clegg said at the close of our meetings together there at Wesley Park. The question was, “ok, where do we go from here?” Will Clegg said, “I think it really starts right here (with the council).” We need to take a year and just live this ourselves before we go to the congregation with anything. Let’s decide to take small initiatives towards arranging our lives to live missionally together, from whence we can then inhabit the church body with the stories we tell and our examples.” Simple but profound (I hope I quoted Will half way accurately). At my own District Conference, as I listened to leaders of churches that once were on the seeker-church, attractional model track as recently as two to five years ago, with larger buildings and budgets, I heard almost the same words. It has to start with the leaders/pastors doing it - living their lives missionally, in the places and lives of those who are lost, hurting and without Christ.

There is always the temptation to lead from the top on down. To use some sort of technique to create a program. But this is an ethos - a culture - we are nurturing: a culture of Mission and Christian community. This cannot be instituted as a program although it can be nurtured through instruction. This cannot be enforced top down although it can be led by those in leadership modeling the kind of life we are leading others into.

There will be fear for a lot of pastors who have been routinized into serving Christians and having the needy come to them always putting the pastor in a position of power. These habits are hard to break but must be broken if we would lead our churches into the Mission of God. I offer these texts below, ironically read by one the leaders at Wesley Park at the end of our meeting. Thanks to Wesley Park and the Midwest District of the C&MA - you all encouraged me and inspired me and blessed me this past week.

You became imitators of us and of the Lord; in spite of severe suffering, you welcomed the message with the joy given by the Holy Spirit. And so you became a model to all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia. The Lord’s message rang out from you not only in Macedonia and Achaia - your faith in God has become known everywhere. Therefore we do not need to say anything about it, for they themselves report what kind of reception you gave us. They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God. 1 Thess 1:6-9.

Join with others in following my example, brothers, and take note of those who live according to the pattern we gave you. Phil 3:7

(These two verses, by the way, are quoted by Alan Hirsch in The Forgotten Ways p. 115 in a discussion of this topic which is very worth reading!).

Filed under: Uncategorized | 6 Comments

“Mystagogy” - historically understood - is that part of the catechesis that follows Easter. Here baptismands (people who have been baptized on Easter) learn how to live the life of the resurrection. We learn how to enter into the mysteries of the faith. For Catholics, this has most often meant the seven sacraments. These are the mysteries which we must learn to participate in. They are mysteries because God is working “supernaturally” in ways we often cannot see or understand and we must learn to participate. We must learn a certain awareness and receptivity in faith in order to participate in what God is doing.
I think there is a mystagogy for the missional church. I think there are a set of mysteries we learn to live and practice into daily that shape and form the way we live the life we have post-Easter. These go beyond the traditional sacraments. Yet even within the  RCIA (Roman Catholic rite of initiation of adults) there is a place to fan the imaginations of the newly baptized for the mysteries of God working in community, working in the world to make witness possible, and working through the tiniest of kind acts to bring people to himself. A Missional mystagogy rightly teaches the baptized how to live into the mysterious working of the Triune God in, among and around us in the Missio Dei.

I believe every Missional church needs a mystagogy. It is essential to discipleship. What might these mysteries be for a missional church? For our church, here is what I think are the top seven. Just so every one knows, I haven’t cleared these with the other pastors or the shepherds in our church. So for now, ‘this is just me.’

1.) The Mystery of God working Around Our Life Rhythms - Why don’t we have outreach programs here that bring people into our orbit? Because we really believe God is working where we live and work and play to bring people to himself. All we need to do is be available and ready to minister out of what God is doing. We need to be taught how to see and participate in this mystery of God’s working.
2.) The Mystery of Meeting in Homes - What’s the big deal about home groups? Yet I truly believe when “two or three” (or more) people gather regularly, to share a meal together, support one another, pay attention to a geographical proximity, give a “cup of water,” look for the hurting and pray fro the neighborhoods, God meets us there in a mystery (Matt 25:37ff.). The closer we are in proximity, the more we are able to save money by sharing with each other, the more attuned we are to hurting places, the more miracles God does to heal people and bring them to Himself. WE need to be nurtured into the miracle of doing regular community in the neigborhood.
3.) The Mystery of Worship as Liturgy - Many people do not understand what liturgy has to do missional church. That’s ok. It’s enough to say that God encounters us in the Word and the Eucharist so that we are shaped into His Story, the Mission. It is simple, organic, yet a mysterious encounter. It is a time to submit. And people who cannot submit to God cannot be part of his mission. Liturgical worship centered in Christ trains us (and our children) not to come to get something but to participate in something, from whence we get more than we could ever have expected. For people to get this, they need to be led a little.
4.) The Mystery of Practicing Spiritual Disicplines - We have small groups but they are not centered in inductive Bible study (we do Bible Study on Sunday mornings at 9 a.m.). Instead we come to submit to the Spirit by following a Benedictine discipline out of Scripture including “confessing sin one to another (James 5:16), speaking truth to one another in love (Eph 4:15, 25) and working out our salvation in fear and trembling (discerning it Phil 2:12). God works mysteriously when two or three gather in His name for the practice of mutual discernment is (Matt 18:19-20). This mystery is hard to teach and organize. Yet mission is not possible without the life of God in us - without true discipleship.
5.) The Mystery of the Eucharist & Baptism- People ask continually why we have a lengthy initiatory process into baptism and eucharist? Because we believe each sacrament/ordinance (this is an unfortunate divide) is a spiritual formation of great mystery (Col 3:3; 1 Cor 11:29-30) It is not that cognitive understanding is the condition for such participation. It is rather that fuller participation (in post Christendom) is aided by intentionality. Baptism is discipleship not a “consumerist dunk“(wink, wink :))
6.) The Mystery of Local Politics - I am often asked, why does this church insist justice is something we do first, not a national policy (BTW this is mostly me speaking, and not for my church). God works locally in the smallest ways when we stand up for Christ’s justice in the world around us. I contend the way God works in local politics as the arena of witness is a mystery. It is only from here then that we can hope to speak into social justice issues on a national scale in compelling ways that do not become subsumed by the wider discourses of power. Check out how God used the the smallest local politics (exemplified in non-violence) of Christ’s church surrounding Martin Luther King’s civil rights movements to change things. They only ever got bogged down when government/national/corporate interests assume power. Exploring local politics as a mystery of God, I believe would prove fruitful.

7.) The Mystery of Seeding New Communities - Why don’t we build a mega church here? Or at least a bigger building? What do you mean when you say church-planting is a way of life? The way God works to start churches on little resources, within neighborhoods that have little, is a mystery. A micro-pentecost must happen for these places to survive and flourish. The bigger a church gets, the more it is driven by business management and meeting needs of existing Christians. It is no mystery why thousands come. On the other hand, there is no technique, no marketing plan, there is no business plan for planting churches among the lesser classes, with more problems and where there are fewer Christians to attract. Yet it is happening. And this is a mystery. WE need to be taught the book of Acts like this. (P.S. there are ways of thinking about and doing missional community as a sustainable way of life just about anywhere and this may require some training for re-imagining church and living by faith)

8.) The Mystery of Encountering Christ among the Poor - Although an underlying assumption for 1. ,2. ,6. and 7., we need to make it explicit. There is a mystery at work in the way God works in our encounter with the poor. Jesus is there (Matt 25:37ff.). The poor are blessed because they are in a position to more readily recognize their need for God (Matt 5:3). The poor and the needy are the fertile ground for the gospel. There is no need to romanticize poverty, yet God works supernaturally, if mysteriously,in this encounter to shape us into a deeper receptivity to God. Thanks Len for this reminder.

OK, so this is the mystagogy I think fits our church (not yet accepted). We’re working on numbers 1 and 2, and 4 for this post Easter season. What is your church’s mystagogy? Do you have other elements to add to the list for a truly Missional mystagogy?

Filed under: Missional, Missional Leadership, Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Skye Jethani, Managing Editor of Leadership Journal, author of the new book, The Divine Commodity, and friend,  is visiting 20 different blogs today to talk about his new book. Skye’s book deals with several subjects that have been part of my work for the last ten years: consumerist culture, consumerism in American church, and the spiritual disciplines that are a necessary practice for true faithfulness amidst these forces. The best thing about his book is the endless streams of stories, illustrations, analogies and artistic explorations that enable us to see and imagine what consumerism is doing to us and where we might go from here.

My question for Skye concerns our current economic crisis and the disruption it is having over much of the consumerism of America. Currently, as our economy crashes, rebounds and (I believe) crashes again, it is undercutting the various ways consumer attachments, idolatries and habits that have formed our identities. The stable consumer self , that consumer Christianity has appealed to, is being disrupted to the core. Given all of Skye’s thinking on how to move beyond consumerist forms of church, I asked Skye: how can pastors take advantage of this economic upheaval to forge a new post consumer post American way of being church-mission in the world? Here’s Skye on that question:

Skye:  I believe the current economic recession, if it is protracted, presents an opportunity for “creative dislocation” within the church. It may force us to acknowledge many of the assumptions that have driven our view of ministry in many large churches as well as many smaller ones. Central to this, I believe, is consumerism-rooted believe that institutions are the instruments and vessels of God’s mission rather than people.

The common assumption within the North American church is that with the right curriculum, the right principles, and the right programs, values, and goals, the Spirit will act to produce the ministry outcomes we envision. This plug-and-play approach to ministry makes God a predictable, mechanical device and it assumes his Spirit resides within organizations and systems rather than people. In addition, this model of ministry requires a significant investment of money to pay for the buildings, programs, staff, and resources to run the programming. It depends upon the laity’s willingness to give their surplus time and surplus money to keep the church’s programmatic engines running.

But what happens when people have less surplus time and less surplus money—like in a protracted economic recession? Will the mission of the gospel simply have to wait until we can pay for more LCD screens and multi-media auditoriums? Or will we rediscover a different way of participating in God’s re-creative mission?

This economic meltdown might prove to be one of God’s greatest blessings to the modern church. We may find that the gospel is an incarnate reality living within and among the people of God, not a program to be designed and marketed. And we may find that the reality of the Good News is transmitted via the human/divine medium of relationship, not simply the electric impulses of digital media.

As far as simple/practical things church leaders can do during this recession to help their congregation detach from consumerism, let me offer two ideas:

1. Look for programmatic redundancies and simplify your church’s institutional footprint. If another faith community has a pre-existing ministry, participate in the work they have already initiated rather than launching or continuing your own. Most churches believe that in order to have an impact in the community they need to start programs. In some cases this may be true, but why does everything have to be under our church’s banner? Rick McKinley from Imago Dei in Portland, Oregon, likes to say “No logo, no ego.”

As people in your church sense God’s calling and discern their giftedness, why not engage them outside your church’s programming? If First Baptist down the street already has a homeless ministry going, why do you have to start one at your church? Instead, send your volunteers who are passionate about caring for the homeless over to First Baptist to help. By looking for places where local church have redundant programming they can be more effective, practice Christian unity, reduce institutional overhead costs, and engage more people with their gifts.

2. Change what your church measures. Dallas Willard has said that most church measure the ABCs: attendance, buildings, and cash. These are all institutional markers, not necessarily missional markers. Determine a way to measure how many people in your congregation have at least one meaningful relationship with another believer (other than their spouse) with whom they can be vulnerable and challenged to grow. Or begin to measure how often people are engaging Scripture on their own and praying.

These measurements are not to be legalistic, but to communicate that what’s most important is engaging God and fellow believers and not just institutional programs. What we measure reveals what we value. And this isn’t simply to help the laity experience transformation, but church leaders. We, perhaps more than anyone, need to find release from consumerism’s grip on our minds and hearts.

Thanks Skye, that’s alot!!

I know Skye will be visiting around all the blogs today, so if you have a follow-up question or comment, perhaps he’ll get a chance to respond.  What follows is a list of the blogs involved in asking Skye other questions concerning his book and this very important topic.

Out of Ur (OutofUr.com)

Flowerdust.net (http://www.flowerdust.net/)

Stuff Christians Like (http://stufffchristianslike.blogspot.com/)

Ragamuffin Soul (www.ragamuffinsoul.com)

Monday Morning Insight (http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/)

Mark D Roberts (http://www.markdroberts.com/)

Ben Arment (www.benarment.com)

Church Relevance (http://churchrelevance.com/)

Bob Franquiz (http://bobfranquiz.typepad.com/)

Bob Hyatt (http://bobhyatt.typepad.com/)

Cole-Slaw (http://cole-slaw.blogspot.com/)

The Forgotten Ways (www.theforgottenways.org)

Reclaiming the Mission (http://www.reclaimingthemission.com/)

Shaun Groves (http://www.shaungroves.com/shlog)

Frank Viola (www.frankviola.wordpress.com/)

The Gospel-Driven Church (http://www.gospeldrivenchurch.blogspot.com/)

Christina Meyer (http://w2christina.blogspot.com/)

Lee Coate (http://leecoate.wordpress.com/)

Preaching Today (http://blog.preachingtoday.com/)

Gathering In Light (http://gatheringinlight.com/)

Off the Agenda (http://blog.BuildingChurchLeaders.com)

Take Your Vitamin Z (www.takeyourvitaminz.blogspot.com)

Staying Focused (http://kimmartinezstayingfocused.wordpress.com/)

ZonderFann (http://zonderfann.com/)

Filed under: consumerism | 4 Comments