I take it as a given that a missional church sees and understands the new strange contexts of post Christendom as a mission field. Therefore, when our gathering gets too big for true relational community – we do not try to increase the size of our building or find ways to accommodate more people. We recognize that relationships are essential to the gospel and that when we increase the size of gatherings/buildings, organizational infrastructure to accommodate more and more people, we LOSE THE INHERENT ABILITY TO ORGANICALLY BE INVOLVED IN PEOPLE’S LIVES WHO ARE OUTSIDE THE GOSPEL. We recognize then that when we get over a certain size, all we end up doing is making the goods and services of being a Christian more accessible and convenient for already existing Christians. We have no other option then, when we get too big, to ask fifteen or twenty people to leave and go be missionaries to dechurched places in post Christendom. This used to be called church planting. We often now call it “seeding missional communities.”

This “seeding missional communities” however will look stunningly different than the church planting ways of the past so inherently dependent upon the cultural assumptions of Christendom. The much-derided “Franchise” approach has little application here in these contexts. We cannot depend on an already interested “market.” We cannot enter a place expecting them to “come to us” on our terms. We cannot even expect the way we talk about God, sin and Jesus to make sense apart from a way of life (and a displayed Story) from which such words take on flesh. So we like to think in terms of “sending” groups of people as “missional orders” into a community – bands of people who can take time, and sink in and learn that culture and be among the place in which God has called them to minister Christ. When we discern places for such a missionary endeavor, we ask are these places “under-churched,” “affordable for us as we seek to live missionally and beneath our means.” Can we get a calling for this place even though we have not yet “landed.” Are there signs God is calling us to this place?

5 Issues to Be Discerned in Seeding a New Community

Assuming we have discerned the place God is calling us to, the following 5 issues should be discerned as each group forms. Each one of these issues takes discernment as well as much prayer and seeking God for guidance. I take it for granted that each church planter is seeking God and listening to the gifts in community locally with people who already know them (Although JR has reminded me that I should not assume – instead we need to be intentional about that – Amen JR).

1.) DISCERN THE 3 (4 or 5) LEADERS. We (our church body) must discern the team of leaders who will be responsible for leading the theological integrity of this new community. This will be a team of leaders (as opposed to single superstar entrepreneur) who are on the same page philosophically, who will be bi-vocational, who will compliment one another in their giftings (APEPT), who have proven themselves in character and theological integrity so as to lead a community. Such a multiple bi-vocational leadership pushes the church outward instead of inward. Once assembled they will model THE 3 (4-5), THE 12, THE 120 seeking to build a strong shepherd/elder leadership who then they each shepherd 3-5 people. Together we learn the ways of “revolutionary subordination” – where God inhabits every conflict for the growth and furtherance of this community into the center of what He is doing in the community.

2.) They must then LAND (as opposed to a “Launch”). They will have to get jobs, places to live close enough together, start a small rhythm of life, a worship gathering, a communal meal, teach the children. Luke 10:17 tells us to “go eat there” – have a regular meeting with Jesus to be sent by Him (verse 1) from and return to (verse 17) to be grounded in Incarnate Christ. We enter not from power, but from humility …the goal is to become imbedded in sustainable and engaging ways of life with our surroundings.

3.) EXEGETE THE COMMUNITY (as opposed to doing a market survey) Again following Luke 10, we look for places to bless which usually means looking for the poor. We look for persons of peace (you will need relationships). We seek out the poor where God is working among the “poor in spirit” disenfranchised from the structures of power. Here we can find God at work and the harvest. Here we can learn about the Kingdom. We enter a community not to market, not from power, but meekly to discern where the hurting are.

4. TEACH MISSIONAL RHYTHMS.  (As opposed to attractional events) We learn to inhabit and live among the places God has put us. We learn how to listen, pay attention, and take notice of those in our path as places where God is already working. We set places where we regularly visit same time same place every week. We seek out a time every month/week to be present among the poor (of all kinds). ALL WITHIN THE DAILY RHYTHMS OF LIFE (Luke 10.3 says “on your way,” 10.7 “remain eating and drinking”). We work not to build an evangelistic organization to individuals, but a missional way of life where God is at work. Luke 10:2 – the harvest is plenty; all we need is laborers out there.

5. PREPARE FOR A SUSTAINABLE WAY OF LIFE OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. (as opposed to projected growth and financial sustainability after three years). EXPECT GROWTH TO BE SLOW, BUT OF MIRACULOUS VARIETY. YOU MAY START WITH 10-20 PEOPLE, EXPECT NO SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS FOR THE FIRST FIVE YEARS. IT TAKES FIVE YEARS TO BUILD A MISSIOANL PRESENCE. BY THE FIFTH TO EIGHT YEAR,  GROWTH WILL HAPPEN.

………………………….
I’m here in Edmonton writing this and have found friends of like mind who have wonderful materials. I recommend the Karen Wilk’s materials here in Edmonton entitled Living Dangerously. Wonderfully written by Karen, you can find out more about them at kwministry@shaw.ca. Also, check out the great materials at Roxburgh Missional Network – particularly the MBIN (moving back into the neighborhood) workbook (find out more at www.roxburghmissionalnet.com). Blessings to Howard Lawrence and Greg Brandenbarg and their work in the neighbohoods of Edmonton. They are part of Forge.ca. Thanks to Hioward, Greg and Karen – I was blessed to have met you this week!

Everytime I hear a political ad on the radio these days, I am repulsed. “Hi, my opponent is ______. He believes _______. He wants to destroy America. Three times last year I caught him taking out his garbage and three pieces of plastic were left un- recycled. He’s anti environment. I also saw an illicit magazine in his garbage can. Character counts. Vote for me in 2010.” I just turn this garbage off.

During the State of the Union address, everytime I saw the applause divided between the two sides of the house, it made me want to puke. At least no one hurled insults publicly. Then the republican governor that gave the response address afterward trying to replicate the State of the Union applause in his own State Capital building. Stunningly juvenile. Can anyone believe anything good can come from this kind of hostile everyday at-your-throat exchange? I couldn’t bear to watch.

This is “win-at-all-costs,” “I am right you are wrong” politics. It shows how Rush Limbaugh is really all you have left when there is no God at the center of your life together. Sadly, the politics of American church looks little different.

The Way Christians Resolve Conflict

It would be wonderful to imagine an alternative to all this. The church as “body Politic” is the alternative. Here wherever “two or three gather in my name” to resolve a conflict Jesus is present and at work. We assume a submissive posture to each other, one of vulerability, listening, prayer, allowing those who study Scripture well to speak, and we discern, out of a concrete situation which way God is leading forward. Jesus inhabits this activity in what John Howard Yoder called a sacrament. “The Spirit leads to all truth.” This is infleshed politics of Jesus.

Unfortunately we rarely do this.Too often, in churches large or small, at the moment if conflict, the senior pastor ascends to Mt Sinai with a Bible and then comes down to tell us all what to do. Then those who agree stay and those who don’t leave to go find another church where they already agree with him/her (until the next disagreeement). Or, it’s the malaise of democratic tolerance where we all agree to accept each other in our disagreements … never actually discerning the concrete situation and what is at stake for the gospel. There is no political formation for justice in this, it is merely a bunch of individuals who agree to stay individuals until the disagreements become too onerous to tolerate. We never get anywhere and just continue on in our confusion or self delusion or a combination of both.

The Challenge to Christians Everywhere

So there’s a challenge here: Can we Christians be any different? I’m not talking about a new civility here when we enter the public square. I am not talking about some new form of compromise. Here I am saying instead of the church of Jesus Christ exemplifying the same divide and conquer win at all costs approach to conflict resolution in America, can we humbly submit to one another, read Scripture together, discern and allow the presense of Jesus to actually forge a “moral discernment among us” Instead of the never ending string of multiple divisions church splits and hostile disagreements, can we communally submit to one another in humility, piece, non violence, and courage ever listenimng submittng until we come to an Acts 15 “It seems good to us and the Holy Spirt.” I WOULD ARGUE IT IS IN THIS VERY PRACTICE OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION THAT INCARNATIONAL COMMUNITY IS FORMED. AND IF WE CANNNOT WITNESS TO OUR SOCIETY WHAT IT MEANS TO LIVE IN PEACE TOGETHER AS GOD INCARNATES HIS WILL AMONG US, we might as well join in with the hostility and juvenile politics that this country has become. The evangelical right is not an option if we want incarnational witness of the gospel in America.

I’m off to Edmonton. Looking foward to it. When I get back I hope to post some more on the nature of this practice of binding and loosing and incarnational discernment. I hope to engage why I think Brian McLaren’s approach here on this video to conflict resolution, though compassionate and thoughtful, will not be sufficient for faithful incarnational witness of the gospel.

The difference between a fad and a movement is that a movement produces long term enduring change in history ‘on the ground.’ A fad feeds off something that already exists: a cultural awareness, a disenchantment or even a novel idea and expands on it. Through media, publishing, viral exchange, it becomes a sensation that sells books, creates a lot of activity, makes people feel something exciting … but in the end it produces not enough of substance that can sustain lasting change in history. Often, in the midst of something new, we can not tell the difference. Whether this is a fad or a movement – we will not know for many years for only then will the fruit be manifest. I am sure many thought John Wesley and what was called derisively “Methodism” was just a fad. It turned out to change the landscape of protestant Christianity (especially in N America) for all time. Anyone who is an evangelical lives beneath its shadow to this day.

In the last ten to fifteen years there have been a few tidal waves of reaction to N American evangelical Christianity: Emerging church and its founding Emergent Village, The Organic (or Simple or House) Church movement, and of course Missional Church. There are others but the reason why I mention these is that there has been a lot of blog commotion recently over their demise or decline. In each case I suggest frankly – Methinks We Worry Too Much.

When we see things fall apart, split into factions, or splinter off personalities, we should not worry. What is of substance will last if it rooted on the ground in real life communities. What was a fad needed to die anyway. Let those people move on with what they’ve learned and be part of something real. Yet we often see people clamor to keep the fad going. Perhaps these folk were invested in the benefits accruing to them as part of the fad. People like to keep the feeling alive of being involved in something important. But again – Methinks We Worry Too Much. Fighting too much to keep something going is itself a sign of a fad. The people fighting for it should let it go and devote themselves to what is happening on the ground.

I am in no position to judge whether Emergent, Organic or Missional is a fad or a movement. But I have a few observations off recent blog developments. With each observation the question would be Why are these people worried so much? Is this wasted energy – a sign that this is nothing but a fad? “Chill,” and let’s get on with the faithfulness on the ground. The fruit will bear witness eventually.

On Emergent Village: When Tall Skinny Kiwi (TSK) announced he was dropping out of Emergent there was an overly strong reaction. I personally see no reason to take the”friend of Emergent” banner off my blog. I still have a lot of friends over in this camp. People like Brian McLaren and Steve Knight have been good friends and have helped me personally. I see no reasons to announce a break. But Andrew Jones had some good reasons that I’m not sure I understand. What’s the fuss? Why are people fretting so much over Emergent Village staying together? or TSK leaving? Are these folk too invested? for all the wrong reasons? Methinks We Worry Too Much. If Emergent is a fad, a bunch of publisher induced hype, if its conversations never really affect a sustainable tangable progress of God’s justice in the world, we will know soon enough. If on the other hand,  the leaders of Emergent work on the ground in real life movements of God in Mission, its fruit will be undeniable. Perhaps this is what Tony Jones is doing? He’s leaving the label to do work on the ground? Perhaps not. I don’t know. But for now,  I see no reason to worry about him or Emergent, just encourage him and everyone in it towards faithfulness in Mission by the Holy Spirit. Perhaps this is what TSK is getting at for himself when he expresses “the need for some of us to move on from the label and get on with the job.” If so bravo!

On the Organic Church: When Mark Galli starts worrying over at CT and Out of Ur about the demise of Organic church, I ask why fret? He worries “about the energetic men and women at the forefront of the movement. Will they become embittered and abandon the church, and maybe their God?” Come on? These men and women are working ‘on the ground’ in real church communities. The fruit of their work will be visible when the time comes. Up until then I am sure these folk are not worried. So why should we? I like what Neil Cole has to say in response to Galli’s article: “I do not live for success but to follow Christ every day. If, when my life ends, I have only a handful of followers of Jesus that can carry on his work, I will not be ashamed to meet my Lord.” He in essence is saying to Mark: “Methinks You Worry Too Much.”

On the Missional Church: Much has been written about the problem with the word “missional” (see here for instance) It’s meaning has become diluted. It is being misused as a new market nich in church. A whole synchroblog was created to answer the question “What is Missional? Some fret about the word losing its meaning.   Oh Ok – probably right. Nonetheless, I personally gravitate towards the Missional movement. I find it rich in theology and history. The word means a lot to me. I admit I get agitated when I have to explain myself a lot more when I use the word, nonetheless I still find it all compelling. I think the best tack is to take what I’ve learned among Bosch, newbigen, Guder, Hirsch, Frost, Roxburgh and many others: work within the church that God has placed me, be as discerning and thoughtful as I can with the resources God has given, and let the fruit speak for itself. For me, there is already much much fruit. I think anyone who spends a lot of time setting up turf for ‘missional’ Worries Too Much!

Those of us who publish books, write blogs and speak at conferences are always tempted to find an image/or be part of something  we can project and find marketable. It gives one power with publishers. There’s also some kind of sick enjoyment that comes from seeing our name in print or influence. I have regularly had to nail any such temptations (as meager as the temptations have been) to death. That’s part of my necessary spiritual formation. Sorry, it’s true. Each one of the above “labels” has the potential to attract such spiritually malforming ‘bandwagoning.’ We should resist such grasping for attention by refusing to worry too much. For the seeking of any such attention through any of the above ‘labels’ is a sure sign that we have lost sight of Mission and the ‘movements’ have already become mere fads. So I end this post quickly! lest I find myself worrying too much.

Here’s a post that is sure to make nobody happy … but I can’t help but reflect on pres. Obama’s dilemma of leading this country as president in contrast to the way MLK led us back 50 years ago. The contrast to me is stunning and challenges all of us Christian leaders to be of a different kind of leadership best exemplified by MLK.

Over a year ago now I took some heat ( here and here) for suggesting that not-voting in the presidential election was perhaps the best stance forward for Christians seeking change in our society on all issues of justice. I was called out for being a sectarian or even worse “a white Christian telling a black Christian not to vote.” Admittedly, this call for non-voting was precarious at best when the nation is on the verge of electing it’s first black president. Perhaps I should have used better judgement? In many ways, the symbolic stature of that historic occasion cannot be minimized. To this day I am appreciative of the new president. I don’t agree with all his policies. In some respects however, I don’t think he could perform more admirably. I am glad for his election.

Yet my argument back then was as it is now: that pres. Barack Obama, by virtue of being voted into office, is already hand cuffed to the politics of violence and corporatism that indeed governs our nation. By being VOTED IN – he already is entertwined in this form of politics. He can do very little if anything to bring true justice to the world. Instead, I argued, we ought to be careful not to be distracted by the Obama presidency. At that time I was worried that the emerging church was putting all their eggs into the election basket of Barack Obama. In essence, I asked that we put all our eggs in the basket of the church and God’s working in all of the ways we bring peace, reconciliation and justice to all of our relationships individually and corporately as His people … whether marital, economic or in cases of nation-state conflict. This is where we best can see God’s justice infest the world. Vote if you must, but don’t expect much.

My review on President Obama’s first year is uneven.

Frankly, I believe he and Geithner, and Bernanke saved the economy from an all out depression. For me, my Republican friends don’t get it (I spent many years in the financial service industry). The crisis brought on by the lassez- faire market policies on a shadow banking system was about to create a catastrophe – untold economic hardship the likes we have not see since the depression. Pres. Obama, and his team, held steady, and walked us out of it. Of course, it’s long from over. And pres. Obama is all the more hamstrung by it. We will in essence have to pay for thirty years of over-consumption and excess. But the economy has stabilized.
On the other side however, I believe pres. Obama’s health care policies and Afghanistan policies show how handcuffed any head of state is. As hard as he might try, pres Obama can do little better than play along with the health care industry and its lobbies as well as the military machine of the United States. I simply don’t get how we can allow the corporate health insurance companies to control the health insurance programs of this country. We now have the costliest and the most unjust system of health care in the developed world undergirded by the ideology of the individual’s freedom to choose my doctor or my health care plan (huh? to choose from  among what?). As far as Pres. Obama’s Afghan decisions, I know I speak from a certain minority stance, but violence breeds violence. War gets us nowhere. Let us go do for Afghanistan – what we’re trying to do for Haiti in the midst of this disaster – and we will win this war through compassion and subordination (revolutionary subordination ala John Howard Yoder’s Politics of Jesus). Let us spend all the money on military and spend it for humanitarian relief.  But again, this is unimaginable for the state to embrace as the United States of America.  So this is not so much pres. Obama’s fault. It just reveals how much his policies are a product of the system.

This is why the revolutionary stance of Christian communities is so important. We can embody a justice (in Christ) that the governemnt could never do.  And sometimes we can express this by not voting. For in essence we bring a justice that is subversive to these “powers.”
And so I get to the point of this post (I know – it took lomg enough). Martin Luther King represented on many levels such a leader of a revolutionary posture of justice in the world. Today we remember him. He was far from perfect but he understood the inherent way God works through non-violence and revolutionary subordination, the willing obedience to structures that are not just -  in order to reveal to the world injustice so that things might change for righteoussness sake.  But if MLK were to have been elected, could he have led out of such a space? It’s questionable.

This why the contrast between Martin Luther King and Pres. Obama’s positions on war is so instructive. On the occasion of receiving his Nobel Peace prize pres. Obama defended war (on Milbank’s terms of a primordial ontology of vilence). He said “Now the questions are not new.  War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man.  At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.”

He then disqualified the means of non-violence as incapable of bringing down Hitler’s armies – never stopping to ask what 17 million confessional Lutherans could have done if they just refused to particpate in a Nationalist war.

In contrast, Martin Luther King some 45 years earlier accepted his Nobel Peace prize with these words:
I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results.  Nations have frequently won their independence in battle.  But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace.  It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones.  Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. . .  It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible.

Martin Luther King spoke as a Christian. Brack Obama spoke as head of the State. And so placing Martin Luther King alongside pres. Obama highlights the challenges we Christians face who place too much hope in the government for justice. The best we can hope for is preserving structures (which I still carry hopes for with regard to the current adminstration). I do not mean to demean pres. Obama. I only show that only so much can be accomplished for justice by the most well meaning leaders of our time by the State. Much much more shall be accomplished for justice by the church, by missional communities engaging the world with our peculiar form of justice and reconciliation born out of who we are in the Incarnate work of God in Christ through His people.

Just a thought on this day we remember Martin Luther King.

——————————————–

Give to Haiti. I recommend donating to the fine on the ground relief effort at work by International Teams!!  You can give by credit card here. “No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied … until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream” MLK

As I understand the missional church, the Sunday gathering can never be the focal point. And yet it plays a crucial role in the formation of a people into God’s Mission. It is essential for the sustaining of a missional community who lives life in the rhythms of mission. We do not gather for self-improvement as Christians (although this happens), we do not seek to attract more Christians into this church for the sake of building a “successful church.” Yet here we are shaped by the Spirit into a political force for the Mission of God in the world. Assuming all this, if you were to come and visit one of these gatherings, I think you would notice some things that should tip off that this church has a culture of Mission. What would you notice? Here’s my (off the cuff) list of 8 things to ponder that should tip us off that this gathering is Missional.

1.) There is no single dominating leader/pastor: You won’t be able to tell who the senior pastor is. There will be leaders, but no one leader will dominate this gathering. There probably will not be one dominant preacher. Leadership will be diffused. This pushes leadership outward. Read about it here. There will be a high percentage of people involved in various forms of leadership.

2.) The Service isn’t Produced: The liturgies, preaching and music will have an organic sense to it. It will be a family type gathering not a show. There will probably be candles, art and other tactile means to enter into the reality of God in Christ. The production value of the service has more to do with organic artistry, not professional produced excellence. Above all, there is a focus towards the communal encounter with the living God. We don’t have full-time paid professionals to orchestrate a Sunday morning service. In fact, if we all came together 5 minutes before the gathering time, and 3 of the leaders for the service were sick, I would like to thin we could put it together without a hitch. This is because the gathering is about the regular liturgical shaping of who we are into the Mission of God.

3.) There probably will not be many strangers present in this service: There will not be as many strangers, for these kinds of connections take place outside the Sunday gathering. We do hope to see people who don’t walk with Christ among us – but they will be folk who have gotten to know people in our community (who do walk with Christ). We hope to have people among us asking a lot of questions who have arrived here through an important relationship in their lives.

4.) Socio and economic diversity: Everybody should not be of the same socio-economic strata. Maybe you couldn’t tell on your first visit, but there should be people hanging around living below the poverty level who are being helped and sustained by this community. You should see folks with handicaps welcomed and loved and feeling comfortable. You should see these kinds of diversity as the justice of God through reconciliation of all kinds permeates through this cmmunity into all our other relationships.

5.) Sunday Morning Greeters?: OK, I don’t know about this one. All I know is that you should notice strong and viable friendships happening. And this might make it harder to or more uncomfortable to actually meet people if you’re s stranger just visiting on a Sunday. Most connection happens in relationships outside the church from which people come to the gathering. This means that visitors will find true communal connection on a Sunday morning gathering more difficult. We should expect people to make significant connection with strangers (especially strangers to the gospel) outside the church gathering.

6.) The Sending Out: The high point of the time together should be the benediction!- The Sending Out. There will be various liturgies and worship all centered in the encounter with the living God. It always ends however with the sending out for mission. There is a centrifugal nature to the missional Sunday morning gathering.
7.) The Gathering is Participatory: At Life on the Vine, we sit together in a round before God around the altar, not as passive spectators for a performance. The service is active and participant driven. I can’t imagine a missional church that trains its people to sit passively on Sunday all facing in one direction as if they come to sit and receive. Anyways, this is how we arrange the gathering place at LOV. Is this just us?

8.) Ethnic Diversity?: OK I admit to being troubled by this one. Especialy after last weekend’s missional learning commons. Should missional communities be diverse by definition? Even if we are located in a predominantly white context? Should all Christian communities be diverse even if they have to pay people of a different ethnicity to come and be a leader/singer ? I deliberately left this one up for grabs. Missional communities are not typically diverse. But we can do some things to prepare the way? We’ve had many suggestions? Any new ones?

Anyways, these are just a few hints as to what someone might notice upon entering a missional community’s Sunday gathering. I am sure there are many more. I’m not sure the comunity I co-lead can live up to these ideals. Any immediate ones you’d like to add to the list?

There is a pressure that young people face upon graduating from college. I see it and hear it all the time. Get married, get the secure job, buy a house, have 2.5 kids, and then spend the majority of your life keeping up with that lifestyle. Keep working and ascend the proper rungs on the ladder. By the time you’re 50 years old, your kids out of college, and a huge chunk of your life has been swallowed up in the black whole of the American dream, maybe now you can think about ministry/mission?

I have had a least a dozen people talk to me recently about these pressures. From my 20 year old nephew to a 50 year old woman, we all face these pressures – to make a certain salary, live a certain lifetstyle, talk about your kids, and provide all the comforts and accoutrements of everyday American life. When I had about fifteen young future missional leaders over to my house a couple weeks ago, some admitted they feared the lack of security in the missional pastor/church planter life (I pulled it out of them). It would be much easier to go the more secure route and do the typical pastoral route in order to ascend to the position of a professional senior pastor with full salary and benefits.

It is default mode in American society to attach one’s identity to a certain version of success. We judge our lives, attach happiness to a.) being successful in career, b.) having the basic comforts of status and provision, c.) have a family. Ironically, most pastors coming out of seminary, with professional degrees, attach their identity to their success in their churches. How fast were they able to grow it? How many conversions? How successful were they at managing the growth of this church into a mega/influential church.

What do you do with all this if you’re a missional community leader/pastor?

All of these pressures work against the missional verve for every Christian – not just potential leaders in churches. If we give in, inevitably our energy gets focused elsewhere. Church turns into a few hours of volunteer work a week. We get sucked in and compromise, our lives become busy, we must work 60 hours a week, we must spend countless hours making up for our absense from our families. Church becomes this side activity which we take on to get the warm fuzzy comforts of being spiritually secure – and to support the vacuity of this same lifestyle (and to provide our children with a good Christian education). Living the Christian life becomes a sub-therapeutic accoutrement we take on to balance the pressures/demands of the American consumerist/capitalist/Focus on the Family kind of life. And of course most of our evangelical churches find ways to make this feel alright.

Now I should say: I have no problem buying a house – when it is a missional discernment. I have no problem having children when we do not make our children into idols for our own gratification and self-glorying (and please – let us also elevate celibacy as a noble standard for Christian mission). We raise children for the Kingdom unto God’s glory not our own. I have no problem even when a career is blessed by God in wealth – when this wealth and success come as a surprise (in other words our goal was to do the job for God’s glory not our own wealth accumulation) and when this wealth is seen as God’s and used for His Kingdom. But we need another way even to make these attitudes possible.

We must cultivate an appetite and a vision for another way of life. To do this we will need a posture of resistance to the American dream. Zizek, in his recent book The Parrallax View points to Melville’s character Bartleby (in the short story Bartleby, the Scrivener: a Story of Wall Street) who began to challenge the demands of his office where he worked with the phrase “I would prefer not to.” For Zizek it is a gesture that provides the posture for a resistance which means something amidst an all the pervasive ideology that seeks to absorb anything we say or do into its own ways. Paraphrasing Zizek, We can imagine the varieties of such a gesture in today’s public space: … There are great chances of a new career here! Join us!” “Thank-you but I would prefer not to.” You must get married in order to have children or you will have nothing to live for “Thank-you but I prefer not to.” You haven’t bought a house? You’re wasting your money. Throwing it down the drain in rent (I can’t tell you how often I heard this in the last decade) “Thank-you but I prefer not to.” Zizek says this is more than the kind of resistance which parasites upon what it negates (example: we must bring justice to the minority peoples who have been excluded from economic prosperity! Yes, let’s make it possible to sell them houses they can’t afford too!”) This is a resistance which opens up a new space outside of the hegemonic culture.”(383-384)

I can’t explain all of what Zizek means here. And it’s not all relevant to this post. And Bartleby of course ended up opting out of society as a whole. The best lesson of Bartleby may be in the people he would stun by his refusal to play the games allof them felt so pressed to play.  All I’m trying to say here is that our missional communities need to provide training in the posture of “No Thank You- I would prefer not to” for the purposes of opening up a space for the nurtuance of the Kingdom of God in and among us. Yet I’m afraid this doesn’t provide enough help? Do you have any ideas, practices, ways of nurturing resistance to the forces I am referring to above in this post?

And don’t say “thank-you – but I’d prefer not to.”

Thanks to everyone joining us in Ft Wayne at the Missional Learning Commons. It looks like we’ll be having a good turnout and I know I’m looking forward to seeing everybody – both new and old friends.

Again, this is a non-conference. Although there are four sessions on Saturday, the speakers will be short. We want to hear from each other. Come expecting to participate, tell us what you’re learning, ask questions, learn from other practicioners. We need coffee. We’re hoping to keep a steady brew of coffee going. So we’re asking people to come with some free trade coffee to share during the day. If you can afford it – and like to drink it – please bring some ground coffee to share – For all other munchies including lunch – we’re on our own.

Friday night – two professors from Northern Seminary ( me and Sam Hamstra)  are leading a discussion on Soong Chan Rah’s book The Next Evangelicalism. We’re hoping to pull in other folk into a lively conversation. Here’s my take on Prof. Rah’s book here. If you’re coming Friday night, please come having read the book. We hope to have a serious engagement with the issues of race and diversity in missional church.

This non-conference is free. It is organic. It’s planned by seven people who met in a restaurant in Michigan City last summer. It has cost nothing to put on. It is meant to bring people together, encourage and enflame imagination for mission. For more information see the web page here, or the facebook page here.

Blessings and we’ll see you this weekend.