Ditto on the great question from Matt J. A lot of people like Roxburgh are arguing for an overhaul of existing church structures and entities, from the local to denominational (as well as interdenominational networks and such). To even begin to work through that, we have to be able to answer Matt’s question of how to move people (that is, the millions of people in N. America who currently profess faith in Christ and are part of local communities of faith) into a more missional way of understanding, being, and doing church and ministry.

One of the big issues we are facing is a small, but growing, generation of missional leaders who, unless they are evangelistically gifted, are finding themselves without a context in which to lead. In any given community, the proportion of people willing and ready to follow a missional leader to people looking for more Christendom types of leadership (e.g., priest, pedagogue, professional) remains very small. So long as the missional conversation remains among a relatively small, insular group of academicians, pastors, and bloggers, we will not see the ‘missional renaissance’ we are hoping for. Despite the popularity of the term ‘missional,’ and the various attempts to define it in more mainstream Christian media (e.g., CT, LN), to most people it still remains either nebulous or simply a synonym for ‘externally focused.’

I believe it is going to take more than books, blogs, and informal, intimate relational networks to spread the vision. We need those, for sure, but engaging the larger population of existing ‘Christendom N. America’ needs to be high on our priority list. Macro-level strategic thinking is an urgent must.

Regards,

matt

I agree that these events still attract crowds because some folk still find them entertaining. In my local church I have been fighting battles because people still feel the need to do an easter program, when last year we only had 9 disciples. The attractional evangelical model simply doesn’t work.

I think the biggest change that will have to be made in the local church is for people to learn to not “think like Christians”, meaning what they find entertaining, enjoyable and spiritually profitable. You would be hard pressed to get a non-Christian to come to an old fashioned revival meeting, but if the church is hold a discussion group about the affects of “insert important topic” on the local church, you might get some people in church that wouldn’t otherwise come.

I think it is alright for us to have some nostalgia. I have it at times to…but I can separate it. Its all about context.

But I also share your sense that “we should also transition our Christendom churches somehow (I have a few ideas for such a transition) into a missional disposition in the world.”

Here are some things I hope your post on this transition will address:
Does the transition from the institutional to missional paradigm need to be wholesale in order for it to be authentic/legitimate? Are hybrid congregations possible, that have one foot in Christendom/programming and another in fostering incarnational communities that inhabit their neighborhoods?

In previous posts you’ve offered many insights into how this transition impacts a church’s liturgy and ministry focus. But can you describe how the transition to a missional paradigm takes root in the hearts and minds of those who have spent decades in Christendom? How do I open the imaginations of my congregants to see the need to move beyond the nostalgia?

As for the ineffectivenss of evangelism. I most certainty am advocating for a renewal of evangelism in post Christendom. My previous posts and the one to come on this subject hopefully helps towards an engaged post Christendom evangelism.

Thanks for commenting!!

If the word ’saved’ (and all of the assumed baggage that is packed into it) no longer makes sense in our post-Christendom context how do we explain the concept of salvation outside of a Christendom bound vocabulary?

My initial thoughts lead to the re-appropriation of cultural vocabulary akin to Jesus and the early church; the word ‘gospel’ for example.

In order to be missional in precedence our evangelism must by a physical, mental, and spiritual engagement. I think we are beginning to understand a post-Christendom theology of presence/incarnation, I am just not sure that thinking in the realm of missional engagement of the intellect or heart are as far along.

I’m not arguing an either/or here, but just asking questions and thinking out loud. I hear what you are saying and think I agree. But others obviously do not. For example, James MacDonald is rallying the troups in Chicago to host a Harvest CRUSADE with Greg Laurie. This is the same thing that Graham did except you now have a contemporary outdoor worship service instead of the traditional one. And apparently it is working (however, you define that) or Laurie would not be doing these all over the country.

So has it changed as much as you think? Isn’t there enough “power” in the Word and Gospel alone that we can just “preach it?” Will God not do what God is going to do?

Also, maybe evangelism today is ineffective because we just don’t do it. We don’t trust the power of the gospel. So we hold back and emphasize relationship over proclamation and we never get to proclamation and no one “gets saved.” Could this be the problem?

I am just raising the questions because when I say the things you have said to people in “Christendom” I get these types of questions thrown at me.

What do yo think?

But I think I have witnessed what have been saying. I recently had a conversation with a friend and we were both speaking what we believed about the condition of people. Needless to say we were at odds in our beliefs. I quickly saw that I could not approach him as though I had the answer he needed. I believe he would have dismissed me as being condescending. (What good is winning a debate/being proved right, and losing a relationship?) So I am trying to make my life do the talking. and not just my life, but mine and my wife’s. I am praying that he will see what the Kingdom of God looks like through Victoria and I. (Fortunately the Holy Spirit enables us to be an example of the Kingdom )