Eine Geschichte, die mich sehr berührt hat wurde für mich in den letzten Monaten zu einem Sinnbild dafür wie Männer Gott anbeten können. Sie steht am Ende des Buchs “Der wilde Messias” von Michael Frost und Alan Hirsch (S. 239 – 242), die ich hier komplett wiedergeben möchte:

“Zwei Männer betreten gemeinsam eine Kneipe…

Zwei Männer in ihren mittleren Jahren treffen sich in einer Kneipe mitten in einem kleinen, unscheinbaren Dorf. Sie schließen sich herzlich in die Arme, ihre harten Hände umschlingen den breiten Rücken des anderen voller Zuneigung. Sie küssen sich zweimal, auf jede Wange. Dann setzen sie sich, um zu essen, zusammengekauert über dem gemeinsamen Tisch wie beim dem Treffen einer Verschwörung. Der Staub auf ihren Gesichtern unterstreicht die Linien um ihre Augen, ihre ergrauten Bärte verraten ihre Jahre. Zwei alte Löwen, Kämpfer, die so manche Schlacht geschlagen haben und immer noch auf ihren Beinen stehen.

Während er sich die Krümel aus dem Bart wischt, sagt der eine mit einem Grinsen: “Du bist aber alt geworden.” Der andere schaut auf und hebt eine Augenbraue. “Ich meine doch nur”, fährt der Erste fort, “ich habe dich schon lange nicht mehr gesehen und du scheinst älter geworden zu sein in dieser Zeit.” Erneutes Grinsen. Beide lachen und der erstse Sprecher legt seine Hand auf den Arm seines Freundes. Sein Tonfall wird ernster. “Es sind die vielen Reisen – sie sind so kräftezehrend”, gibt er zu.

“Bei mir ebenso. Und die Enttäuschungen. Ich könnte das Reisen, die schlechten Unterkünfte, die Rückschläge und all das aushalten. Aber diese lähmende Enttäuschung, Kameraden, die sich auf und davon machen, ihre Gruppen verlassen oder unsere Lehren verdrehen – ehrlich – das ist es, was mich fertig macht. Du bist nicht der Erste, der bemerkt, dass mich all das älter macht.” Er schaut seinen Freund durchdringend an.

“Ja, du siehst sogar sehr alt aus.” Beide lachen. Stille. Nach einer Weile beginnt der Erste wieder: “Sag mal, Paulus, machen dir die Korinther immer noch Kopfschmerzen? Sind sie der Grund für die grauen Strähnen in deinem Bart?” “Das ist doch noch gar nichts – Kopfschmerzen und graue Strähnen, Petrus! Hast du nicht gehört? Du willst es gar nicht wissen! Eifersucht, Streit und Spaltungen! Einige haben meine Stellung als Apostel schlichtweg abgelehnt. Sie wollen Leiter, die mehr Gaben vorweisen können als ich sie habe! Ist das zu fassen? Sie verstehen nicht, dass all Weisheit vom Heiligen Geist herkommt. Nach so langer Zeit habe ich es nur mit Babys in Christus zu tun. Und ich will gar nicht anfangen, all ihre Verbrechen aufzuzählen: sexuelle Ausschweifung, sie verklagen sich gegenseitig vor den Richtern, missbrauchen ihre Freiheit und tolerieren, Geschwister, die in Unmoral leben – einfach so. Sie sind stolz auf ihre Geistesgaben, die Gottesdienste sind das reine Chaos – du solltest sie über die Auferstehung reden hören – furchtbar. Und was soll ich dir sagen – sie haben einfach keine Liebe füreinander! Vier! Vier Briefe habe ich ihnen dazu geschrieben und es hat den Anschein, dass alles nur noch schlimmer wird. Ich habe schon darüber nachgedacht, ihnen einfach nicht mehr zu schreiben, um die Diskussion zu beenden. Vielleicht können ja meine Fäuste ihnen das einbläuen, was meine Worte scheinbar nicht vermögen. Hm – du bist bestimmt ein besserer Fautkämpfer, als ich es bin – Lust auf eine Fahrt nach Korinth?” “Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob eine Keilerei den Korinthern helfen wird, Kamerad. Obwohl ich mir vorstellen könnte, dich zu begleiten.” Petrus lächelt aufmunternd.

“Wie geht es der Zellgruppe in Galatien? Hast du was von ihnen gehört?”, fragt Paulus nach einem tiefen Schluck aus seinem Becher. Petrus schüttelt langsam den Kopf. Paulus spricht weiter: “Ihr Glaube war nicht fest genug, um all der Verwirrung standzuhalten, die diese Judenchristen über die Notwendigkeit der Beschneidung verursacht haben. Sie haben dem Evangelium, das ich ihnen gebracht habe, nicht vertraut! Überdies zweifeln sie genau wie die Korinther meine Autorität als Apostel an.”

Und so geht es weiter. Zwei Männer, müde von ihren Reisen, erzählen sich ihre Geschichten, von den neuen Zellgruppen in Kleinasien, Bekehrungen in Europa, Enwicklungen in Griechenland. Am Ende des Abends sagt Paulus: “Petrus, ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ich dich noch einmal sehen werde…” “Das sagst du jedes Mal, wenn wir uns treffen.” “Ich weiß, und darum ist es nicht weniger wahr. Aber nur für den Fall, dass unsere Wege sich nicht mehr kreuzen, kannst du mir noch einmal von ihm erzählen?” Petrus lächelt traurig: “Oh Paulus – ich habe dir die Geschichten schon hunderttausend Mal erzählt. Du kennst sie inzwischen besser als ich selbst.”

Paulus rutscht auf seinem Stuhl nach vorne und schaut seinen Freund an: “Kamerad, ich wurde geschlagen, verlassen, verraten, bin schiffbrüchig gewesen und für tot gehalten worden. Ich weiß, von keiner Gemeinschaft, die ich gegründet habe, die nicht durch irgendeine Krise geht, egal ob persönlich oder in der Lehre. Ich bin ein alter Mann geworden. Die Revolution ist in vollem Gange, langsam aber sicher kommt sie. Was haben wir nicht schon alles gesehen? Aber es ist manchmal so anstrengend. Ich warte auf den Herrn, wie der Wächter auf das Ende der Nacht wartet. Und weißt du, manchmal frage ich mich, ob aus diesen kleinen Zellgruppen, die wir angefangen haben, jemals die Bewegung werden wird, von der wir träumen. Ja, ich frage mich das. Auch nach allem, was ich gesehen und erlebt habe. Nach allem, was wir gesehen und erlebt haben..”

Er schaut Petrus mit seinen klaren Augen an und sagt nochmals, fast schon flehend: “Erzähle es mir noch einmal.”"

Diese Geschichte spiegelt so viel Tiefe des Lebens wider. Egal in welchen geistlichen, beruflichen, persönlichen Herausforderungen wir stecken. Wir brauchen Gefährten mit denen wir uns in einer Tiefe begegnen können und gegenseitig dabei helfen können, uns auf die Person Jesus ausrichten zu können – um immer sagen zu können: Ja, es hat alles einen Sinn!

I’m off to the Renov8 conference this week to swipe missional pointers from the best, and from whomever else happens to be there. I’m generally not that big on conferences (they’re like podcasts, but, annoyingly, I can’t do anything else while I listen to them), but I’ll get to hang with my buddy Dave and hear a favourite missiologist of mine, Mike Frost, which makes this one worth attending. If you’ve never encountered Mike Frost before, you should. These talks from the end of last year in Southampton are a great summary of what he has to say, and the most mature expression of it I’ve heard from him yet. If you like what you hear, you can catch him for free 7:00 pm Tuesday night at Centre Street Church here in Calgary. I’m planning to swing by the U on my way to snag anyone who wants to go, so let me know if you’re in.

Yes, this is a church planting conference, and no, I’m not a church planter. There’s not a lot out there for university ministers, and what there is tends to be a long way from Canada, so I’ll be taking Benson’s advice and doing my best to co-opt this thing and attend it with a collegiate slant to glean what I can for my context. You can expect to have much of this shared, with news as it happens on Twitter, and thoughtful post-conference reflections here.

Thanks to my denom for footing my bill, Dave for tracking down the fundage, and all the guys at bsmucalgary for letting me take a week off to learn and grow as a minister. I’ll miss hangin’ at the U, and I’m hoping that it doesn’t become too apparent in my absence that I’m not needed.

(ht: jonny baker)

To read the original article, visit Neil Cole’s website, CMAResources.org.

Think about what questions you’ve been asked about your church. Questions come up like “What church do you go to? How big is your church? Where is your church? What kind of music do you have at your church? What denomination is your church? Who is the pastor at your church?” I find that we often ask about things that may seem important, but we usually aren’t getting at what matters most. These are things about churches. But what is a church?

I came to a point, after trying to plant churches for some time, where I asked the Lord one of the most dangerous questions I have ever asked: “Okay, Lord, so what is a church anyway?” I say it was a dangerous question because asking it forced me to admit that I had been trying to grow something without knowing what it was.

Our Vision of Church: Limited by Our Experience
To help find the best answer, I went to my peers and leaders, asking them in all sincerity, “What is church?” When I asked the question, however, it caused others to reflect and realize that they might not really know what church is either. Oh sure, we all know what our experience is. We all know what our traditions are. We speak as though we obviously know the answer to this question. But in reality, we found that many of us hadn’t taken a moment to ask the question. Rather than starting with the question of what church is, we had been asking how we can make churches get bigger or better, or how we can start more of them.

The temptation is to define “church” according to our own experience. We think we know something because of familiarity. By defining “church” this way, we are assured that we are always right, but this is a cheap solution that perpetuates all our current problems. It is much more vital to look at the Scripture with honesty and courage as we try to define “church.” Once we ask the question, however, we must be ready to expect the unexpected.

While as seminary student, I was given a definition of church that was really more of a description. Church was explained as embodying these five characteristics:

1. A group of believers gathered together regularly…

2. That considers itself a church…

3. That has qualified elders present…

4. That regularly practices the ordinances of baptism and communion as well as church discipline…

5. And that has an agreed-on set of doctrinal beliefs and evangelistic purpose.

These are all good qualities for any church to have. Most of our churches, in fact, would meet these standards. But my question was still with me, so I turned the question inside out by asking what is missing from this list of five things. Since that time I’ve put the same list and question before a lot of groups. “What is missing?” After a few minutes of responses, I generally tell them what I think is missing if they haven’t already found it.

Jesus is missing!

One of my respected mentors, a theologian and career missionary, told me that Jesus is assumed to be in the definition because it is believers who are gathered. My response was, “Why would you verify that qualified elders are present but assume that Jesus is present?”

This assumption betrays a problem in our churches, a serious one. The church is often more about the people and the institutions that gather in the name of Jesus than it is about the reality of the risen Jesus, alive and active with His people.

Seeing Jesus
As the world looks at our churches, particularly in the West, it sees only what people have done or what programs they are doing. The world is not impressed. In response, we scheme and plot and plan, “What can we do to make our church more appealing to the people in our community?” This is, once again, the wrong question. It’s as if we we’re trying to boost God’s approval ratings. It is God’s name that is at risk, not ours, and we are not responsible for protecting His reputation. He can handle that, by Himself, just fine.

A better question is, “Where is Jesus seen at work in our midst?” Where do we see lives changing, and communities transforming simply by the power of the Gospel? Where do we see fathers restored to a life of holiness and responsibility? Where do we see daughters reconciling with fathers? Where do we see addicts who no longer live under the bondage of chemical dependency? Where are wealthy businessmen making restitution for past crimes that went unnoticed? These are the questions that lead people to recognize the living presence of Jesus, loving and governing people’s lives as their King. When people encounter Jesus, alive and present as King, they get a taste of God’s Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven.

If Jesus is missing in our understanding of church, He will likely be missing in our expression of church as well.

What a Church is: Jesus Followed
I have come to understand church as this: the presence of Jesus among His people called out as a spiritual family to pursue His mission on this planet.

Granted, this is quite broad, but I like a broad definition of church. The Scriptures don’t give a precise definition, so I’m not going to do what God has not done. I want something that captures what the Scriptures say about the Kingdom of God. In one of only two places where Jesus mentions church in the Gospels, He says, “For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst” (Matt 18.20). His presence must be an important element of church.

To a church that has lost sight of its true love, Jesus says these harsh words: “The One who walks among the lampstands, says this…remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place–unless you repent” (Rev 2.1,5). To a disobedient and unhealthy church, Jesus threatens to remove the lampstand (representing the church) from the presence of Jesus. The presence of Jesus is crucial to what church is. His presence is life; His absence is death. He is the most essential portion of who and what we are. He should be the most important thing about us and the most recognizable aspect that the world sees.

In many of the churches in the West, ministry is done for Jesus, but not by Jesus–and therein lies a big difference. If we evaluated our churches not by attendance or buildings but by how recognizable Jesus is in our midst, our influence would be more far-reaching and our strategies would be far more dynamic. Unfortunately, it’s possible to do all of the things that make up the five qualities of traditional churches but fail to demonstrate anything of the person or work of Christ in a neighborhood. But if we start our entire understanding of church with Christ’s presence among and working with us, then we will expect to see much more.

Organic Church
We’ve come to refer to some of the ideals of church planting movements as an “organic church.” By organic, I don’t mean that it is pesticide free. It’s a matter of churches being alive and vibrant as living organisms.

The core reality is not how the followers are organized, discipled or helped. The core reality is Jesus Christ being followed, loved and obeyed. Christ alive, forming spiritual families and working with them to fulfill His mission, is the living reality of the organic church. The church really is an embodiment of the risen Jesus. No wonder the Bible refers to the church as the body of Christ.

Christ First
Mike Frost and Alan Hirsch have challenged the way we order our thinking about Jesus and the church. Typically, we think of church as something to mobilize so that people will come to Jesus. Instead, Jesus leads people in mission, who in turn bring forth fruitful churches. Frost and Hirsch show the right sequence for our thinking by beginning with Christ. They say that clear Christology will inform our best missiology, which in turn leads to the most fruitful ecclesiology.[i]

Christ comes first. He then commands us into His mission. The byproduct of our mission is His kingdom spread on earth via the building of His church.

I have come to realize that we should focus on planting Jesus, and let Jesus build His church and work through His church. Our command is to connect people to Jesus as their King. We are to extend the reign of Christ on earth. The byproduct of this work is church. Organic Churches Reproduce I think we are confusing the fruit with the seed. We must plant the seed of the gospel of the Kingdom and the fruit that will grow will be changed lives living out their faith together, and that’s exactly what we mean by “church.” The true fruit of an apple tree is not an apple, but more apple trees.Within the fruit is found the seed of the next generation. Christ in us is the seed of the next generation. The difference this seed can leave in the soil of a people group is significant. We all carry within us the seed of future generations of the church. We are to take that seed and plant it in the soil of every people group under the authority of our King. The difference this seed can leave in the soil of a people group is significant. If we put Christ and His kingdom first, we leave behind agents under submission to the reign of their King.

Cultivating Fruit in its own Culture
Our mission is to find and develop Christ followers rather than church members. There is a big difference in these two outcomes. The difference is seen in transformed lives that bring change to neighborhoods and nations. Simply gathering a group of people who subscribe to a common set of beliefs is not worthy of Jesus and the sacrifice He made for us.

We have planted religious organizations rather than planting the powerful presence of Christ. Often, that organization has very Western structure, with values not found in the indigenous soil. If we would simply plant Jesus in these cultures and help His church emerge indigenously from the soil, then a self-sustaining and reproducing church movement would emerge, not dependent upon the West and not removed from the culture in which it grows. Churches don’t always bear the fruit that they should without being challenged, so it’s important to “cultivate” them by equipping them to see Christ’s life flourish in their society. Instead of ending up with groups that strive to be separate and removed from their culture, organic churches can be engaged and transformative of their culture.

Several years ago, in the midst of my foray into being a ‘corporate missionary’, I was called into my new boss’s office. He invited me to sit down at the table in the corner. He picked up some papers from his desk, walked over and sat down opposite me.

“Jim,” he said. “I am going to shoot straight with you. You are one of my most dependable people and have maybe the best work ethic of anyone I’ve ever employed. But, bottom line, here it is: I just don’t need what you do.”

With that I joined the unemployment line.

I had never been unemployed. I was just a few weeks shy of my 49th birthday (an age when people are just rushing out to hire you!), had next to no corporate experience and absolutely no skill for unemployment or for job hunting.

None of that registered with me at first. Why I would just go and find another job! I looked forward to doing that and banking the three months of severance pay I was given.

Did I get an education! The next eight months of unemployment taught me all I need to know about how it feels to be invisible. I had no network. I had loads of church experience and loads of teaching experience but had little corporate experience. On top of that, a whole lot of younger people could do what I did cheaper.

I did not get to feel the pain of rejection. I didn’t get that far. I had to feel the pain of invisibility. I felt like one of those people who stand by the highway while traffic zips by at 75 miles per hour. My sign would have read: “Ph.D. will work for food.”

Those eight months of unemployment were among the most painful months of my life not simply because of the unemployment but also because of all of that which gathers vulture-like around the unemployed. From this ten year vantage, I can see that what I experienced was something on the order of exile.

As missiologist Michael Frost has written:

“Exiles feel like a ‘motherless child’-abandoned, rootless, vulnerable, orphaned…the danger in exile is to become so pre-occupied with self that one cannot step outside oneself to rethink, reimagine and redescribe larger reality. Such self-preoccupation very rarely produces energy, courage, or freedom…” (p. 9)

For the exile reality comes down to the danger of exile: becoming so “pre-occupied with self that one cannot step outside oneself to rethink, reimagine and redescribe larger reality.” Frost’s tongue-in-cheek reminder of what it produces is almost insulting. What it produces is despair…wretched despair.

The story of blessing is, among other things a story, for exiles lost in the experience of exile. The creation story, according to some scholars, was written as an answer to the condition of the Babylonian exile. (6th century B.C.) As Brueggemann notes, it was likely written as a “refutation” of the Babylonian claim that the captivity of Israel demonstrated the superiority of their gods over the God of Israel.

The creation account was written “to despairing exiles…(and) declared that the God of Israel is the Lord of all life.” (p. 25) The story is not a pre-scientific statement about the origin of the universe as much as it is a “…pastoral statement addressed to a real historical problem.” (p. 25) The story stands as an argument against any feeling or claim that God has abandoned the exile. “Its affirmation is this: this God can be trusted even against contemporary data. The refutation of contemporary data may include sickness, poverty, unemployment, loneliness, that is, every human experience of abandonment.” (p. 25)

We have heard it put this way: “Life goes on.” We have seen the t-shirt “Life is good!” We have heard the song: “The sun’lll come out tomorrow, bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow there’ll be sun.”

What we do not often hear is the assumption behind the claim. That is what the story of creation, the story of life, the story of blessing, the story of God’s delight teaches us: that behind the momentary storm- no matter how long the moment or how great the storm- is the God who intends and assures that life goes on and that not even exile…not even death…can alter that.

Creation is our constant reminder of that. Perhaps that is why Jesus encouraged an oppressed people to take the time to consider the birds of the air and flowers of the field…even in exile…even in unemployment.

I presented my business card and website design last night to three members of the Alternative String Band, Kristin Arnold (violin), Reylynn Goessling (violin) and Krystyna Ogella (cello). They’ve green-lit the design that Michael Frost (viola) and I started collaborating on in January. We took a break from it and just resumed the collaboration last month. We wanted to make something that had a sense of symmetry, movement and tradition. I’m sending the business card design to Overnightprints.com and building the site in the coming weeks. I’ve attached the abridged process for the logo and card design below.

The Alternative String Band is a local string quartet that plays arrangements of rock ‘n roll songs such as Stairway to Heaven, Sweet Dreams Are Made of This and more. The last time they played at Fox and Goose, they stole the show from Autumn (what’s her name…folksy space case). Last night, Philip, Tracy and I got to hear them test new arrangements such as All You Need is Love, Palladio (otherwise known as the DeBeers song), With or Without You and Somewhere Out There.”

Taking a little break from our non-violence series again today, I thought I would share another book with you that I recently finished.   I know that many of you have asked for some resources and helpful books to read regarding what we call “church” and hopefully the books I mention here will be of value to you.

Today’s book is called, “Exiles” by Michael Frost.

This book is definitely one of the best books that I have read all year.  (Okay, so we’re only 6 months through the year, but I do read a lot).

The word, “Missional” is maybe the hottest church-fad word around these days.  In fact, I hear it all the time in staff meetings and among peers.

“What are we doing to be more missional?”

I hear church leaders asking this question all the time, but sometimes I wonder, “Do we even know what that means?”

The danger of “Missional” becoming the pop-church word is that it becomes absorbed into the programmatic paradigm of Western consumer-church.   “Missional” becomes just another in a long line of “cool” programs to get people into our buildings.  But mission is so much more!

If you really want to understand the concept of a “Missional Church” then this is required reading for Class 101.   “Exiles” is the missional handbook for a new generation of Jesus-followers trying to feel their way through a world that is broken and a church that feels irrelevant.

In his own words, the author says his book is written for:

“…those Christians who find themselves falling into the cracks between contemporary secular Western culture and a quaint, old-fashioned church culture of respectability and conservatism.

Michael Frost

This book is for the many people who wish to be faithful followers of the radical Jesus but no longer find themselves able to fit into the bland, limp, unsavory straitjacket of a church that seems to be yearning to return to the days when ‘everyone’ used to attend church and ‘Christian family values’ reigned.

This book is for those who can’t remain in the safe modes of church and who wish to live expansive, confident Christian lives in this world without having to abandon themselves to the values of contemporary society.  This book is for those Christians who feel themselves ready (or yearning) to jump ship but don’t want to be left adrift in a world where greed, consumerism, laziness, and materialism toss them about endlessly and pointlessly.  Such Christians live with the nagging tension of being at home neither in the world nor in the church as they’ve known it.”

If any of those words describe you or what you have felt in regards to church and life, then I would visit Amazon.com immediately and order this book.

This book is broken down into four sections that deal with the “danger” of being a self-imposed exile in this world.   According to Frost, our primary citizenship and allegiance to the kingdom of God makes us EXILES to the power structures of this world.   Thus, these “self-imposed EXILES” continue their hope and heritage by clinging to their Dangerous Memories, Promises, Criticism and Songs.  Each section has its own unique points of interest and exploration.

Among his best insights is the idea that in trying to create churches with “deep community” we have pursued the wrong goal.   Of course community is good, but community for the sake of community, Frost argues, will ultimately fail.   Real community is formed by a group of people “exiling” themselves from the way of the world and serving in the trenches of mission together.

For Frost, a common mission forges the deepest community.  Authentic and meaningful community is essential, but it is the by-product of our involvement in a mission together.   Mission is the goal; community is what happens during the journey.

If the future of church is even remotely interesting to you, I cannot recommend this book more highly.   Michael Frost writes with a very direct and honest voice that will bring enlightenment to the casual reader as well as enough research and detail to enthrall the more intense studier.    

This book is a MUST READ!

If I could, I’d hold every American Christian’s eye-lids open to make sure they finished it. 

My Rating:  4.5 out of 5 stars

Today I am going to start another dimension to this blog experience.  Not another dimension in the sense that we are going to explore alternative realities of existence, although I did watch the new STAR TREK last night and it was absolutely phenomenal!  (ok, I’m an old school trekkie, I admit it).

But, I have been reading my eyeballs out for the past few years and have come across some excellent books that have helped re-shape my thinking about God, humanity, church and life in general.

Often now I as I talk with people someone will say, “wow, that’s crazy!  I never thought of it like that… How did you come to that conclusion?”

Now, on the one hand, I like those questions because it gives me an opportunity to address a whole system of thought that I think needs voiced.  But, on the other hand, so much has shaped me, I sometimes wonder where to begin.

Many of you have also wanted to do some thinking and reading on your own about these same topics and I have tried to recommend some good resources to you as I come across them.

Along this line, about a month or so ago, I agreed to join a viral-blog group for TheOOZE.com to read and write reviews for new books.   If you have never stopped by TheOOZE.com, I would encourage you to become a regular visitor.

Those of you who really know me know that I love to read and write and so it seemed like the natural thing to do.
As I have been reading, I have found several books to be not only interesting for me personally, but the type of thing I’d love to pass on to you, if you have the same desire to continually rethink your relationship with God and this life.

So, today is my first real review.  My hope is that I will be able to convey some of the content and purpose of these works in a way that might help you decide whether it might be a helpful read for you as well.

I sincerely believe that we are in the midst of great transition in the life of humanity on this planet and in the church, especially in the West.  The more of us that are rethinking the issues of what it means to follow in the life of Jesus in this context, the better.

So happy reading and thinking!  And as you read and think, please leave a comment and contribute your own “review” to the rest of our community.

Oh, and do yourself a favor and go watch STAR TREK!

Buy your STAR TREK tickets on Fandango here!

————————————————————————————————————————————–

Today, I want to look briefly at a book called, “ReJesus” by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with these names, you should definitely pick this book up because they are among the most articulate and well-thought-out voices in the “missional theology” discussion today.  I would highly recommend nearly anything from either of these two authors to give perspective and depth to whatever you have heard called, “missional”.

At under 200-pages, I expected ReJesus to be a rather quick read.  I expected to find a popularized, easy-to-read summary of what it means to be missional.

But, while the book is clearly written and very understandable, it was anything but a quick read.  I found myself reading paragraphs over and over, not because the authors didn’t write clearly, but because there were so many thoughts to explore and rethink in every sentence.

This work is clearly more than a popularized summary of what it means to be missional.  This is a concisely written missional theology manifesto.  It has depth of thought and intentionality that went beyond my expectations.

ReJesus is a book aimed at redeveloping Christology as the center of the modern church.   Or as they state it,

“to reinstate the central role of Jesus in the ongoing spiritual life of the faith and in the life and mission of God’s people… it is an attempt to recalibrate the mission of the church around the person and work of Jesus.”

Michael Frost

The critique of the writers is that the church has, over many centuries, gotten sidetracked from the person of Jesus to a system of morality, liturgy, ritual and theology/philosophy.   Hirsch and Frost both argue that though these other things may not be necessarily bad, that our first call is to follow the life pattern of Jesus.

In this return to making Jesus central they challenge us to re-evaluate how our personal relationship to Jesus should look, how our church organization should function and work, what our preaching should focus on, and the type of things we teach and model that should prized.  It is a call to ACT and LIVE like Christ, not simply WORSHIP and THEOLOGIZE about him.

In one very excellent chapter, they even challenge our personal picture of Jesus in light of the gospels.  We are taken on a journey through the art that has depicted Jesus over the many centuries to see the impact that it has had on forming our perception of him.

Alan Hirsch

This is an excellent book.  It draws heavily on critiques of Christendom from Soren Kierkegaard and Jacques Ellul (who wrote another excellent book titled, “The Subversion of Christianity”).   It is full of quotes from both of these excellent thinkers  and is obviously heavily influenced by their work.  Both Kierkegaard and Ellul are brilliant but difficult to read, so this book may be a good source to make sense of their ideas without the extra effort.

In the end, this is a book I would highly recommend for anyone wanting to seriously wrestle with the issues that church faces in today’s culture.  I would caution that it is not an “easy read,” so if you’re looking for something a little more popular, look elsewhere.  But, for those of you who wanna dig in, get dirty and start thinking, this is the book for you.

MY RATING:  3.5 out of 5 stars

Lots to see in the blogosphere today:

• Jeff at Losing My Religion is celebrating a birthday today (5/5) and this week has a great, lengthy interview with Michael Frost, missional church guru and co-author (with Alan Hirsch) of the book ReJesus.
  
• Video book promos on YouTube are somewhat mandatory these days if you have a new release; and Tony Morgan’s gives an excellent preview of his book Killing Cockroaches without any hype.  (HT: Church Relevance blog)
  
• If you want to re-write the definitive standard for an over-the-top church website, the one for Evangel Cathedral should do it.  (HT: Pragmatic Electric blog.  Be sure to check out his Apr. 25 post, If Jesus Returns Tonight, Who Will Feed Your Pets?  It contains a vital link to Post Rapture Pets.)
• Jim Upchurch has renamed his blog, Christ: His Work and His Word.   Last weekend he wrote an excellent devotional piece, What if You Knew How and When You Would Die?
• Quoted on Bob Hyatt’s blog:  “In a faster world, maybe we need a slower church.” ~ Leighton Ford
• Two entire chapters of Hebrews.   Totally memorized.    Shared with passion by Ryan Ferguson.    Takes eleven minutes.   Google Video link here.   (HT: Tony Miano’s blog, Lawman Chronicles)
• Finally, on the lighter side; Michael Tait isn’t the newest member of Newsboys after all, as the blog Backseat Writer makes visibly clear in this post.   That’s it for today’s links.
  
• Almost every time I do links like this, I always include a link to my unpublished book The Pornography Effect: Understanding for the Wives, Mothers, Daughters, Sisters and Girlfriends, because every day there’s someone new who needs to read it.   It’s online and it’s free to read.
• Since you asked, I’m currently reading The Blue Parakeet by Scot McKnight (Zondervan) and the revised — 14 years later — edition of The King James Only Controversy by James White (Bethany House).   Both deal with the Bible and how we both read and translate it, so I don’t mind reading the two books at once.   If you want to make it a hat-trick, you’d have to add How To Choose a Bible Translation For All It’s Worth by Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss (Zondervan).
  
• Today’s cartoon is from ASBO Jesus.  Now with over 700 thought-provoking, intriguing, controversial and sometimes frustrating cartoons served.   Never a dull moment at that cartoon blog.   (It’s Brit-speak for Anti-Social Behavior Order.)
  
• Since this post is a potpourri already, the survey, which follows, is from Christianity Today and reflects that readers of its various websites have a rather secularized view of how we all got here.  If you’re going to comment on something here, this would be the one.
  Christianity Today Poll
  What best describes your view of the origins of creation?

  Young-earth creationism 10%

  Old-earth creationism 10%

  Theistic evolution 10%

  Naturalistic evolution 62%

  I don’t know 3%

  None of the above 4%

  
  Total Votes: 4153

Peruse your local bookstore or listen to your local Christian radio station and you will discover one undeniable truth – people (especially Christians) have an enormous appetite for spiritual development and formation. People yearn to be spiritual, and the very yearning is itself considered good and admirable (never mind that spirituality is practiced by people of all faiths, including those that are routinely rejected by the vast majority of people).

Here’s the problem, Jesus never talked about ‘being spiritual.’ OK, technically that’s not true; he did talk about it, but not in the popular sense. When Jesus talked about personal spirituality, it was a wake-up-call to folks who engaged in superficial spiritual practices that made them appear to be close to God when they were not.

Contrast the rows and rows of spiritual self-help books at the bookstore with the spiritual formation formula Jesus gave us: “Love God with all you have. Love your neighbor as you want to be loved. And, follow me.” That’s a big difference: rows and rows of books versus a single line of 12 pt. type.

If you happen to like Richard Foster (by the way, I do too), or Michael Frost (me too), or… name anyone here… you could point out that Jesus’ simple instructions are so tightly packed with meaning that no number of volumes could ever successfully plumb their depth – and you’d be right. But that may be precisely the point. As well intended as some spiritual formation programs may be, they might also make it easier for us to avoid the hard work of wrestling for meaning with God. Not only can spiritual practices be used to avoid wrestling with God, but they can also substitute for meaning with God. In modern Christian culture, we prefer commentary to text, explanation to exhortation. In other words, the explanation of the thing has become more important than the thing itself.

So, back to the original question: why are our bookstores filled with detailed, complicated explanations of something so simple? More importantly, why do our pastors preach as if they possessed some particular knowledge or understanding that can’t be obtained by ordinary Christians? It’s very simple, you can’t sell very many books telling folks to “Love God, love their neighbor, and follow Jesus.” Pastors can’t grow large churches just by telling folks to “Love God, love their neighbor, and follow Jesus.” Really, that’s it. Success (power, prestige, money) demands that they become experts in a field in which Jesus intended parity.

So, if that’s all there is to it, do we really need authors, pastors and spiritual formation plans? Well, surprisingly, yes. We do need them because we aren’t merely being manipulated by prurient interests, we are seeking what we want – the most complicated spiritual maze imaginable. In other words, we’re looking for a convenient excuse to fail. We need authors, pastors and spiritual formation plans to remind us of the simplicity of faith and hold us accountable to the hard work of taking Jesus’ instruction seriously. We need authors, pastors and plans that both point out and admonish us to tear down the superficial spiritual houses we tend to prefer for either selfish motives or fear. Sadly, they are more often complicit in our superficiality.

Being people who live in the way of Jesus is simpler than you think. It doesn’t require extravagant spiritual formation plans, 40-day encounters or the gifted oratory of clever theologians to accomplish. Jesus didn’t tell his disciples that he’d teach them to become spiritual giants – he said he’d teach them to become fishers of men. Are we willing to put our personal aspirations aside in order to learn what Jesus is teaching: or, would we rather be spiritual?

I just finished reading a book, “ReJesus” by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost.  I will be doing a full book review tomorrow, however, there was a great quote that I thought I would post today.   The quote comes as a bit of a “side-note” in the greater context of the book, but is well worth the space re-typing it  here.

————————————————————————————————————————-

“For many suburban, middle-class churches, niceness is the supreme expression of discipleship.  But any cursory reading of the Gospels will serve to remind you that Jesus wasn’t always nice.  He was good.  He was loving.  He was compassionate.  But he wasn’t always nice.  The church must abandon its preference for good-manners piety and adopt again the kingdom values as taught by Jesus.

Allow us to give you an example.  Some time ago Michael wrote an article for a Sydney newspaper, commenting on the influence of Sydney’s largest church, Hillsong.  In the article, he defended the church against various attacks in the media, but he also gently raised his concerns about Hillsong’s emphasis on prosperity doctrine (the so-called health and wealth gospel).  He received an avalanche of letters and emails berating him for daring to be publicly critical of another church.  A significant number of these angry correspondents claimed that it was un-Christlike to criticize the church in any way.

Now, whether you agree with Michael’s decision to write such a thing in the media or not is beside the point.  But the point is that somehow these people, most of them ministers, failed to recognize that Jesus was regularly and scathingly critical of the religious leaders of his faith community.  Furthermore, Jesus’ seven messages to the seven churches in the book of Revelation (Rev. 2:1-3:22) contain plenty of harsh critical comments directed at the church!

To claim that it is un-Christlike to criticize the church is to disregard the example of Jesus.”

—————————————————————————————————————————

Wow!  Nicely said.  In the Spirit of Jesus and the personality of those like yesterday’s Soren Kierkegaard, maybe the call is for at least a few to become this new voice of reformation in the church today.   Could it be that what is needed is not so much a voice that is critical of unbelievers, but an “inner-voice” within the church that is critical of what we have created out of Jesus’ teachings and life?

Of course there is no room for a spirit of meanness, disrespect and destruction, but maybe as much as any time in history, the church needs the new voices of Luther, Kierkegaard, Calvin and even Jesus Himself to be heard.

Rather than reacting with anger towards these voices calling us to reform, perhaps it is time to evaluate the merit of what is being said and look again with a critical eye at the static religion we have created out of the wild and beautiful revolution Jesus initiated.

Possibly we are due for a total re-calibration and re-centering on the person of Jesus in our organizational churches.

For a great start to this discussion, consider picking up a copy of “ReJesus“.

Think about it…

Als kleiner Zusatz hier eine Übersicht über Links zur Konferenz mit Michael Frost im März 2009 und zur Emergent Church-Bewegung:

I’m one chapter shy of finishing the latest book by Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church, for an upcoming Leadership Journal review.  These two Aussies are some of the most prolific writers and thinkers these days about all things missional. (See, for example, Hirsch’s recent article in LJ, Defining Missional.)  In this book the authors explore their regular claim that all missiology must begin with the doctrine of the Trinity rather than ecclesiology.  In other words, mission proceeds from the very nature of God rather than from any theology of the church.

I’ve appreciated the book, but will save any commentary for the LJ review.  However, there is one quote towards the end of the book that is too good to wait.  Of the tendency to prioritized the Bible over Jesus the authors write,

In a way we are not really the “people of the Book,” as we are so often called- as far as we can ascertain, it was the Muslims [who] gave us this tag.  In a far more fundamental way we can claim rather that we are truly Jesus’ people before we are anything else. Our focal point remains the Messiah, and we must be guided by the Bible toward a true experience and understanding of Messiah.

This seems like a fairly straightforward aspect of Christianity but often doesn’t play out this way.   People often tell me the primary problem with present-day Christianity is lack of Biblical knowledge.  I’d argue that the real issue any time Christianity goes off track (as it often has) is when the person of Jesus is set aside.  Frost and Hirsch are right that the Bible guides “toward a true experience and understanding” of Jesus, but the Bible can never replace the actual focus of the Christian’s worship.

As always, I’m curious about your take on this.  I imagine many of you have observed the tendency to prioritize the Bible to the point that Jesus becomes of secondary importance.

Michael Frost, bekannter Vertreter der Emergent-Church Bewegung  (manchmal auch Emerging Church) und Buchautor, hat an einem Kongress zur Zukunft der Kirche drei Gründe dafür genannt, dass “Mission” als zentrales Organisationsprinzip von Kirchen stehen sollte:

1. Theologischer Grund: Missio Dei = Gott zeigt sich als ein gesendeter und sendender Gott – durch die gesamte Bibel (vom Wort, das er aussendet und die Welt erschafft über den Hauch, mit der er die Menschen lebendig macht, bis hin zu Jesus, der der Gesandte Gottes ist) Gott selber sendet sich in die Welt hinein und so sind alle gesendet, dazu aufgerufen, über sich hinaus zu gehen.

2. Kultureller Grund: Der säkularisierte Westen ist bezüglich der religiösen Sozialisation ein multikultureller Kontext geworden. Leute, die keine kirchlichen Bezugspunkt hatten, kommen nie mehr “zurück zur Kirche”. Sie werden nie mehr in Gottesdienste kommen – auch wenn dort die tollste Musik gespielt wird und die bequemsten Sofas stehen.  Der gesellschaftliche Fluss fliesst inzwischen woanders. Deshalb muss sich die Kirche aufmachen und zu den Menschen gehen, wo sie sind.

3. Praktischer Grund: Mission als Organisationsprinzip verändert die anderen Bereiche einer Kirche (Verkündigung, Gemeinschaft, Unterricht) viel stärker als umgekehrt.

So fordert Michael Frost auf, radikal die Denkrichtung zu drehen. Nicht mehr attraktionale Kirche sein mit der Idee, dass alle kommen, sobald wir genügend attraktive Angebote haben. Sondern inkarnierende Kirche zu sein, die hinaus geht und mit offenen Augen und Ohren und Herzen sieht, wo die Menschen leben und in welcher Kultur sie sind und was sie benötigen.

Ziel all dieser Bemühung ist, das Gottesreich bereits spürbar zu machen. Einem Trailer ähnlich, der im Kino läuft, um den Blockbuster schmackhaft zu machen. Denn die missio dei – die Mission Gottes hat nichts weniger im Sinn als Liebe, Friede, soziale Gerechtigkeit für die ganze Kreatur.

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

So ergibt sich ein Ausgangspunkt bei der Christologie. Wir müssen zuerst über den Inhalt des Evangeliums neu nachdenken. Daraus ergibt sich dann eine Missiologie (ein total neues Verständnis davon, das auf keinen Fall dieselben Fehler machen darf, wie sie jahrhundertelang in Afrika und andernorts machte). Und erst dann ergeben sich Gedanken zu einer Ekklesiologie, dazu wie die Kirche aussehen soll.

In einer Pause erzählte mir Michael Frost, dass er in Deutschland und in den englischsprachigen Ländern die Landeskirchen als diejenigen erlebt, die innovativer und experimenteller mit den Emergent Church-Ideen umgehen. Dies deshalb, weil sie nichts mehr zu verlieren haben (im Unterschied zu einer Freikirche mit vielleicht 200 oder 300 Mitgliedern) und weil doch noch einiges an finanziellen Ressourcen vorhanden ist.

An einem Workshop am Nachmittag (Folien des Referats hier) haben dann vier reformierte Theologen aus dem Kanton Zürich versucht, die Emergent Church Ideen für den landeskirchlichen Kontext umzusetzen. Ralph Kunz, Theologieprofessor an der Uni Zürich, Kari Flückiger, Beauftragter für Gemeindeaufbau der Zürcher Kirche, Thomas Bachofen und Thomas Schaufelberger, Gemeindepfarrer im Kanton Zürich, haben zunächst einen Überblick über die Gemeindeaufbau-Bewegungen gegeben. Gemäss Ralph Kunz befinden sich alle bisherigen Modelle in einer Sackgasse. Thomas Schaufelberger hat den Blick geöffnet hin zur postmodernen Organisationstheorie, welche ein neues Modell von Organisationen andenkt. Es ist am besten mit Stichworten wie “lernende Organisation” oder “Selbstorganisation” zu umschreiben. Thomas Bachofen erläuterte dann einen Veränderungsprozess  mit neueren Methoden in einer Kirchgemeinde. Schliesslich leitete Kari Flückiger eine Sequenz in der die rund 40 Teilnehmenden dazu aufgefordert wurden, im landeskirchlichen Kontext Orte und Räume zu entdecken, um mit den Menschen zu sein.

Die Tagung bot Gelegenheit für eine äusserst befruchtende Diskussion, die noch weiter gehen muss. Wie die Emergent Church Bewegung in der Landeskirche Gestalt annimmt, muss noch offen bleiben. Zwei Dinge wurden dennoch schon klar: Will sie im landeskirchlichen Kontext eine Wirkung erzielen, muss sie sich aus dem evangelikalen Umfeld, in dem sie sich momentan befindet, befreien.  Um ein Wort von Michael Frost aufzunehmen: Die Emergent Church Bewegung muss sich erst noch Kontextualisieren im landeskirchlich-theologischen Raum. Was bestimmt nicht funktioniert (obwohl der Versuch an dieser Tagung deutlich spürbar war) ist, dass alte, überholte und etwas verstaubte, evangelikale Konzepte wieder aus Schubladen hervor geholt werden. Emergent Church ist ein Neuansatz mit radikalen Konsquenzen. Alle die sich erhoffen, dass endlich alte Postulate erfüllt werden, werden wohl enttäuscht werden.

Fazit: Spannend ist der Emergent Church Ansatz weil er eine radikale Umorientierung der kirchlichen Handlungsfelder vorschlägt. Wichtig ist dabei aber, dass das Wort “Mission” nicht mit altem Inhalt gefüllt wird. Es ist neu zu definieren, nämlich als konsequente Hinwendung zur Kultur und Lebenswirklichkeit der entkirchlichten Menschen im Westen. Spannend bleibt dieser Ansatz nur, wenn er sich aus den alten Mustern (liberal/evangelikal) befreien kann.

Link: Artikel zum Kongress auf livenet.ch

The degree to which a group is committed to the accomplishment of individual transformation may have a direct negative correlation to its success at achieving its goal. This would explain why small groups, as well as, simple, organic, house and cell-churches have been ineffective in long-term transformation of either individuals or communities in North America. The sum of the parts does not equal the whole.

I am not saying that small groups, simple, organic, house and cell-churches fail to produce transformed lives – they do - that is why they continue to grow.  Nor am I saying that larger and more established churches always produce transformed lives – they don’t - that is why people are increasingly turning to alternative faith communities.  What I am saying is that individual transformations, no matter how numerous, will neither transform a community, nor produce long-term transformation in the individual.  The one advantage the larger institution has over the smaller is the possession of a structure and scale which diminish the individual (which is one of the main reasons people check out of them) and focus upon the collective.

Either group, but especially the smaller one, will by virtue of its relational closeness, tend to focus upon individuals and the small group dynamic without establishing, building and maintaining relational bridges to the outside world.  All groups, large and small, will fail to look outward unless they are carefully structured and intentionally maintained to do so.  Left to the individualized expressions of hospitality and generosity, the group will devolve into its own cosmos and personal development and group cohesion will be mistaken for group health.  The larger group is not immune to this phenomena, but it is, in my opinion, less vulnerable to it.

Once again, the teaching of Jesus is instructive. Jesus taught that the way of individualism and self-transformation (self-service) is the way to death. The way to life – His Way – is the way of service to the larger community through the expression of love to our neighbor. Only when the community shares the common goal of mission – brining marginalized people to center to experience the love and acceptance of true belonging (learning to ‘be with others’) does the entire community become transformed and community life resemble that of Kingdom life. Communities formed in reaction to another, rather than choosing to belong with others in a reformed and transformed community life, cannot achieve community transformation because the group was founded with the ethos of separation and isolation.

I realize I just picked a fight with a number of very popular authors and theorists, and that I’ve broken ranks with a growing horde of folks who find the institutional church less and less fulfilling. My point is that the lack of fulfillment is not with the product of a flawed institution (‘institutions’ are what you make of them, no more, no less) but of the self-seeking goals of its members. More remarkable should be the fact that social theorists have come to understand mission (see the definition above) as the essential characteristic of transforming communities before many of the leading voices in the church.  No matter what you have read about the demise of modernity, there’s no denying that rampant individualism is alive and well in America.

I have much more to say on the matter, but holding to the basic belief that all transformation is inherently linguistic (our conversations, which include our interactions and actions, shape us in more profound ways than we realize – this is why debate must always accompany action, to do otherwise is to continue the policy of reaction and isolation), I would rather begin a conversation. In light of that, I’d like to offer a partial bibliography of works that are shaping my thoughts on the matter. You may wish to peruse some of them as well – either way; you will at least know I am not a lone voice crying in the wilderness…

- the Gospel of Luke (any Gospel will do, but Luke majors in missional community)
- the book of Revelation (read Genesis 1-3, then flip ahead to the end – it’s all about community)
- Community: the structure of belonging, by Peter Block
- Theology for the Community of God, by Stanley Grenz
- Exiles, by Michael Frost
- Missional Church, by Darrell Guder
- Life Together, by Dietrich Bonhoeffer
- A Community of Character, by Stanley Hauerwas
- The Challenge of Jesus, by N.T. Wright (specifically, the chapter “Walking Emmaus”)
- Cadences of Home, by Walter Brueggemann

All of the above books can be found and purchased in Ichabod’s Reading Room in the right hand sidebar.

Am IGW-Kongress mit Michael Frost gibt es für Interessierte aus Landeskirchen die Gelegenheit, die Ideen von Michael Frost, die Emerging-Church Bewegung und ihre Konsequenzen im landeskirchlichen Kontext zu diskutieren. Am Donnerstag, 26. März 2009, sind Tagesgäste aus Landeskirchen zugelassen. Am Morgen findet das Referat von Michael Frost statt. Am Nachmittag der Workshop

Emerging Church in landeskirchlichen Strukturen: Finden und Wecken!

mit Ralph Kunz, Professor Uni Zürich, Thomas Bachofner und Thomas Schaufelberger, Gemeindepfarrer im Kanton Zürich, und Karl Flückiger, Fachstelle Gemeindeaufbau der Zürcher Landeskirche.

Die Kosten für den Tag inkl. Verpflegung betragen 30.– für Studenten (mit Znacht 40.–) und 90.– für Berufstätige. Zahlbar vor Ort. Treffpunkt ist der Kongressort am 26.3.09 um 9 Uhr: www.igwevents.eu/infos/karte-ch

Anmeldung bis 20.3.09 via Mail an Alexandra Eisenring: alexandra.eisenring@zh.ref.ch Aufkunft bei Karl Flückiger 044 258 92 43.

Anmeldeinformationen: frost-26-marz-09

In the book, Cadences of Home: Preaching Among Exiles, Walter Brueggemann warns that the great danger of exile is becoming so preoccupied with self that one is effectively blinded to the larger, communal reality. The exile is unable to describe, imagine or live in the hope of a larger (and truer) reality. Fear, malaise and restriction, he goes on to say, are the marks of a community that is so self-obsessed. Sound familiar?

While exiles yearn for a new reality (a better reality), they find themselves increasingly isolated by the fear-driven obsessions of personal growth and individualized spiritual disciplines. Michael Frost characterizes the individualization of spiritual practice as the,

“root of the problem of the church today. Victimized by nostalgia and buffeted by fear, the church is focused too much on merely holding the small plot of ground that it currently occupies to confidently reimagine a robust future. The result is a retreat into some fundamentalist us-versus-them model…”

Community transformation is inherently emerging – it is alive and responsive to the Spirit of God and the faith community (the Great Commandment). If we continue to approach spiritual disciplines, spiritual formation and discipleship from an individualized perspective, we will continue to live as exiles. But, if we begin to approach spiritual growth and formation from the perspective of community life, seeking the miraculous transformation of an entire people instead of individual persons, we might just see a community with the faith and courage to imagine and begin living in the hope of a new and better reality.

Some years ago Stanley Hauerwas wrote Community of Character: a book which has profoundly shaped my understanding of the power of story to create, define, empower or limit a people. We recognize this power when we retell the stories of our spiritual ancestors: Abraham, Moses, Rahab, Joshua, Gideon, David, Elijah, Daniel, Mary and Jesus. We continue the tradition when we give testimony to the saving grace of the Spirit of God in our own lives. We retell these stories because they give us hope: if God transformed David’s heart, He can transform mine as well. Much less often, are the stories of Israel and the early Church being retold.

If our communities are exemplified by individual, isolated transformations, perhaps it is partly due to the stories we tell. Maybe our stories (testimonies) are limited to those involving individuals who have escaped an exile in which the larger community still wallows. Is the controlling metaphor of our faith one of individual escape (salvation) and prosperity (growth, or discipleship), rather than one of a people returning from exile and flourishing in the Kingdom Come? If so, what will it take to change, and are we willing to sacrifice ourselves for a bold, new world, an uncertain path and unprecedented hope in a future of God’s design? I’d like to know.

From the “It’s a small world” file, Lee Camp is quoted in Alan Hirsch’s new book Re-Jesus, and Lee Camp is a friend of mine who executive produces the Tokens radio show here in Nashville.

Actually, perhaps it’s not that the world is small, but that I know just a few people and they all know each other. Either way, you’ll want to check out the sample chapters Hirsch provides for free on his website.

In the book, Hirsch and co-author Michael Frost aim to “refound” the church on its foundation—Jesus—with questions like: How is the Christian religion informed and shaped by the Jesus we meet in the Gospels? In how many ways do we domesticate the radical Revolutionary in order to sustain our religion and religiosity? And how can a rediscovery of Jesus renew our discipleship, the Christian community, and the ongoing mission of the church?

I agree with the authors’ assessment that we as a church “seem a little lost, if truth be told, and no quick-fix church-growth solution can be found that can stop the hemorrhage. There is no doubt that we face a spiritual, theological, missional and existential crisis in the West.”

I can’t wait to read the whole thing. And to see if I know any others quoted in the intros.

In the book Exiles (see recent post for review) , Michael Frost mentions the acronym BELLS as a simple rule/order his church community are based around. Below is a brief explanation of BELLS lifted directly from their website. [via smallboatbigsea.com]

BLESSING – The Hebrew for ‘blessing’ (barak) means “to empower to strength”. We seek God’s blessing and pass that blessing on to others.

EATING – Sharing food has always been central to a shared life of community. We want to place worship and communion back where it began: as a providore’s delight in the middle of the shared table.

LISTENING – We believe that God is capable of speaking to us. We do not confine him to any particular medium, but we try to be attentive to his voice, wherever and whenever it speaks.

LEARN – We desire to take on the image of God and to participate in his plan. We seek out knowledge about God to help us to do this.

SENT – We are ambassadors who bear God’s image in the world. We remind ourselves regularly that we are sent to participate in God’s activity in the world.

Exiles, Michael Frost

In Exiles:Living Missionally in a Post Christian Culture, Michael Frost explores how christians ought to live out their faith in a secular environment.  Frost draws comparisons between Babylon’s conquest of the Jewish people (especially as told in the book of Daniel) and the fall of Christendom. The antidote, he suggests, is to firstly remind ourselves of how dangerous a life of obedience to God can be.  This is not a nostalgic  call of return to how things were, but a pressing forwards and embracing of the grave situation that is before us.  All this could be misunderstood as a dire lament, but for Frost it is more akin to the Old Testament concept of  the “Remant” and the joy of a redemptive God. Frost (among other things) calls for a reiteration of Jesus’ fully divine and human nature. For the church to return to a trinitarian theology, covenantal expression, catholic orientation with a missional intent.  His basic rule for community BELLS is also noteworthy. Much of this book is practical and may not be that eye-opening for those already interested in missional living (eg. he suggests hanging out in coffee shops).  There are moments when pop-culture topics such as recycling and eating organically were for me a distraction, but this book laced with great insight and sound advice. His reshaping of Brother Lawrence’s  “The Practice of the Presence of God” is already amongst my essential teaching tools.

I got in the mail this week the new book ReJesus by my friends and former colleagues Mike Frost and Alan Hirsch. I really encourage you to go out and pick up this book. While the missional church discussion continues to rage, Al and Mike remind us that everything that we do is based around the person of Christ. The book reminds us that Christ does not fit easily into our agenda’s, but rather that we need to fit into the agenda of the radical, wild God/Man Rabbi from Nazareth. Pick it up here

Also just a quick link, another friend Mark Conner has written a wise and well informed response to the suggestions made by some leaders here in Australia regarding our recent tragic bushfires being an act of God’s judgement. Read it here.

Michael Frost, a great thinker and writer on the topic of missions rocks my world.  His ideas have shaped the way that I think about what the church is to be.  He has shaped how I see God. Specifically, he has helped me move from thinking about missions, as something that we do (an activity), to mission or being missional which reconceptualizes mission to be something that we are.   If missions is embraced as something that is essentially rooted in the heart of God that is expressed in the whole of our lives, it will shake us.  It will shake our boxes and systems and borders. I’ve found this  shift to be dangerous for my comfort. However,  as I’ve begun to embrace the reality of missional living along side of Libbie and great friends, I have found beauty along side of danger the whole way.  It makes the world more colorful.  It makes God bigger.  It makes our lives mean something more.  

Here is a video of Michael Frost speaking about what it means for the church to embrace missions in this new light.  

I’d like to thank David for his willingness to partcipate in my interview. I’ve never met him in person (yet), but I perceive a gracious spirit in this brother as well as a sharp intellect and a genuine heart for God and His people.

To David — a few thoughts in response to our interview. I’ll number them for ease of reading:

1. Like you, I have great respect for John H. Yoder. I particularly love his “hermeneutics of peoplehood” and his no-compromise statements on contra the “religious specialist” (the clergy). As a tag to this blog, I’ve quoted some of his words on this score.

Stanley Hauerwas is brilliant. One of the things that I appreciate about him is his passion and his unwillingness to sugar-coat his message. For that reason, he tends to polarize his audience. People love what he says or they hate it. Few sit in the middle. Personally, I believe we need more people of his tribe. When I think of people like Hauerwas and Tony Campolo (another mad man), Tozer’s words come to mind:

If Christianity is to receive a rejuvenation it must be by other means than any now being used. If the church in the second half of [the twentieth] century is to recover from the injuries she suffered in the first half, there must appear a new type of preacher. The proper, ruler-of-the-synagogue type will never do. Neither will the priestly type of man who carries out his duties, takes his pay and asks no questions, nor the smooth-talking pastoral type who knows how to make the Christian religion acceptable to everyone. All these have been tried and found wanting. Another kind of religious leader must arise among us. He must be of the old prophet type, a man who has seen visions of God and has heard a voice from the Throne. When he comes (and I pray God there will not be one but many) he will stand in flat contradiction to everything our smirking, smooth civilization holds dear. He will contradict, denounce and protest in the name of God and will earn the hatred and opposition of a large segment of Christendom.

It’s been my observation that such people are often hated, abused, personally judged, and trashed by a certain portion of the Christian population; yet God uses them to effect lasting change in His church.

2. You write: “I was really discontent with the unquestioned assumptions that drove the status quo …” You get three cheers for that sentence

3. You also said: “I saw young pastors getting killed.” A large portion of my email is from such folks, though some of these folks aren’t so young.

4. Another memorable statement: “Everything I was learning from Scripture and the history of the church suggested this was more a creation of American business than faithfulness to being God’s people in the world. Does that sound harsh? Whoah sorry!”

[Cough], you’re joking right? Have you not read Pagan Christianity? No, I don’t think you were harsh at all. We’re tracking very closely here. I would simply add that it’s not just the mega-church movement that is creating “churches” patterned after GM and Microsoft. It’s most traditional/institutional churches today. Size is really irrelevent here. Mega-churches just blow the problem up more so that it’s easier to see. Would you not agree?

5. Again you say: “I hope people reflect on what we’re doing! And probe the assumptions that drive us to do what we do in the name of church. I hope for a renewed faithfulness in our time to being God’s people in the world.” We’re tracking 100% here. Scarey.

Question on this score: Do you think it’s possible that there are assumptions that you yourself have about church and leadership that haven’t been probed yet?

6. Regarding what comes first mission or church — missiology or ecclesiology, I think it boils down to how one defines mission. For instance, if we define “the mission” as God’s Eternal Purpose, as I do, then mission proceeds ecclesiology because it produces the ekklesia. But if we define it through the lens of D.L. Moody, which is so often the case today, then it simply means bringing the gospel to lost souls and seeing them converted. Evangelism flows out of the ekklesia. It’s what she, the organism of the church, does biologically when she is following her spiritual instincts. But it’s not the only thing she does. Nor is it the most important. God’s purpose goes far beyond the saving of lost souls (or whatever language one likes to use for that).

I personally think that within the modern missional movement there’s massive confusion on the difference between what Luke calls “the work” and “the church.”

The work is the regional, traveling, itinerant ministry of apostolic workers. The goal of the work is to produce local, corporate expressions of Jesus Christ (ekklesias). Workers, however, are produced by the church. Which comes first? It’s a chicken-egg situation. The church produces workers and workers raise up the church.

I’m really not sure how helpful it is to argue over what comes first, mission or church. To my mind, that line of thinking often leads us to the same place that fruitless Word vs. Spirit debates take us. Not very far.

I could be wrong about this, but I think it’s far more important to understand what God’s mission is exactly. I’ve done some surveys on this question among my friends in the missional church movement, and one thing stands out. When that question is raised, things get really murky.

That brings us back to the question of the Eternal (or Ageless) Purpose of God, as Paul calls it in Ephesians. I believe that this is the critical issue of the missional church conversation today.

7. You talk about how you’ve seen missional communities meeting in various places. Most are not bigger than 200 members. Some are smaller than 40. My question: What do these particular communites look like exactly?

Specifically, what do their corporate gatherings look like? Do they have the typical (500 year old) Sunday morning order of worship with songs led by a worship team or leader, a sermon given by a pastor, offering, etc.? Or do they map more to the NT vision of open-participatory gatherings under the headship of Jesus Christ? And what does their day-to-day life like together look like? I’d be interested in hearing this.

Please also add what your own congregation looks like in their corporate gatherings and in the daily life of the assembly. If the readers of this blog were to visit and observe your church for two solid weeks, what would we see? Give us a blow-by-blow of a typical week or two in the life of David Fitch’s church.

8. A final question: Some of the readers of this blog were tracking with you until you begain explaing the leadership schema of your church.

First, in your answer, it didn’t appear that there were any other leaders aside from pastors or shepherds.

Second, you seem to draw a distinction between pastors and shepherds. You said you have 3 pastors and 12 shepherds. Can you ’splain?

Third, how is your view of the pastor (as an office/role) different from the office and role of the modern Protestant pastor which has no biblical merit?

I look forward to your answers ….

From the pen of John Howard Yoder

“The whole concern of Reformation theology was to justify restructuring the organized church without shaking its foundations.”

“There are few more reliable constants running through all human society than the special place every human community makes for the professional religionist . . . But if we were to ask whether any of the N.T. literature makes the assumptions listed — Is there one particular office in which there should be only one or a few individuals for whom it provides a livelihood, unique in character due to ordination, central to the definition of the church and the key to her functioning? Then the answer from the biblical material is a resounding negation [no].”

“The conclusion is inescapable that the multiplicity of ministries is not a mere adiaphoron, a happenstance of only superficial significance, but a specific work of grace and a standard for the church.”

“Losing the specific and original trait of the primitive community, the church by and large became again subject to the usual anthropologically universal pattern of the single, sacramentally qualified religionist. By and large . . . this pattern has continued to our day in churches of every polity and theology.”

“Let us then ask first not whether there is a clear, solid concept of preaching, but whether there was in the N.T. one particular preaching office, identifiable as distinctly as the other ministries. Neither in the most varied picture (Corinthians) nor in the least varied (Pastoral Epistles) is there one particular ministry thus defined.”