Stewart 5

I am aware that in choosing to link my blog posts to facebook, when I write something it drops the first few lines to my fb posts.  Consequently, I should really come up with something much more compelling to get you to keep reading than this: A couple of thoughts from my reading of Transforming Mission by David Bosch – chapter 6: The Missionary Paradigm in the Eastern Church [patristic era]

First, I should begin by saying that I am part of an awesome reading group – all practitioners and thinkers who are really wrestling with the challenging ideas Bosch presents.  Every time we meet, our discussions are always personal and meaningful, never purely philosophical.  Yes!  As such, no need to give  abook report of the chapter.  Rather, just want to offer a few thoughts on two quotes/idea from this particular chapter on the Church’s thoughts on mission in the Greek Patristic era.  They aren’t necessarily even major points of the section, but ones that jumped out at me.  Can’t wait to hear what Tom has to say on this chpater, as this era is where he has been studying.

“In the final analysis, it was not the miracles of the itinerant evangelists and wandering monks that impressed the populace – miracle workers were a familiar phenomenon in the ancient world – but the exemplary lives of ordinary Christians” (p. 191, referencing Kretschmar).

Is this true, or do I just want it to be?  I DO believe that the greatest witness is a transformed life.  But where we live, miracle workers sure do get a lot of press, and there are plenty to go around.  I suppose part of the argument is that miracles draw crowds, but changed lives keep them coming.  But what about revolutions?  Isn’t there always some spark – generally a person or a few people – who exemplify, demonstrate, and propagate something new?  To be fair Bosch continues to spell out what these changed lives looked like and how this was so counter cultural at the time that people couldn’t help but notice.

Maybe that’s the better measure – lives transformed not just to “good” – but to radically different from and prophetic to – the culture around us.  I can get behind that.  Sadly, when we envision a life changed by Jesus, it is generally so pedestrian that I don’t think many people notice at all.  I don’t mean that we all have to become John the Baptist types, but I do think we have exceptionally low understanding and expectation for the life God would hope for us… that He has made possible for us…. that could indeed transform our world.

Are you with me people?

Second quote:

“…For a while, the church had to forfeit its opportunity for rapid growth ; it devoted its time and energy to finding clarity on crucial theological issues and to consolidating internally” (p. 200).

Hmmmm.  Can it be that all those eras of Church history that I look on with disdain, the ones where we spent more time arguing with ourselves than extending God’s love to anyone else, might have actually been necessary?  Granted, Bosch is not justifying all the crapola in Church history.  But he does give me reason to pause and drop some of my judgmental attitude.  I do believe in seasons of rest, rhythms of life – maybe that applies [and should/must apply] to the Church itself?

Case in point – the Church today.  Are we still seriously arguing about the rapture, emerging church, and original sin?  Yes we are.  And I have so little time for it.  BUT, maybe we’re in one of those times of regrouping.  Makes sense.  We’ve come off a long run of being the big influence in culture and are now faced with our loss of voice.  I don’t think anyone still tries to argue that we are in the middle of massive paradigm shift.  Everything is changing.  So, maybe we do need to get our act together.  I still don’t think that means endless arguments over trivia to the neglect of partnering with God’s Kingdom, but maybe it’s not that either/or.  And MAYBE we actually do need to get it together to address whatever our world will look like tomorrow.  Not the message, but certainly how it is presented lived.

That’s a beauty of Bosch’s work.  He makes such a good case that the Church has indeed approached mission (and it’s own self-understanding) quite differently over the ages.  No need to fear change, or think we are being unfaithful to the Church of the ages.  Rather, this is how God has always worked, and presumably will continue.

How will we respond?

May your life be transformed today, even if it means resting a bit.  I find that sometimes, this is when God does the most work in us.

Comments(1)

Was part of a great book discussion today on David Bosh’s crazy-good, often referred to, yet under appreciated Transforming Mission.  Bosch’s book is one of those that for some reason I have never got around to reading – until now.  So glad I am.  Beyond the reading, the discussions look like they will be both fun and challenging.  It’s nice to talk with a bunch of people who have hearts that resonate, and “get” one another.  So, we can dive deeper than just discussing theological/philosophical concepts to why and how it matters for our lives.  I think that just maybe we will find some ways to put parts into practice together as well.   Tom, Cobus, and Chris have written about this conversation/their thoughts.  I am sure that   Sure Joe will as well (especially since I just called him out).

So much that I would like to comment on, but I’ll save for other posts.  For now, maybe just a quote from the end of the chapter we were discussing.  I didn’t get a chance to say anything in our group, so here’s my chance…

In discussing the ways in which the early church participated in living signs of the Kingdom, Bosch maintains that they did so in a manner consistent with Jesus.  However, they failed in at least 3 ways.  First, the early church too quickly established what separated themselves from others rather than their calling and responsibility toward these others.  Second, the movement turned into an institution.  Third, the growing church marginalized the Jews (those from whom they were birthed).  Those of you who have studied organizations know that these are pretty common in the life cycle of any movement.  We always wonder how to influence the process so that institutionalization/fossilization doesn’t take place in some inevitable fashion.  I would dare say that this has happened with the emerging church in the USA (but Tony, I think you have wisely and subversively multiplied influence by deconstruction, perhaps preempting the process? – yet another blog post I should write).

Then Bosch throws in this little nugget that has left me thinking a lot: “Very few people can be both at the periphery and at the center at the same time.  And even if they do manage that, they usually do so only for a very short while” (52).  Crap!  We’re trying so hard to be a church for all people.  A place where homeless and affluent rub shoulders, where radical discipleship is the norm, not the exception.  Are you saying we can’t live on the edge and in the middle of society?

Bosch is right, I think.  All my years (oh so many years, at that) seem to point that way.  You choose to live on the edge or at the center.  Lots of young, excited, or naive people get started on the fringes.  What usually happens over time?  They get sucked toward the middle.  They become jaded, disenchanted, tired of fighting the system, or just plain selfish.  The middle has a strong pull, doesn’t it?  But I repeat: YOU CAN CHOOSE TO LIVE ON THE EDGE OR AT THE CENTER.

The edge is scary, risky, exciting, unknown, and the place of miracles because God is needed.  It’’s real reality, the “thin place” where heaven and earth come close together.  It’s the place of angels and demons.  It’s where we see God’s Kingdom coming.  It’s where I want to be.  If I must choose between the periphery and center, I choose the edge.

I choose the edge.

Comments(2)