Introduction and Overview (Gordon Cotterill)
Discussion Point #2
The Framework of the Mission in Practice module is outlined as following the observations of Hirsch and Frost:-
"Christology determines missiology, and missiology determines ecclesiology..." (Hirsch and Frost 2003)In other words our understanding of Christ's life and ministry should shape our understanding of mission and that is what should shape our understanding of Church.
Do you see benefits of such a focus?
Give examples of the dangers of an ecclesiology not founded on an understanding of Christ centred mission.
Does such a framework limit our understanding of mission?
posted by ETLnetwork at 11:38 AM
18 Comments:
We need to look to the person of Christ if we are to affective in Mission. The dangers of not doing this can be quite dramatic. A few years ago I was a member of a Mission Council at a large SA church. There was a proposal to erect a large wooden cross in the Worship hall which would be back lit and fixed to the wall behind the platform. Most seemed to agree with the proposal. However, one person (who is a highly devoted Christian) objected to the Cross on the grounds that it might offend groups that hired our building, and may affect funding from the local council for the Corps. This person was part of Corps finance team. The Cross was never erected. We are Christ-Centred in all we do . If we lose that focus then we are in danger of going off down paths that take us away from God. There are no dangers in my mind of having a narrow Christ focussed Mission, because if it is not Christ- centred we should not be doing it. In the Gospels Christ left us a blue print of how to engage in effective mission. It is as relevant today as it always was.
Chris Hall
Deborah, I like your statement, ‘that anyone with a Bible has the same blue print to refer to’. (I read through a short book by Lesllie Newbigin called Mission in Christ’s Way and would recommend it). Newbigin outlines Christ’s life and ministry, which further helped shape my understanding of mission in the church. To work out God’s mission it is imperative to focus upon Christ’s life and ministry.
Having listened to Chick Yuill’s lecture on the ‘Dying Church’ he raised many questions regarding priorities other than Jesus, sadly could it be TSA focus was not on Jesus’ ministry but instead had erred to its own established traditions? Chick Yuill spoke of many issues that have taken our eyes away from Jesus and we need to be repentant of those. I am currently in an appointment where we are preparing for our valedictory meeting, why . . . because people wanted to be maintained rather than be involved in God’s mission. Chick Yuill (lecture of Mission for Matrix) spoke of a quote in a SA periodical, ‘musicians are the backbone of TSA’, where does that put our focus?
Could it be suggested that the establishment of the Church has been a hindrance to the religious lifestyle. Applying a style, which was more suited to pre-modern and modern times, will have little appeal to draw those who are seriously seeking the spiritual encounter in their lives.
Carol Skene
"In the Gospels Christ left us a blue print of how to engage in effective mission."
I like the point Chris - isn't amazing that 2000 years on we seem to have so many blue prints?
----
"Applying a style, which was more suited to pre-modern and modern times, will have little appeal to draw those who are seriously seeking the spiritual encounter in their lives."
I understand Carol perfectly the point you are making - but is this a call for relevance or is it pointing to something more profound?
Gordon
I'm intrigued by Carol's suggestion that the Church can be a hindrance to people's religious lifestyle. As I understand it there is a considerable move away from the established church simply because it seems to have got in the way of a genuine Christian Spirituality. Alan Jameson has written up the findings of his research into Church Leavers in a book called 'A Churchless faith' (worth a look if you get the chance, it's in the library). The scary thing is that the story of a number of the people he features sounds remarkably familiar. However one of the interesting things is that these church leavers appear in some senses to have begun to form their own 'churches'. Perhaps that is an indication that even though some people can't live with it, the truth is that they can't live without it.
Steve Dutfield
One of the benefits of such a focus is that our understanding of mission, church remains firmly Christ centered. Christ is given the pre-eminence in all that we undertake. It preserves the divine order, God sent Christ who in turn sends us, and also gives the divine pattern for mission.
If our understanding of Church is not founded on an understanding of Christ centered mission possible dangers could include;
A church that is nothing more than a man made empire. It may be caught up in man made rules and traditions. It may simply have a form of godliness.
A church that is a cozy club which ignores the world.
A church that is largely irrelevant to the culture, it expects people to come rather than the church to go. Its mission is limited and ineffective.
Such a framework does not limit our understanding of mission it in fact allows for the scope and perspective of Missio Dei as seen in Christ's mission. Christ gives us a pattern to use in ways relevant to our time and culture.
Yvonne
I agree absolutely Steve, there are some people 'who can't live with it (the church) and can't live without it!
I also think that there is a danger that some 'breakaway' churches finding themselves another set of rules for their holy huddles!
I was also thinking along the lines of the difficulty for the unchurched finding their way in to the established church which sometimes can look and sound like something from the 1950's (not that I can remember those days!!).
I absolutely agree with the Hirsch abd Frost quote. For too long things have been the other way around - I feel that some try and get Jesus to fit into their own ideas of church, sometimes as if he is an after thought almost.
There are so many irrelevant expressions of church, some merely existing for little other benefit than being a social club.We need to question whether that is God honouring, but at the same time managing the tension of providing pastoral support for these faithful people.
I recall a quote from one of the Chick Yuill lectures who outlines a local officer saying that his purpose in the Corps was to preserve the tradition, so that his children would have a place to go (or words to that effect!). What is worrying is that often financial resources are bring ploughed into such places which could be better spent in those places who really want Christology to shape everything that flows out of them.
I am reading an interesting book at the moment - They like Jesus but not the Church by Dan Kimball. Time and time again he gives examples of people who are facinated by Jesus, but are severely disappointed by the Church. My passion is making connection with these people, who are not adverse to the concept of faith - some of whom even pray, but would not dream of going to a church.
Reflecting on the damage that not starting with Christ in order to shape our understanding of mission is key into our officership. Examples of mission being over stretched because of a false starting premise are there to be seen - we try hard not to replicate!
I totally agree with Hirsch and Frost's quote - I believe that we must look to Jesus. If we follow Jesus' way then we shouldn't go wrong. The dangers of not looking to Christ's example is that we we will be building this man made empire (as suggested by Yvonne), and we will be responsible for no more than building a social club (Catherine's words). Although this in itself may have some benefits to those that join, our purpose is for people to recognise God's Kingdom here on earth and want to be part of it. If our mission is not Christ centred then we will fail in our endeavours.
Sandra
I do think it is necessary for any church to be Christ-centred. If we believe he shows the very heart of God, then we logically focus on Christ in the way we live and shape church. Deborah said something about the Bible giving a blueprint. I see a lot of different interpretations of the Bible; this shows two things: the focus does not narrow our mission: that is the good news! Secondly, the different interpretations might lead to different shapes of churches. Could this be wrong? Not necessarily, I think. In order to be Christ-centred we need to know who Christ was, what his purpose was, how he acted. In order to know that; we need to be in an intimate relationship with Christ. If Christians do live in this intimate relationship, than a mission-shaped church will follow naturally.
I would like to add that a couple of years ago I was involved in founding a new youth church. This church existed for about 4 years, after that it slowly died. It was never missionary, only showed a small growth (in the volunteers that were involved), people left unsatisfied and was never able to live out a Christ-like life. Up till this day I am convinced that this was because of the focus: it was not on Christ, but on other things.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I have written some stuff on this subject on my blog. This entry is about the 2nd chapter of Ann Morisy's book "Journeying out" The last bit is about looking at Christ:
I believe on the other hand that the opposite of grace has its own cascade, that might be even more influential sometimes. We can battle this ‘curse’ crusade effectively by focussing in our mission on Jesus. He was in the business of turning people and ideas upside down and by that developing a relationship with them. He did not focus on the things that were wrong, but he replaced them by stories of grace. An example that I want to follow wholeheartedly.
If you want to know what this is about, please read my blog about this.
I'm interested in what the opposite of Grace might be? Engaging with it with stories of Grace is a great concept!
If I look at the 'cascades of grace' mentioned by Morisy, than I see positive stories that go far beyond influencing the people that the stories are about. Basically these cascades are the building stones of the Kingdom of God. Or maybe it is more fitting to say that these stories are the mortar and we are the stones...
The opposite of grace are the stories that break thing apart like gossip, stories of disappointment but also racism and bullying. Sometimes it seems that these stories are more numerous then the cascades of grace... I belief however that the Stories of Grace and the influence they have on the world have much more potential!
I agree with quote from Hirsch and Frost we must have christ at the centre of everthing we do. Without christ at the centre we cannot expect things to take off. However, we must take our plans from God not take our plans to God. So many times I have heard of corps and churches who decide to start something new and then ask God to bless the venture. We need to ask God first what it is we need to start. All we do must be Christ centred, however I do agree with others who say that for some church is nothing more than a scoial club, they do not want to be challenged by God.
'we must take our plans from God not take our plans to God' that is the nub of it - I like that!
What are his plans? In Christ we get to see it - what do we see?
Thanks Suzanne.
I agree with Hirsch and Frost’s quote completely. Jesus has to be the centre of all that we are as individuals and all that we do corporately. The fact is that when we focus an individual’s attention truly upon Jesus they engage, it’s the traditional form of church that they often struggle with today. I am not one who wants to throw away our spiritual heritage however neither do I want to keep human tradition for traditions sake.
I was challenged by Gordon’s personal reflection upon the fact that it is God’s mission not Gordon’s mission. I think this is a trap that we can all fall into within spiritual leadership. We need to remember whose mission it truly is and follow His guidance. It’s not Angela’s mission, nor even William Booth’s mission and certainly not great Aunt Mabel who always sits on the third row mission. Mariska makes a good point when she talks of the need for intimacy with Jesus. The truth is that when Jesus is the centre of our mission then it will never be about empire building but always about kingdom building and that’s what true mission should be.
Thanks Angela
It is good to see you connecting with eth recorded material and applying it to your ministry.
I wonder what we mean by kingdom building?
Post a Comment
<< Home