Christology: Leadership for Mission (Chick Yuill)
Discussion Point #1
" The challenge is to distinguish between those things that cannot change - dispensing grace and serving a lost world and those things that must change - the acquired cultural baggage that must be jettisoned if we are to fulfil our God-givenWhat do you perceive as acquired cultural baggage that must be jettisoned?
mission. We must hold on to our heritage, but be willing to throw away those traditions that no longer achieve their purpose. "
What do you perceive as the dangers that can undermine our dispensing grace and serving a lost world ?
posted by ETLnetwork at 6:39 AM
15 Comments:
This subject is not quite as easy as it might seem . It has been my experience so far that we are different things to different people. To many of the younger generation we are not seen as relevant . Many younger people know little about SA . However, many would not know much about the Christian Church either. However, I have mentioned to other groups about proposed changes to SA such as changes in uniform or non- uniform wearing and there seems to be a consensus that this would affect our mission in the World . I believe we need to carefully examine everything we do. What is purely part of our heritage yet not part of our God given mission. I believe we will eventually for instance need to examine membership . I agree that parts of Soldiers covenant are hard to justify on purely Biblical grounds . We have to face the facts that many Christians may not see a problem with having a glass of wine with their Sunday dinner . This is the real World in which we inhabit and I believe will have to be faced up to in the future as our Army declines in Europe. I believe the focus is not whether we wear caps or have Brass bands but how these tools expand the Kingdom of God on Earth. I believe on occasions these traditional methods work. Where it does not work when music sections become elite and music itself becomes the focus rather than Christ. We face a challenge to be inclusive in a changing World.
Chris Hall
What do we look like to the world beyond our Halls? Our clothing, our language our military metaphors . . . Do these convey a message of relevance in this post-modern culture? I am certainly not in favour of throwing away heritage or tradition ‘just because’ but let us not hold on to anything for sentimental (and I am a sentimentalist) reasons that actually is now not relevant for the building of God’s Kingdom. I love this quote of Catherine Booth, “You cannot improve the future without disturbing the present,” (A. M. Nicol: 105), especially when I consider she preached this in the early years of TSA.
As Chick Yuill writes (Leadership on the Axis of Change, pg 5) ‘never in the history of humankind have people witnessed such rapid and continuous changes as are happening almost daily’. He goes on to say, ‘the church must be ever changing and adaptability must be a necessity to be relevant to the age and the culture of society’ (pg 17). The more I have studied over these two years, the more I am challenged by the churches failure to have progressed over the years. Christianity is about transformation, and as such, we are ever changing into more and more of the likeness of Christ. TSA image is important – we are that image – through every aspect of our living.
“Churches and organisations can become so wrapped up in what they are doing that they never stop to ask how effective their work is. And the less effective something is, the harder they work at it . . . We’ve sanctified sterility and called it faithfulness” (pg 86 Chick Yuill). I am beginning to wonder whether for too long we have tried to appease many of the ‘faithful souls’ by trying to move them gently into this era rather than looking beyond ourselves into the community where we are. Actually, the vast jump that is needed from modernity – post-modernity is perhaps too much for some (and even leaders) already in the churches, but I also think of the dying world that can see no relevance in church as it is.
Therefore, a dilemma arises, is it better to maintain and keep the heritage/tradition for a number of faithful saints, or is it better to reach out into the community to offer God’s mission to the multitudes? Can both happen? Relevance, in my mind is crucial for all aspects of ministry today and I recognise that each and every community may vary in needs. I am now pondering the issue of whether we have become too institutionalised . . . and whether for this post modern culture we need to completely break free, yet I know that there are aspects that I love in TSA. I do believe that within TSA that catching up with this changing era needs to be initiated from the ‘top’ down. (I am really not a rebel, I love TSA – but - I do have a burden for the lost, and unless we are seen to be as relevant/passionate as WB was way back in the 1800’s then I am concerned. Looking at the life and actions of Jesus should resolve such issues.) We cannot emulate the 1800’s but we need to be working in the context of today’s society. The officer in a transitioning corps taking a congregation to a large SA event can find themselves stepped back in time. This is not about which songs are used.
Carol Skene
Yvonne:
There is some cultural baggage in the SA that I think could be jettisoned. My background is not SA and when I started coming to the army I found it a bit bamboozling e.g. the military terminology, and the various uniforms. I think the great danger of cultural baggage is that it can become more important to us than what God wants and also we can expend a great deal of time and energy in maintaining it. We can be so caught up in traditions that we miss serving God’s purposes for this generation, and fail to move forward with all that God wants to do.
The dangers that can undermine our dispensing grace and serving a lost world could be;
That we compromise as we form partnerships with other agencies.
That we absorb the postmodern spirit in our undertakings.
Not keeping the balance right e.g. by dispensing grace and serving the lost at the expense of the other elements of mission. We need to keep to all that God wants.
Relegating Jesus and letting it become all about works and doing. We need to keep Christ centered, directed by and in step with him
I is good to look out and o reflect on what has become unhelpful in terms of mission.
I wonder if it is largely unhealthy attitude that needs attention. Uniform as an example in itself isn't a bad thing when used correctly - but a poor attitude to it that makes an idol of it is a cause for concern.
A good rule of thumb is to ask 'for whose kingdom?'
You make a good point Yvonne - I'm wondering whether we can stop post-modernity impacting TSA - but an unhealthy response might be simply always to chase relevance instead of concentratng on making the gospel real.
Gordon I like the 'for whose kingdom ' concept. A reminder that we need to continually be questioning why we do things - for what purpose?
Two dangers here - to 'rubbish' all the tradition and see it as baggage that weighs us down or to cling onto things 'as that is the way we do things'.
Chris makes a good point on the issue of membership. There are still those who look down upon those Christians who worship with us that do not want to, for whatever reason, 'sign up' for either soldiership or adherency. I recently have had a conversation with someone who says that for her, there is no point, as it will not change anything in her spiritual life.
I think that there are too many people getting side tracked by what really is trivia - whilst people need reaching with the gospel. I am grateful for the relative freedom that I have,in a small corps setting.
I think that we must be careful not to think everything old is bad and discard it. Likewise we don't necessarily have to accept that everything postmodern is good and that we must implement it.
I think that less rigidity as Deborah said would be a good thing. I think that uniforms are helpful at certain times and can be a great witness, but does this always have to be the shirt and tie/ blouse and brooch as some corps members might think. There are times when the informal uniform is more than appropriate My personal opinion is that some people think that a band and songsters within corps are the 'be all and end all'. It seems to be the case by some people that unless there is a band or songsters within a corps, then that particular corps is not as good as the one down the road. (Don't get me wrong, I'll be more than happy to enjoy these sections when I'm worthy enough!, but having coped without any musical sections in our last two corps I can state that sections aren't everything).
I also agree with Catherine re soldiership and adherency or neither. Some people consider it vital that someone who has aligned themselves with the SA should be a soldier. Surely it is more important to be a Christian first.
I see that the main danger of undermining dispensing grace and serving a lost world is what Yvonne has already identified - if we are not careful we may relegate Jesus as we concentrate on what we perceive is needed doing, rather than concentrating on what Jesus' mission is.
I just want to reiterate what all of you have said. I for one love to wear my uniform and actually see it as a tool rather than something to lord over people. I think it is a real privilege to be able to walk down the high street and for people to know who I am and who I represent. If we didn't have a uniform we would blend into the crowd like any other Christian within our communities. I do wonder sometimes whether people would rather get rid of the uniform because they want to blend in with the crowd rather than stand up and be counted.
I'm not sure either what good getting rid of our uniforms would do. After all, aren't other non-uniform wearing Churches struggling in the same way as we are?
There may be other traditions that we are more caught up in and that deter us from doing what we're meant to be doing. I know it's not the case in every Corps but there are a number of big Corps whose bands dominate decisions that are made and a number of officers are too scared to stand up to them because they think they will lose so many from the Corps. The bands were introduced to enhance worship and to attract people into the meeting but then they became self indulgent and inward looking and competed against each other to see which ones could be the best, and now when we go to a band festival we have to sit and listen to classical music to show off their brilliance rather than be blessed by Christian music. Then when we listen to outside bands they seem to play more SA music than our own bands. Please don't get me wrong, I love brass bands; I play an instrument myself and I think that they are a tool in ministry that can still work....but only if it is done in the right spirit in the way that it was intended! I think the answer to this question like all the others really, is that it all boils down to the authenticity of all of our relationships with Christ. If we are close to God and seeking his guidance, then we will doing his will and it will be regardless of what we wear or what we do, it will be genuine because we will be Christ to those that we meet.
As I am reading “The shaping of things to come” it becomes more and more clear to me that the church became too institutionalised. And so did the SA. Hirsh and Frost state that the institutionalisation is due to the Roman-Greco world view. According to them the church needs to reject to dualistic worldview (‘us’ versus ‘them’) and hierarchy. In stead of the latter one, they plead for a ‘heir-archy’; which fits in perfectly in Gordons remark about ‘whose Kingdom’. We are fellow heirs of the grace of God! It seems that church -as soon as cathedrals and big churches were built- and its members became as ceremonious, solemn and rigid as their buildings. We need to change church into an organic movement, more apostolic as it was meant to be. Concrete, this would imply for the SA several things. If we want to be that missional, apostolic and organic movement, fully Christ-centred, what would we do then? And would we still use big buildings, uniforms, flags, brass bands and ranks? Especially the hierarchy and leadership of the SA will be attacked be this view.
The dangers that undermine our serving and spreading grace could be from the ‘inside’ as well as from the ‘outside’. (This implies the dualistic view, I know! If you look at it in a holistic approach you wouldn’t use the words inside and outside.) I think the biggest danger for the church is not knowing their mission and purpose. All other things like bad leadership, (lack of) money and people are minor dangers compared to this.
looking through some of the more recent comments it is interesting how cultural baggage is seen as uniform. I think you have widened the conversation - thanks
This is an interesting discussion. Cultural baggage could be anything that is not as effective as it could be in reaching a dying world, spreading the Good News and furthering God’s Kingdom.
To give an example:
In our corps there is a young talented guy in his twenties who enjoys the atmosphere and friendliness of our corps and is inspired by all the older people. He started visiting one of our older ladies, bying groceries for her. Next to this he befriended one of the asylum seekers, goed swimming with him or bowling or playing golf. Next to this he helps him with the asylum procedure and with some volunteer work so that the asylum seeker has something useful to fill his otherwise uneventful days with.
To ask this guy to become a uniform-wearing Salvationist is ridiculous. The uniform would look silly on him and I suspect that it would hinder his spontaneity in helping others.
Now my question is: Who is the real Salvationist here? Salvationists are people that bring others to salvation. Salvationists are in the business of rescuing others. I challenge the idea that this is done most effectively with all of the traditions that we have like our hierarchy and our uniforms.
Tracey says that other churches are struggling as well. This is absolutely true, but does that mean we need to cling to our own cultural baggage? My uniform works when I visit people in a hospital. It opens doors, but a simple badge or some ID as being a pastor would do the same. It is helpful in interdenominational meetings and sometimes it gives you a lead to talk with people while travelling. But that’s about it! My friends think I look great in my uniform, but would never wear it themselves. My question then is: Is the uniform the most relevant in contacting others?
I truly believe that the uniform sets us apart from the rest of the world, while an inclusive approach would be much more effective in post-modernity.
I am sorry for making the discussion a bit more narrow again. I guess my wife’s input was more helpful! ;)
We seem to be defining uniform as cultural baggage - I'm not sure it is. What is cultural baggage is our attitude towards it.
YOu make good points Marc - would the uniform look ridicolous if it were to be used to achieve a missional outcome. I remember turning around a council decision on a marginal man where he was being ignored. On that occassion I went home and changed from logoed T shirt to epualettes and tie and had the issue resolved in minutes :o)
The danger is when the essence of our discussion is determined by personal taste.
True! Personal taste should never be part of decision-making.
It's all about effectiveness like Gordon has pointed out. The key issue here is that in the post modern community there is no 'uniform' way of expressing ourselves and spreading the Gospel and helping others.
The methods we use should be flexible and adapted to the situation.
Reading previous comments I have to agree with Sandra that we must not think that every thing old is bad. Whilst I like some of our traditions we must change if they are not in keeping with our mission to bring God to the people. When I was growing up Open airs on a sunday morning were normal, however in the eighties people did not want to be woken up at 10am by the army band, so we stoppped as it was doing more harm than good. I feel I have to add something to the topic of uniform for myself I do not feel it is a baggage that needs to be got rid off I agree with Gordon it is our attitude towards it. For myself I wear working uniform with a blouse other than for parent and tots when I wear logo t-shirts, in my placement we have a busy community centre with many people coming in who have no connection with the Salvation Army they recognise the uniform and I have lost count of the times people have returned to talk when in need and have said it is because they have seen my uniform and know the Salvation Army is somewhere they can come for help. Also as I have been in town I have been stopped purely because of my uniform. However I do appreciate that this may be very different in my next appointment, I personally would not like to see us get rid of uniform as I feel it can be an important tool for mission.
Like others I think it does depend on the corps how open and flexible they want to be. We do of course have the traditional corps for who the band or songsters are the be all and end all of the corps and they will always attract the people who only want to be part of a large section we do have to question why they worship at the army is it God they worship or the band or songsters.
We must be careful though not to dumb down our traditions and standards just to accommodate some people. We should only jettison them if they are getting in the way of serving the lost world and getting in the way of opur God-given mission.
I think that the important aspect for TSA is working out what things can never change and ensuring that they will never change i.e. the dispensing of grace and the saving of a lost world. For when we are secure in those areas we should be unafraid to dispense of the things that can and indeed do need to change.
The ironic fact is the early SA was fresh, vibrant and radical as it spoke against tradition for traditions sake. And yet today we have pockets of TSA and SA leadership that are scared of letting go of man made SA tradition (baggage). I love TSA and I believe that God created TSA for mission. Yet so often we box ourselves in by rules and tradition, and this boxing in sadly hinders us at times from getting on with the mission at hand.
I believe that there are important areas that TSA needs to be brave enough to address some of which have already been raised above. But don’t let us get ourselves so caught up on the minor things; instead we need to learn to work with them and use them appropriately and sensitively.
I am fortunate that my current placement is a relatively new Corps with very little formal tradition or baggage. And yet even within this setting we have to guide ourselves against creating tradition, either for traditions sake or even as a way of showing that we are a growing Corps.
Thanks Suzanne and Angela
Keeping our focus on our essence is ehat is important - perhaps much of our deabte is on visible form ie what we look like, but the tradition that is detectable in what God has called us to be will shape our understanding of mission. This will haelp us understand what it is to 'save the world' through being grace centred.
Post a Comment
<< Home