PGF Outbox

Calvinism Hinders Being Missional?

Southern Baptist Convention Today recently interviewed Dr. Bill Wagner.  Dr. Wagner is a candidate to be President of the Southern Baptist Convention.  The interview can be found on their website: http://sbctoday.com/2008/03/07/interview-with-dr-bill-wagner/

In the interview, Dr. Wagner states: "However, I have spoken to a lot of our missionaries overseas and its a very strange thing because our missionaries have said that we are beginning to get more and more people out on the field who are Calvinistic in their theology, and it is strange, but those that are Calvinistic are not nearly as desirous of winning people to Christ as they are about talking about theology. So I am little bit fearful, that if Calvinism begins to have too much influence, that we might go the way of some of the other Protestant denominations have gone and that is to deemphasize our missions.

Now, I know of a lot of tremendous missionaries who are Calvinists. But I say, by and large, Calvinists have a tendency to be less missional in their approach."

What do you think?  What do you think he means when he uses the word, "missional"?  Look forward to a good discussion.  The Article in Time Magazine that Sparked this discussion is titled: 10 Ideas That Are Changing the World Right Now - #3 The New Calvinism.  

Missional not for everyone? Is transformation possible?

As you may or may not know, the mission of Presbyterian Global Fellowship is: To transform mainline congregations into missional communities following Jesus Christ. 

This week a pastor and blogger, Doug Resler, challenged the worth of this mission.  He makes two arguments.  First, missional ecclesiology isn't for everyone.  Second, that it is not reasonable to think that institutional/traditional/attractional churches can make the shift to missional/incarnational. 

As a leader in PGF, a life-long Presbyterian, and someone under 40 years old in leadership in the church, I find this conversation of utmost importance. 

So read what he says.  He is a great writer, so I urge you to absorb his thinking and arguments for yourselves. Because if missional ecclesiology is a fad for a few and/or not even possible for most, then I personally have a lot of changes to make in my life. 

Should All Churches Make the Missional/Incarnational Leap?

Thinking Out Loud

Generationally Speaking

When I became a solo pastor four years ago I knew that I was in for quite a learning experience.  As a rookie I knew the learning curve was quite high and that I’d have to quickly discover how to moderate a session, do administrative work, interpret the scripture each week, care for the hurting, discern a vision as to where God was calling us and everything else that goes into being a solo pastor.  To describe it would take pretty much every adjective Webster could come up with:  exhilarating, exciting, discouraging, frustrating, fun, boring.  You get the point.  But amongst all these descriptors what is perhaps the most applicable of all is the word exhausting.

 

I didn’t realize just how tiring it would be to try and help a congregation become more missional.  I still feel a bit like a wimp admitting to it.  I mean, I’m not out pouring concrete or working on a roof or traveling from one city to the next.  Heck, I don’t even stand very much.  That said, I have frequently thought that it’s a good thing I’m still somewhat young because otherwise I’m not sure I’d have the energy to do this.  (I keep waiting for the new Gatorade geared toward solo pastors.  Any ideas for the name?)

 

As I’ve wrestled with this weariness, there have been a couple things that have really helped to restore my energy.  One of these is the glimpses I receive from time to time of how the congregation is really beginning to see God at work in their lives, the community and in our church.  To look into people’s eyes and see them light up as they describe how the Spirit surprised them at work or how God revealed himself while reaching out to our neighbors is enough to keep me going for weeks.  Those moments are nothing less than miracles to me, fortifying my faith in God and my calling to this place.

 

The second thing that has rejuvenated me is the conversations that I have with other solo pastors.  The truth, of course, is while there are many similarities between solos, associates, and seniors, there is something unique to being “the staff.”  I am reminded of a conversation I had where, after telling an associate pastor that I worked in a small church he asked, “So if it’s small, how many pastors are on staff?”  Not a bad question I suppose, it simply reveals just how different of questions we’re asking. 

 

But perhaps equally as important as my conversations with solo pastors are my conversations with young solo pastors.  While I knew that this particular calling would have lonely times, I didn’t fully appreciate how much I would miss conversing with colleagues my age.  It isn’t that we don’t have much to learn from our seniors or that I don’t enjoy older colleagues it’s simply that, as all generations will attest, we simply see the world (and the church) differently.  And when you’re tired and needing a pick-me-up it’s nice to not have to interpret what I’m saying to another generation.

 

As a fellow young solo pastor said to me the other day, it’s nice to be able to talk about being missional in a small church without having to convince the other person of  the legitimacy of  what we’re doing.  These conversations I’ve had have encouraged me, restored my spirit, and helped me to see what a unique opportunity we young solo pastors have.  I have become more and more convinced that rather than waiting for larger churches to come our way, or daydreaming about how much better things would be if we had an associate, that we as energetic small church pastors are actually standing (or sitting!) in the middle of where so much of the missional action is.  But, this understanding has come mostly through those pivotal conversations I’ve had, allowing me to engage with colleagues coming from the same place and dealing with the same things. 

 

It doesn’t mean, of course, that we don’t need to talk to all kinds of pastors of all ages.  It does, however, mean that if we are to truly understand the unique opportunities we have that we must talk with and listen to other young solo pastors.  In this way we will not be so tired or caught up in the busyness of our particular vocation that we miss out on this beautiful work of God to which we have been called.   

Multi-site Church as a Missional Strategy...

First Church, Champaign is a multi-site church.  In a nut shell that means we are one church made up of two campuses. I am an associate pastor at First Church and the lead pastor of our Southwest Campus, called "the Launch".  If you are new to the whole concept of multi-site churches, you can explore it further here: http://multisitechurch.typepad.com/

So, why in the world did we do this?  For me, the heart of this whole MISSIONAL movement is that the core of our identity (as individual followers of Christ and as the body of Christ) is our “sent-ness”.  And a multi-site strategy became, for us, an opportunity to flesh that identity out.  We are pursuing a multi-site strategy because we are realizing that our "sent-ness" is more important than being together.

In Life Together, Bonhoeffer quotes Luther: “we love to be among friends, and to sit among the roses and the lilies, but our calling is always to go and live among the thorns.”  That's our tension!

Truth be told, we started down this road for sheerly practical reasons.  We didn’t have enough parking.  We were land locked.  There was a wee bit of tension between the traditional worship service and the contemporary service.  We were a very old downtown church, but all the growth in our city was out in the suburbs.  We didn’t want to abandon the heart of the city.  But we felt strongly compelled to more effectively love our neighbors out in the burbs who were not remotely likely to find their way into our downtown sanctuary.

So we did both.  We stayed in the heart of the city and we expanded into the suburbs.  We recruited 22 families (75 people) to be the heart of our new campus and we worked out an agreement with the new elementary school out on the edge of town.  And we opened our second campus. A year and a half in and we’re averaging 250 attendance.

There are tons of challenges within this model. 

But here’s a couple of benefits.  (And a couple of reasons you might want to think about trying it)

1.  It turned our eyes outward.  It pushed us to think about ministry in terms of our neighbor and our coworker and our peers instead of just the person we sat beside in worship.  It is pushing us into a Great Commission kind of mindset.  Without a doubt, it would “feel” better and maybe even “look” better to all be together in one place, but instead of focusing on internal measures of success, we are focusing outwardly on our ability to love and serve our neighbors.

2.  It gave us an "incarnational".  We meet in a school cafeteria.  Instead of stained glass windows, we have posters of pop stars drinking milk on the walls.  Traditional models of church have (inadvertently) communicated to our members that you come to church to practice your faith.  But this multi-site model has reinforced for us that we can “do church” anywhere and everywhere.  We practice our faith in the places we go every day.  My son goes to school at the school where our campus meets.  He’s in that building 6 days a week.  There will never be any question for him that God is with him when he’s going through his day at school.  Not only is God present with us in those “secular” places, but we are present as the body of Christ in those places: in the schools, in the places we work, in our neighborhoods.

3.  Mission vs Program.  At our new campus, space and time limitations mean that we can only really do the programs that we have to do.  We've been forced into a Simple Church model.  We really only have a few committees.  So instead of burning up our volunteer's time and energy with committee meetings, we are releasing them to pour their time and energy into chasing after the Mission of God.  Instead of putting so much time and energy into maintaining a host of programs inside the church, we are freeing them to pour their time and energy into being the hands and feet of Jesus to their neighbor, their peers, their co-workers, the school where we meet, the poor in our city, etc.  

4.  Turning “sacred cows into hamburger”.  One of the biggest challenges of shifting a church culture can be the steadfast hold that certain programs have.  It’s the “we’ve always done it that way” syndrome.  Going to a multi-site model has basically forced us to stretch beyond what we’ve always done and instead do what will be most effective.  At our new campus, we don’t have a building that’s our own so we are forced to be innovative.  Anything’s possible.  It has to be.

In short, a multi-site strategy has given us a great framework for being a missional church.  We’ve made a bunch of mistakes along the way.  And we’ve got a long way to go.  We have to be very intentional to not let ourselves slip back into our deeply engrained habits of the attractional, program driven church.  But we’re making progress and learning as we go!

What do you think?

Scott Keeble

Teaching Pastor @ the Launch

www.scottkeeble.blogspot.com

My Letter to the Editor of The Outlook

Dear Mr. Editor, 

In response to your article, Educating the rest of us, I respectfully pose that you have missed the point entirely.  You state that Eileen Linder shared statistics about the Presbyterian Church's loss of members to tell the truth, correct misunderstandings, and set the record straight.  

She gives four reasons that the church is losing members that are all about us: not being on the right block, not having young adults, not having enough parking, or bad sermons.  These are not the reasons, they are simply the symptoms.  

We are losing members because we continue to do 1950's ministry in a culture that is 21st century.  We are losing members because we continue to try and attract people into our buildings to experience our type of Christian community instead of going out to serve people where they are.  The road to vitality is not by looking in, but by being sent into the world to partner with Jesus.  We will continue to lose members if fail to transform into missional communities that can effectively share the gospel in a culture in which Christianity is not the norm. 

 If we continue to focus on how to modify programs and classes to attract people, then we will continue to fail.   We must transform the heart and soul of our congregations into being missionaries sent out to join Jesus in the world.  In this adventure, there is not collective despondency over membership loss. There is only the excitement of finding out where God is leading. 

Kelly Kannwischer

Growing Crisis Threatens Idea of One

The New York Times Published an article today about how the growing economic crisis is threatening the European Unity's unity.  Growing Economic Crisis Threatens the Idea of One Europe (http://tinyurl.com/bg2ugn).  The basic premise is that the European Union has a common currency - the Euro.  But they do not share a common polity.  Quoting the author: "With uncertain leadership and few powerful collective institutions, the European Union is struggling with the strains this crisis has inevitably produced among 27 countries with uneven levels of development."

Mainline denominations have the inverse problem: common polity without a shared currency.  As Presbyterians, we have a common polity as defined by our Constitution (Book of Order and Confessions).  But we do not share a common currency - who we understand Jesus to be.   

For years we have focused on tinkering with polity.  What should be in or out of the Book of Order.  At the recent assembly, translations and versions of confessions were debated.  Renewal groups spend time on votes, issues, and overtures.  

But what about the other half of the equation:  Christology - who is Jesus?  How do we understand our relationship to him, as individuals and the church?  How does that affect our interpretation of scripture? 

The PCUSA finds itself in the same boat: "Uncertain leadership and few powerful collective institutions" that result in the PCUSA struggling with the strains the crisis of postmodernity has inevitably produced among thousands of churches with differing understandings of the person and divinity of Jesus. 

The missional church movement is about getting in touch with who Jesus is, what he is doing in the world, and figuring out how we are called to participate in his work.  In this metaphor, it is about focusing on the currency.  

Without a common currency what is the point of a common polity?