Back in February, at the end of a post in which I engaged with Alan Kreider’s The Patient Ferment of the Early Church (link) I invited people — anyone, anywhere — into a conversation. With our life in the mission of God as the context, I wanted to consider whether it is enough to target being relevant, or is there something more, something deeper?
See, the difficulty with relevance alone, is that when it is the sole focus for cultural engagement, we run the risk of being salty, without being lighty. Too often and too easily we end up being very involved, but not very distinctive — not ‘doing/being’ in ways that are that different from the society around us. Again and again, studies of the church in the West reveal that there is no discernible difference between the behaviour of those within the Christian community and those beyond it. This is not something I’ve experienced outside the West nearly as much, especially among first-generation believers. Maybe we need to listen and to learn from them a bit more? There is a blindspot to be exposed. Being involved, without being distinctive, is flawed mission. It is deficient. It ain’t got what it takes.
The church in the early centuries, on a cultural canvas not unlike our own, certainly thought so. Their little pockets of influence eventually white-anted the Roman Empire. Plenty of scholars chime in about how it is that they did this: “fitting in and being different” (Hurtado); “they lived lives that contained a ‘yes’ and a ‘no'” (Kreider); “there was a clear difference between being an insider to the group and an outsider” (Hurtado, referencing Stark); they had a “faithful (to God) presence within the world” (James Davison Hunter); they were salt and light (Jesus). On and on it goes…
Yes, maybe we need to recover the “twinkle, twinkle little star, how I wonder what you are” dynamic in mission. The curiosity. The surprise. The attraction, not just the incarnation. The aroma of Christ. The gospel of Christ, lived and spoken. Very involved, very distinctive … intriguing.
15 people responded.
Off we went together: a journalist, an artist, a software engineer, a business-entrepreneur, a consultant (medicine) — together with some pastors, homemakers, theological educators, and mission agency staff members.
To accommodate schedules, we split into two groups. One met at Tuesday lunchtime and the other on Tuesday evenings — just for 60 minutes. I gave one piece of homework beforehand: to watch
The Intern, a movie which highlights, in a setting far from the church and the gospel, how an ‘intriguing’ life can be far more transformative than a merely ‘relevant’ one.
The first conversation took time to hear each person express why they were interested in being part of the conversation. It gave each one of us the opportunity to hear each other’s back-story and context. So valuable, so critical.
The second conversation involved me integrating some of my stray thoughts on the subject and presenting them, inviting the responses of the others.
The third conversation involved each person presenting a case study, with the task being…
EITHER
1. To identify an existing community-bridging ministry in the life of their church…
And if it is already intriguing, describe how this is the case & share how this can be made even stronger.
But if it is (merely) relevant, describe how they could nurture it towards becoming intriguing.
OR
2. To imagine a new ministry into existence, a fresh initiative, and describe how they would embed an intriguing dynamic into it.
We were drawn into some fascinating conversations around intrigue as we roamed across diverse mission contexts together:
An English-language class for Indian immigrant communities.
An honest, permission-giving group, led by a believer & an atheist, for discussing big topics.
A initiative with children, in a neighbouring primary school, who are struggling with reading.
A series of retreats for women, open and welcoming.
A ministry among mothers with young children.
A group hosted by two older people creating a space for international students over lunch.
A space created among students designed to help them pauseso as to serve and to create.
A worship space created in a public ‘art gallery’ space, offering hospitality to the passer-by.
A space for belonging and connection around food, after the worship space.
A ‘priestly’ presence in the midst of the commercial workplace, enabling others to flourish.
A fresh approach to ‘justice’, rising above the polarizing views in both society and church.
A website originating probing questions and messages .
An approach to churches working collaboratively across borders (ethnic, generational etc).
…
With one of the presentations, these two slides captured me. They express such careful and care-full thought around how to be both ‘very involved’ and ‘very distinctive’ in the same ministry at the same time.
This is a glimpse, a taste, of the way forward in mission…
nice chatting
Paul
PS…
As I was writing this post, my weekend was being absorbed with an Indian Christian wedding here in Auckland. Interesting to be reminded again of all the traditions that are designed to highlight the distinctiveness of a Christian wedding in the multi-religious context of India. The God-stuff, foreign though it be, is maximised as a witness to those who are not Christian. And yet, how many times, at a New Zealand Christian wedding, have I been asked, quietly, to minimise the God-stuff because there will be many people who are not Christian who will be present? I think this scratches where these conversations were itching…
