Missional Explorer

Beyond the Christian "Bubble"

Among the important points we have discussed as a class (including the concepts of missional, incarnational, and contextual) is the importance of crossing the subcultural divide that divides the (optimistically) 40% of Americans who are "churched" from the other 60% (some put this figure as high as 80%) of Americans who are either de-churched, unchurched, or otherwise have no point-of-reference re: the Christian subculture.  It is no secret that most churches are competing over an ever-decreasing segment of the American population. . . while the rest of our culture looks on with distaste over our perceived prejudices (see the book unChristian listed on the sidebar), uncertainty as to who "we" are, and/or bemusement at our infighting over the seemingly limitless minutia of "belief". 

We discussed the reality that it is very possible to spend one's entire lifetime primarily within these bounds of the Christian subculture, having little-to-no significant contact those outside our faith.  There are, in fact, multiple reasons for this including, in my experience, fear of "the world" and all the temptations, lusts, and corruption within it.  But, as I have told our kids, we must missionally cross over this subcultural divide in order to engage the 60% for that is where we join Jesus.  It may not be pretty or clean but, like Jesus, we must get our hands dirty in the muck and mire of life if we are to join Jesus in his redemptive work.

The Christian subculture is not new of course as it truly dates back to the advent of Christendom and the rule of Constantine.  While the Christendom "bubble" remains formidable in the U.S., it appears to be dead or dying elsewhere in the West.  Some lament this course and are taking up "swords" to fight these culture wars.  Others (including myself) celebrate this dying for, in Christendom's demise, can be sown the seeds of an authentic rebirth of life and faith at the margins of society where we are not (a) in a confusing mixed allegiance with nationalism trying to save democracy and the American way of life or (b) buying into a uniquely American brand of Christianity where, mixing superficial faith with rampant consumerism and radical individualism, we have turned a pet phrase on it's head by becoming (in one author's words) "of the world but not in the world".

As you can probably tell, I am having fun with showing kids this world.  This past week, for example, I used The Truman Show to unpack the Christian "bubble".  While not a perfect metaphor, this film illuminates many of the dynamics we will face in exploring God's work beyond the walls of a still-formidable Christian subculture.  May God join us in this journey.   

Has the "Christian School" Movement Come and Gone?

I recently posed this question to two pastors over coffee.  Very much like attractional churches, Christian Schools appear to be competing over an ever-dwindling segment of the American population.  The Christian school where I work is, like the majority of others, facing acute financial pressures with an enrollment that never seems to match even our most realistic expectations.  Many if not most churched families continue to choose public government schools or their close cousins, charter schools, as their schools of choice.  So what are we to do in the face of these realities?

Returning to my original question posed over coffee, my two pastor-friends insisted that "YES INDEED. . . if by Christian Schools one is assuming schools which are retreating from the world into a perceived sterile/safe Christian subculture, the Christian School movement truly has come and gone!"  Superficially this would be appear to be very bad news for Christian schools especially coming from these pastors which, while only two voices, I think accurately reflects the opinions and perceptions of most other pastors I know.  (I was prompted to ask this question because, in another setting, where I was among leaders of 15 other Christian schools, I was greeted with stony silence and even literally a comment of "Good Luck" when I suggested that we work through local churches to advertise an upcoming Greater Denver Christian School Expo.  While not at all surprising, this cynicism as to church's support of Christian Schooling was indeed revealing of more serious issues/questions we must then ask.) 

Yet, in the midst of what appears to be very bad news for the Christian School movement in every demographic of the American churched population (with the possible exception of the geographic and cultural South where Christian Schooling is still inexorably linked with Southern culture), I am thankful that our small, two-bit school, in a death match struggle for survival continues to act counter-culturally to this trend.  From the very beginning, we have tried to avoid the temptation of "retreat & protection" and have instead worked to "prepare our kids for life and ministry IN the world"!  Our Mission Statement bears this out as we attempt to embody "To Help Every Student Grow in Their Passion for God and His Work in the World".  Not retreat but engagement.  Not safe but risky.  Not protection but preparation.  . . . both vertical with God and horizontal with our "neighbors".  Will we buck the trend which has closed myriad Christian schools in the Denver area alone?  God only knows!  But, even as my two pastor-friends insisted that we must think "out-of-the-box", I am hopeful we are still working WITH God at JES.         

Engaging Culture

FYI, I love the definition of ENGAGING CULTURE that has come out of our school's host church: Engaging culture is "Listening to, loving, and living with those non-Christ followers around us while we connect them to our Christ following family. This is what we as Christ followers are born to do!"

Our staff has been haggling over the risks and realities of "engaging culture".  This response ain't half bad for addressing those concerns.  It is tempting to give in to fear of life outside the Christian subculture and therefore never journey outside the Christian "bubble".  For those who are advocating a fear-based response to our culture, I understand their concerns because it IS dangerous out there.  There are all kinds of realities that would pose threats to our faith.  But, as I read the Bible, I don't see that we have any choice if we are truly following Jesus.  Jesus aggressively and incarnationally engaged the culture of his day to the point of given many of those "religious" enormous offense.  And in John 17, in His most extended prayer, Jesus assumed that we would be IN the world as he asked God not to take "us" out of the world but rather protect us from the Evil One.  So, fear or not, I don't see that we have any choice.  We must go out as a community not as radical individuals but "go out" we must.

As I think I mentioned before, this week I am showing The Truman Show to our Joining God's Mission class.  Far beyond mere entertainment, this film shows what life in a bubble looks like including Truman's efforts to escape.  A truly awesome metaphor for the walk we must walk.

"All the Best Gifts Are Dangerous!"

Linda and I participated in a most unusual and enjoyable event last night when we joined a number of other JES folks from our school's past for a wine-tasting/teaching party.  One of my former students, Micah, has developed a passion and understanding for fine wine so Micah brought 15-20 wines from different countries and styles for us to sample.  Believe it or not, part of the fun of this event (aside from the laughter and fellowship of old friends) was when Pastor Joe Beach brought a little devotional before the festivities (and teaching) began.  Joe used a number of passages from Scripture to show how the Biblical narrative shows wine to be a sign of prosperity and celebration.  But, even more compelling, was Joe's comment that "All of God's best gifts to us can also be the most dangerous!" 

We talked about that comment throughout the evening.  Sex, money, drink, and food are all wondrous gifts from God meant for our enjoyment but they are also tremendously ripe for misuse and damage leading to destruction of lives and relationships.  This, of course, does not happen in a vacuum.  Human beings obviously and often make destructive choices but we must also recognize one of our enemies prime weapons: to bend and twist that which is ultimately meant for our good towards damage and despair. So do we avoid these and other "gifts" from God because they are potentially threatening and dangerous or do we recognize the danger and still share in these gifts with thankfulness and careful abandon?   

Disengaging in Order to Engage

Wrapping up three observations on moving from Christendom to Diaspora from Douglas John Hall, Hall commends us to:

"Disestablish yourselves!  But what does that mean, concretely speaking?  It is a relatively straightforwad thing to disestablish when establishment, in the primary sense, has meant a legal arrangement between the church and state.  The famous Barmen Declaration required immense courage and a strong, biblically inspired theology; but it could come to the strategic point that it did come to with a kind of enviable immediacy.  'Since we Christians are bound in obedience to the one Lord', said the drafters of the Declaration, in effect, 'we cannot admit as ultimate the authority of any other leader, and (by implication) especially not the little self-proclaimed Fuhrer whose agenda so obviously violates what w hear from our one Source and Sovereign.

In light of the suffering of the Confessing Church under Hitler one dare not suggest that Barmen was easy.  But as the most dramatic instance of Christian disestablishment in modern European history, Barmen is premised on the existence of a de jure form of religious establishment.  Its authors knew quite precisely where the disengagement from culture had to concentrate its attention.  Intentional disestablishment in North America is another story.  How can churches disengage themselves from such nebulous things as worldviews, ways of life, moral codes, social values, dreams of happiness and prosperity?"

Personally, I totally agree with Hall's diagnosis here and also agree with his general prescriptive treatment of disestablishment or, what I call, disavowing/disengaging from Christendom as the institutional church.  Yes, very easy to say. . . incredibly hard to do.  Ultimately however I disagree with Hall's specific prescriptive treatment as he proceeds to identify "theology" as our way out. . . ao our way to disestablishment.  My current and preferred option of dealing with (again in Hugh Halter's words) our "1700 year wedgie"--- where the early Church was unwittingly corrupted in accepting an alliance between church & state (yes, the ending of persecution was obviously welcomed but at what cost as Constantine proceeded to "use" Christianity to unite the empire)---is not theology but missionality at the margins: accepting and perhaps even welcoming our marginality in society as an opportunity for authentic faith and true engagement with our culture. 

In the end, I agree with Patrick Keifert in his new book We Are Here Now: A New Missional Era when he insists, with theologian Martin Kahler, that "Mission is the mother of theology."  Perhaps its because I've seen theology as wedded to the discipline of philosophy and propositional (abstract) truth far too long.  If theology were more often de-westernized and seen as "relational truth" (as author Mary Lou Codman-Wilson identifies in her chapter "Witness in the Midst of Religious Plurality" in Van Gelder) rather than "propositional truth", I might agree.  But, in the meantime, my own personal view is that walking in primacy of our missionality (actively engaging the world) will force our theology to be more than just a "head trip" and therefore more accountable in the real world beyond academia.    

One Bible: Many Messages

I am continuing to joyfully "participate" in a recorded conversation led by Brian McLaren and Richard Twiss from the recent National Pastor's Convention.  Focusing on the Bible, Brian has suggested that traditional readings of the Word are primarily "flat", hearing only one "voice" and one "message" (and usually one "interpretation", often one's own interpretation of course. . . see previous blog where Dallas Willard comments that there are more than 30,000 Christian denominations in the world and they all think they are "right".  I tell my students: "what are the chances that any one denomination is "right" on everything.  Not only are the chances astronomically small but, if one denomination should be right on everything, guess what, they are "God" because there ain't nobody this side of heaven that is "right" on on everything.  But I digress:-).

I was fascinated with McLaren's suggestion that we are limited if we approach the Bible with the "one voice, one message" mindset.  For example, Brian recounted the substantial case using the Bible that pro-slavery pastors made in defense of slavery back in the mid-1800's.  As Brian admitted, both Old and New Testaments assume/defend slavery as normative part of life even if, in the NT, the relationship of slave and master is to be transformed.   Brian actually suggested that the Biblical argument against slavery was the weaker argument back in the 1800's, weaker because it was based on a more general  reading of the Bible as opposed to the specific texts that were used to justify human bondage.  Yet, despite the specific passages in both Old and New Testaments that would seem to ratify slavery, virtually no one in the Christian community would seek to justify slavery today.

Slavery is only one example where the Bible genuinely seems to speak with multiple voices and messages on a large number of issues.  Other examples could include war, violence, women (and men), community issues, etc.  I have to admit that Brian's point is very persuasive and, further, that many of our present disagreements among Christ-followers center on these very issues where multiple voices and messages are heard with cases that can be made using the Bible in very authentic ways and yet are still very contradictory.  So, the $64,000 question to me (and not having completed this conversation guided by Brian and Richard), how do we approach the Bible with a multiple voice/message assumption?  And, with the 800 pound gorilla (a "Biblical approach to violence") lurking in the corner, how do we specifically as American even begin to unpack this one let alone listen to our "non-American" brothers and sisters overseas?  As a tease, Brian suggests that we Americans desperately need to develop an authentic "Biblical hermeneutic on violence" even as the rest of the evangelical world outside the States looks on with disbelief and despair, often asking as one person put it: "Do you American Evangelicals realize how dangerous you are right now???"

What are your thoughts on authentically hearing multiple voices and messages in the Biblical Narrative??  Are we American Christ-followers "right" on everything?  If the answer is an obvious "NO!" (in fact, from God's perspective, there's probably a whole raft of stuff that we're not "getting") then how do we drop our ethnocentric arrogance and nationalism in order to truly hear our brothers and sisters overseas?         

Easter Eve With Richard Twiss

I've been listening to Richard Twiss, a Native American and Christ-Follower activist speaking on how culture inhabits and inhibits our ability to see anything absolutely or objectively.  From Richard:

"The sooner we can recognize that we are ALL (a) creatures of culture (b) ethnocentric (c) narrow-minded and (d) see only in part, the sooner we can appreciate "otherness" and our need for "the other", particularly those who don't fit into our categories."

Continuing,

"For Enlightenment-thinking Westerners, everything about God needs to be explained so we can "know" Him.  For Native Peoples, mystery is a good thing!  There is no need to explain away mystery and wonder.  But in the Western mind, the unknown is just that--unknown--and if it's unknown, it needs to be known. . . so the more we think we know, the better and more secure we feel."  Which is why we desperately want the Bible to be the Book that provides the "absolute truth" to all questions rather than live within the discomfort of mystery, uncertainty, and, in the words of Paul, "seeing through a glass darkly" (as if through a dirty window).  Question: On Easter Eve, why do you think it is so difficult for us to admit that our knowledge is, in fact, incomplete. . . that, at best, we can "know" now only in part. . . including the events which are perhaps the most mysterious of all: the Death and Resurrection of Jesus?            

Ugly Americans?

One of the things that has fascinated me the most on our trip to the UK and New Zealand is what has been called the “ugly  American” persona.  It’s not as if the U.S. has a lock on ugliness.  As cross-cultural consultant Dean Foster points out “Now that a lot of people are traveling from a lot of places, I see ugly Italians and ugly Brits, ugly Chinese, and ugly Germans.  Anyone who’s ignorant of the culture they’re in is ugly.”  But, because I am so familiar with the particular brand of ethnocentrism in the U.S.(and the isolationism that both engenders it and spreads as a result), I find myself looking, listening, and learning about how Americans are perceived in my local contexts.  I have compiled “heaps” of anecdotal stories here in New Zealand. . everything from conversations to newspapers articles to local controversies, the most amusing of which is a running feud in the local newspaper’s “letters-to-the-editor” section that erupted when a local middle school, intentionally or not (that is part of the controversy), failed to include the United States in a world map project on the playground.  When a parent asked why, the teacher’s reply was allegedly “for political reasons”.  Whereupon all hell broke loose with accusations, recriminations, etc.  So you can see that dealing with America and Americans is an ongoing and complicated debate here.  And I’m guessing this extends far beyond New Zealand borders.  I am not at all suggesting that this is the harmless stuff of playground legends because I/we have genuinely grieved over (a) how we occasionally see Americans misunderstood but even more so (b) how Americans continually create our own rotten reputation simply out of our general ignorance of and appreciation for culture.   The reputation of the “ugly American” abroad has actually unraveled to the point that the New York-based Business for  Diplomatic Action has developed an etiquette guide of 25 behavior tips for Americans traveling overseas.  I would strongly suggest that we Americans listen very carefully to this forthcoming document whether we plan to travel or not for it may hold tremendous potential for us to learn about ourselves as a country and as a people.  The website for the article referenced above is www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2006-04-27-ugly-americans_x.htm while the guide can be found by clicking on the "world citizen guide" link at www.businessfordiplomaticaction.org.  Let me know what you think.

Walking as Aliens

We have been here in New Zealand for almost 3 months now. . . long enough to become acclimated to a new country and a new culture.  As all of our friends know, we truly love it here.  Yet, in the midst our immense enjoyment of new friends and a new environment, the truth is that we are still not completely familiar here.  This is not “home”.  The driving is different, the rules of engagement are different, work is different, and the language, while similar, is still different in hundreds of ways.  So while we feel comfortable living here in NZ, we still find ourselves outsiders of sorts, aware that we are not Kiwis, that we live here only so long as NZ consents, and that we are still largely strangers to Kiwi ways.  In a word, we are aliens.  As Linda and I talked this morning, we were startled to realize that our feelings of being comfortable but not relaxed, open but still cautious, a part of here but still not belonging, participating but not totally adjusted to. . .  may also be the way we should live in the United States as our country-of-origins.  Author Rodney Clapp calls our country-of-origin our “host country” and infers that people with a primary allegiance to God’s Kingdom should always be somewhat uncomfortable with political nation-states.  Several questions come to our minds: As the people of God and citizens of a different “country”, have we become too comfortable in the United States?  Have we adjusted too easily and too completely to a home that is really not our home?  And is it possible that we should have more in common with Jesus-followers from other lands and cultures than we do with fellow citizens of the United States.  By and large we are still grateful to be a part of the United States.  But confusing gratefulness with primary identity and allegiance would seem to be truly a dangerous mix.    

Irony on Easter

We have enjoyed celebrating Easter with our new Kiwi friends here in New Zealand.  Good Friday, in particular, was an intense time for our family as we walked the Stations of the Cross here in Nelson (a participatory meditation on Jesus’ journey to the Cross) guided and adapted by Karel van Helden, my pastor/friend with whom I have enjoyed so many great conversations.  One ironic observation comparing Easter here in New Zealand with Easter as it’s practiced in the U.S.:  In the U.S., Christendom (the historic “cooperative arrangement between church and state”) still possesses significant power and prestige. . . yet Good Friday and Easter have no official holiday status whatsoever.  But here in New Zealand, a country in which, even Kiwis acknowledge, has very little trace of Christendom influence left, both Good Friday and Easter are national “shop trading” holidays where, by law, ALL stores must close, truly a vestige of tradition and history when Christendom did hold sway.  Stores here can actually be prosecuted if they open for trading on Good Friday or Easter.  And while there are only four of these “shop trading” holidays in the entire calendar year, two of them surround Easter (the other two being Christmas and ANZAC Day, sort of our equivalent to Memorial Day).  Before one leaps to conclusions about “isn’t it great that NZ honors Easter” I must immediately add that, consistent in a post-Christendom context, EASTER HAS ABOLUTELY NO MEANING TO THE AVERAGE UNCHURCHED KIWI WHATSOEVER!   We've had fascinating conversations with a cross-section of Kiwis.  Most Kiwis love the days off and still call it Easter weekend but have long ago lost any real connection to the context for the holiday itself. So while honoring Easter with a national holiday sounds good, it carries little meaning beyond the vestiges of a bygone day.  Kiwi Christians accept this and smile at the irony.    Meanwhile in the U.S., we Christians don't seem to accept this at all and often insist on fighting over symbols that, likewise, don’t mean a thing to the average person.  “Keeping Christ in Christmas”, “Posting the 10 Commandments in Courthouses”, and “The right for Christian groups to participate in a Christmas parade” come to mind.  The battle feels good because it feels like we are staving off secular infidels and fighting to keep our country a “Christian” nation (as if that’s even possible for a country to be Christian—one more sign of Christendom run amok).  Why not just accept the fact that we, as Christians, are strangers in a strange land with no country to call our own (save for God’s Kingdom).  Wouldn’t this be better than fighting endless and essentially meaningless cultural wars where Christians come across as shortsighted and bigoted loons?  My thought is to spend our time and energy on activities that not only communicate a more faithful Gospel message but on activities that actually mean something.