08.11.09

Mike Todd on ekklesia.. Hybels, Bono and ReJesus

Posted in ekklesia, mission, theology at 8:26 am by len

Mike Todd offers a reflection on one of the more prominent conversations at the Leadership Summit. Were these two godly men really hearing each other?

I think Mike is right that we have a language issue here. I recall first reflecting on this about 2002 when I wrote, “Leaving the church to find the church.” It was a strange journey, but one that got me asking an entirely new set of questions.

As for the rest, this is the same conversation again, still a good one – the church exists in this material world as both an organization and an organism, as both Spirit and structure. We need both, but one is more primary, and the dynamic of institutionalization always pulls us away from Spirit and toward structure. We have to know when to applaud, when to resist, when to subvert, and when to buy dynamite.

Ultimately, the church must be an alternative society, this point emphasized by the likes of William Stringfellow in the last generation and Hauerwas and crew more recently. To the extent we fail at this task, we are a human organization and not an expression of the kingdom. Mike closes with this quote from African theologian Emmanuel Katongole:

“…by showing how the various social problems arise out of a particular social imagination, one is able to see the church, more clearly, as a set of stories and practices that reflect an alternative or at least a different imagination and vision of society.” (A Future for Africa: Critical Essays in Christian Social Imagination, p. xvi)

In the first chapter of ReJesus Frost and Hirsch offer three lenses for us. They write that “through the eyes of Jesus we will see God differently, no longer as a distant father figure, but through the paradigm of the missio Dei to find the sent and sending God. Second, we will see the church differently, no longer as a religious institution but as a community of Jesus followers devoted to participating in his mission (participatio Christi)… Third, through Jesus eyes we will see the world afresh, not simply as fallen or depraved but as bearing the mark of the imago Dei — the image of God.” (24) What follows from here is a lucid and stimulating discussion that is both theologically anchored and rich in application.

1. You will see God differently – missio Dei

“The Latin phrase missio Dei is used to describe more the divine nature of God than simply the practical nature of Christian mission.” (24) There aren’t any footnotes to this comment, but it assumes a great deal, not least a background and conversation that most of their readers will not know. While I’m inclined to agree with the theological implication, excepting Moltmann and Holmes, most would affirm that the missio Dei is rooted in the economic (immanent) Trinity but not the social (eternal) being of God.

Still, it’s a great question. Does God have a mission, or is he a missionary God?

The next page continues with a reference to David Bosch. Then we are back to the incarnation. “In the incarnation of Jesus, we hear the missio Dei presented to us in his teaching and embodied in his flesh.” God is so devoted to this broken planet that he sends himself forth to redeem it. But this movement itself, rooted in Godself, expands yet again: “Father, Son and Holy Spirit send the church into the world” (Bosch quoted on page 27). The Trinity will not be kept locked up in church. “God escapes the stained-glass crypt and sends himself out throughout the world.”

In opposition to some kind of temple theology we have the words of Jesus in John 4. “The time is coming, and now is, when those who worship the Father must worship him in spirit and in truth.” Paul picks this up when he refers to the church as the body of Christ. “The triune God doesn’t reside in a temple or any other building. Rather, the physical embodiment of the Trinity is in the people of God.” (28)

2. You will see the church differently – participatio Christi

“Through Jesus eyes, the church is the sent people of God.”

“As we said earlier, God’s mission in this world is his and his alone. The glory of God, not the church, is the ultimate goal of mission.” (29) The authors point out that we humbly participate in this mission as we serve the king and his kingdom. Immediately they broaden out mission to the entire scope of creation. Bosch again,

“Mission is the participation of Christians in the liberating mission of Jesus.. it is the good news of God’s love, incarnated in the witness of a community, for the sake of the world.” (29) As Bosch suggests, this can’t be boiled down to a spiritual goal or to social justice. The mission of Jesus unfolds all around us in the world. “It is our task to create foretastes of the kingdom of God on this planet — living glimpses of what life is meant to be…” In this description I hear “shalom.” On the next page they continue:

“The kingdom is much broader than the church — it is cosmic in scope. The church is perhaps the primary agent of the kingdom but not mot be equated fully with it.” (30) Following, they relate the parable of the wheat and the chaff (Matthew 13:24-30). They bemoan a church so narrow in its perspective that Bono of U2 can’t be seen to be about this same mission.

What follows next on page 31-32 bears some photocopy work so it can be more readily shared. A nice bit of etymological work along with some good theological framing on the meaning of the little word, “ecclesia.” In common usage among believers we often translate “the called out ones” and note that the implication is an assembly or gathering that is set apart. However, the meaning is more nuanced than this. Paul could have used any number of words to denote a gathering, and probably would have chosen “synagoge” if this is all he meant. Similar to the work William Cavanaugh has been doing in this area (in particular his article “The Church as God’s Body Language”) Frost and Hirsch here hit at the political meaning.

“An ecclesia was a gathering of wise community leaders, brought together by their common vision for the harmony and well-being of the wider community.” (32)

“We think that to be the sent people of God we will have our neighborhood’s best interests at heart. We think Christians should see themselves as sent by Jesus into the villages of which they’re part, to add value, to bring wisdom, to foster a better village. In short, to participate with the work of Christ all around us.”  Shades of God Next Door.. this is good stuff. (and see also Luke 10). Now comes a nice bit of theological reflection that undergirds all this very well.

3. You will see the world differently – Imago Dei

In The Shaping of Things to Come the authors wrote about prevenient grace, the God that goes before us in the world. But there is a second aspect of presence and it is written on the soul of every person – the image of God.

The authors rightly point out that the Imago does not deny the inherent brokenness of our race, but rather points to our God capacity, our inherent dignity and beauty. The Imago is so deeply written on us that not even the fall could remove it. (In comparison to Calvinism, the cup is half full rather than half empty). I agree with Michael and Alan that the parable of the sheep and the goats has the Imago in mind (33 – “you did it not to [them]. you did it not to me”). The very least of these bear the image of the king.

The implications are clear. If our race has such dignity and marred beauty in the eyes of our Creator, one of our tasks is to see what is obscured and to tease it out. “If we ReJesus the church we will lead it to a greater respect for the unbeliever” (34). Brian McLaren affirmed this strongly in A Generous Orthodoxy, and others (Amos Yong) have been making the theological move in their advocating a Spirit-Christology. Every created thing bears both a Word image and a Spirit image, and both of these are obscured by the fall.

The chapter closes with a story from Flannery O’Connor (35-37) that I won’t summarize here. It is her final story and considered by many her best (Parker’s Back, the story about the tatooed man). If we are marked by Jesus we participate in his mission, share his passion and compassion, and see the world through his eyes.

In closing, a timely reflection by David Fitch:

“I offer two principles concerning organization and ecclesiology to all missional church planters that can clarify the “incarnational” implications of the form of  church practice and its organization.

1.) Structure/organization should always be an “after-development” and inextricably connected to the “gifts of the Spirit.” Yet we still need it and we should never avoid it. Structure actually grounds the “charisma” (gift) into day-to-day historical life which is another way of being incarnational (not fleeing the day to day).

2.) Ecclesiological form – certain core practices – serves to ground the church in history, i.e. preserves its continuity with Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son. In this way – church form is actually incarnational preventing the church from becoming a mystical society of individuals all into their own thing even if it might go by the name of “Jesus.”

Permalink