The video below (produced/edited by Bill Kinnon) is an interesting conversation between Alan Roxbugh and Pat Keifert. They discuss a wide range of issues, including definitions/descriptions of missional church, common views of the contemporary church, and leadership in missional congregations.

In the discussion on leadership I appreciate Keifert’s emphasis on leadership being more about time than about a position. He speaks about the leader cultivating segments of time to assist the congregation in discerning what God is doing in their local context. It is about taking the time to create environments for people to dwell in the Word. It is about having the time to be patient — to hear from God and to hear from each other.

Another topic that I found interesting dealt with Keifert’s journey towards the missional church conversation. He shares how it involved both “failure” and “discovery.” The failure involved disenchantment with his own ministry experience in a traditional church. The discovery included the reading of Newbigin’s “Foolishness to the Greeks.”

I think Keifert’s journey parallels the experience of many. There is a deep sense of  uneasiness, frustration, or even failure in a current ministry setting. Church leaders recognize something isn’t right about how they do ministry. They sense that something has changed, but they are unsure about the essence of the change, or what changes might be necessary. At some point, however, they “discover” that others have experienced the same anxiety. They “discover” authors that begin to give language to these changes. Perhaps, like Keifert its Newbigin, or Bosch; or more recently, maybe it is Guder, Van Gelder, Hirsch, or Frost. But regardless of the author, they rediscover the missionary nature of God and His church, and the reality that the church is sent into the mission field that is now North America.

This has certainly been my journey. I wonder about your experience. Has failure + discovery propelled you into the missional conversation?

Mark your calendars for an event coming up this September in Kansas City. We will be hosting a conference titled “Turning the Church Inside/Out” with Reggie McNeal.

The conference will be on Tuesday, September 14th from 9:00am to 5:30pm. McNeal will lead three main sessions focused on helping church leaders understand the cultural shifts taking place in North America and how to best maneuver the necessary missiological and ecclesiological changes. There will be special emphasis on the importance of developing and deploying church members as missionaries in local neighborhoods and work places. There will also be six breakout sessions offered that will assist participants in making personal application in a local context.

The conference fee is only $30, which will also include lunch. For additional information on the conference, including location, lodging and a detailed schedule check out the conference website here. If you have further questions about the conference leave a comment or send me an email at brad.brisco@gmail.com

I really like this short video of Michael Frost talking about the importance of developing new “measuring sticks” or “scorecards” for the church. He emphasizes the need to find new ways to measure where the rule/reign of God is flourishing. What sort of things can we “measure” that will illustrate evidence of the Kingdom?

This video made me reflect on why we are apparently quite good at measuring church stuff; such as buildings, butts, and bucks, yet seemingly struggle with identifying measurables for activity outside of church life. I am afraid it boils down to the fact that as church people we know very well how to live in the church, but struggle mightily with knowing how to live in the Kingdom.

(ht)

Over the past few months I have had an increasing number of conversations with pastors and church leaders about moving existing churches in a missional direction. I have been asked what key issues or topics need to be considered when attempting to transition a traditional church. The following list is certainly not conclusive or comprehensive, but here are nine elements that I believe need to be considered when making a missional shift:

1. Start with Spiritual Formation

God calls the church to be a sent community of people who no longer live for themselves but instead live to participate with Him in His redemptive purposes. However, people will have neither the passion nor the strength to live as a counter-cultural society for the sake of others if they are not transformed by the way of Jesus. If the church is to “go and be,” rather than “come and see,” then we must make certain that we are a Spirit-formed community that has the spiritual capacity to impact the lives of others.

This means the church must take seriously its responsibility to cultivate spiritual transformation that does not allow believers to remain as adolescents in their spiritual maturity. Such spiritual formation will involve much greater relational underpinnings and considerable engagement with a multitude of spiritual disciplines.

One such discipline should involve dwelling in the word, whereby the church learns to regard Scripture not as a tool, but as the living voice of God that exists to guide people into His mission. If we believe the mission is truly God’s mission, then we must learn to discern where He is working; and further discern, in light of our gifts and resources, how He desires a church to participant in what He is doing in a local context.

2. Cultivate a Missional Leadership Approach

The second most important transition in fostering a missional posture in a local congregation is rethinking church leadership models that have been accepted as the status quo. This will require the development of a missional leadership approach that has a special emphasis on the apostolic function of church leadership, which was marginalized during the time of Christendom in favor of the pastor/teacher function.

This missional leadership approach will involve creating an apostolic environment throughout the life of the church. The leader must encourage pioneering activity that pushes the church into new territory. However, because not all in the church will embrace such risk, the best approach will involve creating a sort of “R&D” or “skunk works” department in the church for those who are innovators and early adopters.

A culture of experimentation must be cultivated where attempting new initiatives is expected, even if they don’t all succeed. As pioneering activities bear fruit, and the stories of life change begin to bubble up within the church, an increasing number of people will begin to take notice and get involved.

3. Emphasize the Priesthood of All Believers

Martin Luther’s idea of the priesthood of all believers was that all Christians were called to carry out their vocational ministries in every area of life. Every believer must fully understand how their vocation plays a central part in God’s redemptive Kingdom.

I think it was Rick Warren who made popular the phase “every member is a minister.” While this phrase is a helpful slogan to move people to understand their responsibility in the life of the church, God’s purpose for His church would be better served if we encouraged people to recognize that “every member is a missionary.” This missionary activity will include not just being sent to far away places, but to local work places, schools and neighborhoods.

4. Focus Attention on the Local Community

As individual members begin to see themselves as missionaries sent into their local context the congregation will begin to shift from a community-for-me mentality, to a me-for-the-community mentality. The church must begin to develop a theology of the city that sees the church as an agent of transformation for the good of the city (Jeremiah 29:7). This will involve exegeting each segment of the city to understand the local needs, identify with people, and discover unique opportunities for the church to share the good news of Jesus.

5. Don’t Do It Alone

Missional activity that leads to significant community transformation takes a lot of work and no church can afford to work alone. Missional churches must learn to create partnerships with other churches as well as already existing ministries that care about the community.

6. Create New Means of Measuring Success

The church must move beyond measuring success by the traditional indicators of attendance, buildings and cash. Instead we must create new scorecards to measure ministry effectiveness. These new scorecards will include measurements that point to the church’s impact on community transformation rather than measuring what is happening among church members inside the church walls. For the missional church it is no longer about the number of people active in the church but instead the number of people active in the community. It is no longer about the amount of money received but it is about the amount of money given away.

A missional church may ask how many hours has the church spent praying for community issues? How many hours have church members spent with unbelievers? How many of those unbelievers are making significant movement towards Jesus? How many community groups use the facilities of the church? How many people are healthier because of the clinic the church operates? How many people are in new jobs because of free job training offered by the church? What is the number of school children who are getting better grades because of after-school tutoring the church provides. Or how many times do community leaders call the church asking for advice?

Until the church reconsiders the definition of ministry success and creates new scorecards to appropriately measure that success, it will continue to allocate vital resources in misguided directions.

7. Search for Third Places

In a post-Christendom culture where more and more people are less and less interested in activities of the church, it is increasingly important to connect with people in places of neutrality, or common “hang outs.” In the book “The Great Good Place” author Ray Oldenburg identifies these places of common ground as “third places.”

According to Oldenburg, third places are those environments in which people meet to interact with others and develop friendships. In Oldenburg’s thinking our first place is the home and the people with whom we live. The second place is where we work and the place we spend the majority of our waking hours. But the third place is an informal setting where people relax and have the opportunity to know and be known by others.

Third places might include the local coffee shop, hair salon, restaurant, mall, or fitness center. These places of common ground must take a position of greater importance in the overall ministry of the church as individuals begin to recognize themselves as missionaries sent into the local context to serve and share.

In addition to connecting with people in the third places present in our local communities, we need to rediscover the topic of hospitality whereby our own homes become a place of common ground. Biblical hospitality is much more than entertaining others in our homes. Genuine hospitality involves inviting people into our lives, learning to listen, and cultivating an environment of mercy and justice, whether our interactions occur in third places or within our own homes. Regardless of our setting, we must learn to welcome the stranger.

8. Tap into the Power of Stories

Instead of trying to define what it means to be missional, it is helpful to describe missional living through stories and images. Stories create new possibilities and energize people to do things they had not previously imagined. We can capture the “missional imagination” by sharing what other faith communities are doing and illustrate what it looks like to connect with people in third places, cultivate rapport with local schools, and build life transforming relationships with neighbors.

Moreover, we can reflect deeply on biblical images of mission, service and hospitality by spending time on passages such as Genesis 12:2, Isaiah 61:1-3, Matthew 5:43; 10:40; 22:39; 25:35; and Luke 10:25-37.

9. Promote Patience

The greatest challenge facing the church in the West is the “re-conversion” of its own members. We need to be converted away from an internally-focused, Constantinean mode of church, and converted towards an externally-focused, missional-incarnational movement that is a true reflection of the missionary God we follow.

However, this conversion will not be easy. The gravitational pull to focus all of our resources on ourselves is very strong. Because Christendom still maintains a stranglehold on the church in North America – even though the culture is fully aware of the death of Christendom – the transition towards a missional posture will take great patience; both with those inside and outside the church. Many inside the church will need considerable time to learn how to reconstruct church life for the sake of others. At the same time, the church will need to patiently love on people, and whole communities, that have increasingly become skeptical of the church.

In this latest video clip from Michael Frost he speaks to the self-preserving use of resources by the church in North America and how such use leads to an unbiblical separation from the “world.” In the clip Frost shares a great statement when he contends that, “Your missional effectiveness is directly proportional to your relational capacity.”

(ht)

When attempting to transition a “traditional” church in a more missional direction I believe one of the topics of discussion must be the importance of “the priesthood of all believers.” If we believe the church is God’s agent sent into the world to participate in what He is already doing, then every member must be developed and deployed as missionaries into the local context. The church is sent, not just collectively, but individually. Therefore, the church needs to be affirming and “commissioning” every member to engage their local mission field.

A few weeks ago I had the opportunity to hear Deb and Alan Hirsch tell a story of how they “commissioned” the entire congregation of South Melbourne Restoration Community, one Sunday morning. I was glad to discover the story in their latest book, Untamed: Reactivating a Missional Form of Discipleship.

At South we took the “priesthood of all believer” (that every person is a minister and needs to be released as such) seriously. This didn’t mean that our community always lived this out, but it was a value we tried to live by (and at times used humor to reinforce). In order to drive this point home, one Sunday morning, as our community arrived for our gathering, we greeted each person at the door and handed them a two-inch-wide strip of white flexible card and a fastener. Many looked puzzled but decided to play along, wondering just what we were up to.

A short time after the service began, Al asked everybody to stand up and fasten the white strip around their necks. He then proceeded to lead the whole church through an ordination ceremony. It wasn’t quite what people were expecting, but that morning each and every person gathered at South was officially ordained into the ministry of Jesus. Once they were all ordained, they could dispose of the symbolic (and very unnecessary) dog collars and just live out their commission.

This past weekend I had the privilege of attending the launch of Forge America in Chicago. It was a great time of networking and hearing how God is moving in various contexts around the world.

It was also fantastic to hear from Deb and Alan Hirsch as they shared the heart of their new book Untamed: Reactivating a Missional Form of Discipleship. I am more excited than ever to begin reading the book later this week.

The most challenging time for me, however, was the last session of the day on Saturday. Micheal Frost shared on how the church must “step into” the way of mission as exemplified by Jesus. I was once again reminded of Frost’s prophetic voice, raised up to push back on the safe, consumerist culture of the American church. Now two days later, Frost’s words continue to challenge me deeply.

A portion of Frost’s talk focused on John 20:21, a passage very popular in the missional conversation. However, Frost’s emphasis was not on the ever so familiar second portion of the passage – that we are “sent” by Jesus – but instead his focus was that we are sent “just as” Jesus was sent. And how, or to whom, or better yet, into what was Jesus sent?

Frost contends, Jesus was sent “into the crap of life.” He was sent to the broken, the homeless, the lost, the lepers, the prostitutes, the oppressed, the outcasts. Frost’s point was that the church loves to focus on the second part of John 20:21. We love to talk about how we are sent. We are a sending church. We are a sent people. (If you are not convinced of the sending nature of God and His church you can check out this page!) But as helpful as it is to recognized that we are a called and sent people of God, we do not really “step into the mission of Jesus” if we are not sent into the broken parts of the world, “just as the Father” sent Jesus.

This means, at least in part, that we must moved beyond proximity (which is certainly a start) to a place of “presence.” We must “move into the neighborhood” (Jn 1:14, MSG), not just geographically, but with our hearts. We must embody the Gospel among the people that we have been sent to.

What else does stepping into the way of mission as illustrated by Jesus do for us, and to us? Here is another short video where Frost speaks of how mission is the catalyst for genuine community and worship.

(ht)

Here is another short, yet challenging video from Michael Frost (thanks again to almost an M). I am looking forward to hearing more from Frost on Friday and Saturday at the Forge Missional Conference in Chicago.

Churches throughout the Western world find themselves increasingly marginalized from society as they endeavor to relate the good news to people whose assumptions and attitudes have been shaped by modernity and postmodernity. Our post-Christian, neopagan, pluralistic North American context presents crosscultural missionary challenges every bit as daunting as those we would face on any other continent.

Unfortunately most pastors and church leaders have had no missiological training. Consequently they resort to marketing strategies in place of missionary insights in their attempts to reach out to a population that is becoming increasingly distanced from the church.

– Eddie Gibbs in Church Next: Quantum Changes in How We Do Ministry

While there are several classic McNeal nuggets in this 30 minute conference session from earlier this year, there was one particular metaphor that stood out that I had never heard/read from Reggie before.

He uses a helpful technology metaphor when speaking of the differences of extracting oil out from under the sands of Saudi Arabia (“as easy as sticking a straw in the sand and sucking the oil out”) and pulling oil out of difficult areas such as western Canada. He contends that alternative technologies must be used to make contact with the difficult to reach, embedded pools of oil. He then moves to say that he wants to challenge the existing church “to sponsor these alternative and parallel technologies that are going to reach deeply embedded pockets of our population that are never going to be church people, no matter what we do with church.”

By the way, we will be hosting Reggie McNeal for a one-day conference here in Kansas City on September 14th. If you would like to know more about that conference shoot me an email.

Over the past couple of years I have been attempting to read through every book from the Gospel and Our Culture Series written or edited by such authors as Darrell Guder, Craig Van Gelder, George Hunsberger, Lois Barrett and others. My two favorites have been the ever popular “Missional Church” and the lesser known “Confident Witness – Changing World.”

In additon to the book in this series I have also tried to find writings by each author that were pre - GOCN. One such book is “Be My Witnesses” by Darrell Guder. In chapter ten, titled “Correcting The Church’s Course” Guder offers an excellent contrast between what the church is and what it should be using the images of the Temple and the Tabernacle. He writes:

With regard to the church’s interpretation of its role in history, I suggest that the church has developed, from early on, a “temple” interpretation of itself, whereas the biblical image of the church is more the “tabernacle” of the Old Covenant. The difference between these two images is profound.

The temple is an unmovable building, a center for religious activity, even a headquarters for a religious elite or massive building housing an organization whose commitment is to its continuation as it is. Temples often are walled compounds, separated from the world without, architecturally symbolizing a chasm between the so-called sacred and the secular. Temples can be places in which religion functions as an arcane discipline, reserved for the initiates. They are built to last forever, to resist change, to maintain their form and activity in as pure a fashion as possible.

Tabernacles, on the other hand, are a unique expression of a people’s faith. The “tent-church” of the Old Covenant was not permanent but moved with the people whenever they followed God’s leading into new territory. The furnishings of the tabernacle, and the acts of worship and community that took place there, constantly focused the people upon their God, his actions on their behalf, his presence in their midst, and his will and direction for their future.

Israel symbolized and celebrated her faith in this tent-church. It carried both the history and the future hope of Israel’s faith within it, and stood as a constant reminder of her identity as God’s chosen people. At the same time, it was designed and equipped to be mobile, responsive to change, and to provide what the people needed spiritually as they continued their pilgrimage from bondage to the promised land. . . .

My contention is that the tabernacle is closer to the New Testament image of the church than is the temple. We have mentioned earlier that Peter refers to the Christian community as the diaspora, the aliens or pilgrims, when describing their situation in the world in his first epistle. The early church clearly had that sense about itself. Its first self-denomination was “the followers of the Way,” which conveys the sense of movement and pilgrimage that we find in Peter and in the tabernacle.

But very early in its history, the church began to adapt itself to the temple mentality. We see this in its architecture, once Christians began to build buildings or adapt other religious buildings to their use. Gradually, the accoutrements of temple worship crept into the church (we really cannot sort out how and when), so that within a few centuries we have altars, priestly orders, and many of the features of the temple-oriented religions that thrived in the Mediterranean world.

As the Christian church became more and more woven into the fabric of society and government in the Western world, its temple self-interpretation expanded and hardened. The church became the central institution in the typical town or village, symbolized still today by the church steeple that dominates the skylines of Europe and America.

The distinction between secular and sacred developed into a system according to which all of social life, even the practices of calendar keeping, was regulated. Rather than being understood as a pilgrim people, following God through history, the church was seen as a great unchangeable and permanent presence in the world, guaranteeing those central and sacred realities that the haphazard course of human history could not affect. In that position, the church exercised great power. But we must regard that power as a threat in many ways to the church’s obedience to its primary calling.

A missional church is a unified body of believers, [1] intent on being God’s missionary presence [2] to the indigenous community that surrounds them, [3] recognizing that God is already at work. [4]

__________________________

One of the key elements of moving an existing congregation in a missional direction involves assisting the church in understanding cultural shifts. The most significant shift for the church to consider is the one from Christendom to Post-Christendom. Without a clear grasp of the significant missiological and ecclesiological changes that are necessary in a Post-Christendom context, a missional posture will be impossible to develop. Following are seven such shifts taken from the Anabaptist Network Newsletter:

From the centre to margins: in Christendom the Christian story and the churches were central, but in post-Christendom these are marginal.

From majority to minority: in Christendom Christians comprised the (often overwhelming) majority, but in post-Christendom we are a minority.

From settlers to sojourners: in Christendom Christians felt at home in a culture shaped by their story, but in post-Christendom we are aliens, exiles and pilgrims in a culture where we no longer feel at home.

From privilege to plurality: in Christendom Christians enjoyed many privileges, but in post-Christendom we are one community among many in a plural society.

From control to witness: in Christendom churches could exert control over society, but in post-Christendom we exercise influence only through witnessing to our story and its implications.

From maintenance to mission: in Christendom the emphasis was on maintaining a supposedly Christian status quo, but in post-Christendom it is on mission within a contested environment.

From institution to movement: in Christendom churches operated mainly in institutional mode, but in post-Christendom we must become again a Christian movement.

Here is an interesting video dialog (produced/edited by Bill Kinnon) between Alan Roxbugh and Pat Keifert. They discuss a wide range of issues, including definitions/descriptions of missional church, common views of the contemporary church, and leadership in missional congregations.

In the discussion on leadership I appreciate Keifert’s emphasis on leadership being more about time than about a position. He speaks about the leader cultivating segments of time to assist the congregation in discerning what God is doing in their local context. It is about taking the time to create environments for people to dwell in the Word. It is about having the time to be patient — to hear from God and to hear from each other.

Another topic that I found interesting dealt with Keifert’s journey towards the missional church conversation. He shares how it involved both “failure” and “discovery.” The failure involved disenchantment with his own ministry experience in a traditional church. The discovery included the reading of Newbigin’s “Foolishness to the Greeks.”

I think Keifert’s journey parallels the experience of many. There is a deep sense of  uneasiness, frustration, or even failure in a current ministry setting. Church leaders recognize something isn’t right about how they do ministry. They sense that something has changed, but they are unsure about the essence of the change, or what changes might be necessary. At some point, however, they “discover” that others have experienced the same anxiety. They “discover” authors that begin to give language to these changes. Perhaps, like Keifert its Newbigin, or Bosch; or more recently, maybe it is Guder, Van Gelder, Hirsch, or Frost. But regardless of the author, they rediscover the missionary nature of God and His church, and the reality that the church is sent into the mission field that is now North America.

This has certainly been my journey. I wonder about your experience. Has failure + discovery propelled you into the missional conversation?

Over the past year I have had an increasing number of conversations with pastors and church leaders about the church’s inability to “reach” their local communities. Many local churches have come to the realization that they have lost the ability to “attract” people to church programs and events. They sense that something has changed, but they are unsure about the essence of the change and what ministry adjustments might be necessary. In most cases, the leaders have no “grid” or “framework” to rethink the form and function of the church. Therefore, they lean towards a solution that ultimately involves more of the same church growth principles and programming.

I believe, as many of you that follow this blog, that a significant portion of the “solution” begins with recapturing the missionary nature of God and His church. The “framework” that is necessary is found in the best of the missional church conversation that is taking place today.

I have been studying and participating in this conversation for the past decade. Last year I completed a doctoral project that was targeted on assisting churches in the development of a missional ecclesiology. The core of the training project included three major elements.

The first piece of the training attempted to answer the question, “What is Missional Church?” During this portion of the training we examined the biblical, theological, and missiological underpinnings of the missional conversation. We also conducted a brief survey of the history of missional church, along with exploring what others were saying on the topic.

The second portion of the training focused on understanding the cultural shifts that have taken place in North America, and how those shifts have contributed to the marginalization of the church. This second element speaks to the question of “Why is the Missional Church conversation important?”

The third element of the training dealt with missional practice, or the question, “How can an existing church cultivate a more missional posture?” In this final section of the training we focused on issues surrounding community engagement and transformation, as well as how to make incremental changes in a missional direction with resources such as prayer, time, staff, facilities, and finances.

I share this brief training outline as an introduction to what I would be willing to share with other local congregations. I would like to make available a customized seminar that would focus on the series of topics mentioned above. The training could be customized to any size group that was most helpful. It could range from a two hour presentation targeted to a selected group of church leaders to a full day seminar presented to the whole congregation. You would decide the best fit for your situation and local context.

I want to make perfectly clear, that I am not trying to “make a buck” off of the missional church conversation. In fact, because I am supported by a national mission organization, the North American Mission Board, I would lead such a seminar with no required fee. I simply desire to assist churches and church leaders to better understand the missional conversation, and the significant implications it has for a local congregation.

If you have questions or would like to discuss what this might look like for your church, simply email me at brad.brisco@gmail.com