Daniel Rose: The Pastor Next Door

>submitted by Robin Schmidt

It is the information age. We can find out pretty much anything through books, television, or the world wide web.

We value knowledge and pursue it. We have game shows where people compete to see who possesses greater knowledge. Remember Ken from Jeopardy? He seemed to know EVERYTHING. We believe knowledge is power. If we know then we are in control.

My father-in-law is not a doctor, but he plays one on the internet. With a small amount of research he can diagnose symptoms, attempt to manage treatment and presume to advise doctors. Sometimes a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Recently, I have been reflecting on the connection between knowledge and fear.

In the beginning there was a tree and it was called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Of all that God created this was the one tree whose fruit man and woman could not eat.

Then came the lie. You will not die if you eat this fruit, said the serpent, eat it and your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.

You will be like God. What did the woman think that meant? Exactly like God? Equal to God? Did she get that it was just like God in knowing?

Fast forward a few hundred/thousand years and consider some shepherds outside of Bethlehem. An angel appeared to them, and his first words were: Fear not. Why? Because an angel appeared to the shepherds and suddenly they knew. They knew that angels existed. They knew they were not alone. They knew what an angel sounded like, looked like, and they were afraid, sore afraid.

Faced with the knowledge of an angel, we know we are not the biggest thing going. We are NOT God, we are little and powerless and vulnerable and we become afraid. Very afraid. Sore afraid.

We are made in God’s image but we don’t have his perspective, his power, you name it we ain’t got it. So, here we are, NOT a lot like God, only now we know.

The woman saw that the tree was good for food, it was a delight to the eye and it was desirable for gaining knowledge. She desired knowledge so she took it and ate and gave it to the man.

You might say she had a hunger for knowledge. So do we.

They ate the fruit and they recognized their nakedness and attempted to hide it and then hid themselves from God because they were afraid.

Afraid of what?

I’m thinking they were afraid of what they knew.

God told them not to eat from that tree, presumably because they didn’t need to know good and evil. God walked with them in the garden and was asking them to live on a need to know basis. But knowledge is power and we want to know.

The thing is, they already knew all they needed to know. They knew God.

Here is something I put together about applying the missional concept to the role of “Youth Pastor”. What do you think?

Introduction

There has been a fundamental change in the way the world works over the last twenty-five years. The shift has been called “post-modernism” or “hyper-modernity” or “post-Christian” or “post-Christendom”. Regardless of what one calls the paradigm change, the change has indeed happened. The way that most people see and understand the world is very different than it was not very long ago. You could say, “this ain’t your mama’s world anymore”. The kind of shift that has happened is as thoroughgoing as the shift that took place in the 1960’s, maybe even more so.

The environment that the children of the emerging generations are growing up with is a unique one that the church, their parents, and their educators have not ever experienced. The rampant individualism, the emphasis on a radical consumerism, and the overdevelopment of the institutional church are leaving the emerging generations out of the spiritual conversation. If we are going to reach the emerging generations there has to be a change that takes place on a fundamental level.
Consider briefly the reality that the Benoit Mindset List tells us of this year’s graduating seniors:
“Most of the students entering College this fall, members of the Class of 2011, were born in 1989. For them, Alvin Ailey, Andrei Sakharov, Huey Newton, Emperor Hirohito, Ted Bundy, Abbie Hoffman, and Don the Beachcomber have always been dead.

1. What Berlin wall?
2. Rush Limbaugh and the “Dittoheads” have always been lambasting liberals.
3. They never “rolled down” a car window.
4. They may confuse the Keating Five with a rock group.
5. They have grown up with bottled water.
6. General Motors has always been working on an electric car.
7. Nelson Mandela has always been free and a force in South Africa.
8. Pete Rose has never played baseball.
9. Rap music has always been mainstream.
10. Religious leaders have always been telling politicians what to do, or else!
11. “Off the hook” has never had anything to do with a telephone.
12. Russia has always had a multi-party political system.
13. Women have always been police chiefs in major cities.
14. Classmates could include Michelle Wie, Jordin Sparks, and Bart Simpson.
15. Wal-Mart has always been a larger retailer than Sears and has always employed more workers than GM.
16. 16. Being “lame” has to do with being dumb or inarticulate, not disabled.
17. When all else fails, the Prozac defense has always been a possibility.
18. Multigrain chips have always provided healthful junk food.
19. They grew up in Wayne’s World.
20. U2 has always been more than a spy plane.
21. Stadiums, rock tours and sporting events have always had corporate names.
22. Commercial product placements have been the norm in films and on TV.
23. Women’s studies majors have always been offered on campus.
24. Being a latchkey kid has never been a big deal.
25. Thanks to MySpace and Facebook, autobiography can happen in real time.
26. High definition television has always been available.
27. Microbreweries have always been ubiquitous.
28. Virtual reality has always been available when the real thing failed.
29. Tiananmen Square is a 2008 Olympics venue, not the scene of a massacre.
30. MTV has never featured music videos.
31. They get much more information from Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert than from the newspaper.
32. They’re always texting 1 n other.
33. They never saw Johnny Carson live on television.
34. Avatars have nothing to do with Hindu deities.
35. The World Wide Web has been an online tool since they were born.”

Biblical Foundations

The change is simple and yet so radical that we might simply dismiss it out of hand without thinking through the consequences. The fact of the matter is that we as the church are like most auto manufacturers. We are seeking to outsource the spiritual formation of the emerging generations.
Biblically the primary function of the parent is to “bring them [children] up in the training and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4). Interestingly, the emphasis is on the father here. He is not to “exasperate” his child. This is the role of the parent. It is their responsibility to train and instruct their child in the Lord.

This idea is not new to the Newer Testament but is found throughout the Older Testament as well. A key passage is in Deuteronomy 6:1–9:

“1 These are the commands, decrees and laws the LORD your God directed me to teach you to observe in the land that you are crossing the Jordan to possess, 2 so that you, your children and their children after them may fear the LORD your God as long as you live by keeping all his decrees and commands that I give you, and so that you may enjoy long life. 3 Hear, O Israel, and be careful to obey so that it may go well with you and that you may increase greatly in a land flowing with milk and honey, just as the LORD, the God of your fathers, promised you.

4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. 5 Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. 6 These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. 7 Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. 8 Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. 9 Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates.”

The concepts of the parents passing on the fundamental truth about who God is, is placed on the shoulders of the parents.

It is not the responsibility of the youth pastor. It is not the responsibility of the Christian school. It is not the responsibility of the Sunday School. The spiritual formation of the child is the parent’s responsibility.

The body of believers is then to come alongside the parent to aid in that process of spiritual formation. This is communal. Think about what you just read there in Deuteronomy 6. Could you imagine being a child and every home you went to had Deuteronomy 6:4, 5 written on the doorposts? You would be exposed to it at every turn.

The other key thing is that at a very early age (probably 13) boys and girls were understood to be fully a part of the community of faith. The disciples of Jesus were most likely teenagers. The covenants were bestowed on children at eight days old!

Today, most people younger than 35 in our faith communities are seen as children who are not ready to exert leadership. It’s nice if they want to be in a choir or a play, even play in the band. But, they are not challenged to teach, to engage as leaders in the community. How many conversations take place around the dinner tables in our homes about spiritual things? Does family worship take place? Is there intentionality of the parent to teach their child spiritual truth?

Missional Paradigm Applied

Approximately 80% of churched children do not continue in their faith after high school. The keys to retention seem to be pretty straightforward, discipleship and parental involvement.

Most churches however, hire “Youth Pastors”. The job descriptions are simple. Reach out and care for our High School and Junior High students while providing support for K-5.

The consistent pull in youth ministry over the last twenty-five years has been to create a bigger, better program. If you entertain them, they will come. The hard part is that you keep them by how you get them. The entertainment has to be bigger, better, and more awesome each week or they will go down the block to the other church.

What if we saw the children in our congregation as not simply kids but as image bearers of the triune God? What if the parents were engaged in the spiritual development of their children? What if we sought to actually send our kids out as ambassadors and engaged with them as brothers and sisters in Christ?

To achieve this there would have to be a fundamental transformation in the role of the “Youth Pastor”. He would have to become a “Family Pastor”. To understand what “Family” pastor means one must first define what is meant by “family”.

Family is the core building block of a community. This would include young married people to those who have sent their children to college. This would also include single parents and blended families. The reason is that marriage is the primary foundation for godly parenting. The Family Pastor would first help marriages to be healthy and then build on that foundation when as people have children. He will help in the transition from no kids to one child to elementary to middle school to high school to college.

This role would have him focusing on the discipleship of parents, helping them to engage their children in spiritual formation. He would then be freed to foster the “youth” of the church to be missionaries to their peers.

This means that the ministry of the church to the youth would have a focus on pulling the children into mission as opposed to pushing them through a program. The emphasis would be on training. Sending them to their peers as ambassadors for Christ.

A developing community of Christ followers who happened to be young people would replace programs. “Church” would become a place to connect with other Christ followers on mission. Sunday mornings would be a time of worship, prayer, training, and teaching.

Young people would be pulled into the rest of the community. They would be influenced by 80 somethings, 70 somethings, and on and on.

Generational differentiation would be replaced as young people are seen as participating members of the community. The Family pastor would help to bridge the gaps between generations.
Youth involvement would move beyond babysitting and singing in the choir to a full engagement in the life of the church. Youth would be seen and understood as people created in the image God along with adults. Believing youth would be recognized as fellow believers indwelt by the Holy Spirit with spiritual gifts.

As emerging generations graduate and leave the context of the church and enter the world, they will leave with a firm grasp of their faith, and how it functions in the context of the body of Christ.
To move from program to organic community in realm of families and youth will require time. There will be consolidation. But, when the gospel is embraced by a generation (be it emerging, Boomer, or even X) the results are explosive.

Nuts and Bolts
The big question that must be answered is practically what does this look like in a job description for a search committee of a church that desires to apply the missional approach to “youth” ministry. The key would be not the development of programs but a pastor who is focused on discipleship as his primary ministry. I think that it could look something like this:

• An embracing of the concept of covenantal family.
• This points to the fact that within the body of Christ there are covenantal families that comprise it.
• Children are brought to adulthood, recognized as adults, and differentiated from their parents.
• Shepherds families (as defined above)
• Marriage support
• Parenting training
• Oversees and develops volunteers in all youth ministries.
• Disciples parents and trains them to engage in spiritual formation of their children.
• Disciples teens and sends them out on mission to their peers.
• Develops an environment of spiritual formation for youth church-wide cross generationally so that all believers are embraced and sent as laborers.
• Recruiting and developing multi-generational disciplers.
• Drawing teens into discipleship relationships beyond their parents and peers.
• Develops an organic community among youth and families where youth are continued to be developed into adulthood and maturity in the faith.
• Develops and provides opportunities for training and involvement in mission in the peer and familial context.
• Develops an environment where the family is the first discipler but not the only discipler, thereby creating an environment where teens are prepared to be discipled outside the family context.
• Teens are developed and sent as adults and mature believers upon graduation.
• An acknowledgement from the church that this will be an imperfect and messy process.

Imagine…
Imagine generation after generation of covenant children embracing their relationship with God as their own…

Imagine sending High School seniors as ambassadors for Christ to the university, work force, and the world, year after year…

Imagine healthy marriages that foster an environment for healthy parenting…

Imagine parents and children engaged with Jesus together…

Imagine generation after generation Christ-followers being born, grown, and sent to the world…

Imagine our church changing the world by sending laborers to the harvest one son and one daughter at a time…
Imagine the Lord smiling and saying to each generation of parents, “Well done, my good and faithful servants.”

It’s hard to imagine a few weeks ago when I sat down with my friend Doug at the Bean and he encouraged me to read Allelon.org’s blogs about the missional church that it would have led to a month of thinking more deeply about what it means to be the church. The next day I walked into the library at Michigan Theological Seminary and grabbed a little book called The Forgotten Ways. This is post eight, the last chapter of the book: Communitas, not Community.

I think that the opening quote from Paulo Coelho is best summary of the chapter where he says, “The ship is safest when it is in port. But that’s not what ships were made for.”

The quote says it all. In recent times there has been an emphasis on “community”. This emphasis has always highlighted the church being a safe place, a retreat from the world. The metaphor of a hospital has been used. The community was a place where you can come and be yourself and be accepted and find rest.

Hirsch argues this is the Constantinian, institutional, Christendom at its best! I agree.

The difference between community and communitas is the purpose for the gathering of the people. There are many similarities but there is one key difference. That is mission.

Hirsch uses a number of illustrations for communitas but the one that resonated with me the most is the Fellowship of the Ring. This radical little band of hobbits, men, an elf, a dwarf, and a wizard set out to defeat the ultimate evil. They start as tolerating each other at best. But, by the end of the mission they are something different. They experienced communitas.

The organization that I work for has something called “Summer Project”. In the states it is a 10–12 week mission experience for college students. They work at the local McD’s or Starbucks. They proclaim the gospel on the beach. The best summer projects are those that have communitas, where the mission of turning lost students into Christ-centered laborers is always present and being pursued.

The problem with communitas is that it requires there to be conflict. The Fellowship of the Ring fought against insurmountable odds. Summer project students have to face support raising and spiritual attack. Or consider a sports team, like the Detroit Red Wings who had to face injury, horrible officiating, and a league front office that did everything they could to keep them from winning Lord Stanley’s Cup.

The church in the West since the time of Constatine has for the most part not faced very much conflict. Sure there have been internal struggles mut not much outward. There is no persecution. Just a calm acceptance of the church’s presence. The church has become comfortable and lost its sense of mission (does this sound familiar? If not read parts 1–3).

When a community goes on mission together it ceases to be community and becomes communitas. It experiences pain, conflict, joy, victory, defeat. It goes through something toward something. I think that’s why when churches are ramping up for a program they experience something different but then the program happens and the experience is not sustained. That’s because the ramp up feels like mission but in the end it is not.

To experience communitas requires the radical transformation of the very reason for why we gather as a community. Will we gather as a community to sing? To pray? To hear the Bible taught? All nice things. All things that will develop community. But if we gather to do these apart from being on mission then we are missing something, we are missing communitas.

Community is a ship in port. Communitas is a ship at sea. The ship is not designed for port. The ship is designed for the sea. The church is not designed for community. It is designed at its core DNA to be communitas.

Th ramifications of this are so huge that I might develop carpal tunnel syndrome trying to write them. The key thing that I want to think more about though is how can we send every part of the church on mission? A week in Mexico is a nice beginning but it is barely scratching the surface. What does it look like to be on mission as a people of God everyday, from young to old? This is the core question of communitas.

As I sit here at home I have just finished the book! So we are on the home stretch with only a couple of posts on The Forgotten Ways remain. This chapter was one that I was not particularly looking forward to. As a result it took a while to chew through it. However, it turns out that “Organic Systems” are actually pretty cool things! Who knew?

I think that the best way to understand the concept of “Organic Systems” in Hirsch’s mindset is to think about a spiderweb. The whole web is connected to itself. There are multiple nodes and lines. The whole thing is interconnected. This is what an organic system is all about.

Consider our body. There are multiple little systems like the nervous system, skeletal system, or epidermal system, but each one by itself does not a body make. They all come together and create a body. This is what the church ought to look like.

The church, Hirsch argues, is a living system. This means that it is marked by certain elements that set it apart from a static system. A static system represents something solid. Consider a chair or some other inanimate object. It is assembled and when finished does not change. No matter what room it is in the chair remains exactly the same.

Now, consider a living system. It is always growing, adapting, and changing. Think of a plant. If it is in a room where a window is to its left the plant will grow towards the light and have a bit of leftward orientation. If you move the plant to the other side of the window then it will change its orientation to the light. It is liquid and not solid.

Hirsch makes a compelling argument that the church is to be like this plant. It is to be liquid. The church is to be ever changing as it pushes forward into new cultures and times and people groups. The manifestation of the church must look different for each context within which it finds itself.

To achieve this it must have a system that is liquid and not static. This means that there must be a movement ethos within the church itself. A movement ethos is that mindset of being on mission with Jesus towards the ends building his kingdom for his glory.

Leadership within this system is decentralized and spread out. Hirsch points to Al Qaeda as a picture of how this works in reality. Each individual cell has the DNA to reproduce the entire movement. This is why all the armies of the first world cannot stomp it out. This is why the persecuted church grows with such rapidity. The leadership is not centralized in one person or in a group of persons.

The church must be constantly birthing new cells with their own leaders who can and do embed the mDNA. This is very different from the way the institutional church plants. Hirsch argues that the Christendom model is cloning as opposed to birthing. In a clone the new church seeks to look just like the parent church. In birthing there is a combination of different factors that bring about something new (not to mention the fact that making a baby is more fun than cloning one).

Hirsch uses the example of Willow Creek and Saddleback to paint this picture. A church plant from these places will have difficulty in reproducing the level of programming and excellence that the original brings, because by its very nature it does not have the critical mass to do so. However, if you birth a new church it will take the mDNA of the parent and combine it with a new context thus creating a whole new church that belongs in the family of the parent but is itself a unique embodiment of the mDNA.

This is what organic systems are all about. He argues that organic systems grow by hyperbolic multiplication as opposed to linear addition. The example he cites is Pay it Forward the film that protrayed the story of a boy who is assigned the task of changing the world. He devises a plan where you don’t pay back someone for doing something good but you pay it forward. The effects were deep and lasting. The arrangement was that you pay forward two good deeds when someone does something good to you. This rippled to the other side of the country.

Hirsch argues that it is this hyperbolic growth that saw the Chinese church grow from 2,000,000 to 60,000,000 in forty years. The picture is quite simple. Each individual covenants to lead two people to trust Christ and disciple them sending them out to do the same. Each church covenants to plant two churches and pushes them to do the same. It would not take long to reach the whole world with the gospel.

This chapter is simple spiritual multiplication. It is something that most of us have known about for years and years. However, most of our churches have not embraced this. We have moved into a fortress mentality where bigger is better and safer. We pull people in and out of the world as opposed to discipling them and sending them out.

What would happen if our church, your church, grasped and applied this principle of hyperbolic growth? Are we willing to change? Are we willing to push leadership to the edges? Are we willing to send, send, send?

If the church is going to become this embodiment of Jesus in a communal way then there is a foundational issue that must be dealt with. That is our conception of what it means to lead. How do we lead if we have set aside the corporate and the coercive models of power?

Hirsch argues that there is a change in the leadership environment of the church. This means that there must be an embracing of what he calls “Apostolic Leadership”. This kind of leadership he argues is one of function and not office. The concept of leadership as being function and not office is a big deal in the tradition that I come out of. Offices are critical to the leadership of the church in my tradition, those of Elder and Deacon.

To move our leadership beyond these offices is not something that can be taken lightly. However, this idea of function means quite simply that anyone, regardless of office, can lead. So, what are the functions of the apostolic leader?

1. The apostolic leader embeds mDNA through the taking of new ground for the gospel and the church. The church is to be dynamic and ever growing, therefore, the leadership must transcend sitting at a desk, to actually engaging in the mission of the church. This means that the apostolic is building into others the mDNA.
2. The apostolic leader guards mDNA through the integration and application of apostolic theology. This means that the apostolic leader is not just pioneering new things but she is also making sure that the church stays on course as the dynamic people on a mission.
3. The apostolic leader creates the environment for even more ministry to emerge. The apostolic ministry is the one that is the touchstone for all other ministries. This means that a teacher can’t teach if he has no people. A pastor can’t shepherd an empty community. The apostolic ministry creates the environment that brings about the possibility for all the other ministries listed in Ephesians 4 to exist.

Apostolic ministry (this is the touchstone ministry) creates the environment for the prophetic ministry (without this ministry evangelism becomes hollow and God himself becomes an idol) which creates the environment for the evangelistic (it opens the hearer to the message of the evangelist) which creates the ministry for the pastoral (exposes the disciple to their need for understanding) which creates the environment for the teaching (teaching from the revealed will of God that brings understanding).

The apostolic leader is one who comes into leadership not through the appointment of a role but is a leader because of who he is. This Hirsch terms “greatness”. This greatness is organic, inspirational, and profoundly spiritual. The example of the apostolic leader is Jesus. Jesus led with an amazing humility and authority that drew people into not just a follower but a discipleship where they sought to become like him.

Hirsch argues that an apostolic leader is one who can create “webs of meaning”. This means that he is able to bring about the connections of many different people, groups, and agencies by creating the apostolic environment where meaning is brought about by focusing on the mission of Jesus.

There is so much more detail in the Hirsch’s chapter that I can’t possibly cover it all. I think that this is a decent synopsis of the Apostolic Environment. The impact of this is important to keep in mind. Too often the person who is wired for apostolic ministry is seen as a trouble maker. She is never satisfied with the status quo. He is frustrated with the lack of outward looking concern for the people on the fringes. The questions that are before us are simple, are we willing to embrace these people as opposed to shunning them? Are leaders willing to learn how to be apostolic? Are pastors willing to bring others into leadership?

In my tradition where there is a plurality of leadership there is great opportunity. The question is though are we willing to disciple new elders who fit in all five kinds of leaders: apostles, prophets, evangelist, pastors, and teachers?

Part five is upon us! The Missional Incarnational Impulse. What the heck does that mean? This is another chapter where Hirsch makes it pretty clear that he must define his term in the negative, what I mean is that, a positive declaration of “missional-incarnational impulse” is difficult in and of itself to define, therefore, you have to state what it is not to bring clarity to what it is!

Missional-incarnational impulse is basically the opposite of the attractional model of the church. What is the attractional model, you ask? Well, it is the idea that we are to draw people into the church building by providing the best, most exciting, and most relevant programming that we can possibly fathom. I think the best way to illustrate the attractional model of the church is from Field of Dreams, “If you build it, they will come.”

The opposite of this is the concept of mission. What do you think of when you consider the word “missionary”? Mostly you think of Wycliffe or New Tribes or the Jesus Film or some ministry that send white folks to places where “no man has gone before”. They live in huts and try to bring Christianity to a people far, far away. However, this is not the heart of “mission”. Hirsch, I think rightly, argues that when you think about being a “missionary” the person in the mirror ought to come to mind.

To that end he provides the theological backdrop for the fact that the people of God are on mission and not to be cloistered in a church building. He argues from John 20:21, “As the Father has sent me, I am sending you (cf, 5:36–37, 6:44, 8:16–18, 17:18; I also think you could back to Genesis and the Abrahamic covenant in Gen 12 and 15 and you see the sending heart of God there, in the beginning).” So, from the beginning of the Jesus movement the focus was on sending as opposed to attracting. Hirsch calls this the “sneeze effect.” The movement of the gospel is to be like a sneeze sending germs out! It is a web of multiplication as opposed to a straight line of addition.

That defines “mission” but what is incarnation? John 1:1–18. The word became flesh. Jesus is the God-man. The perfect embodiment of God and man. Two natures. One person. Jesus, Emmanuel, God with us. This is incarnation. It is a mystery. In light of this Hirsch points out four dimensions of the incarnation (here I will quote extensively from page 132):

1. Presence: In Jesus the eternal God is fully present to us; he was God in the flesh (Jn 1:1–15; Col. 2:9).
2. Proximity: God in Christ approached us not only in a way we can understand but in a way we can access. He not only called people to repentance and proclaimed the direct presence of God but befriended outcast people and lived life in proximity with the broken and “the lost” (Luke 19:10).
3. Powerlessness: In becoming “one of us”, God takes the form of a servant and that of someone who rules over us (Phil 2:6ff; Luke 22:25–27). In acting in this way he shuns all notions of coercive power and demonstrates for us how love and humility (powerlessness) reflect the true nature of God and are the key means to transform human society.
4. Proclamation: Not only did the Presence of God directly dignify all that is human, but he heralded the reign of God and called people to respond in repentance and faith. In this he initiates the gospel invitation, which is active to this very day.

The issue then is that we must apply these four dimensions to our own lifestyles. So consider my own reflections about how this looks:

1. Presence: We must be “in” our neighborhoods and communities. That means that we play a role in the life and rhythm of our neighborhoods. Go to an association meeting. Join in cleaning up the neighborhood greenspace. Coach baseball. Be a part of the PTA. Volunteer somewhere. A friend of mine once said that 99% of ministry is just “showing up”. We need to show up.
2. Proximity:We must make ourselves available to relationship. This means that we make time for chatting at the mailbox with the neighbor. This means that we invite someone over to watch the big game. This means that we go when invited to watch the big game! This means that we havet to be willing to open our lives and invite people in. But, the same goes for our churches. It’s awful tough to invite someone to worship when it’s 25 miles away. Proximity is also the physical closeness of the gathering of worshipers.
3. Powerlessness: We must be servants. Shovel your neighbors walk. Watch their kids so they can go on a date to work on their marriage. Actually listen and care about what is going on in their lives and not waiting for an opportunity to “share the gospel”. Powerlessness means in the church envrionment that leaders are working at raising up more leaders and discipling themselves out of a job.
4. Proclamation: Recognizing that we are part of a “message tribe”. This means that in our opening our lives we are faithfully communicating the story of Jesus in our lives (actions) and in words. This means that we UNASHAMEDLY communicate the need to know Jesus and that he is the center of who we are. We need to be bold and clear. Believe it or not if we hide this about ourselves and then “spring” it on people they will actually be more offended.

This living will require us to know what is going on around us. We will have to study our communities like a missionary going to a foreign land. We will have to know with certainty the language they speak (are they Losties or into McDreamy? And if you don’t know what I am talking about then it’s time to get our from under your rock).

Ultimately this missional-incarnational impulse means that we take church to the people. 

Think about what would happen if we were to actually take the gospel to people. It would spread. It would spread everywhere. We would be living locally and caring deeply for people. Our communitites would change. But, something else would happen. The gospel would spread out to their webs of relationships. Soon, the gospel will go all over the world.

This spreading creates the necessity for new churches. New local communities of worshippers (isn’t this what we see in Acts?). These new communities continue to spread and send. The gospel takes root in new cultures and communities and then gets passed on again.

Finally, how do we get all this in order. Simple. Christology determines Missiology determines Ecclesiology. What does that mean? Our understanding of who Jesus is determines what we believe our mission is and what we believe our mission is determines “how” we are the church!

If we believe that Jesus is sending us out then we must go and be incarnational, like him. If this is our mission, then the church building becomes less of a central place for programming and becomes a gathering place for the discipleship and sending of missionaries!

I am beginning to think that this is huge! One thing that Hirsch has not really addressed in this idea of incarnational is that the Holy Spirit lives in us. Think about the reality of this! The third person of the Trinity of God lives inside me, you, and any person who follows Jesus. We ARE incarnational. This “transition” from attractional to “incarnational” is one that actually WANT to make but simply fear it. Because if we do, then something messy results. We become powerless and have to relinquish ourselves to the Holy Spirit.

The Heart of It All — Jesus is Lord. So, now what? The first main principle that Hirsch lays out is that of disciple making. The development of disciples has taken on a new cool twist recently with all the emphasis on the Jewish life and what a Rabbi really is and therefore what it means to be a disciple. Hirsch steps in a provides a clear, succinct, and challenging picture of what discipleship is all about. How important is discipleship? Hirsch argues, “if we fail at this point then we must fail in all the others.”

So what is discipleship? It is the embedding of mDNA into other people. It is that process by which men and women follow Jesus are built into people who can reproduce their lives into others. This is God’s plan for sending his message all over the world. And it as Hirsch puts it, “it worked.”

Discipleship has taken on many labels over the years, Robert Coleman called it “The Master Plan of Evangelism”. The envogue thing these days to be a disciple of Jesus, getting his “dust all over you.” Here’s the thing. We all talk about discipleship. We all know that being a disciple is an important thing to be. But, how many people actually practice discipleship? This is the real question.

Hirsch challenges our concept in this subject based on the reality that church involvement has become the lowest common denominator. The “seeker-sensitive” church has made it so that anyone can come to church. In the early church to be a member you had to work through the “catechisms”. This could take years.

When there is danger surrounding the church and it has to make sure that false brothers are not slipping in then discipleship takes on a whole new meaning. In the West we do not fear for our lives. In the West we are able to shop for our church and find the one with the best program and the least amount of commitment. This simply is not possible in the persecuted church or the early church.

Hirsch has labeled his concept of discipleship as “The Conspiracy of the Little Jesus”. This means that he understands Matthew 28:18–20 to be Jesus casting a vision for there to be “a lot of little versions” of himself “infiltrating every nook and cranny of himself.”

This is the heart of what it means to be missional. There is a build and send aspect to the entire concept of discipleship in the missional church. Discipleship has often been understood as come out to church, Sunday school, Wednesday nights. These events constantly pull people out from their worlds.

The missional understanding of discipleship is one where building and sending takes place at the same time. Discipleship cannot be done rightly in the walls of a church but it must be done out in the world. We must continue to go out and enter into every aspect of the world.

Hirsch argues, and I think convincingly, that this is the center of what it means to be “in Christ” or “abiding in Christ”.

The key to discipleship in Hirsch’s mind is embodiment. This concept simply means that the “teacher” needs to be living out the Christ message in life before the “learner”. So, again we must take another look at what it means to do discipleship. It’s not taking people through a curriculum. It is living life with other believers in the context of their world.

Paul uses imitation language throughout his writing. Can someone learn to imitate another by hanging out at church? In a coffee shop? No. They need to do life together. Discipleship is something that has to be intentional. It has to be all-inclusive.

Discipleship then has significant ramifications for how the church is led. Hirsch puts it succinctly, “leadership to be genuinely Christian, must always reflect Christlikeness and therefore…discipleship.”

Movements can only reach as far as the leadership base. Leaders in the missional church are self-reproducing, fully devoted disciples. Therefore, leaders can only be built as disciples are built. In the missional church the best way to judge health of the movement is the number of disciples that are reproducing their lives.

Discipleship is a necessity. Discipleship is the core practice of the missional church.

The way that Hirsch argues for discipleship to take place is right practice bringing about right belief. That is, processing what it means to be a Christ follower as we go. That is thrusting people into mission RIGHT NOW and teaching them on the job, as it were.

Think about all the things that we learn to do: walking, talking, socializing, all of it is done through doing and learning as you go. This is the same for following Christ. We need to take people and get them doing it. Involve them and they will become more like Christ.

I think that there is so much good here in the discussion that Hirsch provides on discipleship. There are some things that I think are inherently hard for us in the West to swallow. Especially, those of us in suburban life. How can we do life together when our congregations travel as much as an hour to come to church?

Personally, I know of two families in our church that live in my suburb. We travel 20 minutes to church. Why? Because there is a need for reformed, biblical communities in metro Detroit.

What would it look like to organize a church around its communities? What if a church organized cell/small groups based on geography and said, “Do life together. Include others from your community.” Eat dinner together. Have your kids play with each other.

What is all this took place in the rhythm of life? What if we chose to limit the number of times we “pulled out” people from the world in which they live?

Discipleship is radical. Am I willing to be radical?

Hirsch gets going into the “heart of it all” in chapter 3. This chapter lays out the necessity for Jesus to be Lord. This is the center of mDNA, oh, wait, I am ahead of myself. What is mDNA? This is the organic coding for Apostolic Genius. What is Apostolic Genius?

Well, it’s the results of mDNA.

Enough playing around. mDNA is comprised of the five key principles along with the driving story that “Jesus is Lord.” mDNA it is argued is found within each believer and when it is unleashed the result is Apostolic Genius which is best understood to be the ability to live out what it means to be the church.

The five key principles:

1. Disciplemaking
2. Missional-Incarnational Impulse
3. Apostolic Environment
4. Organic Systems
5. Communitas NOT Community

The next few chapters will be focused on these six concepts. So, let’s begin with the driving story that Jesus is Lord.

The heart of Chapter 3 is this controlling story that Jesus is Lord. Hirsch provides the technical term of “Christocentric Monotheism.” This story is the one that defines who we are as men and women that seek to follow Jesus. The monotheistic concept, Hirsch argues, takes form only in tension with the polytheistic worldviews that existed in the Older Testament accounts and in the Newer Testament accounts and in our own time.

It is easy for people to think about the story in tension with the Baal worship of the pagan Ancient Near East. It is easy to think about the Greek and Roman gods creating tension. But, what about now? What about in the contemporary West? Sure, there is Hinduism and certain forms of New Age religion, or even Buddhism (which in its truest sense is atheistic). But, these religions don’t seem to create the tension that we see in the Bible.

Hirsch argues that it is consumerism in our time. Consumerism the critical story in conflict with the Jesus story in our day and time. The gods of Consumerism create the conflict with other religions, within our own religion, and with one another.

The reason that Christocentric Monotheism is in such conflict with the gods of Consumerism is because at its heart this radical monotheism is not a theological perspective but is an “existential claim that there is only on God and he is Lord of every aspect of life (Hirsch, 89). This concept gets fleshed out further in the following chapters as it plays into the five principles.

Hirsch also argues that there is no secular/sacred division for the follower of Christ. This is critical. He states unequivocably that as Christians divide their space then they become practicing polytheists. One god for Sunday, one for Monday, one at work, one on vacation (go to spring break in Panama City Beach or ‘What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas’).

I was deeply challenged by this chapter and it has caused me to again consider what is at the heart of my relationship with God. Why am I Christian? Do I live daily in the reality that Jesus is Lord? Am I a practicing polytheist? I know I am not a practicing atheist. But am I a polytheist? Or am I fully committed to the one God. For the LORD is our God and the LORD is one.

Is Jesus the heart of it all?

As it turns out chapter 2 is all about the role of Christendom and institutional Christianity. Who knew? So, again I will outline the chapter and then give you my thoughts on it.

Hirsch begins by arguing that the natural way of things is to default back to that which is comfortable and known. He quotes the great philosopher Bono from U2, “stuck in a moment and now [we] can’t get out of it”. Whenever we seek to try something new we invariably default back to what has proven to work.

This is especially true in Christendom where the institutional concept of what it means to be a Christian is so deeply ingrained in our minds and limits our imaginations.

Therefore, the way that change can come about is by not simply adjusting the programs but stepping into the very heart of what it means to be the church. Hirsch provides a great illustration, that of the the computer. It goes like this: programs (interface with user) -> operating system (mediates between programs and machine) -> machine language/hardware (basic code). He then parallels the church: programs/ministry -> theological ideas -> ecclesial mode.

His argument is simple. If you simply change the software on an out of date computer you don’t actually fix anything, if anything you make it run SLOWER. However, if you change out the hardware (improve the processor, RAM, HD, etc…) that’s when real change has taken place. This is the same with Christianity. We must speak to the central issue to provoke real change. The missional church is one that doesn’t simply change behavior or programs to become missional one must change the very understanding of what it means to be the church (ecclesial mode).

This central core is called the Systems Story. Basically, one must step in and change the entire story that a community is operating on to bring about any kind of change. This means the very heart and motivation of what it means to be the church has to change in the heart and mind of those IN the community. When the story or the driving concept of what it means to be the church changes then a community is freed up to imagine a new (old?) paradigm.

Hirsch then argues that the Christian faith was never intended to be an institution, a Christendom but that it was always intended to be in “holy rebellion” against the elemental principles of this world. He argues that Jesus, Paul, and God the father himself are all holy rebels.

This he says is the heart of “prophetic religion”. He quotes C.S. Lewis to summarize the section, “there exists in every church something that sooner or later works against the very purpose for which it came into existence. So we must strive very hard, by the grace of God to keep the church focused on the mission that Christ originally gave to it.”

The chapter closes with a look at the state of the Western church using a model of missionary engagement, m0, m1, m2, m3, m4. These markers represent the barriers that exist for a people group to authentically engage in the gospel.

m0–1 represents people who can understand the gospel, speak the same language, are of the same class, nationality, and so on. These are people who are most likely your friends.

m1–2 is the average person who doesn’t know Jesus. These people run the gamut from being somewhat spiritually interested to not at all. But have some experience, good or bad, with the church. Hirsch says that you should stop by your local pub to meet these folks.

m2–3 is the group of people who have no idea about Jesus or have been severely marginalized (i.e. the gay community). This group of people is definitely antagonistic.

m3–4 is the group of people that are ethnically or religiously opposed and seriously hinders meaningful dialogue (i.e. Muslims or Jewish people).

The central question of this chapter is simple: If the world has changed since 313 when Constatine came to power (and it has) why does the church engage with the world as if it hasn’t?

Many will say that they church has changed over the years. But, not really. It’s just gotten bigger, bigger, and bigger. The promotion has gotten better. But the western church really isn’t that different from what it was 50, 100, or 500 years ago. It is institutionalized religion where nothing radical for the most part happens.

We live in a new world with new rules and an emerging culture. Francis Schaeffer spoke about this reality in his text, The God Who is There. The amazing thing is that this book was written in the late 60’s. The book is relevant for today. Please read it.

I for one want to figure out what it means to be the church instead of how to do church. 


 — — — — — -
Now playing: Coldplay — God Put a Smile Upon Your Face
via FoxyTunes

So, I realized that there was one other thing running through my mind from the introduction and first chapter. Hirsch begins to make a distinction between Christianity and Christendom. This is what he calls the difference between institution and organic growth.

The thing that caught my mind was the role of the institutional church. Doug and I were talking about this on Wednesday at the Bean and then reading Hirsch some thoughts began to crystallize. This idea of the institution is pretty powerful. Around 310ish is when the Church went from underground to large and in charge so to speak. Then something happened — an institution was born.

I run in some different parts of the Christian sub-culture and one in particular is a large parachurch organization. A favorite phrase is, “a movement becomes a monument overnight”. I think that there is some truth to this. Almost that fast the underground church became an institution. The faith that was demonstrated by a crucified and resurrected messiah became an empire.

I am beginning to think that this empire brought about many of the struggles that we are facing today because no matter how hard we try we are unable to throw off the shackles of this empire. Hirsch explores this in his story about his church in Melbourne, the most recent edition of Leadership Journal describes this in relation to The Next Level Church in Denver, it can be seen drastically in the Methodist church (could you imagine what Wesley would think of the current configuration?).

I don’t have any answers about this but, I am really beginning to be aware of the deep seeded institutionalism that pervades the church. Alright, that’s it for now.

I have a direction for this blog which is exciting. This summer I am interning at my local church. Currently our church is going through a transition from a “come and see” model to a “go and tell” model. Our pastor and has been encouraging our elders to consider deeply what it means to be the Church. In the midst of this transition I am coming alongside Doug (my pastor) and seeking to learn what it means to be a pastor and in so doing I am learning what it means to be missional.

Therefore, I am reading the text, Forgotten Ways by Alan Hirsch. What I am going to do is take a few posts and summarize each chapter and then write a bit about what is running through my head as a result.

The introduction and first chapter Hirsch sets the stage for what he desires to talk about in the text. I need to go out of order in my summary because of what I want to focus this post on.

The first chapter lays out Hirsch’s own story of leading and doing church. He began as a young pastor in Melbourne and saw God do some amazing things as he participated in the revitalization of a church there.

This church quickly became filled with people from the margins. In ministering to these people Hirsch learned about organic, authentic ministry. He developed a sensitivity to what was going on in the world and culture around him. The church tried all sorts of different things to plant in the various sub-cultures in the city. Some went well, others not so well.

The kicker was when they attempted a cafe that ultimately failed because two thirds of the church did not embrace the vision. This led them to think through what it means to be missional and what exactly are the principles. They broke the key DNA to five things (Hirsch, 47):

1. Together we follow (community or togetherness)
2. Engagement with Scripture (Integrating Scripture into our lives)
3. Mission (The central discipline that bind the others and integrates them)
4. Passion for Jesus (Worship and prayer)
5. Transformation (Character development and accountability)

This DNA points back to their definition of an ekklesia (Hirsch 40–41):

1. A covenanted community — people bound together in a distinctive bond.
2. Centered on Jesus — he is the epicenter of the Christian faith, this community is not a God-community it is a community centered on the second person of the Trinity.
3. Worship — the offering of lives back to God through Jesus.
4. Discipleship — following Jesus and increasingly becoming like him.
5. Mission — extension of redemptive purposes through the activities of his people.

I think that summarizes chapter one pretty well. The key question that I want to interact with is from the introduction. How did the early church grow from 25,000 in AD 100 to 20,000,000 in AD 310?

Think about this — the faith was illegal, there was no technology, there was no buildings, there was no “Bible”, and there was no church institution. How could they grow without these things? How is it possible that they grew that much?

Hirsch argues that in this episode of church history we should be able to find the authentic heart of what it means to be the church. He also argues from the perspective of China and yet the persecuted church growth concept does not hold serve in places like the Soviet Union or Albania.

Now, the key thing that I am thinking about is the necessity for the faith to push down to our everyday lives. What do I mean? I mean that in the early church and in China there was no place for the faith to “be”. There was no collection place the way we think about it today. The believers had to live their faith out loud in a sense.

The first century believers lived out their faith in every conceivable way. They were forced to walk outside their doors and follow Jesus in the fields and marketplaces. There was no place to hide.

How often do we hide? “Personal faith” is the disease that most of face. We can no longer have personal faith. We must live our faith at the coffee shop, bar, front yard, and ball fields. How else will anyone hear and see the gospel lived out? We must be about the redemption of all aspects of our lives and creation.

Everything and everyone longs to be redeemed.

There is a strange phenomenon that has taken place in the world today. Not very long ago there were little girls with diaries that had locks and keys. Now, they have been replaced by Blogger, Xanga, Myspace, and Facebook Notes. The world is invited into our minds, memories,thoughts, concepts, and ideas. So why do this? Why invite people in?

A friend of mine, Ken, said that blogging was cathartic and that in it this generation finds hope for community and connection. I think he is right. There is something cleansing about writing your words out. Sending your ideas into the universe and to possibly have them read one day by someone. In past times people wrote books. Well, nobody reads anymore. I am struck by the fact that Jonathon Edwards, a Christ-follower from an earlier time, seemed to be aware that his journals would someday be read. He had an eye to the encouragement and edification of future people.

My hope is that through the posts on this blog I will find some aspect of this cathartic enterprise. I have attempted blogs before. The first began well. Then devolved to YouTube posting and pictures. The images took over. This time I hope there will be a difference. I hope that the posts here will be the kind reminiscent of earlier generations with an authenticity that cleansing requires and an eye to the reader who in some way might possibly be edified.

A friend of mine wants to know the meaning of the title of the blog. Well, quite honestly most other “cool” names were already taken. I was thinking about CS Lewis and Narnia when I opened this one and his whole thing about sneaking in behind the dragons of this world. That along with the image of a back porch. So, slipping in the back…