I appreciate the comments that continue to come in on my posts this week on our "movement" status.
In the comments from yesterday's post, marlene and andy touched on an important theme: mission. Marlene reminded us that we were first and foremost a "reformation" movement and that mission was secondary. Andy pushed this a little further stating that "naming and identifying who we are ... is pointless", but "What does matter is changing the world we live in by the presence of God, via His Son and Spirit".
While arguing over the definition of what it means to be a "movement" is not that useful, we nonetheless need to come to terms with our identity, which, like it or not, is wrapped up in the cloak of being a reformation movement. Perhaps we need to demythologize this self-understanding before we are capable to move on to the mission to which we are ultimately called. But, even this does not have to preclude us from contributing from our unique perspective and distinctives.
The question we need to ask ourselves is: Are we prepared to accept a fresh call of God for this time and generation? We can celebrate the contribution of our reformation in the unique context in which our movement was formed, but our world has changed and the challenges facing the church are different. The need today is less that of bringing all Christians together, but more of reaching out to a world that has barely been exposed to the reality of the Good News. Are we ready to join in this movement which is already taking shape around us? Or, will we go off marching to the beat of our own drum?
2 comments:
first Lloyd, the question you pose in this post, "Are we ready..." is not a new question -- in fact, isn't that the question that has faced every generation of believers since the great commission?
secondly, Marlene's comments prompted an immediate rebuttal because though the CoG began as a reformation movement, it is still primarily the Church -- and the primary mission, function, purpose is to reach the lost. BUT...the more i wanted to write against that comment, the more i had to think on it. bringing the church together is at issue
the movement to unity cannot be separated from the movement to reach the lost. "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me" (John 17:21)
i minister in Alabama, a state that still currently has two assemblies of churches ('black' and 'white'); as i minister in a congregation of 90+ years where it is difficult to get an embrace between generations; and equally difficult to move folks of a rural, south background into relationships with our suburban folks; and difficult to get those suburbans to embrace an increasingly more urban neighborhood.
our hurdle to reaching the lost is often that they don't look, act, think, believe, etc. like us. but we can't handle the differences within, how can we possibly embrace the differences on the outside?
when you look at our CoG congregations you see homogenous groups of people -- not diversity (though there are exceptions).
i was saddened this weeek while listening to ESPN radio when a host said that if you wanted to see diversity in action and cooperation you look at sports because no other organization in the world brings different people together for a common cause like sports. i was saddened because the church wasn't even on the radar as being close to offer a model of diversity at work
i like reading, listening, and being challenged by Erwin McManus of Mosaic church in LA. i read an interview with him on outreach in which he said something incredibly convicting, that our churches should be mirrors of the community's diversity. further, that if your church does not mirror your community, then you have or are "INTENTIONALLY" doing something to prevent it.
if we're not doing something intentionally to mirror that diversity, aren't we by neglect intentionally preventing it?
our efforts to reach the lost as homogenous groups cannot be nearly as effective as reaching the lost in unity
(that kind of church would be attractive, even contagious, to other church groups/denominations--we wouldn't have to call them to 'come out,' they'd come running)
Ken, good comments!
True, my question isn't new, but how quickly we forget it.
I hear what you are saying about "the movement to unity cannot be separated from the movement to reach the lost". In your region of the country you probably are more sensitive to it than others of us. Certainly it's not an either/or choice.
My concern, however, is that in the Church of God we keep talking about unity and reconciliation (even among ourselves) but it just seems to be talk. Maybe we even use it as an excuse sometimes for not being more missional (i.e. "we need to get our 'ducks in a row' first" mentality). I would like to believe that if we just starting engaging in Christ's mission as our focus we would begin to experience more unity. Nothing brings people together like a common cause.
Post a Comment