The historic Context:
Many Protestant non-fundamentalist churches are dying in urban North America. Why?
it is because the soul of of the Protesting Church is the rugged individualism, the entrepreneurial spirit that built America’s great cities. Each church stands apart, alone, a testament to the sacrificial spirit and theological identity that created it—each reinforcing the isolating ideal—we are here, confident in our unique message. ‘Meaning‘ lives inside the Word of Life that sets such communities apart, in tension with the surrounding communities.
The demographics and spiritual makeup of our cities have changed in the decades since WWII, the result of a massive influx of immigrant populations whose core beliefs are communal and inter-dependent. It is the familial, nurturing and cross-generational nature of these communities and the faith traditions that inter-weave ‘meaning‘ inside these cultural/ familial norms that thrive, be they Buddhist, Muslim or Christian communions; broadly Christian traditions that practice a nurturing faith within cultural and familial such as Catholic, LDS and immigrant or community centered Protestant communions.
The crises we who are Wesleyan/American holiness and Protesting are experiencing is precisely along our Wesleyan (Europea, urban) and American Holiness (revivalist, rural) fault lines. Wesley’s renewal was born in urban environs, focused on nurturing communal and highly confessional communities keenly aware of and ministering within the social, political needs of its parishioners for labor and child-labor reform and the over-arching moral evil of slavery. The American revivalist version began within the highly charged and socially aware environment of large rural gatherings and found expression in the civil rights, abolitionist, Womens sufferage and temperance movements, permeated with an optimism about revivalists reach into the larger Christian and Parrish communities. In the twentieth century, WWI, the depression and WWII emotionally buried such optimism and underneath a newly awakened Calvinist informed fundamentalism resulting in a highly personalized transactional salvation whose sights were on heaven, a universe apart.
Nazarenes are a hybrid of these twin impulses; message centric, set apart salvation and Incarnational inter-weaving, narratives about Jesus in communities. The post-modern world view taking hold of our larger culture ampifies the fault line over who is in, whose out, the Jesus event being either an expression of God’s profound love for a world lost or the reconciling event that saves everyone. the only question being who lives into or away from this All Love cruciform life.
Congruence or Incongruence:
Im convinced the Naz faith, in the urban experience, is insufficiently committed to a gospel of “message” transformation to successfully stand alone, apart and thereby attract the lonely unconverted. That is a gospel cut off from the historical faith which understood Jesus as dividing past/future, changing everything for everyone, a new reality of Love breaking into this world. It clearly remains a message, but one lived out within and for every people group, city, village, person. The message is God is here, reconciled, breathing inside every act that is truly loving, changing this world now and forever.
Our mission is to live congruent lives, inside our cultural norms as Jesus followers. We, as Christians in every age will be a scandal wherever we come up against persons, institutions or cultural norms that de-value or cancel any person or group. That is the heart of our cruciform life, but one committed to cultural renewal not cultural isolation, the healing and cleansing of Terra-forma, not an escape to another time and place.
We, the body of Christ are the leaven of the restored reign of love. As such, our mission is inevitably, Incarnational, Communal, Institutional.
Note: These three attributes are developmental, building on each other.
Incarnational missions are creative, culture centric, entrepreneurial, with few partners and little or no structure—listening and learning from the neighbors. In short, Incarnational missions throw a lot on the wall to see what sticks.
Communal missions are partner seeking, open to critique, invitational to everyone of good heart. The very nature of partnership requires a skeletal institutional relationship that developed and protects the integrity of the mission, though often having no formal or even focused relation to existing ecclesial structures. These are hybrids focused on Parrish needs and mission with structure sufficient to resource and incite diverse partnerships. Communal missions build experience, community, shared possibilities.
Institututional missions are emerging expressions of longer term commitment to Parrish life and needs. When healthy the focus is need meeting, supportIve, with sufficient skeletal development to assure diverse voices and gathering investment with both the mission and the history making narrative that becomes the skin holding the skeletal frame, adding cross generational, cross-economic and cross-cultural muscle, heart and means of disposing no longer necessary mission.
in a healthy organism the institutional developmental stage has the greatest impact and futherest reach, but only to the point that the institution is the servant of the mission and not its master. Ministry requires service without institutional pay-back, needs based, Parrish centric. Equally, every healthy institution retains a vital inviting and learning centric capacity to deepen and maintain Missional cohesion.
Definitions of Missional Focus for each Developmental Stage:
Incarnational:
We live as Abram of old, learners in the land, at peace and seeking Shalom. We listen. We perceive need. We offer dignity and help, where sought.
Our message is simply the meaning of life lived before, with and in The Creator. Nothing more. Nothing less. Ours is a communal message emerging from within the observations of God in and around the Community. As such it is always a narrative lived, not taught; an Incarnational narrative.
Communal:
We seek to become partners with, seek partners of our neighbors who are just as much a part of God’s creational fabric as we; we are just as broken and in need of them and importantly God’s mercy as they.
At every level who is in and who is out is irrelevant in all matters, except good will.
Institutional:
Human making is institutional by definition for the cross generational and cultural life that institutions give is what connects all humans. To fail to commit to institutional development is to fail humanity, beyond our little group.
The critical question is in ownership verses stewardship of the institution. If we build buildings we do not own them as having rental rights. Our buildings are owned by the Parrish Community for the benefit of our neighbor. We are entrusted only with the care for and availability of use in the larger community.
Institutions are a skeleton only. They make great servants, horrific masters. It is here that the cruciform life is profoundly needed.
Toward A City Church In Renewal:
We desperately need to recognize that our Parrish communities coming together are at different places and need differing tools for entrance.
Institutional history has a tendency to stifle the very creative entrepreneurial energy of persons who are simply Missional, in the Incarnational and listening developmental stage.
That has been the central struggle of SCCN, the continual need of WAPAC and Parrish churches that have a living institutional presence—perhaps even aware that each (Urban WAPAC, 1st Naz, North Naz, WSCN) are in varying degrees in crises or needing an urban or Parrish rebirth to re-learn Incarnational Presence, but still—necessarily needing the skeleton in which to affirm institutional security.
Others in our SCCN journey have largely set institutional frameworks aside and are in early or late stages of Incarnational Presence and feel the need for COM partners (Communal Presence) feeling intuitively a growing sense of imprisonmen from those who need to protect legitimate, historic and invested partners and narrative while seeing in SCCN the possibility of new eyes in which to revisit the city and Parrish. The specific need of those free of institutional restraints is for partners, communal presence; to develop relationships and new skeletons that may not initially have anything to do with the institution of the Church.
Indeed most of those early relationships and the institutions that emerge will thrive only if seperate from, though informally related to the Church.
I believe this is the dance we’ve been in, even stuck in, having insufficient perspective from 10,000 feet to unravel, hear well and move forward given the multiple and diverse needs.
One of the beautiful things about Communities on Mission (COM) is that they are necessarily Parrish centric and may arise from within or apart from the Church and as they each develop formal or informal skeletons (Institutional Presence) will interweave our relationships, freely, keeping SCCN Incarnation-ally focused, communal in nature.
Next Steps:
Set aside, for the moment, the parsing of our collected document of Institutional Presence. Having each/all coming to either a One Church Parrish Centric model or One City Over-Arching Missional Union with Parrish Centric COMs & Worshiping Communities—begin to live into the reality of the Union/Church in the following ways:
1) Evaluate where each player, representing their Parrish is coming from. Where are we each in process? (Including WAPAC)
Incarnational > Communal > Institutional
What is the need of each Parrish and Community in terms of its own future engagement in mission?
2) Take or tweek the existing skeleton, asking for a two year “engagement“ and commit.
Note: A simple statement of understanding would be needed with current WAPAC agreement it’s foundation—knowing it will be revised by the Executive Committee over time, based upon the learning curve and discoveries made. (For existing and historic churches simply agree to their Church boards functioning in the interim as more than Parrish Missional Team—meeting only as needed to affirm decisions of the Executive Team (as it relates to that Parrish)—the Principal during this two year faze-in being consensus.
3) Get every aspect up and running:
Executive Board of Directors: focused on $, Property and actual Institutional Skeleton.
Ministry Teams:
Lead Pastoral Team: Twice a month only for Admin, dreaming, prayer.
Full COM Ministry Team: (Professional & Lay Ministers) focused on Parrish support & City wide & Parrish centric COMs & prayer. (Initially this team should meet twice a month focused singularly on COM Development. This is the most critical need as it is both Incarnational & Communal.
Indeed, the reason for whole COM team meetings is to at the same time be aware of city-wide & Parrish COMs… these COMs cannot be taught, except as part of the dynamic of communal participation. That is the very difference of creating a “volunteer ask” verses a “Ministry Team“ around each COM, especially in its developmental stages. These gatherings should be centered around ‘devotional worship’, Dreaming & Facilitating Startups, education.
4) Now is the time for a Step-Forward, wide enough to encompass all of the diverse and legitimate needs. The next two years should be an Engagement—all in, with-holding Vows. Dating is passed, now is the time for synchronizing—for engagement, especially our missions.
Two years hence is the time to present a final document that reflects actual experience, not the theoretical perspectives of the Lead Pastoral Team. To present a document now, other than an understanding of Execution would likely be seen as spinning wheels. Now is the time for COMs and the Executive Board focused in the background on it’s important work.
If we do these things we will be in a much clearer position for final marriage and WAPAC blessings.
Terry 11/10/21
Comentarios