The Church as Gatherers

David Fairchild shares some great thoughts about the mission of the church that he gleaned from Ed Clowney. Here’s a section of his thoughts to get you interested:

“What is true of a congregation is true also of a Christian home. If a family fails to seek to gather friends and neighbours to Christ in hospitality and quiet witness, the children of the family will be scattered. We fail to bring up children in the nurture of the Lord if we fail to in to involve them in our efforts to gather others to their Saviour.”

Alan Hirsch Interview

10 Benefits from Blogging

Some of my friends ask me where I get the time to blog and why I even bother in the first place. Well blogging is not without its benefits and so I thought I’d list 10 benefits I’ve experienced over the past two years of blogging as a Christian blogger (they’re in no particular order):

1. I’ve made great Christian friends – and some of them I’ve actually got to meet in the flesh even though they live thousands of miles away from me – that’s quite something.

2. I’ve been able to clarify my thinking on a number of subjects. For example I’ve come to understand the emerging church with far more depth through blogging than if I’d simply just picked up a book.

3. I’ve discovered like minded organisations and groups to network with. My time with some of the guys from Acts29 two months ago was great and I’m hoping that together we can see a whole lot of fruit here in South Africa – this link up would never have happened if I didn’t blog.

4. I’ve been encouraged to keep on going. Reading about people doing gospel ministry on the other side of the planet is always one of my biggest encouragements in ministry.

5. I’ve enjoyed times of laughing. Ok this one is a bit of nerdy in-house thing but bloggers seem to have a peculiar sense of humour that isn’t often present in face to face conversation but is rather more unique to the blogsphere.

6. I’ve seen friends and colleagues become more internet savy. This has been one of my aims from day one in blogging, and that is to point people to the right places on the web to maximize their time online from a Christian ministry point of view.

7. I’ve been used of God to encourage people at crucial times. On more than one occasion someone has let me know that a post that I wrote really encouraged them at an important time. Praise God for that.

8. I’ve been able to negotiate the academic arena better. Interacting with the blogging world gives you access to large amounts of information but in an extremely quick amount of time. This is crucial when trying to navigate the who’s who of the Christian academic arena.

9. I’ve been able to express my feelings. What can I say I’m a Web2.0 child I have this inbuilt need for expression that I control – blogging gives me that.

10. I’ve been motivated for mission. I think this might just be the biggest way in which blogging has motivated me. Its caused me to think long and hard about mission and what I’m doing with my life.

Why not start you’re own blog and begin to enjoy some of the benefits?

A Call to Die – Mark’s Gospel and Me

Tonight we’re going to wrap up Mark’s gospel at our study group. We finished going through the text last week and this week we want to draw out some of the big ideas so that they stick in the minds of those in the group for future readings of Mark. It’s a fascinating ride starting as Mark develops a picture of the Messiah king in the chapters leading up to 8:29 and Peter’s great confession. Then he turns the narrative a bit to show us a second identity to which Jesus claims fulfillment – that of the Suffering Servant. Leading up to the cross and including the cross narrative the text is absolutely littered with references to Isaiah and not only to the traditional ‘servant songs’ but also to numerous passages dealing with both judgment of Israel and the restoration of Israel which also marks the occasion when the gentiles will come streaming in. Its a masterful narrative that in one sense is fairly simple to understand, so much so that some have often summarized Mark’s gospel to teach ‘who Jesus is and what he came to do’. Yet it also has so much depth and will keep you wondering for days as to why Mark chose to arrange the material the way he did. Its a gospel that calls for deep reflection and life evaluation.

As a Christian reader of Mark’s gospel, as one who has acknowledged the atonement to which the narrative points I was really overwhelmed by one giant challenge that Mark throws at those who would follow Christ – the call to die to self, to take up ones cross daily (8:34-36). If there is one application the Christian community needs to grab hold of it is that – we, as those having been cleansed by the atonement, are called by God himself to die to our own wants, needs, desires, motives, attitudes and passions and live for the wants, needs, desires, motives, attitudes and passions of Christ, which means crucifixion every single day. It’s a hard call and without the atonement it would be an impossible call to even attempt to respond to. However, in light of God’s mercy we must respond – we must die.

Are ‘White’ Christians Scared?

I watched a documentary last night about the community of Atlantis a former industrial area about 40mins drive north of Cape Town on the West Coast. The community was originally designed to be an industrial hub under the previous government pre-1994. Many factories relocated to the area and received government subsidies. At the same time the working force swelled as people flocked in, and were brought in to work in the industries. When the old government was replaced after the first democratic elections in 1994 the subsidies ceased and most of the industry pulled out leaving some 200 000 residents, approximately half of which became unemployed as a result.

In the years following and due to the high unemployment the community of Atlantis has undergone massive moral and social decay. Gangsterism, drug abuse, alcoholism and sexual abuse of all sorts abound throughout the area. As an outsider looking in the entire situation appeared something akin to anarchy to me. My heart bled as I listened to stories of families torn apart by gangsterism and violence and young children being horribly sexually molested. I couldn’t but help wonder about the responsibility of the church, as those entrusted with life giving gospel of Jesus Christ, to this dire situation.

I’ve been involved in two major denominations in this country as well as regularly fellowshipping with people involved in other Christian groups in South Africa, and whilst I don’t deny that there is much good work going on I can’t shake the feeling that we’re not even getting past the tip of the iceberg. My main issue is with the ‘white’ churches – and there are many. These churches have people, they have facilities and they have finances – why are they not launching an all out offensive on communities like Atlantis. Why aren’t they pulling up their sleeves and getting dirty, down there in the grit and grim of these scarred communities, listening to the needs of so many desperate people? Why aren’t they mobilizing others? Why aren’t we seeing church planting on a larger scale? Why aren’t we seeing mercy ministries springing up left right and center? How do so many of the members of these ‘white’ churches sleep at night knowing that in the suburb next door another world is being played out? How is it that the bearers of the news about a Suffering Servant turn a blind eye to the suffering going on right next to them?

I think they’re scared stiff. I know I’m scared stiff when I think about what’s out there. I’m one of those ‘whites’ in a ‘white’ church and I’m terrified. Atlantis is just one of a hundred other such communities in this country – it scares me to death. All I can trust is that the message of that Suffering Servant will grip my heart so tightly that I will be constrained by the love of God to pull up those sleeves…

Moffat and Adoption

In light of the coming, and existing, orphan crisis in South Africa I’ve been thinking through the Christian response and the varied ways in which the church could possibly respond. Adoption would obviously rank quite high on possible options for response and something that all Christians should think about. Interestingly it is something that great Christians of the past have thought about too. Consider this excerpt from the life of pioneer missionary to the Tswana people in South Africa, Robert Moffat and his wife:

‘In addition to their own children, they also adopted two San (Bushman) orphans in 1822. Moffat had unexpectedly come across a party of San digging a grave for a woman. They were proposing to bury the orphans with her, that they might be cared for by their mother in the shades of the other world, when Moffat begged to adopt them. Rejoicing in the names Dicky and Ann, they became an integral part of his own family.’ Zion City RSA – Kevin Roy, p. 63

Does not Moffat perhaps provide us with the most natural response to such a crisis as members of the heavenly family represented here on earth as the church?

Church and Integration

When planting a church in an area that is culturally, racially, linguistically and economically diverse what principles govern how to get everyone to meet together?

One would hard pressed to demonstrate that the Bible does not call for visible unity in the church that spans across areas of race, culture and class. Ephesians 2:11-22 seems to be clear that the Gospel does not only redeem but it also reconciles together people from these various groups. It would therefore seem obvious that the church is to display integration at numerous levels. Yet some such as Donald McGavran have suggested that in order to increase church growth we ought to arrange churches in homogeneous groups whereby the individual coming to Christ does not have to cross many barriers in order to enter into fellowship. This became known as the Homogeneous Unit Principle (HUP – For more discussion on the HUP see Tim Chester’s post here).

Naturally the HUP raises significant theological problems and we soon find that we begin to enter a number of ‘grey’ realms when we ask such questions as: How homogeneous ought the Christian gathering to be? Are there limits to integration? Is the integration of diverse peoples supposed to be evident on a local church level or on a larger scale, like denominations or national churches etc.

My own view is that firstly we must enter this discussion with humility. Paul does not give us specific details into just how integrated the church life was in these early churches, nor is Acts sufficiently comprehensive in providing models of the inner-workings of many of the early churches in this area. What is clear is that there was integration and so any church or mission that does not show any integration is failing to recognize the reconciling nature of the gospel. I would describe my position as being committed to integration but open to the limiting nature of certain pragmatic elements.

More from Peter Jensen

I know this article is half a month old already – which BTW is absolute ages in the blogsphere- but its worth a read anyway. Peter Jensen speaks about why he thinks the idea of setting the goal of 10% (10 percent of the population in Sydney to be in church within 10 years – they are currently at the 5 year mark of the Mission) is worthwhile part of the Sydney Mission. Notice how much of what he says has ‘missional’ overtones.

Consumer to Missional

I found this little diagram very simple yet very helpful in terms of what we’re trying to get across when we use the term ‘missional’:

Read the brief article where this came from here (word doc.)

To ‘Hell’ with the ‘Missionaries’!

My anonymous commenter wasn’t joking: check it out, by posting one post I went from PG to Restricted: No under 17′s!

And its those darn missionaries again! Not to mention the use of the word, ‘hell’. Kids back away from this site or you might end up in the burning lake of sulfur!

Keep Your Kids Away from Missionaries

Apparently my blog gets a ‘PG’ rating because, get this, the word ‘missionary’ appears a number of times on it as do the words ‘death’ and ‘dead’. So it would seem that material about missionaries is not suitable for children (I had better tell a friend of mine who’s busy writing a Sunday School booklet on missionary biographies for kids!).

Oops I just used the word ‘missonary’ three times (oops that’s four times now) – I’m probably up to PG13 by now!

Martyrs and Mission

I gave a presentation on the church history of Uganda today which I’ve been researching for the past few weeks. The story of the European missionary push and their converts in the 19th century contains some of the most powerful accounts of martyrdom ever recorded. Here’s and extract from a book that plays out the account of probably the most tragic and yet amazing three martyrs from the late 19th century in Uganda. It involves three young boys who worked in King Mwanga’s court and had rejected homosexual approaches that he had made upon them on the basis of their faith in Christ – the eldest was 16 and the youngest only 12 – these are the events that followed:

‘The head executioner was Mujasi, a Mohammedan. “Do you admit being followers of Jesus Christ?” asked Mujasi fiercely. The two younger boys nodded assent, but Seruwanga’s boldly answered, “Yes, and I am not ashamed of it.” “You believe you will rise from the dead!” shouted Mujasi. “I shall burn you and see if this is so!” A hideous roar of laughter came from the mob. As Seruwanga’s arms were cut off and his bleeding body was cast into the fire, no sound came from his lips, save words of testimony and prayer. Yusufu was next mutilated and consigned to the flames.

Then took place the saddest scene of all. As the executioner approached the twelve-year-old Lugalama, the boy cried out: ‘Please do not cut off my arms. I will not struggle! Only throw me into the fire!” Surely this is one of the saddest prayers ever uttered on this sad earth – “Only throw me into the fire!” The butchers did their ghastly work and the bleeding, tortured boy was committed to the flames.’ – “Road Maker for Christ in Uganda“, E.M. Harrison 1949

You Have Commenced the Struggle

The history of the gospel in East Africa is a history that is covered in blood, blood spilled by the thousands of martyrs who have died for the sake of Christ in this eastern part of the continent. At the outset of the 19th century missionary push into the region one of the most famous missionaries to East Africa, Johann Krapf wrote these powerful words after the death of his wife in 1844:

‘Tell our friends at home that there is now on the Eastern African coast a lonely missionary grave. This is a sign that you have commenced the struggle…As the victories of the church are gained by stepping over the graves of her members, you may be convinced that the hour is at hand when you are summoned to the conversion of Africa from its eastern shore.’

Keller at his Best

The Resurgence have posted 4 articles by Tim Keller on the subject, ‘Ministry in the New Global Culture of Major City Centers‘. These four articles are bursting at the seams with serious reflection, insight and practical advice. If you minister in a major city anywhere in the world then you NEED to read these articles – Part I, Part II, Part III & Part IV

Nominalism and the Emerging Church in South Africa

The following quote is from the description of the Facebook group ‘Emerging Church Conversation in South Africa’ – I’m presuming that means that Roger Saner wrote it.

“Within South Africa, we know from our history that in spite of over 70% of the country being Christian, we managed to divorce our private faith from our public beliefs quite successfully, taking a long time to denounce structural evil (at least, this applies to the whities – others always knew that this thing was wrong). And what is more, we used Biblical justification for Apartheid…which means, as we move beyond that, we need to see the incorrect ways in which we approached (and used) the Bible.”

I admire what Roger writes, IMHO he speaks more clearly about the EC in South Africa than anyone else I’ve read. We don’t always land up in the same place theologically, but Roger is willing to dialogue and to listen carefully – something we could all learn from in the EC conversation. I’ve pulled this section up because to me it seems to indicate that there’s a relationship of sorts between nominal Christianity in South Africa and the fact that Emerging ideas seem to be finding something of a footing in the South African theological landscape. Is part of the conversation a reaction, on the part of some, to the seemingly widespread nominalism that exists in South Africa?

If this is the case then again the ‘reformed’ (theologically) community and the ‘emerging’ community have a point of contact – they both despair at the levels of nominalism. Now maybe this can help to turn the conversation from discussing whether the EC is divergent or not, to how do we address nominalism. The two sides can then present their suggestions and dialogue, graciously, about the strengths and weaknesses in both approaches – and maybe, just maybe, they can ‘emerge’ with an approach that attempts to show the utmost fidelity to the revealed purposes of God and at the same time helps us to help each other, rather than constantly talking about why the EC is second only to the Antichrist in terms of heresy.

How would you answer this question?

Here’s a question that someone asked on the Facebook group:

“From the church tradition I belong to, too much missional activity is predominantly aimed at white people. But the reality is in SA today the vast majority of our population are not white, and therefore not being “reached” by missional churches. And even when there is a multi-racial congregation this does not necessarily equal mulit-cultural. Of course we could do mono-cultural mission and reach separate people separately (the homogeneous unit principle) but that is not the picture that I find of one new humanity that I find in Ephesians 2. Does being missional in South Africa require being multi-cultural?”

 

How would you answer this?

Conn and Apartheid

I got through the foreword and the first chapter of ‘The Face of Urban Mission – Ministering the Gospel in a diverse and changing world‘ by Harie Conn and others. The foreword is a testimony to the very practical ministry of the late Harvie Conn and his deep passion for the gospel to be practised in a holistic manner.

In chapter 1 he hits the nail on the head of probably the biggest problem in modern missions – the ‘apartheid’ that separates mission from theology. Normally when one brings up this subject the blame is either laid at theology’s door for being too stuck in its ‘ivory towers’ to be of any practical use OR at the door of missions for being to pragmatically driven to take real cognisance of theology. Conn doesn’t pick sides – rather he highlights the errors on both sides and suggests, drawing quite a bit from David Bosch, something of a way forward that seems to be emerging where both are integrated. I wonder what Harive Conn would make of the Emerging Church in its current expression? I’m looking forward to the next lot of chapters and getting into some of the nitty gritty of urban mission.

Mission in Hosea

Introduction

One of the clearest Old Testament pictures of the gospel and of God as a missionary God is found in the opening metaphor in the book of the minor prophet Hosea. God, the faithful, takes an unfaithful wife and remains faithful to that wife to illustrate his saving faithfulness to his people Israel. The rest of the book picks up two themes, that of a calling of the unfaithful to return to their faithful God and then secondly the theme of impending judgment for those who refuse to return. Taken together these three concepts bring into focus three of the essential concepts of the gospel message and of mission. God is a faithful God who calls men and woman to return to him or else face devastating judgment. We shall explore these three themes and place them into the context of firstly the Bible as a whole and then secondly into the context of the subject of mission.

Historical Context:

Hosea, a native of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, prophesied in the Northern Kingdom from approximately 750 to 715 B.C. (Dillard & Longman: 1994: 354). Verse 1 of chapter 1 tells us that he prophesied during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah who were kings of Judah and also during the reigns of Jeroboam. It is also clear, from the historical record that Hosea overlapped with the reigns of Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah, Pekah and Hoshea, kings of the Northern Kingdom, who are not mentioned in the first verse (McConville in Carson, France, Motyer & Wenham [eds.]: 1994: 22).

This period of history in the Northern Kingdom begins with relative material prosperity but ends in 722 B.C. with the total obliteration of the nation by the Assyrian Empire under Shalmaneser V. Dillard and Longman point out that at the beginning of Hosea’s prophetic ministry the Northern Kingdom sat in a rather secure position as its usual enemies, the surrounding nations, were preoccupied with other concerns (1994: 355). This false sense of security led, eventually, to spiritual complacency on the part of Samaria. After Jeroboam II the whole political security of Israel began to unravel. Hubbard points out that ‘six kings toppled in thirty years, three of whom, ruled two years or less and four of whom were assassinated, while the fifth was deposed.’ (1989: 24-25). This coincided with a rise in power and rejuvenation of the Assyrian Empire under Tiglath-Pileser III and Shalmaneser V. The Northern Kingdom became engaged in vicious war firstly with Judah in approximately 735 B.C. which then ultimately lead to their second devastating war with the Assyrian Empire in which they were completely destroyed in 722 B.C. This period was marked by political intrigue and backstabbing, covenantal unfaithfulness and continual increase in the desecration and distortion of the holy practices of the Mosaic Law. It is against this backdrop that the prophet speaks God’s Word into the lives of the unfaithful Northerners.

Faithful to the Unfaithful – The Motivation for Mission

The first three chapters of Hosea record the word of the Lord coming to Hosea and commanding him to ‘take an adulterous wife and children of unfaithfulness’ (1:2). The prophet is to live out a metaphor of the Lord’s relationship with his people, Israel and Judah. Hosea is to love the wife even though she is completely unfaithful. This love is likened to the love with which ‘the Lord loves the Israelites, though they turn to other gods…’ (3:1). It shows a passionate God with a passionate love for his people, one scholar writes that ‘no other book in the Old Testament includes such a detailed description of God’s inner feelings as Hosea does.’ (Bostrom in Alexander & Rosner [eds.]: 2000: 237). He is a God who cares passionately about being united to a people. The book of Hosea makes clear, by it’s discarding of the physical nation of Israel, as in the Northern Kingdom, which takes place in a literary sense in chapter 8, that God’s people, promised and described in verses 10 and 11 of chapter 1 include far more than just the old covenant people of Judah and Samaria.

This gives us a picture of a missionary God who is passionately concerned with the people he is to be united with in the union of marriage, which the New Testament instructs us to see as a saving relationship. In this sense the metaphor of the opening of Hosea serves as a fundamental motivation for missions. Why seek out the lost? Why be passionate about those who are not in a relationship with the living God? The answer lies clearly in that that same living God is passionately in love with the lost, and those who will become his people. Goldsworthy remarks that this metaphor ‘presents a magnificent illustration … of the covenant love and faithfulness of God.’ (2000: 173). A magnificent illustration it is, and a magnificent motivation too.

Return to the Lord – The Call of Mission

Hosea chapter 7 verses 13 to 16 depict a God who longs for this unrepentant people to turn back to him – he longs for them to repent. Although the call to turn back to the Lord in the book of Hosea is not really explicit (calls to return to the Lord are extremely rare in Hosea’s prophecies), the concept of return is definitely implied through the attitude of a passionate God and through the promises of that God. Bartholomew and Goheen note that,

 ‘The Old Testament prophets bear ample witness to God’s patience with his people and to the repeated efforts he makes to call them back to faithfulness within the covenant.’ (2004: 107)

 Added to God’s desire are his promises. These promises, as found particularly in chapter 1 verse 10 to the end of the chapter, show the heart of the Lord in wanting his people to return to him and be restored. John Stott explains the restoration as ‘described in the words which once more echo the promise to Abraham’ (in Winter & Hawthorne [eds.]: 1992: A-14). God promises an increase in descendants (vs. 10), a place (vs. 10) and that they will be God’s children – presumably living under his rule again (vs. 11). These images are completely in line with the universal missional promise made to Abraham in Genesis 12.

With these promises laid out on the table before unfaithful Israel one can assume that God’s call for them is to return to him. God is a missionary God who calls for their return. As the correlation with Genesis 12 has been shown, this is a universal call, for people to be reconciled with God – to become his people, in his place, under his rule and blessing. Peter, clearly drawing on the imagery of Hosea proclaims the Christians sense of belonging to the people of God in 1Peter 2: 9-10, further illustrating the result of the missionary call of Hosea. Ultimately Hosea presents the heart of the missionary call as it leaves this implicit message in its readers – that the unfaithful are to be reconciled to their faithful ruling king.

Judgment Awaits – The Concern of Mission

The missionary call of Hosea is not without its concerns for it seems that, in spite of the prophet’s urgent warnings against the idolatry of the Israelites and also taking into account the passionate love of a faithful God, the Israelites did not heed the warning. In 722 B.C. the Assyrian army swooped in and completely desolated the Northern Kingdom and scattering the people throughout the Near East, far away from the Promised Land. Chapter 8 picks up this warning with great detail as it describes Assyria waiting over the house of Israel like a vulture ready to devour (vs. 1). In the entire chapter there is no call to repent on the part of the Israelites, no plea for a turning from their wicked ways. It is almost as if at this point in the chronology of the prophecy, which is during the reign of the final king, King Hoshea, that God has sealed the fate of the Northern Kingdom and there is no return from this point. There is only judgment.

Mission has a serious concern – that is – that for those who reject the faithful love of God and choose not to make him their king and ruler, there is judgment. The judgment is final and it is total. The obliteration of the Northern Kingdom, and even later the Southern Kingdom stand as stern reminders that the God who loves passionately also judges violently because his holy character demands it. Mission’s concern is that people be reconciled with this God, because without reconciliation there is only judgment.

Conclusion: 

Hosea is a prophetic book against a stark historical background that gives us good insight into the workings and desires of a missionary God. The book shows us that God is a passionately loving God, even to the most undeserving of people, it shows us that God is a God who longs for reconciliation from our rebellious ways and finally it also shows that God is a God who will judge all rebellion once and for all. As we contemplate mission we cannot look past these three fundamental truths and so it is helpful to consider Hosea as making an important contribution to the canonical discussion of mission.

Further Reading:

 Alexander, T D & Rosner, B S. 2000. New Dictionary of Biblical Theology. Inter-Varsity Press. Leicester.

Bartholomew, C G & Goheen, M W. 2004. The Drama of Scripture. Baker Academic. Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Carson, D A, France, R T, Motyer, J A, Wenham, G J. 1994. The New Bible Commentary. Inter-Varsity Press. Leicester.

Dillard, R B & Longman III, T. 1994. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Zondervan. Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Hubbard, D A. 1989. Hosea – TOTC. Inter-Varsity Press. Leicester.

Goldsworthy, G. 2000. Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture. Inter-Varsity Press. Leicester.

Winter, R D & Hawthorne, S C. 1992. Perspectives on the World Christian Movement. William Carey Library. Pasadena, California.

Mission and Partnership

I had to write a joint paper on the above topic recently and my job was to have a look at something of a theological basis for partnership in mission. Here’s a bit of what I came up with:

It is helpful to outline a brief theological basis for partnership in mission from the New Testament. One disclaimer must be made: To fully understand the theological implications of mission and partnership we need to explore a theology of the doctrine of church and its role in mission. This however is beyond the scope of this paper, but any genuine, holistic attempt to place partnership and the church within the context of mission must take this into account as it will have ramifications on the nature of partnership from a theological point of view.

Theology of church and mission aside, the following examples give indication of the existence of local church partnership in the early church. These examples have been drawn from the epistles of the apostle Paul so as to avoid the prescription/description debate that occurs often when occurrences in the book of Acts are used to authorize normative acts for the church today in terms of mission.

An extremely helpful place to start is to look at Paul’s understanding of the term ‘kononia’. The term is most commonly associated with the word ‘fellowship’ however it has also often been associated with ‘partnership’ hence the New International Version’s translation of the word in Philippians 1:5. One recent speaker at the Cape Crossword Easter Convention remarked that the term ‘partnership’ is a helpful way of delineating the main idea in the book of Philippians, so frequent are the occurrences of ‘kononia’ and its cognates.

Peter O’Brien suggests that we should understand the word kononia and its cognates as expressing the idea of common participation or ‘having something in common with someone’ – he argues however that the New Testament emphasis is on ‘participation’ in ‘something’ rather than association with someone which is the emphasis on the contemporary notion of fellowship. (1993: 294).

So in Philippians 1:5 Paul gives thanks because of the Philippian church’s participation with him in the proclamation of the apostolic gospel. When consulting 4:15 of the same epistle we see that a large component of that partnership was financial. Paul picks this up again, with presumably the same church in mind when in 2 Corinthians 8:4 Paul commends the Macedonians for their generous financial partnership. This partnership was not so much with Paul but with the Jerusalem church who were the most likely recipients of the financial gift – Paul simply acted as a go-between.

One might wonder about the apostles and other traveling church planters and evangelists as to how they might have in some sense partnered with the churches. 2 Corinthians 8:19 appears to give us some insight into this. Paul speaks of a ‘brother’ who will accompany Titus and himself in their travels and visits to the Corinthians. This brother, according to Paul, was ‘praised by all the churches’ for his service to the gospel – it seems that however he traveled and worked, he did so in close relation to the local church, perhaps even under their authority. The sending off of Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13:1-3 is a possible correlation of this idea, where the traveling apostles are sent off under the blessing and authority of the church. In Acts 14:27 they report back to the church about their missionary initiatives.

The New Testament is clearly in support of the notion of partnership for the sake of the proclamation of the gospel. So strong is the emphasis in books like Philippians that it seems to ‘partner’ with one another for the sake of the gospel is built into the very fabric of what it means to be a Christian. A body of believers without partnership both amongst themselves and with other bodies is not a biblical body of believers. Depending upon one’s theology of the local church one might extend this then to say that the local church is designed to be in partnership, for the sake of the gospel, with other local churches, and that this is the New Testament model for the progression of mission.

See: O’BRIEN, P. T. 1993. Fellowship, Communion, Sharing in the Dictionary of Paul and his Letters. Leicester. Inter-Varsity Press.

 

Training Pastors for Mission

Well the NT Wright battle of the atonement war seems to have died down, at least from a blog post point of view. I’m pretty tired of searching the blogs for meaty posts on the subject – if you want to follow it further then go to technorati and search for NT Wright. In the mean time…

I sat in a missions class today discussing contextualization and I was struck by what is probably not a very novel idea. It dawned upon me that western pastors really need to study missiology. At my college you can choose one of two streams of study for your final year, either pastoral or missions. For a number of reasons I opted for missions even though I’m going into the pastorate shortly. Reflecting on it now, I’m convinced that I’m actually getting better training, in general, than those who opted for the pastoral route.

Almost every single issue we discuss in my current course, ‘Contemporary Issues in Mission’, has fairly direct bearing upon everyday ministry in a western context. So today we discussed contextualization, and every time we mentioned a principle or a lesson in contextualization I could almost immediately visualize how one would incorporate that into a western context.

Missiology teaches you to think missionally right now where you are – it’s a must for pastors who don’t just want to keep their churches alive but actually want to make inroads into the community for Christ and his gospel.