A Living Alternative

Like for many of you, “The Shaping of Things to Come: Innovation and Mission for the 21 Century Church” by Michael Frost & Alan Hirsch was a groundbreaking book in my understanding of being the Body of Christ.  So I was thrilled when I heard they were co-writing another book.  “ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church” was released this month to many eager and expectant readers, myself included.  The book description is as follows:

    ReJesus asks the following questions:

* What ongoing role does Jesus the Messiah play in shaping the ethos and self understanding of the movement that originated in him?

* How is the Christian religion informed and shaped by the Jesus that we meet in the Gospels?

* How do we assess the continuity required between the life and example of Jesus and the subsequent religion called Christianity?

* In how many ways do we domesticate the radical Revolutionary in order to sustain our religion and religiosity?

* How can a rediscovery of Jesus renew our discipleship, the Christian community, and the ongoing mission of the church.

These questions take us to the core of what the church is all about. Rather than reformation, the authors call their task re-founding the church because it raises the issue of the Church’s true Founder or Foundation. This theme is of particular importance at the dawn of the twenty-first century as many attempt to address Christianity’s endemic and long trended decline in the West. The authors feel that a spiritual, theological, missional, and existential crisis looms in the West.

Rather than the typical review, I asked Mike if I could ask him a few questions about the book.  I hope you enjoy:

Jamie: I am sure you and Alan have much you could write about that is important to you.  Why did you choose this topic?  Why is it so important to you?

Michael: What could be more important to us than Jesus! Seriously, we think it’s the very thing that missiologists should be addressing. In our first book together, The Shaping of Things to Come, we presented a little maxim that I’ve seen repeated in a variety of places that goes: our christology should lead to our missiology which in turn will lead to our ecclesiology. In other words, the way we understand the gospels and the character of God revealed to us in Jesus will affect our way of thinking about our mission in the world. If we get our christology right, it will lead to a right missiology. If we engage missionally in a godly fashion, issues such as how to ‘do’ church (ecclesiology) will take care of themselves. In Shaping, we argued that a great many church leaders want to start with questions about how to ‘do’ church. We argued strongly that we need to go back to the gospels and let Jesus give rise to our missiology. ‘Doing’ church then kinda falls out the back of a biblical missiology. So it makes sense that our second book together should focus on a missional christology.
 
J: How does this book complement “The Shaping of Things to Come”?  And “Exiles”?

M: Well, as I just mentioned, it really is the next logical step on from Shaping. I wrote Exiles a few years ago as a way of trying to popularise the material in Shaping for a broader audience. Anyone who has read Exiles will know it begins with an extended reflection on how Jesus should shape us as missional exiles in a post-Christendom age. In fact, it’s often been mentioned to me that the early section in that book on Jesus is the most helpful. I think ReJesus  is just the next step in this process. It takes what I’ve witten about before and expands it into a fuller missional framework for appreciating the person and work of Jesus. That is to say, rather than only ever approaching the biblical Jesus devotionally (as most Christians seem to) we also need to approach him missionally, as the template for all godly missional activity in this world.
 
J: Who is this book primarily written for?

M: I guess it’ll get picked up by the missional church community and those who’ve valued the work that Alan and I do. But we wrote ReJesus with potential new readers in mind as well. You don’t have to have read Shaping or Exiles or The Forgotten Ways to appreciate this book. We are hoping for a wide readership for ReJesus because we think it goes to the core of Christian ‘business’ today - that is, the radical imitation of Christ by his followers. We dare to suggest that such radical imitation might actually contribute to the renewal of the church in the West. Anyone who’s into that agenda will value the book, I hope.
   
J: If you were to be critiqued or questioned any idea(s) presented in the book, which would they be and why?

M: Some might ask why we’ve just leaped over 2000 years of church history and landed right back in the gospels again. Surely, they might ask, there’s much we can learn from church history and the various renewal movements that have happened throughout that history. I’d agree with them, in a sense. But David Bosch’s wonderful Transforming Mission, does exactly that - tracing missiology throughout its various historical paradigms. We want to suggest that the gospels should provide a constant troubler to the church’s soul and whenever we get too institutionalised, too arrogant, too far from Jesus’ vision, they should jerk us back into line. In the book, we refer to the booster jets on a spaceship. Apparently most spaceships drift off course quite regularly, drawn by gravitational pull, until their boosters fire up and push them back on target. We think the gospels should do the same for the church. Whenever we’re drifting too far off course, they fire us back on track.
 
J: I’ve read in a recent review a concern that the books emphasis on Christology might lack adequate to a Trinitarian theology.  How would you respond to this concern?                                                                                                                

M: Well, it’s a popular attempt at a missional christology - that is, how the church must be shaped missionally by Jesus. I think if it was attempting a more scholarly and thoroughgoing christology a sustained discussion about the trinity would have been more appropriate. But we are taking a more narrow focus in this book. In a relatively short book we are wanting to inflame our readers with a desire to re-Jesus their churches and their lives. Now, some would argue that any biblical missiology must be anchored in a trinitarian theology and I couldn’t agree more. But I think the likes of Bosch and Newbigin and others have made that case quite clearly. I detect a growing awareness that the primary motivator for Christian mission must be located in the character and nature of the triune God. Assuming that, we are digging a bit deeper into the gospels to explore what mission looks like when lived out by the enfleshed God. I think the review you read (if it’s the same one I read) is criticising us for what we don’t say in ReJesus rather than for anything we do say. I think that’s a bit tough. I think it’s perfectly legitimate to write a book emphasising that God is Jesus-like without providing a sustained treatment of the trinity. The danger is that we might have ended up with some lofty high-falutin ontological discussion of the mysterious nature of the Godhead and lead our readers away from where we wanted to go - to a practical, action-focused framework for mission-in-the-way-of-Jesus.
 
J: Tell your readers something odd and unique about you they might not have read or heard before.

M: Frankly, I don’t think there’s anything odd about me, although I recall Alan Hirsch once telling me I was a “strange man”. I wasn’t sure what he meant, and when I asked, he just repeated, “Frosty, you are a very strange dude.”

Since Mike refused to ‘fess up, I contacted Alan Hirsch for the scoop.  Here is what he has to say about Odd Frosty:

“He is a human GPS!  He looks at a map once, and never has to again…and he’s almost always right. Weird!”

Many people have been asking me for an update on our adoption.  While I have sent our personal emails, I realized that I have not really posted much here on the blog.  We have SO appreciated the interest, prayer and support we have received from so many of you in respect to our adopting our first child from Ethiopia.

At this stage, our dossier is in Ethiopia and has (likely) been translated to use within the country.  The good news is that this means it is in the stack of applications from which children will be matched, meaning the next contact we are likely to receive will be a referral of a child.  The bad news- or rather, the tempering news is that this process could take up to a year or more.  So, we are in a waiting game.  Of course, it could happen sooner, so please pray with us that the process goes well.

One advantage of the delay is that it gives us more time to save.  The cost of international adoption from Canada is very expensive with very few (and widely sought after) grants and financial aides.  We have applied for one grant, which could cover up to $10,000 worth of costs (far less than half of the cost).  This is a stretch for most families, made additionally challenging on missionary “wages”.  However, God has always provided and people like you have been very generous.  We are getting there!  (Check out Adopt-A-Pixel for a detailed update on funds raised).

We are really excited about the adoption.  To be a father is something that stirs me on levels I cannot express.  Sure, I am also terrified to become a parent, but that is one blind leap I am more than willing to make!  Thanks again for all your prayer and support.  As you pray for us, also pray for Ethiopia as it faces the beginnings of what looks to be another famine that is already devastating the country.

As a person passionate about learning, change, growth and reform, the conversation and movement toward missionality in the church has been a thrilling and rewarding one.  Also, as a very pragmatic thinker, I am also driven to try and test ideas in real life contexts, which I have been seeing in other communities and doing in our own.  Acknowledging the experimental nature of this process, we intentionally engage in analysis and critique, both internally and externally, for the purpose of being more authentically missional Christians in the world.

This is an essential part of the process of spiritual and missional maturity, both for individuals and communities.  We must be willing to put our ideas and ideals into action and allow the larger Body of Christ (with whom there should be mutual and trusting relationship on some level) to speak frankly, constructively and even correctively into our lives.  After all, how else are we to grow and learn?  How else are we going to resist falling in love with our own ideas and models, allowing us the freedom to change as is needed?

As I read the many conversations only about the different ideas and models, I have begun to become more aware of the posture of analysis different people take.  For the most part, those who are committed to truly become God’s people in the world engage the issues, even the criticisms, appropriately.  However, it is very easy, as theology and ministry become professional practices, to treat these evaluations with overly clinical eyes.  At times, this approach lacks the patient grace and familial love that should characterize our relationship to others, especially within the Church.  How would our engagement of these issues change in tone and  nature if we were committed to consider the heart of the other first?

I am not suggesting that rigorous academic, theological and/or organizational analysis is not important.  However, I am saying that these approaches must come under the temperance of relational grace and consideration.  Whether we are critiquing missional theology and models or mega-church attractional techniques, we must intentionally acknowledge that we are relating to sisters and brothers in Christ.  This does not ignore or even diminish the important role of corrective (even prophetic) challenge, but rather realigns our focus foremost to the heart.

To that end, as you come across ideas, examples, model- even rants and polemics- pause to consider the person or persons behind it.  Let us change our posture of clinical analysis to one of patient consideration.  Even where correction and rebuke is deserved, let us respond with the undeserved grace that we also received from Christ and hope to receive when we put our own ideas and lives out before a watching world.

“Walmart Worker Killed In ‘Black Friday’ Shopper Stampede”

So read one headline about the senseless killing of a Wal-Mart employee by crazed consumers this past Friday.  Several others were injured as well.  Perhaps almost as sick as the wild greed that drove people to care so little for the man they killed (and witnesses have shown that they were aware of what was happening), was the anger of some customers when they learned the store had to be closed due to the death.  After all, they had stood in line all night to shop.  God have mercy…

I was baffled at how a person could get so consumed with the desire for “stuff” that they would literally walk over other people.  Sure, I can understand it in the face of starvation or imminent death.  But for a cheaper plasma screen TV or a $28 vacuum cleaner?  Who would devalue the lives of others so much to save a few bucks on more crap, even if it might by some stretch even be a need, not just a want?  Surely there is only a minority of people who could be that way.

As I considered this, something struck me.  It hit me like a load of brick that nearly sent me literally to my knees:  Most of us do, in fact, devalue the lives of others for our own selfish wants.  Granted, I think very few of us would trample a helpless person under our feet to buy a discounted digital camera- the immediate result of such selfishness is too much for us to live with.  However, what about when the effect of our choices are not so immediate?  Is it ultimately any less moral repugnant or tangibly violent when the very real consequence is distanced from us?

Looking at the “best deals” around, we often fail to ask where the savings came from.  After all, how many of these massive price cutting retailers offer discounts out of the goodness of their hearts?  After all, if profit margins on the products was that high, couldn’t all stores offer such discounts?  Of course not.  Rather, the savings comes through business practices that exploit others in order to cut costs.  Be in the tiny nations whose land was raped for the rough materials, the factory workers barely making a living wage in a place that pollutes their body and communities, the workers whose rights and interests are ignored and violated- through various means, our current system thrives on the exploitation of others.

And let’s be honest.  While a small minority of people buy things from these store out of real need to save money.  Most of us are not so much trying to survive as we are trying to sustain a level of comfort and privilege that requires us to cut corners in this way.  There are alternatives, but not ones without cost or without sacrifice.  The North American Dream has become the North American Illusion, a false reality that would convince us that we not only deserve everything, but that we need it.  And yet, as we are freed from these illusions, we begin to see that we our choices not only cost us our souls, but that they cost others their very lives.

So as we consider those men and women who trampled that man to death, let us not be too hasty to judge or dismiss them without first consider our own choices.  While this happened on Black Friday, our choices have far more reaching consequence and are made every day of the weeks.  As the Body of Christ present in a dying world, it is not enough for us to simply abstain from such choices, but rather we must be radical living alternatives.  In the words of St. Basil the Great (ht: Erika):

“The bread which you do not use is the bread of the hungry; the garment hanging in the wardrobe is the garment of the one who is naked; the shoes you do not wear are the shoes of the one who is barefoot; the money you keep locked away is the money of the poor; the acts of charity you do not perform are so many injustices that you commit.”

Over the last year, our little missional community has begun to be intentional about sharing at least one meal together in a week.  In time, we began to invite others to join us- people from the neighbourhood and those whose paths we cross day to day.  It has been growing into a really enjoyable and vibrant  group of around 25 people from different walks of life- university students, single parents, homeless folk and many others.  It is rapidly outgrowing the space we have, which is a great problem to have.

It is really exciting to see the relationship grow in breadth and depth, increasingly been drawn towards a share passion to be a community of faith within our inner city neighbourhood.  It is out of this common table that our “church plant” (a cumbersome phrase) is emerging.  The painful and rewarding challenges of opening our lives to the messy realities of these relationships has been truly life giving for and for the rest of our group.  The more it develops, the more confident I am that we were wise not rush into organizing and forcing a start to the church expression.  Out of the organic development, we are slowly becoming more intentional to form as a community around the mission of God to our neighbourhood.

I have not said much about it here, as I wanted to let things develop in their own time.  However, I am excited to see things come together.  For those who don’t know, our partnership with Mennonite Church Manitoba is giving birth to the Little Flowers Community.  The website is still being developed, but more information will be added regularly.  We want to ask you to join us in praying for this new community.  Here are some specifics:

-While part of a team of people committed to see this happen, Kim & I are providing the primary leadership at this stage.  We are praying that 2-3 others will join us in this role, making the West End home.  This is, perhaps, our biggest, most difficult challenge.

-None of the leadership is receiving salaries and don’t have much in respect to start up money.  We don’t necessarily see this as a negative, as we have learned to live simply and integrate our lives more fully with the neighbourhood.  However, the cost of living is on the rise and missions giving is on the decline.  Pray that God will provide for all involved.

-The relationships we are forming are wonderful, but inevitably come with challenges.  Pray for us all to grow together in peace and grace.

(Pre-Post Note: Due to lack of interest in my current series, I am discontinuing it.  No worries!)

Anyone who knows me well knows that I that am very concerned about how commercialized Christmas has become.  A sacred season on the Christian calender has been exploited to fuel the machine of commerce.  We have lost much and have so much to restore.  I needed to start with this qualifier lest what I am about to say sounds like compromise.

As much as I hate the commercialism surround Christmas, much of the celebration that has no direct connection to its Christian foundation (i.e. decorations, lights, trees, family/friend meals, etc.) stir in me real and passionate life.  Even gift giving (within reason) can be a beautiful act of intimacy and extravagant love.  We are in such need for celebration in our lives, especially in the context of community.

However, as I have already said, we have lost so much of the deep spiritual significance of the Advent season.  Instead of allow this central part of The Story shape us, we opt for buying into the self-serving spiral of the culture.

So my questions are these: Can we have the best of both?  If so, in what ways can we be intentional about embracing (even integrating) both?  If not, why not?

Do tell!

P.S. If you have 20 mins, the following video is well worth it (also see the official site, The Story of Stuff):

Building on the foundation of our basic understanding of what the Gospel is (see previous post), we then looked at story of the Gospel that we find in the Bible.  For this, we drew from Scot McKnight’s basic outline as found in his excellent new book “The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read The Bible”, we explored the story in this way:

-Created For Oneness: We were created for relationship with God, each other and Creation. It is in the beginning that we find God’s intention.

-Sin Brings Otherness: Sin broke relationship with God, others and Creation. We were dis-integrated, broken images/eikons of God.

-Struggle For Oneness: God calls a covenant people onto a journey towards oneness again with God, others & Creation.

-Oneness In Christ: As we share in the death & resurrection of Christ we become one in/as His Body.

-Oneness Forever: When God establishes a new heaven & earth, we will be perfectly restored to God, others & Creation.

The work of the Gospel is about re-integration, restoration, relationship.  This sounds promising- and it is- but it is also offensive.  The Gospel offers forgiveness and restoration regardless of the brokenness, the failing and the sin.  It means we are called into a story- THE Story- in which all are welcomed and offered hope.  That is a terrifying, messy and wonderful prospect.  It can only happen through the Cross and by the Spirit.

Consider this quote from Martin Luther King Jr. (from “Strength To Love”, Pocket Book, 1968):

“Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated… Desegregation will break down the legal barriers and bring men together physically, but something must touch the hearts and souls of men so that they will come together spiritually because it is natural and right. A vigorous enforcement of civil rights laws will bring an end to segregated public facilities, which are barriers to a truly desegregated society, but it cannot bring an end to fear, prejudice, pride, and irrationality, which are barriers to a truly integrated society.



“These dark and demonic responses will be removed only as men are possessed by by the invisible, inner law which etches on their hearts the conviction that all men are brothers and that love is mankind’s most potent weapon for personal and social transformation. True integration will be achieved by true neighbors who are willingly obedient to unenforceable obligations.”

The life of the Gospel is one where, together, we becoming willingly obedient to the unenforceable obligations of God.  It means our lives are not our own, but His.  In this way, true leadership is simply those who embrace such obedience.

What would that look like?  What would your life be if you lived with such devotion?  What stands in the way?

I wrote the following several years ago (at my old blog) and recently shared this story with our JDTS students:

I want to tell you a story. It isn’t a pleasant story, so I will present it to you as simply and straight forwardly as I can.

“Preach the Gospel at all times. When necessary, use words.”
(attributed to St. Francis of Assisi)

As our understanding of the Gospel- of Truth- expands to encompass the fullness of the message of Jesus, we will inevitably come to a demanding reality. The declaration of the Gospel, through the spoken and written word, only finds its authority to the degree that the Truth of the Gospel in embodied in the lives of the Church- not merely in the context of individual “righteousness” and morality, but in the transformational fullness of the Kingdom of God.

I went on to ask the students to consider the question: What is the Good News, the Gospel?  We explored just a few Scriptures, drawing from each how much bigger the Gospel is:

        -  Is. 61:1-3; Matt. 24:14; Matt. 26:10-13, Mark 8:34-38; Mark 16:15; Luke 4:17-21
        - Matt. 9:35; Matt. 28:18-20; Gal. 1:9, Gal. 2:14; Gal. 3:7-9; Eph. 6:19
        - Is. 40-9; Is. 52:7; Mark 1:1, Nah. 1:15; Mark 1:15; Luke 7:22

From there, we explored a few understandings of the story of God (drawing a great deal from Scot McKnight’s great books “Embracing Grace” & “The Blue Parakeet”).  Then setting up the context for the rest of the weeks teaching, I suggested a general understanding of the Gospel as follows:

This past week I was teaching on our Justice Discipleship Training School (JDTS) about what it means to be genuinely communities of the mission.  While I can’t share in full detail everything that I taught on, a few people expressed interest in the highlights, so I’ll do my best to give you the general feel of things.  Much of the material can be found in various blog posts on over the past several years.  I will likely have to break this up into a number of posts, as it is too much for just the one.  Feel free to ask for more details if you need them.

The lecturer prior to me was Chad Chomlack from Banff.  During his (excellent) week, one of the things he had the students reflect on was people who they looked up to and/or aspired to be like and why.  While he went on to process the answers in very personal ways, it provided the perfect starting point for my week of teaching.  When I asked the students why they respected these people so much, without exception their answers were rooted in the lived out, incarnational, hands-on, “do something” life of their choices.  It was clear that all of us, while respecting and honouring knowledge and wisdom, were hungry for people who lived their convictions in very real ways.

The world is very much the same.  People everywhere are watching, waiting, searching for others who have embraced their convictions in tangible ways.  And, whether we like it or not, we (the Church) are also being watched and measured according to how our lives measure up to our espoused beliefs.  We reflected on this by watching the following short video montage of just a very few images of Jesus.  These images are some of the ways- good, bad and cheesy- that the world perceived Jesus.  Take some time to watch carefully, considering your feelings towards each image:

Whether it is fair or not, the world is going to form their image of Jesus in large part by how we represent Him in our lives- not as much by our theology, doctrines or propositional beliefs (though each are unquestionably important).  This is only natural because, not only were we created in the image of God, but as Christians are reborn & resurrected into Christ’s Body.  So when people look at us, especially collectively, they should be seeing Jesus.  To use the Lord’s name in vain, more than anything else, means to live lives that are unworthy of His name.

What do they see when they see you with your community of faith?  Can they see you?  What would you want them to see?

In my years in ministry (and life in general) I have observed a strange phenomenon among a group of people.  Where ever I go I seem to find individuals or groups who seem to draw their identity from crisis.  Oh, they will articulate it as genuine suffering- be it illness, financial woes or relational breakdowns (often a combination of them all and more).  However, when it comes down to it, they seem to draw a sense of excitement, meaning and power from being the “victim” of their circumstances.  For many it seems to stem out of need to be special, set apart by their suffering.

With the election of Barack Obama as the next President of the United States of America, I have begun to observe this same kind of trend- groups of people who seem to thrill in proclaiming doom, gloom and judgment for the nation.  They “know” this is not God’s will, which can only mean that any who voted for Obama did not (and do not) know His will, blinded by the enemy, by the world, by secularism, by their ignorance.  They paint pictures of the future that offer no hope, but sullenly promise that the unfaithful will get what they deserve.  They, of course, will suffer too, but it will be the martyred suffering of God’s remnant.  From this they seem to define themselves.

Let me be clear: I am not suggesting that all who voted for McCain believe or act in this way.  Neither do I believe that the opposite is true- that a vote for Obama is a fulfillment of God’s divine purpose.  Both views elevate the political sphere to a level of importance that is too lofty, neglecting the reality that the Church is responsible for change, not beholding to any government to produce it.  Those of us who are happy with the results of the election must also have the wisdom and humility to acknowledge that Obama has and will make mistakes that are too big to ignore.  His policies on several issues grieve me deeply.  We MUST listen to the voices of caution, as they carry a wisdom we lack.  There were many good and right reasons to vote for McCain and we must respect that.

So how do we respond to those so devoted to the belief that America has become an “Obamantion” to the Lord?  For most- people who we do not know, but simply interact with in passing- I suspect ignoring it might be the greatest wisdom.  Being drawn in to a debate is likely only to drive the divide further, playing out before a watching world our petty divisiveness.  I am not suggesting we ignore the issues, but rather choose where we will place our energies and add our voices.  Most often peoples ignorance will prove themselves out without any help from others.

However, for many, these divides are between family and friend, between beloved brothers and sisters in the Body of Christ.  How do we respond then?  Oh God, for the grace, patience, humility and wisdom to love those with whom we differ!

What do you say?  How do we best respond?