Bulletins as Missional Indicators?
Over at Mere Mission, Todd Hiestand asks what the announcements in our church bulletins can tell us about how missional our congregations are.
Are all your announcements about things internal? While I’m a believer that discipleship and community life stuff is important for the mission of a local body, if all of the activities, programs, etc are pointed inward, this might be a good indication that the church needs to take some intentional steps outside itself.
This is a good question, in my opinion. If bulletins tell us what is happening in the life of a congregation from week to week, I think they can give us a sense of where our focus lies. This would be a challenging and life-giving experiment for many churches, I imagine.
So you would steer away from: “Tuesday @ 10am: Sewing for Christ.”
Comment by Eddy E — May 6, 2008 @ 4:11 pm
I know you’re making a joke, so forgive me for answering it a bit seriously. Most anything we do as a community can have a missional focus. Decades ago, our church had a sewing circle ministry that made blankets for every baby born at Huntington Hospital. It’s hard for me to think of a more amazing token telling babies and families that God and God’s people love them. And the women in the sewing circle had the benefit of community prayer and fellowship.
Of course more babies are probably born at Huntington in a couple of weeks than were born in a year when they ran this ministry, so their goal is no longer feasible. The ministry has thus morphed a bit. Women in our church still make blankets for a home our church supports that gives sanctuary to young or expecting mothers who are at risk. I think Jesus is going to say beautiful things to these women when they stand before him on the day of judgment.
Comment by Tyler Watson — May 6, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
Daing… I should have asked you instead about the Wednesday 3pm Walking Ministry…
Comment by Eddy E — May 6, 2008 @ 6:26 pm
Not just our bulletins, but our church budgets as well.
Comment by Kim — May 7, 2008 @ 7:58 am
Good one, Kim. Bulletins might be a less-threatening starting point for conversation.
Comment by Tyler Watson — May 7, 2008 @ 11:24 am
We used to go to your church from time to time.
And I know the ‘at risk’ single moms home you mention. We lived in that ‘at risk’ Northwest Pasadena neighborhood for many years.
Here’s my question.
Why are some obviously bright and gifted Christian folks so seemingly committed to trying to revive potentially cracked and worn out institutional wine skins?
When good folks are spending emotional and spiritual energy debating about potentially subversive worship bulletins I wonder if there is some reason to ponder if we’ve lost track of the bigger picture. Those same people could be investing themselves in helping more immediately creative and relevant wine skins hold and pour out the life giving wine.
I say all that with great respect for folks trying to bring established institutional change. I spent my first 15 years after college trying to do that kind of thing with Inter Varsity.
But I do wonder.
Comment by Tom Pratt — May 8, 2008 @ 10:06 pm
Those are important questions Tom. Speaking for myself, I don’t believe I have the call to bring about institutional change. The call I believe my family has is to listen to God and pursue his kingdom within whatever community he places us. Institutional change may come from that, but I do not feel called to seek that change for the sake of the change. I do believe that I am called into the denomination where I am seeking ordination (Evangelical Covenant Church) and the congregations and people in the ECC generally excite me.
The ECC is doing a lot in terms of church planting, church renewal, and ongoing mobilization for missional activity. I appreciate that we haven’t decided to pursue new efforts at the expense of older congregations and have believed that participating in God’s mission is a call to the whole Church, even if some communities are inwardly focused.
I’ve seen amazing folks move forward in new endeavors outside traditional structures and I have also seen people follow God radically within the structures that have existed. Honestly, I’m wary and weary of movements that decide what has gone before is no longer worthy of our energy. I’m not saying you’re communicating or endorsing this Tom, but I’ve seen many people decide that they know what it is to follow Jesus and cast aside other brothers and sisters like they’re wiping the dust off their feet because they decided others don’t know how to follow Jesus. It smacks of and feeds the worst aspects of denominationalism. I affirm denominations and mourn their existence at the same time. I believe denominations have been created for good and bad reasons. When I was at Fuller, there were more denominations represented than nations and we had students from something like 70 countries.
Lastly and most importantly, I have a belief that missional engagement is a calling for the whole Church no matter how navel-gazing and entrenched our congregations may be. I don’t think the Spirit gives up on the communities it has created. The verse that informs me of this comes from Paul’s letter to the church at Philippi: “I am confident of this, that the one who began a good work among you will bring it to completion by the day of Jesus Christ.” (1.6)
At the same time, I believe that the Spirit can lead certain communities to the decision to close their doors and our denomination has seen that happen. When done well, closing a church has been a powerful participation in mission since those churches can see that their resources can help several vibrant ministries.
Comment by Tyler Watson — May 9, 2008 @ 7:05 am
Thoughtful and encouraging response.
Coupla responses of my own.
Re the idea of ‘call,’ I’m one of those folks who disagree with most Reformation and post-Reformation Protestant thinking on the issue. I don’t think the NT talks about call in terms of specific assignments or relationships in life. From my point of view that’s a religious viewpoint that all of us from pretty much every culture and religion tends to use to gain needed existential confidence about our personal decisions. Seems to me the issue of ‘call’ in the NT is reserved for the idea of following Jesus into serious discipleship.
I think that’s what you’re getting at with your comments about your family’s call to listen to God and follow where led. We’re on the same page there.
Personally, I don’t think people are ‘called’ into denominations or into anything else beyond basic discipleship.
If that’s true it has implications.
In terms of the strength of a word like ‘calling,’ God seems to leave decisions about where we serve and who we serve to us.
God’s working everywhere and faithful people should and do serve in every context.
But I think the basic teachings of the gospel imply that change—with institutional change as one particularly important species—is fundamental.
Your comment about institutional change didn’t ring entirely true to me. You obviously desire fairly dramatic change in your context. Not sure why you would have put up this post or lots of others otherwise.
All of can claim to be simply following Jesus but I think there are implications from that relationship that tend to lead disciples toward a less institutional and traditional bent, and which favor ministry among those who will someday be comforted.
In any case, I think those that choose to serve primarily among the comfortable in this world and in ‘navel gazing and entrenched’ (your terms) institutional settings have got some legitimate explaining to do. I’m all with God sending his people into every situation, and I spent a lot of my ministry life serving elites and the wealthy and the institutionally satisfied. So I’m not pointing fingers. And I think there are plenty of good reasons to serve in those settings. I guess I was looking for that kind of explanation instead of falling back on the potentially misapplied idea of ‘call.’
I don’t know anybody that wants change for change sake. How did that unfortunate idea get into the conversation :^)?
—wanted to let you know how much I appreciate what you’re doing here. I know of few situations where this kind of discussion could even take place.
Comment by Tom Pratt — May 16, 2008 @ 10:15 pm
Tom, thanks for your encouraging words. I absolutely affirm your sense that the call is to follow Christ in discipleship. Where we split is that is that I believe God can also call us into specific roles or locations. It seems to me from reading the biblical record and from viewing the history of the Church—including my peers—that people have been called or led by God into specific places for specific purposes. My view probably also has some vestiges from my Calvin-ish upbringing. Perhaps I could distinguish between the Call and a call.
I agree that oftentimes we use the term call to “gain needed existential confidence about our personal decisions.” I’ve seen the idea of call employed as a trump card in debate. I try to be more careful—I worry that this usage is akin to taking God’s name in vain. I believe call in the sense I’ve used it is discerned in and by the community.
I admit that I have other conversations and debates running through my head as we’ve engaged on this topic. I’ve tried my best to keep them out, but at times, I can see how those discussions have shaped my responses to you.
Comment by Tyler Watson — May 19, 2008 @ 7:06 am
Somehow almost everybody ends up ‘called’ to serve comfortable people in comfortable situations. Maybe a more relevant question is ‘which community?’ helps people gain specific shorter term and less ‘trump card’ versions of God’s direction in life.
Not sure how to respond to your last paragraph, though I appreciate your honesty.
Always good to have a chance to be a part of discussions and debates. Hard to trust decisions made without the input of everybody in the mix.
You’re right. Real community is a good thing :^)
Comment by Tom — May 24, 2008 @ 9:32 pm