Amidst the polarizing, fragmenting, and empire-building forces that seem to be rearing their ugly heads throughout evangelical Protestantism lately, the Ecclesia Network remains for me something of a refuge.  Ecclesia, as both a context and a family, is committed to and united by a modest, yet deliberate and substantive engagement with the various facets and issues of North American Christianity.  It’s this sort of posture that I believe sets Ecclesia apart in terms of its unique contribution to the lives of leaders, churches, and, through various initiatives and resources, the broader evangelical community.

To point to just a few things that excite me about Ecclesia, consider the following…

A yearly national conference (the next one being just about a month out), that seeks to help church planters and pastors wrestle with some of the most pressing issues of mission and ministry from the perspective of those who take seriously the challenges (perhaps better understood as happy opportunities!) of Post-Christendom.

Over the last 4 years, we’ve brought together leading voices, including those of women and minorities, to help us wrestle with the practical issues of incarnational expressions of ecclesial life.  In each instance, this has been done without pomp and circumstance, opting instead for a subdued environment where the focus is on encouraging one another, building relationships, and giving a good deal of attention to God’s presence and work in our midst.  In this way, our national gathering remains vitally connected to the rest of our lives, relationships, and ministry.

A leadership podcast that offers listeners a window into the lives and thinking of local church planters and pastors who are either in or connected to the Ecclesia Network.  Backed by the genius and savvy of Mr. Todd Hiestand and John Chandler, esquire, this podcast is just getting going, but there’s some good ones in there already.  Check out the latest podcast w/ Chris Backert, who, at long last, is offering to the world (in multiple parts no less!) some blog posts.  In part of the podcast, he talks a bit about Missio Alliance, an initiative I’m privileged to be a part of and will no doubt be writing more extensively in regard to in the future, but the rest of the podcast is a great introduction into the way Ecclesia has come about and what it “feels” like.

Aside from those things, Ecclesia is also involved in church planter training (here’s a bunch of great audio from the most recent training session), coaching, and publishing.  Ecclesia also initiates and sponsors regional events like this one in the Northeast, this one in the Northwest, and the Missional Learning Commons here in the Mid-West.

This is all good stuff.  None of it is completely unique; others seek to offer similar resources and opportunities.  What means the most to me, and what is simultaneously the biggest encouragement to me as something like the Missio Alliance gets underway, is the manner, character, and quality of all this work.  Like I tried to communicate above, as I look around and see so much discord and angling for influence across the evangelical landscape, I’ve just never gotten that taste from the people and work of Ecclesia and I’m grateful for this band of brothers and sisters.

Below is the fourth and final article that we’ve submitted to Patheos as a contribution to their forum on “The Future of the Seminary.”  I don’t believe it’s actually up over there yet and it seems like that forum has sort of run out of steam, so I thought I’d go ahead and post it here.  If it does make it up over at Patheos, I’ll update this post.  If this happens to be new to you and you’ve got some interest, here’s where you can find the first three articles:

Shaping Students w/ the Character and Competency of Jesus (lifeasmission | Patheos)

Missionary Pastors for a Missionary God (lifeasmission | Patheos)

Ministers are Mobilizers, Not Managers (lifeasmission | Patheos)

As I’ve noted in previous posts, this is some edited content from a more comprehensive white paper that I worked on.  You can find the whole paper here as a resource at thefutureoftheologicaleducation.com.

I hope to round this all out with a (more brief!) summary post soon.  Thanks to those of you who have been following along and weighing in.  Engagement is the only way to refine these sort of ideas toward the creation of something truly new, helpful, and concrete.

This is the 4th and final article in a series that we have been happy to offer related this Patheos forum on, “The Future of the Seminary.”  For our part, we have sought to call attention to the idea that inasmuch as theological education seeks to locate its purpose and aim in the missio Dei, its shape and future can be most helpfully understood from a missiological perspective.  This is the fundamental point of the white paper from which these few posts have emerged, The Missiological Future of Theological Education.

We first offered a video, which summarizes the issues surrounding the way in which Christendom obscured our view of God’s missionary nature, thereby mis-shaping not only our theology, but our ecclesiology and the systems of theological education that we constructed to prepare leaders for these Christendom-shaped churches.  The video also suggests that…

as we seek to re-imagine theological education along missional lines, the most important ‘accrediting factor’ for our schools lies in their ability to do their part in producing leaders who are able to demonstrate having taken on the character and competency of Jesus.

If you haven’t seen it yet, the video is embedded below:

After this initial post, we offered two more that sought to outline the missiological principles that we believe best contribute to creating processes of theological formation along these lines:

1) Missionary Pastors for a Missionary God, in which we suggest that missional approaches to theological education will be praxeological – geared toward the training of theologically reflective practitioners.

2) Ministers are Mobilizers, not Managers, in which we suggest that missional approaches to theological education will be mobilizational - geared toward the training of missionary leaders.

In this final post, we’d like to outline a final missiological principle that we believe will guide a faithful re-imagining of theological education, that of being spiritual – geared toward the training of kingdom citizens.

Spiritual, of course, can mean many things. For us, it simply means that everything about what theological education is and does, ought to be predicated on the centrality of a vibrant and growing relationship with the triune God and his work in the world.  In other words, just as Jesus’ efforts to train and form his disciples would have had no ultimate significance apart from their connection to God and God’s work in the world, so too are the efforts of seminaries wasted apart from this same connection.

Having lost its proper missiological shape, theological education within Christendom made it possible to separate ones intellectual development from ones spiritual maturity. This is a dichotomy that our centers of theological education must repudiate if they hope to lend any support to the shaping of leaders for Kingdom ministry.  Moving forward will call for, at the very least, processes of theological formation that shape convictions, impart spiritual knowledge, re-frame our relationship to Scripture, and embrace the irreplaceable role of the Holy Spirit.

Shaping Kingdom Convictions

As theologian James McClendon once said, “Convictions are not so much things that we have but things that have us.”  As important as we believe Christian doctrine and truth are, if we fail to cultivate leaders who are as convicted by them (as evidenced by life transformation) as they purport to be convinced of them, we will only continue to contribute to the collapse of Western Christianity. If seminaries are to make any sort of meaningful contribution to the mission and witness of the Church in Western culture, they must show primary concern, not only for the information that their graduates possess, but for the convictions that will shape, drive and sustain them through all the trials and tribulations of not only ministry in a Post-Christian context, but amidst the sort of suffering and persecution which the Bible tells us always accompanies faithful witness.

Imparting Spiritual Knowledge

Seminaries and churches are full of people who know plenty of things about God. What our seminaries and churches seem in desperate lack of are people who truly know God in the way the Apostle Paul speaks of when he says, “I want to know Christ—yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death…” What we have to accept is that this kind of “knowing” cannot be manufactured or controlled. The impartation of spiritual knowledge is finally the work of the Holy Spirit as we live in relationship with God and participate in his mission in the world in the way of Jesus. Thus, it is incumbent upon seminaries to create environments where God can do this kind of work in shaping Kingdom leaders.

Re-framing Our Relationship to Scripture

It should go without saying that in the endeavor of theological education to contribute to the shaping of Christian leaders, there is no text more important or sacred than the Bible. Unfortunately, the experience of many a seminarian is that the Bible is reduced to little more than an object to be examined and dissected. However, when you abstract an engagement with Scripture from a predisposition towards inviting the work of the Holy Spirit, we miss God’s intention for this discipline. Therefore, in terms of truly honoring a spiritual disposition towards theological education, not only will the Bible occupy a primary place throughout the whole of our programs (as opposed to being confined to individual courses), it will increasingly need to be seen as the very story out of which seminaries derive their own identity, purpose, and function.

Embracing the Irreplaceable Role of the Holy Spirit

Our prevailing systems of theological education train and equip people to be leaders in such a way that they assume an ability to succeed based upon their own intellectual capacity and/or skill-set rather than upon their ability to discern the Holy Spirit’s leading and therefore upon the Holy Spirit’s power rather than their own. We suggest that to the degree that centers of theological education want to contribute to preparing leaders for faithful service as Kingdom citizens, they must re-imagine theological education in such a way that the work and role of the Holy Spirit in the theological formation of leaders, as well as in the world, will be given primary attention.

Concluding Thoughts

One of the great travesties of our current Christian landscape is that emerging leaders often feel like they have to make a choice between “going to seminary,” because it will provide the sort of “accreditation” that many denominations and organizations require, or “going into ministry,” in order to give themselves fully to the sort of life & labor they feel like God has called them to.  As we re-imagine theological education along the lines of God’s Kingdom and God’s mission in the world, our hope and prayer is that these emerging leaders wouldn’t feel like this is a choice they have to make. Instead, we envision truly missional systems of theological education, so radically committed to a Kingdom vision of accreditation and to commissioning Kingdom leaders on account of their character and competency rather than their GPA, that ministry becomes the context for all our education and formation as we train reflective practitioners, that the aim of our education would become the mobilization of God’s people for loving and faithful service as we train missionary leaders, and that all of this emerges out of a vibrant and growing relationship with the triune God as we train Kingdom citizens.

It’s been a few weeks since I posted about the groundswell of conversation that seemed to be happening around the topic of the state and future of theological education. Since then, a lot has happened.

1) I joined Doug Paul and Mike Breen of 3DM in hosting a forum on this topic at Northern Seminary.

2) We’ve launched a website that is hosting the white paper and video we produced as contributions to the conversation.

3) A number of people have begin conversations in the discussion forums on that site.

4) Dr. Craig Blomberg, Professor of New Testament at Denver Seminary, offered a response to the paper that is posted on the resource blog

5) A slew of new posts, including the 1st of 4 from our perspective, have appeared in the online forum over at Patheos.

6) And we have received a couple dozen emails from people who are asking everything from, “Can you keep me informed on how this goes forward?” to “Can you come and help lead a discussion on this in our context?” Which we are more than excited to do! (inquire here).

I am actually quite a bit more interested in driving traffic over to thefutureoftheologicaleducation.com as a place where we can try and centralize some conversation and garner insight from as broad a population as possible, but just to generate some interest, I thought I would try and peak your interest with a few words from the introduction of the paper and the video that goes along with the initiative…

The American Church finds itself in a precarious position. Based on current statistics, each year 2.7 million people cease to be part of a local church community and 4000 churches close their doors. Beyond this, 85 percent of all our churches are classified as stagnant and dying…

…while we wholeheartedly agree that we are indeed in the midst of a cultural earthquake, we believe that these statistics are better read as symptoms of a deeper problem. Rather than working toward solutions aimed at helping the Church maintain or regain its position of power and privilege at the center of society, our contention is that a more faithful posture, in the midst of this cultural earthquake, is pausing to ask what God is saying and doing and how God is calling us to respond?

The missiological crisis of Christendom not only affected the Church, but also bore corresponding implications for seminaries and indeed our systems of theological education in general. As such, we believe that a massive re-imagining of the nature, purpose, and practice of theological education is in order. Simply put, the guiding thesis of this paper is that to the extent that our current systems of theological education have been shaped by Christendom presuppositions, they have lost their missiological bearings and are wholly inadequate to prepare Kingdom leaders. Incremental changes and clever adaptations to these current systems only serve to distract from the opportunity we have before us to develop a Kingdom, and therefore missional, vision of theological education. At the heart of this vision is the conviction that the proper telos of theological education is an “accreditation” of students based not merely on the degrees they earn, but on the development and fit of their character and competency for life and leadership in the Kingdom of God.

Back in August I posted about a partnership brewing b/t Northern Seminary and 3DM as we share a vision for discipleship-oriented theological education.  I also intimated that I would be sharing about more work along these lines in the future.  I’m here to make good on that promise.

We all know that 3DM is coming to Chicago to conduct a workshop on discipleship and mission at the end of the month, right?  This is happening on Friday, October 28 in the morning and afternoon.  Following this will be the annual Missional Learning Commons, which starts that evening and wraps up around 3PM on Saturday.

Well, before all of this goodness, Northern will be hosting an event on Thursday evening during which 3DM will present a video and paper as a way to spark some conversation about the future of theological education.

From Mike Breen’s blog,

One of the things that has become abundantly clear in our work with pastors and leaders is that there is a devastating disconnect between the ways that our seminaries and theological schools train and equip leaders for ministry and the realities that these leaders are facing day in and day out.  Noticing this has caused us to begin asking (along with many others), “What is the future of theological education?”  While we don’t think we have all answers to that question, we do have some thoughts and would like to invite you to an evening of dialogue about this important topic in Chicago.

So here’s your shot, if you have thoughts, questions, concerns, or ideas about the future of theological education, we’d love for you to join us and contribute to the discussion.  The video and paper will be made publicly available in November, but those who join us for this event will have some advance access to them.

Note: We don’t anticipate this being a large event, but we really do want to advance the word to those who share a genuine interest in this topic, so please feel free to use the social sharing options below or your own avenues of social networking to let others know about this Thursday evening event as well as the workshop and Commons.  Here’s some additional details on the Thursday night event…

• When:  Thursday, October 27 from 7-9 PM
• Where: Northern Seminary, Lindner Conference Center
• What: Presentations of a video and paper on the future of theological education followed by responses by Dr. David Fitch and others and an open question and response time.
• Cost: There is no charge to attend this event, but we would ask that you register here, so that we have an idea of how many will be joining us for the evening.

It’s interesting how things come together. I’ve been cultivating a growing interest in the future of theological education, especially under the direction of missional approaches to theology and ecclesiology since about the time I started into my own seminary experience, almost seven years ago now. Shortly thereafter, through a handful of professors and some involvement in Pasadena Mennonite Church, I was introduced to the Anabaptist tradition and its unique approach to theology and ecclesiology. I was especially taken with the way in which, for them, discipleship wasn’t something extraneous to “being saved,” but was the way in which we fully receive and participate in the good news of God’s salvation. Personally then, I’ve got these two passions, missional approaches to theological education and the centrality of discipleship for how we understand and practice being the Church.

Working at Northern Seminary, a school that is radically committed to exploring the best ways to come alongside the Church and Christian ministries to equip men and women for service and leadership in an increasingly Post-Christian context, sometimes affords me the opportunity to bring these two areas of passion together. This is especially true as I am in Pawley’s Island, SC working with my pal Doug Paul and other members of the 3DM team as we develop a partnership that will 1) Make it possible for participants in 3DM Learning Communities to earn seminary credit for the work they do over the two years of that journey and 2) Bring discipleship front and center as the focus of earning an Certificate, MA, MDiv, or DMin from a seminary.

Northern, in my opinion, has gotten quite good at creating partnership-driven programs that afford students the opportunity to craft degree programs that are both rooted in concrete ministry contexts and directly related to the area of Christian ministry and leadership that God has called them to. This partnership with 3DM is no exception. Over the course of two years, 3DM guides pastors and leaders through not just the ideas of creating a discipling culture, multiplying missional leaders, launching missional communities, and establishing centers of mission, but the nuts and bolts of those endeavors as well. This is what makes them so unique. They are not just content providers, they serve as mentors and coaches through two years of implementing these ideas. The nature and fruit of this process is more than enough to make someone scratch their head when comparing it to traditional models of theological education, which are almost always class based rather than ministry based. This partnership is a deliberate attempt to begin to rectify this shortcoming by creating a definitive bond between theological reflection and ministry experience with a view toward spiritual formation.

Crafting syllabi and shaping the contours of these various degree programs is just a part of what I’ll be spending my time on while I’m down here with the good people of 3DM We’re also working on a couple side projects that I think will add some value to the conversations and initiatives related to the reshaping of theological education and the place and practice of discipleship in the Church.

A few weeks ago now, I pointed to a couple posts that Tony Jones has offered about the missional church.  I mentioned that I was particularly interested because of some intersections those posts had with the research I will be doing over the next few years as part of the DMiss cohort I am a part of.

I am still very much at the early stages of articulating my research project, not to mention working through all the details of what it will entail in terms of field work.  But, I thought I’d go ahead and throw what I am working with so far out there and see what sort of feedback others might have.

The DMiss degree is structured around equally important labors of academic and field research.  In the joining of these two different kinds of research, the aim is to be both descriptive – what is actually happening in concrete contexts, as well as constructive – how do insights gained from field and academic research combine to help these local contexts change, adapt, or improve.

My ultimate concern has to do with the relationship between soteriology (how we understand salvation) and the structures and practices used for disciple-making in missional churches for a Post-Christendom context.

Given this central interest, I plan to do research in local churches that will help me understand just how this is playing out.  In terms of academic research, I plan to focus on the intersection of the missio Dei (as it pertains to soteriology), Anabaptist theology (as a non-Christendom theological framework), and missional ecclesiology (as it pertains to discipleship).

So, descriptively, I hope to be able to give an accurate and insightful portrayal of the soteriological vision of multiple church contexts and how that vision relates to their structures & practices for making disciples in Post-Christendom.

Constructively, I hope to be able to articulate what might be called a missional soteriology (vision of salvation rooted in the missio Dei) and then reflect on the implications of this for disciple-making in Post-Christendom.

At the end of the day, I am hoping that the results of this research will benefit, first and foremost, my own various “missional church” tribes.  In my view, if the research that I am to do doesn’t serve these contexts, it is of no real use.  Additionally, I have a great concern for how this research might benefit the field of theological education as it continues to grapple with the challenges of equipping leaders for ministry in a context in which the church is increasingly pushed to the margins of society.  Bottom line, we do not know how to do this well and if centers of theological education are going to figure out what it means to equip missionaries as opposed to managers, some major shifts are needed.

Would love to hear any thoughts you might have on what I am setting out here.

Oh, by the way, several others have encouraged my to try and find some funding for this research so that I might be able to conduct it on a broader scope.  If you have any thoughts along those lines, I’m all ears.

Like many others, I received a free copy of Launching Missional Communities: A Field Guide by Mike Breen & Alex Absalom to read and review here on my blog.

I should probably say upfront that I have a ton of 3DM (the training network behind this book) friends.  I love them, their hearts, and their ministries, so as I come to this book, I’m already biased in favor of it.

The easiest thing to say about this book is that it’s practical.  While it’s easy, even fun, to read, it almost can be treated more like a resource manual than a book.  It doesn’t need to be read straight through and it’s easy to reference bits and pieces depending on your interests.

Before diving into all the good stuff I want to say, let me go ahead and get my one major criticism out of the way.  There is a small chapter entitled, “Attractional vs. Missional” in which the authors attempt to argue that we need both.  My opinion, however, is that the argument fails on both theological and analogical fronts.  They use the pre-Reformation phenomenon of Roman model churches (if you build it they will come) and Celtic model churches (more outward focused) to suggest that we need attractional and missional kinds of churches playing off of one another.  The analogical problem here is that what is generally meant today by attractional and missional does not at all correspond to the realities and circumstances in which these models of churches existed.  As for the theological problem, I can probably best articulate that by sharing the last sentences of the chapter and my notes in the margin.

The quote…

We just need to understand what Attractional does well and do it.

We need to understand what Missional does well and do it.

My notes…

Impossible – attractional and missional churches are such because they have divergent understandings of basic Christian doctrines.  What we need is a theologically robust understanding the relationship between the the Missio Dei, the gospel of the Kingdom of God, and the Church.  This will lead us not to the ‘best’ of these two models, but to a cohesive vision of a missional ecclesiology.  This is the great error of ‘AND’ thinking; you never get to core issues because you spend all your time trying to artificially hold incompatible things together.

The saddest part of this is that the underlying genius of the book actually does this work.  It undercuts the errant theology and philosophy driving attractional churches.  I just wish they had been more direct in stating it.

UPDATE: Be sure to check this post Mike Breen offered in response.

OK, on to the far more substantive praise.

The authors fully communicate their heart for the life and ministry of local churches in their various forms.  They offer not just a proposal, but a methodical plan for churches of any size (though it seems pretty obvious that they have in mind mainly new, smaller communities and then more established larger communities in mind) and kind to begin to incorporate missional communities into the life of their larger church community.

Discipleship, leadership and mission are the driving themes of both the book and the entire philosophy of missional communities.  To get the point of the book, you have to understand that from the author’s perspective, the task of the church is discipleship – period – the end.  And they are right.  You also have to embrace the idea that the replication of leaders is imperative to the larger task of discipleship.  If you don’t equip and empower leaders, you can kiss your changes of exponential discipleship bye-bye.  Again, I’m totally with them here.  Finally, mission is the context in which leaders are equipped and disciples are formed.  Amen!  If you can embrace and own these three things, then you’ll love this book and what it offers.

A few final things.  I deeply appreciate that they didn’t skip over the tough (practical) issues like kids, schedules, and finances.  they address these things as only those who’ve lived through the ins and outs of the details could.  They also interspersed quotes and stories from those who have gone through their 3DM training and others who have implemented missional communities (or some derivation thereof) into their larger church context.

Seriously, it was a great book – something that we are finding valuable at Life on the Vine even.  The guys behind 3DM are doing a good work and the people who contributed stories to the book are the ultimate testimony of that.  I highly recommend you pick up a copy or two to read through with a group that’s interested in the whole idea of missional communities – you won’t find a better practical guide for sure.

We tend to think of leadership as an activity and not a relationship.  But in terms of creating a culture of discipleship, equipping each other for ministry, and mobilizing people and groups for mission, the relational aspect of leadership is of enormous significance.

Having already engaged in conversations around the themes of missional discipleship and missional family, the Missional Learning Commons will round off with a discussions about missional leadership.  Speakers, topics, and bios are below.  More information and registration here.

David Fitch: The Hazards of Being Paid to Pastor: Overcoming the Bad Dynamics of Money

Summary:

When a pastor gets paid a set of negative dynamics are set into motion. Power relationships develop within a community. There are expectations from people who “give.” Ministry can turn inward and into politics. All of this works against moving a community into mission. I offer a couple observations and simple moves to subvert these dynamics.

Bio:

David Fitch is a co-pastor at Life on the Vine in northwest Chicagoland and a church planter/coach. He is also Lindner professor of evangelical theology at Northern Seminary’s programs in missional church studies teaching on matters having to do with gospel and culture. He is an author with his next book – The End of Evangelicalism? Discerning a New Faithfulness for Mission coming out in January 2011. Dave is married to Rae Ann and dad to their son Max.

Fitch, Take 2: Leadership is Submission: The Counter-Cultural Way of the Cross in Leadership

Summary:

Leadership that leads into the new territories of mission will always produce conflict. This is the inevitable prospect of a community pushing into Mission. The Missional leader is not one who manages this conflict from top down. Instead, through the posture of humility, service and trust in the Spirit, out of Scripture and mutual discernment in prayer, he or she leads the community through inviting it to seek what God is doing, hear and respond. In this way of non-coercion and submission, the “revolutionary” community is birthed, brought together in Christ “on the way” of Mission.

Amy Rozko: Global Perspectives on Missional Leadership:  Reflections and Observations from Cape Town 2010 (The 3rd Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization)

Summary:

Local churches bear the responsibility not only of equipping leaders for ministry in an increasingly globalized world at home, but also of mobilizing them for participation in God’s Kingdom work across the globe.  Doing so necessitates that we have a meaningful sense of what God is saying and how God is working in other parts of the world.  In this session, Amy will offer reflections on the state of the church around the world from a recent gathering of 4000 global church leaders and invite us to discuss the implications for churches in terms of leadership development.

Bio:

Amy is excited to have just participated as a delegate to the Third Lausanne Congress on World Evangelization in Cape Town, South Africa.  She and her husband of just over a year, JR, live in Elgin, IL where she also works for International Teams US as the Director of Mobilization.  They are an active part of Life on the Vine in the Chicagoland suburbs.

Internet here in Cape town has been spotty and expensive, but here’s a few tid bits from our first few days here.

I have spent most of my time at pastors conferences.  This is an entirely different feel.  To be honest, it feels weightier, more significant.  This probably has something to do with the fact that the bulk of the people here have made unspeakably greater sacrifices to follow God than the average pastor in the US.  It should also be noted that you would never get this sense in talking to the people here – which probably stems from another difference – no one is grumbling or complaining about how no one will follow them or get on board with their vision. They are too busy doing some of the most significant Kingdom work around the world to worry about stuff like that.

As this conference is being touted as one of, if not the most, diverse gatherings of Christian leaders in the history of the world, the vibe of it just defies explanation.  Rubbing shoulders and having conversations with people in contexts that I can scarcely imagine will certainly be one of my highlight coming home.

As someone put it yesterday, there is something “interesting” about being part of a gathering where there are “a lot of chiefs and not all that many Indians.”  (There were actually a handful of Native Americans sitting right behind us when that got said – thankfully they had a sense of humor.)  Basically every other person I meet is President of something, author of a book, or Archbishop of some diocese somewhere.  Oh, Rene Padilla just passed me and there goes the wife of Bill Bright – no kidding.  It’s encouraging to see so many people who are used to being treated as a VIP engage as part of the “common folk.”  Easy, I suppose, when you just don’t think in those terms.

OK, hopefully more later.  Be sure to check out blog posts from Andrew Jones and Skye Jethani.

Today is the day.  Amy and I have been busy all morning with last minute details as we get set to take off for Cape Town, South Africa for the Third Lausanne Congress on World Evanglization.

We are only able to go thanks to the generosity of a plethora of family and friends who financially supported us and we are grateful beyond words.

If you have some measure of interest in this gathering, I highly recommend you check out the advance papers, participate online, or maybe even attend one of the Globalink Events.

Between the place we are staying and the conference center, we should have some access to Internet and I plan to do my best to offer brief reflections and pictures throughout our time there.

Thanks for your prayers for us and the rest of the leaders that will be gathered in Cape Town for the next week or so.  May God use this event for the sake of His Kingdom breaking forth in new ways all around the world!

I’ve mentioned before the DMin in Missional Leadership cohort that is being convened at Northern Seminary here in Chicago.  I could list out a whole slew of reasons that I think this is going to be an unbelievable opportunity, but might as well let Dave Fitch, Craig Van Gelder, and Al Roxburgh just tell you themselves.  Check out the 4 brief videos below.

The first one is an introduction and speaks to leadership issues.

This second one has to do with issues of theology and cultural context.

The third video pertains to congregational change and formation.

This final clip speaks to the unique features of this program as one offered through Northern.

I have the good fortune to work for Northern, but this is far from a paid advertisement.  This is just me wanting to spread the word about the sort of opportunity that I think is well suited to equip men and women for service in and to the Church in an increasingly post-Christian context.

My first experience with the missional community in the midwest was through a somewhat random collection of pastors and leaders that met at Life on the Vine over 2 days in January of 2008.  That was what has become known as the Missional Learning Commons…

A collaborative day for missional churches to exchange ideas, support, and encouragement on how to incarnate the gospel in their contexts.

We gathered for the 3rd time in January of this year and loved the time so much that we just had to bump the next gathering up to this fall – Friday, Oct. 29 – Saturday, Oct. 30!

(click image for PDF)

I’ve said before, there is a lot of power in regional gatherings.  So, if you are a pastor or leader who lives in driving distance of Chicago and is at all interested in the learning/participating in the missional conversation in real life, rubber-meets-the-road, kinds of ways, you should definitely join us.

This event has always been free in the past, but in an effort to make sure that we have all kinds of voices at the table, we are charging $10 to help cover the cost of childcare during the event.

Lots more info and banners/posters courtesy of one Mr. Benjamin Sternke can be had over at missionalcommons.org.

Northern Seminary has offered to host the event for us and Ecclesia is helping to sponsor it.  Spread the word!

I have a decision to make.  Several months ago I wrote a post about Fuller pulling together a DMiss cohort around the topic of Anabaptist Perspectives in Missional Ecclesiology.  I applied to this program and it is scheduled to begin this November.

In the meantime, I accepted a job here in the Chicagoland area at Northern Seminary which is pulling together its own DMin cohort around the topic of missional leadership.

Of course each program comes with its own features and benefits.  Both programs are cohort-based and non-residential, but let me lay out some of the distinctives of each program and see what sort of thoughts and advice you might have to offer.

The DMiss…

The DMiss, like a PhD, is a research driven program.  The program moves from theological/missiological considerations to issues of context and culture, and finally, to leadership and change dynamics.  The final year is given to integration, assessment, and dissertation writing.  The cohort will be led, primarily, by Wilbert Shenk and James Krabill.

The DMin…

The DMin is a course driven program, the topics such as, “The Church in Post-Christendom, The Gospel and Culture, Missional Theology, and Misional Leadership.”  The program culminates in the writing of a thesis.  David Fitch is leading the cohort while Al Roxburgh and Craig Van Gelder will be involved as well.

I think very highly of both of these schools and their programs.  I think both programs will do immeasurable good in equipping men and women for service in and to missional churches, but I go back and forth on which one is the best for me, at this time, given the larger scope of all that God is doing in my life.

What sort of questions would you be asking if you were me?  What aspects of doctoral level education do you believe are most important and relevant?

UPDATE: Be sure to check out what other bloggers are saying about their experience at this gathering.

Dave Fitch here and here, Ben Sternke, J.R. Briggs, Todd Hiestand, Drew Hart, and Geoff Holsclaw (not quite real).  I’ll add more as I become aware of them.

John Chandler is in.

Here’s Geoff Holsclaw’s real one.

Bob Hyatt provides his reflections here.

Jason Salamun, new to Eclclesia, reviews his time here.

——————————————–

The missional community Amy and I are a part of, Life on the Vine, is a part of Ecclesia,

a relational network of churches, leaders and movements that seek to equip, partner and multiply missional churches and movements.

Before I offer some reflections on the national gathering that just concluded, I wanted to mention a few of the unique features of Ecclesia that compel me to appreciate this network more than others.

The Kingdom of God.  As opposed to one particular understanding of the gospel, Eccelsia finds unity in Jesus’ message of the Kingdom thus making room for those who articulate the good news in different ways.

Relationships/Partnerships.  Through and through, Ecclesia is relationally driven. They exhibit no desire for the network to be central, but rather labor to facilitate relationships and partnerships between leaders and churches.

Affirmation of Women.  We still have work to do in this area, but especially at this years gathering which featured a husband wife team as keynote presenters, we put on display what I hope continues to emerge as as a stated value for the importance of men and women partnering in ministry.

I could probably add more, but on to the reflections I go.

Dallas Willard and Bob & Mary Hopkins were the speakers for the main sessions. Todd Hunter was supposed to be there as well, but needed to cancel for personal and understandable reasons.

Dallas was brilliant.  Wisdom seemed to pour out of this man as he spoke.  His main theme through the week was “knowledge.”  He wasn’t speaking of the intellectual/factual sort of knowledge, but the relational/experiential sort. His aim seemed to be that we would be known not just for what we do, but what we deeply, personally, and powerfully know to be true about God and life in God’s Kingdom.

One of the topics Dallas took up in a break out session was that of religious pluralism.  Central to that conversation was the issue of homosexuality.  As he so often does Dallas reframed the trajectory of the conversation by commenting,

I think homosexuality is a disastrous lifestyle, but heterosexuality ain’t doing so good either. And if it weren’t for the failings of heterosexuality, homosexuality may not be such a huge issue.

This is what Dallas does best.  He brings a frame of reference that just isn’t on the radar for so many people.  For Dallas, the main issue is always is our nuanced journey into Christlike character as opposed to simple doctrinal statements or moral judgments.

Bob & Mary Hopkins were equally excellent. Mainly they talked about the functioning of teams and incarnational/contextual issues of church planting and ministry.

They shared from their years of experience with church planting and equipping church leaders and teams in the UK.

Everything that Willard and the Hopkins’ had to say was insightful and helpful, but I don’t think it was my favorite part of the week.  My favorite part of the week was the consistency and pervasiveness of voices from within the network.  A big part of this was the size of the gathering – capped at 200.  But more than that, the structure of the gathering featured panel sessions, extended Q&A sessions, and specific opportunities for us to hear, both as a large group and via breakout sessions, from those who are leading local churches within the network.

I may have some more thoughts that surface later, but for now, here’s the twitter stream (#eng2010) from the conference as well as the live blog we used.  The audio from the conference should be available soon and I’ll be sure to let you know when it is.

A little over a week ago, my cousin-in-law Josh, asked how one might go about transitioning traditional churches into “something more missional at its core.”  Since I have banged my head against this wall for years in several different churches, my response will be a mixture of, “here’s where I failed,” and “here’s what I think is most helpful.”  For anyone who might have missed them, my posts on, “The Move: The Journey from Attractional to Missional,” and “What is Missional?” would be really helpful in understanding where I am coming from.

I should say a few things at the beginning to help frame my thoughts.

1) This is a wine skins issue (Mt. 9:17).  Anyone considering this topic who thinks (whether they realize it or not) that this is basically about getting new wine into old wine skins is destined for frustration and failure – I speak from experience!  Missional churches represent brand new wine skins, not just new wine.

2) This takes a long time.  The most experienced people will tell you 8-10 years minimum.  When we are talking about changing the core identity of, not just a person, but a community, we have to expect a long hard road.  An apt analogy – God got Israel out of Egypt in pretty short order, but it took another 40 years to get Egypt out of Israel.

3) No one person is capable of maneuvering this transition.  Solo pastors are dead in the water in this regard.  And this isn’t to say that the better way is having a team of top-down leaders – this will end up being damaging as well.  One of the keys to instilling missional DNA in a church community is inspiring and encouraging new imagination from the bottom.

Those things being said, what does it take?  What might the process look like?

My short answer is,

A Spirit-guided intermingling of communal practices, teaching, and prayerful reflection.

Here’s my slightly-longer expansion on those three things.

I take for granted that fundamental to the distinctions of “traditional” and “missional” is a vision of what it means to be the church in Post-Christendom vs. Christendom.  My personal opinion (others may disagree) is that there is no point in talking about what it means to be a missional church until Christendom has been rejected as a cultural value. Thus, transitioning traditional churches to missional ones is a non-linear process of deconstruction and reconstruction.  Communal practices, teaching, and reflection are the tools which assist in this ongoing task.  It would be a (classically modern) mistake to think of this as a mainly intellectual enterprise.  Instead, in the integration of these things, deconstruction and reconstruction happen alongside one another.

Since there is no universal model to apply to this topic, we are better served by asking general questions that need to be answered in specific contexts.  Here are some questions which I think would serve us well in maneuvering this sort of transition.

– In both small numbers as well as large, what are the practices we can engage in as a community that will shape us into people and “a people” who think and act like Jesus?

– As we try to be honest with ourselves, what things are we doing as a community that don’t seem to be contributing to our spiritual formation?

– How do we incorporate space in our times together (in homes, in meetings, in gatherings) to intentionally reflect on and respond to what we sense God is speaking and doing in our community?

– Who are those in our community who seem most gifted to teach (identified by the fruit of their teaching helping people become more like Jesus)? How can we encourage these people to engage with authors and speakers who are dealing with the subject of missional ecclesiology on our behalf?

– How do we make incremental yet strategic changes in the percentage of money that goes to those things which ensure our security as opposed to those things which necessitate faith in the midst of great risk?

Over and above questions like these, I would also suggest these sort of biblical principles for those who shoulder the responsibility for a transition like this:

– Find people of peace who can be trusted and are willing to commit to the journey. Ask for their help.

– Demonstrate servant leadership by being open, transparent, and broken.

– Commit to structures of biblical conflict resolution.  Entrust to God’s care those who choose to leave (there will be many and this is not necessarily a sign of poor leadership).

OK, there’s some initial thoughts.  I’m sure I’ll have more so I hope to continue the discussion by way of comments.