Moving from the Assumptions of Christendom into a Post-Christendom, Mission-focus Praxis (Part 2)

In part 1 of this two-part post, I made some general comments about the realities of Post-Christendom. In sum, Post-Christendom is the culture that is emerging as the Christian story loses its primacy as that which shapes lives and institutions...Post-Christendom is a reality that includes the following transitions:

• From center to the margins – the Christian story no longer holds a preferred place in culture.
• From majority to minority – Christian population is no longer the undisputed majority of population.
• From settlers to sojourners – Post-Christendom creates a community of people who feel that they are exiles and aliens.
• From privilege to plurality – Post-Christendom sees the inclusion of other stories and faith systems as equally valid.
• From control to witness – no longer able to coerce society, Christians now influence via witness and lifestyle.
• From maintenance to mission – with the demise of the status quo, post-Christendom wrestles with a new understanding of mission.
• From institution to movement – there is a new understanding of the power of movement and the fluidity of a non-reliance on institutionalism.

I ended that initial post by writing, "Some may see these transitions are a tragedy. Others, including myself, see this age as an age of excitement and opportunity. Christ-followers have not had to deal with these dynamics since the early days of the Christian movement. It is not an easy environment to live but it does provide a chance to see faith and life from a radically new perspective. It also demands new ways of thinking about mission, discipleship, leadership development and theology as the movement of Christianity enters one of its most challenging eras in history."

Now, in this post, we are on to the “So what?” That is the question I try to pose to myself as I encounter any new information or try to learn something that could have the potential of impacting my life. If we have moved into an era of Post-Christendom, what are the “take aways”…what lessons do we need to learn as we attempt to be faithful to the call of our Lord Jesus and track His Spirit’s movement in our lives and the lives of others? Below are some "suggestions"...a place to start a dialog on how to proceed and how this "new playing field" may be that which the Holy Spirit uses to challenge the Body of Christ for a new era of ministry.

Possible Action Steps for a Movement of followers of Jesus

1. Discourse in the vernacular.

In Christendom there was little difference between the language inside and outside of the Church. In fact, because of a unified foundation of understanding/frame of reference, there was little need to engage in the language of culture. When Martin Luther himself completed his translation of the scriptures and the penning of hymnody utilizing the songs of local fare he was a full participant in the benefits of Christendom. But times have changed…in a movement of followers of Jesus in today’s culture, what appears to “us” to be common religious, theological or biblical terms must be explained and translated. The movement must avoid 'tribal' language, stylized or parochial language, and unnecessary pious jargon. The movement of mission needs to consider avoiding “we-them” language, disdainful jokes that mock divergent politics and beliefs, and dismissive discourse. The church needs to begin to avoid ever talking as if non-believing people are not present. If you speak and discourse as if your “whole neighborhood” is present (not just scattered Christians), eventually more and more of your neighborhood will find their way into relationship. As one missiologist wrote, “Unless all of the above is the outflow of a truly humble-bold gospel-changed heart, it is all just 'marketing' and 'spin.'”

2. Enter and re-tell the culture's stories with a biblical narrative perspective.

In Christendom it was entirely possible to simply exhort Christianized people to "do what they know they should" or “just be a good Baptist/Lutheran/Methodist/Catholic/etc.” in order to “correct” errant behavior or practice. There was no need for real relational engagement, listening, or persuasion. Church history is littered with communication permeated with exhortation, challenge, as well as a heavy reliance on guilt and legalism. In a Post-Christendom faith community, preaching and communication should always assume the presence of skeptical or irreligious people, and should seek to engage their stories, not simply talk about "the good ole days” when living the faith was perceived to be easier. To "enter" the story of the culture means that ministry “architects” show sympathy toward and deep acquaintance with what one author calls, “the literature, music, theater, etc. of the existing culture's hopes, dreams, 'heroic' narratives, fears.” To "re-tell" means that we take seriously how to communicate the reality of the Kingdom of God, the redemptive heart of God in Jesus, and the power and presence of God through the Spirit where the biblical narrative not only embraces and convicts but transforms the formed stories of those to whom we minister.

3. We have to intentionally “tackle” the perceive separation between the clergy and the laity. Faith Communities MUST theologically train lay people for public life and vocation.

In a Post-Christendom world, we must begin to take a “hard look” at the perception of the “ministry divide” between the clergy and laity. Not only do few people in the culture understand or appreciate the role of the clergy in the formalized Christian experience (i.e. institutional church), but there still is a void in the “ownership” of ministry by the laity. Most believe that they are not trained, called, gifted, or empowered to do the work of Jesus (like that of the pastor). We must also understand that despite all our words that highlight the biblical proclamation of the “priesthood of all believers” that the symbols, offices, roles, the public experience of most followers of Jesus within local faith communities underscore the experience of a specified “religious class” that solely handle the precious gifts of faith. In Christendom, the Church could afford to train people to be religious professionals – to see the acts of prayer, worship facilitation, Bible study, ministry leadership, even evangelism as private world skills. Christendom needed its “experts” because they are not facing radically non-Christian values in their public life…in other words, it seemed to make more sense to have a religious caste system in a world that was dominated by religious institutions and worldviews. But times have changed…in a “mission-minded” community, the laity needs to have not only access but also the permission to engage in the deep, transformational experiences of the life of faith. The culture needs to see followers of Jesus who are not being “paid” to be “professional” representatives of the Kingdom of God. Relevance, authenticity, and transparency are the call words of a new era. In order to facilitate and inform a growing experience of ownership in ministry, theological education and an intentionality of discipleship training need to be the passion of leadership in regards to the laity. All followers of Jesus need an opportunity to grow in “thinking Christianly” about everything and work/live with faithful, biblical distinctiveness. They need to how to discern cultural practices were experiences of common grace could be embraced as well as what practices are antithetical to the gospel and must be rejected. Post-Christendom marks a new day for lay people who are on the “front lines” of renewing and transforming the culture through a distinctive understanding of Christian vocation where everyone takes their place at the “table” of real “kingdom work” and ministry alongside those committed to the traditional ministry of the Word and Sacraments. Finally, Christ followers will need to learn how to use the gospel to demonstrate true love and “acceptance” in "the public square" toward those with whom we deeply differ. Acceptance should equal or exceed that which opposing views show toward the Jesus following experience.

4. Create Christian community that is counter-cultural and counter-intuitive.

In Christendom, “ekklesia” became the foundation of personal faith nurturing, support and accountability. In the 20th century, the onslaughts of the values of consumerism have further promoted the “individualistic ingestion” of the Christian experience. In a Post-Christendom culture, those dynamics continue to be a necessary aspect of the faith community. However, the realities of Post-Christendom demand that the Christian community go beyond personal encouragement and relational development. As in the book of Acts, a community of followers of Jesus must begin to embody a “counter-culture” which demonstrates to the culture at large how radically different a society transformed by the Spirit is God is. This kind of church is profoundly “counter-intuitive”to cultural observers. The community that lives the “Sermon on the Mount”, that takes seriously the “Fruit of the Holy Spirit”, and the ethic of the Kingdom of God is truly one that will stand in diametrical opposition to the culture at large. In a Post-Christendom world, followers of Jesus in community must make the faith and life of a disciple so evident that it refutes cultural dismissal and marginalization.

5. Practice and promote Christian unity as much as possible.

In Christendom, the understanding existed that “everyone was a Christian” and that “brands” of the Church could exist, on the one hand, to act as a leaven to heresy but also as unique expressions of the faith within ethnic or even personal preference boundaries and understandings. Many regarded the diversity of “church”/denominational experience as necessary as a plethora of followers of Jesus sought to define themselves and underscore their experience within the flow of history. Within the Christendom paradigm, Christian identity was clarified by denominational preference. Denominational preference led to a diversity of ekklesia that enabled people to experience “church” within theological and practical comfort zones but also led to an explosion of ecclesiastical pride and arrogance. As Christendom was falling, a once helpful diversity of religious experience in denominationalism led to public condemnations over differences, turf wars, and a radical, exclusionary differentiation of the faith journey furthering the breakdown of any understanding of Christian unity. In a Post-Christendom culture, denominational is the ecclesiastical equivalent to “white noise”. The “brands” of Christianity make no sense to the culture…those driving by buildings with a denominational or even non-denominational titles mean nothing. One religious institution equals that of another. It is past the time to call our churches to a new sense of partnership in embodying the Kingdom of God in today’s world. It is very important that we not spend our time bashing and criticizing other kinds of churches, movements, and ministries especially if those expressions of the faith fall under a commonality of understanding and passion for the truth of the Gospel. While we need to uphold some practices that align ourselves in denominations that share many of our specific distinctives, at the local level we need to incarnate a renewed passion to cooperate with, reach out to and support other congregations and faith communities. It is time we obeyed the words of Jesus who, in the parable of the Wheat and the Weeds, challenged all to allow the “Lord of the Harvest” to be the One who brings any charge, condemnation, or exclusion to the fruits of the fields of life that are ultimately His.

“The church gets in trouble whenever it thinks it’s in the church business rather than the Kingdom business. In the church business people are concerned with church activities, religious behavior and spiritual things. In the Kingdom business people are concerned with Kingdom activities, all human behavior and everything God has made, visible and invisible. Kingdom people see human affairs as saturated with spiritual meaning and Kingdom significance. Church people often think about how to get people into church; Kingdom people think about how to get the church into the world. Church people worry that the world might change the church; Kingdom people work to see the church change the world. When Christians put the church ahead of the Kingdom they settle for the status quo and their own kind of people. When they catch a vision of the Kingdom of God their sights shift to the poor, the orphan, the widow, the refugee 'the wretched of the earth' and to God's future. They see the life and work of the church from the perspective of the Kingdom. If the church has one great need it is this: to be set free for the Kingdom of God, to be liberated from itself as it has become in order to be itself as God intends.” Howard Snyder


Comments or questions: rdugall@apu.edu