The Church as Stewards of the Change
A final theme prevalent in the literature on missional church concerns how the church ought to respond to the changes taking place in culture and in the church. In choosing how to respond best, the church faces many temptations. One temptation is to resist the change, sticking to the old way of doing things in the name of remaining true to Scripture (Hall, 1999; Van Gelder, 2007). Resistance, though, will only keep the church separated from culture and will leave it no room to be influential. Another insufficient option is relevance. When the church tries to be relevant, it becomes both “captured” and “intimidated” by culture, not fully loyal to the gospel and not fully engaged in the context (Hunsberger, 1996). The third temptation of the church is simply to resign, give up, and let the changes run unchecked and keeping the Gospel from having its full impact. Instead of utilizing any of these strategies, missional authors suggest the church seek to “steward the change [emphasis in original], asking for positive meaning that is in it and endeavoring . . . to direct the process toward its potential goal” (Hall, 2008, p. 73).
To steward the change, the church first needs to accept the loss of its “old story” (Roxburgh, 2008, p. 76) and see its new “powerlessness” or marginality as a
creative opportunity for change” (Randall, 2007, p. 230). This acceptance requires dealing with the present crisis with the earnest sincerity without succumbing to it (Bosch, 1991). Van Gelder (2007) suggests the church should be both reforming (confessional) and forming (missional).
Though the voices calling for change can be pointed and harsh, in the end their tone is often optimistic. The goal of the criticism is not deconstructive, but constructive, seeking to build missional communities throughout the West. To best understand what missional thinkers hope to construct, it is necessary to take a detailed look at what defines missional living.
No comments:
Post a Comment