In the midst of the church’s experiences of relativism, pluralism and fragmentation, have we lost our way because we no longer are sure ourselves or about the Gospel truth that we too have relativised, pluralized and fragmented church. I recall many years ago now when a survey was taken in the Presbytery I was part of. We asked people 2 simple questions: What do you think about Church? and What do you think about Jesus Christ? It was part of larger national research in the Church of Scotland. The returns pointed out that the majority of people church or not, had many points of view and much to say about ‘Church’. But when it came to Jesus there were few responses. In a very simple way it was felt that we seemed to convey a great deal and talk much about ‘Church’ to the detriment of Jesus. We still seem to be living according the rationalism of Enlightenment and modern Christendom that in one way causes us to place the Gospel in a ‘knowledge framework’.
Hoedemaker’s Secularisation and Mission states that the relationship between Christianity and rationality has become problematic. It calls therefore for a rethink about what ‘mission’ might mean, since secularization questions the suppositions much tradition in faith and mission. The challenge being to rethink the place of ‘religion’ in culture, especially when religion has been privatized or is relative.
Indeed this pervades us at all levels and the tensions between this and the new realities we encounter have caused us to have a sense of displacement. The in word of course is ‘liminality’ which is the place of such crushing removal from our ‘comfort zones’, but equally is the place of potential for the new. Herein lies some hope to be seen.
This is very much where the Highgate is itself. But the crucial question I keep hammering out of late is that how we operate is or should be determined by our vision for this context in which we stake a claim of the Gospel truth. My challenge for us here as I see it is to exercise Sabbath rhythms. Herein lies a challenge for our mission. This means that the leadership and the church needs to shake off all the busy DOING stuff that runs to keep the Prebyterian cogs turning, but which for all the many of them few make a difference to what we should be concentrating upon more effectively We are burning people out, we are keeping people away because we give off all the wrong signals about church, but more about the sort of Gospel we hold to. Hence when we explore what future mission will be its hard to not be all activist and doing and to have an urgency to ‘set priorities’ as PCANZ meeting, or fill the gaps with stuff to get busy as there is a sense that a busy, active place is buzzing and MUST be a good going church that people will want to come and be part of. It is perhaps all too easy in a relative, plural and fragmented world for us to operate this way. Such ‘knowledge’ based approaches almost tend to process people through faith and church. Our mission is surely beyond such!
Rather, my task, as I see it, is to set a different ‘rule’ in place. I fear if we play to the ‘world’ tune we will deny God and seek to control all that is called church and we have all seen that route and lived in it. Emerging, we need Godly Sabbath rhythms that are patterns for us as individuals, as groups, as congregations. Why? Because I believe that if the Gospel is to fulfil its mission then first of all we must begin with ourselves, as Newbigin reminds us “the locus of confidence is not in the competence of our own knowing, but in the faithfulness and reliability of the one who is known.”( Proper Confidence Newbigin p66,67) He further states; “We are not given a theory which we then translate into practice. Instead, we are invited to respond to a word of calling by believing and acting, specifically, by becoming part of the community which is already committed to the service of the Builder.”
It is the Who? question that grounds us. In this way we actually move from knowledge to praxis. By this I understand praxis to be theology is embodied in the practices of the church, it isn’t simply something to be known. The dynamic is also one where practice – living and experience- equally informs theology. Hence, ‘Christianity is praxis, a character task’ (Kierkegaard)
