another week of my life has gone by — i wonder how many i have left? and once again, i have stolen away to put some words on the world wide web for anybody to read and interact with.

this past friday i was at a meeting with an individual who does church coaching. rather, he described himself as ‘the bridge’ between past forms of the church and emerging forms of the church. he gave us a hangout that had on it three forms of church that he has seen, or been a part of, in his lifetime. the first is the ‘historic church’ where everything is believer center and the leader is a man/woman that preaches the word. the second, that was born in the 80’s through bill hybels and others is the ‘contemporary church’ that is seeker center and the leader of the church is CEO. where all decisions go through the pastor and the pastor teaches sermons as well as does capital campaigns, hires, fires, and casts vision. the third, and most emerging of the three is what is called the ‘missional church.’ The missional church is a church that is other centered and the leader is a missionary that is sent out into a geographical context.

the leader of this meeting then had us gather into groups and discuss our church history. as i ran through my head the types of churches that i have been a part of I found myself landing, at least for a time, at each of the three. the church that i attended growing up, Berean Bible Church in Holland Michigan was and still is a ‘historic church’ that on occasion looks outward but mainly does so through the desire for growth. My parents and I then made the decision at the age of 16 to leave that church to go to a ‘contemporary church’ that was more seeker centered and have an overwhelming attractional model to it. everything was at the church. the youth group had a huge gathering area with ping pong tables, pool tables, a coffee house. from there, i left for college and after about a 2 year religious sabbatical i found myself in a church that may look like a seeker centered church, but is kind of a hybrid of contemporary church and missional church. i then left that geographical area completely to attend seminary in Seattle and now, after i have graduated I find myself in the process of birthing what is labeled a ‘missional church.’

ok, i’m sure you are thinking, that’s great joel, but why do i care about your church history?

i’m glad you asked.

in the process of going through all three of these labels the speaker said something that i learned early on, and am continuing to learn. he said, the tendancy of anyone of these when speaking about what they are and what they aren’t is to say “we aren’t this” and “we aren’t going to do that” he went on to say that this isn’t a profitable way forward because the more one talks about what they aren’t the more they continue to subtly subvert that which exists and in time will alienate themselves and lose track of who they really are. a philosophical category for this is sometimes called a ‘reactionary movement.’ where movement happens, but it is simply in reaction to something and therefore it ends up being short lived and shallow with no real sustainability. i call these movements ‘hip-blips.’

so the challenge for me became a gut check. where is my identity in my ecclesiology? is it an ecclesiology birthed out of a reaction to what i feel doesn’t work? what isn’t me? or, is it an ecclesiology birthed out of who God is calling me to be in and through him?

now, granted i can never remove myself from my context, and i am consciously and sub-consciously influenced by my surroundings, but, because i believe in a spiritual realm and in a story that goes on apart from me i have another realm in which i can defer to.

so thank you Steven Ogne for being a bridge and for giving me a gut check and reminding me of what my identity is truly found in.

peace
joel