Developing Culture vs. Technical Fixes
I often contemplate the difference between a purely organic approach and a mechanistic approach to church organization. I'm not really talking about simple/organic church here although I think that structure is helpful, and I'm not truly addressing program-driven churches though I, personally, am happy to work outside of a purely programmatic approach.
It is more a matter of a community's ethos. Sure one structure or another may facilitate more organic expressions more naturally than others, but that's not really what I've been wrestling with. For me, here's the tension. As I understand the current religious climate, what we have largely experienced in North American church growth are what Mark Love refers to as technical fixes (Peppedine Lectures 2006). I don't think that strategic thinking is bad if it means making anthropological & theological decisions based on a cultural context. However, our tendency is to create technical fixes in order to generate numerical results and/or organizational stability. I've been thoroughly trained in this approach, but I'm trying to unlearn and relearn something different.
What's the alternative? What if we committed ourselves to nurturing a culture instead of a growth technique? First, we must understand that not only does the church interact with culture but is also a culture within itself. With this realization, we focus on developing an ecclesial culture rather than a technique. In reality, this isn't very attractive to our American microwave mentality. Nurturing an eccesial culture requires developing theology, encouraging indigeneity, celebrating creativity, re-imagining church structures. Opting for this alternative, I believe, is more difficult. But since in reality our technical fixes and growth strategies also generate church culture -- whether intentionally or unintentionally -- it may be wise for us to focus our efforts in developing ecclesial cultures that are shaped by the Gospel.
This is true for presentation-style churches, cell-based churches, organic church networks, and for any number of various church expressions. Our ethos of technical fixes is too deeply engrained in our collective psyche for any one church expression in America to be immune. May we learn to develop ecclesial cultures that are shaped by the Good News of Christ and led by the power of the Holy Spirit.
It is more a matter of a community's ethos. Sure one structure or another may facilitate more organic expressions more naturally than others, but that's not really what I've been wrestling with. For me, here's the tension. As I understand the current religious climate, what we have largely experienced in North American church growth are what Mark Love refers to as technical fixes (Peppedine Lectures 2006). I don't think that strategic thinking is bad if it means making anthropological & theological decisions based on a cultural context. However, our tendency is to create technical fixes in order to generate numerical results and/or organizational stability. I've been thoroughly trained in this approach, but I'm trying to unlearn and relearn something different.
What's the alternative? What if we committed ourselves to nurturing a culture instead of a growth technique? First, we must understand that not only does the church interact with culture but is also a culture within itself. With this realization, we focus on developing an ecclesial culture rather than a technique. In reality, this isn't very attractive to our American microwave mentality. Nurturing an eccesial culture requires developing theology, encouraging indigeneity, celebrating creativity, re-imagining church structures. Opting for this alternative, I believe, is more difficult. But since in reality our technical fixes and growth strategies also generate church culture -- whether intentionally or unintentionally -- it may be wise for us to focus our efforts in developing ecclesial cultures that are shaped by the Gospel.
This is true for presentation-style churches, cell-based churches, organic church networks, and for any number of various church expressions. Our ethos of technical fixes is too deeply engrained in our collective psyche for any one church expression in America to be immune. May we learn to develop ecclesial cultures that are shaped by the Good News of Christ and led by the power of the Holy Spirit.
posted by Jared | 5:02 PM
4 Comments:
Amazing! Just Wednesday, we spent hours discussing this very thing in regard to our efforts in Merkel. One of our support resources strongly encouraged building a foundation of "technical fixes" that, in my opinion, would be less fruitful in the community where we live/work/serve than reaching out to the community where they are with Jesus' message. Our thinking is that it is more effective to go into our community rather than bringing our community to us.
Hey very interesting post. I like this idea of "technical fixes", which I would also call surface cosmetic changes, rather than deep structural and cultural reformation.
Oh the agony of the long plodding nature of culture change...I wonder though in our weblog, high speed world, if we could do it faster than they did in the past...I hope so.
Love your blog, Jeff
I love that, Jeff -- "surface cosmetic changes" vs. "deep structural and cultural reformation." Well said.
-Jared
Grave's theory of worldview formation and culture (which he called "value systems") builds off Maslow and says that culture is created in response to existential problems. At it's root, culture is a tool box of fixes, coping mechanisms, and possible solutions to all the current problems of existence, as precieved by a people group. Myth, narrative, religion, and ritual are all means for encoding both the expression of those problems and the culture's solution. It think this is a good starting point for thinking about what it will take to do culture formation in the church.
Post a Comment
<< Home