Can we all just take a moment to stop “thinking outside of the box?” I am not objecting to it because it has become a meaningless cliché, but because we cannot think outside of the box until we understand what box we’re talking about in the first place. There are different boxes after all, some of which we need to work inside of, and others we need to look well beyond. As a new church, the leadership at Redeemer Fellowship is always talking about these issues, though we tend to avoid the box talk.
There is a danger in the allure to think outside of the box, especially when it comes to new churches and dying churches. It sounds promising, exciting, and new, but for many “thinking outside of the box” simply boils down to trying something we’ve never tried before. This often means we imitate the ministries of other churches, like Mars Hill, Harvest, Sojourn, Saddleback, or FBC of Whatevertown. We see successful churches doing great things, and in our desire to see God do something great among us we simply copy another ministry. So, while we wind up thinking outside of the box of our own operation (a potentially good thing), we may wind up thinking well outside of the box of our cultural context (a bad thing).
Here’s what I’m thinking. In the metaphor, the “box” represents the parameters within which we think and act. For the church, there are many different boxes – here are three to consider: the boxes of Scripture, culture, and tradition.
As a church, the Scripture sets the parameters for what we believe and what our essential tasks and goals are. The bible calls us to worship, make disciples, practice discipline, serve the community, etc. How this takes shape will vary from culture to culture, but the tasks remain the same. Thinking outside of this box may mean compromising the divine mandate for the church.
Culture is another box we must think and act within. If you’re a part of a church in a rural community of 1000 people, doing church as if you were in an urban context would make you at best, ineffective, or worse, irrelevant. Thinking within the box of your cultural context does not meaning accommodating the culture at every point, but interacting with it redemptively. To think inside this box we ask questions like, What are the community’s needs? Who are these people? What’s broken? What are the prevalent evils, virtues, and customs? What would it look like if the Kingdom of God took over in the neighborhood our church is in? How can we best preach and demonstrate the gospel in this context (box)? Thinking outside of this box may not mean theological error, but it will make us irrelevant, and thus unbiblical in form.
The third box is tradition. Rather than dismissing everything that has happened within these parameters we need to review and evaluate. What have we been doing? Is it faithful to Scripture and appropriate for our context? Has it produced fruit? Is it producing fruit now? What can we do better? What do we need to do different? Has this box been covered in gold and treated like an idol? If so, how can we melt it down? This is the box we may need to think outside of, or destroy in faithfulness to God.
As I see it the best churches and church leaders throughout history have all thought outside of the box of tradition (when necessary), while thinking inside the boxes of Scripture and culture. Consider Martin Luther, John Bunyan, George Whitefield, John Wesley, William Carey and Charles Spurgeon. These are men who were radically committed to proclaiming the gospel in word and deed in ways appropriate to their particular culture. From the language they used, to the contexts created for hearing and responding to the word, to the works of mercy they created for the good of those who suffered they were all thinking through a biblical and cultural grid.
All of the churches that I admire today are thinking outside of the box of tradition (again, only when necessary) and within the boxes of Scripture and culture. Yet, none of these churches would want another church to simply do what they do. In fact, they warn against it. They do however call other churches to operate according to biblical principles while figuring out the best way to work it out in their own context.
I know, churches want to get going, get doing, start making a difference for the glory of God and the good of our neighbors, but we first have to commit ourselves to thinking within some boxes while remaining willing to think outside of the others that so often needlessly trap us. This takes a deep dependence on God, a radical commitment to Scripture, a sensitivity to culture and much time, trial and error.
I am the Lead Pastor of Redeemer Fellowship; husband to Jen; Dad to Katherine, Elias, Madeline, and Kilian. If you're in town you can probably find me in the local coffee house or running through the neighborhoods.
{ 8 comments }
This is a great post. I have been discussing this same issue with a couple of my closest friends lately. It seems as if some churches and pastors have given up on hashing through the Scriptures and coming up with their own beliefs and opinions on how church should be done. And in return, they are simply borrowing or in my opinion stealing from others, and making it their own.
This just seems to be an easy but costly way to do church. I really appreciate the thought that it seems you put into this post, and I would like to see this discussion more in the inner circles of seminaries and churches across the nation. This is a major problem that we face, and it is my prayer that we seek God more than we seek man on these issues.
You are right about not getting too far outside the “cultural” box. I’m ministering in rural town in S. Louisiana. We don’t have a Starbucks. The folks here are mainly employed in agricultural industry or factory work. Also, the region is almost entirely Roman Catholic. This place is very unique.
All that to say I envy you because you can go to a coffeeshop to talk theology.
Thats interesting Brad. Are you from the area, or a similar one, giving you easy access to the culture? Really doing biblical ministry within your own culture is harder than simply adopting someone else’s model that was developed for their context. It’s harder, but better and I believe bears more fruit.
Joe,
I appreciate this post and the tension that is presented and embraced. It seems ironic to, without thinking and praying, just cut and paste someone else’s ‘successful’ ministry model into your own. For, oftentimes it is that same lazy leadership that produces the need for change.
I also appreciated your statements regarding tradition. It is true that we often gold plate our traditions and they need to be melted down and replaced, but sometimes they are good and should not become a casualty of trigger happy and impatient mavericks who just want to change.
It is a good call to know the Scripture, your church and your culture. Thanks.
All we can do is pray and follow the Holy Spirit’s leading.
A very thoughtful presentation. However, I always react to criticisms of tradition for it usually means throw everything out the window. I would point out that anything can become tradition. Sometimes what we come up with outside the box becomes its own tradition. We need to remember that there is a historical Christian tradition that has spanned over 2000 years. The people quoted were more critical of how they thought the Gospel had been distorted, not Christian tradition as such. The distorted Gospel had become a tradition. Just be careful how far out of the box you go.
Joe,
Actually, no. I’m originally from Alabama, and you’d think that would be sort of the same since we’re both “Southern.” But I always tell people that we’re actually below the Bible belt. It’s a different world once you get south of interstate 10.
For example, in Alabama, the majority of the folks are “evangelical.” Even folks who aren’t active in a church would sort of default to an evangelical mindset, or at least be at ease around evangelical thought. Here, the default is Roman Catholic, and the heritage is French, not English. Only two generations ago, there were children who entered grammar school here without knowing English.
Here’s how that matters: in Alabama, Baptist type folks feel very confident in proclaiming their views b/c the average guy knows that most folks will at least nod when they take the soapbox. Here, that confidence is lacking b/c of the differences. It’s easy to go into a sort of “retreat” mode when you are a serious minority, and if you don’t do that, then you will compromise on your distinctives. (And I’m not talking about views on alcohol or playing bingo when I mention distinctives, just to be clear.)
The biggest thing to realize in this situation, I think, is that it simply takes time. Folks have to get used to you, and it takes time to “get known” in the community. I’m still not where I’d like to be, and there is much that needs to be addressed inside our fellowship as well. So pray for me that I’ll be faithful and find a way to equip our folks to meaningfully interact with the community in order to share the gospel.
One more thing, since I’m talking about it.:) Many of our church members are “transplants.” That is, they came from Mississippi or Arkansas or Alabama for work here. That means they are outsiders as well. If you aren’t careful, the church can become a little huddle of folks on the retreat from the perceived “weirdness” that is S. Louisiana.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 3 trackbacks }