http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/TheForgottenWays/~3/289500178/
On with the series of posts on the mDNA of apostolic environment; It is worthy to note again at this point that the church in the West is facing a massive adaptive challenge: positively in the form of compelling opportunity and negatively in the form of rapid, discontinuous change. These twin challenges comprise a considerable threat to Christianity locked as it is into the prevailing Constantinian (Christendom) form of church with all its associated institutional rigidity. We are in a situation of what Roxburgh calls ‘liminality’. Liminality in his view is the transition from one fundamental form of the church to another necessitating the apostolic role. Environments of discontinuous change require adaptive organizations and leadership. As the apostolic role is responsible and gifted for the extension of Christianity, so too the missionary situation requires a pioneering and innovative mode of leadership to help the church negotiate the new territory in which it finds itself. This is clear enough when we consider the Emerging Missional Church which relies heavily on an innovative pioneering spirit and is therefore fundamentally apostolic in nature. But it is equally true for established churches.
The apostolic person’s calling is essentially the extension of Christianity. As such he/she calls the church to its essential calling and helps guide it in into its destiny as a missionary people with a transformative message for the world. All other functions of the church must be qualified by its mission to extend the redemptive mission of God through its life and witness. The apostolic leader thus embodies, symbolizes, and re-presents the apostolic mission to the missional community. Furthermore, he/she calls forth and develops the gifts and callings of all of God’s people. Without apostolic ministry the church either forgets its high calling or fails to implement it successfully. Sadly, in declining denominational systems, such people are commonly ‘frozen out’ or exiled because they disturb the equilibrium of a system in stasis. This ‘loss’ of the apostolic influencer accounts for one of the major reasons for mainstream denominational decline. If we really want missional church, then we must have a missional leadership system to drive it—it’s that simple.
I am well aware of the various reactions that this subject can evoke. This is so partly because of the confusion between the unique role and calling of the original apostles and that of present day apostol-ic ministry i.e. a ministry gifting that further extends and substantiates the original apostolic work but does not in any way alter it. But another reason for negative reaction has been because many who have claimed ‘apostleship’ do it no justice and in the end discredit this vital role. Sadly church history is littered with false apostles.
The only conclusion from the research and study undergirding this book is that apostolic ministry is a distinct element of Apostolic Genius and because of this we need to find a way to understand and re-embrace it if we want to become a genuinely missional church. Quite simply; a missional church needs missional leadership and it’s going to take more than the traditional Pastor-Teacher mode of leadership to pull this off. Leadership always provides a strategic point of leverage for missional change and renewal. If this is conceded, then the question is what type of leadership is naturally follows. The natural answer is missional and therefore must include the idea of the apostolic. We simply have to get over our historical cringe in this matter if we are going to grow and mature as a missional movement (Eph.4:11ff). It no mere coincidence that all the historical denominations have by and large have rejected apostolic leadership find themselves in long term, systematic, decline in every context in the West. This chapter will therefore focus on why apostolic ministry is needed and why it is a irreplaceable aspect of mDNA.
Comments
Over time I have come to some conclusions about terminologies and thier roll in the debates over many subjects, in this case the apostolic gift/s. In my view, the gifts are self evident in the fruit of those exercising the gift. Self proclamation is many times a defensive posture or an insecure affirmation of one's self. Am I casting stones, no. I too, believe in the apostolic as necessary in the framework of leadership in accomplishing both the mission and understanding of missionality as well as other aspects of communitas, ecclesia, etc. I think the heart of the debate is more over the mission itself and especially with those who would seek to defend a traditional institutional Christendom mindset. I think the roll of the apostolic leader must be evidenced in the framework of leadership regardless of the title acknowledged so long as the actual roll is functioning. For me, several have tried to tie titles to my ministry style/person (including apostle) which I have chosen to shed for practical reasons of focusing on the centrality of the real challenge and often debate, the mission itself. I agree that the roll and title of apostle or apostolic ministry should become as normative as pastor/teacher. I have just found it practical in the context of ministry to avoid the title debate in order to actually accomplish the mission. Nuf for now.
Signed,
Bruce Jakola - Head Bottle Washer
(oh yeah, the title doesn't matter as long as the bottles get washed)