Author: fewebadmin

Evaluating Hope08 (Fritha Wheeler)

Fritha WheelerFritha Wheeler evaluates Hope08.

When I first thought about working for Hope08, quite a few people told me not to bother. It was 2006 and nobody was really sure what this 'Hope 2008' thing was – just that it had some famous Christians attached to it, a bit of hype and a fairly unspecific website. I was told that the concept of unified, holistic, nationwide Christian mission was at best silly, and at worst cynically motivated empire building.

I'm not good at taking advice so I signed up to work for Hope08. I liked the passion of the leadership team and the real efforts they were making to genuinely give their idea away to local churches. I also liked that it was a bit ridiculous and that it could only work if God liked it too.

So we started trudging away – getting churches excited about working together and suggesting ways they could bless their communities. We put together books, gave advice, published yet more websites, went to conferences and made up a framework of 'high points' to help churches access the year of intense mission.

We were a comparatively tiny team attempting to commission the UK to 'do more evangelism, do it together and do it in word and action'. Sometimes it felt like the whole thing was stuck on pause, and sometimes we couldn't handle the number of people signing up. We had no idea what – if anything – was going to happen in 2008. Christmas 2007 was scary.

I've been in shock for the whole of 2008 – we were unprepared for the generosity, beauty, kindness and grit of the church in the UK. We'd had a few ideas of what churches could do, but our feeble bleatings were drowned out by the weight and originality of what happened in that year.

Hope08I couldn't ever sum this all up, but I do know that all over the UK people came to church for the first time because the church had come to them. Cheesy, but true! Simple things worked, like car washing and litter picking. Complicated things like citywide youth outreach weekends also worked. In some places family fun days gave churches roots in their communities, and in other places social action projects flooded Jesus into the places that need him most.

We've published an evaluation with lots of numbers in it. We like it because it's full of encouraging stats, and also because it tells the truth – there are things we could have done better and that future projects probably need to know about. Mainly, though, it's exciting stuff and it seems that Hope church groups aren't stopping here but are carrying on into 09 and beyond!

We had no idea it was going to go as well as it did, but we're glad to have been involved.

Can pioneers water down the gospel? (David Muir)

David MuirDavid Muir asks whether pioneers can water down the gospel.

As an Ordained Pioneer Minister, I am sometimes asked whether gospel truths are being watered down in my pioneer work. People are worried that I may be diluting the challenge of the gospel in order to make it acceptable to the kinds of people I want to reach.

I can only agree that this is a genuine and important concern. Pioneer work involves expressing Christian faith in new and innovative ways, ways that resonate with people in our society and strike a chord in their hearts. It seeks to reformulate Christian truth and Christian lifestyle in order to apply the wisdom and grace of God to a different situation. There is a danger that we are not wise and astute enough to sustain the abiding truth of the gospel as we put new clothes on it. Keeping Christianity true to itself requires constant vigilance.

I think this is a danger that most of us pioneers are very aware of. Precisely because we long for people to embrace the Christian faith, we are tempted to 'soften' the gospel where it sits uncomfortably with people's values and viewpoints. But the danger mustn't deter us from engaging in the process of making the gospel relevant to today's society. An irrelevant gospel is just as untrue to the Faith as a watered down one. Both deprive the gospel of its power.

Christian faith becomes richer as it becomes more diverse

But beyond the danger there is a wonderful thing happening in pioneer work. As the gospel is related to more situations, to more different kinds of people, the truth of God keeps expanding. The wisdom of God is shown to be wise in new and unexpected ways. The grace of God transforms yet another situation, which we had never seen before. Far from being diminished and diluted, Christian faith becomes richer as it becomes more diverse. Christ is shown to be truly the Saviour of the whole world.

A US question to the Church of England (Tom Brackett)

Tom BrackettTom Brackett poses a US question to the Church of England.

My explorations of fresh expressions in Britain have been remarkably encouraging. Normally, my job has me visiting new ministries throughout the Episcopal Church, constantly in search of what I might share as 'learnings' with the larger church. That persistent search for 'learnings' and new insights suits my job title perfectly as Program Officer for Church Planting and Ministry Redevelopment for the Episcopal Church. In short, I am the Episcopal Church's Chief Cheerleader for new ministry development, and I am based in New York.

This visit to the church in Britain has been marked by gracious hospitality and generosity from leaders in the Diocese of Liverpool, Church Army and The Sheffield Centre, Fresh Expressions and local saints in Manchester, Liverpool, London and Sheffield. I am really grateful.

As I prepared for this trip, I surveyed colleagues and advisors for the questions they wish they could ask of ministry leaders here in the Church of England. What emerged as the key question is based on the belief that the CoE has wrestled with the effects of secularisation considerably longer than we have in the States.

'If you'd known 20 years ago what you know now about the church's needed responses to secularisation, what might you have done differently, in anticipation?'

The question goes something like this: 'If you'd known 20 years ago what you know now about the church's needed responses to secularisation, what might you have done differently, in anticipation?' In other words: 'How would you have intentionally prepared faith communities to partner with the work of the Spirit in a rapidly changing world?'

The question is not meant to be heard as: 'What do you wish you had done, back in the day?' as much as: 'How might we (as an institution) prepare our hearts to embrace the new work that the Spirit is longing to engage in us?' I look forward to sharing your responses with our Ministry Innovators back in the States.

With hope, Tom Brackett

Breathe (Jenny Baker)

Jenny Baker introduces Breathe, a resource to engage teenagers with spiritual reflection.

Jenny BakerThirty teenagers jostle into the room, shedding bags and coats, grumbling at being asked to take off their shoes, mocking each other's socks. Some make up their minds that this is boring and a waste of time; some are intrigued and ready to engage; others have 'impress me' written clearly across their faces.

Fifteen minutes later a stillness has settled on the room and they sit engrossed, touching a plasma ball as they think about how they might connect with God, writing the names of significant people in their lives on leaves and adding them to a tree, playing with Mr Potato Head as they think about the labels that they use for other people.

This is Breathe, an installation that enables pupils to explore some of life's big questions. Its ingredients will be over familiar to anyone involved in alternative worship – iPods with words and music to listen to, stations with a focus that encourage questions and wondering, creative activities with an element of surprise that unlock their spirituality.

The difference, perhaps, is that this is not worship and it's taking place in a school, far from any church. And it's happening with young people who just don't normally do still and quiet. One teacher booked Breathe without knowing much about it and when it was set up hurriedly sent for the deputy head to come and help supervise. She expected her class to throw wooden bricks at each other instead of using them to measure out their carbon footprint; she imagined them starting a riot instead of engaging in spiritual reflection. We were all quietly amazed as they passed our expectations.

One boy who had been in trouble with the police and who was on the brink of exclusion wrote movingly afterwards about his mum's experience of faith and how perhaps there was something in it. Another time, at a conference for diocesan officers, we kept Breathe open late so a couple of staff members who worked in the venue and were intrigued by what they had seen could have a go. One wrote: 'Really very inspirational. Didn't ever really take time to think about things and in this relaxing environment really gives you the chance to.'

How can we create more opportunities for creative spirituality for those outside the church?

Resources like Breathe create a space – for questioning, reflection, wondering – and a sense of place – that this is what you do here. (Words coined by Bob Mayo in his work on the spirituality of young people.) It makes the most of the curriculum requirement to learn about and from religion, the potential for a thin place in the otherwise noisy school day; if young people have to do that, why not give them the best of what we have discovered that feeds our souls? The challenge for those of us who maybe take for granted the riches of creative spirituality is how we can create more opportunities like these for those outside the church to participate in.

Each month in Grace we invest time and energy in creating a space for people to encounter God. We've often asked ourselves how we can also do that in other contexts for people who will never come into our building. I'm not sure we've come up with many answers, but we've been inspired by groups like Beyond in Brighton and their beach hut advent calendar. Again, they have used the thin place that Christmas provides and invited people to consider what it's all about.

These stories remind us that God has set eternity in the hearts of people and perhaps all they need is a little nudge and a bit of space to connect with their creator.

What is a pioneer minister? (Hannah Smith)

Hannah Smith asks, what is a pioneer minister?

Hannah SmithIf I had a pound for every person who has asked me what a pioneer minister is, I'd be rich. If I had another pound for every different definition of a pioneer minister that I've heard, I'd probably have enough money to fund the 50 or so training for Ordained Pioneer Ministry in the Church of England.

So what is a pioneer? Well I got selected as one. I am training as an OPM (Ordained Pioneer Minister) at St Mellitus' College, the new college in London which has a particular stream aimed at training pioneers.

I chose the 'pioneer track' as it was suggested to me by my DDO, although I agonised about whether I was 'pioneering enough' or 'too pioneering' for the role, depending on who I spoke to. The selectors at my BAP had some awareness of what being a pioneer might entail, but to be honest, I do not think that they had a clearer idea than I did.

Since starting training, I have been ruminating about the heady mix on the St Mellitus 'pioneer course'. It is a mixed mode course and we have a number of people who seem to have started fresh expressions of church without really knowing what that is; there are people who are interested in inherited church planting (planting traditional forms of church in new areas); and there are people who are off the map pioneers, with experience and theology to back them up. Thrown into the mix are a number of 'parish' ordinands who are sometimes more pioneering than the pioneers themselves.

The boundaries aren't clear and no one really knows what we will be asked to do when we leave.

A pioneer is: 'a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region, thus opening it for occupation and development by others'

There is recognition that different people who have different callings need different training, as, for example, there are different skills needed to plant an inherited church model in comparison with those who are starting a fresh expression with people struggling with addictions.

I think it is important for the first of the Ordained Pioneer Ministers ('pioneering pioneers'!) to remember that the definition of 'pioneer' is 'a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region, thus opening it for occupation and development by others'. This holds two connotations.

Firstly, that we are pioneering what pioneers are, and therefore we will have to take responsibility for the training and experience that we get; that the courses will be written as we do them.

Secondly, we are opening up new areas for the whole church to occupy and develop. This means that pioneers cannot disconnect themselves from the wider church and just 'do their own thing'. It is of vital importance for the pioneers to be constantly training others, lay and ordained people, in how to live lives of mission and reach out to communities of de-churched and non-churched people who need to see the kingdom in their lives.

Is the church in danger of domesticating and institutionalising pioneers? (Dave Male)

Dave Male asks whether the church is in danger of domesticating and institutionalising pioneers.

Dave MaleI thoroughly agreed with everything that Mark Russell wrote on the Share Blog on 2nd January (What a great picture for a caption competition as well, Mark! Any suggestions?) We need more pioneers and evangelists working on the margin and with the gifts and abilities to connect with people way outside the orbit of the church.

I think my fear is that we, as the church, can be in danger of domesticating and institutionalising pioneers, and I say this as someone who is involved in training pioneers. I worry sometimes where the dangerous and radical pioneers are. I hear discussions amongst possible pioneers about job prospects, career opportunities, education possibilities, stipends and pay, housing and pensions, but less of the 'go anywhere, do anything, send me out for the sake of the good news of Jesus' approach … and training institutions can sometimes give the impression that what really matters is the ability to fit in and not rock the boat, while of course getting good marks for your essays.

Two recent experiences have really got me thinking. Firstly, I recently was talking with another leader and we started talking about what you actually need to know in terms of education and training before you can start pioneering. A very interesting conversation ensued during which we reckoned the essential information required was very modest, requiring a month at the most, and further training could be provided as required by the situation and context.

Secondly, I was reading a conversation between two church leaders in America. They were each asked how they would start a church. One talked about raising money, paying leaders, hiring facilities, creating a worship event. The second replied, 'We would drop two people off in the centre of the town and then spend a lot of time in prayer.' Now, that got me thinking…

The language of ‘fresh expressions of church’ may be killing our mission (Steve Hollinghurst)

Steve HollinghurstSteven Hollinghurst asks whether the language of 'fresh expressions of church' is killing our mission.

I think we often underestimate the power of language. The words we choose conjure up images of what we are describing, and sometimes these can have unintended consequences. I am increasingly seeing this happen when people use the phrase 'fresh expressions of church'; indeed, even more so when people talk of their mission as 'creating fresh expressions of church'.

I remain a great supporter of both the analysis and aims of the Mission-Shaped Church report which has led to this kind of language. The problem is that the language has taken on a life of its own that means it is often no longer serving that report's vision; indeed, I think it is often working against it.

The insight of the report that we need fresh expressions of church for a new cross-cultural mission situation remains true, but increasingly the effect of the fresh expressions language is leading to something quite different. People seem to have got into their heads that the need is to 'create a fresh expression of church' and not that they are called to cross-cultural mission which may in time, and sometimes a long time, lead to a fresh expression of church emerging from that mission.

The result of this is that people set up whatever kind of fresh expression they think they ought to run and then go looking for people who might want to join it. Such churches are not in the least bit 'mission-shaped'; they are simply a way of consumer niche marketing existing church to provide a wider range of choices for church shoppers.

They have already had the culture of the 'fresh expression' decided for them in advance by a group of well meaning but culturally different Christians

The categorising of fresh expressions as certain types of church may add to the problem, suggesting they are styles of worship. The likely result is that those attracted will be existing church members, or those who have left church. Such churches cannot enable new Christians from non-churched backgrounds to worship in their own culture when they have already had the culture of the 'fresh expression' decided for them in advance by a group of well meaning but culturally different Christians.

So, my suggestion? Let's stop starting fresh expressions of church and let's start doing the real task of cross-cultural mission in the belief that in time fresh expressions will emerge.

The changing face of church planting in the countryside (Sally Gaze)

Sally Gaze explores the changing face of church planting in the countryside.

CowsA few years ago, when the working party for the best-selling Mission-shaped Church report asked questions about church-planting in a questionnaire, there was a less than enthusiastic response from rural areas. As one Church of England official wrote,

With 648 churches in this diocese, there is little incentive to plant more.

This is understandable; in the countryside there are typically many more churches per head of population than in urban areas – and some of those congregations struggle to keep going. A person might well conclude we don't need any more.

However, deep down, we know that when we think like that we've got it precisely the wrong way round. God's mission isn't there to keep existing particular congregations going. Rather it is the church as God's people, which has been called into being to participate in God's mission – the sharing of his love with his world. The whole point of church is God's mission – doing what God sends us to do. The need for church planting is often something that emerges when people consider what church in a particular area of countryside would look like if we started from that perspective: If God has sent his people to this rural area, what is it that they need to do to carry out his mission, including the making of disciples?

One particular characteristic of good rural church planting is the degree to which it works in a complementary way to older forms of church. This is partly aiming for the Heineken effect: Reaching the parts that other churches have not reached! It is also about appreciating the strengths of other churches and loving them. A church plant which is great at communicating the gospel to teenagers through contemporary youth culture, might struggle to make Jesus real for elderly people and vice versa. When those two churches meet for joint projects or to socialise together, they give a glimpse of the kingdom of God.

Urban church plants with larger numbers and working in larger populations may get away with independent witness. In a rural village, everyone can see whether the Christians truly love and support one another. As Jesus said, 'By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.'

To find out more about the Rural Churchplanters' Forum, including how to join, please contact Peter Hallsworth, the current convenor.

Losing my church shoes (Beth Keith)

Beth KeithBeth Keith discusses losing her church shoes.

When I think about what I think about church

My head automatically jumps to what I already know

What I have already experienced

What church has meant for me

With all its practises and churchologies

I am not a missionary heading off into the unknowable

I have baggage, church baggage, church shoes

During the last four years I have been involved with ReSource, developing training with pioneers starting churches in emerging culture. One of the themes we have revisited is: What makes something church? What is essential and what is negotiable? When given the chance to step back and think about what we do as church and what we believe about church, time and again people show genuine surprise at the amount of church practice which is habitual but not essential to what it means to be church.

Rowan Williams recently suggested that the church should be prepared to risk everything except 'those things that hold us to the truth of his presence – Word and sacrament'. But it's not just that it's risky to leave behind what you're comfortable with; isn't it also tricky to imagine what something could be like that is beyond what you've experienced?

Any discussion on essential elements of church prompts quite a bit of debate. As we've talked there has been recognition of the church as one, holy, catholic and apostolic (or words to that effect), but even with these as defining marks there is still enormous scope for diversity of both expression and understanding.  And the question remains: How do we move beyond all the extra stuff we do which isn't essential and give more time to the things we may value most about being church?

In last week's blog on Share, Richard Sudworth talked about the need for real listening in mission, listening which is active, transforming and relational: 'let the draught go both ways'. I suppose it would be fair to say that we have found that alongside this missiological conversation there is also a dynamic ecclesiological conversation to be had between our experience in mission and the historic, present and future church. It is a conversation that involves letting go of our church experience and stepping out of our church shoes. Only then can we come to the conversation open to the creative and imaginative Spirit. Only when we embrace the messy and improvised dialogue between mission and church do we find the essence of what being church is about.

360 degree listening (Richard Sudworth)

Richard Sudworth explores 360 degree listening.

Richard SudworthIn one of my all-time favourite TV shows, an American police sergeant used to send his officers out onto their beat with a: 'Now, make sure you do it to them before they do it to you!' I have lived and worked amongst Muslims in Britain for over five years now and there's a lot of talk about mission and church planting that sounds worryingly like that clarion call to arms. I wonder, though, whether you've ever considered mission as, primarily, a task of listening?

It takes incredible security and self-confidence to listen well. Good listeners don't feel the need to interrupt and make their point. Isn't it obvious when someone is not listening but just waiting for a pause to say what they want to say? Too much of our mission is like that!

In the church where I am based we have a slogan: 'Let the draught go both ways'. We used to have a draughty corridor connecting Sunday worship (the main church building) with nursery services, stay-and-play, youth and after school clubs (church hall). We figured this was a good metaphor for what God's vision was for us as a church community. The 'draught' of our prayer, worship, Scripture reading (in traditional terms, the 'Sunday' stuff), needed to impact the community Monday to Saturday. But that was not all. The life of the community needed to impact us; Monday to Saturday would change us.

The thing is, real listening changes us. Conversations become different; relationships deepen. And genuine listening isn't passive; you need to check you've been understood, reflect back, and sometimes to challenge. In one sense, my own mission context of other faiths, and in particular, Islam, raises the stakes. Dare I say that we as a church community have learned from our Muslim neighbours? Can we say that part of our mission is to be able to receive something from our community too?

I can say that we have, and when I look at our example of Jesus, that we ought. It's not to deny the times when we have had to challenge, present Jesus explicitly, more boldly explain the hope that underscores all that we do. But active listening as an approach to mission is less about knowing in advance what you will do. Rather, it's being prepared to be vulnerable; it's mission as relationship rather than strategy.