Toward a missio Dei Model of Abundance...

This is a response to a response of David Fitch to a response of Ben Sternke to David's interview of Frank Viola...  This is a model of missio Dei theology that I'm working out.  Take it for what its worth (which is probably not much at all compared to what these guys bring to the table!).

I'm particularly responding to this statement of Ben's:

In the end, I think that any paradigm that seeks to place missiology "ahead of" or "prior to" ecclesiology (ala Hirsch) is problematic, because the church always ends up being provisional and/or optional.

To put it bluntly: Yes, God needs the church.

It seems much, much more "problematic" to me to think of God a

s needing anything than it is to think of the church as ending up "provisional and/or optional."  It is a problematic dilemma of which I am sure anyone can spot: How can God, a perfect being, need anything? 

In our theology of the missio Dei, it seems clear to me that a paradigm of Divine abundance would be far superior to a paradigm of Divine need.

This is a model of abundance that seems to make more sense to me.  It seems to make more sense to me that God doesn't need the Church (the corpus Christi) in the process of re-creation and redemption any more (or any less) than he would need the Adam (the imago Dei) in the process of creation.  As I see it, it was not out of a lack in Himself, or a 'need' for human co-creativity that he created the Adam.  It was out abundance, out of the overflow of God's joy and ("It was good") pleasure in His creative activity.  Out of the excess (not need), He wanted to share this joyful vocation of creativity with humanity. 

As there seems to be a striking analogy between the imago Dei (the Adam) and the corpus Christi (the Second Adam), it appears also that this analogy might hold true between the missio Dei via imago Dei and the missio Dei via corpus Christi.  It would likewise not be out a lack or need that God in Christ missions through the Church.  It is out of excess and abundance of joy.  We are graced by the overflow--not recruited because of the need--to be participants in the joyful, life-giving re-creativity of Christ.

At least that's what seems to make sense to me.  But this is, of course, based on a chain of reasoning into which I could not go in depth here.

 

 

Technorati Tags: missio dei,missiology,ecclesiology,imago dei,mission,missional church

Why 'Arts Ministry'?

Technorati Tags: arts ministry,arts pastor,david taylor,theology,art,artist,aesthetics

 

David Taylor is really a pioneer in the vocation of Arts Pastor. I love the guy. I have known him now for several years, and in Summer 2007 had the privilege of having him as my mentor for my semester of mentorship as a part of my M.Div at Truett Seminary.  David earned his M.A. and Th.M. from Regent College, Vancouver. 

Although there are many churches who have positions with titles such as "Creative Arts Director" or "Fine Arts Pastor," the function for the vast majority of these positions is specifically to incorporate the arts into Sunday Morning worship.  This is a task that needs to be done, and it is a blessing to the church to have ministers performing those important functions.  However, David's decade-long task as "Arts Pastor" of Hope Chapel's arts ministry (Austin) was as shepherd--shepherding artists, and shepherding the arts in general outside of the scope of Sunday morning worship.  He is currently writing a book for Baker Academic that is going to be the first of its kind (so far as I'm aware) addressing this task of shepherding.  Yet this pastorate does not only have implications for artists, but for the body as a whole, for we all can be served by a someone to help us navigate the complicated waters of the the cultures of art (from fine art to popular art) that have such a profound effect upon our lives.  Moreover, we can all benefit by someone helping us to be better able to "taste and see that the Lord is good." 

This locus of ministry is something that I think is drastically needed in the church today, and this for many reasons.  I don't say this flippantly, and I have much reason to believe I am not saying this naively: I foresee this sphere of ministry as being a next logical step for the evangelical church (and seminary).  It is, in fact, already happening.  It is a hunch I've had since the beginning of my career here at Truett Seminary, and the need for this kind of ministry has since been confirmed time and time again in almost every class I've taken--from missions, to practical theology, to scripture, to homiletics, to pastoral ministry, etc.. 

It just makes too much sense for me to ignore.  With respect to the Platonic triad of Truth, Beauty and Goodness, the Evangelical Church has traditionally paid tremendous attention to Truth.  It has more recently also seen the importance of Goodness, engaging quite effectively with social justice.  This is evinced in the rise of publications such as Sojourners, the M.Div/Social Work degree at Truett, and the evangelical political support of policies addressing social justice.  What there has not yet been widespread evangelical attention given to is the locus of Beauty.  The Arts have a special connection to Beauty that seems to be obvious.  However it is also inextricable from Truth--as Paul Tillich was particularly apt to point out to us--and also Goodness--as some such as Iris Murdoch and Elaine Scarry, as well as all the poet-prophets from the ancient Hebrews until today make manifest to us.  Even disciplines as oft-reductionistic as the sciences have turned their attention more and more to the important place Beauty--elegance, parsimony, etc. The reality that seems to be making itself heard is that all of these things--Truth, Beauty, Goodness--exist in a kind of perichoresis, interpenetrating one another.  As such, a truncated approach that specializes in only one or two of these elements will only end up depriving itself even of a true understanding of those two elements.  A holistic approach is necessary for a proper grasp of each part.

I could go on (and on...and on) about the matrix of reasons supporting why this locus of ministry makes sense, but the short of it, as far as I see it, is this: the signs of the times for the evangelical church point quite forcefully in the direction of this kind of arts ministry.  I think it behooves Christian seminaries, colleges, and churches to seriously consider this, and start more intentionally seeking ways to engage in the conversation that is already going on regarding this locus of ministry, and to educate ministers and laity in this regard.  Fuller Seminary and Regent College--among others (most recently Duke Divinity)--have already done significant work in this regard, even offering graduate and post-graduate degree concentrations in the arts. 

If you can't tell, I am passionately convinced of the importance of this.  I trust that if I am misguided in writing this, and if this is not in the best interests of the Church, then the Holy Spirit will make that clear to the reader.  Yet if I have indeed been prompted by the Spirit to share this, I trust that the Spirit will make this need perceivable to you as well.

Grace and Peace,

Adam