Subscribe to Posts
why missionaries might prefer centered sets
It’s no accident that proponents of applying centered set thinking have been missionaries. Missions is about bringing the gospel into new territory. Missionaries are front line people, not rear guard people. They face many challenges that others don’t face.
Paul was a missionary to the Gentile world. As such he faced challenges that the other apostles, operating in the Jewish world, didn’t face. Should Gentile converts learn to observe Torah? Be circumcised? Observe the Sabbath, as commanded the Ten Commandments? Eat meat sacrificed to idols, as most meat was? Be allowed to maintain more than one wife?
A leader needs, among other things, competence to face these complex issues. C.S. Lewis, writing at the beginning of the post-Christian era in England, focused on what he called “Mere Christianity.” This was his attempt at defining the center of a centered set. Keep it simple, stupid, back to basics.
John Wimber promoted mere Christianity. Vineyard churches don’t even have a common view of baptism or communion for heaven’s sake, let alone a complex issue like divorce and remarriage. Most Vineyard pastors I know haven’t carefully these issues.
It takes a more developed competence to do bounded set churches well. One has to decide how to handle the second generation, for example. In a revival movement it’s easy to discern who has been touched by the revival, more difficult to discern what’s going on with the second generation. All the pesky theological issues that need sorting–predestination, free will, atonement theories, end time scenarios. Oh, and the moral issues.
Missionaries tend to be pragmatists, like Wimber was. Let’s get the job done. In the case of reaching those left behind by the institutional churches, let’s get the job done that isn’t being done by the current approaches. Yes, all these theological and moral questions are important, but they take time, energy and attention that we don’t have. People need Christianity who don’t have Christianity. Instead of working to refine Christianity even further, perhaps we should offer them mere Christianity.
The centered set approach may or may not be the “ideal” approach. Who cares, says the missionary. It’s the handiest approach for getting the job done.
October 27th, 2009 at 9:18 am
My dad, the son of a pastor always pounded into my head what his dad pounded into his head:
‘Christianity’s essence is ’stupidly simple’, if it requires an education to understand its foundations, it is not Christianity, it is demonic.’
Issues like predestination, end times prophecy, baptism method, what happens to pygmies in Africa when they die without ever hearing from Jesus, etc., were always dismissed as ‘interesting discussion items, but irrelevant when compared with simple truth that we are sinners, separated from God and need to embrace Jesus and only Jesus as the solution to this problem.’
So when a discussion on these side issues got heated, the response was ‘you know…I am glad this is God’s problem and not mine to solve…after I die, I will ask Him.’
October 27th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
Let your yes be yes and your no be no. The simplicity of the gospel message leads me to believe that the gospel is a yes, or no issue. The religious hypocrisy clearly defined by Jesus’ teaching is a yes, or no issue. The moral issues clearly defined in scripture and the broken trail of human suffering are also yes, or no issues.
To say yes or no is not so easy most of the time. We want something in between, especially when we are referring to our sins. If we are saying yes to Jesus with a centered set approach, what are we saying no to? Since we are part of the culture we are trying to reach, and we are quite familiar with the issues, do we ignore the obvious sins that so easily beset us all? Since we are members of the culture, is it fair compare ourselves with missionaries that go to other cultures where one must first find bridges into that culture?
This is an extreme example, but I will ask the questions anyway. How would the centered set approach have worked in the years leading up to the Holocaust? Would a centered set approach work for Dietrich Bonhoeffer as he challenged the culture in which he lived? Do followers of Jesus have a responsibility to challenge the culture in which they live?
October 27th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Once again, Ken, you break things down to the commonest of denominators. That was the “problem” Jesus faced with the unbelieving public. It was so simple and straightforward that noone could see how true it was when our Lord and Savior said that His yoke is easy. Our minds are so small and finite, that we all want to dissect everything and make it more complicated than it really has to be, simply because we can’t perceive that that something so awesome and incredible could be so simple.
October 27th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
As a mi$$ion@ry in a frontier setting, I think what Ken’s saying about it being more pragmatic to have a centered set approach is true. Starting a ch_rch in a new setting where our faith has never been introduced is messy business, esp in places where there are next-to-no Judeo-Chr values established in the culture to begin with.
We have too much to do to squabble about boundary lines, esp with one another. I work alongside Calvinists, Seventh Day Adventists, Mennonites, pentecostals, messianic Jews, Southern Baptists, Catholics – the whole spectrum. Mostly people are able to put aside traditional religious boundary markers out of necessity – nothing would get done if we worked on our own.
Occasionally I encounter people who seem to have more grace with the culture they’re trying to reach than with one another, and I always wonder what that’s about. Is it because we’ve set ourselves up as the “experts” in our faith? We have grace with new believers, but not with mature ones, who we think should’ve come around to our way of thinking by now?
Something Ken once said in a sermon stuck with me, and it’s this: “Truth is a person, with whom we have relationship.” It takes a lifetime of intimacy with J to come into an understanding of Truth, capital T. My job is to introduce people into relationship with J so that the Spirit can lead them into all truth. When people tell me they’ve got the corner on truth – in terms of how to believe, how to behave, or who’s “in” or “out”, I always want to say to them, “So, you’ve got J all figured out, eh? And at 30 years old? That’s amazing!” I would hope we’d have more humility than that.
October 28th, 2009 at 8:51 am
YEP!
It isn’t that missionaries are trying to play fast and loose with the rules, it’s just that mistakes happen and things get messy when you are trying new nets. Oh well. Erwin McManus talks about the fact that you are just going to do some dumb, messy things when trying to take the gospel to places it hasn’t been before. As soon as a method of evangelism gets established it is probably out of date and won’t connect with the ever changing culture. The message never changes, but the means have to. There is reason at times to talk about the repercussions, but we’ve got to keep going. Of course I don’t like knowing that I’ve done something stupid, but I can only trust in God’s mercy here too.
October 28th, 2009 at 7:58 pm
There’s a helpful little section on this in David Adam’s (the Vicar of Lindisfarne) Flame in My Heart looking at how St Aidan had to tackle these issues in bringing Christianity to Northumbria (http://www.amazon.com/Flame-My-Heart-Aidan-Today/dp/0281050333). One nice quote in the context of mission: “If you cannot accept the otherness of the person you meet, how can you be open to the Great Other which is God?”
October 29th, 2009 at 8:19 am
gem –
i’m not sure the cnetered-set isn’t a challenge. in fact, i would say it is the most radical challenge. re-orient life around a different center is totally challenging to most people, epsecially me. lots of things are always threatening to de-center Jesus in my life…including church.
i think the missionary-perspective is right on, as newbigin and others have told us, we live in a post-Christian era (not a post-religious one…that’s for sure, just post-Christian) and thus we need to become missionaries to north america.
as to the holocaust example, had more people been centered on jesus, instead of letting other de-center him and put your culture/heritage/nation’s leader in that place, a centered set would have made a huge difference.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:26 am
The problem I have with bounded set groups is that I see sin as a continuum. As we follow Jesus we move away from sin, but we are never totally free. Paul expressed this as crucifying the old man, it seemed even Paul continued to struggle with the old nature. So if this is true, where do you draw the line and how do you know for sure since alot of sin is internal? For me I find it more satisfying seeing people moving toward Jesus, this is often easy to see. It puts Jesus in charge of the process. So I see my job as a Christian is to get as many people as possible on the path and to help them move toward Jesus. As a side comment, this is why I am not nervous with Ken having these discussions since there is no doubt in my mind that Ken is trying to follow the path.
October 29th, 2009 at 10:54 am
I see some misconceptions about what a centered set approach means.
1) To have a centered set approach is not equivalent to never having anything clearly defined as sin. It just puts the focus on the simple call to believe in and follow Jesus.
2) A centered set approach does not mean sin is not dealt with. If people are following (i.e. obeying)Jesus, they will be moving away from sin.
3) If people are turning to Jesus in faith and following him, that will ultimately affect the culture.
October 29th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
A hearty “thank you-amen” to comments 9,8,7. A centered set church may also have requirements for various things (membership, etc.) To steve’s comment: the centered set approach relies on movement toward the center. Adopting a set of belief-convictions does not equal movement. Faith working itself out in love does. Movement is a work of the Spirit which cannot be generated by organizational strategies (those these can facilitate or impede). Examples of movement: serving, giving, facing personal struggles, caring for others, praying.
October 29th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Yes, work of the Spirit. Allowing the Holy Spirit entrance. Inviting the Holy Spirit’s entrance and posession of oneself. Allowing the Holy Spirit to put oneself in another room for awhile and operate the vehicle. This is what is called for.
As to moving away from sin, I don’t think so. That is not what is going on here. It is inviting the Holy Spirit into one’s heart to take up residence there. Take up dominion there. Asking the Holy Spirit to please boot out the current resident.
But of course this occupation by the Holy Spirit is temporary. Soon the current resident boots the Holy Spirit out.
We never do leave sin behind. We can only hope that the Holy Spirit will help us deal with this problem from time to time. We can only hope that we can get its help to make course corrections from time to time.
October 29th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
I am beginning to get this. I have been very comfortable in the bounded set mentality since becoming a believer in 1986.
At the time, I felt ok about my moral fiber. Reading the scripture was a good experience when I read about some sins (yeah, I don’t do those) and scary when I read about others (oops, I do those). As I worked towards being on the inside of the particular bounded set my church seemed to follow and made progress, I felt like I was growing. It was easy to plan my growth, to set goals.
As I ‘fixed’ many of my sins, I found myself mostly within the set and I started to relax. I saw no further need to keep growing beyond where I was. I graduated !!
At present, I do find myself rather comfortable within my circle of acceptability. The scary part about centered set is that all of the sudden, I am in bad shape again. I feel I am not really growing a lot lately, and that is ok according to a bounded set if I don’t cross the line outward, but it is terrible according to the centered set because my rate of travel towards the center has slowed.
So…I am a bit nervous about what living in a centered set may mean. It’s like ‘what will Jesus ask me to do next? And He has a history of asking his folks to do rather challenging things, inclding dying.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Thanks for the comments. I have read all of the posts and comments, and I mostly have questions because it seems like a nice theory, but I wonder what does this look like. If the centered set approach allows Jesus to increase and the religious pretense to decrease, then wisdom will be justified by her children.
October 31st, 2009 at 9:28 pm
mm, I really like Joao’s #12. I resonate with that a lot, because in some ways that is part of my story.
As I’ve gone through life, I’ve found some of my perspectives on Christianity not fitting so neatly inside the bounded set, and the result is that I’ve freaked out some friends and family who can’t understand how I can be a Jesus follower while not fitting so neatly inside their ‘boundary.’
What is interesting is that as I’ve understood grace more, the outside boundary has seemed less and relevant, because my ultimate security is in Jesus’ death and resurrection …