The 218th General Assembly (2008) reflections part 4
Reflections on our World Mission
One of the highlights for me of this week’s General Assembly meeting thus far was the World Mission luncheon on Sunday. (NOTE: We have scheduled the director of World Mission, Hunter Farrell, to be with us in our Presbytery for our April Presbytery meeting.) There is completely new national staff in place in our World Mission office, and I am very supportive of our effort in the church to grow our international mission work. It was very meaningful and moving to sit together at the World Mission luncheon with Christian brothers and sisters from our partner churches all over the world, all of whom express deep gratitude for the mission and ministry of our Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). There are stories upon stories from all around the world of churches that were initially planted, and conversions to Christ that were originally sparked, sometimes several generations ago, by the work of Presbyterian missionaries from the United States.
Hunter Farrell, in a very compelling address, spoke in broad terms of the history of Presbyterian world mission work and offered his vision of this new era. The Presbyterian Church made a massive commitment to world mission more than 150 years. This began the great era of mission work during which we sent our missionaries around the world. Many of our international partners today are churches that were planted and formed in that great era of world mission emphasis. Presbyterian Churches in Korea, Kenya, Brazil, Mexico, Thailand, and many others were planted by American Presbyterians. Because that era was also a time of limited communication and difficult international travel, our mission strategy was necessarily a “dependent” strategy. That is to say our congregations depended on our General Assembly to do this mission work. The congregations provided the funding, massive amounts of funding, and the General Assembly functioned as a mission sending agency. This was a profoundly successful strategy for doing world mission work.
Everything shifted and changed in our culture through the 1960s. Thus from the 1970s through the 1990s our world mission work shifted to an “independent” strategy. For many reasons, including the breakdown of trust in the church and the flattening of the world with our now easy communication and travel, individual congregations started doing world mission with a local and personal involvement. This is the era when the concept of mission trips started and has become an established part of our mission work. In this era the world mission work of the General Assembly floundered and downsized because congregations were no longer dependent on the General Assembly to engage in world mission. We are now learning the downside of this completely independent strategy for world mission work. I have seen this in the Presbytery of Honduras which simply does not have the resources or leadership to constantly host the vast numbers of American mission trips that are arriving. I have heard, for example, of one Presbyterian mission hospital in Kenya that was completely overwhelmed by the requests of three different American Presbyterian congregations that wanted to bring medical mission teams, each of more than 20 people, in the same month this summer. I have heard the terrible story of a small Presbyterian church in Mexico who organized the painting of the same wall in their town’s park six weeks in row by six different American mission teams because they do not have the resources or leadership to host this annual onslaught of American teams. The real tragedy of this independent, congregational based world mission work is that we have had to cut back on our financial commitment to full-time, fluent in the local language, professional mission workers because our money has shifted to short-term, usually week-long, mission trips.
Are we poised for a new era of world mission commitment? A new era which, obviously, will never return to a strategy in which our congregations are fully dependent on the General Assembly to do mission. A new era which, I hope, with a higher level of trust. A new era which may move us beyond the excesses of a completely independent strategy of world mission in which each congregation does their own thing with little coordination with others who may be working in the same nation. Are we ready to move into a collaborative era of world mission in which congregations, presbyteries and the General Assembly work together with our international church partners. This is clearly the direction in which Hunter Farrell would like to lead our world mission efforts. This is clearly the direction that is being proposed in the concept of mission networks. (I am very involved in the Honduras mission network). There are now 35 mission networks in our church.
Each congregation needs to be directly and personally connected with world mission. Each congregation needs to do mission trips, including international trips. But we also need communication and collaboration with our international church partners so we do not overwhelm them with our arrogant American audacity. We also need to make a serious commitment to the calling and equipping of full-time, professional mission workers serving with long term commitment all around the world. We also need the General Assembly, through the concept of mission networks and the regional liaisons staff people, to help congregations and presbyteries coordinate our world mission efforts so we are not paying thousands of dollars to travel to a foreign nation to paint the same wall six weeks in a row.
It is new day for the church. In the name of Jesus Christ let us make a commitment to world mission.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Sunday, June 22, 2008
General Assembly reflections part 3
Copied from the General Assembly website: http://www.pcusa.org/ga218
The Rev. Bruce Reyes-Chow, 39, an energetic new church development pastor in San Francisco and leader in the “emergent church” movement, was elected moderator of the 218th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Saturday night (June 21), capturing a second ballot victory.
Reyes-Chow — who received 48 percent of the first ballot votes — won an easy majority on the second ballot with 390 votes or 55 percent.
The Rev. William “Bill” Teng of National Capital Presbytery finished second with 255 votes or 36 percent. The Rev. D. Carl Mazza of New Castle Presbytery finished third with 52 votes or 7 percent. Elder Roger Shoemaker of Homestead Presbytery trailed with seven votes or 1 percent.
Reyes-Chow is pastor of Mission Bay Community Church, an innovative new church of San Francisco Presbytery that was recently named winner of a 2007 Sam and Helen Walton Award for outstanding new church development. In his address to the Assembly, he noted that he makes as many pastoral calls by email as by in-person visitation.
Such is the future of ministry, Reyes-Chow said. Mission Bay has a state-of-the-art Web site and extensive electronic communications among members and participants, which he said is absolutely essential for a congregation that is predominantly under-40.
In her nominating speech for him, Elder Vivian Guthrie of Greater Atlanta Presbytery urged Reyes-Chow’s election “to keep our church relevant … or we aren’t going to be on the same page as younger people. Bruce has a profound understanding of the way the world is changing, so he can help us feel less anxious and less resistant to change.”
In both his speech and his responses to questions, Reyes-Chow reiterated over and over his belief that “nothing is too hard or too wondrous for God. If the church steps out in faith rather than clinging to survival, to be more intent on being faithful than on being right, to be together based on our common covenant in Jesus Christ rather than by property or pensions, then we will be able to live into a future in which we are a vital and vibrant presence in the world.”
Teng, the only one of the four candidates to explicitly support the current constitutional prohibition of the ordination of sexually active gay and lesbian Presbyterians as church officers, emphasized his campaign theme of “gratitude and hope.” “We gather up a wealth of meaning as Presbyterians in response to the grace of God in Jesus Christ,” Teng said. “We have no greater need than to look beyond ourselves and follow Jesus into the world he loves and calls us to love.”
Mazza, who brought to his candidacy a compelling personal story of conversion and resultant commitment to the homeless and other marginalized people as founder and director of Meeting Ground in Elkton, MD, spoke of the two “great strengths” of the PC(USA) that drive his ministry: “We have an abiding commitment to gospel and Jesus Christ and a commitment to mission in the world,” he said. Shoemaker, the only elder among the four, called for Presbyterians to develop a greater understanding of themselves as the body of Christ and as Presbyterians and in doing so “we will find ways to pursue solutions that will grow our congregations spiritually and numerically.”
Reyes-Chow, the grandson of Chinese and Filipino immigrants to California, was raised in Sacramento and Stockton, CA. He is a graduate of San Francisco State University and San Francisco Theological Seminary. A prolific writer and blogger, Reyes-Chow describes himself as a “pastor/geek/dad/follower of Christ.”
The Rev. Bruce Reyes-Chow, 39, an energetic new church development pastor in San Francisco and leader in the “emergent church” movement, was elected moderator of the 218th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Saturday night (June 21), capturing a second ballot victory.
Reyes-Chow — who received 48 percent of the first ballot votes — won an easy majority on the second ballot with 390 votes or 55 percent.
The Rev. William “Bill” Teng of National Capital Presbytery finished second with 255 votes or 36 percent. The Rev. D. Carl Mazza of New Castle Presbytery finished third with 52 votes or 7 percent. Elder Roger Shoemaker of Homestead Presbytery trailed with seven votes or 1 percent.
Reyes-Chow is pastor of Mission Bay Community Church, an innovative new church of San Francisco Presbytery that was recently named winner of a 2007 Sam and Helen Walton Award for outstanding new church development. In his address to the Assembly, he noted that he makes as many pastoral calls by email as by in-person visitation.
Such is the future of ministry, Reyes-Chow said. Mission Bay has a state-of-the-art Web site and extensive electronic communications among members and participants, which he said is absolutely essential for a congregation that is predominantly under-40.
In her nominating speech for him, Elder Vivian Guthrie of Greater Atlanta Presbytery urged Reyes-Chow’s election “to keep our church relevant … or we aren’t going to be on the same page as younger people. Bruce has a profound understanding of the way the world is changing, so he can help us feel less anxious and less resistant to change.”
In both his speech and his responses to questions, Reyes-Chow reiterated over and over his belief that “nothing is too hard or too wondrous for God. If the church steps out in faith rather than clinging to survival, to be more intent on being faithful than on being right, to be together based on our common covenant in Jesus Christ rather than by property or pensions, then we will be able to live into a future in which we are a vital and vibrant presence in the world.”
Teng, the only one of the four candidates to explicitly support the current constitutional prohibition of the ordination of sexually active gay and lesbian Presbyterians as church officers, emphasized his campaign theme of “gratitude and hope.” “We gather up a wealth of meaning as Presbyterians in response to the grace of God in Jesus Christ,” Teng said. “We have no greater need than to look beyond ourselves and follow Jesus into the world he loves and calls us to love.”
Mazza, who brought to his candidacy a compelling personal story of conversion and resultant commitment to the homeless and other marginalized people as founder and director of Meeting Ground in Elkton, MD, spoke of the two “great strengths” of the PC(USA) that drive his ministry: “We have an abiding commitment to gospel and Jesus Christ and a commitment to mission in the world,” he said. Shoemaker, the only elder among the four, called for Presbyterians to develop a greater understanding of themselves as the body of Christ and as Presbyterians and in doing so “we will find ways to pursue solutions that will grow our congregations spiritually and numerically.”
Reyes-Chow, the grandson of Chinese and Filipino immigrants to California, was raised in Sacramento and Stockton, CA. He is a graduate of San Francisco State University and San Francisco Theological Seminary. A prolific writer and blogger, Reyes-Chow describes himself as a “pastor/geek/dad/follower of Christ.”
Saturday, June 21, 2008
General Assembly reflections part 2
The 218th General Assembly (2008) reflections part 2
Quoted here is the recommendation coming to the General Assembly asking “organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation.” I shared this document with our Presbytery at our June meeting, asking us to consider it for adoption in September. I hope this invitation will help us have conversation about mission in our Presbytery, and make a renewed commitment to our world mission efforts:
RECOMMENDATION
As a result of the Worldwide Mission Consultation, “Renewed Call to Presbyterian Mission in the World! Dialogue for Our Shared Future” that was held January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas, the Moderator, together with the Stated Clerk and the General Assembly Council, recommend that the 218th General Assembly (2008) invite the sessions, middle governing bodies, seminaries, General Assembly Council ministries areas, and all PC(USA)-related mission organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation:
An Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission
As members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) committed to God’s mission, accompanied by global partners, we gathered together January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas. We acknowledge the rich Presbyterian heritage in world mission and reaffirm the Presbyterian understanding of God’s mission as it is expressed in “Gathering for God’s Future,”
The Good News of Jesus Christ is to be shared with the whole world. As disciples of Jesus Christ, each of us in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is sent into the world to join God’s mission. As individuals and as a church, we are called to be faithful in this discipleship. Our mission is centered in the triune God. Our mission is God-called, Christ-centered, and Spirit-led. Our mission is both proclamation and service; it is the reason the church exists. …
Our renewed call from God is to face the challenges of witnessing and evangelizing worldwide, equipping the church for transforming mission, engaging in ministries of reconciliation, justice, healing and grace, and living the Good News of Jesus Christ in community with people who are poor, [persecuted, and living in the midst of violence]…
The church is part of God’s plan. We are called into the community of the church, and we call new disciples into that community. With Christ as our head, the church community exists for the sake of God's mission. We learn to serve in mission in a way that is faithful to the triune God. We are to model the kind of community God intends for all humanity. To be the church is to be one large mission society. [PC(USA), “Gathering for God’s Future: Witness, Discipleship, Community: A Renewed Call to Worldwide Mission,” 2003, pp. 1, 16. Text in brackets is added.]
Grounded in this theological foundation we realize that God is calling us to new patterns of mission. The world has changed, and the majority of the world’s Christians are now in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The great growth and mission faithfulness of the Church outside the West invite us into a new posture. We must listen and learn to receive. We must also be open to new patterns of collaboration. These new patterns involve new cooperation and partnerships within the PC(USA).
I. We recognize that God calls us to mission that is grounded in confession of our sins, grows out of a life of prayer and is sustained in worship. Therefore, we covenant to live and serve together in God’s mission according to the following values:
1. Trusting in the Holy Spirit and trusting in one another as each discerns how God is moving us in mission. (Acts 10)
2. Doing mission in the way of Jesus who humbled himself, showing the way of self-giving and self-emptying. (Philippians 2)
3. Seeking to be faithful to God as we live and proclaim the fullness of Jesus Christ’s good news; personal witness to those outside the church, justice for the oppressed, and compassion for those in need. We accompany others in their efforts to be faithful. (Luke 4)
4. Affirming the complementary nature of God’s gifts to all in the one body of Christ and encouraging one another in living out those gifts. (1 Corinthians 12)
5. Recognizing our responsibility to each other by communicating openly, acting transparently, and speaking and hearing the truth in love. (Ephesians 4)
6. Striving in our mission to be aware of the context out of which we come, to respect the persons with whom we labor, and to honor the context in which they live. In an era of massive global inequalities we commit ourselves to be sensitive to and address the issues of power that result from our differences. (Philippians 2)
7. Valuing long-term relationships, partnerships characterized by perseverance and long-term commitments, which support and encourage global partners. (1 Thessalonians 2)
II. We seek to live out these mission values with humility, integrity, and steadfastness. Recognizing that God invites us all to be full participants in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to work cooperatively with one another in the following ways:
1. We will affirm and encourage World Mission as it continues to move from a regulatory role to a more enabling and equipping role.
2. We will celebrate and encourage diverse Presbyterian approaches and structures for mission while maintaining the unity of our participation in God’s mission.
3. We will share responsibility for the education and preparation of all Presbyterians for mission.
4. We commit ourselves to seeking more mission personnel who will serve long-term in cross-cultural contexts through the PC(USA), and to supporting them fully.
5. We commit ourselves to enabling and supporting our global partners as they send their mission personnel in cross-cultural service.
6. We recognize and affirm the growing opportunity for cross-cultural mission in our own increasingly pluralistic and multicultural society, and we receive the global community from near and far as mission partners and God’s gift to us. We seek increased integration between local and global mission.
III. As we move forward together in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to calling the church to ongoing intercessory prayer for God’s mission and to the following tasks:
1. We will form a coordinating committee to ensure that we will meet together to share and cooperate on a regular basis.
2. During the coming year we will work to address two immediate priorities:
a. to coordinate and collaborate in the sending of mission personnel;
b. to expand Presbyterian funding for mission personnel.
3. During the next three months we will share this document and invitation with our constituencies.
IV. With bold humility we invite those who would covenant with us to join in this new collaborative model of Presbyterian mission, and we ask for encouragement, for guidance and for prayer, remembering Jesus’ own prayer:
The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:22-23)
Quoted here is the recommendation coming to the General Assembly asking “organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation.” I shared this document with our Presbytery at our June meeting, asking us to consider it for adoption in September. I hope this invitation will help us have conversation about mission in our Presbytery, and make a renewed commitment to our world mission efforts:
RECOMMENDATION
As a result of the Worldwide Mission Consultation, “Renewed Call to Presbyterian Mission in the World! Dialogue for Our Shared Future” that was held January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas, the Moderator, together with the Stated Clerk and the General Assembly Council, recommend that the 218th General Assembly (2008) invite the sessions, middle governing bodies, seminaries, General Assembly Council ministries areas, and all PC(USA)-related mission organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation:
An Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission
As members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) committed to God’s mission, accompanied by global partners, we gathered together January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas. We acknowledge the rich Presbyterian heritage in world mission and reaffirm the Presbyterian understanding of God’s mission as it is expressed in “Gathering for God’s Future,”
The Good News of Jesus Christ is to be shared with the whole world. As disciples of Jesus Christ, each of us in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is sent into the world to join God’s mission. As individuals and as a church, we are called to be faithful in this discipleship. Our mission is centered in the triune God. Our mission is God-called, Christ-centered, and Spirit-led. Our mission is both proclamation and service; it is the reason the church exists. …
Our renewed call from God is to face the challenges of witnessing and evangelizing worldwide, equipping the church for transforming mission, engaging in ministries of reconciliation, justice, healing and grace, and living the Good News of Jesus Christ in community with people who are poor, [persecuted, and living in the midst of violence]…
The church is part of God’s plan. We are called into the community of the church, and we call new disciples into that community. With Christ as our head, the church community exists for the sake of God's mission. We learn to serve in mission in a way that is faithful to the triune God. We are to model the kind of community God intends for all humanity. To be the church is to be one large mission society. [PC(USA), “Gathering for God’s Future: Witness, Discipleship, Community: A Renewed Call to Worldwide Mission,” 2003, pp. 1, 16. Text in brackets is added.]
Grounded in this theological foundation we realize that God is calling us to new patterns of mission. The world has changed, and the majority of the world’s Christians are now in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The great growth and mission faithfulness of the Church outside the West invite us into a new posture. We must listen and learn to receive. We must also be open to new patterns of collaboration. These new patterns involve new cooperation and partnerships within the PC(USA).
I. We recognize that God calls us to mission that is grounded in confession of our sins, grows out of a life of prayer and is sustained in worship. Therefore, we covenant to live and serve together in God’s mission according to the following values:
1. Trusting in the Holy Spirit and trusting in one another as each discerns how God is moving us in mission. (Acts 10)
2. Doing mission in the way of Jesus who humbled himself, showing the way of self-giving and self-emptying. (Philippians 2)
3. Seeking to be faithful to God as we live and proclaim the fullness of Jesus Christ’s good news; personal witness to those outside the church, justice for the oppressed, and compassion for those in need. We accompany others in their efforts to be faithful. (Luke 4)
4. Affirming the complementary nature of God’s gifts to all in the one body of Christ and encouraging one another in living out those gifts. (1 Corinthians 12)
5. Recognizing our responsibility to each other by communicating openly, acting transparently, and speaking and hearing the truth in love. (Ephesians 4)
6. Striving in our mission to be aware of the context out of which we come, to respect the persons with whom we labor, and to honor the context in which they live. In an era of massive global inequalities we commit ourselves to be sensitive to and address the issues of power that result from our differences. (Philippians 2)
7. Valuing long-term relationships, partnerships characterized by perseverance and long-term commitments, which support and encourage global partners. (1 Thessalonians 2)
II. We seek to live out these mission values with humility, integrity, and steadfastness. Recognizing that God invites us all to be full participants in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to work cooperatively with one another in the following ways:
1. We will affirm and encourage World Mission as it continues to move from a regulatory role to a more enabling and equipping role.
2. We will celebrate and encourage diverse Presbyterian approaches and structures for mission while maintaining the unity of our participation in God’s mission.
3. We will share responsibility for the education and preparation of all Presbyterians for mission.
4. We commit ourselves to seeking more mission personnel who will serve long-term in cross-cultural contexts through the PC(USA), and to supporting them fully.
5. We commit ourselves to enabling and supporting our global partners as they send their mission personnel in cross-cultural service.
6. We recognize and affirm the growing opportunity for cross-cultural mission in our own increasingly pluralistic and multicultural society, and we receive the global community from near and far as mission partners and God’s gift to us. We seek increased integration between local and global mission.
III. As we move forward together in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to calling the church to ongoing intercessory prayer for God’s mission and to the following tasks:
1. We will form a coordinating committee to ensure that we will meet together to share and cooperate on a regular basis.
2. During the coming year we will work to address two immediate priorities:
a. to coordinate and collaborate in the sending of mission personnel;
b. to expand Presbyterian funding for mission personnel.
3. During the next three months we will share this document and invitation with our constituencies.
IV. With bold humility we invite those who would covenant with us to join in this new collaborative model of Presbyterian mission, and we ask for encouragement, for guidance and for prayer, remembering Jesus’ own prayer:
The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:22-23)
General Assembly reflections part 1
The 218th General Assembly (2008): Reflections part 1
Saturday June 21, 2008
The report of the Form of Government taskforce is certainly one of the most important issues before this year’s General Assembly. This is a sweeping, comprehensive revision of the Form of Government, which is, of course, the largest part of our Book of Order. (Our Book of Order also includes the Directory for Worship, and the Rules for Discipline.) Although the General Assembly’s first business meeting convenes today at 10:00, there was already, late Friday evening, an open presentation by the Form of Government taskforce concerning their proposal. Clearly, the taskforce has done an amazing amount of work in preparation for this decision this week. I have written about their proposal and discussed it in several different forums since their first draft was distributed last fall.
I am of two minds concerning the Form of Government taskforce proposal. I like it; I like the flexibility and streamlining of our polity which they have built into their proposal. I like the serious shift of authority and decision making back to the presbyteries, where historically it belongs. I like the focus on function rather than structure. On the other hand the approval of this proposal will require a much higher level and trust and cooperation across the church than currently exists. This kind of massive change in our administrative organization requires a very high level of trust. Does such trust exist in the church today? If not, this proposal may degenerate into deep conflict or move many people into deep apathy as they simply withdraw from this complicated conversation.
The distinction between function and structure may be the deepest change which this proposal brings. It is this distinction which may be the most important shift. The proposed Form of Government defines the function and responsibilities of the various “councils” of the church (sessions, presbyteries, synods and General Assembly). But the proposal does not define specifically how those functions should be expressed and implemented. For example, the proposed Form of Government does not explicitly state, as our current Form of Government does, that each presbytery must have a Committee on Ministry, a Committee on Preparation for Ministry and a Committee on Representation. In fact, many of the specific implementation steps and specific rules of the current Form of Government are dropped out in the new proposal. Instead broad responsibilities are outlined but specific steps for implementation are left to the decision of the individual councils.
Given some of the conversation we have started in the Presbytery of Carlisle, I want to emphasize that this proposed Form of Government is intended to be a “missional polity”. What does that mean? I want to quote here some background which was distributed by the Taskforce to help us understand their purpose and task. I quote here from “An Introduction” which is a short paper the Taskforce shared at their presentation Friday evening.
“The Form of Government proposed by the task force seeks to implement a missional polity. What is missional polity?
· To be missional begins in the confession that God has sent the church into the world to bear witness to God’s activity in reconciling and transforming the world. Therefore, mission is not something the church does; it is what the church is.
· Polity is the architecture of mission. A missional polity recognizes that the church councils – session, presbyteries, synods and General Assembly – guide and support the work of the congregation, and connect and coordinate that work with other congregations so that the whole church may witness more effectively to the activity of God in the world.
· A mission polity provides flexibility so that each congregation, as it engages the world in it particular corner of Christ’s kingdom, may do so effectively as possible, while still maintaining overarching constitutional standards that apply across the church.”
Saturday June 21, 2008
The report of the Form of Government taskforce is certainly one of the most important issues before this year’s General Assembly. This is a sweeping, comprehensive revision of the Form of Government, which is, of course, the largest part of our Book of Order. (Our Book of Order also includes the Directory for Worship, and the Rules for Discipline.) Although the General Assembly’s first business meeting convenes today at 10:00, there was already, late Friday evening, an open presentation by the Form of Government taskforce concerning their proposal. Clearly, the taskforce has done an amazing amount of work in preparation for this decision this week. I have written about their proposal and discussed it in several different forums since their first draft was distributed last fall.
I am of two minds concerning the Form of Government taskforce proposal. I like it; I like the flexibility and streamlining of our polity which they have built into their proposal. I like the serious shift of authority and decision making back to the presbyteries, where historically it belongs. I like the focus on function rather than structure. On the other hand the approval of this proposal will require a much higher level and trust and cooperation across the church than currently exists. This kind of massive change in our administrative organization requires a very high level of trust. Does such trust exist in the church today? If not, this proposal may degenerate into deep conflict or move many people into deep apathy as they simply withdraw from this complicated conversation.
The distinction between function and structure may be the deepest change which this proposal brings. It is this distinction which may be the most important shift. The proposed Form of Government defines the function and responsibilities of the various “councils” of the church (sessions, presbyteries, synods and General Assembly). But the proposal does not define specifically how those functions should be expressed and implemented. For example, the proposed Form of Government does not explicitly state, as our current Form of Government does, that each presbytery must have a Committee on Ministry, a Committee on Preparation for Ministry and a Committee on Representation. In fact, many of the specific implementation steps and specific rules of the current Form of Government are dropped out in the new proposal. Instead broad responsibilities are outlined but specific steps for implementation are left to the decision of the individual councils.
Given some of the conversation we have started in the Presbytery of Carlisle, I want to emphasize that this proposed Form of Government is intended to be a “missional polity”. What does that mean? I want to quote here some background which was distributed by the Taskforce to help us understand their purpose and task. I quote here from “An Introduction” which is a short paper the Taskforce shared at their presentation Friday evening.
“The Form of Government proposed by the task force seeks to implement a missional polity. What is missional polity?
· To be missional begins in the confession that God has sent the church into the world to bear witness to God’s activity in reconciling and transforming the world. Therefore, mission is not something the church does; it is what the church is.
· Polity is the architecture of mission. A missional polity recognizes that the church councils – session, presbyteries, synods and General Assembly – guide and support the work of the congregation, and connect and coordinate that work with other congregations so that the whole church may witness more effectively to the activity of God in the world.
· A mission polity provides flexibility so that each congregation, as it engages the world in it particular corner of Christ’s kingdom, may do so effectively as possible, while still maintaining overarching constitutional standards that apply across the church.”
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Report to the Presbytery June 17, 2008
Our Coordinating Council organized a very successful Committee Day in April, when all the Committees of the Presbytery had their meetings at the same time, in the same place. Many committee members present that day responded to some discussion questions which our Council had prepared. We appreciate your thoughtfulness and input. Our Council discussed your responses at length. What we have learned most clearly is that many people simple do not have a deep understanding of what our presbytery is supposed to be and do. And, of course, we always have new leaders in our midst who are first learning about our life together. I would like with this report to offer some response to that uncertainty about our presbytery’s mission and ministry.
The Presbytery of Carlisle voted to implement a new administrative structure in April, 2000. Thus the new structure is already eight years old. This Presbytery was one of the first, but now Presbyteries all across our church are doing the same thing and moving in the same direction. It seems to me that our presbytery is on the front edge of the deep restructuring and reformation that is happening in our denomination. I am excited to be part of it all.
The centerpiece of our presbytery’s, administrative structure is the philosophy of supporting congregations and the strategy of “ministry initiative.” This kind of thinking is becoming common sense across our church today. Our purpose is to support our congregations, connect them together, and identify new ministry initiatives as they are developing in our congregations.
We have created a culture in our presbytery of supporting congregations. The presbytery structure implemented in 2000 focused that purpose in the work of our Strengthening our Congregations Committee. We are now poised to push this to a whole new level with our Missional Church Initiative. We have started a professional relationship with the Center for Parish Development. We have a team working on this proposal and we will be, over the next year, be asking each church, each committee, and the presbytery as a whole to consider missional transformation as a common goal for our life together. I ask us to consider what it would look like if we established missional transformation as the theological foundation for our support of our congregations? We will, of course, have lots of discussion about what exactly that means in the days ahead.
The concept of ministry initiative is foundational to our presbytery structure. The idea is that the presbytery will identify and support new initiatives, ideas, and dreams as they come up out of our life together. My question is when do we take a ministry idea, which a lot of different people are contributing to, and establish it officially as a strategic initiative of the presbytery? This is an important discernment process. When do we have enough participation and ownership across the presbytery in a particular initiative in order to establish it as a strategic focus of the whole presbytery?
I want to name three important initiatives that are happening in our presbytery. I want to ask whether these should be established pieces of the strategic emphasis of our presbytery.
1. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to Presbyterian international mission work by funding a new international mission co-worker position and establishing an international mission partnership. What would that look like?
2. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to building our ministry at Camp Krislund. We need to do more than build a new building with our capital campaign; we need to build a whole new ministry at the camp. I have in a mind there a Missional Church Training Center. What could that be?
3. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to clergy care building on the important work that our clergy support groups are now doing. What would that look like if the care for our church professionals was established as a wide and deep commitment across our presbytery?
As we continue to live into the administrative structure which we have adopted as a presbytery we need to theologically establish the support of congregations as the bedrock of all we do. We need to discern, discuss, claim and implement new initiatives as they are identified in our midst. May Jesus Christ our Lord bless our ministry and mission.
The Presbytery of Carlisle voted to implement a new administrative structure in April, 2000. Thus the new structure is already eight years old. This Presbytery was one of the first, but now Presbyteries all across our church are doing the same thing and moving in the same direction. It seems to me that our presbytery is on the front edge of the deep restructuring and reformation that is happening in our denomination. I am excited to be part of it all.
The centerpiece of our presbytery’s, administrative structure is the philosophy of supporting congregations and the strategy of “ministry initiative.” This kind of thinking is becoming common sense across our church today. Our purpose is to support our congregations, connect them together, and identify new ministry initiatives as they are developing in our congregations.
We have created a culture in our presbytery of supporting congregations. The presbytery structure implemented in 2000 focused that purpose in the work of our Strengthening our Congregations Committee. We are now poised to push this to a whole new level with our Missional Church Initiative. We have started a professional relationship with the Center for Parish Development. We have a team working on this proposal and we will be, over the next year, be asking each church, each committee, and the presbytery as a whole to consider missional transformation as a common goal for our life together. I ask us to consider what it would look like if we established missional transformation as the theological foundation for our support of our congregations? We will, of course, have lots of discussion about what exactly that means in the days ahead.
The concept of ministry initiative is foundational to our presbytery structure. The idea is that the presbytery will identify and support new initiatives, ideas, and dreams as they come up out of our life together. My question is when do we take a ministry idea, which a lot of different people are contributing to, and establish it officially as a strategic initiative of the presbytery? This is an important discernment process. When do we have enough participation and ownership across the presbytery in a particular initiative in order to establish it as a strategic focus of the whole presbytery?
I want to name three important initiatives that are happening in our presbytery. I want to ask whether these should be established pieces of the strategic emphasis of our presbytery.
1. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to Presbyterian international mission work by funding a new international mission co-worker position and establishing an international mission partnership. What would that look like?
2. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to building our ministry at Camp Krislund. We need to do more than build a new building with our capital campaign; we need to build a whole new ministry at the camp. I have in a mind there a Missional Church Training Center. What could that be?
3. That the Presbytery make a renewed and aggressive commitment to clergy care building on the important work that our clergy support groups are now doing. What would that look like if the care for our church professionals was established as a wide and deep commitment across our presbytery?
As we continue to live into the administrative structure which we have adopted as a presbytery we need to theologically establish the support of congregations as the bedrock of all we do. We need to discern, discuss, claim and implement new initiatives as they are identified in our midst. May Jesus Christ our Lord bless our ministry and mission.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Report to the Presbytery April 22, 2008
What kind of theology? Claiming a Missional Theology.
I am a theology junky. I love the academic study of theology. Although I was born and raised in a very active church family in a Presbyterian Church, I was never exposed to the academic world of theological study growing up. While in Seminary it is the academic study of theology that captured my heart and blessed me, and it still does. The Presbyterian Church has always made a very important intellectual assumption about church leadership. We assume that the academic study of theology is essential for our pastors and all church leaders.
But we must ask what theology should we study? Like all academic areas of study there is a rich diversity in the world of theology. In my opinion, part of the reason why the Presbyterian Church is so diverse, with such a dizzying array of convictions, perspectives and opinions, is that our church leaders do not have all the same theological grounding. We do not all read the same books. My study of theology has been incredibly diverse and, in some ways, scattered.
I have, of course, carefully studied our Book of Confessions and the historical context of our confessions. The idea of the ‘Invisible Kirk” in the Scots Confession blesses me. I look for and see glimpses of it in our churches. The Confession of 1967’s call to a ministry of reconciliation remains authentic and true for me. I enjoy the Brief Statement of Faith and I have used it extensively in my ministry.
I have studied a lot of church history and the theology of the Reformation Era. I have read a lot of John Calvin. His image of the church and its organization is remarkable. I have learned the important difference between the theology of John Calvin and the theology of Calvinism as it developed in various forms and places.
I have studied a lot of American theology including the American Great Awakenings, the great conflicts in the Presbyterian Church between the Old School and New School, the new light and old light, and the Fundamentalist Modernist controversy before World War Two. I have studied the long history of American evangelical theology. Maybe my favorite theologian is Reinhold Niebuhr. Especially in this election year, it would be good for us all to read Niebuhr again.
I have also studied a lot of Latin American liberation theology and African American liberation theology. In this tradition, Martin Luther King is a very influential American theologian. I appreciate King’s weaving together of American history and the Bible into his concept of the “beloved community.”
My point is this. As I reflect on my own theological education, I realize it is very scattered. One of the great blessings in the church has been the rich diversity of academic theology. One of the great problems, in my opinion, in the church has been the rich diversity of academic theology. There is so much to read and study that church leaders are seldom reading the same things. This, in my opinion, has contributed to our inability to come together theologically with a united heart and mind. Those of us who are immersed in Latin American liberation theology have a difficult time finding anything in common with those of us who are reading American evangelical theology. Those of us who are reading American feminist theology are having a hard time finding anything in common with those of us reading classical European Reformed theology.
From a theological perspective, I am now very excited about the church. I believe there is emerging a new school, a new brand, a new style of academic theology which has the potential to truly bring us together in common conversation. We call it missional theology. I believe missional theology has the ability to truly transcend our culture wars and bring people together. I believe that missional theology, unlike a lot of academic theology, connects theological reflection with the practice of ministry. Missional theology is truly theology for the church. I believe that missional theology is both very biblical and very consistent with our Reformed tradition. I believe that missional theology is also very attractive to young people, especially as it is being discussed in the emergent church movement.
So I bring a modest proposal to us today. Maybe we should start reading some of the same books. Maybe we should try and come together theologically. I suggest the whole genre of missional theology may be a common theme with which we all can connect. I suggest we start with the works of Leslie Newbigin, Darrel Guder and Brian McLaren. Or, for example, we may use the services of Amazon.com where there are 156 titles listed under a search on “missional theology.” Maybe a new theological movement is starting in our midst which, truly, has the potential to bring us together in service to Jesus Christ our Lord.
I am a theology junky. I love the academic study of theology. Although I was born and raised in a very active church family in a Presbyterian Church, I was never exposed to the academic world of theological study growing up. While in Seminary it is the academic study of theology that captured my heart and blessed me, and it still does. The Presbyterian Church has always made a very important intellectual assumption about church leadership. We assume that the academic study of theology is essential for our pastors and all church leaders.
But we must ask what theology should we study? Like all academic areas of study there is a rich diversity in the world of theology. In my opinion, part of the reason why the Presbyterian Church is so diverse, with such a dizzying array of convictions, perspectives and opinions, is that our church leaders do not have all the same theological grounding. We do not all read the same books. My study of theology has been incredibly diverse and, in some ways, scattered.
I have, of course, carefully studied our Book of Confessions and the historical context of our confessions. The idea of the ‘Invisible Kirk” in the Scots Confession blesses me. I look for and see glimpses of it in our churches. The Confession of 1967’s call to a ministry of reconciliation remains authentic and true for me. I enjoy the Brief Statement of Faith and I have used it extensively in my ministry.
I have studied a lot of church history and the theology of the Reformation Era. I have read a lot of John Calvin. His image of the church and its organization is remarkable. I have learned the important difference between the theology of John Calvin and the theology of Calvinism as it developed in various forms and places.
I have studied a lot of American theology including the American Great Awakenings, the great conflicts in the Presbyterian Church between the Old School and New School, the new light and old light, and the Fundamentalist Modernist controversy before World War Two. I have studied the long history of American evangelical theology. Maybe my favorite theologian is Reinhold Niebuhr. Especially in this election year, it would be good for us all to read Niebuhr again.
I have also studied a lot of Latin American liberation theology and African American liberation theology. In this tradition, Martin Luther King is a very influential American theologian. I appreciate King’s weaving together of American history and the Bible into his concept of the “beloved community.”
My point is this. As I reflect on my own theological education, I realize it is very scattered. One of the great blessings in the church has been the rich diversity of academic theology. One of the great problems, in my opinion, in the church has been the rich diversity of academic theology. There is so much to read and study that church leaders are seldom reading the same things. This, in my opinion, has contributed to our inability to come together theologically with a united heart and mind. Those of us who are immersed in Latin American liberation theology have a difficult time finding anything in common with those of us who are reading American evangelical theology. Those of us who are reading American feminist theology are having a hard time finding anything in common with those of us reading classical European Reformed theology.
From a theological perspective, I am now very excited about the church. I believe there is emerging a new school, a new brand, a new style of academic theology which has the potential to truly bring us together in common conversation. We call it missional theology. I believe missional theology has the ability to truly transcend our culture wars and bring people together. I believe that missional theology, unlike a lot of academic theology, connects theological reflection with the practice of ministry. Missional theology is truly theology for the church. I believe that missional theology is both very biblical and very consistent with our Reformed tradition. I believe that missional theology is also very attractive to young people, especially as it is being discussed in the emergent church movement.
So I bring a modest proposal to us today. Maybe we should start reading some of the same books. Maybe we should try and come together theologically. I suggest the whole genre of missional theology may be a common theme with which we all can connect. I suggest we start with the works of Leslie Newbigin, Darrel Guder and Brian McLaren. Or, for example, we may use the services of Amazon.com where there are 156 titles listed under a search on “missional theology.” Maybe a new theological movement is starting in our midst which, truly, has the potential to bring us together in service to Jesus Christ our Lord.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Preparation for the 218 General Assembly (Part Two)
I believe our congregations and presbyteries should be seriously considering this call to expand God's mission:
RECOMMENDATION #34 to the 218th General Assembly:
As a result of the Worldwide Mission Consultation[1], “Renewed Call to Presbyterian Mission in the World! Dialogue for Our Shared Future” that was held January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas, the Moderator, together with the Stated Clerk and the General Assembly Council, recommend that the 218th General Assembly (2008) invite the sessions, middle governing bodies, seminaries, General Assembly Council ministries areas, and all PC(USA)-related mission organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation:
An Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission
As members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) committed to God’s mission, accompanied by global partners, we gathered together January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas. We acknowledge the rich Presbyterian heritage in world mission and reaffirm the Presbyterian understanding of God’s mission as it is expressed in “Gathering for God’s Future,”
The Good News of Jesus Christ is to be shared with the whole world. As disciples of Jesus Christ, each of us in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is sent into the world to join God’s mission. As individuals and as a church, we are called to be faithful in this discipleship. Our mission is centered in the triune God. Our mission is God-called, Christ-centered, and Spirit-led. Our mission is both proclamation and service; it is the reason the church exists. …
Our renewed call from God is to face the challenges of witnessing and evangelizing worldwide, equipping the church for transforming mission, engaging in ministries of reconciliation, justice, healing and grace, and living the Good News of Jesus Christ in community with people who are poor, [persecuted, and living in the midst of violence]…
The church is part of God’s plan. We are called into the community of the church, and we call new disciples into that community. With Christ as our head, the church community exists for the sake of God's mission. We learn to serve in mission in a way that is faithful to the triune God. We are to model the kind of community God intends for all humanity. To be the church is to be one large mission society. [PC(USA), “Gathering for God’s Future: Witness, Discipleship, Community: A Renewed Call to Worldwide Mission,” 2003, pp. 1, 16. Text in brackets is added.]
Grounded in this theological foundation we realize that God is calling us to new patterns of mission. The world has changed, and the majority of the world’s Christians are now in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The great growth and mission faithfulness of the Church outside the West invite us into a new posture. We must listen and learn to receive. We must also be open to new patterns of collaboration. These new patterns involve new cooperation and partnerships within the PC(USA).
I. We recognize that God calls us to mission that is grounded in confession of our sins, grows out of a life of prayer and is sustained in worship. Therefore, we covenant to live and serve together in God’s mission according to the following values:
1. Trusting in the Holy Spirit and trusting in one another as each discerns how God is moving us in mission. (Acts 10)
2. Doing mission in the way of Jesus who humbled himself, showing the way of self-giving and self-emptying. (Philippians 2)
3. Seeking to be faithful to God as we live and proclaim the fullness of Jesus Christ’s good news; personal witness to those outside the church, justice for the oppressed, and compassion for those in need. We accompany others in their efforts to be faithful. (Luke 4)
4. Affirming the complementary nature of God’s gifts to all in the one body of Christ and encouraging one another in living out those gifts. (1 Corinthians 12)
5. Recognizing our responsibility to each other by communicating openly, acting transparently, and speaking and hearing the truth in love. (Ephesians 4)
6. Striving in our mission to be aware of the context out of which we come, to respect the persons with whom we labor, and to honor the context in which they live. In an era of massive global inequalities we commit ourselves to be sensitive to and address the issues of power that result from our differences. (Philippians 2)
7. Valuing long-term relationships, partnerships characterized by perseverance and long-term commitments, which support and encourage global partners. (1 Thessalonians 2)
II. We seek to live out these mission values with humility, integrity, and steadfastness. Recognizing that God invites us all to be full participants in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to work cooperatively with one another in the following ways:
1. We will affirm and encourage World Mission as it continues to move from a regulatory role to a more enabling and equipping role.
2. We will celebrate and encourage diverse Presbyterian approaches and structures for mission while maintaining the unity of our participation in God’s mission.
3. We will share responsibility for the education and preparation of all Presbyterians for mission.
4. We commit ourselves to seeking more mission personnel who will serve long-term in cross-cultural contexts through the PC(USA), and to supporting them fully.
5. We commit ourselves to enabling and supporting our global partners as they send their mission personnel in cross-cultural service.
6. We recognize and affirm the growing opportunity for cross-cultural mission in our own increasingly pluralistic and multicultural society, and we receive the global community from near and far as mission partners and God’s gift to us. We seek increased integration between local and global mission.
III. As we move forward together in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to calling the church to ongoing intercessory prayer for God’s mission and to the following tasks:
1. We will form a coordinating committee to ensure that we will meet together to share and cooperate on a regular basis.
2. During the coming year we will work to address two immediate priorities:
a. to coordinate and collaborate in the sending of mission personnel;
b. to expand Presbyterian funding for mission personnel.
3. During the next three months we will share this document and invitation with our constituencies.
IV. With bold humility we invite those who would covenant with us to join in this new collaborative model of Presbyterian mission, and we ask for encouragement, for guidance and for prayer, remembering Jesus’ own prayer:
The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:22-23)
[1] The Dallas Mission Consultation’s website is at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/about.htm.
The presentations made at the conference are available at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/papers.htm#top.
This “Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission” is also available at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/read-invite.htm.
RECOMMENDATION #34 to the 218th General Assembly:
As a result of the Worldwide Mission Consultation[1], “Renewed Call to Presbyterian Mission in the World! Dialogue for Our Shared Future” that was held January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas, the Moderator, together with the Stated Clerk and the General Assembly Council, recommend that the 218th General Assembly (2008) invite the sessions, middle governing bodies, seminaries, General Assembly Council ministries areas, and all PC(USA)-related mission organizations to affirm and adopt the following invitation:
An Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission
As members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) committed to God’s mission, accompanied by global partners, we gathered together January 16-18, 2008, in Dallas, Texas. We acknowledge the rich Presbyterian heritage in world mission and reaffirm the Presbyterian understanding of God’s mission as it is expressed in “Gathering for God’s Future,”
The Good News of Jesus Christ is to be shared with the whole world. As disciples of Jesus Christ, each of us in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is sent into the world to join God’s mission. As individuals and as a church, we are called to be faithful in this discipleship. Our mission is centered in the triune God. Our mission is God-called, Christ-centered, and Spirit-led. Our mission is both proclamation and service; it is the reason the church exists. …
Our renewed call from God is to face the challenges of witnessing and evangelizing worldwide, equipping the church for transforming mission, engaging in ministries of reconciliation, justice, healing and grace, and living the Good News of Jesus Christ in community with people who are poor, [persecuted, and living in the midst of violence]…
The church is part of God’s plan. We are called into the community of the church, and we call new disciples into that community. With Christ as our head, the church community exists for the sake of God's mission. We learn to serve in mission in a way that is faithful to the triune God. We are to model the kind of community God intends for all humanity. To be the church is to be one large mission society. [PC(USA), “Gathering for God’s Future: Witness, Discipleship, Community: A Renewed Call to Worldwide Mission,” 2003, pp. 1, 16. Text in brackets is added.]
Grounded in this theological foundation we realize that God is calling us to new patterns of mission. The world has changed, and the majority of the world’s Christians are now in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The great growth and mission faithfulness of the Church outside the West invite us into a new posture. We must listen and learn to receive. We must also be open to new patterns of collaboration. These new patterns involve new cooperation and partnerships within the PC(USA).
I. We recognize that God calls us to mission that is grounded in confession of our sins, grows out of a life of prayer and is sustained in worship. Therefore, we covenant to live and serve together in God’s mission according to the following values:
1. Trusting in the Holy Spirit and trusting in one another as each discerns how God is moving us in mission. (Acts 10)
2. Doing mission in the way of Jesus who humbled himself, showing the way of self-giving and self-emptying. (Philippians 2)
3. Seeking to be faithful to God as we live and proclaim the fullness of Jesus Christ’s good news; personal witness to those outside the church, justice for the oppressed, and compassion for those in need. We accompany others in their efforts to be faithful. (Luke 4)
4. Affirming the complementary nature of God’s gifts to all in the one body of Christ and encouraging one another in living out those gifts. (1 Corinthians 12)
5. Recognizing our responsibility to each other by communicating openly, acting transparently, and speaking and hearing the truth in love. (Ephesians 4)
6. Striving in our mission to be aware of the context out of which we come, to respect the persons with whom we labor, and to honor the context in which they live. In an era of massive global inequalities we commit ourselves to be sensitive to and address the issues of power that result from our differences. (Philippians 2)
7. Valuing long-term relationships, partnerships characterized by perseverance and long-term commitments, which support and encourage global partners. (1 Thessalonians 2)
II. We seek to live out these mission values with humility, integrity, and steadfastness. Recognizing that God invites us all to be full participants in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to work cooperatively with one another in the following ways:
1. We will affirm and encourage World Mission as it continues to move from a regulatory role to a more enabling and equipping role.
2. We will celebrate and encourage diverse Presbyterian approaches and structures for mission while maintaining the unity of our participation in God’s mission.
3. We will share responsibility for the education and preparation of all Presbyterians for mission.
4. We commit ourselves to seeking more mission personnel who will serve long-term in cross-cultural contexts through the PC(USA), and to supporting them fully.
5. We commit ourselves to enabling and supporting our global partners as they send their mission personnel in cross-cultural service.
6. We recognize and affirm the growing opportunity for cross-cultural mission in our own increasingly pluralistic and multicultural society, and we receive the global community from near and far as mission partners and God’s gift to us. We seek increased integration between local and global mission.
III. As we move forward together in God’s mission, we commit ourselves to calling the church to ongoing intercessory prayer for God’s mission and to the following tasks:
1. We will form a coordinating committee to ensure that we will meet together to share and cooperate on a regular basis.
2. During the coming year we will work to address two immediate priorities:
a. to coordinate and collaborate in the sending of mission personnel;
b. to expand Presbyterian funding for mission personnel.
3. During the next three months we will share this document and invitation with our constituencies.
IV. With bold humility we invite those who would covenant with us to join in this new collaborative model of Presbyterian mission, and we ask for encouragement, for guidance and for prayer, remembering Jesus’ own prayer:
The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:22-23)
[1] The Dallas Mission Consultation’s website is at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/about.htm.
The presentations made at the conference are available at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/papers.htm#top.
This “Invitation to Expanding Partnership in God’s Mission” is also available at http://www.pcusa.org/calltomission/read-invite.htm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)