mDNA - Challenges for Northern
This continues the look at mDNA - organic systems and how it applies to Northern Community. The other posts in the mDNA series are here
This concludes a look at mDNA - organic systems and the Northern experience. Next in the series is mDNA Element - Communitas not community.
Challenges for Northern
Northern has demonstrated a commitment to the organic way of organising a church. This has not been without pain. The system story of a single cell and a centralised authority structure is one that is very ingrained in the established church. Northern is not a church plant but rather a merger of four established churches. Therefore the move to more organic systems has at times been painful and frustratingly slow. Sometimes it is like one step forward and several back. The commitment to try something different and release many different expressions of mission has empowered change.
The challenge for Northern is to sustain this more organic way of structuring itself. Can we resist the powerful system story in times of crisis? I do not know and only time will tell. However, this organic approach has meant that many new people are now a part of Northern and many of them know no other way of structuring the life of a church.
I would argue that Northern’s focus on multiple groups, whether congregations or missional teams, has moved us to utilise more organic leadership systems. Having multiple expressions of our congregations means that the ministry team leader or even the ministry team cannot be present at all congregations. This would limit what we are striving to achieve. The leaders of each of our congregations and missional teams are empowered to lead. This means that they have the authority to quickly adapt to the many challenges that we face. This has meant that some of our congregations and missional teams have changed or even closed and reformed to better carry out our vision.
September 21st, 2005 at 11:26 pm
Hi Phil & Dan - trust it’s OK to comment on your mDNA posts - I noticed that they aren’t quite as popular as some of your other posts (which, by the way provide for hours of entertainment!).
I’m not a regular commentator at all but I’ve really enjoyed your thought provoking mDNA posts and sharing of the Northen experience and thought I might throw in a small idea which has been floating around in my head over the last month or so - it may be a little off topic and I have to confess, I’m only just emerging from a stint as an anti-intellectual so I’m not the most widely read blog reader going so if any of this is old news I wouldn’t be too surprised.
I sat in on Darryl Gardiner’s session at UNOH’s Surrender:05 conference which were primarily looking at worker development and sustainability issues. The session jumped around a bit and covered a number of topics be we spent some time looking at the sodality/modality, 2 redemptive structures stuff that Ralph Winter championed in the 1970’s. It brought back nasty memories of a meeting at South CofC in the early 90’s were a few of us (including pre UNOH Ash) heard Bob Logan and Al Hirsch throw this stuff around - actually did my head in at the time and since, I’d latched onto the idea of missional church (why create more program driven structures, Christ is the centre of any healing, redemtive community etc.) but I’ve had cause to revisit it post the sessions with Darryl.
I have to confess to know very little of your structure other than a vague idea about the multi congregational thing and your mention of mission teams (which sounds very good). I guess the point I’m getting to is (can you tell I take a while getting to points?) that there appears to have been a degree of angst in some EC initiatives that stems from the perceived need to hold in tension the ideas of a higher committment to facilitate mission functions with the desire to retain an open set, Christ centred focus. In some ways this is a leadership discussion and I think the 5 fold stuff goes part way to addressing it but heres where I think some sodality/modality thinking might offer a possible structural framework.
Ralph Winters paper from ‘73 gave an historical rundown that suggested the two structures were present from pre-Christ right through to today in varying guises and forms. Jewish evangelists predating Paul by 100 years (sodalities), synagogues (modalities), Paul’s missionary bands (sodalities), early church (modalities) etc. here’s an extract:
Thus, on the one hand, the structure we call the New Testament church is a prototype of all subsequent Christian fellowships where old and young, male and female are gathered together as normal biological families in aggregate. On the other hand, Paul’s missionary band can be considered a prototype of all subsequent missionary endeavors organized out of committed, experienced workers who affiliated themselves in task-oriented communities as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.
I’m trying hard to make this succinct but failing miserably… basically he covers the medieval period and suggests that for a time, certain sodalities (actively involved monastic orders such as the Celtic church ) were the primary vehicle for the continuence of the church. He also suggests that some of the the hybrid movements (believers church’s) Anabaptists, menonites, Salvo’s etc. represent a fairly radical and significant structural experiment. Personally, I think it sounds similar to the ‘higher level committment’ calls in some EC or missional church areas. (ummm, I think it will be easier to send the document - I guess you may have already read it).
Anyway, the most recent modernist developments of the 20th century saw the rise of the sodalities as missionary societies and later institutions (interestingly, initiatially with independant executive powers but later, subsumed into the ‘modalities’.
All this to say that why can’t we protestants (who don’t have a great track record with sodalities) reclaim the second structure but in much greater numbers and in much greater proximity to the local expressions of church? Ideally, why can’t a specifically focused mission team evolve into an autonomous sodality that both speaks into and closely asociates with it’s birthing modality (and others for that matter). I don’t mean the larger welfare models as such but smaller, missionary bands that are task oriented, more focused on cross cultural mission and free to require a higher level of common committments?
A lot more to say but I’d better stop for fear of descending into a mire of unsubtantiated drivel.
September 22nd, 2005 at 10:54 am
Thanks Nick, atleast someone is reading my mdna posts
And welcome to signposts!
If you could send the document that would be great - just email it to phil@signposts.org.au
I am still grappling with what you are saying.
September 22nd, 2005 at 12:25 pm
Nick,
That is absolute rubbish!!! What a silly idea. I am glad I don’t go to your church
It appears to me that the local church seemed to be more able to influence their neighborhood, and do missionary work within their context, but the missionary bands were more apostolic bands that went out into more “unchurched” areas. Would you agree with that Nick? And shouldn’t the modalities be evangelistic? And is the main thrust of this line of reasoning to free the sodalities from pastoral, and management issues that tend to stall them?
Good post brother, I know we can talk about this over a cuppa, but some of these guys may want to lean in.
the rev
September 22nd, 2005 at 1:10 pm
Thanks Phil. no thanks Rev. You make your coffee to weak.
I definitely don’t see it as an either or or even a ‘must have’ model, just that I think it may offer some positive alternative models for newer (and older) church initiatives. I truly belive that modalities can and should be mission oriented and, without knowing the structure in any detail, specific mission teams like Northerns’ sound ideal. These groups can remain a part of the modalic structure but, (in the interests of keeping it vaguely connected to the original post) what if they ‘organically’ grow to have a focus, purpose or orientation that no longer needs the ‘parental’ modality and in fact, needs to be freed to flourish (as you said rev).
I guess anecdotal evidence would suggest a fair degree of frustration occuring between the more sodalicly inclined and the modalicly oriented individuals, mainly in terms of leadership. The 5 fold stuff can be helpful here in as much as it may provide some hints as to which structure you are more likely to find whcih gifting; pastors - modalic, evangelists - sodalic(maybe), although of course this is not a rule, just a guide. Seems as if there are many frustrated leaders within modalities that can’t abide the inactive, uncommitted flock and there are also a number of true pastors trying to manage and care for task focused organisations.
Sorry, to get to your first point rev, I think that newer ‘unchurched’ groups or communities are hard to find in the west, I would like to think that the sodalities may be better suited to cross cultural situations. Some examples off the top of my head: God Squad (not St Martins or TruthLib) - Outlaw bikers, UNOH (Not Rainbow) - poor and marginalised, Urban Seed etc.
The Ralph Winters paper includes all monastic orders, missionary bands, mission agencies etc. as Sodalities and I guess you could add any other organisation that has as it’s general aim, the furthering of the kingdom, but defines itself alltogether differently than a church (modality).
I guess all I’m suggesting is that a lot of EC or Missional Church conversation seems to not address the two structures thinking and, although it’s not new and the dangers of institutionalisation are real, modalities can help stay healthy over the long haul by nurturing and birthing sodalities that can (as one of their functions) in turn, speak prophetically back into the wider church. A true symbiotic relationship, not the distanced and uneasy allainces that seem to characterise much of the churches relationships with mission agencies and service providers today ( I think a lot of it is a problem of scale).
December 6th, 2005 at 1:16 am
The article by Winter from 1973 - I read it long ago - should’ve saved it - probably did - but couldn’t find it in a million years. I could really use a copy of it now for my coaching of our district board. Any chance I could get Nick to take pity on me and send it to me???
Would be grateful,
Mark Overmyer
EFCA Church Planting Director
New England District
mobiewan@metrocast.net