mdna - The role of disciple-making in the church
We are exploring the mDNA component -disciple-making or discipleship from Alan Hirsch forthcoming book and how it applies to Northern Community. The other posts in the mDNA series are here
The role of disciple-making in the church
The future of the Christian church rests on the quality and the success of our discipleship. The future of any movement relies on the ability of the current members to recruit people to the cause. If Jesus had not been successful in recruiting people to his cause and inspiring them to follow in his path, then the Christian faith would have concluded with his death. The resurrection experiences of the early disciples were obviously a significant factor in turning the scattered and scared disciples into people who were capable of creating a fledging Christian community. Yet, the resurrection experience was significant only in the context of the discipleship that Jesus had offered in his lifetime. The continuation and growth of the Christian faith resulted from Jesus’ ability to infuse his disciples with the message. As Hirsch notes, it almost failed; despite the time and energy that Jesus put into his followers’ discipleship, the fragile Christian movement almost failed before it had begun.
Hirsch analyses Jesus’ great commission to make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:18-20) as a call to make ‘the conspiracy of little Jesus’ our central task. He writes:
If the heart of discipleship is to become like Jesus, then it seems to me that a missional reading of this text requires that we see Jesus’ strategy is to get a whole lot of little versions of him infiltrating into every nook and cranny of society by reproducing himself in and through his people in every place throughout the world.
It seems to me that it is appropriate to consider discipleship or as Hirsch puts it, ‘the conspiracy of little Jesus’’ as our central task. The formation of faith communities, evangelism and social justice are also important but these aspects of the Christian faith rely in turn on the discipleship process. If people are not committed to and embodying the cause of Jesus then these endeavours will be flawed. If the cause of Jesus is to live on, it will do so in the shoes of his followers. Hirsch quotes Mother Teresa to make this point: “We must become holy not because we want to feel holy but because Christ must be able to live his life fully in us”.
Hirsch uses the words embodiment and transmission to describe the discipleship task. He defines that “…embodiment means to literally give flesh to the ideas and experiences which animate us.” Embodiment is a critical concept in disciple-making as it involves more than ideas, books and sermons and is communicated through the life of the actual disciple-maker. We can see this in the life of Jesus as he gathers a group of disciples and invests his life into them for three years. In the gospels, we can see Jesus in these years embody his message and transmit it to his disciples through this embodiment.
According to Hirsch, the significant revolutionary or reforming movements of history also accomplish this embodiment. He writes: “they have found a way to translate the grand themes of the Gospel (Kingdom of God, redemption, atonement, forgiveness, love, etc) into concrete life through the embodiment of Jesus in ways that were profoundly relational and attractive.” This translation and the subsequent embodiment and transmission are urgent tasks of discipleship.
The Christian faith has always found ways to communicate and create disciples. The task has not changed, even if the context has. We need to create ways to develop disciples who embody the ways of Jesus. This development needs to take into account our current post-Christendom, post-modern, post-denominational and consumeristic missional context. We need to ask what it means to covenant together to take the missio deo seriously. How do we cultivate individual commitment to the cause of Jesus?
January 19th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Great post! Even better question!! How do we cultivate individual commitment to the cause of Jesus?
January 19th, 2006 at 11:23 pm
I wonder if recruitment to the cause of Jesus is appropriate for today. In Melbourne, for example, there are people of many faiths - maybe it would be better to work within an inter-faith context.
Instead of recruiting people to the cause of Jesus - which may offend Muslims, or have no meaning for those of Budhist background - we need to rise above the partisan nature of particular religious traditions and seek and practice universal truths that are applicable across all faiths.
I believe it’s time to go beyond the limits of the bible and a single faith.
January 20th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
Sorry Kenny - Jesus IS the Truth (says so himself in the ‘limited bible edition’.
The others are wrong. They won’t like me saying so, and it doesn’t make them bad people (even ‘good’ people can believe bulldust) but it does make them wrong.
Oh - no, I’m not perfect, just forgiven.
January 20th, 2006 at 9:05 pm
Good to see Phil that we are not in the post latin age! I’m not certain that an analysis built around “little Jesus” and series of “posts” leads anywhere.Am in agreement that in every age and in every context Christians are confronted with living out their faith,and appreciate your exploration of discipleship. Notions of reforming and revolutionar movements translating the great themes of scripture seem self evident. As I look around the church today it seems to me, and maybe cynicism has something to do with age!!, there are those who write about revolutionary movements and those who not only bind the wounds of the robbed but go after the bastards who/which did the wounding - whether Howard,Bush,TNcs who screw the papuans,wheat boards which lie,and politicians who will spend billions on sporting events while the sick and disturbed sleep in the streets.The question then is how to recruit and how to disciple.Why start with a theory(Hirst) and not with the outcome of discipleship?
January 20th, 2006 at 9:06 pm
Apolgies - meant Hirsch
January 21st, 2006 at 12:09 am
Alan, is that a criticism of George Bush, the born-again christian president of the USA? How can one christian be publicly tearing down another fellow christian?
We, in Australia, cannot hope to understand God’s will in directing GW into a brutal war against Iraq and Afganhistan. Remember, GW has publicly declared is faithfulness to God. Also arrogant brutality against another nation is patterned on sound old testament traditions.
How dare you question the will of God, Alan.
January 21st, 2006 at 12:16 am
Toddy, is it not rather arrogant of you to sweep aside other spiritual practices and traditions?
Boldly asserting that “Jessus is the truth” does not mean it applies to us today. Remember the cultural setting and audience where Jesus spoke these words - jews with a tradition of sacrificing animals for ritualistic purposes. There is no suggestion that this is relevant for us today.
Toddy, it would be profitable for you to open your eyes and look at the wider spiritual beliefs. Useful tools can be a more skeptical mind, an analytical approach, and, where appropiate, methods of synthesing information.
January 21st, 2006 at 6:40 am
[…] d Structures, Discipleship — Matt @ 3:40 pm (-0600) Some good stuff from the Signposts folks: The future of the Chr […]
January 21st, 2006 at 9:49 am
“Why start with a theory(Hirsh) and not with the outcome of discipleship?”
Because that was the purpose of my essay.
January 21st, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Phil, I think Alan was questioning the relevance of a theory like Hirsh’s in the first place.
Why not work backwards from the outcome?
January 21st, 2006 at 1:59 pm
I didn’t interpret it that way and having re-read it, I still don’t. Seeing it is unclear, maybe Alan could clear up what he meant.
January 21st, 2006 at 7:03 pm
I don’t think it is a simple either/or when it comes to theory and praxis. For the records, I do actually advocate in the work Phil is referring to, to a fully fledged action learning approach. I think discipleship start with action, but having said that, reflection (conceptual engagement) must follow straight after action if real learning is to take place. I suggest there (following Pascale et.al.) that for the most part ‘we don’t think their way into a new way of acting.’ Rather ‘we must act our way into a new way of thinking.’
But in writing books, one has to deal with the transfer of ideas….theory Every medium is limited, no?
Thanks for discussion.
January 21st, 2006 at 7:03 pm
I don’t think it is a simple either/or when it comes to theory and praxis. For the records, I do actually advocate in the work Phil is referring to, to a fully fledged action learning approach. I think discipleship start with action, but having said that, reflection (conceptual engagement) must follow straight after action if real learning is to take place. I suggest there (following Pascale et.al.) that for the most part ‘we don’t think their way into a new way of acting.’ Rather ‘we must act our way into a new way of thinking.’
But in writing books, one has to deal with the transfer of ideas….theory Every medium is limited, no?
Thanks for discussion.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:43 am
Sorry for the confusion Phil - it was the relevance of the “theory” not whether or not you should be writing essays! I become a little anxious when the basis of a “theory” is based on a string of adjectives(!!) - “post Christendom,post modern,post denominational etc etc” but not post latin!
For example I would be interested to see some “evidence”(stories) that the “missional/emerging” church and “discipleship” is grappling with the doctrine of creation. Theres much about personal faith,much about leadership and “radical” and “revolutionary” but some how or other it just appears to be a continuation of the past -House churches,pub meetings,on the street ministry,care and individual ministry with the poor and marginalised etc.without the confrontation with “the principalities and powers”.Its as tho we’ve overlooked a couple of centuries of the work of the Holy Spirit and bounced back into the first century.