In the Missional Imagination course I teach for Central Seminary, we acknowledge that the Church has adopted different paradigms over the last two thousand years to carry out the mission of God in ways that are both effective and culturally appropriate. Here is a quick summary:
- The apocalyptic paradigm of primitive Christianity—We expect Jesus to come back at any moment, so how many people can we share the Gospel with before His return?
- The Hellenistic paradigm of the patristic period—Jesus has not returned, so how do we impact our culture?
- The medieval Roman Catholic paradigm—How can the church provide stability to society?
- The Protestant (Reformation) paradigm—Is there a different way to do church? (Although providing a new understanding of Scripture, this just resulted in moving people around into new religious groups and often focused on providing credibility for the ruling elite).
- The modern Enlightenment paradigm—How can we use what we are learning about the world and humanity to spread the Gospel?
- The emerging ecumenical paradigm—How can we all work together to do mission?
- The Postmodern paradigm—What does it mean to be Christian in postmodern society?
I won’t go into depth on all of these, but I will give an example of the modern Enlightenment paradigm. If you think that this period of discovery and learning did not impact the Church, consider the case of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge (SPCK), an early Protestant missionary society. On March 8, 1698, British missionary Thomas Bray and four laymen found the society "to advance the honor of God and the good of mankind by promoting Christian knowledge both at home and in the other parts of the world by the best methods that should offer.”
Note the key terms— “good of mankind,” “promoting. . .knowledge,” and “the best methods that should offer”—could be used for many enterprises that came out of the industrial age into the twentieth century.
So where are we today? I think the “Postmodern paradigm” could also be termed the “post-Christendom paradigm.” The Church no longer holds a special place in the world just by being the Church. This doesn’t mean that it is without influence but that influence no longer comes from position, authority, or alignment with national identity. The impact of the Church will come both from what it proclaims and what it practices.
Perhaps the best model continues to be that of Jesus. His words had impact primarily because they offered an alternative to the established religious teachings of His day. His actions had influence because He embodied what he taught. His relationships made a difference by the way in which He treated people. His life had an impact because in dying, He identified completely with humankind. Jesus provides an essential but challenging paradigm for being on mission with God.
Comments