Data publikacji: 05 kwi 2020
Zakres stron: 199 - 218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/holiness-2015-0006
Słowa kluczowe
© 2015 Joanne Cox-Darling, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Fresh Expressions and Methodism have a long and intimate history. This essay explores the context of this ecumenical relationship, before arguing that a rediscovery of denominational distinctiveness may enable Methodism to gain self-confidence afresh, and ultimately liberate the Fresh Expressions organisation from the threat of mediocrity.
The essay is structured in two parts. The first section explores the influence of the Church of England, Mission-Shaped Church Working Party, 2004.
This essay is a development from a DThM thesis awarded in 2012, entitled ‘Challenging Leadership: Mission-Shaped Presbyters in Methodist Fresh Expressions’. Some of the evidence in this thesis has been anonymised to protect the identities of those involved in this particular piece of qualitative work.
In 2004, the Archbishop’s Council published the much-awaited See Hull 2006.
According to Murray-Williams 2004, p. 3. The report cites the work of Castells 2000 when it describes the networked society of the twenty-first century. The theory of networks has continued to be of interest to sociologists and to the continuing developments in social media. Further evidence of this can be found in Holland 1998, Johnson 2001, Surowiecki 2004, Brafman and Beckstrom 2006, Shirky 2009, Leadbeater 2009, and Shirky 2010. Church of England, Mission-Shaped Church Working Party, 2004, p. 12.
The influence of networks, globalisation and consumer culture can be seen in the suggested groupings of the then newly coined term ‘fresh expression’. Although the list of 12 groupings no longer forms a part of Fresh Expressions working definitions, it is important to note the influence of consumer culture and third-space literature with the inclusion of cafe-church; Schultz and Jones Yang 1997), Hashemi and Hashemi 2002, Lloyd 2006, Brown 2005), Cohen and Greenfield, 1997), and Baker Gay 2003, Ward 2004, Baker 2010, and Dawn 2010.
In 2009, 56 per cent of Methodist circuits had at least one self-defined fresh expression, totalling 846 fresh expressions of church occurring in association with Methodist churches. Fresh expressions of church are thus present in a majority of circuits and are becoming an increasing feature of church life. In turn, presbyters and deacons within these circuits are being asked to provide more and varied forms of worship and community for the various groups within the local circuit and church context. The statistics for the current quadrennial are yet to be released, but they nonetheless seem to maintain this trend towards self-identified missional experiments taking place in local contexts and churches. Fresh expressions are a vital part of twenty-first-century mission and ministry, and yet qualitatively may not be achieving what is expected of them.
According to the Fresh Expressions organisation,
A fresh expression is a form of church for our changing culture, established primarily for the benefit of people who are not yet members of any church. It will come into being through principles of listening, service, incarnational mission and making disciples. It will have the potential to become a mature expression of church shaped by the gospel and the enduring marks of the church and for its cultural context.
There is an argument, to suggest that many self-identified fresh expressions are extraordinary experiments in mission and ministry, but are not actually fresh expressions. They use
Although much debunked in missiological literature and practice, one achievement of Andrew Davison and Alison Milbank’s scorching criticism of Fresh Expressions,
Church of England, Mission-Shaped Church Working Party, 2004, p. 1. ‘Deep Church’ is a phrase initially coined by C. S. Lewis, but is now used by a number of constituencies to describe what Bretherton and Walker note as ‘neither an attempt to simplify, restate or repristinate the Christian tradition, this is tantamount to ancestor worship, nor does it take its bearings from the emerging culture, to do this is simply to assimilate to the prevailing hegemony, rather, to be a deep church means to stand on the cusp or the breaking point of both the Christian tradition and the emerging culture, deeply rooted in the former while fully engaged in the latter’. Walker Bretherton 2007, p. xvii. See also Belcher 2009, and Orr-Ewing and Orr-Ewing 2008. Walton 2009, p. 26.
Given that the report is from the Archbishop’s Council, the Church of England terminology should not be over-critiqued. However, if the report is going to continue to challenge and renew all the Churches in strategic partnership with the organisation, the Anglican default for church and mission needs to be challenged. ‘The Anglican calling, because of theological conviction, is to be a church for all . . . To be a Church for the nation, the holes in our national network need to be filled.’ Church of England, Mission-Shaped Church Working Party, 2004, p. 35.
The relegation of denominational DNA to something that is secondary to the debate could be seen as a manoeuvre made from a position of organisational power. Denominational DNA after all does not matter if the presumed model is that which is already known, cherished and held in esteem. Fresh Expressions has an Anglican default setting which transfers into all parts of the organisation, often without critique or comment. One anonymous conversation revealed that Methodists often feel like ‘second-class citizens’ to both the Methodist circuit and to the Fresh Expressions organisation. It may well be that once again, one of Methodism’s inheritances is the ability to question assumed authority structures and thus give the opportunity for other denominations and parachurch partners and associates to begin to share their codes of DNA in the theological reflection too. Although not meant to be complimentary, it is no bad thing that ‘our [Anglican] doctrine of the Church has leapt, not drifted, in the direction of Free Church Protestantism’. Davison and Milbank 2010, p. 41.
Davison and Milbank 2010, p. vii. See also Croft 2006, and Bayes and Sledge 2006.
More recent works in the fresh expressions canon are willing to be more critical of the Anglican bias to the organisation, with Mike Moynagh beginning to advocate for a progression in understanding and practice which demonstrates that ‘churches are not bringing something entirely novel into the church. Nor are they just repeating the past. They are opening a chapter that carries the church’s story forwards.’ Moynah 2012, p. 192.
The intention of this essay is not to fuel more of the binary debate about the effectiveness and success of fresh expressions (or otherwise) – but instead to inspire a dwindling Methodist Church to take the challenge of contextual mission and faithful discipleship seriously, and to press deeper into the potential of Methodism to once again be a community of people who are socially and biblically literate and engaged, and who invite people to participate in the kingdom of God wherever it is discovered. Methodism has certainly not got it all together, and the current statistics about terminal decline indicate that there are many things which are failing to connect with those inside and outside of the Methodist fold. Methodist people can still transformatively contribute to the ecumenical landscape of mission in a postmodern context.
The missiologist Stuart Murray Williams notes, ‘For the church to understand itself as a movement, not an institution, it needs to know its history and destiny. Movements are dynamic, people sharing history and traditions and journeying together towards a longed-for future.’ Murray-Williams 2004, p. 277.
Methodism has a narrative to contribute to the mission-shaped picture, which risks being drowned out in the prevailing societal consumer desire for all things new and better. Jane Craske comments: ‘Given Methodism’s origins, it should be at the forefront of mission . . . Methodism should equally be at the forefront of enabling British Christianity to see what the contemporary equivalent of that past Methodist calling should be in its mission.’ Jane Craske, ‘The Threads With Which We Weave: Towards a Holy Church’ in Craske and Marsh 1999, p. 177.
In a context of profound cultural and philosophical shifts, it is no surprise that current missiological endeavours are faced with tensions and conflict. This subsection identifies three key areas of tension and conflict: the tensions between church and state authority – and why Methodism may have a powerful influence in the wider Fresh Expressions evolution because of its dissenting history; the tension between inherited forms of leadership and mission; and finally the real and present danger that communities which are authentically fresh expressions may need the freedom and permission to schism well. Methodism is no stranger to tensions, conflict and schism – indeed we are less than a century from the 1932 Deed of Union which sought to respond to the increasing fragmentation of the Holiness movements of the Evangelical Revival. It is this history, therefore, that can be part of Methodism’s contributory DNA into the Fresh Expressions agenda: how to approach conflict, dissention, power and schism without fear or heavy-handed bureaucracy.
Murray-Williams asks ‘whether we can re-imagine Christianity in a world we no longer control’. Murray-Williams 2004, p. 8. Bruce 2002, pp. 159–161. Gladwell 2000, also quoted by Angela Shier-Jones, ‘Pioneering Circuit Ministry’,
Furthermore, Methodism offers a continuing model of a renewal movement, with all the pervading features that that entails. Howard Snyder identifies the markers of a renewal movement as including tensions that appear between the institution or denomination and the new movement. This tension consequently means that the movement also finds itself in conflict with the world, and subsequently calls people to greater radical commitment. Renewal movements are also noticeable because of the significant number of lay people who take on positions of leadership. Radical engagement with and against the world begins to evolve in working on behalf of the poor and those who are marginalised for whatever reason. Renewal movements have a strong sense of justice. The final mark of a renewal movement is the energy it creates as more and more people are enlisted. Snyder 1997, pp. 24–25.
There is a subversive undercurrent within much missional experience in the Methodist Church, especially for ordained colleagues who are engaging in missional and fresh expressions forms of ministry, that they are doing so at the cost of a circuit appointment. Financially, this may well be true – many fresh expressions are expensive projects to facilitate and run in the long term – although this does not make them any less significant. Anecdotally, one Messy Church participant was overheard to say, ‘I like Messy Church. This is the only hot meal my child has all week.’ Needless to say, that context improved the quality of food provided in light of that disclosure.
What becomes more problematic, however, is where leaders involved in fresh expressions – either lay or ordained – begin to be publicly exposed as those who are predisposed to doing the ‘fun parts’ of ministry at the cost of what is expected within inherited models. One practitioner has reflected, ‘I am treated as though my leadership of a fresh expression is the cherry on a cake the circuit never asked to be iced in the first place.’ Fresh expressions leaders are often seen as rebellious, entrepreneurial – or even infantile – in their opinion and behaviours, with their exuberance and questioning seen as threatening to the status quo. On more than one occasion, comments have been made about leaders needing to ‘grow up’; a sentiment towards their childish behaviour rather than a discipleship desire. In turn, and anecdotally, the risk is that these leaders become over-managed, rather than enabled to flourish in a context.
Fresh expressions and community development is viewed by some in circuit and district oversight as an additional, extra-curricular activity for a presbyter – and a problem for lay people who are no longer taking up formal lay appointments in the Church. Inherited and missional modes are set at odds with each other, and one risks suffocating if not euthanising the other. This tension, therefore, may require some significant policy work in order to facilitate a true ‘mixed economy’ rather than a competitive market.
The Methodist Church, if it takes seriously its history and heritage, will always be a place of protest, social transformation and mission. The risk of the current mixed model of leadership is that both communities and leaders become confused about what they are called to do and be. This in turn fosters a lack of confidence in the local congregation about both the value of the denomination and the cultivation and sharing of a community and individual narrative. Ultimately, the risked consequence of this is a lack of confidence, or disappointment, in God. There is a clear and present danger with the current tension between Church as institution and Church as mission, which results in leaders becoming de-churched themselves, and thereby becoming frustrated, cynical, embittered and angry towards the institution that enabled (and funded) their experimentation in the first place.
I want to suggest that the tension between inherited (or institutional) Methodism and the excited fervour enabled by fresh expressions is not a call to something new – but a rediscovery of our Methodist and missional DNA. There is greater freedom, creativity and verve if we are able to narrate fresh expressions as being authentically Methodist – rather than having to justify their existence as something distinctive and other. Furthermore, this intentional shift of language would free up Fresh Expressions to press deeper into its own aims and outcomes to enable true fresh expressions to develop with greater ecclesiological and denominational connectedness. There are examples of local leaders working and praying hard in new missional opportunities, and yet their work is misunderstood, stymied; it is still perceived as an extraordinary threat to the status quo, rather than a spirit-led and pragmatic response to terminal decline, dislocation from public opinion, and limiting understandings of lay and ordained ministry.
So far, much of the supporting data on fresh expressions and post-Christendom mission as presented in this essay is from within a mainstream approach to the topic. However, there are more radical voices who would prefer a more permanent shift away from any institutional backing. Michael Frost and Alan Hirsch, for example, argue that the strain between movement and institution is necessary, suggesting ‘that renewal movements typically live in tension with the dominant church institution’. Frost and Hirsch 2003, p. 205. Peter Rollins, ‘Biting the Hand that Feeds’, in Nelstrop and Percy 2008, p. 72. Graham, Walton and Ward 2005, p. 220, and Chung 1990.
Methodism has never been immune to splits, schisms and division on missional grounds. A rediscovery of Methodist identity at the heart of current missional and fresh expression praxis may have the (un)desired effect of requiring a more local and context-driven form of oversight than the Methodist Church institution is able to offer. Facilitating this as a positive experience, especially in light of earlier comments about the psychological well-being of leaders, remains a potential outcome to which attention may need to be paid both locally and connexionally.
As one Superintendent has observed, ‘Central Halls were the Fresh Expressions of their day.’ Central Halls, therefore, have the renewed potential to enable focused and specifically contextual ministry and missional appointments for teams of presbyters, deacons and lay people. In contemporary terms, this need not be about buildings per se. The rediscovery of a theology and ecclesial practice of Central Halls enables flexibility within Methodist structures, as Central Halls have their own standing orders and legal status. There is also the intentionality that the context is the primary focus of mission and ministry, not necessarily the original inherited congregants. The
This is not to say that the Central Hall experiment of the twentieth century was a wholehearted success story. Indeed, the urban prioritisation of the mission of the Halls has been an abject failure in many locations. However, the missional theory of Central Hall ecclesiology maintains a focus on contextually appropriate service to a local community and a relevant vehicle for authentic and passionate communication of the gospel. As John Hull notes, ‘the purpose or function of mission is to bring in the Kingdom. In order to do this effectively the mission has (among other things) a church. But the mission is not the church.’ Hull 2006, p. 2.
It would be easy to suggest that the city context of the Central Halls has limited appeal and interest for the wider Connexion. However, the missiology and practice of ministry in and around Central Halls, therefore, offers a significant Methodist model of mission which pre-dates Fresh Expressions and the
Central Hall ecclesiology and missiology, therefore, offer a narrative of fresh expressions which is inherently Methodist, and yet is anything but consumerist, new or alternative. Methodists have been doing ‘fresh expressions’ for a very long time: in fact, perhaps Methodism has always been a fresh expression. If this is the case, then perhaps reclaiming this narrative is the first step towards a greater confidence in our own identity – and an opportunity and invitation for Fresh Expressions the organisation to incorporate more denominational, historical and ideological DNA into their language, practice and education tools.
Statistically, most fresh expression communities attract a small number of people – although in context so do a majority of Methodist congregations, so there is some parity required in how this is explored. However, what remains a significant observation for both fresh and inherited forms of church and worshipping communities is that small groups and fellowship units remain the vehicle for growth, discipleship and pastoral oversight. A focus on small groups within Methodism enables a conversation based on the complementarity of intentional faith development, personal and corporate accountability, financial governance and missional endeavour.
Within the Fresh Expression canon, Davison and Milbank assume that the parish is the formational unit of discipleship. The Davison and Milbank 2010, p. 211.
This is no surprise within a Methodist narrative. As Walton notes:
Wesley was clear what he wanted his system to do. It was to promote scriptural holiness and enable people to make the journey of discipleship together. In doing this, he knew where the groups were located in relation to mission and worship. Class and band meetings were not substitutes for worship . . . nor was the small group a primary means of evangelism. Walton 2014, p. 124.
The contribution that Methodism makes to the current missional agendas at work, therefore, is that communities of people intentionally formed, and potentially covenanted together, remain the vehicles for formation and mission. Walton is keen to note, however, that
our context and John Wesley’s are different. This ought to be a warning to those of us who wish to use small groups for our own and other’s formation within our church’s life. Valuable though a study of Wesley’s small group is, it is unlikely to provide an off-the-shelf model for our own generation. Walton 2014, p. 124.
Perhaps fresh expressions are one way of challenging the one-size fits–all ‘offthe-shelf’ model of formation, and begin to provide Methodism with the renewed sense that context matters. Once again, Methodism’s inheritance has the potential to be Fresh Expression’s gain if small groups and communities continue to make intentional moves towards faith formation, missional endeavour outside of themselves, and accountability.
Small groups of contextually engaged, prayerful individuals who engage in theological reflection and mission together remains the core of Methodist identity – inspired by the Holy Spirit who is active in the world, however conflicted faith and the world appears. The interest in new monasticism indicates that there is a desire for accountability and spiritual direction. Rules of life and covenantal promises are significant in the ongoing life of some fresh expressions. Methodism’s history and heritage has a great deal to offer this conversation, from accountability bands, an annual covenant and covenant discipleship groups. Walton 2009, p. 179. Lyall 2010, pp. 269–270. See Heath 2010, Heath and Duggins 2014, and Heath 2008.
Furthermore, one criteria now projected for the longevity of a fresh expression, beyond its initial missional impetus and towards an ecclesial identity of its own, is that of being self-sustaining. Once again, a Methodist approach takes this seriously. Walton again notes:
It is widely acknowledged that John Wesley’s much-admired class meetings started for a purpose different from the one for which they became famous. Originating as a scheme for collecting money to pay off the loan on the Bristol Building, they rapidly became the engine of Methodist spirituality. Walton 2014, p. 136.
There is the potential for a reverse move here: a re-ignition of Methodist confidence as an authentic and intentional missional community invites consideration of financial as well as ethical accountability. In a UK context where financial irregularity remains headline news, a missional approach that has something to say about justice, economics and spirituality may indeed be a prophetic and attractional model of community engagement.
The Methodist practice of small groups for accountability and pastoral oversight, alongside the prevailing house group model for scriptural engagement and faith formation, and the increasing significance of contemplative forms of missional engagement, offers a critical insight into the importance of the number of people actively engaging in any form of Christian community – fresh or inherited. Once again, the Methodist Church is able to share this DNA in the missional conversation as a tried and tested model, and thus further enhance the suggestion that fresh expressions currently work in Methodism because they inherently employ Methodist theology and practice.
Albert Outler’s often misappropriated and much debated Wesleyan quadrilateral finds an ideological home in the theological reflective practice of fresh expression communities. In a context where, in the words of emerging church specialist Dan Kimball, Western culture ‘like[s] Jesus, but not the church’,
The American Methodist missiologist Leonard Sweet states that ‘the story of Jesus is the story of the table. You can’t think about Jesus without thinking about the table, its meals and its rituals. In fact, if you are reading the Gospels and not getting hungry, you are missing the meat of the Gospels.’ Sweet 2014, p. 61.
The gift of this for the wider catholic Church is that at the heart of Methodist mission and ecclesiology is a desire to include rather than exclude people. Although not always present in a consensus model of policy-making, the intention and sentiment remains. At the heart of Methodism is a desire to enable all people – whatever cultural, transnational, gender, sexual or financial background they have – to encounter the risen Christ in their midst through the power of the Holy Spirit. The
Crucially, such a reflection also offers a theological counterbalance to the charismatic hyperbole of some fresh expressions practitioners. Rather than leave the identity of the community resolutely in the hands of individual leaders, a refocusing on prevenient grace and the work of the Spirit reshapes the missional endeavour towards a relationship with Jesus rather than an individual leader. Methodism speaks much of this grace and provides the opportunities for this christological calibration – sacramentally and missionally.
In conclusion, this essay suggested that the DNA of Fresh Expressions might in fact be subversively and subconsciously Methodist. Therefore, fresh expressions within Methodism offer the experience and opportunity for the Methodist people to be confident in their traditional identity as a mission-shaped Church. Such a conclusion consequently releases Fresh Expressions to achieve what it set out to achieve – new communities of contextually rich and relevant spiritual seekers finding a brand new ecclesial expression – and something which I contest they are not yet achieving. Further, the conclusion that fresh expressions might actually be Methodist, and that Methodism is in fact a fresh expression in its own right, challenges some of the prevailing economics of mission and policy-making. In turn, this may enable Methodist people to gain confidence in their own pragmatic, missional and discipleship calling in a way that begins to challenge the powerful narrative of terminal decline and insignificance which is restricting revival, growth, vision and significant intentional change.
This essay has offered four themes or charisms to underline this contestation: a history of tensions and schism; Central Halls as a model of
Methodism has the potential, if not the present reality, to offer much to Fresh Expressions and wider society, and a renewed self-confidence and inspired narrative may be the first step towards offering more of our DNA into the missional petrie dish. Methodism matters – on its own terms, and because of what we can offer the mission-shaped conversations of the future.