After SVS 2010: Steven Schenk, Examining The Contradictions Between Theology and Praxis
After SVS 2010 is an extended dialogue with presenters from the first annual Society of Vineyard Scholars conference, held Feb 11-13, 2010. Monday through Friday until March 26th we’ll profile an SVS presenter and dialogue with them around their paper. Click here for a brief intro and link directory of the series. Full text of papers are available to SVS members.
_____________________________________________________
Steven Schenk: “Power and Purpose in a Cross Shaped Community: Examining the Contradictions Between Theology and Praxis”
Abstract
We are haunted. In spite of literature, conferences, and personal exhortations to ‘administrate yourselves into mega-churches;’ we cannot shake the nagging suspicion that God’s Church could be revolutionary in beauty and purity. In every denominational stream are those who have grown weary of a Church that feeds on high-dollar advertising, well-funded ministry teams, and the greatest technologies. We are haunted by suspicions that our notion of ‘success’ might be an idolatrous distraction from God’s true purposes. This suspicion is fueled by the disconnect between theology and praxis.
If you want to know what someone holds to be true, attend to their lives instead of their words. The unfortunate truth is that our carefully crafted statements of theology say less about our understanding of God than our everyday decisions. In the area of Church praxis this is most unfortunate, because our practices communicate a theology that is simply unorthodox. We will define Kingdom power and purpose as seen in the Cross, and then move to a more practical and more important purpose: calling Church practitioners to account for our complicity in ‘better business practices’ that largely ignore the implications of the theology we espouse. While practitioners give some thought to the implications for individuals, we are often ignorant of the ecclesiological implications of kingdom theology, and specifically the Cross. The Cross reveals an approach to power and justice that threatens to shift our paradigm. We need this shift to happen in theology, but especially in praxis. The implications of a cruciform Kingdom theology include:
- Power for Others
- Equipping Leadership
- Sending Leadership
- Outward Ministry
- Redeeming Trades
- Personal Transformation
- Deep Community
- Multi-Cultural Expression
- Social Justice
- Christian Storytellers
- Eucharist
- Carrying the Cross
- Identification with the Broken
- Necessary Failure
The Church crafts our praxis in ignorant contradiction to these Kingdom implications. Specifically, basic praxis, as simple as the language used to define terms and practices, how we measure success, what we prioritize, and what we display as our models for health. We cannot continue moving forward with such an ill-conceived project. The ultimate subject here is praxis; others are better suited to exploring Kingdom theology, or the implications of the Cross on that theology. Others will give a more comprehensive treatment to application. The aim of this paper is not to exhaustively detail the theology, or practice; rather to highlight the fact that our theology is contradicted by our practice, and few seem to notice.
Interview With Steven
Q: How did you become interested in your topic?
A: I grew up in church without ever knowing what was going on. I was in a church event just about twice a week, but I never had a relationship with another Christian until I was in college. By that point I had abandoned everything about my faith except for the fire-insurance-Jesus, and had sunk into rebellion, substance abuse, and sex. When I hit the wall, I discovered brotherhood and discipleship. I discovered the Church! In the following years I began to wonder what had been missing from my years growing up in the Church. Why hadn’t the intentional relationships that had so formed me in my early 20′s been a part of my life as a youth? I discovered the beauty and simplicity of the Church! Simultaneously, I discovered the ugliness of consumerism individualism, the idolatry of safety and security, and the Western myopic vision of the gospel corrupting that beauty and simplicity.
Q: How do you think your paper is relevant to the Vineyard movement at large?
A: To a certain degree, I don’t know if I am best qualified to answer that question as I have been a part of the movement for less than a decade, and have little connection to national, or even regional leaders. This means the scope of my vision is somewhat narrow. That caveat aside, I see the Vineyard thoughtfully engaging issues of Church Culture, I see us moving towards a deeper engagement with wider cultural issues, and also with theological issues, but I do not know how well we are asking some of the questions raised by emerging culture with respect to ecclesiology. Specifically, I don’t think we have intentionally moved beyond the definitions of church and church success inherited from our wider evangelical heritage. I see this as a deep problem for the western evangelical Church at large, and I believe we must seek earnestly to avoid it. I hope the Vineyard can rethink the way church and missional success are defined. I hope the paper successfully offers two things: a broad-brush attempt at integrating church success with Kingdom theology in theory; and a very specific and practical set of changes we could make to further that integration practically.
As far as specific relevance to our movement: I pray we would change our definitions of success for our Churches in ways that line up with Kingdom values instead of Western consumerism, and begin to encourage pastors and planters to dream and innovate towards practical effectiveness in terms of those values.
Q: What do you think might be the practical implications of what you’re exploring?
A: Churches and Christians should be more deeply self-aware in terms of cultural engagement and outsider perceptions. A lessening of the fear of failure. Greater innovation in local church culture and practice that could possibly result in two things: more failures and deeper successes. Churches and Christians that define success in radically different ways than before. A deeper awareness of Kingdom theology and practice at all levels of Church involvement. Most importantly, a communal life that more accurately reflects heaven instead of Western culture.
Steven will be available for further questions and dialogue in the comments
________________________________________________________
Steven Schenk lives in Buffalo, New York, is the pastor of a church plant in the heart of the city, and blogs damascus9.blogspot.com. He was sent out of the Vineyard City Church (Redding, CA) under Pastor Mike Kearns. He is married to Tamy ans thet have three crazy kids, Zoe (5), Zane (4), and Aidan (2). He longs to love Jesus more, and hols to the deep conviction that the church is God’s mysterious plan to move forward His Kingdom dream for the universe.
i started reading your paper last night; penetrating and prophetic. i enjoyed it immensely.
in your first part i couldn’t help but hear the echo of jurgen moltmann (probably because i am reading him right now): “God is not a blind judge, like Justitia with her bandaged eyes, who judges without respect of person. God the judge is the friend at court, the advocate of the people without rights and of wrong-doers (Psalm 82). On the side of the victims his righteousness is a righteousness that brings about justice, and on the side of the offenders a righteousness that sets them on the right path…[i]n the light of Israel’s experiences of God, this justice-creating, saving and redeeming righteousness is also understood as God’s compassion. But this compassion does not mean that God puts mercy before judgement, or retains for himself the sovereign right to reprieve those who have been condemned. It is rather that his creative and saving justice is itself his mercy. ”
justice redeemed indeed.
justice as the mission of the Church resonates deeply, as both of the primary Hebrew words translated as justice in the OT (mishphat and tzedekah) have the underlying idea: mishphat is a proclamation of what needs to be done to “set things right or in your usage from Genesis: “make things good”; tzedekah is not only a state of goodness/righteousness/justice, but as Hebrew is not a static thought-world but active, it is : “setting things right”, or again, as you say “making things good”. i really appreciate your connections t the initial creation account in Genesis.
the deep humility of God wanting and empowering and working with us in His work as His children, who mostly get in the way or cause it to be more messy appeals to what i know of God as well.
so, question#1: in terms of redeeming trades: what about ‘politician’ or probably better: ‘elected official’ or speaking personally, ‘public/civil servant’? if we are to redeem the entire scope of work (‘eved in the Hebrew, which is also translated service/worship/work in the English), then they are the current outcasts. i know so many churches that seek to be a-political (which i think is nonsense and quite impossible), so any thoughts on redeeming these trades?
question #2: for the most part, the Vineyard…the emerging church, and even the missional church gatherings and pastors – from my own persnal experience – are exceptionally monochrome. white that is. how do we practically tackel a multi-cultural, multi-racial expression in church? is it how they are “doin’ church” that only gathers uni-culturally/uni-racially? i know the Vineyard (and the emerging church and the missional church) has a burgeoning La Vina movement, and even has a task force regarding diversity…but still i wonder, is that helping? and i even ask myself: is it the way we do church…or is it something more culture-based that we are blind to?