My Safe Shelter

I am a believer in Asset Based Community Organizing. I have learned much from John McKnight and Peter Bloch and others (read this for instance). When I was at Northwestern doing a Ph D, McKnight?s office was in the building right behind Garrett seminary. So I?m not an expert, but I?m familiar. I suggest Asset Based Community Development (ABCD) is one of those great studies of how to do things in cooperation with God and what He is already present pushing for. But having said all this, I still don?t think ABCD replaces the church. I love Asset Based Community Organizing, but it?s not the church.

Many times the church in effect look likes it is nurturing something that looks a lot like ABCD. The intersection between ABCD kind of activity and ?body life? (church life) would make for a wonderful research study. The church?s natural life of reconciling people in the neighborhood, of advocating for resources, of nurturing leadership within the community, may/should look alot like ABCD. But there is still a difference between the two. I love Asset Based Community Organizing, but it?s not the church.

I submit that whenever the church of God, Christ?s body, sent into God?s Mission, is present in a place, it brings something above and beyond what ABCD claims to be doing in a context (ABCD in its purest form claims to bring nothing to a context. They claim ?everything is already there.?  This claim I suspect can be an overstatement but I understand what they?re saying and to some degree applaud it).  The church in effect carries the keys of the Kingdom.  It can be and should be the vehicle for God to extend the particular reconciliation, new creation, and/or justice made possible in Jesus Christ in ways that are only possible in the work of the Triune God at work in and through Jesus Christ.  Again, I love Asset Based Community Development. It is certainly God?s work, but on it?s own, it is not the church.

Wendy McCaig recently posted a response to my proposal for the Luke 10 Project  on her blog last week (read it here). She applauds a lot of things. She is less enthused on others.  After reading her blog and seeing her work, I?m an admirer. From what I can tell (and I know very little about Wendy so far), Wendy is a community organizer who advocates ?asset based community development.? I affirm asset based community development as God?s work, but I personally place more emphasis on planting local communities of Mission where people gather to witness to ?the Kingdom? (it?s my calling, while still applauding those called to ABCD). Through the humble gospel presence of communities of Christ, we participate in what God is already doing in our local context to bring the Kingdom into visibility. Wendy argues that Kingdom work means ?living out Jesus mission and continuing his work of bringing sight to the blind, good news to the poor, etc?? If a worship community forms out of that presence that is wonderful.? But even if there is no gathering, the Body of Christ still exists in that place. I disagree. I don?t think ABCD is the body of Christ. I think ?the body of Christ? refers to a social reality formed in some basic core practices of participating in Christ?s inbreaking Lordship over our lives and the context we live in. I  agree with people like Kathy Escobar and the idea of ?Kingdom Outposts? (mentioned here). I have used this way of describing church activotyu myself. Although, I strongly reject the way the forms of church have been reified in Christendom (and ensconced in power), nonetheless, the social practice of coming together under God?s reign in Christ births His presence into the world in a way ABCD does not.  I think we need more thought and reflection here on ecclesiology. Having said this, I agree with Wendy on many things. For instance:

 1.) Wendy disliked the idea that the Luke 10 Project ?assumes the community (we are planting in) is lacking something.? Luke 10 Project needs to ?learn to build on what God is already doing ? they should learn to see the glass as ?half full.? I agree with Wendy that we always should be present in a context assuming God is already working!! And so I regret not emphasizing that enough in the Luke 10 project.  I think I missed on that aspect a little bit. I did talk about how ?the three? leaders inhabiting a place would seek to submit and connect with existing church leaders and seek to work with them, on invitation. I should have placed more emphasis on connecting with all community leaders. To me it is the very nature of the incarnation to inhabit by listening and discerning what God is doing.

 2.) Wendy disliked that the Luke 10 Project emphasized ?relocation? and underemphasized ?indigenous leader development.? I think I may have missed something here as well. I am very committed to raising up leaders in the community for both the building up of the body of Christ as a sign foretaste of the Kingdom, as well as for the prototype ?community development? activities that feed Kingdom work in a community.  I think I have an established record on this for those who know me. But I can always learn more.

 3.) Wendy disliked the emphasis in my post on ?gathering Christians.? In her next post Wendy argues that Kingdom work means ?living out Jesus mission and continuing his work of bringing sight to the blind, good news to the poor, etc?? If a worship community forms out of that presence that is wonderful.? But even if there is no gathering, the Body of Christ still exists in that place.

It?s here where I think Wendy and I differ. It?s a tension I admit. But I believe the church is a social reality that releases God dynamic work of His Kingdom and authority into our midst. Community organizing is God at work. It is doing God?s work and participating in and among His people. But I want to press further on that. I want to argue that when people come together under His reign (in a local context) and are then sent into a local context (ala Luke 10) the authority of the reigning Lord is unleashed. There is posture God can use to enter in. It?;s much like the incarnation. It is this authority of Christ?s reign that overcomes sin, death and evil. This brings another dimension to the Missio Dei. I think this is what NT Wright is addressing in his new book Simply Jesus in chapter 7,9, and 15 and somewhat discussed by Scot McKnight in this post here. I think tis is what Lesslie Newbigin describes so well in ch 8 of his book The Open Secret.

I think therefore there is something to ?being sent? that in humility and vulnerability brings an announcement of the Kingdom. But Wendy?s right in my humble opinion: we cannot enter as if where we go the people in this new context are somehow our clients. Quite the opposite, God is at work in every person.  But I push back on those who say the church is equal to community development work. God is working there, THERE IS AN OVERLAP WHICH SOMETIMES IS HARD TO DISTINGUISH, but it is not the church. CCDA is an excellent example of this overlap (I know CCDA from teaching alongside some of the key leaders in this movement ? see here). I love the way CCDA describes the relationship between the church and community development. I think to not understand this distinction is to reject the very idea of ?Sentness.? To all my community development friends, what say you? Again, I love Asset-based Community Development, but it?s not the church.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/reclaimingthemission/go/~3/W-bTj7Lmqfo/

latter day saint jude the vatican news

The Jackson County Prosecutor announced this afternoon Grand Jury indictments surrounding the case of Shawn Ratigan. The Grand Jury returned misdemeanor indictments against Kansas City ? St. Joseph Bishop Robert W. Finn and the Diocese itself. Each was charged with failure to report suspected child abuse, a Class A misdemeanor carrying a penalty of up to a one year prison term and $1,000 for an individual and up to a $1,000 fine for a corporation. Attorneys for Bishop Finn and the Diocese both entered pleas of not guilty in Jackson County Court.

The following statements were issued by the Diocese and Bishop Finn today.

Statements of the

Most Reverend Robert W. Finn
Bishop of Kansas City ~ St. Joseph

and the
Diocese of Kansas City ~ St. Joseph

concerning
Action of the Jackson County Grand Jury

Kansas City, Mo., Oct. 14, 2011 — Bishop Robert Finn and the Diocese of Kansas City ~ St. Joseph today acknowledged receipt of the misdemeanor charges brought by the Jackson County Prosecutor.  Jean Paul Bradshaw and Tom Bath, counsel for the diocese, entered a plea of not guilty for the diocese. According to Gerald Handley and J.R. Hobbs, counsel for Bishop Finn, the bishop also entered a plea of not guilty.

?Bishop Finn denies any criminal wrongdoing and has cooperated at all stages with law enforcement, the grand jury, the prosecutor?s office, and the Graves Commission. We will continue our efforts to resolve this matter,? said Gerald Handley, counsel for Bishop Finn.

?In response to these charges Bishop Finn said, ?Months ago after the arrest of Shawn Ratigan, I pledged the complete cooperation of the diocese and accountability to law enforcement. We have carried this out faithfully. Diocesan staff and I have given hours of testimony before grand juries, delivered documents, and answered questions fully.?

More importantly, to address the issues that led to this crisis, I reinforced and expanded diocesan procedures. We added the position of ombudsman, effectively moving the ?gatekeeper function? outside the Chancery and under the authority of an independent public liaison, a skilled and experienced former prosecutor. I commissioned the Graves Report to accomplish a full independent investigation of the policies and events that led to this crisis.  I ordered the report to be published in its entirety for the sake of full transparency.?

Today, the Jackson County Prosecutor issued these charges against me personally and against the Diocese of Kansas City-St Joseph.  For our part, we will meet these announcements with a steady resolve and a vigorous defense.?

I ask the prayerful support and unity of our priests, our people, the parishes, and the Catholic institutions. With continued dedication, we will persevere in the many good works that are the hallmark of the faithful people of the diocese throughout its 27 counties and nearly 150-year heritage. With ever stronger determination, we will form, teach, and protect children and care for the spiritual and material needs of people who look daily to the diocese for assistance.?

With deep faith, we will weather this storm and never cease to fulfill our mission, even in moments of adversity,? said Bishop Finn.

In addition to full and complete cooperation with all levels of law enforcement, the diocese has taken an array of steps to ensure accountability for the protection of children in diocesan, parish and school programs.

• June 9 ? Engaged Todd Graves, a former U.S. Attorney and national co-chair of the Department of Justice Child Exploitation Working Group, to conduct an independent investigation of events, policies and procedures,
• June 22 ? Expanded diocesan administration with the appointment of Father Joseph Powers as Vicar for Clergy,
• June 17 ? Completed listening sessions with parishioners served by Shawn Ratigan,
• June 30 ? Appointed Jenifer Valenti, a former prosecuting attorney, as ombudsman to field and investigate all reports of suspicious or inappropriate behavior by clergy, diocesan personnel and volunteers,
• August 15 ? Reviewed requirements for the mandatory reporting of abuse and neglect with more than 925 employees and made the training available by video conferencing to others,
• September 1 ? Published the complete findings and recommendations of Graves Bartle Marcus and Garrett.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheCatholicKeyBlog/~3/fWjXqwZDgU8/diocesan-statement-concerning-action-of.html

church welcomes you catholic abuse stories church of jesus christ

Warning: The following post is more theological requiring some interaction with theologians and church history.

My last post I started to explore the subtle fear and resistance to church practices so common in today?s missional church. I claimed there is often an out-sized reaction in and among the missional church against organizing people into practices traditionally associated with being the church: practices like worship gathering, teaching evangelism postures, ordination of clergy. I called this ?ekklesaphobia.? I freely acknowledged that there are abuses and malformation in all of these practices so a healthy caution is good (a quick glance into the archives of this blog reveals I write a lot about this). We need a reformation of church practice in the West so as to shape a church into God?s missional life. Nonetheless, this phobia, I argue often goes too far leaving us lacking in sustainable formation of God?s people for His Mission as well as a dysfunctional leadership. I named 3 sources of this phobia. 1.) fear of colonialism, 2.)  fear of the protestant principle. 3.) fear of being abused again by corrupt authoritarian church structures as many of us have been in the past. I want to ?riff? a little bit on these 3 fears in the next few posts. I want to start with the fear of ?the protestant principle,? the most difficult of the three to describe and see at work.

The Protestant Principle argues that we must challenge the church (or anyone else for that matter) anytime it acts like it in any way owns the privileged place of God?s presence and authority.  Because when this happens, the church will eventually use this authority for corrupt ends. We are human after all. We are prone to ego and self-serving motives. On the other hand, without the church as  location for Christ?s social body in the world, we are basically left alone to be little Christ?s. We must be an authority unto ourselves (even if we do look to the Bible as a personal authority) in the world to do/participate in God?s Mission. As intuitively American as this is, this still leaves us to be absorbed into society?s structures even when they are bad/evil/corrupt. We get rid of the church as corrupt structure only to be absorbed into the social structures of society (which may be corrupt themselves, or at the very least lacking in the reconciliatory power of Christ).

Paul Tillich articulated the protestant principle as that theological principle which must challenge all historical representations of the divine. In other words, we cannot expect that the transcendent, almighty and perfect God would be located (or limited to being located) in a human institution like a church. For human institutions are by their very nature corrupt and imperfect. And so when we give divine authority to such a structure the worst things imaginable will happen. Human beings will claim to be acting on behalf of God (i.e. the Roman Catholic church and/or the pope). Even worse, divine salvation shall be limited to this structure and be controlled by human beings to their own benefit (i.e. the Roman Catholic church and the transubstantiated Eucharist). In the lineage of the European protestants who have gone on before us, therefore, we must protest whenever we see this happening. God cannot be controlled. God only comes in His own freedom to us (as individuals). The minute anyone associates (in any way!) a human institution as the place where God works, bad things happen! Whenever the church makes any ?claims to absoluteness? (Tillich, Systematic Theology vol. 3 p. 245) in the name of Christ it rejects its own identity in Christ. For God in Christ cannot be contained or boxed in by the church or any other human organization. This principle was followed by H Richard Neibuhr, his brother Reinhold and carries on in many circles of American protestant church. (For more on the protestant principle see D. Stephen Long, who first introduced the concept to me,  Divine Economy 136ff. and my own The Great Giveaway note 17, in chapter 6).

Who can deny this? There is much truth here. Especially to those of us who have seen pastor-authority figures use the church for their own ends. And we must resist the notion that God works in, especially ?only in,? His church. This is a big source of the problems we now face as a church incapable of being in the world where God is working.

BUT (please, hear me on this) we must avoid the other extreme in saying that the church is merely a group of individuals trying to be little Jesus?s, and we come together for mutual support, encouragement (and worse admiration). For this denies that God in history has chosen to reveal himself in the witness of a people before the nations. God in fact does come, in authority, to inhabit a people in a social and visible way WHEN HIS PEOPLE ARE IN SUBMISSION TO HIM AND RECEIVING OF HIM IN SOME BASIC CORE PRACTICES GIVEN TO US IN AND THRU JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF.

Here is a primary example: when people gather (as in Matt 18:15-20) to submit to Christ?s authority as King (?in my name?) and be reconciled (?agree on anything?), Christ?s authority is made manifest (?what you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven?). He becomes present in a special way (?there am I in your midst?). His presence, and that inbreaking authority is carried with us whenever we bring this reconciliation of God in Christ into our everyday relationships, vocations and neighborhoods. This is real flesh and blood (incarnational) Kingdom authority of Christ breaking in our lives and neighborhoods. We do not control it, we cannot possess it, only cooperate with it and be instruments of it. But this is a practice of being His people in His church where God exerts divine authority and becomes divinely present by the Son through the Spirit.

The same can be said of many other practices such as the Eucharist (Luke 22:29), the proclamation of the gospel (Luke 10), of the fivefold ministry (Eph 4), Kingdom prayer (Mark 9:29, Matt 6:9ff)) and so on.

These Practices, When Practiced in Submission to Christ, Extend His Reign.  By gathering in the neighborhoods, via these practices, we bring the Kingdom into visible manifestation as a witness to His Lordship and rule over the whole earth. ?Witness? always means we do cannot control or possess this authority (Karl Barth?s work on ?witness? comes to mind here ? Barth Church Dogmatics IV.3.2 par.71 #4) Instead we point to it and allow it to be manifest in our lives together into the world. These core practices, birthed out of the death, resurrection and enthronement of Jesus Christ as King, become the means by which Jesus becomes present and His reign breaks in. They do not need to ossify a people (like they have in the past) as a people set apart over against society. Instead they become the means by which we materialize the Kingdom in a contextualized way, offering in our midst His reconciliation (Matt 18), hospitality (Eucharist), freedom from sin, death and evil (proclamation of the gospel), leadership into God?s work in the world (5 fold ministry). It is no secret that I have a whole book in process on how these practices, grounded in Jesus Christ Himself as sent one, released through the Holy Spirit, become missional practices when they are released from the captivity of the Christendom institutionalized church.

Til then, what do you think about the protestant principle? Have you seen it at work in your church? your ministry? Do you see it as a deterrent to ministry in your neighborhood? Do you see it as a deterrant to the formation of people into God?s Mission? (P.S. should I keep more theologically intense posts off this blog? keep them in more traditional outlets like journals etc.?)

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/reclaimingthemission/go/~3/9K_poAJ0Y-E/

catholic abuse stories church of jesus christ christian current events