Sunteți pe pagina 1din 302

Huntley

NOURISHING GRASS ROOTS: COGENERATIVE VISION CULTIVATION FOR MISSIONAL MINISTRY

by MICHAEL J. HUNTLEY

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Luther Seminary In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF MINISTRY

ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 2011 1

Huntley

2011 by Michael J. Huntley All rights reserved

Huntley ABSTRACT Nourishing Grass Roots: Cogenerative Vision Cultivation for Missional Ministry By Michael J. Huntley Examines impact of cultivating missional vision in a newly developed congregation using Participatory Action Research. Encouraged cogenerative dialog in shaping the process and the resultant shared vision for missional ministry. Used qualitative/quantitative assessment. Theoretical insights: sociological dynamics of community, vision for leading change, cultivating shared vision. Theological insights: vision inspiring missional activity, components of missional vision, cultivating missional vision. Cogeneratively cultivated and mutually discerned shared missional vision. Congregants appropriated new perspectives for interacting with others within the congregation and daily life, recognized need for shared vision in ministry, and discerned ministry and vocational shared purpose and guiding principles.

ii

Huntley

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To the congregations that I currently serve, who wholeheartedly participated in this research and who both graciously and sacrificially granted me the time and financial assistance to complete this research and thesis, I humbly and sincerely thank you. For your willingness to share personal thoughts and perspectives, and for your honest and wholehearted participation, I am also indebted to the individuals who agreed to participate in the individual and group interviews. For her many hours transcribing interviews, I thank my sister, Michelle Happel. For your keen insights and helpful remarks in writing this thesis, I am grateful for the wisdom and editorial perspectives from my professors, Dr. Gary Simpson and Dr. Alvin Luedke, as well as to my editor, Dr. Joy Blaylock. To my D.Min. cohort, I thank you for your insights and accompaniment on this journey of learning and growth. More specifically, to Brian Ballard, Brian Ford, and Jason Korthauer, my Accountabilibuddies and good friends, I thank you for your edits, your humor, your ideas for deeper thinking, your inspiration, and your companionship on this shared adventure in liminality. Finally and most importantly, to my wife, Kim, and to my children, Adam and Rachel, without whose loving support, understanding, and encouragement this thesis would not have been possible, I declare my highest amount of appreciation. I am indebted to you. I love you deeply!

iii

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ............................................................................................. ix LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................... xii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION TO THESIS ...................................................................................1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................3 Overview ............................................................................................................3 Research Question .............................................................................................4 Research Components ........................................................................................5 Outcome .......................................................................................................5 Intervention Influencing the Outcome .........................................................6 Outside Influences .......................................................................................7 Importance of Research .....................................................................................8 Other Questions Related to the Research Question ...........................................9 Literatures and Key Theories .................................................................................11 Sociological Dynamics of Community ............................................................11 The Efficacy of Vision for Leading and Bringing Change ..............................14 Cultivating Shared Vision ................................................................................15 Practical Considerations...................................................................................16 Biblical and Theological Perspectives ...................................................................16 Vision Inspiring Missional Activity.................................................................17 Components of Missional Vision ....................................................................20 Cultivating Missional Vision ...........................................................................22 Other Matters .........................................................................................................24 Ethical Concerns ..............................................................................................24 Definitions of Key Terms ................................................................................27 Summary ................................................................................................................30 2. LITERATURES AND KEY THEORIES ..................................................................31 Sociological Dynamics of Community ..................................................................33 Organizational Structures and Vision ..............................................................34 Organizational Life Cycle Theory ...................................................................38 Self-Forming, Bottom-Up Communities .........................................................41 Specific Organizational Considerations for Research .....................................43 Partial Ethnography and Congregational Background ..............................44 Transitioning From Top-Down to Bottom-Up Organizational Structures .............................................................................................47 iv

v Small versus Large Group Process ............................................................48 Increasing Need for Intimacy in Society .............................................48 Group Size ...........................................................................................50 The Efficacy of Vision for Leading and Bringing Change ....................................51 Vision and the Field Effect ..............................................................................52 Vision, Lovingly Shared, as a Uniting and Motivating Force .........................53 Cultivating Shared Vision ......................................................................................56 Components of a Vision Cultivation Process ..................................................56 Shared Vision ...................................................................................................57 Cultivating Vision: A Community Garden ......................................................59 Practical Considerations.........................................................................................61 Promise ............................................................................................................62 Tools ................................................................................................................63 Bargain .............................................................................................................64 Conclusion .............................................................................................................65 3. BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ..............................................67 Casting versus Cultivating Missional Vision .........................................................68 Vision Casting in Exodus.................................................................................69 Aspects of Vision Casting in Exodus...............................................................72 Moving From Vision Casting to Vision Cultivation........................................75 Cultivating Missional Vision in Acts...............................................................77 Aspects of Missional Vision in Acts ................................................................80 Components of Missional Vision ..........................................................................83 Trinitarian Facets of Missional Vision ............................................................83 The Social Trinitarian Model .....................................................................83 The Social Trinity in Missional Vision ......................................................88 Missio Dei and the Kingdom of God Aspects of Missional Vision.................89 The Missio Dei in Gods Reign .................................................................89 The Missio Dei and the Reign of God in Missional Vision .......................93 Aspects of the Holy Spirit in the Church, Working in the Vocation of Believers with Missional Vision ............................................94 Gifts of the Holy Spirit in the Vocation of Believers ................................94 Vocation and the Holy Spirit in Missional Vision .....................................97 Cultivating Missional Vision .................................................................................98 Vision in Scripture ...........................................................................................98 Peter and Paul ............................................................................................98 The Holy Spirit and the Body of Christ in Gods Reign..........................100 Theology of Cultivating Missional Vision ....................................................103 Moving Beyond Community to Communitas ..........................................103 Missional, Cogenerative Leadership ........................................................105 A Practical Vision Cultivation Process ..........................................................107 Considerations for Christian Community in Cultivating Missional Vision .......................................................................................................109 Jesus Participation in Small and Large Groups ......................................109 Relationship Building through Small Groups ..........................................112 v

vi Summary ..............................................................................................................113 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN ....................................................114 Overview of Research Methodology ...................................................................115 Specific Research Methodologies ........................................................................116 Participatory Action Research .......................................................................116 Intervention ....................................................................................................119 Metrics for Observing Changes in Congregational Practices and Perspectives..............................................................................................124 Quantitative Research Data Gathering...........................................................126 Faith Maturity Scale .................................................................................126 Rationale for Breakdown of Survey Statements into Subgroups for Analysis..............................................................................................127 Data Analysis ...........................................................................................129 Qualitative Research Data Gathering.............................................................130 Qualitative Interviews ..............................................................................130 Research Areas and Questions for Qualitative Interviews ......................133 Data Analysis ...........................................................................................138 Summary ..............................................................................................................138 5. RESULTS OF STUDY AND INTERPRETATION ................................................140 Narrative of Intervention and Its Impact ..............................................................141 Pre-Intervention Preparations ........................................................................142 Impacts of Intervention ..................................................................................142 Damascus Travelers .................................................................................143 Congregation Retreat ...............................................................................144 Council Work on Vision Elements ..........................................................145 Congregation Forums and Meeting .........................................................146 Unforeseen Events and Results ......................................................................147 Quantitative Survey Results.................................................................................148 Analysis of Responses to Individual Questions .............................................150 Techniques used for Quantitative Analysis .............................................150 Intervention Perspectives from Baseline Quantitative Data ....................152 Personal Faith, Beliefs, and Practices ................................................152 Perspectives in Relating to Others beyond the Congregation ............155 t-Test Results .................................................................................................157 Qualitative Interview Results...............................................................................159 Developing a Shared Vision ..........................................................................161 Data Relating to Lack of Shared Vision Prior to Intervention.................162 Data Relating to the Components of Shared Practices and Vision ..........163 Two Perspectives: Invitational and Vocational .............................................164 Invitational Perspective ............................................................................165 Vocational Perspective.............................................................................166 Invitational/Vocational Interaction in the Group Interview.....................167 Changes in Perspectives and Vision for Life and Missional Activity ...........169 vi

vii Changes Evident in the Group Interview .................................................169 Changes Evident in the First Individual Interview ..................................170 Changes Evident in the Second Individual Interview ..............................171 Missional Praxis Bringing New Vision and Understanding ..........................173 Other Factors Influencing Research and the Outcome ..................................174 Mission Developer Perspectives ..............................................................175 Impact of Denominational Decisions Regarding Gay Clergy .................176 Financial Concerns...................................................................................177 Conclusion ...........................................................................................................177 6. CONCLUSIONS WITH THEOLOGICAL AND THEORETICAL REFLECTION .....................................................................................................178 Impact of Theoretical and Theological Foundations ...........................................180 A Grass-Roots Process that Invites Participation in Cultivating Shared Vision .......................................................................................................180 Grass Roots Rather Than Top-Down Vision Cultivation ........................180 The Ability of Vision, Lovingly Shared, to Unite and Motivate .............183 Social Trinitarian and Perichoretic Foundations of Vision Cultivation.........185 Vision and the Field Effect ............................................................................187 Impact of the Cultivation Process ........................................................................188 Promise, Tools, and Bargain ..........................................................................188 Inviting the Council into the Vision Cultivation Process ........................191 Working with the Discipleship Commission and Damascus Travelers ............................................................................................191 Inviting the Congregation into the Vision Cultivation Process ...............192 Liminality and Communitas ..........................................................................193 Missional Vocation, the Holy Spirit, the Missio Dei, and Gods Reign ........195 Possibilities for Further Research ........................................................................197 Unexpected Research Findings ............................................................................200 Cultivating Vision for the Process and the Role of the Holy Spirit Throughout ...............................................................................................200 New Praxis Yielding New Perspectives ........................................................201 Benefits of Planning, Acting, and Reflecting ................................................202 Personal Reflections on this Research and Missional Leadership .......................203 EPILOGUE ......................................................................................................................208 New Beginnings ...................................................................................................208 Realizing Dreams .................................................................................................210 Moving into the Future ........................................................................................211 Appendix A. B. C. PAR Intervention Timetable ................................................................................213 Quantitative Instrument; Faith Maturity Scale ....................................................216 Faith Maturity Scale participation Thank You Letter ..........................................219 vii

viii D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. Quantitative Survey Results.................................................................................220 Qualitative Interview Research Topics and Questions ........................................253 Sunday School Missional Church Lesson Plan ...................................................255 Retreat/Wednesday Night Agenda and Session Plans .........................................259 Transitioning From Traditional to Missional Handout ........................................264 Damascus Travelers Information .........................................................................268 Prayer Labyrinth Handout....................................................................................277 June 14, 2010 Council Meeting Liminality/Communitas Handout .....................280 Handout Distributed at August 8, 2010 Congregational Forum ..........................282 Purpose Statement and Guiding Principles ..........................................................283

BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................285

viii

Huntley

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 5.1 5.2 5.3 Appendix A.1 Appendix E.1 Appendix E.2 Appendix E.3 Appendix E.4 Appendix E.5 Appendix E.6 Appendix E.7 Appendix E.8 Appendix E.9 Appendix E.10 Appendix E.11 Appendix E.12 Appendix E.13 Appendix E.14 Appendix E.15 Appendix E.16 Appendix E.17 Histogram for Question 2. Histogram for Question 26 (reverse scored). Histogram for Question 28. PAR Intervention Timeline, February 14-August 29, 2010. Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (all ages). Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (18-59). Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (60+). Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (60+). Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (60+). ix 153 154 156 213 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248

x Appendix E.18 Appendix E.19 Appendix E.20 Appendix E.21 Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (60+). Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (60+). Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (60+). Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (60+). 249 250 251 252

Huntley

LIST OF TABLES 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Appendix E.1 Appendix E.2 Appendix E.3 Appendix E.4 Appendix E.5 Appendix E.6 Appendix E.7 Appendix E.8 Appendix E.9 Appendix E.10 Appendix E.11 Appendix E.12 Appendix E.13 Appendix E.14 Appendix E.15 Appendix E.16 Appendix E.17 Appendix E.18 Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (All Ages) t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 18-59) t-Test Results, Question 1 (All Ages) t-Test Results, Questions 3 and 24 (Ages 18-59) t-Test Results, Responses Averaged by Participant t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (All ages) t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 18-59) t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 60+) t-Test Results, by Question (All Ages) t-Test Results, by Question (Ages 18-59) t-Test Results, by Question (Ages 60+) Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by Age Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (All Ages) Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (18-59) Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (60+) Interpretive Key Baseline Data (All Ages) Baseline Data (Ages 18-59) Baseline Data (Ages 60+) Endline Data (All Ages) Endline Data (Ages 18-59) Endline Data (Ages 60+) xi 157 158 159 159 220 220 220 221 221 222 223 224 224 225 225 226 226 227 228 229 230 231

Huntley

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AR Action Research

D.Min. CML Doctorate in Ministry Congregational Mission and Leadership program at Luther Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota DT ELCA ELW FMS IOC IRB LCMS n.d. NRSV PAR PDF QUAL QUAN Damascus Travelers Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Evangelical Lutheran Worship (Pew ed.). This is the current hymnal in use by congregations of the ELCA. Faith Maturity Scale (I)nner, (O)uter and (C)onnecting faith orientations, used as FMS analysis categories Institutional Review Board Lutheran Church Missouri Synod No date New Revised Standard Version Participatory Action Research Adobe Portable Document File format Qualitative Research Methods Quantitative Research Methods

xii

Huntley

DEDICATION For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth takes its name. I pray that, according to the riches of his glory, he may grant that you may be strengthened in your inner being with power through his Spirit, and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, as you are being rooted and grounded in love. I pray that you may have the power to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so that you may be filled with all the fullness of God. Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to accomplish abundantly far more than all we can ask or imagine, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen. (Ephesians 3:14-21, NRSV) To my wife, Kim, and my children, Adam and Rachel. Your love, support, and understanding inspire me and reflect Gods grace and love.

xiii

Huntley

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THESIS What the [Central Pacific construction] crews did [when they constructed an unequaled ten miles of railroad and telegraph in one day] will be remembered as long as this Republic lasts. White men born in America were there, along with former slaves whose ancestors came from Africa, plus emigrants from all across Europe, and more than three thousand [Chinese]. There were some Mexicans with at least a touch of Native American blood in them, as well as French Indians and at least a few Native Americans. Everyone was excited, ready to work, eager to show what he could do. Even the Chinese, usually methodical and a bit scornful of the American way of doing things, were stirred to a fever pitch. They and all the others. We are the world, they said. They had come together at this desolate place in the middle of Western North America to do what had never been done before [or since].1 Within the incredible story of the construction of the Transcontinental Railroad are numerous episodes that are truly amazing and seemingly impossible. Some would be extremely difficult even with the best technology available today. One such story is the feat that the Central Pacific accomplished, to win a $10,000 bet against the Union Pacific. To win the bet, crews laid more than ten miles of track in the Transcontinental Railroad in only one day. On that day, working from sunup to sundown, 1,200 workers labored together with a shared commitment to lay around 10.1 miles of track in a single day. The only task they had completed before the beginning of the day was the survey work. Every other taskgrading, laying ties and rails, bending rails, affixing striker plates, spiking the rails,
Stephen E. Ambrose, Nothing Like It in the World: the Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad, 1863-1869 (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000), 349.
1

2 tapping ties and rails, filling dirt between the ties, and setting the poles and wiring the telegraphwas accomplished that one day for the 10.1 mile section of track. Each worker had one specific part to play within the highly structured plan of attack. For example, four workers labored tirelessly to lay rail after rail into place (totaling 125 tons) at a continuous pace. The railroad advanced at a rate of one mile per hour. Each person worked to do their singular task without stopping, as supplies were ferried forward from five different supply trains using horses, carts, and hand tools. At lunchtime, when the work crew had the opportunity to be replaced by a fresh labor force of an additional 1,200 workers, every single worker refused. They were steadfastly focused on setting a new record. The record stands to this day.2 If they had done this simply to win a bet, it is unlikely that the 1,200 men from a wide diversity of backgrounds would have worked as hard as they did to accomplish this feat. If they were just working for a paycheck, it is also unlikely that they would have accomplished this. After all, their pay was the same whether they did it in one day for quadruple pay or in four days for the standard wage. No, there was something else at work here. There was something personal and deeply important that inspired and brought this incredibly diverse group of people, only a few years after the end of the Civil War, to accomplish something that remains unequaled in history. What is it that inspires 1,200 men from around the world to come together and accomplish what everyone else at the time said was impossible? It was a shared vision that they held passionately. They knew, could see, and believed to the core of their beings

Ibid., 349ff.

3 that as they worked together, each with their own special contributions, that they could do it. What, on the other hand, keeps congregations from incarnating the grace-filled hands, eyes, ears, mouth, and heart of Christ to one another and the world? What is preventing this life-changing Good News of reconciliation between the Creator and created human beings from reaching all of creation? Seemingly, it is a lack of shared vision. Too often, we settle for a pale and incomplete version of community that falls woefully short of the fullness of the community in Christ that God wants us to experience. With this in mind, the research of this thesis sought to cultivate shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation with a hope that people would increasingly experience the true unity of community in Christ that Jesus died to create. Introduction Overview This thesis describes research that utilized a process of mixed-methods Participatory Action Research (PAR) to study the impact of cultivating missional vision in the life of a newly developed congregation. In starting a mission congregation, there is a strong emphasis on growth in numbers to achieve a critical mass to sustain it long term. Living Water Lutheran Church,3 a congregation founded approximately nine years before the beginning of the study, was the site for this research. They have been in permanent facilities for around four years. As the pastor of this congregation, the researcher worked to cultivate and foster missional vision in the congregation. This led to lives of personal
3

This is a pseudonym.

4 and communal growth in faith that led people to live in service and witness to others in daily life and vocation. The Researcher worked to foster this understanding and provide motivation for action by working with congregation leaders, in Sunday School classes, at a congregational retreat, in various meetings and forums, and in small groups to cultivate shared missional vision with the congregation in and through specific events. This thesis describes the research and the impact of these efforts.4 Research Question The primary research question for this thesis is, How does cultivating shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? In asking this question, the researcher used concurrent quantitative and qualitative methods to establish a baseline for the congregation in its understanding and activity of faith and mission. The researcher then worked with the congregation and its leaders, in Sunday School classes, at a congregation retreat in various meetings and forums, and in small groups, to cultivate missional vision that inspires, encourages, and actively initiates spiritual growth with a missional view of life and vocation. The researcher then gathered further quantitative and qualitative endline data that, when compared with the baseline data, helped answer the research question.

See appendix A, PAR Intervention Timetable, for a full description of the intervention

timeline.

5 Research Components Outcome The action taken in this research sought to shape a deeper understanding of missional faith practices that members of the congregation would understand and embody in daily life. The intent was that participants would discover new perspectives that that they might live with a deeper understanding and personal practice of faith. This change in perspectives would also yield a more missional approach to vocation and daily life outside of the church, which would have an impact on persons that congregants interact with on a daily basis. This research used concurrent mixed-methods quantitative and other qualitative techniques to gather general and specific data about congregants views and practices of faith, mission, and evangelism. The researcher utilized quantitative and qualitative methods before and after the intervention to gather baseline and endline data to use in evaluating the effects of the intervention. For the quantitative research, the congregation completed a survey via two convenience samples.5 The researcher also conducted qualitative interviews with persons randomly selected from two demographics within the congregationone person who participated in the initial quantitative survey, and one who participated in the Damascus Travelers small groups. The researcher conducted a third interview with the congregation council as a group. The intent of the qualitative interviews was to gain deeper and richer data for analysis.

The researcher gathered the convenience sample from willing participants after worship on a Sunday, both at the baseline and at the endline.

6 Intervention Influencing the Outcome The PAR intervention sought to cultivate missional vision through a series of directed conversations, prayer, and Scripture study to discern and describe specific statements of purpose and guiding principles that, over time, can continue to shape the congregations vision for ministry.6 The PAR intervention attempting to influence the outcome and answer the research question was the cultivation and understanding of missional vision for life and ministry in the congregation. The context for the research is a congregation that began as a mission start ten or more years prior to the research. The congregation signed the charter and officially incorporated in 2001. As the congregation grew, they built a million-dollar facility and completed construction in 2006. In 2008 the founding pastor retired, and the first pastor called by the congregation after the departure of the mission developer took office in early 2009. In getting to know the congregation, the pastor found that there was a prevailing view of mission and evangelism with a Church Growth7 mindset of gathering and feeding people. In this key adolescent phase of development for the congregation, this Participatory Action Research project sought to help the congregation move from understanding evangelism and mission from a Christendom gather and feed mentality to a more missional perspective to equip and send the priesthood of all believers in daily

Dave Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, Lutheran voices (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2007), 46ff. The Church Growth, for purposes of this discussion, is a movement that reached its zenith in the 1990s and focused on church growth through contemporary forms of worship and preaching targeted to the unchurched and demographics of persons desired to become new congregation members.
7

7 vocations. This work occurred during the intervention, while observing changes in the congregation to assess the outcome. Outside Influences Prior to research, there was a potential for other outside influences to have an unintentional impact on the outcome. The first influence is a lack of congregational finances. The economy, along with an increase in expenses due to staff costs, worked together to bring a state of financial difficulty for the congregation during the intervention. Finances can derail a congregation from actively cultivating and working toward articulating faithful, missional vision for ministry. Financial difficulties may have had an impact on the outcome by providing motivation to embrace change and the vision cultivation process more fully. Another potential outside influence on the outcome was in the form of denominational politics. After some denominational decisions prior to the start of research, persons withdrew their membership from the congregation or actively visited and sought other congregations to join. Worship attendance was down roughly 10-20% in the immediate aftermath, and then it stabilized. Three families withdrew from the congregation membership over the course of the intervention. This outside influence was not only related to the impact of financial influences, but there was also a potential for it to have an impact on the effectiveness of the intervention in changing the missional mindset and activity of the congregation. Even so, its impact was also negligible on the outcome. During the course of research, an additional outside influence surfaced. The mission developer had not completely terminated his relationship with the congregation

8 when he retired from full-time ministry. Instead, he held out the option of returning to the congregation as a member with the permission of the successor pastor in the timeframe of a year or so. During the course of the intervention, the mission developer realized that this arrangement kept the congregation connected to the mission developer in a way that hindered connection with the successor. Midway through the intervention, the mission developer wrote a letter severing the relationship and removing the possibility of returning soon, which quickly strengthened the congregations ties to the successor pastor. This allowed the intervention to have a stronger impact. Importance of Research Currently, a significant amount of research exists that discusses considerations in starting or planting a new congregation. In addition, there is a growing body of work that wrestles with concepts and implications of the missional church movement. These writings discuss general theory, and there are even some resources for helping a well-established congregation to cultivate missional vision and to become more missional. There is scant work (if any) that has been done, however, on how a congregation in the adolescent phase8 of development makes a turn in understanding mission as being outwardly directed through the lives of congregants. This missional, outward direction runs counter to the inward direction and connectivity with the mission developer pastor that a fledgling congregation often experiences as it grows to become financially independent.

In congregational life-cycle theory, this is the phase between birth/infancy and maturity; see chapter 2, Organizational Life Cycle Theory.

9 Unfortunately, some congregations do not make this turn from inward to outward focus in ministry. It may be that this inward focus in the congregations inception and formative years sows the seeds for an established congregation who eventually declines and struggles in a survival mode. The missional church movement has many who find the Christendom model of planting congregations as inwardly focused franchises of the denomination to be inadequate as we enter into this post-modern, post-Christendom era. Infants and young children require a significant effort to nurture and sustain them at a young age. This may or may not be true of mission-start congregations. It is true, however, that an adolescent person needs to learn how to turn focus from one of receiving care to one of living for others and contributing to society. This research assumes that this is also true of a young congregation. The PAR intervention and reflection seeks to contribute some insights into how that may happen in a newly developed congregation. The intent is for this research to give benefit from information derived from this study to the researcher, the congregation, and perhaps even other congregations in a similar phase of organizational life. Another intention is to improve the ministry of both the researcher and the congregation at Living Water by means of the PAR intervention and research itself. Other Questions Related to the Research Question There are some questions to address related to conducting this research. The first question is, How does one cultivate inspiring missional vision? Some think it best that a leader such as the pastor, supported by prayer and the community, ought to discern the vision alone, and then cast it in the midst of the congregation. Others advocate a mutual

10 process of discernment and agreement, through cogenerative, mutual conversation. This research used a mutual cogenerative cultivation process. Another question, following the determination of sound missional vision, asks, How do we inspire others to embrace the vision? This research utilized a model that cultivates vision in the midst of the congregation. This has the best chance, in the long term, of inspiring more congregants to take ownership and make decisions using the cultivated vision in a broader, shared leadership structure. This raises another question; How do we train and equip congregational leaders to participate cogeneratively with the pastor and congregation in embracing the vision cultivation process? Again, the effectiveness of the intervention relied, in large part, upon the ability of the pastor and council to involve as much of the congregation as possible in the vision cultivation and discernment. The desire was for as many people as possible to invest in the process to increase the likelihood of the visions applicability to the congregation and encourage its widespread acceptance. Using Dave Dauberts Living Lutheran9 as a rough outline, leaders received training on how to do this. Even so, the researcher discovered that it is also important to cultivate vision for the process itself among the congregants and leaders. The final question is one relating to the broader applicability of the findings; How can others use what we learned in this research? The hope is that others in similar contexts can access and utilize some of the lessons learned in the course of this research to make a turn toward more fulfilling and missional ministry.

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation.

11 Literatures and Key Theories Four insights yield helpful considerations in answering the research question. In considering literature and disciplines from non-ecclesial sources, it is helpful to consider concepts and insights in the areas of communal social dynamics, the use of vision in leading and bringing change, cultivating shared vision, and practical considerations for planning and implementing the intervention. Sociological Dynamics of Community Dynamics of community are helpful in considering the impact of this process on the congregations communal structures. One perspective for looking at the congregation and shaping the intervention is organizational theory. A key insight into congregational organization is, The church is. The church does what it is. The church organizes what it does.10 This theory was an important concept to remember in facilitating missional conversation during the intervention phase. When planting a new congregation, the denominational authorities dictate that the organization must use structures contained in the mandated Model Constitution for Congregations.11 Using this approach, however, completely bypasses important discernment as the congregation wrestles with identity (the church is) and ministry activity (the church does what it is).

Craig Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007), 17. Model Constitution for Congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), 2009), http://www.elca.org/Who-We-Are/Our-ThreeExpressions/Churchwide-Organization/Office-of-the-Secretary/Congregation-Administration/ModelConstitution-for-Congregations.aspx, (accessed June 29, 2010).
11

10

12 With this top-down model, congregations are given the organizational structure (the church organizes what it does), which then shapes ministry activity and congregational identity. In bypassing key discernment about the congregations identity and activity, this can prevent the congregation and its members from discerning and accepting Gods call for ministry and mission. The structures can shape and drive ministry apart from the congregations identity and Gods call to mission. When this happens, a congregation settles for something less than the fullness of its true potential. When organizational leaders use similar top-down methods in vision casting, they can discover or create problems in properly discerning vision for ministry. This lack of cogenerative discernment can lead to problems in generating enthusiasm within the congregation for embracing the vision. Instead, by cultivating missional vision using cogenerative or bottom-up methods, congregants can take greater ownership in the visioning process. Cultivating, rather than casting vision is more likely to yield vision that better fits the congregation and the wider community. In considering a grass-roots mission cultivation process, it was necessary to consider local congregational characteristics. Living Water is a newly established congregation, and from a life-cycle perspective, it seems to be transitioning from infancy to adolescence. Living Water is transitioning from inward-directed initial growth to outward-directed missional activity. Therefore, it was important to consider components of community awareness and ways to help congregants discover how to share personal faith in everyday conversations in cultivating missional vision. Another aspect to consider about communal structures in contemporary society is a trend toward communal self-forming in bottom-up structures. With the growing

13 influence of the Internet and social networks in society, our notions of community and means for community formation are changing. With Wikipedia, blogs, social networking sites, email, and other technological forms of connectivity, communal structures are increasingly forming in a bottom-up fashion. This differs from traditional ways of forming community through top-down organizational design. In this research, it was important to provide ways for community to self-form in defining vision through a grass-roots style of vision cultivation. The specific characteristics and aspects of congregational life at Living Water were important to consider in answering the research question. Living Water is a relatively new congregation. It began through the ministry of a gifted and engaging mission-developer pastor who canvassed the community and brought the congregation to a point of construction, after which he retired from ministry. Living Water is an extremely healthy congregation. They are now moving from initial mission development to a sustained and established ministry presence in the community. In saying goodbye to the mission developer, they are beginning to move from a communal structure that is pastor-centered to a community of interwoven relationships. This movement in communal structure and organization is essential for them to make as they intentionally transition from a top-down pastor-centered structure to one that is egalitarian, making decisions in a bottom-up fashion. Making this transition helps nurture more intimacy in communal structures at Living Water. In todays Internet-connected society, people are experiencing increasing numbers of superficial relationships with fewer intimate relationships. This characteristic is opposed to a desire for a congregation to have deeper, more perichoretic relationships

14 patterned after relationships Christians share through baptism into the triune God. This desire for deeper and more personal relationships undergirds the rationale for forming small groups in the vision cultivation process. In forming these groups and enhancing personal, intimate relationships, congregants are already partially realizing the goal of missional vision. It also helps create deeper relationships that nurture grass-roots cultivated vision. The Efficacy of Vision for Leading and Bringing Change Without a shared concept, understanding and commitment for each person to focus on their part of the construction process, and without a strong desire to complete over ten miles of railroad and telegraph, it is doubtful that 1,200 people would have ever worked together to accomplish this amazing feat. It was a shared vision and passion to do so that united this sizable and diverse group of people to do what seemed impossible. They even did it with carts, horses, and a few steam locomotives. Like an unseen force that brings two magnets together with a common bond that is difficult to break apart, vision can unite a diverse group of people in common purpose to accomplish things that would otherwise be impossible. In society, people have a variety of talents, gifts, dreams, and desires. Persons seek to use their talents to bring their dreams to fruition or satisfy their desires. At times, this can lead people to engage in destructive behavior as they seek their own ends. At other times, with the appropriate methods of governance, people can come together to accomplish beneficial goals. As diverse persons or groups of people describe and appropriate shared vision, it is possible for groups to work together for the common good. As vision is discerned and articulated, then lovingly embraced, community can form that

15 works for the benefit of individuals and society. Shared vision, cultivated in the midst of the gathered group, is essential for this to happen. Cultivating Shared Vision This type of shared vision does not happen by accident; it comes through intentionally relating with one another, sharing perspectives, and wrestling with questions of faith and life. Four concepts help in cultivating a vision that individuals can share to unite a diverse group of people. First, the process should be egalitarian, minimizing the influence of those who would seek to subvert, control, or overshadow the contributions of others. Second, the process should increase the relationships and interconnectedness of the group. Third, the process should cogeneratively cultivate a shared vision, through prayer, Bible study, and mutual conversation. Finally, the process must be open to everyone in the organization, providing numerous opportunities for people to enter into the conversation. The PAR intervention utilized a vision cultivation process that sought to help congregants discern and describe Gods purpose for life and ministry, along with principles that guide the congregants in making decisions in life and ministry. As these two thingspurpose and guiding principlesare lived with over time, the congregation begins to appreciate Gods vision for ministry.12 This vision gives the congregation perspectivesvisionfor making decisions and moving forward in ministry together. The process of cultivation is similar to that of a community garden. In commercial farming, a paid farmer works the land with other hired hands to maximize yield and

12

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, 46.

16 corporate profit. The farmer uses the plants and the land to maximize personal gain. In a community garden, on the other hand, a community forms around the shared vision of cultivating a garden, which provides food for the community. The relationship between community and garden is one of mutual nurturing and benefit, as community forms in the act of tending and lovingly caring for the garden as it bears food for the community. Practical Considerations In order for an effort to organize people to be effective, it must capture the interest of the people in the group, it must have structures that facilitate the health and growth of the organization, and it must inspire the groups members to participate energetically in it. In seeking to organize a group, leaders can hold out promise to the members that will encourage them to participate in the organization. Leaders also provide tools that effectively facilitate participation and interaction as the members engage the organization and receive the promised benefits. Finally, leaders inspire members to give of themselves through a bargain that defines what they bring to the group and give to others in sharing the promised benefits.13 The intervention, the PAR intervention contained these three components in its planning stages to maximize the impact on Living Water and encourage the widest participation by the members. Biblical and Theological Perspectives In addition to theoretical insights, Scripture along with theological constructs, also yields helpful insights into implementing a strategy for answering the research question. Specifically, biblical and theological perspectives yield insights into perspectives on
Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations (New York: Penguin Press, 2008), 260ff.
13

17 shared vision inspiring missional activity, constitutive components of missional vision, and means for cultivating vision for mission. Vision Inspiring Missional Activity In considering what impact vision can have on communal action, it is helpful to remember that vision is a way for an organization to view and perceive life from a shared perspective. It is a way of viewing the world that allows people to make decisions together in ways that take shape in a community as they live with Gods mission in daily life. In addition, the process of discerning visionwhether it is cast or cultivatedcan impact missional activity, even as shared vision can direct it. In Exodus, God calls Moses to climb Mt. Sinai to receive Gods vision for the Hebrew people, whom God has recently freed from slavery in Egypt. With awesome and fearsome displays of power, God commands Moses to order the people to stay away from the mountain under penalty of death. Over the course of 40 days and nights, God gives Moses the vision for the Hebrew people as they relate to one another and to God on their journey to and occupancy of the land God promised to Abraham. Moses casts this vision, and the people are to accept unquestioningly. It contains precepts that seemingly intend to help Gods people to continue to live peaceably and freely on their journey to the promised land and after they occupy the land. Meanwhile, as Moses receives the Law from God on Mt. Sinai, the people avert their attention due to fear of other, immediate concerns. As a result, they convince Aaron to take over as their leader, and they cast their gold into the form of a golden calf that they may worship. Near the end of Moses 40 days with God, the Lord commands Moses to return to his people and exact a punishment for failing to wait to receive the vision for

18 communal life that Moses is to cast. As a result of their decision to reject God, 3,000 people are put to death and God sends a plague upon them. Six aspects of the mission casting process are evident in this story in Exodus. First, the success of the vision casting endeavor requires that the leader, Moses, be an extremely talented and charismatic leader. Moses is to discern the vision from God and bring it to the people in a hierarchical manner, and the people are to fearfully accept the vision that their leader casts. This fear is necessary to motivate them to accept and embody the vision even though fear is a short-term and fickle motivator. Although the vision itself is missional, it is cast in such a manner that it objectifies and inherently dehumanizes the people as they are forced to accept it. In the person of Jesus Christ and in his ministry, however, God takes on human flesh to walk among Gods people mutually as they bear one anothers burdens. In this, Jesus cultivates missional vision mutually with the disciples. In the Sermon on the Mount, for example, Jesus raises and affirms the Law while applying it anew to the contemporary context. He then comes down from the mount to cultivate vision for Gods kingdom through conversations and daily life with the disciples and Gods people. Ultimately, instead of forcing Gods people to bear the results of their rejection of God and Gods vision for daily life as God did through Moses, Jesus as God enfleshed bears the worst of humanitys rejection by personally and physically bearing humanitys rejection on the cross and overcoming it in the resurrection. This forms the foundation for God to further bear the burdens of life and to cultivate missional vision mutually through the Holy Spirit in the ministry of the disciples and beyond.

19 In the book of Acts, the apostles wrestled with questions about whether the fledgling Christian movement would be one confined primarily within the Hebrew community, or if it would be one that is universally inclusive of Jews and Gentiles. Peter, for example, had a vision from God as he visited a Gentile centurion who later believed the Gospel and entered the Christian community through baptism with his household. Paul and Barnabas intentionally went out into Gentile communities proclaiming the Gospel and baptizing converts. As the question came to the forefront among the early Christian community, people gathered in Jerusalem to decide if this movement would ultimately require converts to be subject to the specific provisions of the Law through circumcision and a decision to follow the Mosaic Law, or if baptism and faith in Christ were the sole criterion for admission to the Christian community. As they discussed this together, God cultivated vision within the community for people to reach out in mission to all. According to this new, shared, and missional vision, the Christian movement would be universally welcoming and would extend beyond the Hebrew community. Six aspects of missional vision are contained in this story in Acts. It is a new way of looking at communal life. God reveals it and the community, together, discerns it. The vision that God reveals is one that embraces the surrounding community, as the Christian community listens to Scripture, tradition, voices in the community, and the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit leads a process that includes people in the entire community, both lay and apostles. The process is missional, as God awakens new perspectives in the community and sends it forth to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

20 Components of Missional Vision With roots in the Gospel in our Culture Network, the missional church movement has particular theological emphases. In cultivating missional vision, these theological concepts served as an initial framework in research for participants to use in conversation. This helped bring forth concepts that are consistent with biblical principles and that are theologically sound. There were three components relevant to this research. The first is trinitarian theology with emphasis on the perichoretic union of the three divine persons. The second is an understanding of the missio Dei14 as a call to mission that invites everyone into Gods reconciling reign of care and redemption. The third is an understanding that Jesus Christ is the center of this mission of reconciliation, which flows out through time and space as the Holy Spirit works in and through the Church. The first and foundational component of missional vision is from the social model of the triune God. The three persons of God exist in a perfect, mutual, loving, and interdwelling union. Gods unity of three persons comes largely from a perfect and loving union wherein God is one God, as the three persons act in concert with one another in one divine will. As the three persons of the Trinity relate to one another and act with one will, they do so in embracing creation, including humanity, in a gracious, caring, and redeeming invitation to join the perichoretic15 fellowship. This restores a relationship of mutual accompaniment between God and creation. The Father sends the Son and Spirit to invite, gather, and draw us into this amazing fellowship as the Spirit unites us to the
14

Missio Dei is Latin for Gods mission. See chapter 3 for more on the concept of perichoresis.

15

21 humanity of Christ through baptism and faith. With this in mind, a missional vision contains a call to go forth and connect with others to form relationships that embody trinitarian fellowship, care, redemption and accompaniment that Christians graciously experience through faith as the Holy Spirit unites us to Christ. This sending is part of the missio Dei wherein God sends the Church into all of creation. It includes Gods loving action to redeem relationships and people broken by sin. In doing this, God assaults the powers and principalities of darkness, sin, and brokenness as Gods Kingdom enters creation to reconcile us to our creator. The reconciling reign of God is Good News, it is already breaking into history even as its fullness has not come fully, it changes everything, it centers in Christ as King, and people enter into it through the Spirits work in the Church. Finally, through the daily vocation and faithful activity of Gods people, the Holy Spirit does the work of Christ to reconcile the world to God. The Spirit gifts all of Gods people to do this work. As the people of God use their gifts and talents in ways shaped by Gods vision for life, God works in the world. God accomplishes the mission of care, redemption, and reconciliation in and through these relationships. Just as the two natures of Christhumanity and divinitydwell in a mutually interdwelling, perichoretic and hypostatic union, so too the Holy Spirit and the Church dwell in a mutual, perichoretic, and hypostatic union. In this way, the mutuality of Gods kenotic self-giving lifts up a fallen humanity to enter Gods kingdom in the person of Jesus Christ. Gods people then go forth, embodying the mutuality of the ministry of the Spirit as the Church that proclaims and brings Gods kingdom into a world otherwise ruled by power and darkness.

22 Cultivating Missional Vision Having considered some aspects of the missional church movement that are important aspects of missional vision, it is then helpful to consider some biblical and theological considerations in cultivating this vision among Gods people. This concept of cultivating missional vision also necessitates a look at three practical considerations in the light of Scripture. An example of God cultivating vision for mission is in Jesus ministry with Simon Peter. Throughout Jesus ministry, Peter was one of the first disciples to step forward as a leader. On one such occasion, Peter made a startling confession that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). This confession earned him praise from Jesus even as Jesus renamed Simon as Peter, calling him the Petra, or foundation rock for Christ to build the Church. Sometimes, this leadership led Peter to being embarrassed. For example, immediately after being named Peter,16 he showed the incompleteness of his understanding of Gods vision as he rebuked Jesus who said that he must be betrayed and die in Jerusalem. Over time, however, God worked with Peter until finally after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, Peter could boldly proclaim the Good News of Christs death and resurrection. Even beyond that, however, God continued to cultivate vision for mission in Peter. God worked in this way with other apostles, such as Saul of Tarsus, whom Jesus also renames as Paul. According to Paul, the Holy Spirit draws people together as one Body of Christ. In gifting people for a variety of work and capabilities, the Spirit works

Cf. Matthew 16:21-23. All future Scripture citations are from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).

16

23 through the diversity of Gods people to accomplish the one missio Dei of realizing the fullness of Gods reconciling and redeeming reign. This means that it is important to remember that the Spirit, not just shared vision, unites and works through the breadth of Christs Body of believers. From a theological perspective, it is important to consider ways that God draws persons together into community with shared vision. As members of Christs Body release control over circumstances and enter into the unsettling reign of God, they often leave comfort zones to enter into wilderness experiences. As people leave comfort zones of safety and self-control, God often creates a sense within community of comradery, unity of vision, and shared purpose. Missional leaders encourage members of the congregation to enter these moments and shape structures that cultivate and foster missional vision and activity through shared, cogenerative experiences. Another theological perspective that is important to consider in answering the research question is the understanding of vision itself. For purposes of this PAR intervention, vision is understood as being composed of a communal understanding of Gods purpose for the congregation, that they work to accomplish according to specific, biblical guiding principles over time. In this way, congregants make decisions and act in accordance with perspectives gleaned from Gods vision for daily life. The fullness of Gods future becomes clear as people live and act with their understandings of this shared vision. A final practical consideration in cultivating missional vision is appropriate congregational participation in large and small groups. During his ministry, Jesus alternated between utilizing large groups for teaching and sharing information that

24 occasionally was confusing to the hearers, and utilizing small groups wherein he nurtured deeper relationships and explained teachings that were confusing to the larger groups. It is important to note that this movement between large and small groups was an important part of Jesus strategy for nurturing intimate and closer relationships in small groups as he equipped the Apostles for future ministry. He did this even as he healed people, taught, and embodied Gods in-breaking Kingdom with larger groups. With this in mind, the PAR intervention contained a mix of small and large group components. The Damascus Travelers small groups, the congregational retreat, and the four Wednesday night vision cultivation sessions acted to create and nurture close relationships for conversation and the unleashing of missional imagination and cogenerative discernment. Larger group discussions, such as the ones in forums and a congregational meeting, along with material shared in sermons and Bible Studies, allowed for sharing information and for decision-making in a forum appropriate to a larger group. Other Matters Ethical Concerns With any social science research, the potential exists for harm to the participants of the study. An Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Luther Seminary reviewed proposed questionnaires and methods to ensure that risk to participants was low. Even so, there are some things to consider with this type of research. There are a number of ethical considerations in relating to people and interviewing them for a research project. First, there is the issue of confidentiality. In order to describe the data and give some explanation about the researchers conclusions, it is necessary to share a few details about the participants responses. In the interests of

25 supporting categories and observation, it was necessary to share some of the participants comments without attribution. This is because results without supporting data could be suspect. It is necessary to support conclusions so that the reader can verify that they are reasonable. On the other hand, if the researcher were to publish a transcript of the interviews and show a full documentation of data supporting the conclusions and results, then there would be no confidentiality at all. This could have precluded the ability to gather data from a willing participant. Reporting of results in connection with this research sought to find a balance between verifying the reliability of conclusions and protecting the confidentiality of research participants. Another problem is the fact that it may be possible to trace specific remarks or results back to the originator, considering the size and field of research. In balancing a need to provide enough information to give an idea of how reliable the data may be, and in protecting the anonymity of the participants, the researcher kept the specific results as minimal, general, and unattributable as possible. A third ethical concern relates to the relationship between the interviewees and the researcher. As a member of the PAR research community, the researcher needed to take care not to damage or negatively influence relationships that existed before, during, and after the research. An additional concern is the fact that the researcher is a pastor, and as researcher, community member, and pastor, there are a number of roles that enter into any specific interview and the research in general. With that in mind, the researcher composed and selected qualitative and quantitative questions with an attempt to be general and to avoid unnecessary risk.

26 The researcher was sensitive to considerations of power that the researcher holds as a pastor in the congregation. The researcher exercised great care to avoid problems with issues relating to power. The final data had to be viewed questioning what information came from the relationship as pastor with the interviewee. The researcher will destroy all specific, attributable data, including interview recordings and transcripts, three years after approval of the thesis. Finally, there is also an ethical concern or consideration relating to any interview itself. In the actual interview process, there are questions. Some of these questions may even be probing questions. Any time one asks a question of another, their relationship changes forever. There are degrees to this, of course, varying with the intensity or intimacy of the question. For example, asking if one prefers paper or plastic bags at the grocery store will alter the relationship (e.g., Aha, she likes plastic bags not very friendly to the environment!) but not in a way that would likely be noticeable or drastic. On the other hand, asking questions that are more intimate in nature (e.g., asking about past indiscretions, or asking if one has ever lied to the questioner) has the potential to alter the relationship radically between the two parties. These questions will even alter the relationship if the interviewee never answers them, because they have broached subject and one cannot retreat from that fact. Furthermore, a question may not only alter the relationship between the two parties involved, but it may also alter relationships with external third parties. A married person asking another person on a date, for example, not only alters the relationship between the two parties, but also alters the relationship between one or both of the parties and their spouse(s). This ethical concern constantly

27 needed to be in the forefront of the researchers mind, both in developing the questions and in conducting the interviews. Definitions of Key Terms Communal/vocational ministryis ministry of daily life, primarily outside of the congregational or familial setting. Vocation, from the Latin word vocatio or call, speaks to the fact that, as a member of the priesthood of believers, God calls all baptized children to live and share faith and the Gospel in all aspects of daily life. This relates to missional aspects of the Social Trinity concept. Communitasis an experience of communality and comradeship17 that forms a group as it mutually experiences a shared incident and/or overcomes a common problem or adversary. Communitas implies a depth of relationship and comradery that is only forged through a shared experience of liminality. Cultivating a missional visionis work done to plant the Word and encourage leaders and other members to listen together in discerning Gods vision for life and mission. When done properly, it utilizes a grass-roots process wherein the Spirit speaks broadly and vision emerges from the wider group. Dechurched personsare those who have, for whatever reason, walked away from organized religion for a significant period. Liminalityderives from the Latin word limen, or threshold. A liminal experience is one that requires a person or group to depart from the confines of safe and familiar environs to enter into a more dangerous and uncertain experience of wilderness,
Alan Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2006), 218.
17

28 transition or uncertainty. Often times, it refers to an unexpected experience that draws one out of the comfort zone with others, who can respond by working together in the period of change or transition to form bonds of comradery found in communitas.18 Missionalis a school of thinking, with foundations in the Gospel in Our Culture Network, which seeks to ground ecclesiology, theology, and life in a trinitarian-based worldview. This worldview sees Christians as gathered, nurtured, and sent as a priesthood of believers to bear the ministry of Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign. Newly developed congregationis a congregation that is less than five years into its new building with the first post-mission developer pastor, who is making the next step with the congregation in life and ministry beyond initial formation. Using the language of life-cycle theory, it is a congregation transitioning from infancy to adolescence. Participatory Action Research (PAR)is a form of the social science Action Research method performed by a researcher who is part of the community under research. Action Research includes an intervention or action within the researched community, with intent to improve the participants situation.19 The researcher studies the community and reports the results and conclusions regarding the impact of the intervention.

18

Cf. Ibid., 220-21.

Davydd J. Greenwood and Morten Levin, Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change, 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2007), 3.

19

29 PerichoresisWith respect to the Trinity, perichoresis refers to the mutual and reciprocal interdwelling of the persons of the Trinity with one another. In a community setting, perichoresis can be a form of circulating around the neighborhood, or mutual conversation with an experience of mutually bearing one anothers burdens. Qualitative researchis a means for exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem. The process of research involves emerging questions and procedures; collecting data in the participants setting; analyzing the data inductively, building from particulars to general themes; and making interpretations of the meaning of the data.20 Quantitative researchis a means for testing objective theories by examining the relationship among variables. These variables can be measured, typically on instruments, so that numbered data can be analyzed using statistical procedures.21 While quantitative research is normally used in research methods that posit a hypothesis that is evaluated using a number of variables, this PAR research used quantitative techniques to evaluate the impact of the intervention on the practices and perspectives of the congregation in answering the research question. The researcher also used baseline quantitative data to gain perspectives in evaluating overall congregation members perspectives and attitudes to assist in designing and conducting the PAR intervention.

John W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 3rd ed. (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2009), 232.
21

20

Ibid., 233.

30 Social Trinityis an understanding of the triune God that emphasizes the relationality of the three persons of God who unite perpetually in a single, perichoretic, mutual, interdwelling, sending, inviting, caring, and redeeming relationship of love. Unchurched personsare normally adults who have never been active in organized religion or congregations. VocationWith roots in the Latin word vocatio, or calling, vocation is the embodiment and daily living of the Priesthood of Believers as the Holy Spirit works in daily life to gift believers and help them to share the love of Christ as a catalyst in the fulfillment of Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign in the world. Summary The participatory action research that this thesis describes sought to answer the question, How can cultivating missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? In answering this question, the researcher intervened in a newly developed congregation to cultivate missional vision. The researcher then reflected on the results gathered through quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This research relies upon theoretical and theological concepts both in designing and conducting the research, and in drawing conclusions from the data. There are four general areas for theoretical design and reflection in this research. The key theories pertain to sociological dynamics of community, the efficacy of vision for leading and bringing change, cultivating shared vision, and other practical considerations for designing, conducting, and reflecting upon the research.

Huntley

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURES AND KEY THEORIES Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their toil. For if they fall, one will lift up the other; but woe to one who is alone and falls and does not have another to help. Again, if two lie together, they keep warm; but how can one keep warm alone? And though one might prevail against another, two will withstand one. A threefold cord is not quickly broken. (Ecclesiastes 4:9-12) Royal, Illinois is a small town that consists of a couple of grain elevators at the intersection of a railroad and County Road 20. With only a few dozen houses, the town boasts a minimal population of around 300 people. Nonetheless, this small, rural community quietly shares a heritage of a community that can accomplish great things with shared vision. Nearly a hundred years ago, the people of St. John Lutheran Church decided to move their church building into town, to serve current and future generations of people in the village of Royal better.1 Not everyone initially wanted to move the church building; the vote to move prevailed by a narrow margin.2 Nonetheless, having made the decision, the congregation came together and embraced the vision for a ministry within the village of Royal. The people worked together for many long, hard hours to move their church home. Carefully and lovingly, the men and boys of the congregation deconstructed the church, brick by brick, and transported the bricks from the rural country church into the
Cf. St. Johns official website, St. John Lutheran Church History, n.d., http://www.stjohnroyal.org/history.html, (accessed March 31, 2011).
2 1

Ibid.

31

32 village of Royal. There, the congregations women and older men painstakingly cleaned the mortar from the bricks, one by one, to provide the building blocks for a new St. John Lutheran Church to serve the people of Royal. It was a shared labor of love. The church still stands today, with 827 members and an average attendance of 195 people.3 Furthermore, this embodied example of people working together with shared vision in a labor of love made an impact on the wider community of Royal. Several years later, around the time of the towns centennial anniversary in 1982, people began to talk to one another about the need for a larger community building that they could use for special events. Royal is isolated on the Illinois prairie, and the town needed a large building for public use. Through mutual conversation among the townspeople, vision of a community building that they could use for special occasions emerged. United with common vision and purpose, they worked together to construct a Community Building to benefit the current and future people of Royal. Yet how could this small, rural village of common farmers and townspeople afford to build a structure large enough to meet their needs? Fortunately, for the people of Royal, a brick apartment building an hour away in Champaign, Illinois needed to be demolished. The owner promised to give the bricks to them for use in constructing a community building. Inspired by the memories and example of the people of St. John Lutheran, the community gathered the bricks from the demolished building, transported them, and worked together to accomplish the arduous task of cleaning the mortar from each individual brick. The people then built the new community building with these
This is from the official website of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Find a Congregation - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, n.d., http://www.elca.org, (accessed March 31, 2011).
3

33 bricks, completing it within a year after the centennial. The building still stands today and the people of Royal use it routinely for personal and public events at little or no cost. In cultivating missional vision, it is important for a community to gather and unite around a shared vision for life together. In order for the community to articulate and embrace a shared way of viewing life and making decisions, it is important for them to share a common vision or outlook that can unite the members of the community and guide their journey together. A community will most fully embrace and embody this vision when it is cogeneratively cultivated in the community, to reflect the breadth of wisdom of the entire group, and to ensure that members of the community share and live it in daily life. Sociological Dynamics of Community Society contains overlapping groups and sub-groups in community. These groups have numerous dynamics in how they react to the environment they are in, how they collectively function in acting and making decisions, and in the characteristics they share in living together. In contemplating the effect of cultivating missional vision in a congregation, it is important to consider sociological characteristics of organizations and communities. Being unique, all organizations act differently. Even so, organizations still bear similarities in characteristics or attributes by virtue of being organizations. Organizational theory is helpful in considering traits that most organized groups share. Once formed, organizations can even take on human life-cycle traits as corporate entities. Organizations form, they mature, and they can die. As a newly developed congregation matures beyond inwardly-focused infancy, it is important to foster habits of cultivating

34 missional vision that encourage broad-based community participation, moving from an inwardly-directed communal motion to an outwardly-directed one. Means of shaping community that focus in a bottom-up structure, are more egalitarian, and contain participative aspects are currently evolving from technology and the Internet. This is important to consider in forming community and cultivating shared missional vision. Organizational Structures and Vision In order for a group to become an organization, it must form structures and relationships for making decisions and working together as a cohesive group. In organizational theory, as applied to congregations, the group functions in a healthy manner to the extent that members work together with a clear understanding of whom they are and why they exist. In working together, a congregation lives this identity and acts cohesively to the extent that they share vision for ministry. In other words, The church is. The church does what it is. The church organizes what it does.4 This means that, as an organization, a congregation forms with a shared and agreed-upon concept of identity and purpose. A congregation may perceive itself as a Spirit-led perichoretic communion of believers that embodies Christs presence5 through which the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God breaks into our world. A congregation that understands itself in this way will act differently than one that understands itself to be a place for believers to come for spiritual nourishment within a Christian community. Both of these congregations will act and form organizational structures differently, in line with actions that are based upon their understandings of
4

Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit, 17. These concepts will be discussed in Chapter 3.

35 their individual identities. Put differently, the church has a specific identity, will act based upon that shared understanding of its identity, and will create organizational structures to support its shared action. This is an important insight for work at Living Water. When planting a new congregation, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) requires the organization to contain structures outlined in the mandated Model Constitution for Congregations.6 Using this approach, however, completely bypasses conversation and communal discernment with respect to the first two statementsThe church is, the church does what it is.7 By constitutionally mandating church structures regardless of congregational identity and action, denominations circumvent key communal discernment of a congregations identity, vision, activity, and mission. This can inhibit the congregation from shaping missional structures. Instead, the Model Constitution proscribes ecclesiological structures in a one-size-fits-all mentality, thereby forcing the congregation, with varying degrees of success, to work within this generic structure. In this top-down model, leadership within the organization often brings vision to the organization in the form of vision casting. In this form of visioning, congregational ministry may or may not flow from Gods call for ministry and mission. With traditional vision casting, a visionary or charismatic leader discerns and describes a future, then brings that vision to the congregation. The leader then expends sizable effort to motivate the congregation to work together to achieve the vision. In this model, the leader is under significant pressure to be the expert who brings the full, complete, and inspiring vision to
6

Model Constitution for Congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit, 17.

36 the congregation. The leader then expects the congregation to provide the resources, to follow the person in charge, and to work together to accomplish the cast vision. Another, perhaps better way, is to start first with methods that discern identity and activity in mission with a bottom-up method of visioning in a congregation.8 With these methods, a congregation utilizes this grass-roots method through shared vision cultivation. With a grass-roots communal vision-cultivation model, the congregation engages in dialog to mutually discern and define a shared vision for making sense of events and for deciding how to act together. Instead of having the leader cast a future vision for everyone to accomplish, a congregation can prayerfully work together to discern and articulate a shared understanding of Gods vision for ministry. Leadership in this model nurtures relationships, facilitates healthy dialog, and fosters trust in the congregation, as members work together to discern and embody the shared vision. Again, instead of casting a vision and enticing people to invest in it and work for it, the Spirit-led community mutually discerns and owns the vision. After vesting in the discernment process, the community is more likely to embrace the shared vision and work together in it. Vision discernment has the greatest likelihood of motivating congregants to change behaviors and to begin to align behavior with the cultivated missional vision personally.9 The way an organization visions and organizes how it does, therefore, impacts its identity. A top-down organization will begin to understand itself in terms of authority,

Dave Daubert, Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities, in The Missional Church and Leadership Formation: Helping Congregations Develop Leadership Capacity, ed. Craig Van Gelder (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2009), 148ff.
9

Ibid., 149ff.

37 operating from a position of power. Bottom-up organizations will begin to understand themselves in terms that are more egalitarian. This change in direction for visioning processes from top-down to bottom-up is becoming increasingly necessary for twenty-first century congregations ostensibly entering the post-Christendom era.10 At times, the one-size-fits-all organizational structures of Christendom are hindering churches living in contemporary society. Increasingly, post-Christendom congregations are realizing that they need to articulate new understandings of church life and ecclesiology. Instead of forcing the Gospel into a culture and focusing on survival, many congregations are working to form church structures that are missional and that faithfully embody cultural tendencies according to biblical principles. It is hard work to engage local contexts in grass-roots dialog, so that church structures authentically embody biblical principles to serve the local community better. It is far easier to take ecclesiastically approved organizational structures and force local congregations to fit the mold in top-down fashion. With this in mind, it is clear that congregations and church organizations would do well to spend time considering their organizations call to ministry and their activity, and then define how they will structure their organizations to support that ministry. In order to do that, congregations and churches may need to reshape their understandings of identity and ecclesiology. For a church or congregation to be truly missional, it is best to

For a fuller discussion of this insight, see Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church. Hirsch compares various characteristics of the apostolic, Christendom, and emergent church ecclesiologies. He contends that the reformation sowed seeds to separate the Constantinian church and state marriage that are coming to fruition today. He advocates a grass-roots ecclesiology that allows community to form biologically, without rigid, hierarchical structures. This research contends that something in the middlea flexible, bottom-up congregational structurewould be a helpful improvement in supporting congregational ministry and mission.

10

38 base organizational structures and ecclesiology upon theological constructs, and to consider theoretical insights, so that activity can most effectively flow from the congregations identity. Once this happens, the congregation can live together, corporately, and can begin to take on characteristics of a coherent and healthy living organism. Organizational Life Cycle Theory Life Cycle Theory likens the behavior of organizations to that of living organisms.11 In this theory, an organization lives together and adopts characteristics similar to those of individual persons, moving over time through individual biological life stagesbirth, infancy, adolescence, prime, maturity, aristocracy, bureaucracy, and death. This theory holds that congregations tend to follow this trajectory from birth, upward to maturity, then downward toward death unless rebirth occurs. This happens by tapping again the life sources inherent in the birth story of the congregation or in discovering a new sense of mission in a changed context.12 This means that all congregations are in various phases of life, with varying phase-dependent gene structures of energizing (E), programs (P), administration (A), and inclusion (I).13 A newly established congregation, like Living Water, will need to make adjustments as it advances through these life stages in moving beyond mission status and

11

Martin F. Saarinen, The Life Cycle of a Congregation (Bethesda: The Alban Institute, 2001

1986), 3.
12

Ibid., 7. Ibid., 4-5.

13

39 becoming an established congregation. As it grows and becomes more firmly established, the congregation advances from infancy through adolescence and beyond. Infant congregations on mission status receive support in large part from the wider church. The Infant congregation inherits a high level of enthusiasm but develops a strong need for survival. This contributes to a yall come attitude (high I), which is open and inclusive.14 The infant congregation focuses primarily on gaining new members and growing in numbers to reach a size that is large enough to be self-sustaining and financially independent. As with a human growing from infancy through adolescence to maturity, it is important to begin to turn a strong inward focus to more of an outward focus. Some congregations, for example, never move beyond the inwardly focused growth phase, and end up in perpetual survival mode. Healthy, thriving congregations, on the other hand, have a stronger outward focus. A congregation successfully moves from infancy through adolescence and beyond as it shifts its focus from inwardly directed growth or survival to outwardly directed ministry and service to the wider community.15 Helping a congregation to begin to move from infancy to adolescence and from inward focus to outward focus can happen by building a sense of community among its members, a consensus on mission, and an outline of functions, goals, and programs.16 In other words, leadership in this phase needs to help a congregation to discover its own personality, much as one would do with an adolescent person. In doing this, it is
14

Ibid., 9. Ibid., 10. Ibid., 16.

15

16

40 important to build a conscious intentionality out of the undifferentiated energy of the congregation. 17 In helping a congregation move from infancy to adolescence and beyond, a leader may encounter the phenomenon of the founders dilemma. Successful mission starts require strong leadership, ability, and high energy from the mission developer. Later, however, the same personal attributes that were helpful to a mission developer in forming and establishing the congregation become a problem. The aura of the [founding] pastors presence surrounds all that the congregation is and does.18 To move to adolescence, the congregation needs to discover its own identity beyond the mission developer intentionally.19 Then, the congregation can move to adjust its vision to behold the local community and beyond. This requires leadership to work with the congregation to help members discover their gifts and to provide opportunities to serve and minister collectively. To do this, leadership must intentionally work to decentralize planning and implementations of ministry to equip, train, and allow members to work together in shared ministry. In other words, reshaping the organization and its structures is necessary for a congregation that moves from the top-down, pastor-centered and pastor-dependent phase of infancy. As it moves toward adolescence and maturity, it is critical for a newly formed congregation to become more independent and inclusive in making decisions. In order to do this effectively, a congregation can adopt structures that are more egalitarian and
17

Ibid. Ibid., 17. Ibid., 18.

18

19

41 bottom-up in an effort to encourage greater participation in the congregations action and decision-making. Recent technological innovations with the Internet and information technologies are creating and shaping new, more egalitarian ways for community to form and do this. Self-Forming, Bottom-Up Communities The growing influence of the Internet and social networks in society is changing notions of what community is and how it forms. Social networks, such as Facebook and MySpace, give people the ability to post and publish written material for the world to read instantly. These networks, along with universally collaborative academic ventures such as Wikipedia, are radically altering the scope and manner of social interactions. The ways that community forms apart from concrete, traditional modern organizations is changing society and societal structures in many ways. The widespread use of weblogs, or blogs, for example, is one technological development that is altering how people communicate and influencing forms of communal structures. With blogs, the art of public communication is moving toward mass amateurization. This kind of thing has happened before, with scribes and the advent of the printing press in the 1500s. Prior to the invention of the printing press, professional scribes wrote every publication by hand. These thoroughly trained monastic scribes developed writing into an art form. The specialization and time requirements of reproducing books drew sizable compensation for the scribes, and they penned the few, costly books primarily for the richest citizens. After the invention of the printing press, however, the expertise of the scribes in making copies was not required. Instead, one

42 capable person without theological training could set the type and churn out many more copies in a day than the meticulous scribes could by hand. With the printing press, many more people could now write and publish to a much wider audience.20 The Internet has had the same effect to a greater degree. Whereas modern publishing had expenses in publishing printed material (even though they were significantly less than costs for the scribes copies), sharing written material via the Internet costs almost nothing. This means that anyone with a computer and Internet connectiona condition that is increasingly becoming ubiquitouscan write and publish anything to a potential audience of billions of people. This has had the effect of democratizing communicationpublishing and readingand is moving us toward a complete equality of access to global communication for everyone. Freedom of speech is becoming universal. This is changing the nature of community and communal structures.21 Another aspect of these new communal structures is that collaboration can become an almost open-ended process. As Internet users invert traditional publishing steps by first publishing writings, then allowing the readers to filter and edit the material, the Internet-based collaboration process becomes increasingly fluid. With the Internet, the ability to publish any thought for dissemination to a wide audience also gives an opportunity for a wide audience to respond and to edit the material in perpetuity. This characteristic is the opposite of traditional publishing media conventions where editors thoroughly pour over material before publishing it. With this so-called publish then filter
20

Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, 66-69. Ibid., 61-66.

21

43 process, anyone can publish anything to an enormous audience of persons who could simultaneously be readers and editors. 22 Blogs, for example, provide an opportunity for folks to reflect and receive responses to what they publish. In collaborative writing endeavors such as Wikipedia, the ability to edit is almost universal. Almost anyone can update or edit an article, post a new article, delete sections of an established article, or restore previous editions of a maliciously redacted article. This has the potential to bring more reliable results than the traditional top-down method. With publish then filter, a person who knows about a topic but cannot write well can still publish the information. Then a person who has no knowledge of an articles topic but has an excellent grasp of language can edit and strengthen the article, a talented speller can make spelling corrections, etc. This widening of opportunity for people to collaborate without ever meeting or coordinating is a new form of egalitarian, bottom-up, and self-forming community.23 Specific Organizational Considerations for Research In designing a PAR intervention for the newly formed Living Water congregation, therefore, it was necessary to consider these organizational concerns. First, the intervention had to account for the needs of a newly developed congregation moving beyond infancy, it needed to nurture egalitarian, grass-roots organizational structure, and it sought to cultivate a Spirit-led, communally-discerned vision for ministry together. In applying these concepts at Living Water, it is first necessary to consider the specific context for the intervention.
22

Ibid., 81ff. Ibid.

23

44 Partial Ethnography and Congregational Background Living Water Lutheran Church formed several years ago when a layperson who felt a passion for planting a congregation in a growing area contacted the bishop and synod staff and asked to start a new congregation. After conversing with the bishop and other synod staffers, he met with a bishops assistant and several local pastors. Finding considerable interest in forming a new congregation in the local area, the layperson found other persons in the area who were interested in starting an ELCA congregation. They canvased the local neighborhoods together, leaving flyers and inviting residents to be part of this new congregation. A few years later, having achieved numbers approaching two-dozen people, the ELCA sent a highly gifted and experienced mission developer to plant a new congregation. He invited the original core group to join with him, and they did. In canvassing numerous area towns and neighborhoods and visiting tens of thousands of people by going door to door, the congregation grew enough to sign a charter as an official congregation in 2001. Construction on a million-dollar building began in 2004 and reached completion in 2006. The new members of the congregation were from varied backgrounds. Several were disaffected members of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) congregations in two local towns. Others were transplanted former ELCA (or predecessor bodies) members who had been part of other local congregations. Still others were unchurched or dechurched24 persons. The mission developer, giving opportunity to channel resources to growing the ministry, accepted payment below
Unchurched refers to persons, normally adult, who have never been active in organized religion or congregations. Dechurched persons are those who have, for whatever reason, walked away from organized religion for a significant period.
24

45 adjudicatory compensation guidelines and waived healthcare benefits due to Medicare coverage for himself and for his wife. His wife also served in an unpaid position as the full-time Parish Administrator. The mission developer retired in early 2008, and when he and the Parish Administrator left the congregation, they left a major void in the leadership of the congregation. Whether it stemmed from a Christendom top-down leadership mindset or from the practical need to establish a healthy congregation that many mission developers experience, the perception of several members of Living Water is that the couple made almost all congregational decisions, major and minor. They also did the majority of the day-to-day chores. A highly gifted and capable Parish Administrator followed them and they hired an additional Administrative Assistant. Following the retirement of the mission developer, the congregation called an Interim Pastor, who was a significant source of conflict and consternation among the congregation members. In early 2009, the congregation called their first full-time post mission-developer pastor. This pastor is also the researcher for this PAR effort and the author of this thesis. After the mission developer and the Parish Administrator left, Living Water began to have some problems. Some members left when the mission developer left, while others left later due to concerns about the interim pastor. The congregation called the next pastor quickly in an effort to get a new permanent pastor, possibly stemming from a desire to restore equilibrium and a sense of security. The newly called pastor has sought to utilize a more communally based form of decision-making and vision discernment. Even so, there has still been a sense of unease for some because of the differences in ministry styles. This is because it is a change from the mission developers top-down method of vision

46 casting, which is common practice during the mission development phase. The newly called pastor considers this change beneficial, because: Vision, then, must emerge from this engagement with the context rather than be foreseen and laid over it. Gadamer points out how significantly our ability to see and articulate our vision is shaped by the limits of our experiences and the worldview from which we have come. If we take this insight to its logical end, the reality of vision is always shaped by the limits placed on vision by those charged with seeing and articulating it. Traditional models of leadership often fail to account for this: the result can be leaders who are effective in the short-term work of advancing a cause but who struggle with long-term effectiveness. When the driving force behind the vision departs from the scenefor whatever reasonthe community is at risk of losing the vision altogether. Within the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America we often witness this in what we call the after pastor effect in mission development and redevelopment: this is a system that has had relatively good health and missional effectiveness on the surface but suddenly goes into decline when the leader leaves. The sense of vision, the gifts and ownership of ministry, and the ability to sustain it apart from the gifts of the leader are inadequate to overcome the centrist approach to leadership that served the system but did not equip it for ongoing work when the one who was the keeper of the vision departed.25 As it stands today, the congregation is exceptionally healthy, with its strength of community, lack of cliques, and depth of perichoretic mutual burden bearing and ministry. Things have gone well with the newly called pastor in ministry and pastoral relationships. Other stressors, however, have been present in this first year of ministry. These stressors come from several sources, including financial difficulties, anxiety over recent denominational decisions, and the loss of a significant number of members because of these decisions or the ministry of the interim minister. Even so, people are increasingly ready to leave these things behind in order to move forward in ministry, with hope and

Daubert, Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities, 161.

25

47 excitement for potential in shared ministry, both within the congregation and in the wider community. Transitioning From Top-Down to Bottom-Up Organizational Structures For a congregation, then, to move beyond infancy and pastor-directed ministry to congregation-based shared ministry, it is important to find ways to help congregants to examine their identity as members of the Body of Christ, and to move from inward-focused building actions to outward-focused evangelical activity. In the organizational theory of The church is, the church does what it is, the church organizes what it does,26 there is a strong emphasis on considering congregational identity issues with respect to the first elementthe church is. It is necessary to discern the congregations identity before bringing change in what the church does and how it organizes that activity, to move from inward-focused to outward-focused activity. The process of discerning missional vision seeks to do that specifically, with an emphasis on the missio or sent aspect of church life. The fact that community in the Internet-era is formed through egalitarian, voluntary collaboration that originates from the grass rootsas opposed to the top-down expert strategies of the modern eraalso provides opportunities, habits and tools to enhance and encourage this type of voluntary participation. In the PAR intervention, various small group opportunities played an important role in developing an interconnected web of congregant relationships, to help transition from a top-down to a grass-roots organizational structure. It was also important

26

Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit, 17.

48 to provide several opportunities and means for congregants to engage and connect with the vision cultivation process. Small versus Large Group Process In order to begin to cultivate cohesive vision in a group such as a congregation, it is essential to create space and an environment that will facilitate healthy and mutual conversation in the context of caring and respectful relationships. It is impossible to guarantee that people will form such relationships, since using force or rules to require people to communicate mutually and freely would inherently curb or destroy the opportunity for such free and mutual relationships. Even so, it should be possible to set a stage that fosters healthy relationship building, both with guidelines that give healthy boundaries shape, and space for this type of conversation, and by nurturing caring relationships between participants as they fill that space. Increasing Need for Intimacy in Society A group must have a level of cohesiveness in order to build relationships capable of healthy dialog about difficult issues. It is helpful to nurture and create such relationships in an effort to discern and describe a shared vision, and to work together to achieve it. Any work that seeks to cultivate a missional vision will have an effect on a group only insofar as the group is cohesive with strong relationships. It will also only be effective if the participants embrace the vision, appropriate it, and assimilate it into their personal and communal lives. In order for the PAR intervention for this thesis project to have the greatest impact, therefore, it contained elements intended to function through strong interpersonal relationships. The concept of cultivating missional vision has, in fact, an included goal of

49 strengthening and building relationships within the congregation and with the community. This fits a growing need in the United States, because research shows that Americans are more lonely and disconnected now than they have been for decades. According to recent research, Americans are growing increasingly more isolated socially. More of us have fewer close friends or confidants with whom we may discuss personal matters than Americans have had in the past. Even as communication via Internet and cell phones increases, intimate social ties are shrinking, and are becoming nonexistent for far too many people. In fact, in difficult times, many people have to suffer with their problems alone.27 Research that relies upon the relationships and cohesiveness of a group cannot take for granted the existence of a network that is strong enough to bring interest in participation, as well as a desire to work together to engage one another in healthy dialog in discerning a shared vision. In order to be effective and even as part of the ultimate goal, this PAR intervention needed to encourage the growth and strengthening of interpersonal relationships. This occurred both within larger groups, and through the formation of small groups, both of which have different possibilities for shaping and nurturing relationships and conversation.

Shankar Vedantam, Social Isolation Growing in U.S., Study Says The Number of People Who Say They Have No One to Confide In Has Risen, Washington Post (Washington, DC, 2006). The newspaper article references an article published by Duke University researchers: Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, , and , Matthew E. Brashears, Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks Over Two Decades, American Sociological Review 71, no. 3 (2006): 353-375.

27

50 Group Size The size of a group can foster or hinder healthy dialog. Groups of varying sizes have differing strengths and weaknesses, and can provide opportunities for various kinds of conversation. Small groups are better suited for fostering relationships, and for more intimate conversation and deliberation. Small group leaders, then, need training to facilitate conversation and help group members to participate authentically and fully in conversation. Small groups encourage intimate, heart-felt conversation.28 Large groups, on the other hand, are better suited for conveying information, drawing expert opinion from group members, or for experts to share information with a wide audience efficiently.29 Thus, for sharing information, teaching, and other activities that aim at increasing knowledge, it is better to use a lecture format with a larger group. For example, if the goal of a Bible study is primarily to foster relationships and to draw forth perspectives from everyone involved, it is better to have a small group that encourages participants to discuss and share feelings and matters of the heart. If, on the other hand, the goal of the Bible study is to impart information and to teach biblical stories and theological concepts, then it is much more desirable to pool resources and bring in a talented scholar who can teach a large group of people.30 It is also important to note that leadership within any group is a key element to nurturing healthy interactions. Within small groups especially, the leader is an important part of nurturing a healthy and enriching small-group experience. For purposes of the
Richard P. Schowalter, Igniting a New Generation of Believers, Ministry for the Third Millennium (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995), 100.
29 28

Ibid. Ibid., 103ff.

30

51 PAR research, therefore, it was important to spend time at the beginning of the small group experience to train persons to facilitate conversation within the clusters. Training participants to lead discussion and facilitate conversation among small-group participants was essential to ensure healthy and successful small-group interaction. In both large and small groups, there must be a force of vision and purpose to unite the group and foster unity in purpose and meaning. One way for this to happen is through communal, shared vision for ministry. The Efficacy of Vision for Leading and Bringing Change A shared purpose or vision unites an organization, whether it consists of large or small groups. Having this shared vision unites a group as an organization. Specifically, a group is an assemblage of persons or objects gathered or located together; an aggregation.31 An organization, on the other hand, is something that has been organized or made into an ordered whole, or a group of persons organized for a particular purpose; an association.32 In other words, a group consists of individuals that may not have any other association or shared purpose aside from being members of the same group. This differs from an organization, which is a group with a shared purpose which orders and organizes it. The organizations vision draws people together to work in an organized fashion, accomplish goals, etc. An organization without shared purpose or vision often times will deteriorate into a disorganized group that may fragment or disintegrate.
31

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin,

2004).
32

Ibid.

52 This understanding of the necessity for a congregation to share missional vision and perspectives is a key component of the rationale for carrying out the PAR intervention at Living Water. The shared vision, constituted by articulating purpose and guiding principles that the group can use in making decisions and in living out a shared faith, is essential for organizing the congregation with a shared ministry. Vision can be considered from at least two perspectives; comparing the effect of vision on an organization to the electromagnetic effect, and the effect of bringing a group together in an act of love as a uniting force. Vision and the Field Effect Margaret Wheatley uses a metaphor for the effect of vision on an organization by pointing to the field effect, such as that caused by an electromagnetic force.33 According to electromagnetic theory, a changing magnetic field near a conductor causes electrons in the wire to move. Moving a magnet along a wire will induce an electronic current within the wire. This is how a generator works; a length of looped wire spins in close proximity to a set of magnets, which generates an electric current. The converse of this is also truecurrent moving in a wire induces a magnetic field. A motor works like a generator, but in reverse; an electrical current applied to a length of looped wire in close proximity to a set of magnets causes the spindle to react by turning. Wheatley contends that shared vision acts upon a group of people in similar fashion. Shared vision organizes a group invisibly to accomplish a shared purpose.

Margaret J Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1999), 49ff.

33

53 We would start by recognizing that in creating a vision, we are creating a power, not a place, an influence, not a destination. This field metaphor would help us understand that we need congruency in the air, visionary messages matched by visionary behaviors.34 The shared vision and purpose unites the group to form an organization. As it permeates the organization, the unseen force of vision has the effect of bringing various, seemingly disconnected actions into concert to accomplish the shared purpose and vocation of the organization.35 Shared vision, therefore, is essential to a group being able to organize, to answer Gods call to ministry, and to achieve a shared purpose with love. Vision, Lovingly Shared, as a Uniting and Motivating Force While it is important for a group united with shared purpose to have an interest in working together to achieve the shared purpose, it also needs an additional component. The group must share motivation to accomplish the purpose. They must have a stake in the success of the group. That interest must also be stronger than personal concerns in order for the individuals to be motivated to sacrifice personal desires in furthering the purposes of the larger organization. Biologist Garrett Hardin describes the Tragedy of the Commons,36 which is a tendency that groups have against pursuing shared goals through collective action. This occurs when people have a stronger incentive to damage the public good for personal gain than they have to nurture it through personal discipline.

34

Ibid., 55-56. Ibid. Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, 51-53.

35

36

54 An example of the Tragedy of the Commons is that of a group of shepherds who utilize a shared pasture. The individual shepherds have competing interests; feed your own sheep versus preserving the pasture for everyone. The self-serving interest is for each to overgraze ones sheep secretly in order to maximize profit by selling the fattest sheep at the market. On the other hand, the shepherds share a communal interest to observe restraint, lest they all overgraze the pasture and destroy it. In this example, everyone benefits communally and individually by sharing the pasture fairly, thereby maximizing the communitys profits as a whole. This only happens, however, if everyone exercises discipline and restraint in grazing the sheep. Everyone suffers if even one shepherd selfishly overgrazes the shared pasture. When one or two shepherds decide to let their sheep greedily eat more than they should, they are increasing their own profits considerably. They do so, however, at the expense of the other shepherds and their flocks. This means that the disciplined, benevolent actions of the conscientious shepherds will cause them to suffer as they fund the profits of the greedy ones who decide to act selfishly. This creates a pressure or incentive for everyone, through greed, suspicion, and mistrust, to destroy the shared pasture or public sphere selfishly, in furtherance of each persons own individual interests. This is the Tragedy of the Commons.37 Two of the ways that governance has sought to mitigate this tendency is through dividing resources, and mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon.38 Using the former method with the shepherd example, the shepherds could divide the pasture into equally
37

Ibid. Ibid. This phrase originated with Hardin along with the Tragedy of the Commons concept.

38

55 sized and equally resourced properties that each shepherd individually owns. Now, each shepherd has an incentive to care properly for his or her own piece of the pasture, while defending it from illicit use by the others. Using the mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon method, the shepherds give authority to a mutually selected third party to arbitrate and regulate individual shepherds use of the shared land in furthering the greater public interest. Again, in the shepherd example, this would be like electing a government who would fairly enforce mutuality and sharing to prevent the shepherds from overgrazing their flocks within the shared pasture. Put differently, this means that collective action by an organization requires sacrifice or loss by some of the members of the organization. To avoid the Tragedy of the Commons, individuals must agree to forsake a personal gain for the betterment of the larger organization or society. When individual members or a sub-group makes decisions that benefit the larger organization, some members will lose. As the size of the group increases, it becomes increasingly likely that the group will make decisions that cause larger numbers of members not to get what they want. For a group to take collective action, it must have some shared vision strong enough to bind the group together, despite periodic decisions that will inevitably displease at least some members.39 Either this vision can be enforced through power (as in the previous examples of dividing resources or binding oversight) or it can be accepted willingly through mutual agreement and love. This is a goal of the vision cultivation process. Vision unites a group to form an organization, but it will only do so to the point that the group willingly adopts the vision
39

Ibid., 53.

56 as a means for shared discernment, decision-making, and action. Unlike the business world, which uses compensation to motivate employees to embrace a shared vision, congregations do not have the power to require members to work together in shared ministry. Instead, individuals must decide to embrace a shared missional vision willingly and work together with it. This means that love, in a decision to sacrifice personal ambitions willingly in favor of the shared missional vision, is the only practical means to achieve congregational unity and shared ministry. A vision cultivation process that seeks to draw people together to discern and define a shared organizational vision is, therefore, preferable to one that casts a vision in a top-down fashion that commands the organization to adopt it. The cultivation process must seek to involve people in an act of love that, together, brings forth missional vision that inspires as many people as possible to share it. Cultivating Shared Vision Components of a Vision Cultivation Process In seeking to embark upon a process of living with a shared missional vision in a congregation, it is important to utilize a process that includes the following characteristics: 1. The process must be egalitarian in nature. It must foster a shared process of discerning and describing the vision so that the congregation will embrace it widely. 2. It should increase interconnectedness, fostering community and a relational network that can work together with a shared vision.

57 3. The process must cogeneratively cultivate a shared vision. In order for the congregation to embrace the vision, it must grow from the members together through prayer, Bible study, and mutual conversation. Cultivated shared vision normally contains unexpected and unforeseen elements that emerge from the collective effort and conversation of the participants. 4. The cultivation process needs to have multiple entry points and opportunities for people to form community that allow for a variety of personalities and means of joining and forming community. This allows for maximum participation and helps build community. Shared Vision The Participatory Action Research (PAR) intervention utilized a form of the visioning process Dave Daubert describes in Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation.40 This process did not to use the conventional top-down, leader-dominated method of casting a vision for the future of the organization. In fact, it used a different understanding of vision. For many, vision has been like a picture of a place that is far away and in the future which the organization works to enter into and achieve. This understanding of vision requires a fewor even onegifted and perceptive individual(s) to accurately perceive and articulate the future vision to the organization. With this understanding, the task of leadership is to cast the vision and then motivate the organization to achieve it.

40

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, 91-95.

58 This can have the effect of making the vision something that seems unachievable in the short term and even somewhat unlikely in the long term. Alternatively, with a grass-roots method of vision cultivation, vision becomes a way for the organization to interpret events and make decisions in the present. Instead of understanding vision in terms of a picture of a future reality, shared vision becomes a shared way of currently viewing reality and making decisions together. This type of vision cultivation is more like helping an organization to discover a new and shared set of eyeballs or lenses through which the organization and its members perceive reality and choose how to act in the present. This has the effect of making an immediate impact on the organization as they live into an unforeseen future through living with the shared vision.41 The process for an organization to discern a shared vision is, in a sense, never complete. Even so, the vision contains specific elements. In grass-roots vision cultivation: Vision = Purpose + Guiding Principles + Time42 With this understanding, the organization lives with a shared vision, as it lives together and makes decisions in accordance with common guiding principles and works together with common purpose. Over time, the organization lives into the future, slowly discovering an unimagined future in the midst of living together and making decisions with the shared purpose according to the guiding principles. This understanding of vision contains all of the components of a vision cultivation process. It is egalitarian and increases interconnectedness. It allows members of the
41

This is based upon concepts in Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation. Ibid., 46.

42

59 organization to act according to conscience and encourages them to work together with others in shared purpose with common guiding principles. It allows multiple entry points, because the future goal is something that the organization continuously discerns as members come and go over time. Finally, the process for discerning the shared vision utilizes a cultivation process that allows vision to grow cogeneratively from within the organization. Cultivating Vision: A Community Garden The process an organization uses in working together to cultivate vision has a direct impact on the result derived from the process. A faulty process normally yields an undesirable result, and a healthy process has the best chances for yielding a beneficial outcome. This means that an organization that seeks to live together with shared vision needs to discern and define that vision in a manner that cogeneratively cultivates shared vision. In an organization that seeks to deliberate and act in ways that are egalitarian, that increases interconnectedness, and that allows multiple entry points, the process of cogeneratively cultivating shared vision inherently builds organizational habits of working together with shared vision. This concept of cultivating organizational vision is similar to the concept of a shared community garden. In commercial farming, the emphasis is on maximizing crop yield to maximize profit. The farmer, with perhaps a few paid helpers, works extensive pieces of land using machines, chemicals, and modern techniques to get the land to produce sizable crops that the farmer sells for profit. The land and the act of farming become a means for the farmers financial ends.

60 In a community garden, however, the wider community shares the garden. As people come to work the land and tend the plants, they work together with a shared vision for tending and nurturing a garden that the community can enjoy as they share the yielded crop. In this way, the work of gardening and sharing the crop has the desirable side effect of forming and nurturing human community. The crop feeds the individuals who personally and carefully worked together to nurture the plants that yield the produce. With a community garden, the garden and the community, together, both become the ends and the means for living together. The people in the community share common bonds as far as each person embraces the shared garden and participates in nurturing it and receiving the crop. Even the plants themselves become part of a symbiotic relationship with the people in the community, as people nurture life in the plants through tending the garden, and the plants nurture life in the community by yielding food for it. This concept of a community garden is a major philosophical foundation for the process of cultivating missional vision in this PAR intervention. The intervention embodies this concept by encouraging the congregation to form relationships and to discern shared missional vision cogeneratively. There were several entry points and opportunities for community to form,43 including small group discipleship, a congregational retreat, Wednesday night meetings, deliberation on shared vision posted publicly with invitation for all to contribute, etc. Throughout the process, the researcher communicated ideas and results publicly in various ways, with invitation for dialog and widespread participation in the discernment and decision-making.
43

Cf. previous discussion about self-forming, bottom-up communities.

61 The congregation formally embraced the shared vision in a congregational meeting. This cultivated and shared vision will be central in moving forward in common ministry at Living Water. It is also an open-ended process, with the possibility for revising and growing the vision in the future. In this way, both the individuals and the congregation nurture one another in a symbiotic relationship, rather than one becoming the means for the others ends. As members nurture the health of the congregation, the congregation nurtures the growth and well-being of the members and the wider community. The extent, however, that the vision and cultivation process make an impact on the congregation is dependent upon the depth and quality of congregational participation. A process of cultivating vision must happen in a way that inspires people to participate as fully as possible. Practical Considerations In order for an effort to organize people to work, it must capture the interest of the people in the group, it must have a structure that facilitates the organization, and it must inspire the groups members to participate. An organization cannot exist without members and membership is impossible without an organization.44 In organizing a group, leaders hold out promise for the benefit of the members and community to embrace and enjoy as they mutually participate in the organization. Leaders provide tools that allow the members to interact in ways that bring the promised benefits. Finally, leaders

Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, 263. This concept of promise, tools, and bargain undergirds his understanding of new ways that society chooses to organize as our connectivity via the Internet continues to influence and change how we interact.

44

62 encourage members to accept a bargain that encourages full participation by the members.45 Promise In order for people to agree to prioritize a new demand on their time and energy over existing ones, the promise they hear in the invitation to participate must clearly communicate something that they will perceive as being a worthwhile priority. In any effort to encourage participation, persons must see a clear benefit in doing so. The promise must be something that strikes a balance between being mundane and excessive. It must contain explicit promises, and may include some implicit ones. One should be able to articulate it succinctly in a way that encourages enthusiasm for participation.46 With respect to literature and key theories presented in this chapter for research, the researcher made two key promises in conducting the PAR intervention. First, the members of Living Water heard the promise of an opportunity to live out their faith together, in ways that would encourage deeper relationships in the midst of an organized, relational community. The researcher encouraged relationship building through more intimate, small group experiences as well as more public, congregational activities. Second, an implicit promise in the research was that individuals faith would grow as Living Water engaged in the process of vision discernment and in living faithfully together with the resultant shared missional vision. This promise also included the assertion that living together in the shared force field of missional vision would

45

Ibid., 260ff. Ibid.

46

63 encourage deepening of relationships with stronger, lay-led missional activity in daily life in the congregation and community. Tools The second practical area to consider in planning the intervention pertained to tools the researcher used to implement the intervention. Different tools are appropriate for different situations. Small groups are better at fostering conversation; thus, they are better suited to help groups to converge on a single perspective. Larger groups, on the other hand, give a wider pool of people who can bring expertise to a problem. They allow loosely connected or even unconnected people to pool knowledge without having to agree on anything in particular.47 In planning various aspects of the vision cultivation process it was necessary to tailor the tools used to foster interaction, along with the sizes of the groups, to help achieve the best possible outcome for the desired aspects of the PAR intervention. With this in mind, the Damascus Travelers were a key component in building relationships that encouraged members of Living Water to converge on a shared understanding of vision for ministry.48 These small group components were present at the congregational retreat, as well as before and after the retreat. The intervention also utilized large group conversation involving the entire congregation to allow people to bring their expertise to bear on the visions basic building blocks that surfaced in the smaller groups, in the congregational retreat, and during the Wednesday night meetings.
47

Ibid., 266-77. See appendix I for specifics on the content of the Damascus Travelers readings and discussion

48

questions.

64 The congregation council conversed as a small group and worked together to converge on set purpose and time statements. These statements then fed back into conversation at a congregational forum where members wisdom could surface and impact the shared vision. The small-group congregation council then discussed and integrated the congregations perspectives into the final statements. They brought these final statements back to the larger congregation for approval and adoption. In this way, the benefits of larger and smaller groups interacted to serve as tools to refine and define shared vision that bubbled up from the congregation, encouraging greater acceptance and use. Bargain Whereas the promise provides an opportunity for members to understand what benefits they receive from participating in an organization, and the tools provide means for meaningful interaction, the bargain describes the activity that the organization asks for or expects from the members. Participants have to agree to the bargain, and it must become a part of the relationship and interaction between the individual members and the group. Again, the group needs to have the members participating even as members need a group in which they may participate. If the promise states the responsibilities of the organization to the individual, then the bargain states the responsibilities of the member to the group. The researcher designed the tools to maximize and augment the fullest possible interrelationship between the organization and its members. The bargain encouraged and inspired members to interact with one another to discern the shared

65 missional vision cogeneratively. The researcher worked to tailor the tools to assist with this need.49 For the PAR intervention, the bargain took the form of an expectation that the vision cultivation process participation would be constructive, authentic, and lively. Again, the small group aspect helped foster accountability of individual members and encourage a greater level of participation. In addition, participants that shared public comments included their names with their remarks to encourage constructive participation. By requiring people to take responsibility for their statements, conversation remained relatively civil and constructive. Finally, allowing members the freedom to choose the level of their participation invited healthy interaction and a greater likelihood that the members would appropriate the congregational vision, to varying degrees, as their own. Conclusion For a congregation to cultivate missional vision, it is important for individuals to form structures of organization that draw them together in a shared vision and purpose. There are various aspects of a complex community, such as the one at Living Water Lutheran Church, that require care in implementing and living with shared vision for ministry. This vision, lovingly shared, can bring Gods people together with a set of principles to guide them in making decisions and working together in shared ministry. The principles of this vision, as a missional vision, are founded theologically in a biblical and theological understanding of the relational and perichoretic triune God. Through

49

Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, 270ff.

66 living with this vision, God draws people into the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of Christs kingdom.

Huntley

CHAPTER 3 BIBLICAL AND THEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES Some people brought a blind man to Jesus and begged him to touch him. He took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the village; and when he had put saliva on his eyes and laid his hands on him, he asked him, Can you see anything? And the man looked up and said, I can see people, but they look like trees, walking. Then Jesus laid his hands on his eyes again; and he looked intently and his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly. (Mark 8:23b-25) In this section of Marks gospel account, Jesus is miraculously feeding and healing people, even as the Pharisees and religious leaders confront Jesus about his authority. The disciples, also, do not understand why Jesus is doing these things, as he makes his journey to Jerusalem and the cross. Along the way, some people bring this blind man to Jesus and beg him to heal the man. Ultimately, Jesus does heal him but it takes two healing attempts to restore the mans vision completely. This mans blindness is similar to the cultural cataracts of the disciples, the Pharisees, and the crowd, each of whose preconceived notions blind them to the true mission of Jesus Christ. Jesus tells the disciples repeatedly that he is on his way to Jerusalem to die and rise again from the dead. Yet, like the blind man whose vision only partially clears with Jesus first touch, the disciples and others do not understand or accept the purpose and scope of Jesus mission. Nonetheless, Jesus repeatedly tells the disciples about his pending death as they journey to Jerusalem. With these repeated spiritual touches, Jesus is cultivating missional vision among the disciples. With what he says and does, Jesus is cultivating a way of looking at the 67

68 world and at daily life that sees and perceives Gods in-breaking kingdom. Jesus repeatedly encourages the disciples to see it as well. As they live with Jesus, see him die, experience the risen Christ, and share these experiences with others in the days after the ascension, the disciples continue on a path of increasing clarity of vision as the Holy Spirit works to cultivate vision for Gods reconciling activity in the world. In answering the research question, How does cultivating shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? the researcher worked to cultivate missional vision among the people of Living Water Lutheran Church. The hope is that congregants grew and will continue to grow in their understanding of Gods missional vision, and that this will impact the lives of congregants and how they interact with the community. In working to achieve this, leadership cultivated missional vision specifically by working with people and shaping systems that helped and encouraged people to see life through eyes of faith. Casting versus Cultivating Missional Vision In considering what it means to have missional vision, it is helpful to remember that vision is a way of viewing and perceiving life with a shared perspective. It is a way of viewing the world that allows people to make decisions together in light of a shared understanding of Gods call to life and mission. Rather than casting a prepackaged vision or goal to reach, the cultivation process seeks to nurture a new vision that, through the work of the Holy Spirit, helps a congregation to see the world and make communal decisions in God-inspired ways.

69 Chapter 2 discusses the concept of moving from understanding vision as something that the leader casts to something that the community discerns. Vision is something that leaders cultivate among people. It is something that equips them to make decisions from a shared missional perspective in praxis and vocation. Instead of a leader going off to define vision then coming back to cast it and convince everyone to achieve it, vision is cultivated in the midst of Gods people, as together they listen and discern a shared new way of living in the world.1 Even so, in Scripture, there are examples of both vision casting and vision cultivation, as God and other leaders interact with Gods people. Moses, for example, received and cast Gods vision for life among the Hebrew people after God freed them from slavery in Egypt. On the other hand, the apostles cultivated vision, with Gods guidance and inspiration, for the life of the new Christian community in the world. Examining both means for visioning yields insight into the concepts of vision casting and cultivation. Vision Casting in Exodus In casting a vision, a leader or small group of leaders often withdraw(s) from the community for a time of prayer and discernment. Together, the leader or leaders seek to define a vision for an ideal goal or situation that the people are to work together to attain. After discerning the vision, the leader returns to describe the vision to the people. The expectation is that they will, as faithful followers of God and Gods appointed leader, embrace the cast vision and work together to achieve it.
Daubert, Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities, 147-71.
1

70 An example of this occurs in Exodus 19, when the Hebrew people arrive at Mt. Sinai after God has freed them from oppression under Pharaoh in Egypt. Upon arriving at Mt. Sinai, God tells the people to wash their clothes and prepare for him to come to the mountain (Exodus 19:10). God then instructs Moses to climb the mountain alone so that God may speak with him, saying, You shall set limits for the people all around, saying, Be careful not to go up the mountain or to touch the edge of it. Any who touch the mountain shall be put to death (Exodus 19:12). In doing this, God is casting the vision for communal life of the Hebrew people after freeing them from slavery in Egypt. God is also casting vision for communal life for the journey to the promised land of Canaan and for daily life after they arrive. To do this, God first speaks to the people and gives them the Ten Commandments. As the people hear the power in Gods voice, accompanied with a dark cloud, thunder, and lightning, they are afraid and they tremble before Gods power. After this, Moses climbs the mountain to receive Gods vision fully. As Scripture describes it, When all the people witnessed the thunder and lightning, the sound of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking, they were afraid, trembled, and stood at a distance, and said to Moses, You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, or we will die. Moses said to the people, Do not be afraid; for God has come only to test you and to put the fear of him upon you so that you do not sin. Then the people stood at a distance, while Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was. (Exodus 20:18-21) While the exact sequence of events is unclear, it appears that Moses remains on the mountain for forty days and nights receiving the vision from God as recorded in chapters 20-31 of Exodus. This vision includes various components. Gods people are to be a light to the nations and a priestly kingdom.2 There are limits for retribution that
2

Exodus 19:5-6.

71 victims can exact from the perpetrator,3 limits on profiting from the poor,4 and requirements for justice irrespective of financial class.5 There are requirements to treat the least in society, such as widows, orphans, and resident aliens, with dignity and special consideration.6 The vision includes administrative components, such as a requirement to have a census.7 God gives Moses numerous proscriptions for annual festivals8 and the temple cult.9 While the Law God gives to Moses contains numerous proscriptions and prohibitions, the overall theme and intent of the Law seems to be an emphasis on fostering shalom; peace with God, peace with others, and peace with self. While on the top of Mt. Sinai, however, God tells Moses that fear has driven the people to forsake God. The people convince Aaron to lead them to worship other gods. Come, make gods for us, they tell him, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him (Exodus 32:1). They gather the peoples gold, some of which they had plundered as God liberated them from slavery in Egypt, in order to melt it down and cast it into an image of a calf. Aaron then proclaims a worship festival and they make plans to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings before the golden calf. As a result, God angrily threatens to destroy the stiff-necked Hebrew people and make a great nation of Moses (Exodus
3

Exodus 21:12ff. Exodus 22:25ff. Exodus 23:1ff. Exodus 22:21ff. Exodus 30:11ff. Exodus 23:14ff. Exodus 25ff.

72 32:9-10). Moses pleads on behalf of the people, making the case that if God destroyed them then it would be an unfavorable witness to the people of Egypt. Because of Moses plea, God changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people (Exodus 32:14). Upon his return from the mountaintop, Moses enters the peoples revelry bearing the two stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments. After listening to Aarons fallacious recounting of the circumstances surrounding the calfs construction, Moses angrily destroys the golden calf and the two stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments. As punishment for rejecting God and the cast vision, Moses commands the leaders to kill about three thousand people, and God brings a plague upon them. Ultimately, Moses returns to the mountain to receive a replacement set of slabs. When he returns again, the people are ready to receive the vision that Moses casts and follow the precepts of the Law. Aspects of Vision Casting in Exodus In this story of God speaking to Moses, who discerns and casts the vision for Gods people to embrace and embody, six aspects provide insights into problems stemming from reliance upon vision casting to motivate and form community. These aspects include: A requirement for an extremely talented and charismatic leader to discern and cast the vision. Dave Daubert refers to this as the Great Man or Woman concept.10 Vision casting requires a leader who has the ability to discern and cast a vision,
Daubert, Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities, 149.
10

73 while motivating people to accept and follow it. Only a small percentage of leaders actually have this ability.11 Not only that, but vision casting can be beneficial only if the leader is conscientious and constructive. Due to its reliance on power and charisma, vision casting is prone to manipulation should the followers place their trust in an unscrupulous leader. Vision casting is inherently exclusive and hierarchical. In the Exodus story, Moses sets off a boundary around Mt. Sinai that the people may not cross.12 In this case, discerning the vision is an activity reserved for the elite. Fear is an important component of respect, which is required for the people to follow the leader in vision casting. Prior to Moses assent of Mt. Sinai, God uses an awesome exhibition of power to awaken fear in the people, in the hopes that the fear will inspire them to accept and embrace of the cast vision.13 This fear does not sustain long-term acceptance of the cast vision, however, as the fear necessary to motivate the people to continue to embody the cast vision is a short-term and fickle motivator. Shortly after Moses and the cloud, lightning, and thunder depart, the people begin to fear other, more immediate things. Because of these proximate fears, they abandon God and Moses while seeking to receive protection and providence from other gods. Since fear does not engage the will beyond the extent of the exercise of power, their allegiance and acceptance of the vision wanes when the powerful display subsides and the charismatic leader
11

Ibid. Cf. Exodus 19. Exodus 20:20.

12

13

74 withdraws. Consequently, while the people may accept the cast vision initially, they do not embrace it or appropriate it as their own in the long term. It is only after Gods power and the leadership of Moses return that they accept the vision, albeit under the pain of plague and death. On the positive side, the vision itself is missional, considering cultural mores of the time. Nonetheless, even though the cast vision is missional and inclusive, the exclusive nature of the process sows the seeds for subsequent rejection of the vision among Gods people. In later Old Testament experiences, God sends prophets to remind the people to live according to the Law of Moses, God exiles the people to Babylon because they have rejected the Law, etc. Even so, as Jesus also states in Matthew 5:17-18, the Law itself is good even if the people do not embrace it consistently. Since coercion and fear are the foundations of the process for discerning, describing, and embracing the vision of the Law, it does not inspire the people to accept it in the long term in shaping a just and compassionate society. This inherently undermines the content of the vision and Law. Finally, by not engaging the people in the discernment process, the casting process inherently objectifies the people. Instead of being treated as partners in ministry, Moses comes down from the mountain with an expectation that they will accept and embody the cast vision without question. There is no dialog. The people are not really allowed to appropriate the vision for themselves. They are to accept either the vision or punishment, like animals that are commanded to obey the masters instructions. In the vision casting process, they are not permitted to

75 help shape the vision or to decide to embrace the vision, join the community, or love God and one another freely. Moving From Vision Casting to Vision Cultivation In casting vision for communal life as Gods people, Moses brings a vision that he discerns from God and casts among the Hebrew people. Gods extreme power, accompanied by violent and even deadly enforcement, is required to compel the people to accept it. Unfortunately, this acceptance seems to last as long as the fear of retribution. When other more fearful or enticing circumstances arise, the Hebrew people forsake the Mosaic Law to reject God and even embrace other gods in worship. Repeatedly, God either calls the Hebrew people to return to the ideal of the law14 or punishes them when they forsake it. In the person of Jesus Christ, God reverses strategies for wooing the Hebrew people to embrace and embody Gods vision for a community founded in grace, mercy, and love. While it is an oversimplification to state that Jesus vision of the kingdom of God15 is an updated form of the Mosaic Law, it nonetheless contains similar foundational principles for living in community. Jesus Sermon on the Mount, for example, is reminiscent of the giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai, and it focuses on fulfilling the intent of the Mosaic Law. At the beginning of this address, Jesus notes, Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will
Cf. Happy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked, or take the path that sinners tread, or sit in the seat of scoffers; but their delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law they meditate day and night (Psalm 1:1-2), among many other exhortations and calls to embrace the Mosaic Law.
15 14

Matthew refers to this as the kingdom of heaven.

76 pass from the law until all is accomplished (Matthew 5:17-18). He then repeatedly goes on to lift up various aspects of the Law, saying You have heard that it was said (Matthew 5:21, for example) after which he gives a new contemporary application, saying But I say to you (Matthew 5:22). Again, it is not a precise retelling or reframing of the original Law of Moses, but the underlying themes of justice and shalom are present in Jesus remarks on the Sermon on the Mount. There is a key difference, however, between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mountthat being the visioning process. Again, in Exodus, God speaks to Moses who brings the Law to the Hebrew people in a top-down fashion. After rejecting God and his vision for shalom, the people bear the pain of their sin and brokenness. On the other hand, in the Gospel accounts, God humbles himself to take on human flesh and become one of us. God walks among the people, speaking and listening, as Jesus and the disciples mutually bear the burdens of life. Most strikingly, instead of violently enforcing the Laws precepts, God in Christ bears the pain and separation of sin and humanitys rejection of God. In the passion of Christ, God bears that brokenness, heals it, and overcomes it, thereby redeeming humanity from the dark powers of sin and separation. Jesus then returns to the Father, and Gods Holy Spirit descends upon and enters into Gods people to dwell inside of them to continue the work of redeeming them and healing the divisions that humanitys sin causes. Furthermore, in contrast to Moses vision casting that objectifies and bends the wills of Gods people to accept the Law, the mutuality of the indwelling Spirit respects the personhood of Gods people by inviting them to respond to Gods grace in faith. This is a key component of any vision cultivation process, as it engages folks in mutual dialog

77 and discernment, nurturing and deepening relationships with God and one another from the grass roots. Gods activity in the community, cultivating missional vision, is evident in Acts as the disciples wrestle with the question of how to invite and incorporate Gentiles into the community of believers. Cultivating Missional Vision in Acts In the early Church, there was a question about whether Gentiles would be subject to the Hebrew Law16that is, to be circumcised and obey the specific provisions of the Lawin order to be members of the Church. At one point, an angel of God visits a centurion named Cornelius who feared God with all his household (Acts 10:2) and tells him to send for Simon Peter. Cornelius then sends for Peter, who travels to see Cornelius. Along the way, God speaks to Peter in a vision and reveals the fact that nothing in creation is unclean. In other words, God tells Peter to move beyond the specific legal demands of the Mosaic Law to accept Cornelius as he is without requiring him or his household to accept circumcision and the specific demands of the Law. As Peter contemplates the vision, Corneliuss men arrive. At the direction of the Holy Spirit, Peter talks with them. The next day, Peter goes with them to Corneliuss house. After arriving, Peter does something a good, practicing Hebrew person would normally not do; he enters the unclean house of a Gentile centurion. As Peter is sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit descends upon Cornelius and his whole household, just as the Spirit did on the day of Pentecost. This surprises the circumcised believers who were with Peter at

In the discussion of vision in Acts, the term Law refers to the Law of Moses as interpreted by and expanded upon in the Pharisaic tradition.

16

78 the time. Peter gives instructions for everyone in Corneliuss household to be baptized, and he stays with them for several days. After this, Peter returns to Jerusalem, where the circumcised believers criticized him, saying, Why did you go to uncircumcised men and eat with them? (Acts 11:2-3). Peter recounts to them all that has happened, from the vision where God spoke to him, to the pouring out of the Holy Spirit with Cornelius and his household coming to faith and being baptized. At the end of the story, Peter asks, If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God? (Acts 11:17). As the story continues, When they heard this, they were silenced. And they praised God, saying, Then God has given even to the Gentiles the repentance that leads to life (Acts 11:18). For those talking with Peter, the matter of whether or not Gentiles are welcomed into Christs Church, without a requirement to be circumcised and to observe the specific precepts in the Mosaic Law, is settled. Through mutual conversation, the community discerned the voice of the Holy Spirit saying that faithful Gentiles are welcome in the Christian community as Gentiles. Even so, this did not settle the matter universally in the early Church. In the next two chapters of Acts, Paul and Barnabas travel to various cities as they proclaim the Gospel, and they find receptive audiences that include both Gentiles and Jews. Everywhere they go, however, a group of people in the crowd continually stirs up opposition to the inclusion of Gentiles among the ranks of Christian believers. This is a recurring problem for Paul and Barnabas. Finally, the apostles call a meeting in Jerusalem, and they appoint Paul and Barnabas to go there to refute those teaching that, Unless you are circumcised according

79 to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved (Acts 15:1). At this meeting, there was lively debate among the gathered people. Some advocated for circumcision and the requirement for all believers to follow the specific precepts of the Law. Paul and Barnabas, on the other hand, held that in numerous places many Gentiles were coming to faith in Christ and that God was doing amazing miracles among the uncircumcised Gentile Christians. Peter then described the vision where God spoke to him, and he shared the fact that although he had previously advocated for circumcision and observing the specific precepts of the Law, God had brought him to a new understanding regarding Gentile circumcision. Finally, James spoke and shared a new interpretation of Scripture from Amos. In a decision that shaped the makeup and practices of the Church forever, the people who assembled at Jerusalem decided to articulate a vision for ministry that allowed Gentiles to become Christians, with some minor instructions regarding food sacrificed to idols and sexual immorality. Gentiles would have to forsake their pre-existing gods and religious worship to embrace Christ and the Church unreservedly, yet they would not have to accept circumcision or be required to live according to the specific precepts of the Law. In moving forward, the Church now had a new vision for life together. Previously, the Christian movement was primarily a movement within the Hebrew people who lived outwardly by the specifics of the Law. As the Holy Spirit spoke to various people as they discussed events and their various experiences, the community gathered, conversed, and discerned together a new way of looking at life together in the Church. As they articulated this new, shared, missional vision, one that included expanding the movement

80 to draw all people into a Christ-centered (rather than a Law-centered) set of faith practices, they cultivated a new vision for life together. The new vision, founded on the original themes of mercy and shalom in the Law, is now lived by praxis of servanthood and sacrifice in the kingdom of God founded in the person of Jesus Christ. As they now live with this new, shared, missional vision for ministry together, God reveals and forms an unimagined future for the Church as millions of people came to faith in Christ by Gods grace. Aspects of Missional Vision in Acts God, then, cultivated missional vision in the early Christian community. In this, God moved the community beyond understanding the Church to be an inward-looking Hebraic reform movement. Instead, they had a new and shared vision of a ministry of Gods care and redemption wherein God is seeking to restore relationships and form a community founded in mercy and shalom with and among all people. This new, missional vision contains the following six key elements: First, it is a new way of looking at life together. Rather than continuing to have circumcision as a key factor for inclusion in the community of faith, God revealed a new way. Now, faith in Christ and baptism into Christ is the foundation for community. In this way, the newly discerned vision requires a radical reorientation of understanding in the community that makes the movement universally inclusive in its invitation to redeem and restore relationships in Christ. Second, God reveals missional vision to Peter, Barnabas, James, and others. Vision for ministry has God as its exclusive source, and the people grasped, understood, and articulated it in the community of faith.

81 It is communally discerned, which is the third key element. The process does not simply seek to find something for everyones agreement. Instead, people in the community prayerfully seek Gods vision so that, together, they can faithfully articulate vision that God reveals. In Acts, God simultaneously revealed the new vision for inclusion of Gentiles to several different people in ministry across a wide area. When they came together to discuss it, they realized that the Holy Spirit had been speaking to them individually yet simultaneously. As they wrote in the statement describing the new missional vision, it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose on you no further burden than these essentials (Acts 15:28). The vision was revealed by God and communally discerned.17 Fourth, the discernment process embraced the surrounding community and culture with mutuality as the apostles listened attentively to Scripture, tradition, voices outside the Church, and the voice of the Holy Spirit. The process of vision discernment included voices from observing God at work in the world, And God, who knows the human heart, testified to them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us (Acts 15:8). Peter acts by mutually accompanying Gentiles in listening to Gods voice when Peter accepts the invitation from Cornelius to visit this Gentile centurion. In fact, this encounter sets Peter on a path to a new understanding of Gentile inclusion in the Church.18 The vision discernment process also included the biblical voice when James quoted Scripture from Amos. It included the voice of personal experience. As Peter says, Now therefore why
17

Cf. Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit, 104ff. Cf. Acts 10.

18

82 are you putting God to the test by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our ancestors nor we have been able to bear? On the contrary, we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will (Acts 15:10-11). As the people gathered prayerfully to discern Gods missional vision, they listened to all voices as they sought direction from the Holy Spirit. Fifth, the Holy Spirit led the process of discernment throughout its entirety. In understanding and perceiving this new God-given vision, the Holy Spirit led them throughout the entire vision-discernment process. Finally, the process involved the entire communitylay people and leadersas they listened to the Holy Spirit and discerned this new, missional vision. The vision was cultivated in a bottom-up fashion rather than having the leader(s) cast a vision for life together in a top-down fashion. In the assembled group, everyone had the opportunity to speak and engage in the process of discerning and describing what this new missional vision would be. In this process of discerning missional vision in Acts, a key event was the vision that Peter had on the rooftop on the way to Corneliuss house. This vision of, What God has made clean, you must not call profane (Acts 10:15), had a large impact on the discernment process. While Peter did not cast the new communal vision on his own, the vision God gave him served as a starting point that the Holy Spirit confirmed and expanded upon in the lives of others in the community. In similar fashion, theological components from the missional church movement served that purpose in the vision-cultivation process at Living Water Lutheran Church.

83 Components of Missional Vision The work that people in the missional church movement have done was foundational in the conversation throughout the vision cultivation process. With roots in the Gospel in our Culture Network, the missional church movement has specific characteristics. These include but are not limited to:19 Trinitarian theology, with the social model of the Trinity. The persons of the Trinity dwell in perichoretic union with one another, and reach out to build perichoretic relationships with us. The missio Dei is a call and a mission to redeem all of creation that draws us into the fullness of Gods caring, redemptive, and reconciling reign (i.e. the Kingdom of God). Caring for creation, redeeming humans in bondage to sin and darkness, creating new relationships, and reconciling strained ones are signs of the in-breaking Reign or Kingdom of God. This mission of reconciliation comes to fruition in the person and life of Jesus Christ, and extends throughout time and space by the work of the Holy Spirit through the churchs ministry and vocation in the world. Trinitarian Facets of Missional Vision The Social Trinitarian Model Gods essence as three divine Persons in union as one infinite God is impossible for created beings to understand. Like the prisoners in Platos cave analogy who have an
Some of these characteristics are based upon work by Craig Van Gelder, Rethinking Denominations and Denominationalism in Light of a Missional Ecclesiology, Word & World 25, no. 1 (2005): 30.
19

84 incomplete perception of reality because their entire understanding of it is formed by watching shadows on a cave wall, we as finite and created beings cannot even begin to perceive or understand the infinite reality of God. This means that any attempt to understand, model, symbolize, or describe God will fall woefully short even if it is accurate. Nonetheless, it is important to try to understand and describe the One in whose image we are made, because in doing so, we can learn and understand more about the human race. With this in mind, even though the social model of trinitarian theology is incomplete in describing the fullness of the triune God, it is nonetheless the first and foundational component of missional vision. Some trinitarian theologies consider the Trinity starting from a position of the oneness or unity of God, and ask, how can this one God exist in three persons? Such theologies often focus on the essence and authority of God. They can also border on modalism, as they focus somewhat on the essence and God-ness of each person of the Trinity at the expense of the differentiation and relationality of the three Persons. The social model, on the other hand, begins by considering the three Persons of God, asking, how can these three persons exist as one God? The social model emphasizes the unity of the Trinity through the relationality and mutual indwelling of the three Persons with one another. This model is more helpful as a foundation for the relational emphasis of vision within the missional church movement. More specifically, the social trinitarian model recognizes God as the one divine Being who eternally exists as three distinct centers of consciousness, equal in nature,

85 genuinely personal in relationships, and each mutually indwelling the other.20 Thus, the three persons (hypostases) of the Trinity are distinct and bounded, yet they unite as one both in essence (ousia) and in perichoretic, interpenetrating, and mutually indwelling relationships. This concept of perichoresis is essential to understanding the unity of the three persons of the Trinity. Relationships that are mutually loving, giving, sacrificing, reciprocal, equal, and inter-dwelling have potential to be perichoretic. One example of perichoresis is that of a village, wherein the inhabitants take to the streets daily at a set time to circulate around the neighborhood, mutually listening and sharing, bearing one anothers burdens, and relating to one another.21 The depth of relationality, then, of the three Persons of the Trinity is essential to understanding God, creation, and in particular, humans created in the image of God. The unity of the three Persons of the Trinity exists, in part, in their common, perichoretic bond as the three Persons of the Trinity who share one divine will, essence, and common bond. Perichoresis, therefore, contains an element of mutual accompaniment. In the Trinity, no hypostasis or person is greater or lesser than the others are. Even when the Father sends Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit, there is a sense of mutuality and accompaniment in the sending. For example, even as the Father sends Jesus, the Father remains with him. As Jesus says, The Father and I are one (John 10:30). Furthermore, the mutuality of these perichoretic relationships extends beyond the triune Godhead. In the Garden of Eden in Genesis, Adam and Eve seemingly had a
J. Scott Horrell, Toward a Biblical Model of the Social Trinity: Avoiding Equivocation of Nature and Order, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 47, no. 3 (2004): 399.
21 20

I am grateful for this analogy from one of my professors, Dr. Gary Simpson.

86 relationship with God marked by mutuality as they accompanied one another in the garden. Yet sin marred that relationship and almost broke it. The relationship remained, however, thanks to Gods work to bring them back into perichoretic fellowship. After disobeying God, Adam and Eve hid while God walked in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, looking for them and calling out, Where are you? (Genesis 3:8-9). This question echoes throughout Scripture and history as God constantly cares for creation and redeems humanity from the dark power of sin, wooing and calling us back into this deep and loving relationship. This broken relationship between God and humanity persists throughout history until the death and resurrection of Christ. When Christ dies, the perfect and perichoretic relationships that the Son has with the Father and the Spirit are broken. Death, after all, is the ultimate in separation and broken relationships. Nonetheless, when Christ rises from the dead, the relationships between the Son and the Father, and the Son and the Spirit are restored. With a relationship of faith in Christ through the Holy Spirit, God extends that restoration to redeem us from our brokenness and restore us to fellowship with God. In the Incarnate Christ who is simultaneously fully God and fully human, God repairs this broken relationship with humanity, and God restores a relationship of perichoresis and mutual accompaniment. In the person of Christ, God kenotically22 humbles himself to reach down, embrace our humanity, redeem us, bear our sin, and draw us up to restore what was lost in Eden. In the person of Jesus Christ, humanity and divinity are

22

Cf. Philippians 2:7.

87 hypostatically united, thereby restoring a relationship of mutual burden bearing and ministry.23 On the cross, Jesus loves us and redeems us by taking our pain and brokenness upon himself and defeating the powers of darkness and division. At Pentecost, the Holy Spirit enters into a hypostatic union with the church that mirrors the Christological hypostatic union of divinity and humanity.24 In other words, as Jesus bears our sin and redeems us from it, and as the Holy Spirit unites believers to the resurrected Christ through faith and baptism, God reconciles humanity with God and with one another. God thereby heals our sinful brokenness. In this way, the sending of the Son and the Spirit in mission25 is a natural outgrowth of the mutual and perichoretic nature of the social Trinity. The missional Trinity is a natural outpouring of the social Trinity as the Father sends the Son and the Spirit to reach out to humanity in our sin and separation from God and one another. In this, God redeems humanity from the brokenness of sin and reconciles us to God and to one another. God restores the perichoretic unity that God created us to share with him.26 By extension, God gathers and unites the church with and one another by the Holy Spirit through baptism and faith in Christ. God then sends the church, as the earthly Body of Christ, to reach out in sacrificial love to connect with others in Gods perichoretic

23

Cf. Matthew 11:28-29 and John 20:21.

This is why, for example, Paul can refer to the Church as the Body of Christ in such places as 1 Corinthians 12:27 and Ephesians 2:14.
25

24

The root word of mission is missio, the Latin word for sent. Cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17-21.

26

88 ministry of accompaniment, burden-bearing, redemption, and reconciliation. This belief is a key aspect of true missional vision. The Social Trinity in Missional Vision In cultivating missional vision at Living Water, therefore, it is essential for the congregation to understand the need for participating in the redemptive, missional, and mutual perichoretic aspects of Gods being. The congregation in relationship with God is sent to join in Gods work to free people from bondage to the dark powers of sin and to share the freeing, reconciling Gospel. In this, God works to form and nurture faithful, equal, free, loving, and mutual relationships with God and with one another. In this way, Christian community can sacramentally be a living icon of the reality of the social Trinity. As John Navone writes, The Father who eternally pours himself out in selfless, self-giving love is seen in the icon of the triune God, in the human self-giving love of his Son, pouring out their Holy Spirit to draw all humankind together within the loving reciprocity of the triune communion. The Son who eternally welcomes the selfless, self-giving love/life of his Father is seen in the icon of those who welcome that same love/life, the Holy Spirit of the triune communion recognized in the mutual love of the disciples (John 13:35). The Holy Spirit of the Father and Son is seen in the self-giving and welcoming love that forms the body of Christ, the icon of the triune communion.27 As people live both the perichoretic and missional aspects of the Trinity, they embody the sacrificing, selfless love of Christ. This is the path to wholeness, peace with justice, and a gracious society. This understanding was foundational both in the process of cultivating missional vision and in the result. As a community works together to live

John J. Navone, Self-Giving and Sharing: the Trinity and Human Fulfillment (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1989), 121.

27

89 perichoretically and reach out to connect with others, Gods mission is accomplished, furthering the coming of the fullness of Gods reign throughout creation. Missio Dei and the Kingdom of God Aspects of Missional Vision The Missio Dei in Gods Reign According to the social model of the Trinity, God exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in perichoretic and mutually interdwelling relationships. The Holy Spirit and the Son are sent into the world in the missio Dei, which is Latin for the sending of God. As a derivative of the word missio, the mission of the Church is the sentness of the Church. The purpose of Gods mission (sending) into the world is to care for creation, redeem people ravaged by sin, and reconcile relationships between God and humanity. The Father sends the Son and the Spirit into the world to free people from darkness and restore relationships broken by sinful humanity. The Son and the Spirit are working to restore humanitys relationships with God, which we have broken by relying upon other gods or powers. Gods mission also includes the healing of our relationships with one another, where we have damaged our relationships by using and mistreating one another for selfish or unloving ends. God sends the Son and the Spirit to heal this brokenness and restore right relationships. Specifically, as Paul writes: So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:17-21).

90 The righteousness of God, in this case, is a restoration of right relationships. Understood in this way, righteousness is living in healthy and loving relationships with God and with one another that are unmarred by the brokenness of sin. This caring, redeeming, and reconciling mission of God, the missio Dei, thus includes restoring what is broken in order to unite the church in the Holy Spirit as Christs Body present in the world. The missio Dei, by extension, includes the sending of the Church into the world as the very presence of God working further to connect with people and with God. The concept of missio Dei recognizes that God is already at work in the world, both inside and outside of the church. 28 God sends the Church to participate with Christ in proclaiming and experiencing the close proximity of Gods kingdom. Put differently, as the Church participates in communion with God through the Holy Spirit, God also sends itjust as the Son and the Spirit, who are in perfect communion with God the Father, are sentto participate in the ministry of reconciliation that God is already doing in the world. This is something that we do because this is who God is. God is a missionary God.29 In carrying out the missio Dei, therefore, God directly assaults the powers and principalities of darkness, sin and brokenness by taking them upon himself and defeating them in the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is the Kingdom of God, or the redemptive reign of God, entering into creation to overcome the dark powers and principalities. Gods reign is overcoming earthly powers of darkness, hopelessness,
Cf. Romans 1:19ff., where Paul argues that the divinity of the Creator is plain to everyone by observing creation. David Jacobus Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission, American Society of Missiology Series 16 (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1991), 390.
29 28

91 bondage to decay, and brokenness, even as it has not yet reached its ultimate fulfillment. As the self-emptying power of Gods reign enters into a world that is overwhelmed by powers that seek to use strength to gain humanitys allegiance apart from God, struggle and strife ensues. Even so, the once for all victory of Christ, who never succumbed to the temptations of using power apart from Gods will, has defeated these dark powers and continues to bring the fullness of Gods reign lovingly to all of creation. This is the redemptive reign of God that, through Christ, cares for and brings back to right relationship all that was lost in the fall, and enters into all aspects of human and created reality.30 This reign, or kingdom, is broad and defined, although not rigidly so. It is also not a vague concept or an imagined utopia, but it clearly exists and has specific traits. Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign includes, but is not limited to, the following characteristics:31 1. It is Good News. It is Gods work in the world to redeem humanity and to create, restore and reconcile relationships broken by sin. Gods reign comes, restoring order to the chaos of lives and relationships broken by sin. In this, God calls people to repent, to change, and to recognize the lordship of Jesus. More specifically,

30

Van Gelder, The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit, 110.

The list that follows is adapted from Mariasusai Dhavamony, The Kingdom of God and World Religions, vol. 31, Documenta Missionalia (Roma: Editrice Pontificia Universit Gregoriana, 2004), 12-30.

31

92 It is repeatedly insisted in the Gospels that the members of Christs Kingdom are those that ... have fed the hungry, clothed the naked, shown mercy to the prisoner and outcastwho have, in short, done the works of Christ (Matt. 25:31-46).32 2. It is already breaking into history, yet its fulfillment is eschatological and universal. During his ministry, Jesus went about healing people and freeing them from unclean spirits, yet the fullness of Gods saving reign will be realized when Christ returns in the second coming. 3. Gods reign, as described in the Sermon on the Mount, changes everything. For example, murder in Gods Kingdom is redefined as hatred from the heart, adultery is redefined as lust, etc.33 4. The kingdom is centered in Christ, who is king of all. It is significant to note that the Kingdom is promised to those who attach themselves to the person of Jesus and that to be his disciple means to be in the Kingdom of God. (Mk. 10:17-31, Lk. 9:57-62).34 Christs kingship is founded in his self-emptying incarnation, death and resurrection. Christs reign over the world is established through his victory on the Cross over his enemies, over all powers that brought rebellion and disorder in the world.35 Through the humble giving of himself, God in Christ restores order to chaos under Jesus authority and reign.

(sic). John Bright, The Kingdom of God, the Biblical Concept and Its Meaning for the Church (Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1953), 221.
33

32

Dhavamony, The Kingdom of God and World Religions, 31:16-17. Ibid., 31:19. Ibid., 31:20.

34

35

93 5. Gods reign is being actualized in and through the Spirits work in the Church, of which Christ is King and head. 36 During Christs earthly ministry, Jesus as God in the flesh embodies the reconciling presence of God and humanity. Having emptied himself37 to take on human form, God in Christ reaches out to call disciples who grow in faith and their relationships with God, who then go out to bear the good news that Gods reconciling reign is near. After the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ, the Spirit comes and joins with the church in a hypostatic union that embodies the union of God and humanity in Christ. In this way, God is present in the baptized to accompany the church to mutually proclaim and enter the kingdom of God. The Missio Dei and the Reign of God in Missional Vision Thus, bringing the fullness of the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God is the mission of Jesus Christ on earth, and the mission of the Holy Spirit in and through the church. In cultivating missional vision, the congregation prayerfully asked questions of God as to the call and purpose that God has for the individuals, the congregation and for the community. In listening to Scripture and in listening to the Spirit, God calls us to be Christs hands, bearing the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God into our families, church, and world. This reign, centered in Christ, is a call to embody the Kingdom actively, as it is already breaking into our midst yet has not reached its fullness. This

36

Ibid., 31:23-24. Cf. Philippians 2:5ff.

37

94 work of bearing Gods reconciling reign is the work of the Holy Spirit living in the lives and working through the vocations of the people of God. Aspects of the Holy Spirit in the Church, Working in the Vocation of Believers with Missional Vision Gifts of the Holy Spirit in the Vocation of Believers The Holy Spirit, in the faithful, daily vocation and ministry of the Church, carries forth the work of Christ in reconciling the world to God through faith. The Holy Spirit incarnates the Word of God in the sacraments and in the proclamation, witness, and service of the Church in the world.38 The Spirit works in the world incarnate in the church, to carry the reconciling Word in a dance of gathering and sending. In gathering to receive the incarnate Word in Holy Communion, the Spirit goes out in the people of God to: Go from worship gatherings to share communion with the sick and homebound, to invite others to the next celebration of the Eucharist, to fill grocery bags in food pantries, to advocate for legislation that will reduce the number of hungry people, to refuse to cross picket lines where workers are striking to be able to feed their families, etc.39 Thus, the Holy Spirit brings the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign and Word of God, incarnate in the ministry and daily vocation of the priesthood of believers. This work is the vocation, derived from the Latin word vocatiocallingof Gods people in daily activity. In their daily vocations, Gods people labor with God and see the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God come to its fullness. As the Psalmist
38

John F. Hoffmeyer, The Missional Trinity, Dialog 40, no. 2 (2001): 110-111. Ibid., 110.

39

95 writes, Unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain (Psalm 127:1). Members of the priesthood of believers are not alone in their efforts to answer Gods call in daily vocations to work with God in bearing the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God. The Spirit gifts all of Gods people with charismata, or divine gifts, through which God works in and through people to bless others. These gifts are widely distributed throughout the people of God in a symmetrical and decentralized distribution of power that allows the church to more faithfully correspond to the trinitarian communion.40 As members of the Church collaborate with one another and with the world perichoretically, they experience the reciprocal and symmetrical41 charismata in a way that reflects the reality of the Trinity missionally for the good of all. Through these charismata, or gifts, God works in the daily vocation of the priesthood of believers to bring the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God to its fullness. This happens, for example, when Jesus asks Peter to allow him to teach from Peters boat (Luke 5:1-11). Jesus is teaching a large crowd beside a lake. When the crowd becomes so large that it presses upon him, Jesus climbs into Peters boat and pushes out into the lake. After teaching for a while, Jesus then tells Peter to Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch (Luke 5:4). Peter protests, because these professional fishers have been working all night without catching any fish. Nonetheless, Peter relents, and puts his nets down in the area Jesus indicates. Astonishingly, Peter pulls in nets that are so full of fish that they are about to break. There are so many fish
Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness: the Church as the Image of the Trinity, Sacra Doctrina (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998), 236.
41 40

Ibid.

96 that when the fishers bring them into Peters and anothers boat, the two boats nearly sink. Peter, along with coworkers James and John, fall at Jesuss feet and acknowledge their sinfulness. Jesus then famously tells them, Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching people (Luke 5:10). As the priesthood of believers, God gifts and forms the church to embody and live the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God in daily life. Throughout the night, Peter, James, and John were working at their occupation, occupying their time with trying to catch fish and earn a living. Jesus comes along, and tells them to do exactly what they have done all night and probably for yearslet down their nets to catch some fish. The only difference is that, in this case, Jesus says, Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch (Luke 5:4). After casting his nets in the place that Jesus told him to, Peter now catches an excessive number of fish. Now, the occupations of Peter, James, and John become vocations, or callings.42 Their charismata, used in accordance with Christs calling, not only yield an incredible harvest of fish, but they also become the foundation for their further life and new-found ministry as Jesus now calls them to be catching people (Luke 5:10). In this way, by using charismata in the vocation of Gods calling, God calls the church to embody Gods kingdom as servants. The Holy Spirit leads the church into the world to connect with others, bearing the Good News of Jesus Christ.43 The vocational
A vocation is a holy calling, a living out of Gods voice in ones life. The root word of vocation is vocatio, which is Latin for a call or summons. The root of vocatio is voc-, or voice. Random House, Random House Websters Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition, 2nd ed. (Random House Reference, 2002), 2129. Darrell L. Guder and Lois Barrett, eds., Missional Church: a Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America, The Gospel and Our Culture Series (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998), 102-08.
43 42

97 work of the missional church is for each person, baptized into the triune God, to listen prayerfully, live faithfully, and embody boldly Gods call in praxis, through the charismata, or gifts, of the Holy Spirit. Vocation and the Holy Spirit in Missional Vision In cultivating missional vision at Living Water, it was important to cultivate a healthy concept of the call and vocation of each person as a member of the priesthood of believers. Current habits in Christian life, however, can serve as an impediment to doing this. Traditionally, members of congregations attend church and act passively, being fed with Scripture lessons, the pastors sermons, and the sacraments. After years of participating in church life in this way, many Christians are shaped to have a passiveor perhaps, inactivelife of faith. Instead, the church needs to transform this monolog into a dialog, where people learn to confront the earthly powers that are at work in their vocations and daily lives. Setting the laity free to actively live and share their faith daily would have the effect of unleashing Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign more fully in the world.44 It is essential, therefore, for a vision cultivation process to include a strong emphasis on helping folks to revise understandings of calling and ministry. During a missional vision cultivation process, it is necessary to encourage participants in various settings, formats, and groups to see ministry in what may be an unfamiliar light. Laypersons are the front-line ministers of the Gospel. As Braaten points out,

Carl E. Braaten, The Apostolic Imperative: Nature and Aim of the Churchs Mission and Ministry (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985), 192.

44

98 Often, however, the laity gets the impression from their pastoral leaders that the big battle is for bigger budgets, higher attendance, increased membership, efficient kitchens and other status symbols. The modern tragedy of the church has been the fallacy of a misplaced emphasis on itself, inevitably downgrading the dignity of the secular ministries of laity in the world. 45 In cultivating missional vision, then, it was important to help folks to look at life in the church from a new perspective. Instead of viewing the pastor as the chief evangelist, the idea that Pastors are servants of the servants of God in the world 46 was a major component of and impetus for cultivating missional vision. Cultivating Missional Vision Within this community of a priesthood of believers enlivened and gifted by the Holy Spirit to live the missio Dei of Gods reign of reconciliation with the social Trinity, God also calls leaders to specific ministries within the church and the world. Missional leaders encourage conversation among Gods people, as the Holy Spirit cogeneratively brings forth shared vision for ministry. Vision in Scripture Peter and Paul In the New Testament, Jesus renames Simon as Peter when Simon confesses Jesus as Messiah.47 Jesus then goes on to communicate Gods vision for the Messiah as one of great suffering, death, and then being raised.48 This does not match with Peters
45

Ibid. Ibid. Cf. Matthew 16:16 and parallels. Cf. Matthew 16:21 and parallels.

46

47

48

99 vision for what being the Messiah means, so he takes Jesus aside and rebukes him. Jesus then turns to Peter and famously says, Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling-block to me; for you are setting your mind not on divine things but on human things (Matthew 16:23). Peter does not have the fullness of vision, and when he acts upon his incomplete vision, Jesus strongly repudiates him. Later, Peter meekly denies knowing Jesus, as Christ is beaten and tried unjustly. Even after finding the empty tomb, Peter returns to hide in a locked room with the other disciples. It is only after the resurrection, Jesus post-resurrection appearances, and the pouring out of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost that Peter seems to view reality with Gods missional vision. Peter then reaches out to the community and boldly proclaims the Gospel. Through this bold proclamation, God brings people to faith, to Baptism, and to the Eucharistic fellowship.49 After the Holy Spirit clarifies Peters vision, he steps out and boldly witnesses to Gods reconciling activity. Before that, Peter lacks faith so that he both actively50 and passively51 opposes Gods work. Similar things happen with Saul of Tarsus, who persecutes the church until Jesus confronts him and gives him first blindness, then clarity of vision.52 At first, Paul sees through the eyes of law and power, and he viciously and murderously works to safeguard the traditional understanding of Judaism and the practice of the Pharisaic Law. It is only after Christ encounters Saul and asks him why he is persecuting Christians that Sauls

49

Cf. Acts 2:14ff. Cf. Matthew 16:22 and parallels. Cf. Matthew 26:69ff. and parallels. Cf. Acts 9.

50

51

52

100 vision changes. In fact, Sauls lack of Godly vision becomes physically evident in his temporary blindness. Saul, whose name God now changes to Paul, then begins to perceive life with a vision that sees things through the prism of Gods gracious love as Jesus bears it with the humiliation and suffering of the cross. He also sees clearly that all peopleslave and free, male and female, Jew and Greek (Galatians 3:28)are called and invited to enter into Gods kingdom by grace apart from circumcision and works of law. The Holy Spirit and the Body of Christ in Gods Reign For Paul, people answer this call and invitation to enter into Gods kingdom of grace as, in baptism and through faith, people become members of the Body of Christ on earth. As Paul begins to discuss the idea of the Body of Christ in his first letter to the church at Corinth, Paul starts with a conversation about gifts of the Holy Spirit. Examples of the Spirit shining in and working through the lives of people include charismata, service,53 activities, utterances of wisdom and knowledge, faith, gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discernment of spirits, various kinds of tongues, and interpretations of tongues (1 Corinthians 12:4-10). In all of these activities shared among the people of God, the Spirit activates and allots them as God chooses. Specifically, in working through these various gifts, the one Holy Spirit unites the diverse group of people as the one Body of Christ. For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one bodyJews or Greeks, slaves or freeand we were all

53

diakoniw/n, or deacon in English.

101 made to drink of one Spirit. Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many. (1 Corinthians 12:12-14) The active, divine person of the Holy Spirit unifies the diverse people of God with a variety of charismata into the one Body of Christ. According to Paul, God does not necessarily unify the Body of Christ as a group with consensus of thinking and full agreement. Instead, God the Holy Spirit works through the charismata of the people to accomplish the missio Dei. The Holy Spirit unites the Body of Christ by virtue of the fact that the Holy Spirit is working to accomplish the one missio Dei in and through the charismata of the individual members of Christs body. In this, the Holy Spirit works in the people through the charismata in one shared ministry of furthering the missio Dei. The Spirit works through the charismata of individuals as they work in the world with shared vision. This work is missional only because the Spirit gives the vision and the people work under the Spirits leadership. It is imperative that folks remember this caveat both during and after the vision cultivation process. Vision will unite the people of God in one shared ministry only insofar as it comes from and is the work of the Holy Spirit.54 This caveat is something that stands over against individuals who would seek to manipulate the process or hijack aspects of the vision description to accomplish a

In practicing missional principles by seeking to deepen faith and connect with Christ, the researcher walked a prayer labyrinth for the first time. During that time of prayer and discernment, God revealed an understanding that there is a limit to what we can do to cultivate missional vision. There comes a point when one just puts it out there in prayer, then lets go to release control and let God bring people into Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign. At one point during the research, the congregation council created a plan to invite congregants to go out into the neighborhoods nearby to knock on doors and visit people. In preparing for worship that morning, the researcher in prayer used an image of this invitation being a set of bones that council had set before the congregation in the hope that God and the congregants would put flesh on the bones. That night, 28 people participated, by far exceeding everyones expectations. Recognizing the need and leaving room for the Spirit to work is essential in the ministry and work of the missional church.

54

102 personal project or desire, or to increase personal power. As previously discussed, the Holy Spirit worked to cultivate missional vision wherein Gentiles would not have to submit to circumcision as recorded in Acts 10-15. As Paul and Barnabas preached the Gospel throughout lands that were predominantly Gentile, people advocating circumcision tried to subvert the new missional vision that the Holy Spirit was bringing into the wider Christian community. They did this by secretly circulating throughout the crowds as they sought to increase support for circumcision. This was in direct opposition to the preaching of Paul and Barnabas, and ultimately, it opposed the work of the Holy Spirit. Because of this, the efforts of those supporting circumcision failed. It was important, then, to strive to keep Scripture study and prayer as key aspects of the vision cultivation process. It was also important to the process to include the widest number of members of the Body of Christ as possible. Again, the hope was that maximizing member participation brought the greatest number of charismata from the broad and diverse Body into the cogenerative discernment process. This has the greatest potential for the congregation to continue to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, who personally unites the Body and draws it into the work of mutually bearing burdens, connecting with Christ, and sharing Gods love. As members of Christs Body listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit and respond in faith, the community can begin to experience a decrease in human control, and an increase of Gods reign breaking into the midst of the community and beyond. There are times when individuals willingly leave comfort zones of personal control to experience Gods reign more fully. At other times, lifes circumstances bring persons and communities into the wilderness. Even though these wilderness times can be

103 disconcerting and fearful, God nonetheless can use these experiences to connect people to Christ and to one another. As persons and communities embrace and enter into these wilderness experiences, they can bear one anothers burdens mutually with God. In these experiences, the community might experience God at work to bring them to a deeper and even life-changing experience of community in what some refer to as liminality that brings communitas. Theology of Cultivating Missional Vision Moving Beyond Community to Communitas When Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast in 2005, it stripped away the veneer of control that modern society imposes upon the environment.55 Without electricity, air conditioners and refrigerators were inoperative. Due to hurricane damage, flooding, and subsequent molding conditions, previously comfortable homes of various prices and ages were either destroyed or uninhabitable. The hurricane not only took away almost all human ability to control the environment and provide shelter, but it also stripped away categories of race, socioeconomic status, level of education, etc. As one Biloxi inner-city resident put it, We came here on different ships, but now were all in the same boat. In the response to Hurricane Katrina, local residents, nearby residents, and people from far away worked together to restore order and bring healing to people harmed emotionally and physically by the widespread destruction. Residents of the Gulf Coast were jarred out of comfort zones and came together to regroup, recover, and rebuild. People from across the country willingly left comfort zones to converge on the Gulf
The researcher went to the Gulf Coast six weeks after Katrina hit to assist in the recovery, and is writing from personal experience.
55

104 Coast to bear the burdens mutually of those whose lives the storm had so radically altered. In the midst of social chaos, people discovered that God worked to comfort, heal, provide, and bring restoration out of the midst of destruction in ways that were inconceivable and even miraculous. In fact, people on the Gulf experienced these miracles of Gods reign breaking into their midst with such regularity that the miraculous almost became mundane. The Holy Spirit bound workers from across the country, along with local residents, together with a comradery of shared experience and work that many found to be deeply moving and life changing. In leaving the comfort zone of modern society, Gulf Coast residents and others who came to help with the recovery entered into experiences of liminality. Based upon the Latin word limen, or threshold, liminal experiences allow persons to step out of the mundane, everyday experiences of life to enter a transitional or chaotic environment. Over the years, researchers have found that when individuals enter a liminal experience, they will often build connections and bonds in an effort to overcome adversity and survive. This experience can create relationships of comradery with a depth that is unlikely in casual or mundane encounters. This depth of relationality, reliance, and mutuality among persons experiencing liminality is communitas. Clearly, Hurricane Katrina was a liminal event that God used to form deep relationships in the midst of the shared risk and trust. In this, God worked to create a deep, mutual, and perichoretic communitas.56

Based upon reflection from reading Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church, 220ff.

56

105 As members of a community move beyond safety, security, comfort, and convenience, they can experience liminality that moves them beyond themselves and controlled environments to experience Gods provision in the wilderness through which God can create communitas. Missional leaders work to inspire others to move beyond the limits of comfort zones in order to engage in shared liminal experiences. In doing this, the community trusts God to work, shape, and form deeper and stronger cogenerative relationships of mutual burden bearing. Through shared liminal experiences, God can work to shape life-changing relationships in communitas experiences. Missional, Cogenerative Leadership Missional leaders, then, work within community to discover opportunities for and enter into shared liminal experiences. Patterned after the example of Jesus, who kenotically emptied himself to join humanity and bring people into Gods kingdom perichoretically and mutually, missional leadership cogeneratively collaborates with others to recognize and enter into Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign. Missional leaders also identify and nurture spiritual growth in others, who work within the community to encourage the further cultivation of missional vision. This mutual and cogenerative aspect is a key component of missional leadership. It is important to foster an understanding and a desire among congregants to leave control and comfort zones to enter Gods control zone willingly through liminal experiences that move them beyond themselves. Again, the leader does this with the congregants, nurturing ever more leaders, as God forms communitas, and as the community together discusses and grows from these experiences.

106 This happened with Jesus and his followers when he sent the seventy workers out in pairs to the towns of Samaria in Luke 10. Jesus has just set his face to go to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51). He is purposefully and unswervingly now on a path to give himself up to be crucified and to rise again from the dead. As he begins this journey, Jesus appointed seventy others and sent them on ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself intended to go (Luke 10:1). He gave them basic instructions, telling them to focus on their purpose, to rely upon Gods provision in and through the mutual sharing of those whom they visit, and to be prepared for hard times. If those they visit receive them, then they can enjoy the mutual hospitality and cure the sick who are there (Luke 10:9). If the people reject them, then they are to move on to somewhere else. In all cases, however, they are to enter the town, proclaiming the same thing; The kingdom of God has come near to you (Luke 10:9, 11). Put differently, Jesus trains the pairs of missional leaders and sends them out to the places of liminality where he will be going to on his path to the Passion in Jerusalem. These appointed missional leaders are in a mutual ministrywith one another and with Jesusof setting people free from sickness and unclean spirits, as they invite others to recognize and experience Gods caring, redeeming and reconciling reign. They are accompanying Jesus in his ministry mutually on his path to Jerusalem. This is borne out more fully as they return joyfully sharing the amazing things they have seen and experienced, saying, Lord, in your name even the demons submit to us! (Luke 10:17). While cautioning them not to be exuberant about their power, but instead to rejoice that their names are written in heaven (Luke 10:20), Jesus nonetheless shares their excitement. In an unparalleled expression of sharing this joy,

107 Jesus, rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth (Luke 10:21).57 In this extended conversation and prayer, Jesus rejoices with God and the disciples in their shared ministry, apparently rejoicing at the fact that they have experienced the wonder of life and communitas in Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign. As Jesus and the disciples, together, announce the coming of Gods reign, they mutually accompany one another in embodying and sharing that reign as they connect with others to experience Gods kingdom in their midst. As a practical consideration, any process that cultivates missional vision must use a similar approach. A Practical Vision Cultivation Process In Living Lutheran, Renewing Your Congregation, along with his contribution to The Missional Church & Leadership Formation, Dave Daubert articulates a process and concept for cultivating missional vision in a congregation. This was the basic approach in this research. The concern is that conventional wisdom and much of current practice conceives of vision as something that is in the future. From this perspective, vision is something that a gifted leader discerns, communicates to the followers, and motivates them to attain. In cultivating vision, however, it is more helpful to understand vision as a perspective or way of looking at current reality, that the community lives and works together with, to enter into Gods future.58

57

Emphasis added.

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation. Also, Daubert, Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities.

58

108 This is a change in understanding vision as a future realitythat may or may not be attainableto one that sees vision as guiding present vocations that we can begin work to achieve today. The latter understanding is important to the concept of cultivating missional vision. Vision is something that we share together in making decisions today, as opposed to being a picture of a future reality that we are trying to bring to fruition. This shift of understanding can affect a congregations actions in ministry profoundly and quickly. For example, instead of articulating a future vision of eradicating hunger in ten years, one could articulate a goal of working together to eradicate hunger today. In putting the goal ten years into the future, one would be saying that it is acceptable for a group of people to remain hungry for the intervening 9 years. Instead, it is better to work on seeing Gods kingdom fully realizedin this case, by actively helping hungry people have food to eatimmediately.59 To do the work of communally discerning and articulating a shared vision of ministry, vision contains specific elements. Put differently, Vision = Gods Purpose + Guiding Principles + Time60 In this process, the congregation prayerfully and communally, with conversation and Scripture study, discerned and articulated Gods purpose for the congregation, both within itself and in the wider community. This purpose is a portion of the missio Dei, and is an articulation of Gods call in communal and individual vocation. The guiding principles then are the specific action phrases that describe the communal life together.
59

This example comes from Dave Daubert by means of the researchers personal conversation

with him.
60

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, 46. Emphasis added.

109 Examples of times might include Together we confess Jesus as Lord and God welcomes all in our midst. As the community lives together and wrestles with questions and ministry over time, Gods vision grows and the future vision becomes clearer to the individuals and the community as they collectively enter into it.61 Considerations for Christian Community in Cultivating Missional Vision In order for the process of cultivating missional vision to have its full and desired effect, the process itself must cultivate a missional community by design. A missional community comes together in prayer, examining the world and community with the discerned vision, to understand and embrace the aspect of the missio Dei that God is specifically calling them to address. Then, the congregants support one another perichoretically in living out Gods call. Jesus Participation in Small and Large Groups In looking at Scripture, it seems that Jesus used a number of techniques to embody and accomplish the missio Dei. He confronted the ruling authorities directly, he suffered unjust punishment and death, and he gathered a small band of followers around himself. This last itemworking with small, defined groupsis most helpful in developing structures for communally discerning Gods call. There were distinct differences in how Jesus interacted with larger groups and with smaller groups. Jesus interaction with larger groups tended to be either didactic or confrontational. With smaller groups, Jesus tended to let his guard down a bit more, to be more personal, and to reach out caringly.
61

Ibid., 46-47. Emphasis added.

110 An example of Jesus working with a small group is in the number of people he had close relationships with during the time of his ministry. Jesus called twelve people to follow him as disciples and to prepare for sending as apostles. Jesus also travelled with a larger number of disciples who followed him in his ministry. Together, Jesus developed personal, longer-term relationships, to varying degrees, with the apostles and disciples. Jesus had a tendency to speak to the large groups in parables that could be difficult to understand, which he would later unpack and explain privately to the disciples. For example, after speaking in parables to a very large crowd (Mark 4:1), Scripture reports, When Jesus was alone, those who were around him along with the twelve asked him about the parables. And he said to them, To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables; in order that they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand; so that they may not turn again and be forgiven. (Mark 4:10-12) Again, as Jesus accompanied the disciples mutually in shared ministry, Gods purposes were clearer to them. Life in the small group gave the disciples a privileged position to understand more clearly the teachings that Jesus gave to the larger group without explanation. At a pivotal moment, Jesus questioned the disciples and worked with them to hone their understanding of Gods vision. He did this in comparison to more public and widely held beliefs. The small-group dynamic helped the disciples to recognize and understand Jesus for who he is. Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, Who do people say that the Son of Man is? And they said, Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. He said to them, But who do you say that I am? Simon Peter answered, You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God. (Matthew 16:13-16)

111 Repeatedly, when Jesus wants to do momentous things, he chooses the small group of the disciples, or even a subgroup thereof, to do his work. Jesus trains 70-72 disciples to travel to various villages to cast out unclean spirits, heal people, and to proclaim the Good News that the Kingdom of God is near.62 Jesus reserves the Last Supper and the ensuing conversation exclusively for the disciples. Even more so, Jesus reserves the pinnacle moments for the very few people closest to him. Repeatedly, Jesus singles out Peter, James, and John, a subgroup of the apostles, to join him for significant events. Such events include the healing of Jairus daughter,63 the Transfiguration,64 and Jesus time of prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane on the night of his betrayal (Mark 14:33). There are still other examples. The sisters Mary and Martha also play significant roles of a small sub-group with a personal relationship with Jesus in the Gospel of John. When Jesus encounters Zacchaeus and his newfound faith, he calls him to come down from his tree so Jesus can have dinner with Zacchaeus at his home for more personal, intimate conversation. Finally, Mary Magdalene alone is the first person to see the risen Jesus in John 20. Clearly, relationships with those closest to him are important to Jesus. Through these relationships, both Jesus and others influence, and at times, even shape one another, perichoretically. The way that Jesus interacts with the smaller group is quite different from the way Jesus interacts with larger groups. In all four Gospel accounts, Jesus provides food for
62

Cf. Luke 10, etc. Cf. Mark 5 and parallels. Cf. Mark 9:2ff. and parallels.

63

64

112 5,000 people with five loaves of bread and two fish. In this, Jesus himself does not feed the five thousand people. Instead, in an example of vocation lived in the priesthood of believers, the disciples figure prominently in the feeding, as Jesus tells the disciples to interact directly with the crowd. This happens, for example, when Jesus tells them, You give them something to eat (Mark 6:37). On the other hand, in the Sermon on the Mount65 and the Sermon on the Plain,66 Jesus clearly interacts with a large group by teaching the crowd, but not in relating to them dialogically on the personal level with which he interacts with the disciples. Relationship Building through Small Groups With this in mind, it is clear that small group interaction was an important component of cultivating missional vision at Living Water. It was an influential part of discerning Gods call. It was vitally important in creating and deepening relationships with the goal of forming a stronger, more perichoretic community of faith. The formation and nurturing of small groups, called Damascus Travelers, helped cultivate a network that would continue in the tradition of the apostles and disciples. It provided a place for Gods Spirit to work in personal relationships and conversations to tickle the missional imagination of the participants. The Damascus Travelers groups were lay-led with an egalitarian and perichoretic design. The relationships that people formed in the Damascus Travelers groups helped further the goal of grass-roots vision cultivation by giving relational structures for conversation and discernment. They helped to build

65

Matthew 5ff. Luke 6:17ff.

66

113 and strengthen relationships among members, in the hope that members relationships with the wider congregation and community would be stronger as well. Summary It is important for leaders to work to cultivate missional vision in the congregations they serve. This requires discipline for the leader to keep from trying to shape and cast the vision for an ultimate or preferred destination. Instead, the leader tries to help congregants discern Gods vision for life. This inherently trusts that the Holy Spirit works in the vocations and lives of members, through a vision for perceiving life and making decisions, in furthering the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God. The PAR research methodology and intervention sought to accomplish this and reflect upon its impact.

Huntley

CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN The principle of emergence was developed to explain the ways organisms develop and adapt in differing environments. Contrary to popular notions that they develop through some top-down, predetermined, well-planned strategy, emergence theory shows that complex systems develop from the bottom up. Relatively simple clusters of cells, or groups of individuals, who individually dont know how to address a complex challenge, when they come together will form, out of relatively simple interactions, an organizational culture of a higher complexity that can address these challenges. In other words the answers to the challenges faced by organisms and organizations in changing environments tend to emerge from the bottom up rather than get planned before hand from the top down. This is why we describe missional leadership as the cultivation of environments within which the missional imagination of the people of God might emerge.1 Recognizing the importance, then, of cogeneratively cultivating shared missional vision as Jesus did with the disciples and as the Holy Spirit did in the midst of the early Christian community, the researcher sought to cultivate shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation. The method of Participatory Action Research (PAR) seemed to be best suited for achieving this goal and for assessing the impact of doing so. The purpose of the PAR at Living Water Lutheran Church was to unleash the missional imagination of the congregants as they discerned, defined, and committed to living in ways formed by the cultivated vision. This research was conducted in the hopes that the ultimate result would include the people of Living Water reaching out to others in the congregation and in the wider community to share the love of Christ and to
1

Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church, 263.

114

115 participate in Gods work to redeem and reconcile everyone to God and to one another. This work was done with a PAR process and intervention that sought to cultivate missional vision in the congregation of Living Water. The research utilized the following methodology in seeking to accomplish this in the midst of the people of Living Water Lutheran Church. Overview of Research Methodology The research for this thesis utilized Participatory Action Research2 in seeking to answer the research question. The researcher is a part of Living Water Lutheran Church as a called pastor. The research relied primarily upon concurrent (quantitative-qualitative) research methods to gather data to analyze in answering the research question. The researchers perceptions, notes, insights, and experiences also served as an informal qualitative source. The overall structure of the research was as follows: 1. Formulate research question and plan. 2. Gain approval to conduct research for thesis, perform and document background information, then refine the research plan based upon feedback. 3. Obtain a baseline evaluation of the congregations understanding of shared vision utilizing a concurrent quantitativequalitative method. The research design utilized quantitative methods to yield general, broad information about missional faith practices. This quantitative data also provided insights into congregational perspectives that the researcher utilized in planning and implementing the

Cf. Greenwood and Levin, Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change.

116 intervention. The researcher gathered data describing congregation practices and perspectives using qualitative methods (yielding depth of information). 4. Implement the proposed PAR intervention by encouraging growth of relationships by forming Damascus Travelers small groups and by working with the congregation and congregational leaders to cultivate missional vision. 5. Obtain an endline evaluation of the impact of cultivating missional vision in the lives of congregants and how they relate with the community after the intervention. Concurrent quantitative and qualitative methods yielded data for endline analysis. 6. Compare baseline and endline information and data to draw conclusions to answer the research question. 7. Document research observations and conclusions. Submit final thesis for defense and approval. Specific Research Methodologies Participatory Action Research The primary research question for this thesis is, How does cultivating shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? In answering the research question, a form of PAR served as the primary research method. In sociology, Action Research (AR) is a type of research that uses some kind of iterative cycle that includes planning, action, and evaluation, then returns to planning, and so forth, to learn how a group or organization reacts to various actions. Normally, there

117 are several iterations of this process; however, due to time constraints, the research for this thesis utilized one iteration of this process. Participatory Action Research (PAR), utilizes this AR concept, except the researcher conducts the research as a part of the organization. With PAR, the researcher implements some kind of action in hopes that the action will bring a favorable change or improvement to the organization.3 The learning comes as the researcher and the participants in the organization reflect upon the effect of the intervention. PAR was the best method for this research, because it fits with the desire to have a process that cultivates missional vision in a bottom-up, egalitarian fashion with the people of Living Water and the researcher. PAR works for this application, because: Participatory action research is not just research nor is it simply an exotic variant of consultation. Instead, it aims to be active co-research, by and for those to be helped. Nor can it be used by one group of people to get another group of people to do what is thought best for them-whether that is to implement a central policy or an organisational or service change. Instead it tries to be a genuinely democratic or non-coercive process whereby those to be helped, determine the purposes and outcomes of their own inquiry. 4 In conducting this PAR, then, the change resulting from the intervention was a deeper understanding of missional faith practices that members of the congregation understand and live in daily life. As people find transformation in their perspectives, the intended result would be that they would live with a deeper understanding and personal practice of faith in a number of areas. This would also result in a more missional approach to vocation and praxis outside of the congregation, which would impact

Cf. Yoland Wadsworth, What is Participatory Action Research, Action Research International, November 1998, http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-ywadsworth98.html, (accessed March 4, 2010).
4

Ibid.

118 members relationships with persons in the community that congregants interact with on a daily basis. The intervention was the cultivation of missional vision for life, ministry, and decision-making in the congregation. The response of the congregation and changes in perspectives and practices due to the intervention in the congregation is the topic of this research. In conducting the research, the primary data-gathering technique was a concurrent quantitative-qualitative method. A quantitative method provided data from a comparatively broader sample that was used to gain perspectives regarding congregants faith practices. Qualitative interview methods provided a deeper understanding of the congregations perception and embodiment of a missional vision. These methods, with identical questionnaires and interview participants,5 yielded baseline and endline data. The PAR method allowed for research based upon intervention with the researcher as part of the system studied. The researcher analyzed the data using quantitative and qualitative techniques, as appropriate, allowing for the determination of the change that occurred in the congregations perspectives and practices. Other, unforeseen outside and inside influences can affect the outcome. These outside influences included recent decisions by the Living Waters adjudicatory body, the impact of the troubled economy, and the changes to the relationship between the congregation and the mission developer.
5

The congregation council was interviewed in a group interview, and the two individuals were chosen randomly according to age demographics from the congregation. The same two individuals were interviewed for the baseline and endline data. The makeup of the council changed, over the year, however, so although the same political entity was interviewed there were a few different people in the group at baseline and endline interviews.

119 The researcher reflected upon results in light of theoretical foundations, as well as through biblical and theological reflection. Prayer for discernment and leading by the Holy Spirit were an important part of the research and reflection. Conclusions drawn provided insights into possibilities for further research. Even though the scope of this thesis was to use one iteration of the PAR action-reflection model, the possibility for future research and/or reflection in ministry was raised for others, for the researcher and for the congregation. Intervention The intervention occurred through a number of inputs into the congregation. These inputs included the following: 1. Working with the congregation council to help congregation lay leaders to understand the vision cultivation process. They were important in fostering healthy dialog, participation, and communication at congregational events, and in distilling the data to create guiding principles and purpose statements. 2. Working with the congregation council to help them implement and embody the cultivated vision in commission meetings and in daily interactions. This included helping them to understand, live, and practice the congregations vision in daily life, that they might encourage and help others to do so as well. 3. Creating and fostering small groups, called Damascus Travelers. These groups formed after the baseline and before the congregational retreat. Congregants were invited to form small groups for the purpose of building relationships, encouraging mutual prayer, mutual accountability, and Scripture study. They were an attempt to decentralize leadership in the vision cultivation process and to

120 encourage and provide a means for dialog in the vision cultivation process. Participants in the Damascus Travelers were also encouraged to find and embrace vocational ministry in praxis. 4. A congregational retreat followed by four weekly evening meetings. This is the centerpiece of the vision cultivation process. The process relies heavily upon the concepts contained in Dave Dauberts Living Lutheran book and the schedule was similar to the Sample Event in appendix F.6 The four weekly meetings contained a similar agenda to the one for the congregational retreat. This effort attempted to invite participation from congregants beyond those who participated in the retreat. The congregational retreat agenda structure followed this outline: a. The first session focused on discussion of missional church theology and foundations with devotions. b. The next session included study with individual groups studying and discussing one each of Acts 2, 10 and 16. Participants then shared perspectives with the larger group. c. Later in the morning, individuals prayerfully described their understanding of Gods purpose for Living Water. Participants discussed these individual responses in small groups, with specific descriptions of groups understanding of what a purpose statement should be for the congregation. Then, they shared these perspectives with the larger group. d. After lunch, groups reviewed the chapters of Acts they had studied earlier. Then, individuals in small groups sorted through and described values and
6

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, 91-95.

121 principles the persons in these passages used in making decisions. The groups sorted through these principles to discuss the most important ones. Then, they shared these perspectives with the larger group. e. Later in the afternoon, small groups met to consider these principles and to state what values should be the guiding principles for the congregation as a whole. Then, they shared these perspectives with the larger group. f. The retreat ended with Eucharist and prayers for safe travel for participants as they returned home. g. After the congregational retreat, several of the participants met at a local establishment to reflect on the experience and process the discussion informally. This after-event meeting was very instrumental in fostering cogenerative cultivation of missional vision. h. Results of the conversations were written on newsprint and hung in the Narthex with space inviting congregants who did not attend the retreat to add written comments in the vision cultivation process as well. i. After the retreat, participants had an opportunity to speak during worship to share observations and insights gained at the retreat. The intent of this was to invite as many congregants as possible to participate in the vision cultivation process. 5. Damascus Travelers met biweekly, studying suggested readings related to missional church concepts. In addition, the groups were encouraged to read the

122 lectionary readings from the Evangelical Lutheran Worship (ELW)7 hymnal daily. Damascus Travelers were encouraged to converse and pray mutually for one another both together and privately. The groups were also encouraged to grow (and if clusters become large enough, to divide) through invitation and reaching out to others. The groups were encouraged to reach out and minister together and support one anothers vocational ministry outside and inside of the congregation. 6. Midway through the intervention, at a council meeting, council members spent extensive time during devotions to discuss the concepts of liminality and communitas. The Holy Spirit provided a spark, and the council decided to move the entire congregation into a liminal situation for the sake of being more missional by shifting from two worship services at 8:15 and 10:45 a.m. to one service at 9:30 a.m. They did this specifically to move the congregation out of their comfort zone into liminality, while bringing everyone together to increase interconnectedness. As the conversation continued, ideas for ways to be better neighbors to those nearby came out of cogenerative, civil, and honest deliberation. The council members specifically recognized these as baby steps even as they committed to helping the congregation stay out of their comfort zone to connect with others and grow faith. 7. At the council meeting following the four meetings, congregation leaders sifted through the information from the retreat and from subsequent congregational

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Evangelical Lutheran Worship, Pew ed. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006), 1147-48.

123 feedback to form initial guiding principles and purpose statements. The council communicated them to the congregation for discussion and review. 8. There was an open forum to encourage conversation for the congregation to discuss the statements from council. Members were also encouraged to share perspectives about the statements via email or written correspondence. 9. At the following meeting, the council revised the guiding principles and purpose statements to incorporate the reflections from the congregation forum and response. 10. A few weeks later, there was a congregational meeting to discuss and adopt the guiding principles and purpose statement for the congregation. 11. Congregation council, commissions, and individual members were encouraged to consider the guiding principles and purpose in making further plans and decisions. Numerous congregants discussed the concept of Vision as something that is lived into and of living with the guiding principles and purpose over time in various forums throughout the process. They now seek to use the guiding principles and purpose since their adoption. Congregants received instruction and encouragement to live into the vision and to act and make decisions considering the purpose statement and guiding principles. 12. Formal participation in Damascus Travelers concluded a few weeks prior to the adoption of the guiding principles and purpose statement. The groups were encouraged to continue to meet informally, but the formal program of the Damascus Travelers ended. Depending upon the participation and enthusiasm

124 level of the clusters, the Disciple Commission may continue to work with the Damascus Travelers as a small-group ministry of the congregation. After the completion of the vision cultivation process, the congregation had some time to live with the guiding principles and purpose statement. During this time, congregants had reminders of the new statements in various publications and forums. Congregants had opportunities in informal groups and in Sunday School classes to discuss the new vision. The statements were prominent in preaching during Sunday worship. The time following the intervention gave congregants time to live with the guiding principles and purpose statement in moving forward into Gods vision for the congregations ministry. Members discussed ways to embody the purpose statement and guiding principles and to move forward and continue to discern Gods vision. This provided opportunities for reflecting upon changes in personal perspectives and practice as enunciated in the endline data collection. Metrics for Observing Changes in Congregational Practices and Perspectives Efforts in the PAR Intervention endeavored to shape a deeper understanding of missional faith practices as members understand and embody them in daily life. As peoples perspectives experience transformation, the intended result was that they live with a deeper understanding and personal practice of faith. The intent was that this would also result in a more missional approach to vocation and praxis outside of the church, which will impact relationships with persons that congregants interact with on a daily basis. The locus of activity for the PAR intervention was the cultivation and understanding of missional vision for life and ministry in the lives of congregants. In

125 analyzing the efficacy of the intervention in bringing about the desired change in members actions and perspectives, the researcher analyzed data in the following areas: 1. Personal faith practices and communal/vocational ministry. Data in this area were gathered and assessed both in quantitative and in qualitative research data. A quantitative questionnaire sought to gather data to compare congregants perceptions of their practice in both personal practices and communal/vocational ministry. This gave the researcher data about how much, in general, the activity of congregants changed throughout the research. Qualitative questions also gathered data that more specifically (and with greater depth) showed change in this aspect of the members actions and perspectives. 2. Understanding of the congregations shared vision. Through qualitative questioning, data gathered and assessed helped to determine how well the vision cultivation process led to an understanding of the congregations shared vision for decision-making and ministry activity. 3. Efficacy of how the congregation equips congregants for growth in personal faith and communal/vocational ministry through the vision. Qualitative questions examined how well the congregation puts the shared vision into action. 4. How congregation vision impacts personal/congregational faith practices. Individuals answered questions about personal practices, while the congregation council discussed questions about the congregational practices. The researcher gathered further qualitative data to find specific ways that the cultivation and determination of the congregations shared vision impacted or influenced congregants personal faith practices.

126 5. How congregation vision impacts communal/vocational ministry. Qualitative inquiry sought to find specific ways that the cultivation of the congregations shared vision impacted or influenced how the congregants reached out to others in answering Gods call to mission, and how their relationships with others changed. The first metric looks at a general concept of the individuals missional practices both inside and outside of the congregation. The second and third metrics examine the congregations vision and how well congregants understand and embody the vision. The last two metrics examine what difference the vision actually makes in the life of congregants and their relationships with others in the wider community. Quantitative Research Data Gathering Faith Maturity Scale The Faith Maturity Scale8 (FMS), administered via a Convenience Sample after both Sunday worship services at the baseline and endline, gave a broad survey of congregation attitudes and actions with respect to faith practices and missional activity. The baseline sample also served to provide information for the researcher in designing and implementing the PAR intervention. The researcher chose the FMS because of its applicability to this research, and its broad multi-denominational support and use. Evidence supporting the validity of the FMS makes it quite suitable for research use.9 Thus, the FMS was not field tested due to its history of validity for research.
Peter L. Benson, Michael J. Donahue, and Joseph A. Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation, Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion 5 (1993): 171-174. Ralph W. Hood and Peter C. Hill, Measures of Religiosity (Birmingham: Religious Education Press, 1999), 172.
9 8

127 The FMS questions focus on three important areas;10 views and faith practices with respect to personal faith,11 views and faith practices with respect to the world,12and views and faith practices that integrate the two.13 With this in mind, congregants completed a form of the actual FMS in its original and complete form, with the addition of basic demographic questions (see appendix B). The researcher interpreted the results as the authors of the study originally intended by means of an aggregate score. The researcher also analyzed the results within clusters of (I)nward, (O)utward, and (C)onnecting types of questions, and within various age groups. Baseline and endline data comparisons used unpaired two-sample t-Test with unequal variances analysis to determine what, if any, statistically significant change occurred. Participants had to sign waivers in order to complete the FMS. They completed both the waivers and the surveys via convenience samples on a Sunday after worship services at the beginning and end of research. Rationale for Breakdown of Survey Statements into Subgroups for Analysis The FMS tool contains statements pertaining to various aspects of faith lived in the lives of survey participants. While this can be helpful in determining faith maturity, this research sought to identify changes in persons faith specifically with respect to personal beliefs and practices, and missional engagement in the world with others in daily life. Although the FMS does not distinguish between personal or individual faith
10

See appendix B for a question by question breakdown of the three aspects that follow. Inward-directed or personal faith views and practices. Outward-directed, or faith views and practices that affect actions. Connecting faith views and practices in the world; integrating faith and life.

11

12

13

128 practices versus those that influence missional activity, it is the researchers belief that the survey results nonetheless yielded insights into personal beliefs and practices with respect to public, vocational, and missional practices. For the purpose of this particular analysis, the results of the FMS statements were grouped into three categories. The intent of doing this was to allow for targeted analysis of the responses with respect to categories of I, O, and C inner beliefs with outer understandings. The questions, along with the designation of I, O, or C as assigned by the researcher is located in appendix B. Criteria used to assign statements to the various categories are as follows: Inner (I) statements focus on personally held beliefs, private faith practices, or issues related to stewardship of body, mind, or spirit. Respondents could hold these personal beliefs or practice in such a way that they would not necessarily or specifically affect the persons activity in the world. (Example: I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on a cross and rose again). The thirteen statements on the FMS in this category are 2, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 19, 20, 24, 26, 30, 32, and 34. Outer (O) statements pertain specifically to the persons activity in the world, or specifically focus on what one thinks are ideals for people to strive for in the world. These are actions, as written, which do not specifically derive from beliefs. (Example: I do things to help protect the environment). The ten statements on the FMS in this category are 1, 4, 6, 8, 13, 16, 21, 22, 31, and 33. Finally, Connecting faith and life in the world (C) statements describe action based in personal beliefs. They may be actions that derive from beliefs, or they may be beliefs that change due to action out in the world. To fit into this category, the statements

129 must specifically assert that some belief directly impacts activity with others or in the world. It may also describe how beliefs affect opinions about others or about God at work in the world. (Example: My faith shapes how I think and act each and every day On the other hand, I speak out for equality for women and minorities is an O because it does not show how that action is based in or stems from a direct impact on personal beliefs.). The fifteen statements on the FMS in this category are 3, 5, 11, 14, 17, 18, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29, 35, 36, 37, and 38. Data Analysis In all data analysis, the questions that were reverse scored (5, 10, 25, and 26) were analyzed by reversing the numbers. Thus, for data analysis, responses coded as 1 were analyzed as 7, responses coded 2 were analyzed as 6, etc. Reverse-scored results described in this thesis are described in this fashion. To analyze the data, the researcher created a database in Microsoft Access and entered the data in the database. The data were then exported to Microsoft Excel, and the researcher wrote programs in Visual Basic for Applications to format the data in Excel for analysis, to use the data analysis tools in Excel, and to format the data for output and publication. The histograms came from reports in Access. These graphs were exported from the Access reports and formatted for publication. Baseline and endline results from the FMS were analyzed using the unpaired two-sample t-Test with unequal variances analysis technique (see appendix D). The first table compares baseline and endline averages of responses to all 38 questions for all respondents, for those aged 18-59, and for those aged 60+. The next three tables show the results of analysis within the I, O and C categories for all ages, for 18-59, and for 60+.

130 The last three t-Tests were performed to analyze data for each question with categories for all ages, 18-59 and 60+. For all t-Test data, a P (T<=t) one-tail probability less than .05 designates a statistically significant change from baseline to endline surveys. Results in that column are highlighted to denote a value less than .05. Data from the FMS were also analyzed, by individual question, to find the mean, standard deviation, median, mode, kurtosis, and skew. These results were tabulated for both baseline and endline responses for all ages, 18-59 and 60+. Finally, histograms graphically showing the number of responses for each possible response (numbers 1-7 possible) for each question were generated. Three different sets of histograms show baseline and endline data for all ages, 18-59 and 60+. Qualitative Research Data Gathering Qualitative Interviews In using PAR to answer the research question, the researcher also analyzed qualitative data derived from interviews. In gathering qualitative data, the researcher used open-ended questions to gain depth of data about how peoples perspectives changed in response to the intervention. This tends to be somewhat more organic than the process of gathering data through quantitative means such as the Faith Maturity Scale questionnaire. This helped the research to yield additional, deeper insights into the effects of the intervention at Living Water. The researcher kept this desire to gain a depth of data in guiding conversation and seeking data during the qualitative interviews. In the initial, baseline interviews, questions sought information to describe participants initial understandings, vision, and practices of the missional perspectives at Living Water. Information from other sources

131 also informed the researchers interpretation of the dataresults of the quantitative surveys, personal diaries, newsletters, bulletins, etc. In comparing this with the endline qualitative interview data, the researcher gained insight into changes the intervention brought in answering the research question. From the qualitative interview data, then, various categories and trends of change in the congregations practices and perspectives resulting from action with the intervention were available for analysis and consideration. Qualitative data provided selective depth of information for consideration in the conclusions. The original plan was to select two participants randomly for the qualitative interviews from the active membership of the congregation according to two general categories; one person aged 20-39 and one person aged 40-59.14 The congregation council was interviewed as a group for the third qualitative interview.15 While the congregation council did participate in baseline and endline interviews, as the research progressed, it became apparent that the two general age categories were not feasible for this study. In analyzing the demographic data for the persons participating in the Damascus Travelers groups and the persons participating in the baseline FMS, the researcher discovered that the majority of participants were in the 60+ group. This meant that the bulk of the Damascus Travelers would be outside of the pool of potential

For purposes of this study, active member is defined as someone who worships, on average over the preceding year, at least once a month. As stated previously, the council group interview was conducted regardless of which specific persons were available for the interview. This was done in this manner because council elections, with changes in specific office holders, occurred during the research timeframe. Council was selected as a group to be interviewed not because of the specific persons who were on council, but because of the unique position and responsibility council holds in congregational life. This responsibility and unique position were consistent throughout the research regardless of who filled the specific positions on council.
15

14

132 interviewees. This methodology would noticeably restrict the pool of participants and thus the reliability of the data. After conversation with an assigned research colleague and with these facts in mind, the researcher alternatively decided to select one participant randomly from the group of people who participated in the baseline FMS, and one participant who participated in the Damascus Travelers groups. The researcher utilized a white-noise based random number generator16 to select one person from the Quantitative Survey participants consent forms, and another person from the list of Damascus Travelers participants. Even though these two individuals were selected randomly, each person was given an opportunity to either sign a research permission document or decline participation in the qualitative data-gathering process. When a person agreed to participate, they specifically agreed to participate in the interview at the beginning and end of the study. In addition, the person selected from the Damascus Travelers group agreed to participate in a Damascus Travelers group actively for the duration of the program. One person selected from the FMS participants group was not an active member, the second declined participation in the research, and a third person from that category agreed to participate. This person did participate in the congregation retreat, the Damascus Travelers, and one of the Wednesday night groups, although this was not required. The first person selected from among the Damascus Travelers groups agreed to these requirements.
The white-noise random number generator was used on the website http://www.random.org. The website works by using ambient white noise signal levels (the best random source currently available) to randomly select a number within a selected integer range.
16

133 The researcher interviewed these two persons and the congregation council, with qualitative data derived. A licensed court reporter17 transcribed the recordings of the interviews for analysis. The recordings and transcriptions will be destroyed three years after the thesis approval, and were treated with full confidentiality throughout the process. Interviews at the beginning and end of research were conducted and compared to one another to look for change in participants understanding of and activity shaped by missional vision. Research Areas and Questions for Qualitative Interviews The researcher structured qualitative interviews to seek data in evaluating the five Metrics for Observing Changes in Congregational Practices and Perspectives described earlier. Primary questions with potential follow-up questions are in appendix E. The follow-up questions are available, but not required, for the interviewer to use to gather data to answer the primary questions completely. These questions were field tested with two persons who are not participating in the vision cultivation process at Living Water, and one minor insight garnered from their feedback was utilized to improve the interview schedule. The qualitative interview schedule questions addressed the following subject areas. Personal faith practices and communal/vocational ministry. The primary interview question is, In what ways does your relationship with God make a difference in your personal life and in your relationships with others? This question seeks to provide an introductory question to allow the interviewee opportunity to share personal

17

The researchers sister is a licensed court reporter.

134 experiences and to gain comfort with the interview process. It also serves to provide a general understanding of the persons faith practices, both personal and communal/vocational. The first follow up question is, What are some examples of times when you have seen God at work? This gives a framework to consider and remember specific events that describe the persons faith. The second question seeks to focus more on aspects of sharing ones faith with, When you talk about God with others, what do you say? The third question seeks a direct correlation between ones understanding of God and their activities and personal faith with, How does God influence what you do on a daily basis? The fourth question again focuses on relationships with others, with the question, How do you bring God into your day-to-day interactions with others? The final instruction focuses specifically on personal faith practices, Describe your devotional life. This item, with a specific focus on personal faith and practice, is last because it is more personal and specific than the broader, more general questions above. Understanding of the congregations shared vision. The primary interview question is, What are some principles or concepts that people in the congregation hold in common as they make decisions and work together in ministry? This question goes specifically to the information sought. The question looks to see if there is an understanding of the congregations shared vision for ministry. Other follow-up questions that can provide ways of asking the respondent about the content of the shared vision statements are available in case the respondent is unfamiliar with a shared vision in the congregation. These include, How do you know this to be the case? Also, Think of some activities that the congregation does together. Based upon these communal activities, what would you infer to be the congregations vision for ministry? Finally,

135 As a congregation member, how do you think a first-time Visitor would describe the congregations shared vision for ministry after worshipping here on a Sunday? Efficacy of how the congregation equips congregants for growth in personal faith and communal/vocational ministry through the vision. The primary interview question is, Consider this shared vision that you just described. What are some ways that this vision helps you make decisions in your daily life? This question seeks to determine how well the participant feels that the congregation has helped her/him to put the shared vision into practice. Delving deeper into what that process is, the first and second follow-up questions ask, How do/would you apply it in making decisions on a day to day basis, and, How does the shared vision impact decisions you make at home, at work, or elsewhere? The third follow-up question would only be necessary for a person who has a clear understanding of the shared vision. This question looks for specific examples of the congregation training for applying the shared vision with, When have you said, Wow, this vision really is helpful in dealing with this situation in life, here at this congregation? Finally, the last follow-up question seeks to find out what the congregation has done specifically to help the respondent apply these with, How does this congregation help you to experience a deeper personal faith life, or to feel comfortable to talk about your faith in daily life? How congregation vision impacts personal/congregational faith practices. Questions involve individual aspects for individual interviews and congregational aspects for the group interviews with council. The primary question is, Consider your personal/the congregations faith life for a moment. How has the congregations shared vision made a difference in your personal/the congregations faith life? The primary

136 emphasis is specifically on the respondents personal faith life to see how the shared vision has impacted the personal faith life. This primary question with its follow-up questions seeks to answer the portion of the research question dealing with the impact the vision cultivation process has had on the personal faith life of the congregant/congregation. The first follow-up question probes deeper for specific examples of changed faith now because of congregational life; What is different in your personal/the congregations faith life now, compared to a year ago? The second seeks to find how God has spoken to the respondent/congregation, because of the shared vision with, What were you doing privately/as a council when you felt God give you insight through considering the shared vision? A negative follow-up question seeks to find negative impact due to the lack of vision with, When have you seen something happen that went against the congregations vision? What did you think or how did you feel about that? Finally, in the endline interview, a follow-up question of, How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted the congregations ministry? is available. How congregation vision impacts communal/vocational ministry. The primary question is, How has the congregations shared vision made a difference in how you relate with others in the community? Emphasis is first placed specifically upon the respondents missional life to see how the shared vision has impacted the respondents life in community and vocation. This primary question with its follow-up questions seeks to answer the portion of the research question dealing with the impact the vision cultivation process has had on the respondents relationships with others in the wider community. The first follow-up question looks for specific examples of missional life

137 with, How has the congregations shared vision impacted your relationships with people outside of the congregation through your actions or verbal witness? The second follow-up question looks for understandings of relational aspects of the shared vision with, How do your relationships with others compare to your understanding of the congregations shared vision? The next follow-up question seeks specific examples of changed behavior in the respondent and how others have been changed in the community due to the vision cultivation process with, How have people in the community that you know benefitted from the ministry of the congregation or its members? Finally, the last three follow-up questions are available for use in the endline interviews to probe specific results brought about by the vision cultivation process. They are, What are you doing differently in our community, whether intentionally or not, as a result of the congregations vision/vision cultivation process? Secondly, How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted your relationships with people in the community? The final follow-up question is, How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted how the congregation as a whole thinks about our community? Anything else? This closing question gives the respondent an open-ended opportunity to share further information with, Is there anything else you would like to say, or that you think I should consider? The first follow-up question probes deeper into the response with, Why is this important to you? In the closing statement of the interview, the interviewer expresses appreciation for the respondents participation with,

138 Thank you for your time and effort in helping me understand more about your understanding of this congregations ministry. Data Analysis The interviews were analyzed using qualitative coding techniques. The researcher initially coded respondents answers. These codes were entered into a Microsoft Access database, by question, and were printed out in two ways for further analysis. The first method involved a longitudinal analysis, wherein codes and categories were derived by comparing all three responses together, by question, for endline and baseline interviews. For example, in longitudinal analysis, the initial codes from baseline interviews for the two individual and the one group interview were coded distinctly and together for each question. The researcher then compared these aggregate codes and categories to similar longitudinal responses for the endline interviews by other respondents in order to derive the results and conclusions. The second method involved a latitudinal analysis, wherein baseline and endline responses were coded by question for each interview. This means, for example, that one individuals interview responses for each question were compared and coded with baseline and endline together. This researcher also analyzed these findings to derive the results and conclusions. Summary The research for this thesis utilized PAR in cultivating missional vision among the people of Living Water Lutheran Church, a newly developed congregation. The intervention of forming Damascus Travelers groups and cultivating missional vision did

139 have an impact on the congregants, and it had in impact on how they make decisions and interact with others in their daily lives. The specific results will be described next.

Huntley

CHAPTER 5 RESULTS OF STUDY AND INTERPRETATION A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives. Inscription on Jackie Robinsons tombstone.1 Although this inscription on Jackie Robinsons tombstone may be worded a bit stronglywe are created in the image of God, after allit does highlight the important role we play as we influence the lives of one another in Gods caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign. The inscription befits a man who broke segregation barriers and stood as an advocate for social and civil rights causes. Robinson broke segregation barriers to attend Officer Candidate School in the U.S. Army.2 As a second lieutenant in 1944, Robinson endured the humiliation of a spurious court martial and subsequent acquittal for refusing to move to the back of an unsegregated Army bus.3 In 1947, Robinson broke the segregation barrier in baseballs major leagues by playing for the Brooklyn Dodgers. Later in Robinsons life, his experience with his sons drug addiction motivated him to become a staunch anti-drug advocate.4 Throughout his life, as Robinson stood for justice and equality, he impacted society in ways that continue to benefit all of us today.

Italics and formatting are sic from the source: Steve Jacobson, Carrying Jackies Torch: The Players Who Integrated Baseball--and America (Lawrence Hill Books, 2007), 239.
2

Arnold Rampersad, Jackie Robinson: A Biography, 1st ed. (New York: Knopf, 1997), 93. Ibid., 102-109. Ibid., 438-443.

140

141 Although the scope of the Participatory Action Research (PAR) for this thesis was significantly smaller than that of Jackie Robinsons entire life, it nonetheless sought to similarly impact a congregation and inspire members to have a meaningful and missional impact in the lives of one another and the community. The research question is, How does cultivating shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? The PAR research sought to have an impact on the lives of congregants, and by extension, on members relationships with others. In order to assess the impact of the PAR intervention it is important to analyze data in order to assess the outcome of the mission cultivation process. The conclusions5 are based upon quantitative and qualitative data gathered during the research for this thesis. The quantitative and qualitative data are now described to allow for assessment of the PAR data in answering the research question. Narrative of Intervention and Its Impact The intervention phase6 of the PAR for this thesis began April 25, 2010, 7 with the start of Sunday School discussions and the Damascus Travelers groups. The intervention phase ended August 22 with the formal adoption of a purpose statement and guiding principles discerned through the missional vision cultivation process. The researcher

Conclusions reached by analyzing the data garnered from the PAR will be described in chapter 6. First, however, it is important to analyze the data in chapter 5 to provide material to consider and assess in chapter 6.
6

See appendix A, PAR Intervention Timetable, for a full description of the intervention

timeline.
7

The remainder of the months and dates refer to the year 2010 unless otherwise noted.

142 worked before the intervention to prepare the congregation for the intervention and to maximize its impact. There were also unanticipated results, including a member-sponsored initiative to reach out and personally connect with residents in the congregations local neighborhood. Pre-Intervention Preparations In February, the researcher met with the congregation council at Living Water to introduce the concept of cultivating missional vision. Dave Dauberts Living Lutheran8 served as a means of beginning the conversation. The council members purchased and read the book. They held substantive and lengthy conversations about the material at meetings in March and, to a lesser extent, in April. Because of this conversation, congregational leaders embraced and endorsed the vision cultivation process and began to have conversations with others in the congregation in the hopes of garnering widespread acceptance and participation. Additionally, in preparation for the beginning of the intervention, the researcher included references to various elements of a missional church concept in sermons, newsletter articles, and informal pastoral conversations. The intervention events, such as Sunday School classes and the congregational retreat, were also publicized with an attempt to maximize congregational participation. Impacts of Intervention The multi-faceted nature of the intervention brought a variety of results. Notable results came in the areas of the Damascus Travelers groups, the congregation retreat, the
8

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation.

143 work of council on vision elements, the work in the congregation forum and meeting to adopt a purpose statement and guiding principles, and through the act of quantitative and qualitative data gathering. Damascus Travelers On March 16, a portion of the Discipleship Commission meeting dealt with planning and launching the Damascus Travelers groups. The researcher shared the concept, described fundamentals of the program, and encouraged cogenerative conversation regarding program specifics. These details were about form and format, program name, and means of garnering greatest congregational participation. One of the best suggestions, for example, included having members of the commission call active congregants to invite them personally to participate in the program.9 This approach of working with the Discipleship Commission was effective in maximizing participation. Twenty-eight persons participated in seven groups; this exceeded the commissions and the researchers most optimistic expectations. In conversation following the experience, participants showed appreciation for the opportunity to get together. Most of the groups stated that they formed close personal connections with the other group members, even with some occasional deep, and even tearful, interactions. For example, one group comforted a member whose close family member was diagnosed with cancer just hours before the scheduled meeting. Participants also stated that they had a positive experience meeting in groups by deepening existing relationships.

See appendix I

144 An example of a problem due to a top-down vision-casting process rather than a grass-roots style occurred in the use of a prayer labyrinth.10 The researcher advocated the use of a prayer labyrinth, with little or no mutual conversation with participants. As a result, only a couple of people utilized it. Overall, however, participants viewed the opportunity to form and strengthen relationships with one another in the Damascus Travelers groups positively.11 Congregation Retreat The congregation retreat, on the other hand, had fewer participants than the Damascus Travelers groups. Participation may have been low because, although the council discussed the retreat, the researcher planned and promoted it almost exclusively in a top-down style. Even so, after several collaborative conversations, the researcher changed the format from an overnight to a one-day retreat when it became clear that nobody would stay overnight. This flexibility in planning the retreat induced several congregants to attend and participate. The conversation at the retreat was lively and folks were engaged in the conversation. After the retreat, most of the participants decided to gather for an impromptu conversation and fellowship at a local restaurant. In this informal conversation, it became clear that several of the participants were excited about the missional concepts they had discussed previously. The cultivated vision was changing not only their perceptions about Living Water, but also their understandings of what it meant

10

See appendix J. The description of the Damascus Travelers experience is from the researchers journal.

11

145 to be a congregation or a missional church.12 During this discussion, participants asked the researcher to bring the retreat material back to the congregation and to host three or four Wednesday evening forums with the same material. Several of the retreat participants even participated in the conversations at the Wednesday evening meetings, in an effort to expand the conversation to include the wider congregation. Apparently, informal discussion following a liminal experience helped strengthen the impact of the retreat and nurtured a communitas experience.13 Council Work on Vision Elements On July 12, the council received the purpose and guiding principles statements from the congregation retreat and the Wednesday night forums. After extensive discussion, the council edited the fifth guiding principle14 and referred the proposed statements to the congregation for consideration at the August 8 forum. The council also discussed ways of encouraging greater participation from the congregation. The council recommended the following purpose and guiding principles statements to the congregation for consideration: Purpose Statement: Gods purpose for [Living Water] is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves. Guiding Principles: 1. Faithfully living with Christ at the center. 2. Prayerfully listening with open hearts and minds.
As one participant put it, You know at first, I thought that we needed to do a bunch of work to reactivate a bunch of people who arent coming any more. But now, as we talk about this and as I understand this missional church, I can see that this isnt our focus. They can come or they can go, but we need to be about doing this other stuff that is important. Working in our community, working on our faith life.
13 12

See chapter 3, Moving Beyond Community to Communitas. See appendix M.

14

146 3. 4. 5. 6. Selflessly welcoming all without preconceptions. Courageously bearing our neighbors burdens. Relating to one another with respect and honesty. Boldly sharing our blessings with others.

On August 9, the council met to review the inputs from the August 8 forum. After reviewing the forums conversation, they decided to present the purpose statement and guiding principles for the congregational meeting without amendment. Congregation Forums and Meeting Qualitative analysis of the baseline and endline group interviews yielded a finding that there were two perspectives, or visions for ministry, that congregants appeared to hold in varying degrees. These mindsets are invitational and vocational visions for ministry.15 These two perspectives seemed to shape much of the conversation at the August 8 congregational forum. As the meeting began, some members spoke about the need to invite persons in the community to join the congregation as members. Some raised concerns about paying the bills. Others spoke about the need to be more active in the wider community. A few people spoke about the need to have a cohesive, shared vision to help congregants to know what they are doing together in working with common purpose and vision. This back and forth conversation continued for a while. Near the end of the meeting, members affirmed the congregations ministry and noted that the purpose statement and guiding principles were helpful.

15

This will be discussed in greater depth in the Qualitative Interview Results section.

147 At the congregational meeting on August 22, the congregation considered the proposed purpose statement and guiding principles. There were no questions or comments, and the congregation adopted the proposal unanimously without amendment. The researcher observed that the persons who spoke from the invitational perspective tended to be people who had not participated in the vision cultivation meetings and process. Those that spoke from the vocational perspective, however, tended to have been a part of the process and meetings in varying degrees. It seems that the intervention helped participants to appropriate vocational perspectives and actions proportional to the extent that they participated in the cultivation process. Unforeseen Events and Results At the June 14 council meeting, the researcher discussed the concepts of liminality and communitas using the handout in appendix K. The discussion took the form of a devotional based upon the concepts of liminality and communitas.16 The conversation focused upon the benefits of risking a move beyond comfort and security to step outside of the comfort zone17 and enter liminality in the hopes that the community can grow relationally and experience communitas. As the conversation continued, various council members shared memories of liminal experiences that had fostered communitas. One person described a recent communitas experience of Gods Spirit in relationships

The handout in appendix K is from Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church, 219-221. Hirschs works derives from the concepts of communitas and liminality described in Victor Turner, The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (Aldine Transaction, 1995). Variations of the phrase stepping outside of the comfort zone have become a part of the congregations lexicon as a result of the missional vision cultivation process.
17

16

148 formed by reaching out and connecting with a neighboring inner-city congregation. Others shared similar experiences. After much cogenerative discussion and discernment, the council decided to invite their fellow congregants to step outside of their comfort zones intentionally and experience liminality together. They also asked the researcher to share the liminality and communitas material with the congregation in a sermon. Over the following month, surprising numbers of congregational members responded to the invitation favorably, as they reached out together to connect with and relate to residents in the local neighborhood. In reflecting upon these events, it would appear that this success emerged from using familiar concepts to draw people into missional, shared experiences of liminality. The conversations and sermons related to the missional vision cultivation process seemingly influenced several people and their relationships with the community. Moved by the conversations about missional vision, liminality, and communitas, the congregation and its leaders shared liminal experiences that drew people together in mission. As congregants joined in mutual conversation and fellowship after these experiences, people seemed to experience communitas. Quantitative Survey Results In this research, the Faith Maturity Scale (FMS)18 served two purposes. First, it provided baseline data that helped the researcher to shape the PAR intervention. Second, it provided baseline and endline data for analysis to help determine the extent of the PAR

18

See appendix B.

149 interventions impact on the congregation and relationships with others in the community in answering the research question. Participants completed the FMS as a baseline convenience sample on March 21 before the PAR intervention began. After the PAR intervention, worshippers completed the FMS in an endline convenience sample on August 29. The convenience samples consisted of people who agreed to remain after worship and complete the consent form and the survey. The developers of the FMS originally intended for it to be evaluated by averaging the scores from the 38 questions to yield one aggregate number to represent the response. Higher scores imply a more favorable result, presumably denoting participants holding a stronger or greater maturity of faith. Five of the questions were reverse scored, and the responses to these questions were reverse scored for analytical purposes (e.g. a 1 survey response was recorded as a 7 in the analysis for reverse-scored questions). The baseline and endline scores were analyzed in this manner for all respondents, as well as for the three age categories (all, 18-59, and 60+), with an unpaired one-tail t-Test. This test is helpful in determining if there was any change of statistical significance from baseline to endline due to the intervention (see appendix D). Finally, the questions were separated into categories of (I)nward, (O)utward, and (C)onnecting faith orientations for analysis with respect to the type of faith activity the question refers to.19 For data analysis, the questions were evaluated on a question-by-question basis to look at the type of responses garnered. The same three age categories (all, 18-59, and 60+) were also analyzed. This analysis utilized histograms, along with kurtosis and skew
19

This was discussed in detail in chapter 4.

150 data, to examine the response for each question for purposes of crafting the PAR intervention and for viewing overall perspectives in the congregations faith. Finally, the t-Test analysis was also performed for each question according to the three aforementioned age categories to gain insights into changes in the congregations faith and practices because of the PAR intervention. Analysis of Responses to Individual Questions Techniques used for Quantitative Analysis The histogram graphs report the number of responses for each possible selection (number 1 through 7) by question. The data were analyzed to determine the mean ( ), the standard deviation (s), the number of responses (N), the median, the mode, the kurtosis, and the skew. The mean is an average of all of the responses. It is helpful in determining the midpoint value of the data; a higher value implies, for example, that the responses cluster toward the higher end of the spectrum of possible answers (which are numbered 1 through 7). The standard deviation describes the width of the data distribution from the mean in a normal distribution20 sample. Higher standard deviations imply a wider data distribution, while smaller standard deviations imply that the data tends to cluster tightly around the mean. In a normal distribution, 66% of responses will fall within one standard

A normal (Gaussian) distribution is commonly referred to as a bell curve due to the bell-like shape of the Cartesian plot of the normal distribution. It is used in probability and statistics for analysis since probability data tends to be distributed along a normal distribution. Cf. Normal Distribution, n.d., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution, (accessed November 29, 2010).

20

151 deviation above and below the mean; 95% of responses will fall within two standard deviations, and 99% will tend to fall within three standard deviations. The median data point is the datum that falls in the middle of the data set. The mode is the data value that occurs most often in the data set. By comparing the median and the mode with the mean and with one another (and the standard deviation), one can discern the shape of the data distribution. A set of data, for example, that has two modes that are far from the mean of the data implies a bimodal system that is probably an inverted form of a normal distribution. On the other hand, a set of data whose mean, median, and mode are numerically close can imply a data set distributed more like a normal distribution. Kurtosis is a measure of how tightly the data clusters around a given response. Kurtosis is a measure of how closely the data set matches a normal distribution. As the data approaches one value, for example, the kurtosis will approach infinity. A histogram with a bimodal response or inverted normal distribution with responses at both ends of the spectrogram, on the other hand, will yield a negative kurtosis value. This is useful in assessing the shape of the data distribution.21 In a standard distribution, the skew measures the extent to which the statistical curve clusters to one side of the mean. A distribution where the mean, the median, and the mode are equal will yield a skew value of zero. A positive skew, therefore, means that the data clusters above the mean. Alternatively, a negative skew implies that the data

21

Kurtosis, n.d., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurtosis, (accessed November 29, 2010).

152 clusters below the mean. Skew, therefore, is useful in determining if the main data cluster is offset by a smaller cluster outside of the normal distribution.22 These statistical techniques were helpful in analyzing and interpreting the FMS data. Perspectives gained through this analysis were helpful in highlighting areas to focus on in the PAR intervention. Intervention Perspectives from Baseline Quantitative Data The FMS tool (see appendix B) provides a window into the faith and practice of an individual or a group. Specifically, the FMS is designed to measure the degree to which a person embodies the priorities, commitments, and perspectives characteristic of vibrant and life transforming faith, as these have been understood in mainline Protestant traditions.23 The baseline FMS data revealed two major aspects of congregants faith and practice for the PAR intervention to address. These aspects are personal faith, beliefs and practices, and perspectives in relating to others beyond the congregation. Although responses to several questions gave insights into these areas, the data from questions 2, 26, and 28 provide sufficient information to illustrate the categories. Personal Faith, Beliefs, and Practices In the baseline FMS data, one person selected option six; everyone else selected option seven, Always true, for question 2, I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on a cross and rose again (see figure 5.1). This near-unanimous acclamation of
22

Skew, n.d., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skew, (accessed November 29, 2010).

Benson, Donahue, and Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation, 171.

23

153 the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ served as a key starting point in implementing the PAR intervention. It allowed the researcher to proceed from an assumption that the congregation recognized the salvific actions of Jesus Christ. By extension, it was also reasonable to assume that the congregation also recognized the divinity of Christ. This finding allowed the understanding of the Lordship of the crucified and risen Christ to be axiomatic in the intervention.

Figure 5.1. Histogram for Question 2, I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on a cross and rose again. = 6.98, s = .12, the kurtosis is 63, and the skew is -7.94 (baseline values). Beyond the shared conviction of Christs crucifixion and resurrection, however, there was an acute difference of opinion about the implications of faith for praxis. In answering the reverse-scored question 26, almost twice as many people chose Always true (1 for data analysis) as those who chose Never true (7 for data analysis) in answering the question, I believe that I must obey Gods rules and commandments in order to be saved (see figure 5.2). The mean of 3.52 supports the finding that the majority of respondents held that this statement is true to some degree. In addition, the rather large standard deviation (2.34) implies a wide disparity of opinion on the topic. The negative kurtosis value of -1.42 numerically supports the visual evidence that the

154 histogram delineates an inverted normal distribution. With the number of responses at the two ends of the spectrum, it appears that the response to question 26 is bimodal, with the primary mode being Always true nearly by a factor of two to one.

Figure 5.2. Histogram for Question 26 (reverse scored)24, I believe that I must obey Gods rules and commandments in order to be saved. In the actual response, = 4.48 and the skew is .31; reverse scored for analytical purposes, = 3.52 and the skew is -.31. In both cases, s = 2.34 and the kurtosis is -1.42, (baseline values). The researcher was rather surprised to discover that a significant number of respondents to the FMS with a Lutheran heritage of being saved by grace through faith apart from works of Law would select Always true in responding to the statement, I believe that I must obey Gods rules and commandments in order to be saved. A perception of works righteousness could lead congregants to look at impoverished members in the community, for example, with an attitude that their actions had led them to poverty, and that they simply needed to get a job in order to get out of poverty. At a fellowship event, the researcher had a conversation with a congregant that followed this line of reasoning. The insights gained from the response to question 26 prepared the
24

As a reminder, on histograms for reverse scored questions contain inverted numbers for the purpose of data analysis. For example, a response of 1 is recorded as 7, a 2 is recorded as 6, etc.

155 researcher to be able to respond to this attitude with a call for understanding, compassion, and action for those who may be struggling with addiction, difficult life circumstances, health problems, etc. Conversations such as these, along with sermons, newsletter articles, classes, and other appropriate forums, gave the researcher opportunities to focus on Gods prevenient and universal grace through the missio Dei in all of creation as a source and foundation for missional activity and praxis. Perspectives in Relating to Others beyond the Congregation In answering the research question, How does cultivating shared missional vision in a newly developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and how they relate to others in the community? it was important first to identify congregants attitudes and perspectives about living missionally in the community. Responses to the FMS questions showed that the congregants did not place as high of a priority or value on engaging the community context as, for example, they held for personal faith perspectives.25 One instance of this is evident in the responses to question 28 (see figure 5.3), I care a great deal about reducing poverty in the United States and throughout the world. The mean of the responses to this question was near the middle of the response spectrum, at 4.72. Also, the near-zero kurtosis of -.21 and of the skew (-.16) imply that the response histogram data are distributed similarly to a normal distribution.

The prior discussion of the response to question 2 is an example of these strongly held faith perspectives. More examples of these distinctions are contained in appendix D. Question7, My faith helps me know right from wrong shows a stronger, Always true response than question 13, I am active in efforts to promote social justice, for example.

25

156

Figure 5.3. Histogram for Question 28, I care a great deal about reducing poverty in the United States and throughout the world. = 4.72, s = 1.31, the kurtosis is -.21, and the skew is -.16 (baseline values). This finding is also evident in FMS scores grouped in categories of (I)nward, (O)utward, and (C)onnecting faith orientations. Respondents consistently selected numbers for outer dimensions of faith that were 10 percent lower26 than those for inner or combined dimensions of faith (see table 5.1). Because of this finding, the researcher intentionally concentrated on encouraging congregants to focus more intently on moving to ministry outside of personal comfort zones and relationships. This was a part of the rationale for inviting congregants to engage in liminal experiences and to focus more on ministry outside of the congregation and beyond their comfort zones. The impact of this effort is also evident in the purpose statement that the congregation adopted, noting that Gods purpose for the congregation is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves.

The O mean value in table 5.1 of 4.46 is approximately .7 points, or 10%, lower than the average I and C values.

26

157 Table 5.1. Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (All Ages)27 Category I O C (Nb) 5.179 (63) 4.460 (63) 5.165 (63) (Ne) 5.214 (43) 4.603 (43) 5.120 (43) sb 0.506 0.796 0.584 se 0.466 0.809 0.563

Other aspects of the impact of the PAR intervention are apparent in the quantitative data. The t-Test is a tool for evaluating change between two sets of data. This test revealed areas of change during the time of the PAR intervention. t-Test Results The unpaired one-tail t-Test analysis tool compares two data sets to determine if there is a statistically significant difference between them. In this research, the t-Test analysis showed the impact of the PAR intervention by comparing FMS baseline and endline data. A probability (P) less than .05 in the t-Test result implies that the change in the mean ( is statistically significant. There were not any statistically significant changes between baseline and endline data when averaging multiple questions responses, whether analyzed by age category and/or by I, O, and C categories. There is an increase in the FMS average for the Outward category for ages 18-59 with P = .055, which is close to the .05 threshold but still outside of required parameters (see table 5.2). In other words, there was a discernable increase of
27

Interpretive Key for Data Results: N is the total number of responses. is the mean. s is the standard deviation. b and e subscripts: baseline and endline data, respectively.

158 0.302 in the mean for the responses of persons aged 18-59 that is very close to being statistically relevant.

Table 5.2. t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 18-59) 28 Category I O C (Nb) 5.140 (28) 4.163 (28) 5.004 (28) (Ne) 5.257 (23) 4.465 (23) 5.118 (23) sb 2 0.273 0.475 0.313 se 2 0.228 0.396 0.183 df 48 48 49 P 0.204 0.055 0.206

In the analysis of the responses to the individual questions, three questions had a statistically significant change from baseline to endline. In the average of all ages, the mean for Question 1 increased significantly from 4.344 to 4.857 (see table 5.3). Question 1 reads, I am concerned that our country is not doing enough to help the poor.29 Since this was a component of several conversations during the PAR intervention, it is reasonable to conclude that the intervention led to an increase in participants concern for the poor.

28

Interpretive Key for t-Test Results: N is the total number of responses. is the mean. s and s2 are the standard deviation and variance, respectively. df is the degrees of freedom value b and e subscripts: baseline and endline data, respectively. P is the probability (T t) one-tail. With bold font: statistically significant change (P < .05).

Benson, Donahue, and Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation, 173.

29

159 Table 5.3. t-Test Results, Question 1 (All Ages) No. 1 (Nb) 4.344 (61) (Ne) 4.857 (42) sb 2 1.896 se 2 1.784 df 90 P 0.031

Two other questions (see table 5.4) showed a statistically significant change in the means from baseline to endline when analyzed within the category of participants aged 18-59. Question 3, My faith shapes how I think and act every day, increased from 5.714 to 6.087 and question 24, My life is filled with meaning and purpose, increased from 5.296 to 5.818. Again, these were both components of several conversations during the intervention, so it is also reasonable to conclude that the intervention led to a positive change in the areas of faith shaping action and experiencing a life filled with meaning and purpose for respondents in the 18-59 age group.

Table 5.4. t-Test Results, Questions 3 and 24 (Ages 18-59) No. 3 24 (Nb) 5.714 (28) 5.296 (27) (Ne) 6.087 (23) 5.818 (22) sb 2 0.804 1.217 se 2 0.447 0.823 df 49 47 P 0.048 0.038

Qualitative Interview Results While the FMS was useful in garnering data from the breadth of the congregation, it did not plumb the depths of congregants faith and practices or identify specific actions or examples. It was necessary, therefore, to dig deeper for data that would provide better insights for understanding congregants faith and practices. The qualitative interviews

160 yielded baseline information that also helped in shaping and implementing the PAR intervention, albeit to a lesser extent than did the FMS quantitative data. Instead, the baseline and endline qualitative interviews yielded significant specific data to assist in evaluating the effects of the PAR intervention. In seeking to answer the research question, the congregation council and two randomly selected individuals participated in interviews at the beginning of the intervention (baseline) and after the conclusion of the intervention (endline) in an effort to gain information. The researcher examined interview transcripts using qualitative evaluation techniques as described in chapter 4. The qualitative analysis revealed information relating to four major categories. These categories include: 1. Developing a Shared Vision. The data revealed a baseline understanding that there was not a shared vision at the beginning of the intervention, although there had been one prior to the construction of the congregations building. Endline data exhibited components of shared vision cultivated during the intervention. 2. Invitational and Vocational Perspectives. The qualitative analysis revealed a disparity in vision between members focused largely on acquiring more congregational members and those focused on embodying missional principles in daily life. 3. Changes in Perspectives and Activity. The PAR intervention impacted, to varying degrees, all of the interviewees perspectives and vision for life and missional activity.

161 4. Impact of Missional Praxis on Beliefs and Perspectives. Data showed that some of the respondents increased their missional activity during the intervention. One individual who intentionally made significant behavioral changes in relationships also experienced significant change in missional perspectives. The qualitative analysis also revealed three minor categories relating to the research question. These categories include Mission Developer Perspectives, Impact of Denominational Decisions Regarding Gay Clergy, and Financial Concerns.30 Developing a Shared Vision In seeking to answer the research question, questions in the qualitative interview schedule focused on the interviewees understanding of the congregations shared vision (see appendix E). In asking these questions in both the baseline and endline interviews, it was possible to gain data about components of shared vision for ministry both before and after the intervention. Data from the interviews show that there was little or no shared vision for ministry prior to the intervention, apart from a general feeling of community and shared experiences. In the endline interviews, however, there was a greater understanding of a shared missional vision for ministry. Analysis of the baseline group interviews and the two individual interviews revealed data showing that there was not an understanding of a shared vision among the respondents prior to the PAR intervention. Even so, there were common understandings of what characterized ministry at Living Water Lutheran Church.

These categories will be described at length below in the Other Factors Influencing Research and the Outcome section.

30

162 Data Relating to Lack of Shared Vision Prior to Intervention Over the course of the baseline group interview and discussion, participants grew to understand that there was not a cohesive shared vision for ministry at that time. In considering questions of what the shared vision was, participants identified elements of unity such as worship practices, a unity of relationship in Christ, and a shared friendliness within the congregation. As the baseline group interview continued and participants described examples of how the shared vision inspired them in daily living or how the congregation equipped members to live and make decisions informed by the shared vision, people increasingly came to realize that there was not an existing shared vision for ministry. While this understanding was also present in the two individual baseline interviews, it was strongest in the group baseline interview. In discussing and answering the questions, the group seemed to realize with increasing agreement that there was not a shared vision for ministry in the congregation. It reached a point where in response to the beginning of question 5, How has the congregations shared vision the group literally interrupted the interviewer to state loudly, in unison, or lack thereof! The group realized that this was leading to a culture of grumbling and mutual attacks among congregational members. As the conversation continued, participants discerned that this was dangerous to the health of the congregation and could fracture the community if it did not change. During the conversation, the group came to agree that there needed to be a vision cultivation process and that there needed to be a shared vision for ministry. The individual interviews revealed a weaker understanding of a lack of shared vision for ministry in the congregation. In comparing the strength of the groups

163 understanding versus that of the two individuals in the baseline interviews, it is difficult to explain why there was such a conspicuous disparity. While this may be due to factors such as the group dynamic of conversation and discernment, the increase in responsibility of the group as congregational council members, or some other factor, it is difficult to ascertain the true reason for the difference reliably without further research. Data Relating to the Components of Shared Practices and Vision Although there was a strongly shared understanding among the participants in the baseline group interview that there was not a shared concept or perspective for making decisions as a congregation, there were nonetheless aspects of experience with respect to congregational life that participants identified as shared practices. While the baseline perspective that there was no shared vision was evident within the group interview responses, both group and individual interviewees shared components of these understandings of congregational practices and perspectives. In the baseline interviews, the group identified worship, a shared unity through a relationship with Christ, a friendliness that is evident in the congregation, and a shared denominational perspective as elements of shared practices or perspectives. The individuals identified a shared praxis of mutual care and concern (like the friendliness concept from the group interview) similar to that of a family as an element of shared congregational practice. One respondent described the congregations mission as one of caring for one another, with a movement to carry that practice out into the community. In short, across all three interviews, there was clearly a shared perspective that the congregation values relating to and caring for one another was an important aspect of ministry and life together.

164 In the endline interviews, aspects of shared vision discussed in the baseline interviews remained. One component that persisted from the baseline interview was the perspective of mutual care and concern. The participants in the group interview noted that the congregation members work together and care for one another in times of crisis. On the other hand, there was evidence in the endline interviews of elements of the congregations newly-cultivated shared vision, as articulated in the purpose statement and guiding principles. This vision to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves caused a group interviewee to look out into the world more, and to have an increased awareness of others. The vision was giving the person an increased awareness of spiritual and physical suffering in the world. According to an individual interviewee, this newly cultivated vision was affecting the congregations quarterly participation in the program to house homeless families at the church. This person also felt that the shared vision, as articulated in the purpose statement and guiding principles, was motivating congregants toward moving out to work in the community. The person noted that it helped inspire the congregation to reach out and strengthen relationships with a nearby inner-city congregation. Two Perspectives: Invitational and Vocational31 The qualitative analysis of the group interview revealed data showing two shared perspectives or visions for ministry among the members of the congregation. One vision emphasizes an invitational role for the congregation, placing primary importance on inviting others to come to the church for worship and spiritual nourishment. The second
While both perspectives might contain some elements of the other perspective, these monikers seemed to describe the two perspectives in as non-pejorative a manner as possible. The researcher selected these terms over others, such as traditional/contemporary, inward/outward, and church growth/missional.
31

165 vision emphasizes a vocational role for the congregation, placing primary importance on encouraging and equipping congregants for ministry in vocation and daily living. The researcher selected these terms as symbols to describe the two perspectives, with an effort to communicate aspects of the perspectives without being pejorative. Analysis of the group interview yielded this category as evidenced in the group interview while participants interacted with one another in considering and discussing the interview questions. Various participants seemed to address issues and share perspectives from a particular mindset along this spectrum; in other words, no one person would be completely invitational or vocational in his or her outlook. Rather, participants would show a disposition or tendency to view questions and perceive reality from one of the two perspectives. The group interviewees specifically described these perspectives; this category was not evident in the individual interviews. Invitational Perspective Persons with a predominantly invitational perspective tended to focus on growing the membership of the congregation. They saw outreach primarily as reaching out to the community to invite persons to worship in the hopes that they might become members of the congregation. This was the vision of the mission developer who is known for going out into the community to knock on thousands of doors in neighborhoods and subdivisions throughout the local and neighboring cities. This was done with a laudable desire to grow the congregation to a size that could support the construction of a church building and move forward there with the ministry of the congregation. Thus, the persons with an invitational perspective in the group interview, for example, specifically equated outreach with going into the community to knock on doors

166 and invite people to worship. During the intervention, the council even planned and led an event that garnered strong participation by the congregation to go out into the nearby neighborhoods to invite people to come to the church for an Independence Day event. Invitational persons pointed out that in the past, conflict brought a call from various folks with this perspective to return to the congregations denominational roots and traditional foundations. One person noted that folks in the congregation do not see themselves as agents of God bearing Christ to the community or elsewhere in daily life. Finally, one of the individual interviewees also noted a desire for visitors in worship to identify themselves to the congregation prior to the start of worship. Vocational Perspective Persons with a predominantly vocational perspective, however, tended to focus on embodying Christ in a sense of call to discuss and share faith with others. Persons with this perspective would be more likely to seek to reach out and form mutual and perichoretic relationships. This perspective also includes openness to newer, non-traditional forms of worship and faith life that is lived and expressed personally. In the baseline group interview, persons speaking from this perspective had a focus on contemporary worship forms and songs. One person, for example, related a story about a fellow member who threatened to cut his guitar strings with a pair of wire cutters after he played his guitar during worship. One of the individual interviewees also noted a desire to participate in the Damascus Travelers group and to read Centered Life32

Jack Fortin, The Centered Life: Awakened, Called, Set Free, Nurtured, 1st ed. (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006).

32

167 in an effort to embrace and embody a vocational life lived from a relationship with Christ at the center. In the endline group interview, some with a vocational perspective advocated an understanding that a new vision for ministry was emerging in the life of the congregation. Participants noted that a new direction seemed to be emerging, that moved in the direction of reaching out to the community with a desire for forming and shaping relationships marked by mutuality and reciprocity. One person even recalled leaving a personal comfort zone to include friends and their children in the congregations Vacation Bible School program. The person noted that this reaching out was something that came as a direct result of the PAR intervention efforts. Invitational/Vocational Interaction in the Group Interview In the baseline group interview, persons engaging in dialog and answering the interview questions noted the fact that there were two groups or concepts for congregational identity and ministry within the membership. There had been verbal clashes in congregational life between persons with the two perspectives. One such event was the threat to damage the guitar described previously. Another person also noted that during the recent call process there had been a push toward embodying a more traditional denominational identity as opposed to the generic, non-denominational one of the mission developer. In the endline group interview, the distinctions between persons with invitational and vocational perspectives were stronger. During the course of the interview, there was a subtle back and forth between people advocating the two perspectives. During portions of the interview, persons with the two perspectives posited and responded to one another

168 over the level of acceptance of the purpose and guiding principles statements. Those with a predominantly vocational perspective perceived a widespread acceptance of a desire to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves. Others with a predominantly invitational perspective felt that the vision was pushed from the top down rather than coming up from the grass roots. Nonetheless, even though there was this back and forth dialog between the vocational and invitational folks, there was still a move from invitational to vocational in persons with both perspectives. In the baseline group interview, one person with a predominantly invitational perspective described a sense that the congregation needed to move from an inward-direction of taking from the community to an outward-directed giving stance. In the endline group interview, one person noted that there were numerous personal changes to faith practices because of the vision cultivation process. In addition, even though one invitational person noted that while individual members might not see themselves as true agents of God, the person did think that people see the pastor, council members, and certain people as agents of God. This showed movement beyond the pastor to include other laypersons as Gods agents with a call33 to ministry. There was shared thinking by persons with both perspectives that while it was not all encompassing, there had nonetheless been baby steps during the PAR intervention to move and change perspectives toward a more missional and vocational perspective.

33

As was stated previously, vocatio, which is the root word of vocation, is Latin for call.

169 Changes in Perspectives and Vision for Life and Missional Activity Qualitative analysis of the group interviews yielded data describing the extent of shared vision, aspects of the shared vision, and the invitational/vocational perspectives of the shared vision. While these aspects were evident in the two individual interviews, they were primarily apparent in the group interviews. In the individual interviews, however, qualitative analysis revealed a category describing significant changes in perspectives and an increase in missional activity. Even though the individual interviews revealed the greatest change from baseline to endline in actual missional activity, there was also a discernable change from the PAR intervention evident in the group interview. Changes Evident in the Group Interview Several of the persons who participated in the group interview indicated that there were changes in perspectives and actions. One respondent noted in the endline interview that the vision was causing the person to look into the world more, and that it was increasing awareness of others. It was helping the person to see and to be more aware of spiritual and physical suffering in the world. Another respondent was specifically reaching out to others more in daily activities and interactions. There was an understanding of the need for and a desire to embody relationships intentionally characterized by mutuality and reciprocity in reaching out to others. Later in the interview, a respondent also pointed to a personal widening of perspectives with respect to living with and in a missional faith. The person indicated that this came in and because of the vision cultivation process.

170 Finally, a person in the group interview stated that there was more of an intentional emphasis, both personally and in the congregation as a whole, to try to think outside of the box. The person indicated that people talked more about new possibilities for ministry due to the new paradigms that people discovered during the vision cultivation process. Changes Evident in the First Individual Interview In the baseline interview, the first individual interviewee expressed a hope and a desire to move to a prior bright spot in his34 journey and life of faith. In answering the fourth question, Consider your personal faith life for a moment. How has the congregations shared vision made a difference in your personal/the congregations faith life? he also mentioned that he did not see a strong connection between his understanding of the congregational vision and his personal life. In the endline interview, however, it became evident that there had been change in perspectives and attitudes regarding personal and congregational ministry. The interviewee was dreaming and brainstorming ideas for congregational ministry in the community. He seemed to have a stronger missional imagination. For example, he was trying to think of ways that the congregations facilities could be used to serve the community. He specifically had spoken with others about the feasibility of starting a community garden for people in the surrounding area to share and use. He was also trying to think of ways to let people know about the congregation and invite them to worship and to be a part of the congregation. He recognized that he was intentionally trying to
This pronoun was selected randomly to allow for a better narrative flow and may or may not match the gender of the first interviewee.
34

171 work outside of the comfort zone and he realized that he was speaking from a new perspective and way of viewing reality. He identified it as a way of viewing reality from a missional perspective. Finally, he said that he felt that the vision articulated in the cultivation process was a potential source for future congregational activity. Changes Evident in the Second Individual Interview The second interviewee showed the greatest impact or change because of the PAR intervention. There had been conversations about the idea of the missional church prior to the PAR intervention. In addition, her35 baseline interview occurred after the congregation retreat. Thus, there are aspects of the baseline interview that were impacted by the PAR intervention and preceding events. Even so, there still seems to be significant and observable change from the baseline to the endline interviews. In the baseline interview, the respondent indicated that her relationship with God was beginning to affect relationships at her workplace in a factory. She was seeing God as active in these relationships as she worked with subordinates to treat them with dignity and in ways that were characterized more by mutual burden bearing than by top-down direction and discipline. She was beginning to see long-term impact from these actions and perspectives as she took personal interest in her coworkers life struggles and situations. Increasingly, she based her managerial style upon the emerging new vision, as she acted out of a prayerful relationship with God. Endline data indicate continued growth based upon the PAR intervention. While she gained some of the perspectives through participation in the Damascus Travelers
This pronoun was selected because it is the opposite the previously selected pronoun for inclusivity, for better narrative flow, and to distinguish the second interviewee from the first. It may or may not match the gender of the second interviewee.
35

172 groups, most of the perspectives came through the conversations and meetings during the vision cultivation process itself. Her vision for ministry had been based on an understanding of the congregation as a family who cares for one another. After the PAR intervention, her vision was primarily one of reaching out to invite people from societys fringes that congregation members might not normally invite. She described perspectives that she gained by being open to change and experimentation, using open-minded processes of discernment. She eschewed a consumer church mentality. She stated that in the practice of her faith, she was moving beyond previous experiences of worship and church life as a rote liturgical enactment that does not fully engage the heart and mind. Instead, she was actively living her faith and worshipping more holistically. She found that she was having more conversations about faith with others rather than keeping it bottled up as she grew spiritually with the process. She was also seeing others grow mutually in faith as she related to them through this experience. Specifically, her newfound missional perspectives and relationality directly influenced her work relationships and environment. As she reached out to relate with others, specifically those on the fringes, she found that people would respond with trust and would talk with her more openly about their personal problems and difficulties. As she intentionally took time to relate with her coworkers, to care about them, and to bear burdens mutually with them, they would also take a cue from her by reaching out to one another to relate in the same way. This complemented a similar initiative to create a more caring work environment from her companys new owners. She felt that the vision cultivation process gave her the insights to do this in her work.

173 Previously, workers perceived supervisors as a threat. Supervisors would watch workers closely and discipline them harshly. Since the PAR intervention, workers were beginning to see one another and supervisors increasingly as working together as a team and relating to one another in relationships of mutual caring. Problems became opportunities for learning. When coworkers were having personal problems, people would respond with mutual care and support. Supervisors were even giving workers more flexibility to adjust work hours to handle personal problems. These changes occurred during the PAR intervention. Certainly, this experience would not be automatically reproducible in every context. Even so, the interviewee clearly described these changes and attributed these new perspectives to her actions as stemming from the vision cultivation process. Missional Praxis Bringing New Vision and Understanding Qualitative analysis of the interview data yielded an unexpected finding that missional praxis yielded a deeper faith and understanding of missional vision. The first individual interviewee, for example, described a greater understanding of the cultivated vision as articulated on paper. He expressed a desire to move from discerning identity to living it. He could see potential in the newly cultivated vision, anticipated an increase in missional activity in the congregation, and could see future benefits coming from the articulated vision. However, he did not describe any personal experiences of living with the vision and its effects. He had some ideas for moving forward with missional vision (such as starting a community garden) but there was no experience or concrete planning to do so. Thus, changed thinking did not bring a noticeable change in activity.

174 Participants in the group interview also mentioned specific missional actions that brought a deeper understanding of missional concepts and an increased desire to act based upon the newly cultivated vision. One respondent, for example, described an experience of leaving the comfort zone to share faith with other friends. The second interviewee described another example of missional praxis nurturing new perspectives. This person clearly described a deeper appreciation and appropriation of the cultivated missional vision by practicing missional living. Through the congregations quarterly ministry of housing the homeless for a week, she reached outside of her comfort zone to get to know the members of the homeless families that the congregation housed. In this experience, she learned new ways of seeing and perceiving others. This, coupled with her perception and observation of her spouses interactions with Family Promise guests, contributed to increased awareness of persons on the fringes. This paved the way for relating with others at work based upon missional vision as described previously. It would seem that as the person continued to behave missionally and then reflected upon the activity, new understandings brought even newer and deeper understandings and appreciations of missional vision that could lead to further changes in practice. Apparently, this continuing loop of praxisreflectionchange may continue to lead her to further growth and action with missional vision. Other Factors Influencing Research and the Outcome Qualitative analysis yielded insights into three outside factors that influenced the outcome of the PAR intervention and research. These factors include the relationship and legacy of the mission developer and interim pastor, the impact of a recent denominational

175 decision to ordain partnered gay clergy, and concerns regarding a lack of financial resources. Mission Developer Perspectives In the baseline group interview, as described previously, there were references to a preexisting shared vision of inviting new members and constructing a building.36 These references pointed to the ministry of the mission developer and his relationship to the congregation. There were also issues related to his departure and the ministry of the subsequent interim pastor. During the course of the baseline group interview, respondents discussed the work of the mission developer. Early in the congregations history, the mission developer cast the vision and members embraced it in a top-down manner. This limited members activity, even as it yielded positive results of congregational growth. This had the effect of limiting controversy and conflict. When the mission developer left, however, there was a sense of widespread disunity as the unifying power left and various disparate visions for ministry held by the members came forth. Several members viewed the interim pastor who followed the mission developer unfavorably. As a result, the congregation transferred the expectations for leadership onto the president. The person who served as president at that time stated that it took approximately 35-40 hours a week (aside from the persons regular occupation) to meet the congregations demands for leadership.

The author views these observations neither negatively nor positively. It is standard practice, in planting a congregation, to focus on growth in numbers and to construct facilities for the congregation to utilize. In fact, the mission developer possesses an impressive ability to knock on doors and invite community residents to worship. This discussion simply attempts to show data gathered during the interviews as a matter of factual representation of outside influences and their impact on answering the research question.

36

176 Impact of Denominational Decisions Regarding Gay Clergy All interviewees noted the fact that the denominational decision to allow partnered gay clergy caused several members of the congregation to leave. This trend continued through the time of the PAR intervention and research, such that approximately one third of the congregations membership had departed the congregation by the end of the research. In the baseline group interview, for example, interviewees noted that this issue had divided a unified congregation. They lamented the decision and noted that they were feeling its effects. The individual interviewees also noted in the baseline interviews that it was difficult to understand why so many people had left the congregation. Even so, one individual who did not agree with the decision also did not want to exclude gays from the congregations ministry. The divisiveness of the issue also bothered respondents in all three interviews because of the loss of members. In the endline interviews, respondents noted that the congregation membership continued to dwindle because of this decision and other unspecified nasty blows. There was a perception that people in the congregation were still reeling because of the decision. One person noted that people who were leaving the congregation over this decision might be doing so because they were failing to see themselves as Christs agents in the world. Finally, an individual interviewee noted that while the decision was divisive, it had the benefit of being an opportunity to welcome a broader range of people into the congregations fellowship, with potential for positive repercussions.

177 Financial Concerns In the baseline group interview, the group also mentioned financial concerns as a major issue in the life of the congregation. They noted that the building and the congregations finances were a major focus. In the endline interview, they pointed out that they were seeing many members who were wrestling with pragmatic fiduciary responsibilities that might have been reducing their willingness to risk faith to step forward into the unknown. They also noted that they saw people as seeking to find a balance between fiduciary responsibilities and faith. Conclusion In looking at the events that transpired during the PAR intervention, the results of the FMS and quantitative analysis, and the results of the interviews and qualitative analysis, it is clear that the PAR intervention had a significant impact on the congregation and its relationships with the community. The quantitative data from the FMS produced broad data from the congregation. This data yielded insights that the researcher used in planning and implementing specific elements and emphases of the intervention. The FMS data analysis showed that the congregation was more attentive to community needs. The qualitative data also provided deeper insights through conversation with a group and two individuals into specific ways the individuals and congregations vision for ministry had changed through the time of the intervention. The qualitative data showed that in the lives of some of the interviewees, there had been significant change in behavior and perspectives. The ramifications of these impacts will now be considered.

Huntley

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS WITH THEOLOGICAL AND THEORETICAL REFLECTION The Spirit is not in the possession of the church but is Lord over the church, guiding the church from its limited, partial, and distorted understanding and embodiment of the truth into the fullness of the truth in Jesus, who is the one in whom all things consist (Col. 1:17). Not every spirit is the Holy Spirit. Not every form of vitality is his work. There is need for the gift of discernment. There is no substitute for the gift of discernment, no set of rules or institutional provisions by which we can be relieved of the responsibility for discernment. Dialogue cannot be made safe for all possible risks. The Christian who enters into dialogue with people of other faiths and ideologies is accepting the risk. But to put my Christianity at risk is precisely the way by which I can confess Jesus Christ as LordLord over all worlds and Lord over my faith. It is only as the church accepts the risk that the promise is fulfilled that the Holy Spirit will take all the treasures of Christ, scattered by the Fathers bounty over all the people and cultures of mankind, and declare them to the church as the possession of Jesus.1 In Open Secret, Lesslie Newbigin describes the Christendom Church as having a top-down mindset with respect to missional activity. He does not describe it in those terms, but the sentiment is present. In this top-down mindset, expert Christendom missionaries enter other places, faiths, and cultures in an attempt to proclaim the Gospel and Christianize the local inhabitants. The missionaries, who unquestioningly bring the truth of the Gospel, share the Christian message and expect others to reject preexisting beliefs and accept it.

Lesslie Newbigin, The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission, Revised. (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995), 187-188.

178

179 With more of a bottom-up mindset and grass-roots focus, Newbigin calls for Christians to approach other cultures and faiths from a mentality founded in one of mutual respect rather than from one that views others as objects to be evangelized. Missionaries enter a culture joining God who is already at work in the missio Dei. Through dialog and mutual discernment, both parties risk pre-existing beliefs in sharing their faith with one another. In order for people to engage one another in this type of mutual and egalitarian relationship, both parties must be open and vulnerable in order to embrace each other fully. This openness means that both parties respect and listen to one another, change in some way through the encounter, and accept the risk attendant with true openness. Through this type of conversation, two parties can engage in cogenerative dialog that seeks to discern an unexpected outcome. This outcome will probably challenge the two parties to question their preconceived notions and to embrace the aspects of the resultant dialog upon which they both agree. This open vulnerability to engage one another in cogenerative discernment is a key aspect of the grass-roots missional vision cultivation process in the PAR intervention. This research shows that utilizing a cogenerative vision cultivation process infused with mutuality and conversation is effective in bringing the researchers and participants together in a way that encourages people to shape and embrace the process and the result. It also showed that, at times, activity founded in a heavy-handed top-down mindset between the researcher and the participants resulted in a response of resistance or rejection. The vision cultivation process impacted both the researcher and the participants, changing them through shared activity and dialog.

180 The theoretical and theological concepts described in chapters 2 and 3 were helpful in planning, influencing, and implementing the PAR intervention. In addition, considering the research findings from theoretical and theological perspectives provided insights into answering the research question, How can cultivating missional vision in a newly-developed congregation impact the lives of congregants and the community? These insights inspired questions that may be helpful for future research and ministry. Finally, the data analysis and interpretation yielded unexpected new insights for missional leaders to consider. Impact of Theoretical and Theological Foundations The theoretical and theological foundations for considering the research question were discussed in chapters two and three. These foundations directly impacted the planning and implementation of the PAR intervention. They include the need to foster a grass-roots cogenerative process, the intent to cultivate missional vision patterned after the social and perichoretic aspects of the Trinity, and the invisible influence, similar to that of an electromagnetic field, that vision has on persons united as an organization. A Grass-Roots Process that Invites Participation in Cultivating Shared Vision Grass Roots Rather Than Top-Down Vision Cultivation The process an organization uses in working together to cultivate shared vision has a direct impact on the result of the process. A faulty process often yields an undesirable result, while a healthy process has the best chances for yielding a beneficial outcome. This means that an organization that seeks to live together with shared vision needs to discern and define that vision in a manner that cogeneratively cultivates shared

181 vision. In order for an organization to maximize the likelihood that members will embrace and share the vision, it should encompass four main components. It should seek to deliberate and to act in ways that are egalitarian, increases interconnectedness, cogeneratively cultivates shared vision, and provides multiple entry points. In attending to these components, a process of cogeneratively cultivating shared vision inherently builds organizational habits of working together with shared vision. In order for the missional vision cultivation process to yield a vision that the congregation would embrace widely, it was essential that the process itself would embody these characteristics. By inviting congregants at Living Water to cogeneratively discern and describe a shared vision for ministry, the process inherently nurtured an environment of mutual discernment that moved the congregation to embody a shared vision of mutual ministry. One example of this occurred in the Damascus Travelers planning process within the Discipleship Commission. Rather than bringing the concept of the Damascus Travellers to the commission with a list of tasks that the commission needed to accomplish in order to implement the small group ministry, the researcher brought the idea to the commission and fostered conversation about the programs goals and objectives. During the course of the conversation, the commission shaped the program mutually. In the conversation, they decided to invite every member of the congregation personally to participate. The commission members took ownership of the program and enthusiastically agreed to do the phone work. They even named the program Damascus Travelers and the name helped shape their shared vision for the project and its implementation.

182 A failure by means of top-down vision casting occurred when the researcher unilaterally decided to provide a prayer labyrinth for the Damascus Travelers to utilize. There was little conversation about the helpfulness of using a prayer labyrinth, little training for the participants in how to use it, and no cogenerative conversation about it. Thus, even though the researcher spent several hours creating the prayer labyrinth, the Damascus Travelers only used it sparingly. This highlights the need for grass roots, cogenerative vision cultivation. It is also important to note that persons not elected or appointed to official leadership positions can nonetheless serve as leaders in a grass-roots cultivation process. During the informal conversation after the congregational retreat, participants cogeneratively discerned a need to hold subsequent Wednesday night meetings and invite the wider congregation to join the process. The participants in this conversation included the researcher, elected lay leaders, and other members of the congregation. These persons took on an important, albeit unofficial, leadership role in expanding the process to include more people in the congregation. An example of an entry point into egalitarian vision cultivation occurred when the congregation responded with vigorous participation in reaching out to the community after the June 14 council meeting. After discussing the concepts of liminality and communitas, the council planned events for the congregation to connect with the community in July. Again, the group made these plans cogeneratively with teachings and insights from the researcher, and together they embraced the ideas with the congregation. The planning and implementation of the event increased interconnectedness for those who participated. With this bottom-up discernment and action, the researcher, the

183 council, and the congregation worked together to enter liminality and experience communitas through missional action. In fact, by including all four components of grass-roots vision cultivation, the events seemed to encourage a fuller shared experience and a better result. Finally, respondents to the group interview highlighted an example of the risks of top-down vision casting in their description of the congregations past vision to construct the church building. The mission developer did an excellent job of inviting and drawing people from the community to participate in the congregations ministry. The mission developers vision was powerful and helpful in forming the congregation and in constructing the building. When the mission developer left, however, the congregation seemingly did not have ownership of the vision or possess the skills to continue with cogenerative vision discernment. This contributed to difficulties when the mission developer departed, and the group clearly described a lack of shared vision for ministry in the congregation. Again, a process and tendency for grass-roots vision discernment, founded in love, may have been more beneficial to unite and motivate the congregation in the long term. The Ability of Vision, Lovingly Shared, to Unite and Motivate Shared vision is a key factor in uniting a group together as an organization. In a congregation who voluntarily unites in mission, it is essential for the vision to not only connect the members, but also for it to inspire and motivate them to work together with shared purpose. This common interest must be stronger than personal concerns in order for the individuals to decide to sacrifice personal desires in furthering the purposes of the larger organization. Therefore, a love that inspires members to sacrifice in embodying the

184 shared vision is an essential aspect of a shared vision cultivation process in a congregation. The two individual respondents in the qualitative interviews indicated that the tendency for the congregation to love and care for one another mutually was an important aspect of the shared vision for ministry. Both interviewees described instances where love motivated them and others in the congregation to sacrifice personal concerns and unite in shared ministry. Respondents in the group interview also noted a new dimension of the congregations ministry emerging through the PAR intervention. They indicated that the congregation was moving in a direction of reaching out to the community to form and shape relationships marked by mutuality and reciprocity. In this case, the newly-discerned shared vision inspired congregants to move beyond themselves sacrificially to others outside of the congregation. One of the individual qualitative interviewees described a strong connection between his understanding of the congregations vision and his changed activity in praxis. He was brainstorming ways to connect with the community with a new missional imagination that conversations during the PAR intervention sparked. He was even acting upon these new ideas to create fresh ways for the congregation to connect together with the community. He did this, for example, by working to start a new community garden on the congregations property. Finally, the second interviewee noted a dramatic increase in missional activity in the workplace due to new perspectives she gained through the vision cultivation process. She described the fact that she was intentionally reaching out to coworkers on the fringe

185 of her work community to build connections based upon her new understandings of missional living. She based this intentional relationality on a new understanding of trinitarian perichoretic and mutual relationality that brought dramatic changes in her workplace environment. Along with other influences from management at her workplace, her intentional relationality even impacted relationships her coworkers had with one another. This was helping to change her agonistic work environment to one where coworkers were increasingly acting with mutual care, compassion, and teamwork. Social Trinitarian and Perichoretic Foundations of Vision Cultivation An essential theological component in missional vision and a foundation of the cultivation process is the concept of the social Trinity. According to the social model of the triune God, the three persons of God exist in a perfect, mutual, loving, and interdwelling union. Gods unity of three persons comes largely from the perfect and loving union wherein God is one God, existing as three persons acting in concert with one another in one divine will. The three persons of the Trinity perichoretically relate to one another, embrace creation (including humanity), and act with one will. As God graciously invites humanity to join the same perichoretic fellowship, God restores relationships of mutual accompaniment. While it is important for the result of a missional vision cultivation process to contain perichoretic aspects, it is also important for the process itself to be mutual and perichoretic. The Damascus Travelers groups were an opportunity for this type of fellowship patterned after the relational social Trinity. Several groups formed close personal relationships to such a depth that there were several deep, even tearful, interactions. These intimate and perichoretic social ties seemed to form part of the

186 foundation for the purpose statement, to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves, along with the guiding principles, courageously bearing our neighbor's burdens, and relating to one another with respect and honesty. According to the individual interviewees, the Damascus Travelers experience also helped to foster an environment of trust that impacted perceptions about the mutual care of congregants for one another. This experience, along with others gained through other aspects of the vision cultivation process, made a significant impact in the missional vision, worldview, and activity of the two interviewees. This mutual conversation was a natural, perichoretic experience of the social Trinity enfleshed in the community. A final example of Trinitarian relationality occurred spontaneously, in the form of a self-forming, bottom-up community2 after the congregation retreat. After a day of deep and thoughtful discussion about the missional church, Gods purpose, and shared guiding principles for Living Water, several participants decided to stop at a local restaurant for continued fellowship. During the course of the informal conversation, participants continued the retreats discussion. During this spontaneous and informal conversation, it was clear that the social Trinity was active in the perichoretic dialog to unleash new perspectives that participants embraced and appropriated. Because of the conversation, the participants with the shared vision served as a catalyst to continue and extend the conversation at Living Water during the Wednesday night conversations that they advocated. This shared vision served to unite them, like the field effect, with a desire to continue the conversation and vision cultivation in these Wednesday night meetings.

See chapter 2 for a discussion regarding self-forming, bottom-up communities.

187 Vision and the Field Effect The concept of vision acting upon an organization to unite people invisibly in shared purpose and action was also present in the vision cultivation process. According to electromagnetic theory, a changing magnetic field along a wire will induce a corresponding current in the wire. Conversely, a changing electric current in a wire creates an invisible corresponding magnetic field. The field effect that invisibly unites electric currents and magnetic fields is analogous to the effect that a shared vision and purpose has in uniting a group to form an organization. As the vision permeates the organization, the unseen force of vision has the effect of bringing various, seemingly disconnected actions into concert as the people accomplish the shared purpose and vocation of the organization.3 One of the individual qualitative interviewees identified the field effect nature of shared vision as an impact in changing his perspectives and actions in personal and congregational ministry. The interviewee seemed to have a stronger missional imagination because of the vision cultivation process and the shared vision that emerged from the conversation. For example, the person was thinking of ways to use the congregations facilities for ministry in the community, notably by establishing a community garden. The person stated that he actively stepped outside of the comfort zone using a phrase that was part of the cultivation conversations. He had even discussed the idea with others and was actively working to enact his new ideas. This was one unexpected way that the field effect of the vision, along with the cultivation process

Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science, 55-56.

188 itself, shaped congregants perspectives and activity. It is clear that the vision cultivation process had an impact on this interviewees missional vision and activity. Impact of the Cultivation Process Theoretical and theological aspects discussed in chapters 2 and 3 give particularly strong insights into the PAR intervention and the impact it had on the lives of congregants and how they relate to the community. One of these aspects is the concept of promise, tools, and bargain that the researcher utilized to invite participation and shape imagination for how the intervention might benefit the individual participants and the congregation as a whole. Another illuminating aspect is the concept of liminality and communitas. Finally, the focus on missional vocation, the Holy Spirit, the missio Dei, and the reconciliation in Gods reign are evident in the process and resulting cultivated missional vision. Promise, Tools, and Bargain In order for an effort to organize people to be effective, it must capture the interest of the people in the group, it must have structures that facilitate the health and growth of the organization, and it must inspire the groups members to participate energetically. In seeking to organize a group, leaders can hold out promise to the members that will encourage them to participate in the organization. Leaders also provide tools that effectively facilitate participation and interaction as the members engage the organization and receive the promised benefits. Finally, leaders inspire members to give of themselves

189 through a bargain that defines what they bring to the group and give to others in sharing the promised benefits.4 The elements of promise, tool, and bargain proved to be very helpful as a way to invite participation in the vision cultivation process in various areas of the congregations organizational structure. In the top-down method of vision casting, the leader casts the vision and tries to convince and motivate followers to accept and embrace it. The top-down method places the leader in a position of superiority over the followers as the expert who has better insights into Gods will for the congregation. Instead, based upon the positive response of congregants in the research, it would appear that the elements of promise, tool, and bargain were a better fit for the grass-roots vision cultivation process. With these elements, the leader shares the promise, designs the tools, and invites the congregation to accept the bargain. This inherently respects the personhood of the congregant to decide to accept the bargain, participate in the process, and embrace the cultivated vision. It is more egalitarian, because it respects people and invites insights and participation from the wider congregation. It differentiates the roles of leader and congregation in mutual and cogenerative ministry without setting up a hierarchical structure of expert and amateur. The concept of cultivating missional vision using promise, tool, and bargain seemed to invite and encourage cogenerative participation rather than demand and force acceptance by power and manipulation. These elements of inviting and encouraging participation in the process were present in various degrees as the researcher dealt with the council and the Discipleship Commission. They were also present as the researcher and the council mutually expanded
4

Shirky, Here Comes Everybody, 260ff.

190 the process to include the wider congregation. The basic itinerary for introducing these concepts was: 1. Introduce and explain the tool. Starting with an explanation of the framework and timeline for the process seemed to help alleviate anxiety and provide a foundation for further discussion about the shape and parameters of the vision cultivation process. 2. Highlight the need for a vision cultivation process. Cogenerative discussion inviting participants to discuss the need for the process helped foster lively participation. 3. Discuss the promise. Having described the tool and highlighted the need, further discussion encouraged brainstorming possibilities and creating hope for the benefits the process offered. 4. Encourage investment in the bargain. The final aspect included an invitation for participants to invest the time and energy to participate in the process and help discern and describe the congregations shared missional vision in moving forward together. Again, it was important to encourage and invite participation in the vision cultivation process carefully without doing so in a manipulative or coercive manner. Rather, by cogeneratively discussing the promise, tools, and bargain in various forums, participants helped shape even the process itself in a cogenerative manner.

191 Inviting the Council into the Vision Cultivation Process Prior to the beginning of the PAR intervention, the researcher shared the basic tools of the process with the council as they read and studied Dauberts Living Lutheran5 book together. As they discussed this material, the researcher also shared the overall research timeline, and the council formally agreed to participate in the process. This allowed the council to understand the overall process fully and to accept the bargain with a clear understanding of their role in the protocol. Preparing for the PAR intervention by involving the council beforehand in this way helped strengthen the impact of the process on both the council and the congregation. The council embraced the promise enthusiastically and participated deeply in all aspects of the cultivation process. Their conversation during the group qualitative interviews also provided the researcher and the council with further understanding of the need for and benefits of the vision cultivation process. Working with the Discipleship Commission and Damascus Travelers The researcher discussed the concept of the Damascus Travelers with the Discipleship Commission immediately prior to the start of the PAR intervention. The group discussed various aspects of the objectives of the small group program, along with the programs role within the larger vision cultivation process. As the group discussed and honed the tools and promise of the program, their overall enthusiasm and investment in the program grew. The enthusiasm grew to the point where the group members devised the extent of the bargain and the method for inviting the congregation to participate in the

Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation.

192 program. Because of this cogenerative discussion, the entire Discipleship Commission committed not only to participate in the program, but also to call every active member of the congregation personally and to invite them to participate in it as well. In this way, cogenerative egalitarian participation increased the Discipleship Commissions investment in the bargain of the intervention. The Damascus Travelers program was a key element of the PAR intervention. It fostered growth as disciples of Christ, it helped to develop and deepen perichoretic relationships of mutual burden bearing, and it encouraged missional imagination and synergism of the participants in the vision cultivation process. Quantitative endline data from the group and the two individual interviews, along with an informal evaluative conversation with several Damascus Travelers participants after the programs completion, substantiated the finding that the Damascus Travelers played a key component in drawing the wider congregation into accepting the bargain to participate in the vision cultivation process. Inviting the Congregation into the Vision Cultivation Process In addition to the role that the Discipleship Commission and the Damascus Travelers program played in drawing the congregation into the conversation, the council also created and shaped unexpected elements of the process. At the June 14 council meeting, the researcher discussed the concepts of liminality and communitas. The council enthusiastically embraced the ideas and encouraged the researcher and one another to share personal experiences and perspectives as they discussed the concept of moving beyond the comfort zone with the wider congregation. During the conversation, the council cogeneratively fashioned its own intervention in the congregation in the form of

193 opportunities to connect with the wider community during the month of July. Together with the researcher, the council articulated the promise of reaching beyond the congregations comfort zone with these tools, and invited the congregation to participate in these opportunities. The congregation responded energetically to the councils invitation. Members who had previously shown an aversion to such activity participated wholeheartedly. The quantity and strength of the congregations response was surprising to the researcher and to several members of the congregation and council. By entering a liminal experience as they stepped together outside of their collective comfort zone, the participants shared an inspiring and intense experience of comradery and communitas. Liminality and Communitas As members of a community move beyond safety, security, comfort, and convenience, they can experience liminality that moves them beyond themselves and controlled environments to experience Gods provision in the wilderness through which God can create communitas. Missional leaders often work to inspire others to move beyond the limits of comfort zones in order to engage in shared liminal experiences. The community also trusts God to work, shape, and form deeper and stronger cogenerative relationships of mutual burden bearing. In the congregational retreat, the participants seemed to experience liminality as they left the comfort and familiarity of their hometowns to journey for a daylong retreat at a retreat facility. During the conversation in the morning sessions, participants formed bonds in which they shared increasingly personal perspectives, concerns, and hopes. For lunch, the facility staff inadvertently served the participants food to another group. This

194 unexpected problem served to heighten the sense of liminality, and as participants waited in the steamy July heat for the kitchen staff to prepare a second meal, communitas began to form as the participants joked with one another and expanded upon previous discussions. This comradery continued as the participants, in an example of grass roots, self-forming community, gathered for refreshments after the retreat in an impromptu gathering at a nearby eating establishment. The shared liminal experience of leaving familiar environs to overcome adversity and discuss the congregations vision for ministry seemed to unite them in bonds of fellowship and a form of communitas. The shared bonds of communitas nurtured during the congregational retreat impacted the overall congregational vision cultivation process. First, the idea for the Wednesday night components of the cultivation process came directly from the impromptu meeting of participants following the retreat. This was not in the original plan, and the researcher embraced the idea and worked with the council to implement it. Second, even though the retreat participants experienced the cultivation process at the retreat, they nonetheless were passionately involved in the repeat cultivation process on the Wednesday nights. Finally, since they contemplated and discussed several of the process discussion topics at the retreat, they tended to help focus the conversations at the Wednesday night meetings in ways that furthered the goals of the missional vision cultivation process. In this way, the communitas experience of the congregation retreat gained through the liminality of stepping outside of comfort zones to experience shared cogenerative discernment had a strong impact on the cultivation process for the congregation as a whole.

195 Missional Vocation, the Holy Spirit, the Missio Dei, and Gods Reign Through the daily vocation and faithful activity of Gods people, the Holy Spirit does the loving work of Christ to redeem and reconcile the world to God. The Spirit gifts and works in the world through Gods people to do this. As the people of God use their gifts and talents in ways shaped by Gods vision for life, God works in the world. The Spirit works in and through various people to accomplish the universal missio Dei, even if individuals do not recognize the unifying and unified work of the Spirit in their individual gifts and vocations. In this, the Spirit frees people from the dark powers of sin and unites them to God and one another perichoretically as they embody the kenotic, self-giving God who lifts a fallen humanity. Through their callings and vocations, God works in the world, invites others to enter Gods kingdom, and redeems people from a world ruled by power and darkness. Efforts through these aspects of the PAR intervention impacted the congregations vision-discernment and decision-making process. The quantitative and qualitative data also reveal impacts that the PAR intervention had on respondents. In reviewing the baseline quantitative Faith Maturity Survey (FMS) data, the researcher concluded that the data showed strong internal faith aspects, such as understanding and acceptance of creedal statements like, Jesus is the Son of God who died on a cross and rose again.6 Even so, the average response to (O)utward faith aspects was 10 percent lower than the average for (I)nward or (C)onnecting aspects of faith.7 This finding caused the researcher to focus extensively on encouraging congregants to
Question 2 from the FMS: Benson, Donahue, and Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation, 173.
7 6

See chapter 5, Perspectives in Relating to Others beyond the Congregation.

196 look outside of the congregation and to work as participants in the missio Dei to embody the work of the Holy Spirit through vocations in the caring, redeeming, and reconciling reign of God. This seemed to have a statistically significant impact in the group aged 18-59, as they showed increases in scores to outward-oriented questions, and a near statistically significant increase in the overall O category score. This effort clearly impacted the vision cultivation process, as the community intentionally decided to step outside of their comfort zones and as they ultimately agreed that Gods purpose for the congregation was to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves.8 Several participants in the qualitative group interview, along with both individual interviewees, pointed to the impact of the PAR intervention in shaping perspectives and in encouraging a stronger focus and ministry outside of the congregation. Both group and individual interviewees stated that they were looking into the world more and that they had an increased awareness of others because of the process. The congregation reached out to deepen relationships with a nearby inner-city congregation. Finally, an individual interviewee gave a detailed description of the impact that the PAR intervention had on her perspectives and activities in her workplace. She began to see her work as a vocationa vocatio or callingto live the missio Dei. Previously, she indicated that she did not notice people on the fringes. Because of her new perspectives, she was specifically connecting and relating with these fringe persons. This, along with other influences at her workplace, contributed to an experience of Gods redeeming, reconciling, and gracious reign confronting the workplace powers of division and agonistic tendencies that she had experienced previously.
8

Emphasis added.

197 Finally, there was evidence, both in the group qualitative interview and in the researchers notes relating to the congregation forum, that the PAR intervention fostered a new vision for ministry among various congregants. The researcher discovered these perspectives, labeling them as vocational and invitational, near the end of the PAR intervention. These perspectives were evident in the group qualitative interviews. They were also evident in congregational dialog during the congregation forum and special meeting near the end of the cultivation process as congregants discussed and adopted the proposed guiding principles and purpose statement. It is reasonable to expect that any intervention to a system will engender a corrective or counteractive response. In this case, the corrective response took the form of an impetus to retreat from an outward-directed vocational vision to an inward-directed invitational vision. The researcher found that persons who advocated enthusiastically for an invitational vision were also persons who had minimal to no participation in the vision cultivation process. The opposite was also true. This also supports a finding that the vision cultivation process impacted the lives of congregants and how they relate to the community. In this case, to the extent that congregants participated in the process, they also grasped and accepted the cultivated shared vision as their own. Possibilities for Further Research Although the PAR intervention in this research had an impact to varying degrees on the lives of congregants and how they relate to the community, the limited scope of the intervention and its enactment revealed questions for further research and inquiry. These opportunities include the following questions:

198 What role do core faith values play in perspectives and openness to cultivating missional vision? One finding, for example, is that almost twice as many respondents answered always true as those who answered never true in rating the quantitative FMS statement, I believe that I must obey Gods rules and commandments in order to be saved.9 This statement would seem to be in conflict with the concept of being justified by grace through faith apart from works of law. Considering the fact that so many congregants hold this and other points of view, how do these perspectives shape discernment and appropriation of missional vision? How do other social and theological perspectives influence the vision and the cultivation process, for good or for ill? How can congregants discern their charismata and work to free others from the dark powers of sin, bondage, and oppression that prevent them from being reconciled to God and experiencing Gods reconciling reign? How do congregational or community perspectives and traditions influence a vision cultivation process? For example, what affect would a larger or stronger tradition in an established congregation have on the impact of a missional vision cultivation process? How would one cultivate missional vision in a congregation with a deep-seated agonistic culture? How would one cultivate deeper missional vision in a healthy congregation that is already actively engaged in missional activity in the community and beyond?

Benson, Donahue, and Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation, 174.

199 How applicable would this be in larger congregations or adjudicatories? This vision cultivation process occurred in a newly developed congregation; are there some lessons learned that could apply to a larger congregation? How would a leader conduct a cogenerative vision discernment process at the adjucatory level? Considering the fact that the researcher and pastor of the congregation had been present for thirteen months at the beginning of the research, what impact would a longer history of prior ministry have on the vision cultivation process? When a pastor begins ministry, both the pastor and the congregation change as the community and leader adapt to the new situation. Both parties are more open to change at the beginning of a pastoral relationship than they are after a history of ministry together. How would the dynamic of a longer shared history impact a vision cultivation process? What are the long-term impacts of a cogenerative vision cultivation process? What influences congregants to return to behaviors and perspectives that the congregation had prior to the cultivation process? What helps the congregation to embody the cultivated vision in the long term? What changes to ecclesial structures can a congregation make to encourage the action-reflection cycle of discovering Gods missional vision and nurture discipleship practices for faithful living? How can a congregation continue to seek and enter liminal experiences together over the long term? This research was confined to one newly-developed congregation, with the results and findings applicable to the particular congregation with its particular heritage and the culture of its context and place in history. Even so, the research yielded unexpected

200 findings that may also be useful in applying and testing the results and conclusions in other contexts. Unexpected Research Findings In planning and implementing the vision cultivation process, with the hopes that it would have the maximum beneficial impact on participants, the researcher made three unexpected discoveries. These findings include a need to include participants cogeneratively in the planning and implementation of the intervention, the fact that new praxis can yield new missional perspectives, and the discovery of the helpfulness of the action-reflection model for gaining new perspectives from communal reflection upon shared missional experiences. Cultivating Vision for the Process and the Role of the Holy Spirit Throughout In planning the PAR intervention and wrestling with which methods to select in conducting it, the researcher realized that introducing an inflexible and preplanned process in accomplishing the intervention in a top-down manner would be undesirable. Since the process sought to cultivate missional vision in a grass-roots manner, the researcher decided to design and implement it in a grass roots and cogenerative fashion as well. The researcher did this prayerfully, seeking assistance from the Holy Spirit. The researcher cultivated vision for the process in various ways, including the cogenerative planning and implementation of the Damascus Travelers portion of the intervention with the Discipleship Commission. The researcher also cultivated vision for the overall intervention itself with the congregation council. As previously described, this engendered broader participation and support for inviting and including a larger portion of the congregation in the process. It also drew more people with richer perspectives in

201 planning the intervention. The researcher attempted to do all of this cogeneratively, prayerfully listening and trusting the Holy Spirit to speak and work among the various participants. Finally, as the researcher exclusively planned and implemented some elements of the processthe failed attempt to garner participation from the Damascus Travelers participants in the prayer labyrinth, for exampleit became clear that prayerfully including more people in not only the implementation but also in the planning of the intervention was beneficial and probably even indispensable. The intervention seemed to have a greater impact due to the researchers openness to changing preconceived notions and plans based upon conversation with the participants. New Praxis Yielding New Perspectives The impact of praxis in creating new missional perspectives was an unexpected finding. Several participants in the vision cultivation process decided to step outside of their comfort zones to connect with others in unfamiliar ways. As they did so, they had experiences that shaped new missional vision and impacted perspectives for further missional activity. This was evident in responses from participants in both individual interviews and in the group interview. For example, one group respondent spoke with friends in the community about her faith and invited them to participate in the summer vacation Bible school she supervised. An individual participant decided to create some new congregational initiatives in sharing faith due to the conversations she participated in during the vision cultivation process. Finally, the second individual interviewee intentionally reached out to form new relationships with persons on the fringes as a result of new experiences she gleaned in the congregations homeless housing ministry and as a result of the

202 conversations she had during the cultivation process. She engaged participants in the homeless ministry in relationships in ways that she otherwise would not have attempted. Again, these experiences led her to engage others at work relationally in ways she normally would not have done. Often times, congregational leaders seek to change behavior by teaching and describing concepts for ministry in the hopes that congregants will learn new perspectives and incorporate them into daily living. Contrary to this standard practice, this unexpected finding highlighted a praxis-reflection-change process for changing perspectives and for increasing missional activity. This finding suggests that missional leaders would do well to pair teaching and fostering missional perspectives with creating opportunities for congregants to step outside of comfort zones to engage personally in missional experiences. Benefits of Planning, Acting, and Reflecting Finally, in conducting Participatory Action Research, the benefit of the action-reflection model was evident. This is not a new idea. In Scripture, Jesus publicly drew the disciples into new experiences of ministry and into conversations with a variety of people. Afterward, Jesus would privately engage the disciples in faith conversations and ask reflective questions. One notable example is when Jesus asked the disciples, Who do people say that the Son of Man is but who do you say that I am? (Matthew 16:13, 15). After reflecting upon this question with their shared experiences in mind, Simon declared with what may have been a new insight, You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). In light of Simons cogeneratively inspired insight, Jesus decided to change his name from Simon to Rock, or Peter. Jesus then took the next

203 step of promising Peter that, on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). There were examples of this iterative process of plan-act-reflect at work. In the impromptu gathering at a restaurant following the congregational retreat, those gathered reflected upon the activity at the retreat and realized that the congregation would benefit from a similar experience spread across four Wednesday night gatherings at church. The researcher, in conversation with the council, even changed the PAR intervention plan based upon these insights. The Damascus Travelers groups used a similar action-reflection process as participants read various missional materials then gathered to discuss them. Finally, as the group interview participants considered research questions and discussed them, new perspectives for missional ministry arose through reflecting on previous activity in ministry during the PAR intervention. These new perspectives, gained through reflection on previous shared experiences, yielded further possibilities for shared ministry and communal discernment. This strengthened the impact of the vision cultivation process on congregants and how they relate to others. Personal Reflections on this Research and Missional Leadership As researcher, I found that the grass-roots process of cultivating missional vision in this context of a newly developed congregation was extremely helpful. It encouraged the people of Living Water to move beyond the post-construction feeling of accomplishment and complacency to begin to contemplate how we can move beyond our comfort zones to engage our local community and join in the missio Dei. In addition, in this cogenerative journey of discovery and discernment, I wrestled with questions about

204 how to lead missionally from within the congregation from a grass-roots cultivation mindset rather than from the familiar top-down vision casting mindset. In other words, this PAR research had an impact both on the congregation and on me. All of us have changed, to varying degrees, through embarking together on this journey of cultivating missional vision. Consider, again, the insights from Lesslie Newbigin at the beginning of this chapter. As a leader, it is tempting to try to stay in control in an effort to ensure a desired outcome in ministry. Clinging to control, however, can inhibit the work of Gods Spirit to call and enliven us as disciples in daily vocations. Trusting others and nurturing deeper relationships that allow love to flourish is inherently risky. Furthermore, engaging a cogenerative and mutual process of discernment requires openness to change with a grasp on previously held opinions that is gentle, yet firm. This is a difficult and important thing for missional leaders and congregations to remember in life and ministry. The days when the pastor could go to a congregation to direct and control the congregations activities are long gone. On the other hand, simply standing back and allowing a congregation to wander about aimlessly in the hopes that it will independently discover Gods call to ministry and mission is unlikely to yield a vibrant and thriving ministry. In fact, it is an abdication of leadership. Instead, the model of missional leadership that nurtures missional capacity and imagination in a cogenerative manner and that fosters and motivates a mindset of grass-roots vision discernment seems to be more beneficial. At least, this cogenerative model has immense potential and likelihood for nurturing ministry that people embrace with shared vision as they live and reach out to others vocationally as the priesthood of believers.

205 In fact, it seems that a missional leader must wrestle continually with the question of how much pressure one needs to apply in cultivating missional vision. Rather than seeing the pastor as a religious expert or congregational therapist, a missional leader would do well to view the role of leadership as one of nurturing respectful and loving relationships that encourage constructive dialogue, safe space,10 missional imagination, and cogenerative discernment in a congregation. This concept of cogenerative discernment includes the aspect of listening together to one another and to God for leadership, purpose, and direction. Discernment can even have an aspect of action and reflection. This is akin to Luthers sin boldly concept of confidently and faithfully acting with Gods incomplete revelation while trusting God to act graciously in spite of our shortcomings and incomplete understanding of Gods will. As leader and community do this, while listening to God and to one another, God speaks to them. God changes them. This is important to remember in discerning and discovering Gods purpose and vision for shared ministry. This is how Jesus seemed to interact with the disciples. For missional leaders, the cogenerative discernment model of planning, acting, and reflecting is a key component of leadership. This model works well as the leader encourages congregants to seek out and enter into shared liminal experiences prayerfully in the hopes that God will draw them together in mutual communitas experiences. It was our experience that, as we left our comfort zones and entered liminal moments together, the Holy Spirit did indeed work to open new possibilities and perspectives for cogenerative discernment and perichoretic
The phrase safe space also includes the aspect of openness to experimentation and even failure. It is necessary for a missional community to understand that only God is perfect, and to allow imperfect congregants to try various missional endeavors even if they do not produce the intended results. In fact, we learn a great deal from our failures through Gods grace and forbearance.
10

206 communitas. As we reflected together upon these experiences, we recognized the voice of God speaking to us together as a community. It is reasonable to expect that approaching ministry with this mindset of liminal and cogenerative discernment would yield similar benefits in various contexts and specific areas of ministry beyond discerning general vision in a newly developed congregation. In Scripture, Jesus repeatedly entered liminality to share kairotic11 moments with the disciples. In the reflective discussion that followed these experiences, the Holy Spirit seemed to work among them to strengthen bonds of comradery and inspire new and shared vision for life and ministry. Following the ascension of Christ, the Holy Spirit entered the disciples and drove them out into the world to join in the missio Dei as they traveled to the ends of the earth as ambassadors of Gods freeing and reconciling reign. As missional leaders, this is our heritage, our motivation, and our call in life and ministry. We are Jesus contemporary disciples, called to grow personally and communally in faith as we are reconciled to God in Christ through the Holy Spirit. We are Jesus contemporary friends,12 united in loving fellowship and increasingly drawn together with shared vision and purpose. We are Jesus contemporary apostles, sent beyond ourselves as Christs Body to places of power and influence, to the fringes of society, and to the ends of the earth to form relationships for the Holy Spirit to inhabit. God of the universe, you lovingly created us in your image for communion with you and one another. In our brokenness, we depart from you and embark upon paths that lead to brokenness and darkness. As you send your Son with the Holy Spirit to restore your righteous reign and heal our relationships, heal our
, or kairos, is the Greek word for opportune time. Being different from the ordinary chronological time of daily life, kairos refers to a moment in time that is particularly poignant or filled with extraordinary possibilities.
12 11

Cf. John 15:12-17.

207 brokenness and the divisions that we cause. Restore us to your fellowship. Cultivate your vision for life in us. Send us forth burning with zeal and joy for your redemptive reign. Work in us, through us, and in all of creation, that you might restore your loving reign and fellowship with all, through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever.

Huntley

EPILOGUE NEW BEGINNINGS, REALIZING DREAMS In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a fathers only son, full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-4, 14) New Beginnings Epiphany is a day for recognizing and affirming the gift and call of Christ who gives his life for the salvation of the world. On Epiphany, we celebrate the appearance and manifestation of God in Christ as the true light, which enlightens everyone, [which] was coming into the world (John 1:9). As I write this, it is EpiphanyJanuary 6, 2011. Today we celebrate the missio Dei, concretely manifest in Jesus Christ, who walked among us bringing Gods reign to invite and embrace everyone. It has been five months since Living Water Lutheran Church adopted the purpose statement and guiding principles at their July 25 congregational meeting. The purpose statement, Gods purpose for [Living Water] is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves,1 continues to make an impact on the ministry of the congregations members as Living Water turns a page in ministry and reaches out to deepen relationships with a local congregation and the greater community.
1

Living Waters purpose statement (the pseudonym replaces the congregations name).

208

209 This coming Sunday, the people of Living Water will not gather for worship as they normally do at their church building. Instead, they will gather to worship God with a nearby inner-city congregation at their house of worship. This newly developed congregation, the youngest in their conference, will gather and celebrate the beginning of a 6-9 month discernment period for a new partnership of shared ministry with the oldest congregation in their conference. The discernment period will culminate with an interview and qualitative analysis to reflect upon the time of shared ministry. The hope is that this discernment period of ministry action and reflection will lay foundations for a long-term shared-parish ministry. As the people of Living Water discussed this new opportunity for partnership in ministry over the past four months, they did so with a stated and shared purpose of moving beyond themselves. They will now share pastoral ministry on a half-time basis. More importantly, as they connect with this nearby congregation, Living Water will further the intentional effort to cultivate shared missional vision for ministry together. Only now, it will be an effort that includes their brothers and sisters in Christ in the neighboring congregation and community. In this shared endeavor, the two congregation councils are intentionally continuing the action-reflection process Living Water experienced in the vision cultivation process. They will meet bimonthly and in a summer retreat to foster a collaborative effort as mutual companions in ministry as they perichoretically dream, plan, and share in the missio Dei. Living Water is intentionally reaching out to invite and engage the nearby congregation with an invitation to enter a shared liminal experience together. The hope seems to be that God will cogeneratively nurture relationships of

210 shared ministry and communitas. The common hope is that in doing this, God will bridge racial and cultural boundaries by forming new bonds of comradery and mutuality. The expansion of this existing relationship is an expression of the shared vision for ministry that Living Water cultivated in this participatory action research (PAR). As researcher and now pastor of these two congregations, I celebrate this opportunity to continue fulfilling a personal desire and dream that I have had for a long time. Realizing Dreams I remember a momentous day about ten years ago, as a first-call pastor in a rural congregation, when I was sitting in the mid-summer late-afternoon heat of my basement office. It had been a long and hot day of, among other things, dealing with inconsequential squabbles among congregation members. As I sat in my chair taking a much-needed rest from the days work, I leaned back and laced my fingers together behind my head. I wondered, Is this what ministry is supposed to be? It was frustrating and troubling for me to realize that I had given up a promising career as an Air Force electrical and flight test engineer to deal with the picayune issues I was facing. I had entered full-time pastoral ministry hoping to expand upon the fulfilling experiences of seeing God at work in peoples lives that I had known as a lay youth leader. The reality of ordained ministry was not meeting my expectations. As I considered this, I thought, Surely this cant be what ministry is about! What am I supposed to be doing? What is a pastor in ministry supposed to do? This was the beginning of a new dream for pastoral ministry. I hoped for a day when ministry would be about experiencing Christs activity in our lives to deepen our relationships with God and with one another. I began to watch for an opportunity to answer these questions and

211 find ways to nurture this kind of ministry. This became a deep and personal hope, prayer and dream for my life in pastoral ministry. On another day in February, five years ago, I was again doing mundane office work. As I read the mail, I came across a pamphlet promoting the Congregational Mission and Leadership (CML) D.Min. program at Luther Seminary. After an hour of prayerful research on the Internet, I realized that this program was an opportunity for me to begin to answer my earlier questions and to realize my dream to shape perspectives in a meaningful and missional pastoral ministry. I entered into the program a month and a half later. Through this D.Min.-CML program and thesis research, I have been able to wrestle with the questions about vision for pastoral ministry that I raised on that summer afternoon in my first call. This theologically informed PAR has been an excellent opportunity to consider, apply, and reflect upon my earlier learning in the CML program. Thanks to the experience of sociological research I gained through this endeavor, I now have perspectives and tools for ministry that I will carry with me for the rest of my life. Although I doubt that I will ever fully answer the questions I raised early in my ministry, these important insights are giving me new vision for future ministry. I hope that this continuing vision cultivation process will also have a long-term impact on both congregations in their lives of personal, congregational, and shared ministry in the days and years to come. Moving into the Future So now, we cross the threshold of entering into new ministry endeavors as we join in further cultivating shared vision for mutual ministry in the days ahead. As we move

212 into the future, we will experience joys and sorrows together. We will experience success and disappointment. We will experience light and darkness. Even so, as we enter the future on common paths of mutual ministry, we will continue in the ongoing process of cogeneratively dreaming, planning, acting, and reflecting, both theologically and theoretically, on our shared experiences. We will do this in the presence of a gracious God who continues to unite us as we move beyond ourselves to engage one another and the world in the missio Dei. We will accompany one another as we mutually and perichoretically bear one anothers burdens in life. In this, I am convinced that we will see the light of Christ breaking onto our midst to graciously dispel the darkness of our world. This coming Sunday, we will take the next step in a process of discerning Gods vision for us together on a new, unfamiliar path of shared ministry. We will experience Gods reconciling reign breaking into our midst to dispel the darkness. We will perichoretically bear one anothers burdens. God will send us forth with shared vision for ministry as we joyfully enter liminal experiences in Gods loving grace. May Gods kingdom come may Gods will be done. Epiphany of Our Lord, 2011

Huntley

APPENDIX A PAR INTERVENTION TIMETABLE

Figure A.1. PAR Intervention Timeline, February 14-August 29, 2010. February 14, 2010 - April 19, 2010Congregation council reads and discusses Living Lutheran by Dave Daubert in preparation for beginning the vision cultivation process in April. March 21, 2010Obtain baseline quantitative assessment. April 8, 2010Field test qualitative interview questions. 213

214 April 28, May 24 and 26, 2010Obtain baseline qualitative assessment. April 25, May 2 & 9, 2010Sunday School classes discuss missional church concepts (see appendix F) and process for vision cultivation based upon material from Living Lutheran. April 25, 2010Damascus Travelers kick-off event. May 10, 2010Disciple Clusters begin to meet biweekly. Missional Church concepts and theology are discussed in various settings. May 22, 2010Congregational Retreat, utilizing modified retreat schedule from appendix B of Living Lutheran. See appendix G for retreat session plan. June 9, 16, 23 and 30, 2010Wednesday night cultivating missional vision forums are held at Living Water. July 12, 2010Congregation council reviews information from retreat and refines purpose and time statements for congregational review. August 8, 2010Open forum held for congregation to reflect and respond to results of council work. August 9, 2010Council reflects upon input from congregation and makes revisions as necessary, producing Draft 2. August 15, 2010Meet with Damascus Travelers participants to share experiences and evaluate the program. Damascus Travelers program formally ends, but groups are encouraged to continue to meet. August 22, 2010Congregational meeting held to adopt purpose and time statements. Congregation members and commissions (committees) are encouraged to utilize purpose and time statements in planning and making decisions. Congregants will

215 receive instruction and encouragement to live into the vision and to act and make decisions considering the purpose and times. August 22-28, 2010Second and final qualitative endline assessment. August 29, 2010 Second and final quantitative endline assessment to evaluate the congregations understanding and effort toward achieving a missional vision after the intervention.

Huntley

APPENDIX B QUANTITATIVE INSTRUMENT; FAITH MATURITY SCALE1


Instructions: Please answer the following demographic information. The information will only be used to evaluate the validity of the responses demographically with respect to the congregation as a whole. This information will not be used to attempt to identify you as the respondent, and it is completely optional. Gender: Male Female 18-29 30-44 45-59 60-74 75+

Age Range:

On average, how often do you attend or participate in worship in this congregation? Less than once per month Once per month Twice per month Usually every week. Describe your relationship to this congregation: Voting member Inactive member Associate member (e.g., a winter visitor who is a member of another congregation) Non-member affiliated with congregation for longer than six months Non-member affiliated with congregation for less than six months Thank you for your time and attention in completing this survey! Please turn to the next page for the survey questions.

The Faith Maturity Scale, without the demographic questions, is from Benson, Donahue, and Erickson, The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation.

216

217
Instructions: Mark one answer by circling only one number for each statement. Be as honest as possible, describing how true it really is and not how true you would like it to be. Choose from these responses: 1 = never true 2 = rarely true 3 = true once in a while 4 = sometimes true 5 = often true 6 = almost always true 7 = always true

Never True O I C O C O I O I I C I O C I O C C I I O O 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. I am concerned that our country is not doing enough to help the poor. I know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died on a cross and rose again. My faith shapes how I think and act each and every day. I help others with their religious questions and struggles. I tend to be critical of other people (R). In my free time, I help people who have problems or needs. My faith helps me know right from wrong. I do things to help protect the environment. I devote time to reading and studying the Bible. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Always True 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

10. I have a hard time accepting myself (R). 11. Every day I see evidence that God is active in the world. 12. I take excellent care of my physical health. 13. I am active in efforts to promote social justice. 14. I seek out opportunities to help me grow spiritually. 15. I take time for periods of prayer or meditation. 16. I am active in efforts to promote world peace. 17. I accept people whose religious beliefs are different from mine. 18. I feel a deep sense of responsibility for reducing pain and suffering in the world. 19. As I grow older, my understanding of God changes. 20. I feel overwhelmed by all the responsibilities and obligations I have. 21. I give significant portions of my time and money to help other people. 22. I speak out for equality for women and minorities.

218
Never True C I C I C C C I O I O I C C C C 23. I feel Gods presence in my relationships with other people. 24. My life is filled with meaning and purpose. 25. I do not understand how a loving God can allow so much pain and suffering in the world (R). 26. I believe that I must obey Gods rules and commandments in order to be saved (R). 27. I am confident that I can overcome any problem or crisis no matter how serious. 28. I care a great deal about reducing poverty in the United States and throughout the world. 29. I try to apply my faith to political and social issues. 30. My life is committed to Jesus Christ. 31. I talk with other people about my faith. 32. My life is filled with stress and anxiety. 33. I go out of my way to show love to people I meet. 34. I have a real sense that God is guiding me. 35. I do not want the churches of this nation getting involved in political issues (R). 36. I like to worship and pray with others. 37. I think Christians must be about the business of creating international understanding and harmony. 38. I am spiritually moved by the beauty of Gods creation enough to help the poor. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Always True 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

(R) = reversed scored.2 Key to leftmost column: 3 I = Inward orientation (13 questions) O = Outward orientation (10 questions) C = Connecting faith and world (15 questions)

The reverse scoring notations were not in the version distributed to the congregation. This column was not in the version distributed to the congregation.

Huntley

APPENDIX C FAITH MATURITY SCALE PARTICIPATION THANK YOU LETTER March 30, 2010 Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ! Thank you for participating in the Faith Maturity Scale (FMS) survey after worship on March 21. The information that you provided will be extremely helpful for us as we enter into a period of cultivating missional vision as a congregation. I look forward to working with you and the people of [Living Water] as we listen to Gods call to ministry for us as a congregation. I also would like to thank you for signing the Informed Consent Form before completing the survey. As promised, I am returning a copy of that form to you for your records. As part of this visioning process, we will take the FMS after worship late in July. If you are present that day and if you agree to take the survey again, then this consent form will apply to that survey as well. In other words, if you take the survey a second time in July, then you wont need to complete another copy of the consent form. Again, thank you for your help and contribution to the visioning process. May God bless you and the congregation of [Living Water] as we move forward together in ministry [in our area]! In Christ,

[Signed] Enclosure (1)

219

Huntley

APPENDIX D QUANTITATIVE SURVEY RESULTS t-Test Results Interpretive Key N is the total number of responses is the mean s and s2 are the standard deviation and variance, respectively. b and e subscripts: baseline and endline data, respectively. P(T t) one-tail with bold font: Statistically significant change (P < .05) I: Inward-directed questions O: Outward-directed questions C: Combined (both inward-directed and outward-directed questions) Table E.1. t-Test Results, Responses Averaged by Participant
No. Nb Ne sb2 se2 All 63 43 4.98612 5.01818 0.265408 0.228524 18-59 28 23 4.831859 4.992455 0.225398 0.144596 60+ 35 19 5.109528 5.039197 0.269712 0.353128 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical df tStat one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 95 -0.328458 0.3716441 1.661052 0.743288 1.985251 49 -1.341252 0.0930113 1.676551 0.186023 2.009575 33 0.433749 0.3336465 1.69236 0.667293 2.034515

Table E.2. t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (All ages)


No. I O C Nb 63 63 63 Ne sb2 se2 43 5.179149 5.213506 0.255798 0.216791 43 4.460128 4.602824 0.633374 0.654186 43 5.165306 5.120377 0.340736 0.317332 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical df tStat one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 95 -0.360125 0.3597766 1.661052 0.719553 1.985251 89 -0.897701 0.1858836 1.662155 0.371767 1.986979 92 0.397306 0.3460309 1.661585 0.692062 1.986086

Table E.3. t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 18-59)


No. I O C Nb Ne sb2 se2 df tStat 28 23 5.139881 5.256689 0.272847 0.227857 48 -0.833252 28 23 4.163492 4.465217 0.474658 0.396008 48 -1.632264 28 23 5.003571 5.117805 0.312785 0.183064 49 -0.825915 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 0.204415 1.677224 0.40883 2.010635 0.054584 1.677224 0.109168 2.010635 0.2064277 1.676551 0.412855 2.009575

220

221 Table E.4. t-Test Results, by IOC Categories (Ages 60+)


Cat. I O C Nb Ne sb2 se2 35 19 5.210563 5.152227 0.247497 0.219379 35 19 4.697438 4.727444 0.647605 0.966532 35 19 5.294694 5.133333 0.334179 0.514568 df tStat 39 0.427542 31 -0.113923 31 0.843094 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 0.3356682 1.684875 0.671336 2.022691 0.4550167 1.695519 0.910033 2.039513 0.2028171 1.695519 0.405634 2.039513

Table E.5. t-Test Results, by Question (All Ages)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Nb Ne sb2 se2 df tStat 61 42 4.344262 4.857143 1.896175 1.783972 90 -1.891012 63 42 6.984127 7 0.015873 0 62 -1 62 42 5.935484 5.97619 0.782655 0.755517 89 -0.232659 60 42 4.433333 4.595238 1.639548 2.051684 82 -0.586614 61 41 4.47541 4.243902 1.553552 1.689024 83 0.896644 63 42 4.52381 4.285714 2.092166 2.062718 88 0.82984 62 42 6.419355 6.52381 0.575357 0.450639 95 -0.738432 62 42 5.080645 5.119048 1.878636 1.717189 91 -0.143933 62 42 4.145161 3.928571 2.978583 2.702091 91 0.646099 62 42 4.596774 4.785714 2.801957 2.75784 89 -0.567473 63 42 6.285714 6.380952 1.175115 0.631823 102 -0.518825 63 42 5.15873 5.357143 1.555044 1.405923 91 -0.822747 60 41 3.683333 4.04878 1.779379 2.147561 81 -1.275918 63 42 4.84127 4.738095 1.393753 1.319977 90 0.44585 62 42 5.225806 5.404762 1.915389 1.61266 93 -0.679844 62 40 3.145161 3.225 2.158911 2.230128 82 -0.265284 63 42 5.904762 5.642857 1.410138 1.942509 78 0.999714 63 42 4.666667 4.52381 1.580645 1.914053 82 0.537413 63 41 5.761905 5.853659 1.829493 2.078049 82 -0.32496 62 43 4.016129 3.813953 2.475145 3.297896 82 0.592036 62 43 4.741935 4.55814 1.407721 2.300111 76 0.665839 61 41 4.344262 4.487805 2.596175 2.656098 85 -0.438121 62 43 5.66129 5.72093 1.014543 1.72979 75 -0.250705 61 41 5.52459 5.731707 1.186885 1.15122 87 -0.949962 62 43 4.483871 4.44186 2.778424 3.014396 88 0.123928 60 43 3.516667 3.488372 5.474294 5.684385 90 0.059859 60 43 4.983333 5.255814 2.016667 1.909192 92 -0.975569 60 43 4.716667 4.55814 1.698023 2.300111 82 0.554307 62 43 5.145161 5.186047 1.273665 2.202658 74 -0.152617 62 43 6.064516 6.162791 1.14331 1.139535 91 -0.463573 61 42 5.098361 5.119048 1.990164 2.448897 82 -0.068602 61 43 3.95082 3.767442 2.847541 3.277962 86 0.523056 62 42 5.096774 5.404762 1.826547 1.124855 100 -1.298675 62 43 5.83871 6.046512 1.1211 0.75969 100 -1.099043 61 43 3.721311 3.581395 3.837705 3.963455 90 0.355288 62 43 6 5.744186 1.47541 2.337763 77 0.915002 61 43 5.360656 5.534884 2.034426 1.778516 94 -0.637415 61 43 5.131148 5.139535 1.782514 2.170543 85 -0.02971 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 0.0309198 1.661961 0.06184 1.986675 0.1605987 1.669804 0.321197 1.998972 0.4082803 1.662155 0.816561 1.986979 0.2795373 1.663649 0.559075 1.989319 0.1862512 1.66342 0.372502 1.98896 0.2044373 1.662354 0.408875 1.98729 0.2310362 1.661052 0.462072 1.985251 0.4429357 1.661771 0.885871 1.986377 0.2599206 1.661771 0.519841 1.986377 0.2859108 1.662155 0.571822 1.986979 0.3025031 1.65993 0.605006 1.983495 0.2064014 1.661771 0.412803 1.986377 0.1028156 1.663884 0.205631 1.989686 0.3283882 1.661961 0.656776 1.986675 0.2491459 1.661404 0.498292 1.985802 0.3957283 1.663649 0.791457 1.989319 0.1602701 1.664625 0.32054 1.990847 0.2962189 1.663649 0.592438 1.989319 0.3730194 1.663649 0.746039 1.989319 0.2777278 1.663649 0.555456 1.989319 0.2537649 1.665151 0.50753 1.991673 0.3312051 1.662978 0.66241 1.988268 0.401364 1.665425 0.802728 1.992102 0.1723815 1.662557 0.344763 1.987608 0.4508276 1.662354 0.901655 1.98729 0.4762003 1.661961 0.952401 1.986675 0.1659182 1.661585 0.331836 1.986086 0.2904389 1.663649 0.580878 1.989319 0.4395579 1.665707 0.879116 1.992543 0.3220302 1.661771 0.64406 1.986377 0.4727367 1.663649 0.945473 1.989319 0.3011401 1.662765 0.60228 1.987934 0.0985212 1.660234 0.197042 1.983972 0.1371941 1.660234 0.274388 1.983972 0.3616025 1.661961 0.723205 1.986675 0.1815235 1.664885 0.363047 1.991254 0.262702 1.661226 0.525404 1.985523 0.4881841 1.662978 0.976368 1.988268

222 Table E.6. t-Test Results, by Question (Ages 18-59)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Nb 28 28 28 26 27 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 Ne 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 2 sb2 se2 4.25 4.869565 2.490741 1.664032 6.964286 7 0.035714 0 5.714286 6.086957 0.804233 0.44664 4.269231 4.608696 0.924615 2.158103 4.296296 4 1.37037 1.619048 4.392857 4.304348 2.099206 1.675889 6.481481 6.434783 0.566952 0.529644 4.607143 4.913043 1.506614 1.355731 3.785714 3.782609 2.619048 2.450593 4.5 4.869565 2.407407 2.573123 6.285714 6.26087 0.804233 0.656126 4.571429 4.956522 1.439153 1.316206 3.321429 3.956522 1.411376 2.134387 4.5 4.826087 1.518519 1.059289 4.964286 5.304348 2.332011 1.675889 2.857143 2.826087 2.275132 1.968379 5.607143 5.478261 1.728836 2.26087 4.571429 4.347826 1.513228 1.873518 5.928571 6.090909 1.846561 1.324675 4.464286 4 1.813492 2.454545 4.357143 4.391304 1.349206 1.794466 3.642857 4.304348 2.312169 2.312253 5.571429 5.956522 0.994709 0.86166 5.296296 5.818182 1.216524 0.822511 4.428571 4.478261 2.253968 2.806324 3.535714 3.826087 4.924603 5.513834 4.892857 5.478261 2.099206 1.26087 4.464286 4.434783 1.665344 1.802372 5.178571 5.173913 1.041005 2.150198 6.107143 6.347826 1.210317 0.600791 5.037037 5.217391 1.806268 1.814229 4.607143 4.086957 2.321429 3.083004 4.964286 5.26087 1.813492 0.837945 5.678571 5.869565 1.48545 0.754941 3.851852 4.217391 3.054131 3.450593 5.857143 5.782609 1.830688 1.268775 4.785714 5 2.174603 1.636364 4.928571 20 1.253968 648 df 49 27 49 37 43 49 47 48 48 46 49 48 42 49 49 48 44 45 48 44 44 47 48 47 45 46 49 46 38 48 47 44 47 48 46 49 49 1 tStat -1.542638 -1 -1.698496 -0.943713 0.840248 0.230196 0.222562 -0.910998 0.006943 -0.830843 0.103836 -1.168427 -1.678252 -1.029692 -0.86057 0.076032 0.322162 0.607442 -0.457042 1.121166 -0.09616 -1.54585 -1.425403 -1.817597 -0.110417 -0.450415 -1.624918 0.079466 0.012887 -0.91397 -0.472367 1.116805 -0.932304 -0.651756 -0.712589 0.214674 -0.55549 -0.837244 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 0.0646763 1.676551 0.129353 2.009575 0.1630945 1.703288 0.326189 2.051831 0.047878 1.676551 0.095756 2.009575 0.1757191 1.687094 0.351438 2.026192 0.2027086 1.681071 0.405417 2.016692 0.4094488 1.676551 0.818898 2.009575 0.4124205 1.677927 0.824841 2.011741 0.1834245 1.677224 0.366849 2.010635 0.4972446 1.677224 0.994489 2.010635 0.2051771 1.67866 0.410354 2.012896 0.4588618 1.676551 0.917724 2.009575 0.1242026 1.677224 0.248405 2.010635 0.0503624 1.681952 0.100725 2.018082 0.1541054 1.676551 0.308211 2.009575 0.1968332 1.676551 0.393666 2.009575 0.4698547 1.677224 0.939709 2.010635 0.3744279 1.68023 0.748856 2.015368 0.2733053 1.679427 0.546611 2.014103 0.3248512 1.677224 0.649702 2.010635 0.1341496 1.68023 0.268299 2.015368 0.4619149 1.68023 0.92383 2.015368 0.0644241 1.677927 0.128848 2.011741 0.0802557 1.677224 0.160511 2.010635 0.037752 1.677927 0.075503 2.011741 0.4562847 1.679427 0.912569 2.014103 0.3272637 1.67866 0.654527 2.012896 0.055298 1.676551 0.110596 2.009575 0.4685035 1.67866 0.937007 2.012896 0.4948927 1.685954 0.989785 2.024394 0.1826504 1.677224 0.365301 2.010635 0.3194253 1.677927 0.638851 2.011741 0.1350697 1.68023 0.270139 2.015368 0.1779722 1.677927 0.355944 2.011741 0.2588336 1.677224 0.517667 2.010635 0.2398495 1.67866 0.479699 2.012896 0.4154562 1.676551 0.830912 2.009575 0.2905435 1.676551 0.581087 2.009575 0.2781248 6.313752 0.55625 12.7062

223 Table E.7. t-Test Results, by Question (Ages 60+)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Nb Ne sb2 se2 33 18 4.424242 4.833333 1.439394 2.147059 35 18 7 7 0 0 34 18 6.117647 5.833333 0.713012 1.205882 34 18 4.558824 4.5 2.193405 2.029412 34 18 4.617647 4.611111 1.697861 1.663399 35 18 4.628571 4.222222 2.122689 2.771242 35 18 6.371429 6.611111 0.593277 0.369281 34 18 5.470588 5.333333 1.893048 2.235294 34 18 4.441176 4 3.163102 3.058824 34 18 4.676471 4.722222 3.195187 3.271242 35 18 6.285714 6.555556 1.504202 0.614379 35 18 5.628571 5.777778 1.181513 1.124183 32 17 4 4.117647 1.935484 2.360294 35 18 5.114286 4.611111 1.163025 1.781046 34 18 5.441176 5.611111 1.526738 1.545752 34 16 3.382353 3.75 2.000891 2.333333 35 18 6.142857 5.833333 1.067227 1.676471 35 18 4.742857 4.777778 1.667227 2.065359 35 18 5.628571 5.777778 1.828571 2.300654 34 19 3.647059 3.473684 2.780749 4.263158 34 19 5.058824 4.684211 1.269162 3.005848 33 17 4.939394 4.705882 2.121212 3.345588 34 19 5.735294 5.473684 1.04902 2.818713 34 18 5.705882 5.611111 1.122995 1.663399 34 19 4.529412 4.315789 3.286988 3.450292 32 19 3.5 2.894737 6.129032 5.321637 32 19 5.0625 5.157895 1.995968 2.251462 32 19 4.9375 4.789474 1.673387 2.953216 34 19 5.117647 5.157895 1.500891 2.473684 34 19 6.029412 5.947368 1.120321 1.830409 34 18 5.147059 4.944444 2.18984 3.46732 33 19 3.393939 3.473684 2.683712 3.48538 34 18 5.205882 5.555556 1.865419 1.555556 34 19 5.970588 6.263158 0.817291 0.760234 34 19 3.617647 2.736842 4.546346 3.649123 34 19 6.117647 5.631579 1.197861 3.80117 33 19 5.848485 6.157895 1.445076 1.362573 33 19 5.30303 5.157895 2.217803 3.140351 df 30 In. 28 36 35 31 42 32 35 34 48 35 30 29 35 28 28 31 31 31 27 27 26 29 37 40 36 30 30 30 29 34 38 39 41 24 39 33 tStat -1.013586 65535 0.958615 0.139717 0.017323 0.877159 -1.23827 0.323638 0.860323 -0.087132 -0.971751 -0.48103 -0.263512 1.384019 -0.469908 -0.812625 0.880305 -0.08666 -0.351625 0.313335 0.847179 0.457007 0.617983 0.267583 0.404961 0.881351 -0.224305 0.324783 -0.096393 0.228173 0.399644 -0.154979 -0.930281 -1.156029 1.543195 1.002058 -0.910405 0.301005 P(T t) t Critical P(T t) t Critical one-tail one-tail two-tail two-tail 0.1594429 1.697261 0.318886 2.042272 Indeterm Indeterm Indeterm Indeterm 0.1729788 1.701131 0.345958 2.048407 0.4448312 1.688298 0.889662 2.028094 0.4931385 1.689572 0.986277 2.030108 0.1935738 1.695519 0.387148 2.039513 0.1112464 1.681952 0.222493 2.018082 0.3741589 1.693889 0.748318 2.036933 0.197733 1.689572 0.395466 2.030108 0.4655388 1.690924 0.931078 2.032245 0.1680231 1.677224 0.336046 2.010635 0.3167443 1.689572 0.633489 2.030108 0.3969788 1.697261 0.793958 2.042272 0.0884563 1.699127 0.176913 2.04523 0.3206678 1.689572 0.641336 2.030108 0.2116445 1.701131 0.423289 2.048407 0.1930939 1.701131 0.386188 2.048407 0.4657495 1.695519 0.931499 2.039513 0.3637492 1.695519 0.727498 2.039513 0.3780624 1.695519 0.756125 2.039513 0.2021712 1.703288 0.404342 2.051831 0.3256609 1.703288 0.651322 2.051831 0.270981 1.705618 0.541962 2.055529 0.3954572 1.699127 0.790914 2.04523 0.3439191 1.687094 0.687838 2.026192 0.1916967 1.683851 0.383393 2.021075 0.4118941 1.688298 0.823788 2.028094 0.3737996 1.697261 0.747599 2.042272 0.4619248 1.697261 0.92385 2.042272 0.4105299 1.697261 0.82106 2.042272 0.3461735 1.699127 0.692347 2.04523 0.4388773 1.690924 0.877755 2.032245 0.179049 1.685954 0.358098 2.024394 0.1273511 1.684875 0.254702 2.022691 0.0652338 1.682878 0.130468 2.019541 0.1631562 1.710882 0.326312 2.063899 0.1841008 1.684875 0.368202 2.022691 0.3826495 1.69236 0.765299 2.034515

224 Overall Response Analysis Interpretive Key N is the total number of responses is the mean. s is the standard deviation. b and e subscripts: baseline and endline data, respectively. I: Inward-directed questions O: Outward-directed questions C: Combined (both inward-directed and outward-directed questions)

Table E.8. Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by Age Age All 18-59 60+ Nb 63 28 35 Ne1 43 23 19 4.98612 4.831859 5.109528 5.01818 4.992455 5.039197 sb 0.515177 0.47476 0.519338 se 0.478042 0.380258 0.594246

Table E.9. Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (All Ages) Nb = 63 Ne = 43 Cat. I O C 5.179149 4.460128 5.165306 5.213506 4.602824 5.120377 sb 0.505765 0.795848 0.583726 se 0.465608 0.808818 0.563322

One respondent to the endline FMS survey did not answer the age question; thus, the sum of the counts for the 18-59 and the 60+ age ranges is one less than the count for all respondents.

225 Table E.10. Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (18-59) Nb = 28 Ne = 23 Cat. I O C 5.139881 4.163492 5.003571 5.256689 4.465217 5.117805 sb 0.522348 0.688954 0.559272 se 0.477344 0.629292 0.427859

Table E.11. Count, Mean, and Standard Deviation Data by IOC (60+) Nb = 35 Ne = 19 Cat. I O C 5.210563 4.697438 5.294694 5.152227 4.727444 5.133333 sb 0.497491 0.804739 0.584462 se 0.468379 0.983124 0.717334

226 Individual Response Analysis

Table E.12. Interpretive Key


Cell Attribute Black with White Text Gray with Black Text Hash with Bold Text Kurtosis Range 3 {Value} 1 {Value} < 3 {Value} -1 Skew Range -2 {Value} -1.5 {Value} > -2

Table E.13. Baseline Data (All Ages)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.344262295 6.984126984 5.935483871 4.433333333 4.475409836 4.523809524 6.419354839 5.080645161 4.14516129 4.596774194 6.285714286 5.158730159 3.683333333 4.841269841 5.225806452 3.14516129 5.904761905 4.666666667 5.761904762 4.016129032 4.741935484 4.344262295 5.661290323 5.524590164 4.483870968 3.516666667 4.983333333 4.716666667 5.14516129 6.064516129 5.098360656 3.950819672 5.096774194 5.838709677 3.721311475 6 5.360655738 5.131147541 s 1.377016653 0.125988158 0.884677727 1.280448368 1.246415626 1.446432127 0.758522876 1.3706333 1.725857109 1.673904608 1.084027309 1.247013842 1.333933481 1.180573251 1.38397568 1.469323187 1.187492421 1.257237114 1.352587553 1.573259491 1.186474097 1.611264989 1.00724504 1.089442631 1.666860556 2.339720878 1.420093894 1.303081962 1.128567556 1.069256947 1.410731702 1.687465847 1.351497984 1.058820073 1.959006105 1.214664495 1.426333141 1.335108108 N 61 63 62 60 61 63 62 62 62 62 63 63 60 63 62 62 63 63 63 62 62 61 62 61 62 60 60 60 62 62 61 61 62 62 61 62 61 61 Median 4 7 6 4 4 5 7 5 4 5 7 5 4 5 5 3 6 5 6 4 5 4 6 6 4 3 5 5 5 6 5 4 5 6 4 6 5 5 Mode 5 7 6 4 4 4 7 5 5 3 7 6 4 4 5 2 6 5 6 4 4 3 6 6 3 1 5 5 6 7 5 4 6 6 2 7 7 4 Kurtosis -0.485916727 63 0.829365428 -0.205645277 -0.713813821 -0.495198152 0.520516524 -0.450261836 -0.961871959 -1.33857992 8.033812922 -0.493942195 0.031417751 -0.291958958 0.049019492 -0.408268929 1.630263126 -0.216020647 3.642252663 -0.576639114 -0.642577916 -1.084756514 0.078708545 0.052073403 -0.951361069 -1.421975883 0.240324216 -0.209768947 -0.347071192 0.032051917 -0.546516989 -0.805911631 1.0851038 -0.334109261 -1.189897577 1.782440678 -0.696323516 -0.981158624 Skew -0.296906937 -7.937253933 -0.752144408 0.028099487 0.137953784 -0.329676162 -1.115025117 -0.426027014 -0.152619768 0.042698406 -2.326586157 -0.516812446 0.344526073 -0.228787444 -0.689280967 0.413652592 -1.362508485 -0.290589241 -1.771299484 -0.131836953 0.035967646 -0.067419152 -0.558735365 -0.784650691 -0.047729506 0.314989996 -0.557445823 -0.162283445 -0.294905924 -0.963259814 -0.437567122 0.03663193 -0.922307565 -0.694258031 0.157770851 -1.474572706 -0.45685013 -0.030530966

227 Table E.14. Baseline Data (Ages 18-59)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.25 6.964285714 5.714285714 4.269230769 4.296296296 4.392857143 6.481481481 4.607142857 3.785714286 4.5 6.285714286 4.571428571 3.321428571 4.5 4.964285714 2.857142857 5.607142857 4.571428571 5.928571429 4.464285714 4.357142857 3.642857143 5.571428571 5.296296296 4.428571429 3.535714286 4.892857143 4.464285714 5.178571429 6.107142857 5.037037037 4.607142857 4.964285714 5.678571429 3.851851852 5.857142857 4.785714286 4.928571429 s 1.578208079 0.188982237 0.896790279 0.96156923 1.170628195 1.448863813 0.752961863 1.227441957 1.618347187 1.551582227 0.896790279 1.199647214 1.188013325 1.232281834 1.527092198 1.508354161 1.314852075 1.230133128 1.358882205 1.346659595 1.161553421 1.520581899 0.997350989 1.102961566 1.501322169 2.219144694 1.448863813 1.290482048 1.020296668 1.100144291 1.34397463 1.523623501 1.346659595 1.218790275 1.747607237 1.353029132 1.474653578 1.11980724 N 28 28 28 26 27 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 27 28 28 28 Median Mode Kurtosis Skew 4 6 -0.921773714 -0.201667201 7 7 28 -5.291502622 6 6 2.055319625 -1.036083708 4 4 0.352008029 -0.008651969 4 4 -0.514967691 0.611786594 4 4 -0.101663577 -0.124550419 7 7 -0.241084821 -1.100111107 4.5 4 -0.645798923 -0.072463238 4 4 -1.046576987 -0.360089965 4.5 5 -0.851887483 0.096103464 7 7 -0.152029619 -0.954822241 5 6 -0.940535334 -0.319664113 3 3 2.328111226 0.887860892 4.5 4 -0.179299867 -0.191837404 5 5 -0.339025973 -0.540437433 2.5 2 0.48520248 0.818340334 6 6 1.25414115 -1.303498238 5 5 -0.636808646 -0.112820547 6 6 6.026570149 -2.24613815 4.5 4 -0.54966252 -0.261358513 4 4 -0.137691137 0.297619852 3 3 -0.71140094 0.387570616 6 5 0.289584567 -0.45291828 6 6 0.026412255 -1.015957487 4.5 4 -0.237856652 -0.31175121 3 1 -1.359467237 0.222644543 5 5 -0.380650309 -0.272083952 5 5 -0.579981045 -0.193595858 5.5 6 -1.021038856 -0.383670111 6.5 7 0.767749546 -1.124465592 5 5 -0.32155818 -0.38019908 4.5 4 -0.670839953 -0.219121918 5 5 1.41590698 -1.008561379 6 7 -0.853474644 -0.515423961 4 5 -0.788557585 -0.035955345 6 6 1.945770683 -1.557692536 5 4 -0.789348066 -0.12412626 5 4 -0.837194237 0.490416857

228 Table E.15. Baseline Data (Ages 60+)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.424242424 7 6.117647059 4.558823529 4.617647059 4.628571429 6.371428571 5.470588235 4.441176471 4.676470588 6.285714286 5.628571429 4 5.114285714 5.441176471 3.382352941 6.142857143 4.742857143 5.628571429 3.647058824 5.058823529 4.939393939 5.735294118 5.705882353 4.529411765 3.5 5.0625 4.9375 5.117647059 6.029411765 5.147058824 3.393939394 5.205882353 5.970588235 3.617647059 6.117647059 5.848484848 5.303030303 s 1.199747448 0 0.844400662 1.481014731 1.303019939 1.456945118 0.770244968 1.375880855 1.778511064 1.787508648 1.226459001 1.086974059 1.391216687 1.078436465 1.235612386 1.414528637 1.033066741 1.291211404 1.352246808 1.667557694 1.126570997 1.456438163 1.024216582 1.05971442 1.813005108 2.475688239 1.412787225 1.293594642 1.225108675 1.058452104 1.479810654 1.638203932 1.365803388 0.904041234 2.132216174 1.094468347 1.202113039 1.489229005 N 33 35 34 34 34 35 35 34 34 34 35 35 32 35 34 34 35 35 35 34 34 33 34 34 34 32 32 32 34 34 34 33 34 34 34 34 33 33 Median Mode Kurtosis Skew 5 5 0.086529533 -0.33021947 7 7 Indeterminate Indeterminate 6 6 -0.510809728 -0.554017211 5 5 -0.607153409 -0.121715257 5 5 -0.525396251 -0.186725528 5 5 -0.564817113 -0.512268494 7 7 1.232042009 -1.178924648 6 5 0.681887865 -0.936226119 5 5 -1.134131619 -0.137774691 5 3 -1.620317255 -0.019779288 7 7 9.501234214 -2.716471096 6 6 0.307771887 -0.78804884 4 4 -0.303586207 -0.076671497 5 6 -0.727356591 -0.089778872 6 6 0.450364297 -0.727108135 3 4 -0.642764429 0.15197835 6 7 1.497904678 -1.319988641 5 5 0.261133815 -0.444509146 6 6 3.031253917 -1.538215346 4 4 -0.491264286 0.143432934 5 6 -0.7115995 -0.121553105 5 6 -0.811514319 -0.405418235 6 6 0.210003358 -0.685605972 6 6 -0.071812596 -0.661117019 4 3 -1.319908151 0.046886477 3 1 -1.511629764 0.387770958 5 5 1.226380587 -0.849384804 5 5 0.212878222 -0.163176571 5 5 -0.126454121 -0.237023909 6 7 -0.379608154 -0.876003396 5 6 -0.582558635 -0.506615321 3 3 -0.437727783 0.35933161 5.5 6 1.215995352 -0.926537625 6 6 0.021165906 -0.724210846 3 1 -1.367936209 0.295581695 6 7 0.992823166 -1.277222378 6 7 -0.752156715 -0.610229179 5 7 -0.942417637 -0.377059021

229 Table E.16. Endline Data (All Ages)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.857142857 7 5.976190476 4.595238095 4.243902439 4.285714286 6.523809524 5.119047619 3.928571429 4.785714286 6.380952381 5.357142857 4.048780488 4.738095238 5.404761905 3.225 5.642857143 4.523809524 5.853658537 3.813953488 4.558139535 4.487804878 5.720930233 5.731707317 4.441860465 3.488372093 5.255813953 4.558139535 5.186046512 6.162790698 5.119047619 3.76744186 5.404761905 6.046511628 3.581395349 5.744186047 5.534883721 5.139534884 s 1.335654194 0 0.869204717 1.432370095 1.299624711 1.436216477 0.671296352 1.310415703 1.643803696 1.660674478 0.794873236 1.185716385 1.465455893 1.14890242 1.269905389 1.493361378 1.393739111 1.383493197 1.441543888 1.816010986 1.516611599 1.629753834 1.315214656 1.072948979 1.736201733 2.384194913 1.38173499 1.516611599 1.484135374 1.067489992 1.564895087 1.810514388 1.060591731 0.871601929 1.990842824 1.528974497 1.33361016 1.473276157 N 42 42 42 42 41 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 41 42 42 40 42 42 41 43 43 41 43 41 43 43 43 43 43 43 42 43 42 43 43 43 43 43 Median Mode Kurtosis Skew 5 5 -0.366881972 -0.113181897 7 7 Indeterminate Indeterminate 6 6 -0.002660812 -0.654648803 4 4 -0.182668699 -0.174901469 4 4 -0.414462067 -0.191925185 4 4 -0.195292175 0.246636199 7 7 3.494026791 -1.614432856 5 6 -0.055706311 -0.639784379 4 4 -0.80470241 0.085074186 5 4 -0.782984918 -0.312570409 7 7 0.584881502 -1.118149064 6 6 0.126675121 -0.655572808 4 4 -0.34705995 0.41274349 5 5 -0.384140151 0.342414451 6 6 -0.122885067 -0.676189299 3 2 -0.07244605 0.565975919 6 7 1.408995055 -1.132804603 4 4 0.125564906 0.064254476 6 7 3.751871964 -1.889639196 4 5 -0.742427802 0.115017586 5 5 -0.010159772 -0.610127315 5 5 -0.182583661 -0.523590389 6 6 2.921068612 -1.495387983 6 6 0.541002588 -0.960566506 5 4 -0.870228809 -0.298368756 3 1 -1.321663582 0.501537613 6 6 -0.270240754 -0.712383059 5 5 -0.588277367 -0.137677019 6 6 1.233245736 -1.160392329 7 7 0.739182135 -1.202096033 6 6 1.393779209 -1.209092806 4 2 -0.875626872 0.364343406 5 5 -0.68436438 0.00457562 6 6 -0.453258877 -0.545183631 3 1 -1.093503039 0.291790469 6 7 2.603450262 -1.599313597 6 7 -0.285472828 -0.646886773 5 5 0.653718943 -0.954841115

230 Table E.17. Endline Data (Ages 18-59)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.869565217 7 6.086956522 4.608695652 4 4.304347826 6.434782609 4.913043478 3.782608696 4.869565217 6.260869565 4.956521739 3.956521739 4.826086957 5.304347826 2.826086957 5.47826087 4.347826087 6.090909091 4 4.391304348 4.304347826 5.956521739 5.818181818 4.47826087 3.826086957 5.47826087 4.434782609 5.173913043 6.347826087 5.217391304 4.086956522 5.260869565 5.869565217 4.217391304 5.782608696 5 5.173913043 s 1.289973496 0 0.668311541 1.469048252 1.272418021 1.294561442 0.727766631 1.164358718 1.565436963 1.604095549 0.810016347 1.147260011 1.460954261 1.029217439 1.294561442 1.402989468 1.503618823 1.368765059 1.150945405 1.566698904 1.339576949 1.520609406 0.928256473 0.906923824 1.675208677 2.348155445 1.122884484 1.342524317 1.466355219 0.775106776 1.346933276 1.755848499 0.915393175 0.868873242 1.857577155 1.126398998 1.279204298 1.230379613 N 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 Median Mode Kurtosis Skew 5 6 -0.292787303 -0.29277517 7 7 Indeterminate Indeterminate 6 6 -0.536099706 -0.096474988 4 4 -0.38902709 0.284431815 4 4 0.243616828 -0.305116155 4 4 0.069963256 0.612400255 7 7 4.363873596 -1.690483094 5 5 0.846238508 -0.384887061 4 4 0.101621228 0.628054496 5 6 0.084685636 -0.709178777 6 7 -1.243410821 -0.534401998 5 6 0.264986995 -0.897443491 4 4 -0.092513815 0.560806174 5 5 0.456515928 0.378079291 6 6 0.502770432 -0.902073644 2 2 0.397681604 0.878175617 6 7 1.96886575 -1.184455132 4 4 0.860957875 0.000440377 6 7 7.014745341 -2.253901563 4 5 0.053027631 -0.077674862 5 5 -0.243248323 -0.304896988 5 5 -0.387361448 -0.397790519 6 6 -0.161838229 -0.655126936 6 6 0.407912524 -0.87397812 5 5 -0.594116587 -0.466982874 3 7 -1.447920718 0.389930318 6 6 0.381669935 -0.890164737 4 4 -0.483489975 0.337196302 6 6 1.6006932 -1.181078247 7 7 -0.896062525 -0.722675112 5 6 3.088665938 -1.288907356 4 4 -0.8307867 0.186608171 5 5 -0.155688349 0.594798398 6 6 -0.729772445 -0.185937043 4 4 -1.078098365 0.118484936 6 6 0.409760054 -0.994856399 5 6 0.023280423 -0.570791336 5 5 1.079242089 -1.00222887

231 Table E.18. Endline Data (Ages 60+)


No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 4.833333333 7 5.833333333 4.5 4.611111111 4.222222222 6.611111111 5.333333333 4 4.722222222 6.555555556 5.777777778 4.117647059 4.611111111 5.611111111 3.75 5.833333333 4.777777778 5.777777778 3.473684211 4.684210526 4.705882353 5.473684211 5.611111111 4.315789474 2.894736842 5.157894737 4.789473684 5.157894737 5.947368421 4.944444444 3.473684211 5.555555556 6.263157895 2.736842105 5.631578947 6.157894737 5.157894737 s 1.465284554 0 1.098126747 1.42457424 1.289728147 1.664704728 0.607684989 1.495090003 1.748949264 1.808657466 0.783823376 1.060274967 1.536324874 1.334558261 1.243282604 1.527525232 1.294785924 1.437135859 1.516790557 2.064741605 1.733738144 1.829094922 1.678902454 1.289728147 1.857496271 2.306867449 1.50048725 1.718492471 1.572795031 1.35292622 1.862074183 1.866917276 1.247219129 0.87191394 1.910267732 1.94965884 1.167293065 1.772103518 N 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 17 18 18 16 18 18 18 19 19 17 19 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 18 19 18 19 19 19 19 19 Median Mode Kurtosis Skew 5 5 -0.391743291 0.070115887 7 7 Indeterminate Indeterminate 6 7 -0.934443783 -0.533058552 4.5 6 0.379206049 -0.755374432 4 6 -0.976649774 -0.276097233 4 4 -0.441359247 0.120424779 7 7 1.12632156 -1.36161604 6 6 -0.022368421 -1.003284081 4 6 -1.103994083 -0.371101938 5 7 -1.396909983 -0.003037892 7 7 6.069092349 -2.266576628 6 6 -0.810924824 -0.503105561 4 5 -0.288144941 0.3641818 4 4 -0.86023062 0.483959059 6 6 -0.600431772 -0.595164538 4 4 0.304642296 0.352711365 6 7 -0.278362573 -0.934923908 5 4 -0.488467393 0.035782317 6 7 5.068594234 -1.967090814 3 3 -0.821441913 0.50741856 5 6 0.358955428 -0.883401095 5 4 0.233921783 -0.756273874 6 7 1.441103424 -1.326749817 6 6 -0.007204697 -0.831338291 4 4 -1.007905098 -0.052655061 2 1 -0.655596973 0.901666829 6 4 -0.802296786 -0.409339913 5 5 -0.208355006 -0.66371781 6 6 1.295910668 -1.151727288 7 7 -0.504178393 -0.947642091 6 6 0.318987564 -1.016495389 3 2 -0.606192388 0.589989033 6 7 -0.752521008 -0.448897821 6 7 0.99397842 -1.138079858 2 1 -0.273689713 0.901445506 7 7 1.637445527 -1.528426123 7 7 -0.472564044 -1.04203438 5 5 0.371647907 -1.002501431

232 Response Count Histograms All Ages

Figure E.1. Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

233

Figure E.2. Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

234

Figure E.3. Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

235

Figure E.4. Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

236

Figure E.5. Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

237

Figure E.6. Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

238

Figure E.7. Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (all ages), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

239 Ages 18-59

Figure E.8. Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

240

Figure E.9. Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

241

Figure E.10. Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

242

Figure E.11. Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

243

Figure E.12. Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

244

Figure E.13. Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

245

Figure E.14. Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (18-59), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

246 Age 60+

Figure E.15. Response Count Histograms, Questions 1-6 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

247

Figure E.16. Response Count Histograms, Questions 7-12 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

248

Figure E.17. Response Count Histograms, Questions 13-18 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

249

Figure E.18. Response Count Histograms, Questions 19-24 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

250

Figure E.19. Response Count Histograms, Questions 25-30 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

251

Figure E.20. Response Count Histograms, Questions 31-36 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

252

Figure E.21. Response Count Histograms, Questions 37-38 (60+), the x-axis denotes the response to the question and the y-axis denotes the number of responses to the question.

Huntley

APPENDIX E QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW RESEARCH TOPICS AND QUESTIONS 1. Personal faith practices and communal/vocational ministry In what ways does your relationship with God make a difference in your life and in your relationships with others? o What are some examples of times when you have seen God at work? o When you talk about God with others, what do you say? o How does God influence what you do on a daily basis? o How do you bring God into your day-to-day interactions with others? o Describe your devotional life. 2. Understanding of the congregations shared vision What are some principles or concepts that people in the congregation hold in common as they make decisions and work together in ministry? o How do you know this to be the case? o Think of some activities that the congregation does together. Based upon these communal activities, what would you infer to be the congregations vision for ministry? o As a congregation member, how do you think a first-time Visitor would describe the congregations shared vision for ministry after worshipping here on a Sunday? 3. Efficacy of how the congregation equips congregants for growth in personal faith and communal/vocational ministry through the vision Consider this shared vision that you just described. What are some ways that this vision helps you make decisions in your daily life? o How do/would you apply it in making decisions on a day to day basis? o How does the shared vision impact decisions you make at home, at work, or elsewhere? o When have you said, Wow, this vision is really helpful in dealing with this situation in life? here at this congregation? o How does this congregation help you to experience a deeper personal faith life, or to feel comfortable to talk about your faith in daily life?

253

254 4. How congregation vision impacts personal/congregational faith practices Personal applied to individuals, congregational applied to the council interviews. Consider your personal/the congregations faith life for a moment. How has the congregations shared vision made a difference in your personal/the congregations faith life? o What is different in your personal/the congregations faith life now, compared to a year ago? o What were you doing privately/as a council when you felt God give you insight through considering the shared vision? o When have you seen something happen that went against the congregations vision? What did you think or how did you feel about that? o (For endline interviews). How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted the congregations ministry? 5. How congregation vision impacts communal/vocational ministry How has the congregations shared vision made a difference in how you relate with others in the community? o How has the congregations shared vision impacted your relationships with people outside of the congregation through your actions or verbal witness? o How do your relationships with others compare to your understanding of the congregations shared vision? o How have people in the community that you know benefitted from the ministry of the congregation or its members? o (For endline interviews). What are you doing differently in our community, whether intentionally or not, as a result of the congregations vision/vision cultivation process? o (For endline interviews). How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted your relationships with people in the community? o (For endline interviews). How has the vision cultivation process we have embraced as a congregation over the past few months impacted how the congregation as a whole thinks about our community? 6. Anything else? Is there anything else you would like to say, or that you think I should consider? o Why is this important to you? o Thank you for your time and effort in helping me understand more about your understanding of this congregations ministry.

Huntley

APPENDIX F SUNDAY SCHOOL MISSIONAL CHURCH LESSON PLAN Note: This was covered over a three-week time span. There was not a specific plan for which portions were covered on a given day; each session covered as much material as appropriate. All of this material was covered over the three weeks. 1. Gods work in the world a. Genesis 2 and 3; God in fellowship with humans, left searching for us. Where are you? b. Gods reign is now incomplete. We listen to other voices besides God for our marching orders. c. Love and choice. We choose others over God. d. Even the Exodus and the 10 commandments. Israel is Gods kingdom for reaching out to the world. i. Enslaved after trusting Pharaoh to provide instead of God. Other gods always do this! ii. God frees the Hebrew people iii. Priesthood of Believers did not begin with 1 Peter or Luther. Exodus 19:5-6. Now therefore, if you obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, 6but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the Israelites. iv. I am the Lord who freed you have no other before me (Exodus 20). v. Jealous God e. We want a human king. (1 Samuel 8) rejecting God as king

255

256 f. This continued, back and forth. The prophets constantly called the nation of Israel back to God. g. Two things: Focused on God in the temple, out worshipping other Gods. What happened to the nation of priests (with the Levites priesting the priests)? h. Babylon i. People kicked out of the temple, SENT out there to the nations. ii. Carry the message of Gods kingdom to Ninevah. iii. God was there already. iv. Gods anointed one, or messiah could be Cyrus? Isaiah 45. i. Finally, in Jesus, the sent one God leaves it all behind (Philippians 2) to empty himself and become us. 2. Trinity a. The perichoretic nature of God b. Is poured out for us drawing us into that perichoretic relationship i. The spirit brooding over the waters of chaos, the word sent out to bring order out of chaos in creation (cf. Gen 1 and John 1) ii. Missio Deisending of God in mission at work in the world to come and heal the division iii. Missio is all over John! Cf. John 17:1-8, 15-23. Then, John 20:21-23. iv. Holy Spirit: sent John 14:25-27 v. Now, we: sent John 20:21:23 c. The sending is a reaching out of the perichoretic God to bring us back to fellowship with God. To restore creation to what it was before we broke relationship with God and forsook Gods kingdom for our own. 3. Christendom a. Early church structure; a movement of people being led, formed and shaped by the Spirit

257 i. Founded in the commandments to love God and one another. ii. On the fringe (how can you preach Christ crucified from a position of power?) iii. A movement and a network iv. Inherently relational and personal b. Constantine: Christianity is the official religion (325) i. Church buildings for each parish ii. Baptism and membership automatic iii. Maintenance and in the center of society iv. Sometimes coopted by the king or wrongly using power from king (crusades, missionaries in imperial age, etc.) c. But now something new and old is happening i. Luther started it in the west, the separation of Church and state (leave Roman church) ii. US as new country without king and with religious freedom iii. Postmodern democratizing of universal and instant communication. What now? iv. Where is perichoresis in this? 4. missio DeiThe Mission of God or Sending of God. a. Righteousness of God and right relationships 2 Corinthians 5:17-21 b. Church in the world is the very presence of God (through the Holy Spirit) to reconcile humanity with God 5. Kingdom of God a. Redemptive reign of God b. An assault on the dark powers of this world that keep people in control and away from true peace c. Characteristics

258 i. It is Good News ii. It is already breaking into history, yet its fulfillment is eschatological and universal. iii. Gods reign, as described in the Sermon on the Mount, changes everything. iv. The kingdom is centered in Christ, who is king of all. v. Gods reign is being actualized in and through the Spirits work in the Church, of which Christ is King and head. 6. Role of the Holy Spirit a. Charismata and the Holy Spirit in the body of Christ, 1 Corinthians 12 b. Priesthood of believers c. Vocatio (calling) cf. Luke 5 and the calling of Peter d. the church is called to represent Gods kingdom as servants;

Huntley

APPENDIX G RETREAT/WEDNESDAY NIGHT AGENDA AND SESSION PLANS Retreat Schedule (Saturday, May 22, 2010) 8:30 a.m. 8:45 a.m. 10:15 a.m. 10:30 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 1:00 p.m. 2:30 p.m. 2:45 p.m. 4:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. Devotions (Who is my neighbor?) Session 1Missional church overview Break Session 2Gods purpose in the Book of Acts Lunch Session 3Gods purpose for Living Water Break Session 4Biblical/Guiding principles for Living Water Closing Eucharist Depart Beckwith Wednesday Night Meetings Agenda June 9, 2010 June 16, 2010 June 23, 2010 June 30, 2010 Session 1Who is my neighbor?/Missional church overview Session 2Gods purpose in the Book of Acts Session 3Gods purpose for Living Water Session 4Biblical/Guiding principles for Living Water Devotions (Who is my neighbor?) Session Plan 1. Luke 10:25-28 1.1. What does this mean? 1.2. One person tell a 90 second story of loving your neighbor as yourself. How did you feel? 2. Luke 10:29 2.1. What does this mean? 2.2. One other person tell a story about when someone was a neighbor to you. 2.3. Write And who is my neighbor? on the board.

259

260 3. Luke 10:30-37 3.1. Whats a priest? Today? Pretend youre the priest (reread the story) 3.2. Whats a Levite? Today? Pretend youre the Levite (reread the story) 3.3. Whats a Samaritan? Today? Pretend youre the Samaritan (what do you look like, pastor on Harley, reread the story) 3.4. Whats a guy beaten up by robbers? Today? Pretend youre the guy. Reread the story. 4. Some thoughts 4.1. What if it was our goal to intentionally be Samaritans? 4.2. Who would we hang around with? 4.3. Ministry, missionary work is done on the fringe. What would it look like for us to hang out on the fringe? 5. Read 10:25-29 and contemplate quietly. 6. Sing Amazing Grace, verse 1. Missional Church Overview Session Plan 1. Some initial conversation 1.1. How do we currently talk about church? 1.2. What is our vision (define it) of ministry and congregational life? What does it look like? 1.3. How do we define success 2. Organizational Theory 2.1. The church is, does what it is, organizes what it does 2.2. Currently, we organize, we do that, and that makes us what we are; franchise ELCA congregation. 3. meChurch video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGEmlPjgjVI) 3.1. Describe these people 3.2. Read, Then Jesus told his disciples, If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. (And a version of this is in all three synoptics). 3.3. What kind of disciple does a meChurch shape? (Society is shaping us to be selfish). 4. Lonely People video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py_3IsEmyCU) 4.1. Describe these people 4.2. What would ministry with these people look like?

261 4.3. Instead of effectiveness, what if we shot for faithfulness. How would we measure our level of faithfulness? 5. Briscos Transitioning From Traditional to Missional (see appendix H) 5.1. Item 1: Perichoresis and missio Dei. Bulletins are visitor friendly. What if, instead, the custom and culture was that everybody brought Bibles to church and we all read from our Bibles? 5.2. Item 2: Apostleship 5.3. Item 3: Priesthood of Believers/Spirit working in believers vocations 5.4. Item 4: Sending of 72 to free people so that they may love God. 5.5. Item 5: Perichoresis 5.6. Item 6: Faithfulness, Kingdom of God 5.7. Item 7: Woman at the well 5.8. Item 8: Parables 5.9. Item 9: Paul, To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (though I am not free from Gods law but am under Christs law) so that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, so that I may share in its blessings. 1 Corinthians 9:21-23. Gods Purpose in the Book of Acts Session Plan1 Vision = Gods Purpose + Guiding Principles + Time A. Form small groups. Keep groups smaller than eight per group. Count off by the number of groups needed, depending on how many are present. Do not let people self-group. There should be a multiple of three groups (3, 6, 9, etc.--usually six groups is enough) so that an equal number of groups study each chapter. These will be the work groups for the day. B. Give each group one chapter to study. If more than three groups are formed, give more than one group the same chapter to study. Do not give more than one chapter to any group! 1. Acts 2 2. Acts 10 3. Acts 16 C. Have each group discuss the text. Each group will need to have a scribe to record answers to the following questions. Each group should list at least five or six answers for each question. Have them read the text and then spend about 10-12
1

From Daubert, Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation, 91-92.

262 minutes on each question. The facilitator should help them keep on track with the task and the time available. 1. What did God do in the chapter you studied? 2. What did people of faith do in the chapter you studied? (For example: prayer, public preaching, etc.) 3. What key lessons would you say any church should learn/remember from this chapter? D. Report back to large group. (group scribe serves as primary reporter) 1. Record all answers on newsprint, using large print and markers. 2. Process each question for each group one at a time. (For example, have the group working on Acts 2 list all the things they found God doing in their text, then have the group working on Acts 10 do the same, then the group working on Acts 16 do the same. Then move on to question 2 and repeat the cycle.) 3. Post the newsprint sheets on the walls around the room for everyone to see. E. Close session with prayer. Gods Purpose for Living Water Session Plan2 A. Return to the same small groups. B. Sticky Note Exercise--This is done in silence. Do not allow any conversations until step 6! 1. Give everyone a self-stick note. 2. Have 10 minutes of silent prayer and reflection on morning lessons--encourage people to wander around the room in silence and reflect and pray as they read the newsprint notes from the earlier session. Maintain silence for the entire time as participants work and pray and think! No one should write until they have walked around the room and read what is posted and spent time praying. 3. Instruct each person to create a purpose statement by completing this sentence, adding no more than twelve additional words: Gods purpose for our church is Have them write their statement on their sticky notes. Remind participants to remain silent as they complete this task. 4. Have participants post their sticky notes on the wall in silence. The purpose notes from each group go in a cluster on one wall. 5. Let participants read the notes in silence until everyone has read what everyone wrote. 6. After each person has written a purpose statement for the congregation, reassemble the small groups again. Instruct each group to discuss the statements and from them produce one purpose statement to share with the large group.
2

Ibid., 92-93.

263 7. Come together as a large group and have small groups share their draft purpose statements. 8. Save written copies of each groups statements for the leadership team to use after the retreat. Biblical Guiding Principles Session Plan3 (Return to the same small groups from the morning session) A. Review the chapter (Acts 2, 10, or 16) that you studied earlier. Look at major events and the decisions/choices that people of faith made in them. What values or principles were they using to make those decisions? Each small group should make a list of all the key principles they see in action. Do not try to determine the most important ones; just list as many as you can in 30-40 minutes. B. Sort through the guiding principles you have found and discuss which ones seem to be most important. Compile a list of the five most important. C. Bring the small groups back to a large group and have each group share the top five guiding principles that they see in action in the Bible text. Have someone from each small group read the principles that they have discerned. (A possible idea is to have five different people from the group each read one principle. This involves more people in the reporting.) Guiding Principles for Living Water Session Plan4 A. Return to the same small groups. Have everyone wander and read what has been posted through the day. Then have each group draft five guiding principles for the congregation. What should be the most important as you follow Gods purpose for your congregation? B. Have each group share with the larger group the five principles they drafted. Explain what will happen with the work of the group after the event (see below). Thank participants and send them home with a prayer and a blessing.

Ibid., 93-94. Ibid., 94.

Huntley

APPENDIX H TRANSITIONING FROM TRADITIONAL TO MISSIONAL HANDOUT1 Over the past few months I have had an increasing number of conversations with pastors and church leaders about moving existing churches in a missional direction. I have been asked what key issues or topics need to be considered when attempting to transition a traditional church. The following list is certainly not conclusive or comprehensive, but here are nine elements that I believe need to be considered when making a missional shift: 1. Start with Spiritual Formation God calls the church to be a sent community of people who no longer live for themselves but instead live to participate with Him in His redemptive purposes. However, people will have neither the passion nor the strength to live as a counter-cultural society for the sake of others if they are not transformed by the way of Jesus. If the church is to go and be, rather than come and see, then we must make certain that we are a Spirit-formed community that has the spiritual capacity to impact the lives of others. This means the church must take seriously its responsibility to cultivate spiritual transformation that does not allow believers to remain as adolescents in their spiritual maturity. Such spiritual formation will involve much greater relational underpinnings and considerable engagement with a multitude of spiritual disciplines. One such discipline should involve dwelling in the word, whereby the church learns to regard Scripture not as a tool, but as the living voice of God that exists to guide people into His mission. If we believe the mission is truly Gods mission, then we must learn to discern where He is working; and further discern, in light of our gifts and resources, how He desires a church to participate in what He is doing in a local context. 2. Cultivate a Missional Leadership Approach The second most important transition in fostering a missional posture in a local congregation is rethinking church leadership models that have been accepted as the status quo. This will require the development of a missional leadership approach that has a

Brad Brisco, Transitioning from Traditional to Missional, May 20, 2010, http://missionalchurchnetwork.com/transitioning-from-traditional-to-missional/, (accessed May 21, 2010). (Included here sic).

264

265 special emphasis on the apostolic function of church leadership, which was marginalized during the time of Christendom in favor of the pastor/teacher function. This missional leadership approach will involve creating an apostolic environment throughout the life of the church. The leader must encourage pioneering activity that pushes the church into new territory. However, because not all in the church will embrace such risk, the best approach will involve creating a sort of R&D or skunk works department in the church for those who are innovators and early adopters. A culture of experimentation must be cultivated where attempting new initiatives is expected, even if they dont all succeed. As pioneering activities bear fruit, and the stories of life change begin to bubble up within the church, an increasing number of people will begin to take notice and get involved. 3. Emphasize the Priesthood of All Believers Martin Luthers idea of the priesthood of all believers was that all Christians were called to carry out their vocational ministries in every area of life. Every believer must fully understand how their vocation plays a central part in Gods redemptive Kingdom. I think it was Rick Warren who made popular the phase every member is a minister. While this phrase is a helpful slogan to move people to understand their responsibility in the life of the church, Gods purpose for His church would be better served if we encouraged people to recognize that every member is a missionary. This missionary activity will include not just being sent to faraway places, but to local work places, schools, and neighborhoods. 4. Focus Attention on the Local Community As individual members begin to see themselves as missionaries sent into their local context the congregation will begin to shift from a community-for-me mentality, to a me-for-the-community mentality. The church must begin to develop a theology of the city that sees the church as an agent of transformation for the good of the city (Jeremiah 29:7). This will involve exegeting each segment of the city to understand the local needs, identify with people, and discover unique opportunities for the church to share the good news of Jesus. 5. Dont Do It Alone Missional activity that leads to significant community transformation takes a lot of work and no church can afford to work alone. Missional churches must learn to create partnerships with other churches as well as already existing ministries that care about the community. 6. Create New Means of Measuring Success The church must move beyond measuring success by the traditional indicators of attendance, buildings and cash. Instead we must create new scorecards to measure ministry effectiveness. These new scorecards will include measurements that point to the churchs impact on community transformation rather than measuring what is happening

266 among church members inside the church walls. For the missional church it is no longer about the number of people active in the church but instead the number of people active in the community. It is no longer about the amount of money received but it is about the amount of money given away. A missional church may ask how many hours has the church spent praying for community issues? How many hours have church members spent with unbelievers? How many of those unbelievers are making significant movement towards Jesus? How many community groups use the facilities of the church? How many people are healthier because of the clinic the church operates? How many people are in new jobs because of free job training offered by the church? What is the number of school children who are getting better grades because of after-school tutoring the church provides. Or how many times do community leaders call the church asking for advice? Until the church reconsiders the definition of ministry success and creates new scorecards to appropriately measure that success, it will continue to allocate vital resources in misguided directions. 7. Search for Third Places In a post-Christendom culture where more and more people are less and less interested in activities of the church, it is increasingly important to connect with people in places of neutrality, or common hang outs. In the book The Great Good Place author Ray Oldenburg identifies these places of common ground as third places. According to Oldenburg, third places are those environments in which people meet to interact with others and develop friendships. In Oldenburgs thinking our first place is the home and the people with whom we live. The second place is where we work and the place we spend the majority of our waking hours. But the third place is an informal setting where people relax and have the opportunity to know and be known by others. Third places might include the local coffee shop, hair salon, restaurant, mall, or fitness center. These places of common ground must take a position of greater importance in the overall ministry of the church as individuals begin to recognize themselves as missionaries sent into the local context to serve and share. In addition to connecting with people in the third places present in our local communities, we need to rediscover the topic of hospitality whereby our own homes become a place of common ground. Biblical hospitality is much more than entertaining others in our homes. Genuine hospitality involves inviting people into our lives, learning to listen, and cultivating an environment of mercy and justice, whether our interactions occur in third places or within our own homes. Regardless of our setting, we must learn to welcome the stranger. 8. Tap into the Power of Stories Instead of trying to define what it means to be missional, it is helpful to describe missional living through stories and images. Stories create new possibilities and energize people to do things they had not previously imagined. We can capture the missional

267 imagination by sharing what other faith communities are doing and illustrate what it looks like to connect with people in third places, cultivate rapport with local schools, and build life transforming relationships with neighbors. Moreover, we can reflect deeply on biblical images of mission, service and hospitality by spending time on passages such as Genesis 12:2, Isaiah 61:1-3, Matthew 5:43; 10:40; 22:39; 25:35; and Luke 10:25-37. 9. Promote Patience The greatest challenge facing the church in the West is the re-conversion of its own members. We need to be converted away from an internally-focused, Constantinian mode of church, and converted towards an externally-focused, missional-incarnational movement that is a true reflection of the missionary God we follow. However, this conversion will not be easy. The gravitational pull to focus all of our resources on ourselves is very strong. Because Christendom still maintains a stranglehold on the church in North Americaeven though the culture is fully aware of the death of Christendomthe transition towards a missional posture will take great patience; both with those inside and outside the church. Many inside the church will need considerable time to learn how to reconstruct church life for the sake of others. At the same time, the church will need to patiently love on people, and whole communities, that have increasingly become skeptical of the church.

Huntley

APPENDIX I DAMASCUS TRAVELERS INFORMATION Phone Call Talking Points The following talking points were utilized by the Discipleship Commission members who called and personally invited active congregants to participate in the Damascus Travelers groups: Small groups of about 5 people Men are with men, women are with women Groups meet biweekly. Groups are asked to read various book(s) and Scripture passages and to discuss the readings and their perspectives about them. The first book is The Centered Life, which talks about the difference God makes in our life when Christ is at the center of what we do and say. The hope is that we will deepen our faith as we listen and share our faith with one another. Groups begin to meet in May and the program formally ends in July. We also hope that everyone will participate in the May 21-22 congregational retreat, and that the Damascus Travelers groups will be part of the retreat experience. This is not required, just desired. We really believe that this is an opportunity to form new relationships and deepen existing ones. Our hope is that we will grow in faith as we participate in these conversations with one another.

268

269 Initial Group Instructions, Sent via Email on May 13, 2010 Basic Info 1. I have included a list of the Damascus Traveler groups that are assigned, as of May 13. Groups can grow and even split if they reach a size of six or seven people. In fact, you are encouraged to invite others to participate! 2. For each group, I am asking a person (designated with an asterisk * in the list of groups) to take the bull by the horns and contact folks to schedule a first meeting. Please try to meet by May 23. 3. For each meeting, I recommend choosing a facilitator. It would be a good idea to take turns facilitating at each meeting to prevent one person from seeming as though they are in charge. The facilitators job is to make sure there is equal time for everyone to speak and to share perspectives. Encourage quiet people to participate, and try to keep talkative people from dominating. The facilitator should also participate in an appropriate amount. 4. Remember to respect confidentiality. Do not share anything from the groups with spouses, friends or anyone else. It is important that we can trust and respect one another as we share intimate perspectives. 5. Please let me know when you plan to meet, just so that I know. Also, after you meet, it might be helpful/inspiring to have a person in your group share some insights or aha moments with everyone else. To do so, just send an email to Damascus-Travelers@googlegroups.com. Remember to respect confidentiality and only share appropriate info that the source specifically allows you to share with the rest of us. 6. Remember, there is not really a right way to meet as a group. This is not a program; it is an opportunity for you to grow in your faith. This is for you; make it fit you. Use it as a chance for you to connect with others, to grow as Christians, and to nurture one anothers faith. Talk about things that are important. Bring issues that impact your faith to the group so you can gather insights. Bear one anothers burdens. Pray for one another. Love one another. Have fun. Be a blessing and be blessed! 7. On a personal note, I must admit that this is something that is totally new and unfamiliar for me. We are learning and growing together. There are certainly ways that we can do this better, and there are ways that we will do this well. Thats OK, because we are doing this together and with God. I am absolutely convinced that God wants to be closer to us, and it excites me that we have this opportunity to grow together in our relationship with God. Doing things the right way, or

270 figuring out what is right, is less important than being faithful and growing in our relationship with God. I am confident that God will bless us with his presence in this journey with one another. That is why I think it is important to learn together (myself included). Any and all constructive conversation in this regard is highly encouraged! And I praise God that we have this opportunity to grow together. 8. It might be helpful for you to keep a journal. Write down things that occur to you either in your devotions or in your group. What is God saying to you? What is God saying to others? What are you wrestling with? What occupies your prayer? What do you hear in the daily Scripture readings? How is God challenging you to grow as a Christian? What makes you happy, afraid, concerned, peaceful, in love, sad, or any other emotion? Why do you feel that way? 9. Remember to keep up with the daily devotions and the other readings we have. It is a discipline. I truly believe that God will be present in unanticipated ways as we feast on Gods word together daily and consider our faith from these other perspectives. General Group Meeting Structure As a reminder, each meeting is flexible, subject to the consensus of the group. This is a general outline, an idea, for how you can structure your conversation as a group. Feel free to modify it as appropriate as you journey together on the road to Damascus! 10-15 minutes: Checking in, highs, lows and updates for prayer concerns since last meeting. 25-30 minutes: Discuss the readings for the two-week period. 10-15 minutes: Sharing, discernment, mutual conversation, prayer concerns. (Is there anything you are wrestling with in your life? Do you have any concerns or items for prayer? Is there anything the group can do to help bear a burden in your life or shed additional insight or wisdom?) 10-15 minutes: Prayer Partial Reading Schedule Centered Life, chapter 1 (This is a change, I had originally asked for the first two chapters)

May 10-23:

May 24-June 6: Centered Life, chapters 2 and 3. June 7-June 20: Centered Life, chapters 4 and 5.

271 Also, please immerse yourself in the Scriptures appointed for the Daily Lectionary in the ELW (the cranberry hymnal). A copy of the Daily Lectionary is attached to this email for your convenience. The overall structure for our planned time together is (and it is subject to change): May: Centered in Christ. Group discussion will focus on insights gleaned from The Centered Life. June: Faith practices. Specifically, this will include dwelling in the word, prayer, and other spiritual practices. Folks will be encouraged to individually participate in a faith experience, such as a prayer labyrinth. We will also finish The Centered Life. July: Relating to others, sharing faith and ourselves with others. We will likely look at excerpts from Unchristian and from Free of Charge, Giving and Forgiving in a Culture Stripped of Grace. Final Full Schedule, Sent via Email June 23, 2010 Greetings! I finished discerning the reading schedule, and I also wrote/found/edited discussion questions for the remainder of the readings. The schedule is below, as well as attached to this email as a .pdf file. The readings are also attached as .pdf files. Earlier, I mentioned that each group could continue at their own pace. That is still the case. After putting together the remainder of the reading schedule, however, I am torn between my enthusiasm for these readings (they are quite good, actually) and a desire to fulfill the promise to complete our time together by the end of July. With that in mind, I would like to ask that you prayerfully consider either 1. Stepping up your reading schedule to more closely reflect the original plan, or 2. Possibly meet once or twice in August to complete the reading schedule and conversations. I really think that you will appreciate the readings and conversation. Also, please remember that this week and next week is the time for participating in prayer with the Prayer Labyrinth. Again, it will be available for use in the Narthex this week and next week. There are also labyrinths available in Robertsdale and Mobile. Let me know if you need anything or if there is anything you would like to discuss. Peace, Pastor Mike <><

272 Full Reading Schedule May 10-23: Centered Life1, chapter 1

May 24-June 6: Centered Life, chapters 2 and 3. June 7-June 20: Centered Life, chapters 4 and 5. June 21-July 4: Celebration of Discipline2, chapters 1 and 3 July 5-July 18: unChristian3, chapters 1 and 2 July 19-Aug 1: unChristian, chapter 9 August 8: Meet Sunday after worship to discuss our experiences together as a large group.

Also, please immerse yourself in the Scriptures appointed for the Daily Lectionary in the ELW (the cranberry hymnal). A copy of the Daily Lectionary was distributed previously. The overall structure for our planned time together is: May: Centered in Christ. Group discussion will focus on insights gleaned from The Centered Life. June: Faith practices. Specifically, this will include dwelling in the word, prayer, and other spiritual practices, with excerpts from Celebration of Discipline. Folks will be encouraged to individually participate in a faith experience via a prayer labyrinth. We will also finish The Centered Life. July: Relating to others, sharing faith and ourselves with others. We will look at excerpts from Unchristian.

Fortin, The Centered Life.

Richard J Foster, Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth, 20th anniversary ed., 3rd ed., rev. ed ed. (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1998). David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons, unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity... and Why It Matters (Baker Books, 2007).
3

273 Discussion Questions June 21-July 4 Celebration of Discipline, Chapter 1 1. In the first paragraph, Foster talks about the need for deep people. Share an experience in your life when you had a deep, spiritual experience. What has happening when you had the experience? What impact did the experience have on you and your relationships with those around you? 2. What are some ways that you experience a deep relationship with God? What prevents you from going deeper? 3. What ingrained habits of sin (p. 4) bind you and keep you from deepening your faith? Talk about your struggle to move beyond will worship (p. 5) to enter the door of inner transformation (p. 6ff.). 4. In the section, The Way of Death: Turning the Disciplines into Laws, Foster discusses the dangers of practicing the Spiritual Disciplines externally but not internally. Is this a potential danger for you? Why or why not? Celebration of Discipline, Chapter 3 1. What is prayer for you? Describe your prayer life. When you pray, what is it like? 2. After reading chapter 3, in what ways do you hear the Holy Spirit speaking, calling you to grow and deepen your prayer life? 3. In this chapter, what spoke to you the strongest, and why? 4. Foster writes, Our prayer is to be like a reflex action to Gods prior initiative upon the heart (p. 42). Talk about this. What are some prior initiatives God is placing on your heart? 5. In the section, The Foothills of Prayer, Foster shares several possible means and topics for prayer. Which ones of these foothills resonated with you? What foothills would you add to the list?

274 July 5-18 unChristian, Chapter 14 1. Do you know any outsiders? Would you consider them to be friends? What do you think their perceptions are of Christians or Christianity? 2. The author contends that young people do not like to join things that seem easy, mainstream, or normal. What does that mean for Christianity today? How can we help people grasp that Christianity was never meant to be safe? 3. When a young Christian interacts with the world, they are much more likely to live within a truly pluralistic generation that is, many of his or her friends are not likely to be Christian. What should change, if anything, in the way we prepare to live in a pluralistic, diverse world? 4. How does the Bible teach Christians to behave toward outsiders? If the Bible describes your life as an open letter (2 Corinthians 3:2), what does it say about the God you serve? unChristian, Chapter 25 1. One outsider in the research made the following comment (p. 26): Christian means conservative, entrenched in their thinking, anti-gay, anti-choice, angry, violent, illogical, empire builders; they want to convert everyone, and they generally cannot live peacefully with anyone who does not believe what they believe. What is your reaction to this comment? Why do people come to these conclusions? 2. When Christians talk about being persecuted by todays American culture, do you think they are accurate or not? How does Jesus teaching about being persecuted line up with what people experience today? What is the biblical response to being hated by the world? What does this mean for the way you live the Christian life?

Adapted from unChristian Discussion Guide, 2007, 1, http://www.unchristian.com/downloads/uc_discussion_questions.pdf, (accessed June 22, 2010).
5

Adapted from Ibid.

275 3. What are some examples of ways Christians have become known for what they oppose? What is your church known for? Why does it have that reputation? 4. Do outsiders views matter to you? From the Perceptions of Christianity chart on page 28, discuss the unfavorable and favorable perceptions of Christianity and how they compare with your experiences engaging outsiders. 5. The book describes a movement of young Christians who are reluctant to admit they are Christians. They are not simply trying to be cool or popular, but they are concerned that the current way Christianity is expressed toward outsiders actually makes it more difficult to express what Jesus was about. Are you encouraged or troubled by this trend? In what situations are you more or less likely to say you are a Christian? 6. In what ways can your life help to redeem the term Christian? How can you be a Christian, rather than simply telling people you are one? What does a Christian who represents both truth and grace look and act like? July 19-August 1 unChristian, Chapter 96 1. Reflect on how you can engage criticism with the right perspective. Do you respond with anger and resentment? Or do you respond with understanding and compassion? 2. Cultivating deep relationships with fellow Christians and outsiders is a key element to turning the tide of negative perceptions. How much emphasis did Christ put on relationships in his own life? Discuss steps that will afford you opportunities to connect with outsiders. 3. Do you use clichs to express your faith? What clichs need to be shelved and what new phrases or statements can the Holy Spirit create in you? 4. How can your group or church begin to creatively express your faith in new and fresh ways?

Adapted from Ibid., 5.

276 5. Christ was an example of a true servant. How are you serving your fellow Christians and outsiders in your community? 6. Have someone in your group read aloud the Isaiah 58 passage. Discuss what it means to spend yourself on behalf of the poor.

Huntley

APPENDIX J PRAYER LABYRINTH HANDOUT

The Prayer Labyrinth


The labyrinth is an ancient symbol for the spiritual journey and is found in many cultures around the world. Utilized as a spiritual tool in the Christian faith since the fourth century, it has played a prominent role in the design of numerous cathedrals since the 12th century. Today, the labyrinth has been discovered by a whole new generation of Christ-followers who hunger after God and seek to deepen their spiritual life as they walk its winding paths. What is the Labyrinth? It is a single meandering path which ends in an inner circle. The same path must be followed to leave the labyrinth. Thus, it is not a maze with blind alleys, dead ends, and puzzles. For what is the Labyrinth used? The Labyrinth is designed for prayer and meditation. As a metaphor for the spiritual journey, the labyrinth suggests insights and analogies for each persons place on the spiritual path. The labyrinth is an effective tool for centering prayer- prayer which is essentially focused on listening to God. It can touch our sorrows and release our joys. How does the labyrinth work? Walking a labyrinth is a way to pray and meditate just as kneeling, folding ones hands, or bowing ones head are ways to pray. The labyrinth helps us center on God through the physical act of walking a set path that requires our attention. In the walking, distractions fall away and the mind is put at rest so that the spirit (rather than the mind) is able to lead the prayer for the labyrinth-walker. What are some of the benefits of walking the labyrinth? Mental and physical benefits can include relaxing and healing, as well as relief from stress and anxiety. Spiritual benefits can include deepening our relationship with God, gaining greater self-knowledge, and transforming our souls through communion with God.

277

278
How do I use the Labyrinth? Pause at the entrance and ask God to direct your prayer. Take a moment to reflect on where you are in your life. Bring a question or a problem which you would like to discuss with God, meditate on a Scripture, or simply be silent in your mind and let your senses become aware of the garden around you. Let the labyrinth set the pace of your walk. Let the labyrinth slow and calm you. If you meet someone else on the path, simply step to the side and allow them to pass. If you get confused about where you are, just keep going, and you will wind up at either the center of the labyrinth or its entrance. Pause as you exit and offer thanks to God for His presence with you in the labyrinth. Take some time to reflect on your labyrinth experience. You might wish to record your thoughts and experiences in a spiritual journal
From http://www.stlukesmethodist.org/labyrinth

If you haven't experienced a labyrinth before: 1. Take advantage of this opportunity to pray with your whole body. Give yourself permission to follow the intuitions and desires that come. Be open to your body expressing itself through gestures, movements, or the flow of tears. Dont be trapped by the thought, I cant do that, other people are watching! Other people are busy with their own labyrinth experiences. 2. You cant get lost on a labyrinth, but you can get turned around. If you move off the path and forget which way you were heading when you step back on, you will either end up at the threshold or the center. From there you can decide to continue or end your experience. 3. You may choose to walk the path from the threshold to the center and from the center back out, or to explore the labyrinth pattern in another way. For instance, you may wish to walk around the labyrinth, experience it by witnessing others as they move on it, sit beside it the possibilities are limitless! If an idea comes, try it! For some ideas see Living the Labyrinth. 4. Many have experienced the labyrinth as a mirror where it is possible to view ones life internally and externally at the same time. Open your heart; open your mind to what you may notice. Be compassionate with yourself; judging yourself isnt helpful! 5. Labyrinth experiences are seldom done when one leaves the pattern. You may wish to journal, walk around the labyrinth, use art supplies to explore the meanings of your time on the labyrinth, or sit quietly to let what has begun continue to grow. You may not become aware of all the meanings of your labyrinth encounter for hours, days or even months! 6. Witnessing others as they move in prayer can be a very meaningful way of readying yourself for your prayer on a labyrinth. One of the many gifts the labyrinth offers us is a place to practice watching others with eyes of prayer rather than eyes of judgment.

279
7. Before you enter, let go of any expectations about what may happen during your labyrinth experience. Pay attention whatever develops as you move in prayer. Try to let go of thoughts that distract you from being present to the experience. 8. It is often helpful to respond to your labyrinth experience by writing, drawing, or using some other creative process. Some prayerful ways of approaching your labyrinth experience: Caring God, [persons name] is in Questioning What is the next step? need What do I need? What is changing? Centering As you feel God's presence, move into it more deeply. Reflecting Read or recall a biblical story. Ponder its meanings as you Focusing A favorite name for God, i.e. move. Take your scriptures Jesus, Jesus, Jesus... with you. Stop anywhere to A spiritual word that has read and respond. significance for you, Love, love, love... Releasing Help me let go of... A short prayer, Please help! I forgive... Thy will be done I'm Searching God, I want to understand... available. Seeking Holy One, reveal Yourself to Moving Embody your sacred me. communication. No words are Singing Choose a favorite spiritual necessary. song. Sing it silently or out loud. Opening I'm here. Help me to stay open to all You wish to communicate. Transitioning Ever since Sarah died... Thank You, God, for the new Praising Speak God's name or attributes opportunity... with love and appreciation.
Excerpted from http://www.jillgeoffrion.com Jill K H Geoffrion Used with permission.

Huntley

APPENDIX K JUNE 14, 2010 COUNCIL MEETING LIMINALITY/COMMUNITAS HANDOUT From The Forgotten Ways by Alan Hirsch, pp. 219-221.1

Hirsch, The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church, 219-221.

280

281

Huntley

APPENDIX L HANDOUT DISTRIBUTED AT AUGUST 8, 2010 CONGREGATIONAL FORUM

Missional Vision Forum


What we are doing
What is our vision for ministry? What vision of ministry do we hold in common? What is Gods purpose for us as a congregation? What Biblical principles do we agree upon, to use as a foundation for shared decision-making in light of Gods purpose for us? Today we gather to discuss these questions, and others, as we discern and define a shared understanding of who we are as a congregation. This will then become a basis for deciding what we will do, and how we will organize what we do together in ministry. The Council will meet Monday (August 9) to reflect upon our conversations today to update the purpose statement and guiding principles. We then ask everyone to return on Sunday, August 22 for a special congregational wherein we will officially adopt these statements as our purpose and guiding principles. These statements come from months of conversation among [Living Water] members at a congregational retreat, at special Wednesday night forums through the month of June, and from several council meetings. They serve as a basis for our conversation today.

Suggested Purpose Statement


Gods purpose for [Living Water] is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves.

Suggested Guiding Principles


1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Faithfully living with Christ at the center. Prayerfully listening with open hearts and minds. Selflessly welcoming all without preconceptions. Courageously bearing our neighbors burdens. Relating to one another with respect and honesty. Boldly sharing our blessings with others.

282

Huntley

APPENDIX M PURPOSE STATEMENT AND GUIDING PRINCIPLES From Congregation Retreat Purpose Statement Gods purpose for our church is: Share the Good News. Show everyone the love of God. Guiding Principles 1. We are unconditionally loving. 2. We listen with an open mind. 3. We are faithfully trusting. 4. God is changing us. 5. Believing Jesus is our Lord. 6. Scripture is our rule of faith.

283

284 From Wednesday Evening Forums Purpose Statement Gods purpose for [Living Water] is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves. Guiding Principles 1. Faithfully living with Christ at the center. 2. Prayerfully listening with open hearts and minds. 3. Selflessly welcoming all without preconceptions. 4. Courageously bearing our neighbors burdens. 5. Respectfully seeking and speaking the truth. 6. Boldly sharing our blessings with others. From July Council Meeting (Adopted by the Congregation August 22, 2010) Purpose Statement Gods purpose for [Living Water] is to grow faith that moves us beyond ourselves. Guiding Principles 1. Faithfully living with Christ at the center. 2. Prayerfully listening with open hearts and minds. 3. Selflessly welcoming all without preconceptions. 4. Courageously bearing our neighbors burdens. 5. Relating to one another with respect and honesty. 6. Boldly sharing our blessings with others.

Huntley

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ambrose, Stephen E. Nothing Like It in the World: the Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad, 1863-1869. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000. Benson, Peter L., Michael J. Donahue, and Joseph A. Erickson. The Faith Maturity Scale: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Empirical Validation. Research in the Social Scientific Study of Religion 5 (1993): 171-174. Bosch, David Jacobus. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. American Society of Missiology Series 16. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1991. Braaten, Carl E. The Apostolic Imperative: Nature and Aim of the Churchs Mission and Ministry. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1985. Bright, John. The Kingdom of God, the Biblical Concept and Its Meaning for the Church. Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1953. Brisco, Brad. Transitioning from Traditional to Missional, May 20, 2010. http://missionalchurchnetwork.com/transitioning-from-traditional-to-missional/. (accessed May 21, 2010). Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2009. Daubert, Dave. Living Lutheran: Renewing Your Congregation. Lutheran voices. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2007. . Vision Discerning vs. Vision Casting: How Shared Vision Can Raise Up Communities of Leaders Rather Than Mere Leaders of Communities. In The Missional Church and Leadership Formation: Helping Congregations Develop Leadership Capacity, edited by Craig Van Gelder, 147-171. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2009. Dhavamony, Mariasusai. The Kingdom of God and World Religions. Vol. 31. Documenta Missionalia. Roma: Editrice Pontificia Universit Gregoriana, 2004. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Evangelical Lutheran Worship, Pew ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006. Find a Congregation - Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, n.d. http://www.elca.org. (accessed March 31, 2011). 285

286 Fortin, Jack. The Centered Life: Awakened, Called, Set Free, Nurtured. 1st ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2006. Foster, Richard J. Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth. 20th anniversary ed., 3rd ed., rev. ed ed. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1998. Greenwood, Davydd J., and Morten Levin. Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2007. Guder, Darrell L., and Lois Barrett, eds. Missional Church: a Vision for the Sending of the Church in North America. The Gospel and Our Culture Series. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998. Hirsch, Alan. The Forgotten Ways: Reactivating the Missional Church. Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2006. Hoffmeyer, John F. The Missional Trinity. Dialog 40, no. 2 (2001): 108-111. Hood, Ralph W., and Peter C. Hill. Measures of Religiosity. Birmingham: Religious Education Press, 1999. Horrell, J. Scott. Toward a Biblical Model of the Social Trinity: Avoiding Equivocation of Nature and Order. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 47, no. 3 (2004): 399-421. House, Random. Random House Websters Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition. 2nd ed. Random House Reference, 2002. Jacobson, Steve. Carrying Jackies Torch: The Players Who Integrated Baseball--and America. Lawrence Hill Books, 2007. Kinnaman, David, and Gabe Lyons. unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity... and Why It Matters. Baker Books, 2007. Kurtosis, n.d. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurtosis. (accessed November 29, 2010). Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, , and , Matthew E. Brashears. Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks Over Two Decades. American Sociological Review 71, no. 3 (2006): 353-375. Model Constitution for Congregations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), 2009. http://www.elca.org/Who-We-Are/Our-Three-Expressions/ChurchwideOrganization/Office-of-the-Secretary/Congregation-Administration/ModelConstitution-for-Congregations.aspx. (accessed June 29, 2010). Navone, John J. Self-Giving and Sharing: the Trinity and Human Fulfillment. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1989.

287 Newbigin, Lesslie. The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission. Revised. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995. Normal Distribution, n.d. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution. (accessed November 29, 2010). Rampersad, Arnold. Jackie Robinson: A Biography. 1st ed. New York: Knopf, 1997. Saarinen, Martin F. The Life Cycle of a Congregation. Bethesda: The Alban Institute, 2001 1986. Schowalter, Richard P. Igniting a New Generation of Believers. Ministry for the Third Millennium. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995. Shirky, Clay. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. New York: Penguin Press, 2008. Skew, n.d. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skew. (accessed November 29, 2010). St. John Lutheran Church History, n.d. http://www.stjohnroyal.org/history.html. (accessed March 31, 2011). The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2004. Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. Aldine Transaction, 1995. unChristian Discussion Guide, 2007. http://www.unchristian.com/downloads/uc_discussion_questions.pdf. (accessed June 22, 2010). Van Gelder, Craig. Rethinking Denominations and Denominationalism in Light of a Missional Ecclesiology. Word & World 25, no. 1 (2005): 23-33. . The Ministry of the Missional Church: a Community Led by the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007. Vedantam, Shankar. Social Isolation Growing in U.S., Study Says The Number of People Who Say They Have No One to Confide In Has Risen. Washington Post. Washington, DC, 2006. Volf, Miroslav. After Our Likeness: the Church as the Image of the Trinity. Sacra Doctrina. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1998. Wadsworth, Yoland. What is Participatory Action Research. Action Research International, November 1998. http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/pywadsworth98.html. (accessed March 4, 2010).

288 Wheatley, Margaret J. Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World. 2nd ed. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 1999.

S-ar putea să vă placă și