The FaithX Project

Strategic Missional Consulting

Getting Outside the Building: Missional Context Analysis

The third in a series of blog posts on Vision-Guided Experimentation for faith communities

Click here to read the previous post

By Ken Howard

Vision Guided Experimentation (or VGE) is an emergent learning process which faith-based communities and organizations can use to help them quickly and effective adapt to rapid change while remaining sharply focused on their overarching vision: the seminal organizational belief out which all other organizational beliefs and values flow, which we called Minimum Viable Belief. In the last two posts we discussed the first step in VGE: discerning your congregation’s MVB. In this post, we turn to the next step in the process of Vision Guided Experimentation, which we call Missional Context Analysis.

Missional Context Analysis is about discerning the qualities, needs, strengths, and aspirations of the communities you are called to serve. I use the term “communities” rather than “congregations” as a reminder that faith communities are not just called to serve the people who show up for worship (the community inside the building), but also to serve their neighborhoods around them, and perhaps even the world as a while (the community outside the building). I use the term “missional” as a reminder that God is already at work in the world around us, and that a large part of our discernment is about learning the mission that God may already have in store for us with respect to our neighborhoods.

Speaking to business entrepreneurs, Steve Blanks once said, “No facts exist inside the building – only opinions… so get the hell outside.”[i]

In other words, it’s natural to trust our own assumptions, but we cannot make products our customers want and need unless we “get outside the building” and test our assumptions about what our customers want and need by actually asking or observing them.

Faith-based communities and organizations face the same dilemma, intensified by our tendency toward traditions. We stay inside our worship centers and offices, creating programs we believe our inner and outer communities want, without ever going out and asking.  So our next step is to “get outside the worship center” both figuratively and literally: deriving hypotheses from our MVB, refining those hypotheses against neighborhood demographic and lifestyle data, and then testing those refined hypotheses via direct interaction with the real people behind the numbers.

Essentially, there are three sets of questions we want to ask about our neighborhoods:

  1. Who are the people who make up the community? (Cue the “Sesame Street” theme)
  2. What are the issues the community is facing?
  3. What resources does the community have to deal with those issues?

Missional Context Analysis is crucially important, because the quality of the answers we get when we test your hypotheses depends the clarity and specificity of the hypotheses themselves. We begin by Getting Outside the Worship Center figuratively, exploring how to clarify implications for worship services, spiritual formation programs, congregational and community engagement, and administration. Then we work on Getting Outside the Worship Center literally, mapping out the populations, needs, and assets of the communities we serve, both inside and outside of our organization.

In the language of many Christian (and other) faith traditions, the practice of Missional Context Analysis is related to the idea of “call,” or the particular mission God has in store for a particular faith-based community or organization. While call can be independent of and preliminary to needs of those who we serve, understanding their need can help to refine a faith community’s sense of call. Getting outside the building can help the community inside the building get a clearer idea how God is already at work in the community outside the building, and how their sense of call relates to the ways that God is already at work there.

In future posts we will dig deeper into how to actually conduct a Missional Context Analysis and the tools that are available to do it, including our own soon-to-be released online missional context analysis tool, which we call Datastory for Faith Communities.                                                                                                                                        

[i] Steven G. Blank, Four Steps to the Epiphany (Raleigh, NC: Lulu.com, 2006), 7.

MVB: Seven Steps to an Enduring Vision

By Ken Howard

Write the vision; make it plain… so that a runner may read it.
Habakkuk 2:2

This is the second of two blog posts on Minimum Viable Belief (click here for previous post), the term I have used to describe the driving vision of a faith-based community or organization. Minimum Viable Belief – or MVB – is the seminal belief or value that is so deep, so shared, so core to the community that it is the source of all other beliefs, values, and actions of the organization. It is the core source of meaning and purpose to the community and its members. Simply put, it is the “Why of Whys.” MVB is a vision that is so clear and plain that it creates and sustains an enduring organizational culture that can guide a faith community throughout its life, even when the community encounters turbulent times.

So far so good! But how does a faith-based community or organization discover, articulate, and communicate its MVB?

There are seven steps involved in discerning your community’s MVB:

  1. Naming
  2. Calling
  3. Clarifying
  4. Seeing
  5. Dreaming
  6. Visioning
  7. Proclaiming

Allow me walk you through each of the seven steps, while providing real-life examples from my own former congregation, a mature startup in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C. [Read more…]

Minimum Viable Belief: Discovering Your “Why Of Whys”

Minimum Viable Belief

By Ken Howard

Okay. Let’s review.

Early this summer I published a research paper entitled, “The Religion Singularity: A Demographic Crisis Destabilizing and Transforming Institutional Christianity,” in which I described an emerging phenomenon in which the total numbers of denominations and worship centers (local faith communities) worldwide is growing and splintering considerably faster than the total number of Christians, driving relentlessly downward the average number of Christians per denomination and worship center. This, in turn, will render both institutions unsustainable in their current forms by the end of this century. Ultimately, denominations may die out due to their lack of capacity for experimentation and change. However, local faith communities may be able to transform themselves into a new expression of Church. To do that, they need to develop the capacity to experiment with new ways of being Church without sacrificing the heart of Christianity. So how do they develop those capacities? That was the topic of last week’s blog post, in which I outlined the seven practices I call Vision Guided Experimentation. Today, we explore the first practice, Minimum Viable Belief (MVB), which underpins the practices that follow it.

Where there is no vision, the people perish.
(Proverbs 29:18)

This verse from Proverbs is the reason why the first practice of Vision-Guided Experimentation is so important. Minimum Viable Belief (MVB) is all about vision. It’s about getting to your faith-based community’s “Why of Why’s” – the seminal belief from which all other organizational beliefs and values stem – so that you can make its vision so clear, core, and compelling that it becomes the primary motivator and compass for all members of the community, so that it both motivates them to get up in the morning and keeps them going all day no matter what frustrations they face.

Minimum Viable Belief is the overarching, transcendent, and seminal reason for your faith community’s existence, driving every other practice. It is a transcendent vision about how that organization wants to change the world, a vision so meaningful to the members of the community that they would rather fail in the service of that vision than succeed in the service of anything else. In the Christian tradition – as well as some others – we define this as a sense of call: an clear and overriding sense of what God desires for a faith community or a faith-based organization (or an individual) to do or to be.

Minimum Viable Belief is also about creating a organizational culture that is experimental, creative, and flexible, and yet grounded, focused, and faithful. MVB allows the community and its members to navigate around massive and complex obstacles while continuing to tack towards its ultimate goal. It empowers startup communities and organizations to be sufficiently self-directing, self-correcting, and tenacious that they can survive the departures of their founders and their transition to their community’s full scale.

A problem most faith communities have is that most of the time we never get past asking ourselves the question, “What?,” as in, “what programs should we offer?” And if we are going to do any tweaking of anything we do, it comes up here. Once in a while we dive a little deeper, asking, “How?,” as in, “How do we get this approved?” Unfortunately, we seldom get to “Why?,” as in “What is our motivation for doing this in the first place?” I say unfortunately, since just asking Why once is not enough: we tend to have a different Why for every What. Rather, we have to keep asking Why until we get to the “Why of Whys.” Exactly how you get to that transcendent Why is what this and the next blog post are about. [Read more…]

Midrash: Ancient Bible Study for a Postmodern World – Part 2

By Ken Howard

Part 2: Jots and Tittles – Applying Midrash to the Words of Jesus

In my previous blog post on Midrash, I reflected on the dilemma in which the Church finds itself today: attempting to apply univocal, linear approaches to the study and interpretation of Scripture in a world in which both science and theology have discredited Enlightenment Modernism’s promise that human reason could arrive at objectively certain, universal truths in all areas of human knowledge, including religion.

To extricate ourselves from this predicament, I suggested, we need a deeper approach to the study of Scripture – one that would allow us to “triangulate in on the truth” by harnessing the Bible’s multiple voices – and that such an approach already existed in the ancient Jewish method of Bible study and interpretation known as Midrash, the workings of which I then set about to explain.

Having set forth the principles and the process of Midrash, I would like to invite my readers to participate in applying them. Over the next couple of weeks, I’d like to walk through the steps of Midrash with time in between each of the steps for your observations, comments, and questions. The text I have in mind is very familiar – the “jot and tittle” passage from Matthew, in which Jesus says “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass , one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Mt. 5:17-18 – KJV).

To review, the four steps of Midrash are:

  1. Peshat (lit. Simple). Read the text for its simplest, most literal meaning.
  2. Remez (lit. Hint). Rather than seeking to avoid or rationalize what appear to be contradictions or textual errors, seek them out as hints of deeper meaning.
  3. Drash (lit. Investigation). Use imagination to explore all possible meanings of the text.
  4. Sod (lit. Secret). Meditate on the mysteries revealed through the Drash and open ourselves to surprising revelations.

In today’s post I will walk us through the first two steps of Midrash.

Midrash on Matthew 5:17-18

Step 1: Peshat (Simple).

Since the first step In Midrash is examining the simple meaning of the text, let’s establish the literal definitions of a few key words:

  • Destroy (vs. 17). From the Greek katalu’sai. Literally, to dissolve, to disunite, or to break down into component parts.
  • The Law (vss. 17 & 18). From the Greek nomon. Corresponds to the Hebrew ha-Torah. Literally, Law or Instruction. Refers to the portion of the Hebrew Scriptures known as The Law (i.e., the five books of Moses).
  • The Prophets (vs. 17). From the Greek propheta). Corresponds to the Hebrew ha-Navim. Refers to the portion of the Hebrew Scriptures know as The Prophets.
  • Fulfill (vs. 17). From the Greek plarosai. Literally, “to fill completely.”
  • Jot (vs. 18). From the Greek iota. Smallest letter in the Greek alphabet. Corresponds to the Hebrew yod, the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet.
  • Tittle (vs. 18). From the Greek keraia. Literally, little horn. Often translated as “the smallest stroke of a letter” (e.g., a serif, a breathing mark in Greek, the dot on the “i” in English). Corresponding mark in Hebrew is unclear.
  • Fulfilled (vs. 18). From the Greek genatai. Literally, brought into existence or being.

Step 2: Remez (Hint).

Our familiar exegetical methods tend to assume that a specific Biblical text must have a single, definitive meaning. Therefore, when we come upon what looks like a contradiction or textual error, depending upon where we fall on the conservative-liberal theological continuum, we are predisposed to make one of two choices. Those of us on the conservative “side” tend to ignore or rationalize contradictions in order to harmonize them, while those of us on the liberal “side” tend to discount the authenticity or authority of the passage.

Midrash considers such choices as a false dichotomy and avoids them both. Rather than seeking to avoid or rationalize apparent contradictions/errors, or discount the text because of them, Midrash assumes that God meant them to be there as hints to make us dig deeper. So let’s track down a few of those “contradictions,” shall we?

Within the Passage. There are several apparent inconsistencies within the two verses we are examining.

  • Mt. 5:17 – Jesus lists only two of three parts of Hebrew Scripture:The Law and The Prophets. The section of known as The Writings (ha-Ketuvim) – roughly equivalent to what Christians know as the Psalms, the Proverbs, and the books of Wisdom – is omitted.
  • Mt. 5:18– Jesus lists only The Law, dropping any reference to The Prophets.
  • Mt. 5:17-18– The words translated as “fulfill” and “fulfilled” have different meanings: “to fill to the full” and “to bring into existence or being,” respectively.
  • Mt. 5:18– The literal meaning of “tittle” is unclear. We do not know its equivalent mark in the Hebrew and Aramaic with which Jesus and the Gospel writer were familiar.

In the Context of the Passage. After making a statement that appears to rule out making the smallest of changes to any text, Jesus appears to do exactly that, making them more specific and strict.

  • Mt. 5:21-22: You have heard it said…that you shall not kill…but I say…
  • Mt. 5:27-28: You have heard it said…that you shall not commit adultery…but I say…
  • Mt. 5:33-34: You have heard it said…that you shall not make false oaths…but I say…

In Comparison to Related Passages. In the Gospel according to Mark, Jesus appears to go even further in amending the Law, overturning the entire section dealing with kosher food laws.

  • Mk. 7:19: Thus [Jesus] made all foods clean.

Examine the passage yourself. You may well find other apparent contradictions, omissions, or errors that I overlooked. If you do, I hope you will include them in any comments you care to make.

Step 3: Drash (lit. Investigation).

This step is your chance to fully engage this passage. In the step of Midrash known as Drash or Investigation, we are called upon to use our imagination and creativity in order to explore all possible meanings of the text.

So here are your instructions:

  1. Review all of the apparent contradictions/omissions/errors I identified above along with any you have spotted yourself.
  2. Assume that every apparent contradiction/omission/error is inspired: that God caused them to be placed there as hints to spur your curiosity and imagination, and to drive you toward a deeper, broader, and more complete understanding of God’s word.
  3. Using your imagination and creativity, brainstorm all of the possible meanings of the text.

When you have completed these three steps, I hope you will share your thoughts with me. After all, Drash is at its best when it is done as communal dialogue.

I look forward to Midrashing with you!

 

“Jonah in Prison” by Alma Sheppard-Matsuo (a visual midrash)
Originally posted on August 13, 2012 on the blog “Paradoxical Thoughts”

From Certainty to Faith

From Certainty to Faith

By River Damien Sims

The first twenty five years of our life were filled with certainty. We knew who God was and that “He” made us in a certain way, no matter what. But in that certainty we were filled with fear, depression, and a horrible sense of being the “bad boy” because we were  queer. The church in which we were raised, educated, and ordained told us we  had to be straight or we were a “bad” boy, in fact we were “intrinsically evil.” The time came when we expressed those fears to our district superintendent and he reinforced our “badness” when he  kicked us  out of the ministry. Thus we lost all friends, all means of making a living, but most importantly that which gave meaning and purpose to our life—God.

It was on the streets of Hollywood as a whore, and terribly alone that we began to understand God in Christ  as an always changing and moving, disturbing, and a totally grossing Mystery. All the gods–straightness, wealth, Jesus is the only One, white is best—all failed us. The following of the rules, being dressed in a certain way, being nice to the right people—all failed. They blocked the image of God in life. It was only in unmasking the image of the God who lives in our heart that we could see the panoply of the god images surrounding us, and come to an understanding of the process of life. It was coming to that understanding that we understood that God has always been in our life–from the moment our mother’s egg was fertilized and God knew who we were, and loved us for who we are. Being queer was a gift from that Mystery. God is in us now. And in that evolution growth became the purpose of life. Sister Joan Chittister says that “creation is the process of human growth, and that life is not a program of expectations, and the past is no longer a template forever, but the  God of the future, beckoning us beyond ourselves, beyond the present into the eternal growth of God.” What is true of the individual is true of us corporately as well. God was no longer a certainty, but a mystery and our journey became one of faith. Holiness lies in the journey of faith, of questioning, and listening to that inner voice.

We have never returned to the “organized” church because it holds certainty as one of its “gods”, but we have moved out into the Mystery.  In that Mystery we have learned obedience to that which is within us, to the One who created us, guides us; we have learned humility, that we are simply creatures of the Mystery, one among many, we have learned to come to view  silence as our friend, to spend time simply in waiting, listening and  praying, and from that silence we have learned our call to hospitality, to serving others, and that we are one with others, no divisions, simply children of the same Mystery. Community is found in  loving our neighbor as ourselves without regard to race, creed, age, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation or any other label we choose to place on others.

For us that Mystery is found to be  best expressed in a  creed prepared for children by the World Council of Churches:

“We believe in God, who loves us and wants us to love each other. This is our God.

We believe in Jesus, who cared for children and held them in his arms. He wanted a world where every one could live together in peace. This is Jesus Christ.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, who keeps working with us until everything is good and true. This is the Holy Spirit.

We can be the church, which reminds people of God because we love each other. This we believe.”

And in a summary of our own mission in life we prepared during our time on the streets in which we said:

“The best summary for my mission in life can be found in the statement that: ‘Obedience to Christ does not consist in engaging in propaganda, nor even in stirring people up, but in being a living mystery. It means to live in such a way that one’s life would not make sense if God did not exist.'”  To be a living mystery means to practice the works of mercy, and in the words of Dorothy Day “to live to the point of folly.” Or in the words of Toyohiko Kawaga “I am a free lance, a tramp, a vagabond. I must go until Christ’s work is done. I go like the wind.”

Deo Gratias! Thanks be to God!

Fr. River Damien Sims, sfw, D.S.T., D.Min. candidate

River in ClericalsFr. River Damien Sims is a member of the FaithX Network and an occasional contributor The Future of Faith. River is   a priest in the Society of Franciscan Workers, an independent Catholic affiliation. He is the director of Temenos Catholic Worker, in San Francisco, California, USA, where he works with street youth and homeless. He has earned BA, MDiv, and Doctor of Sacred Theology degrees, and has received a certificate in spiritual direction from the Vincentian Renewal Center in Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

The FaithX Project, Inc. is 501(c)3 nonprofit organization with a religious and charitable purpose operated as a ministry by the Rev. Ken Howard under an extension of ministry from the Episcopal Bishop of Washington.