Complete Book of Everyday Christianity
An A-Z guide to following Christ in every aspect of Life. Here in one book, is the complete guide you need for every part of your life—family, money, relationships, job, church, entertainment and more. The editors, Robert Banks and R. Paul Stevens, combine decades of ministry, scholarship, church leadership, parenting, and other sorts of practical wisdom.VISION
As the word itself suggests, vision generally refers to that upon which individuals, families or members of an organization have “set their sights.” It could be seen as a synonym for “overall goal.” Some people keen on planning might prefer terms such as purpose or mission statement to vision, though others delight in distinguishing a hierarchy: vision and values; mission or purpose; goals, objectives and tasks, each item down the list becoming more narrow, concrete and short-term. For our purpose, we will put vision at the top of the list and mainly confine the discussion to organizational vision (see Calling; Family Goals).
Thus vision is the overarching sense of direction in an organization such as a local church, what it sees itself being in the future. This vision may be mystical and universal, such as Abraham’s anticipation of the heavenly Jerusalem: “For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Hebrews 11:10). Or the vision may be more immediate and even unique to a particular group, such as that which motivated the pioneering work among Gentiles by the nameless church planters in Acts 11:19-21.
The Necessity of Vision
The classic text is Proverbs 29:18: “Where there is no vision, the people perish” (KJV). However, as the New International Version and other modern translations show, the vocabulary and context of this verse have more to do with obeying revealed moral law than with being faithful to something God has in store for us (Ephes. 2:10). If vision is no more than upholding virtues or living out general biblical values such as the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19-20), then there is little more to say. The very quality of these mandates as revelation establishes their central validity.
However, the Bible clearly shows that more particular visions are possible and useful and perhaps even essential. Admittedly, the evidence mostly relates to individual mandates, for example, Jesus’ focusing on Jewish evangelism (Matthew 15:21-28) and Paul’s commissioning at his conversion (Acts 9). But there are hints that corporate visions also have a place. Jesus’ disciples become involved in evangelizing the Jews (Matthew 10:5-6, 23). The churches in Jerusalem and Antioch establish different ministries, for example, Antioch’s commitment to giving (Acts 11:29); Paul’s coworkers endorse his vision to take the gospel to Europe and accompany him to fulfill it (Acts 16:9-10).
A little reflection leads to the same conclusion about the need for group vision. No one organization can do everything, and consequently everyone cannot do the same thing (or something important will be neglected). The big question is, How do we find out what exactly we as a particular group are to be and do? Before attempting to answer this, we must address another question, Ought visions be highly focused or multifaceted? An argument could be made for a sharp focus, but there probably should be a place for the organization that casts a broad and varied net. To use Isaiah Berlin’s imagery from his famous essay on Tolstoy’s view of history, there is room for both hedgehogs and foxes in the kingdom:
There exists a great chasm between those, on the one side, who relate everything to a single central vision . . . and, on the other side, those who pursue many ends, often unrelated and even contradictory. . . . The first kind of intellectual and artistic personality belongs to the hedgehogs, the second to the foxes. (Berlin, p. 3)
The Source of Vision
A strict denominational authority or a strong hierarchy in a parachurch organization might seek to impose a vision on a local group. Or, if not the vision itself, at least the components that shape a vision may be laid down by the “powers that be.” But this is more like the blinders imposed on a horse drawing a cart rather than true vision. Vision, to be our own, needs to come from within the group (even if God is the ultimate source).
This leads us to the second possibility-that a vision will impress itself on a local church or parachurch group. This brings us close to the other major meaning of vision: a picture revealed to the mind or spirit by the Holy Spirit. We see this phenomenon many times in the book of Acts, for example, the church of Antioch being told by the Spirit to set Barnabas and Paul apart “for the work to which I have called them” (Acts 13:2; see also Acts 16:9; Acts 20:22). In Acts 13:3 we also see the role that fasting and prayer might have in a vision for the church. Those who turn to God with a pure, seeking heart will see him (Matthew 5:8) and also “see” the future he has for them.
Some would like to drive a wedge between the previous source of vision and the final one, imagining or constructing a vision with the creative mind of Christ given to us. However, the wedge is unnecessary: God works within the freedom he has risked providing to us. As with any human activity submitted to him, God is quite capable of shaping the planning process that leads to a sense of vision, and he is quite capable of making corrections if a group gets off track (see Guidance). This is especially true if that group is prayerful and open to more specific visions from the Spirit. Of course, every organization’s vision should also be tested against God’s supreme and enduring revelation in the biblical record. That being said, how does a group go about building a vision?
Gaining a Corporate Vision
The first step is to decide who will be involved in the process and how they will be involved. Such decisions are very much shaped by the leadership culture and official polity (government) of the organization. Some groups believe that a single visionary will receive direction, perhaps while on a personal prayer and planning retreat. Others will adapt this model to vest vision shaping in a group of leaders or members of a committee. Still other groups will go for a bottom-up rather than top-down approach, looking for consultation, if not consensus, within the whole body. Here the leader becomes facilitator or equipper rather than prophet or entrepreneur.
There are three components or raw materials that feed into the chosen process: the organization’s location, congregation and tradition. First, as a general rule, a group’s direction in mission and ministry will be shaped by where they are placed in the world, both geographically and socially. It is true in this age of global travel and communication that a group can have an impact well beyond its borders, but our prime responsibility still rests with our neighbors at home and at work. The concept of parish (a word derived from a root meaning “temporary colony”) is a powerful one: penetrating the area where God has planted you, meeting its needs and taking its people, institutions and culture captive for Christ.
The second component is the congregation, the resource of the body of Christ (always more important than your building or budget). What gifts are found among your people, and what burden has God laid on each heart? Is it a gift of preaching and teaching, as seen in Timothy (1 Tim. 4:13-14). Is there a leaning towards planting seeds or watering them (1 Cor. 3:6)? Where do spiritual gifts complement and the passions reinforce one another? When a vision is shared by many members, it is a good indication of its relevance to the whole organization. Wise elders, pastors or church boards will not ignore their flock as they attempt to identify their organization’s direction. For example, with a bottom-up approach they may allow individuals with a passion and maturity to “vision-cast” before the congregation to see if anyone is drawn into the proposed cause.
The final raw material is the tradition of the group. It is fashionable to denigrate tradition today, to leave old wineskins behind. Though it is important to be open to change, abandoning past strengths and emphases too quickly may be unwise. Why not continue to make the unique contribution-theologically, spiritually and practically-that you have made in the past? There must be a very good reason to do otherwise. As with personality types, it is good to have different kinds of Christian organizations. We must be very certain before we assume God is asking us to specialize in radically new ways.
The Application of Vision
Having discovered or assembled a vision through a process of planning, we may ask, What is its value? First, a vision is the basis for further strategic planning. According to one planning paradigm, vision leads to a mission statement, which leads to goals and objectives. Second, it allows a group to be clear about what it is not doing. The selection of appropriate activities for the group must be accompanied by saying no to the many distractions that will come along. The negative here simply means concentrating group resources on projects that contribute to the particular vision of the group. Christians have a hard time saying no, especially to otherwise worthy projects. But even Jesus, the one who came to save the whole world, guarded his priorities.
Another function of a clearly articulated vision is to remind and reinspire. Visions can erode, perhaps as people become weary, or they can be corrupted, perhaps as people become cynical. Initial enthusiasm and idealism can give way to the caution and pragmatism of those with positions to protect. As with individuals, so with organizations: “Let’s just do something, anything, and then let’s lie down for a while.” That is the time to pull out the vision statement and be reconnected to what was your pulse beat. Hezekiah learned the value of reconnecting to an original heart, in his case a vision of worship in the temple (2 Chron. 29). Similarly, Josiah instituted renewal based on the vision of the rediscovered Book of the Covenant (2 Chron. 34). Returning to roots, to original mandates, can be very life giving.
Josiah’s action leads to one last question, Is an organizational vision static? It may be, but it is unlikely. Even if a church does not change location or a parachurch agency move to a new mission field, the target group may shift in composition. Many churches have had to struggle greatly with a changing parish profile; most of the struggle comes from not recreating their vision. Likewise, congregational makeup will change naturally (and sometimes unnaturally through schism). Further, as a matter of course, a group’s tradition will evolve gradually with each new experience. Vision must move accordingly, though the change may not be dramatic. In fact, students of change agency maintain that dramatic shifts of vision are usually not wise. Finally, every vision must be held loosely, with open hands, for our God is one who makes all things new: God could have a few surprises in store for your group no matter how comprehensive your vision setting may be.
References and Resources
I. Berlin, The Hedgehog and the Fox (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, Publisher, 1978); D. E. Galloway, 20 20 Vision (Portland, Ore.: Scott Publishing, 1986).
-Dan Williams
Originally published in The Complete Book of Everyday Christianity by Robert Banks and R. Paul Stevens. ©1997 by Robert Banks and R. Paul Stevens. Used by permission of InterVarsity Press, P.O. Box 1400, Downers Grove, IL 60515, USA. www.ivpress.com
Print
Email
