Reflections
THEOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS ON THE MINISTRY OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD
By Robert Banks
Introduction
In this paper I do not intend to go over well-established theological ground, but rather will attempt to occupy some less explored territory. So, for example, I simply assume that:
- All the people of God are involved in ministry and that this primarily takes place in the world;
- All those involved in ministry, whether ordained or not, are part of the laos of God.
Assuming the first does not mean that I regard the contribution of the people of God to ministry in the church as anything less than fundamental, and I will say more about that later. Assuming the second does not mean that I regard ordination, as presently practiced, as unproblematic, and I shall take up that issue briefly in my conclusion.
I could add two further assumptions to those I have mentioned:
Differences in ministry are mainly due to differences in experience, maturity and gifts;
Differences between the roles of the people of God are functional rather than in character.
On these there is now considerable, if not complete, theological consensus.
I prefer to focus on five matters centrally connected with the ministry of the laity. Since I . . . [have] live[d] and work[ed] in Los Angeles, in terms of this conference I address these questions as a representative of the "North," and will frame my remarks within that context. (I do remind you, however, that originally I come from Australia, the last excolony of "the North" before "the South" Pole!) [Robert returned home to Australia permanently in 1999]
How do the people of God discover their ministry from God?
Only a minority experience what they would describe as a "call" from God to a particular type of work. I want to argue that more people are drawn into a specific form of work by God than are aware of it. What gets in the way of their seeing this is the language of "call" that is symbiotically related to the language of "ministry."
When we look for the roots of this notion, we find "call" referred to in three ways in the biblical writings:
It is used of God’s appeal to us in and through the Gospel
It is used of God’s request that we live out our obedience to the Gospel in whatever situations it finds us
It is used of God’s invitation to take up a specific task.
This third form of the idea, which is so closely connected to our understanding of "ministry," has its roots in passages like Isaiah’s well known vision of God, as well as similar examples of a divine "call" to such figures as Moses, Samuel, Jonah, Jeremiah and, of course, Paul. On the basis of this usage, many have drawn the conclusion people have only been recruited into ministry if they have had some dramatic encounter with God, whether through a vision, prophecy, challenging address, text of Scripture, or an inner voice. This idea of call is sometimes broadened to include the pattern of surrounding circumstances, or the church’s endorsement of a person’s qualities and gifts. Even so, in most cases the call is to so called "full-time" ministry, in a church, parachurch or missionary setting. It is not surprising, then, that most Christians, especially those whose main focus is the marketplace, conclude that they do not have a ministry, but only an occupation. As a result they feel they are second class citizens of the kingdom of God, overshadowed by those who are involved in a "real" ministry.
But this is a very narrow reading of the evidence. Return for a moment to the biblical figures mentioned above. They all have something in common, namely, they are either prophets or religious leaders. What about biblical figures involved in other kinds of work, especially those in what we would term a "marketplace" setting? If it sounds strange to refer to the Bible in this connection, let me suggest that at least we might expect some consistency in the way God operates in people’s lives in the past and present. If not, why do we consult biblical texts and preach or speak from them? I am not wanting to use the Bible as a kind of divine textbook here, but rather see whether there are fruitful analogies between the way God worked earlier in human history and the way God works today.
Consider, then, the top civil servant in Egypt (Joseph); two directors of operations during the construction of a sacred building (Bezalel and Ohaliab); a young ethnic woman who became the royal consort in Persia (Esther); a regional governor in charge of reconstructing a city (Nehemiah); and a married couple running a family business (Priscilla and Aquila). It would not be difficult to name others, such as four young bureaucrats in the making (Daniel and company); an young immigrant woman who was a farmhand (Ruth); a military commander (Joab); and a highly valued dressmaker and community worker (Tabitha).
The ways in which these were drawn into the positions from which they contributed most significantly to fulfilling God’s historical purposes, were extremely varied. They include the consequences of other’s actions, surprising events, personal gifts and application, recruitment by a superior, winning a beauty contest, concern and prayer for one’s people, willingness to meet new challenges, taking a counter-cultural position, following the advice of a mother_in-law, etc. Though here and there a dream plays a general part in their life story, or God intimates to someone else the role they should play, in none of these stories do we find a dramatic encounter with God that has the nature of a "call." Yet these people seemed to have— or to have developed— a sense that they were in the position God wanted.
William Diehl provides an interesting case study that is relevant to this. In preparation for his book In Search of Faithfulness: Lessons from the Christian Community, (Philadelphia Fortress, 1987), he surveyed almost two hundred Christian CEO’s to find out what part their religious convictions played in their daily work. The decisive factor was whether the person concerned had a sense of being in the right place for God. Where this was present such a person scored consistently higher on various indices of Christian commitment, e.g., prayer and meditation, involvement in the church, personal maturity, financial generosity, seeking justice in the workplace. Though, like Diehl himself, these people had not experienced any specific call from God, they had got beyond this conception.
This is why we need to find other words than "call" to describe the way God brought such people into the place they should occupy: perhaps the language of "drawing," "superintending," or "organizing," or older terms such as leading, "guiding" or "directing." If an image is preferable, then rather than focusing on hearing the "voice" of God, perhaps we should talk about discerning the "hand" of God in one’s life story.
How much does the ordinary work of God’s people reflect God’s work?
The connection between divine and human work, particularly the everyday work of the people of God, has not been strenuously explored. One way of testing this—and it is only one—is to take the traditional ways of describing God’s work and asking how much ordinary human work has been linked up with them. The answer is: only to some of them, and only then to a certain extent. Let us take some of these divine job descriptions, beginning with those where overlap between divine and human activity has been given greater attention. Again, if this seems a way of approaching the issue which few contemporary lay people would find relevant, consider it a cross-cultural thought experiment which might help us look at our present situation in a new light, though I would regard it as having more to offer than that.
The God who brings Justice
Though talk of God as Judge, or establisher of Righteousness, beyond giving people their fair redress or due, and though human justice constantly fails to live up to this standard, there is a valid connection between the two. In some measure the work of legislators and those who draw up government regulations, judges and attorneys, supervisors and paralegal workers, reflect this. It is not a slip on Paul’s part when he describes those who seek to reward good and punish evil as "ministers of God" (Rom. 12.4). So, in a different way, do social activists, minority advocates, consumer protectors and others. But in many other types of work, including the home, bringing justice is an aspect or dimension of what is done, when people apply equitable rules, avoid discrimination, or adopt affirmative action.
The God who cares
In linking the activity of the Divine Carer with its human counterpart, one thinks immediately of what are broadly termed the helping professions, including doctors, nurses and paramedics, psychologists, therapists, community workers, home visitors, personnel directors and welfare agents. It is often these kinds of work, which are considered most compatible with Christian service in the world. In addition to these full-time occupations, many people are involved in some kind of "helping" work in a part-time capacity, or this is a constitutive part of their regular job responsibilities, whether outside or inside the home.
The God who Creates
Those in the arts have often been regarded as reflecting something of the Divine Creator, even when they don’t acknowledge that God is the source of their inspiration. In other occupations where inventiveness, craft, design, or construction is central, we also frequently talk about creativity: musicians, painters, sculptors, poets, novelists, film-makers, interior designers, dressmakers, landscape gardeners, builders, architects as well as potters, metalworkers, jewelers and other craft-persons. But any occupation or activity that has a touch of originality about it reflects something of God’s creative work. Many homemakers, office workers and factory hands have found ways of gracing aspects of their work with a creative touch.
Alongside these more obvious correlations between divine and human work, other areas of God’s activity and ours can be compared. For example:
The God who Provides
The connection between this and our work is frequently overlooked or minimized. Divine Providence includes all that God does to maintain the universe and human life in an orderly and beneficial fashion. It involves conserving, sustaining and replenishing the world rather than creating or redeeming it. Many types of human work have something of the same character. Civil servants, city officials, those working for public utilities, entrepreneurs, service occupations, and trades-people all fall into this category. So, too, does the work of the trash collector, cab or bus driver, garage mechanic, cleaner, janitor and plumber. At times we literally "thank God" for such people when we need them and they appear on the scene, or even refer to them as "angels in disguise." Our language is appropriately theological here, however unconsciously. But wherever there is an element of "doing the groundwork," "keeping the machinery going" or "fixing what is broken," providential work of some kind is involved.
The God who Reveals
Throughout the Bible God is constantly described as the Revealer, the one who unveils certain mysteries and enlightens us about the truth. This is a fundamental dimension of God’s work. While there are obvious and direct connections between this and the work of the preacher and teacher, echoes of the more general revealing, enlightening, educating activity of God occur wherever people are seeking to genuinely inform and instruct others. Whoever communicates truth of any kind—professor, teacher, writer, commentator, journalist, parent, guide, humorist, or cartoonist—is to some degree engaged in divine work. Since initiating others into some understanding of their work, or of some aspect of life, is part of many other activities, we should not limit this to the kinds of occupations I have mentioned.
The God who Redeems
God’s saving activity rightly has centrality in any discussion of divine work. What took take place in and through Christ lies at the center of history and the cosmos. This is why we prize the work of evangelists, apologists and church founders. Unfortunately in some quarters it is only when someone is engaged in these activities—whether full-time or in an occasional way—that they are regarded as doing God’s work. For such people the workplace is primarily a context for evangelizing others or for providing support for preachers and evangelists. But other types of work also have a redemptive character. One thinks especially of all those involved in mediation, conflict resolution, and arbitration, as well as much social work and counseling. But it goes further than this, for many others seek to bring a redemptive dimension to what they do. One of the best embodiments of this I know is a producer/scriptwriter in Hollywood: going beyond a concern for family values or for some kind of morality in his work, he strives to create characters or stories through which some authentic and concrete expression of faith, love or hope comes to expression.
I am well aware the examples I have provided are not the only facets of God’s work that can be correlated with human work. There are other possibilities. For example, I have not considered here the God who makes Covenant, or the God who builds Community, or the God who transforms the Cosmos. There are also other ways in which this whole task could be undertaken. Following the approach of my . . . book entitled God the Worker, we could use images of divine activity in the Bible drawn from the arena of human occupations to throw light on the connection between the two. We find God described in terms of all kinds of work, from earlier equivalents of "high touch low-tech" to "high-tech low touch" work. Examples range from God as Houseworker and Dressmaker, through Gardener and Orchardist, or Crop Farmer and Wine grower, to Builder and Architect, and Composer and Performer. For the majority of church connected people, approaching the issue through images rather than doctrines would be far more effective.
I am also aware that the connections I have drawn are not unproblematic. In the first place, I would not wish to infer that the kinds of human work I have identified always or fully reflect the work of God. Often we distort the work we do through having a superficial view of it, through doing it incompetently, through putting it to unworthy ends, or through exploiting it. This means that any exercise of this kind would need to explore the extent to which our work distorts or profanes the work of God as well as how much it reflects it. In the second place, people who have no biblical or theological literacy might find either of these approaches less appropriate. If that were the case, other terms could be used than the classical biblical or theological ones, even in talking about God, to achieve some of the same result.
I am also aware that, for some, any approach along these lines might seem to make God’s activity too immanent and remove all paradox from God’s ways of working. Is there not a danger of identifying God’s work too much with human structures, and of identifying too easily where God is present in the world? My aim, however, has been to show that some of our work of the people of God has a more transcendental reference than they realize, and I would want to affirm the central role of God’s redemptive and transforming work upon an else in which God is engaged, which means that we can never rest with the status quo. I recognize too that we cannot always be certain when we are doing the will of God or engaging in work that will have divine success. Though I am concerned to bring greater clarity to the vagueness the people of God so often have with respect to their work, I do not wish to eliminate the mystery that is integral to God’s way of operating. For all this, the work of ordinary Christians would be significantly enhanced if they could see some of the connections I have suggested, if they could view themselves as collaborating with God in fulfilling some of God’s purposes in each of these ways. This is especially the case if over all these kinds of work we pronounce the words of Luther:
There is no work better than another to please God;
to pour water, to wash dishes,
to be a shoemaker, or an apostle,
all are one, as touching the deed,
to please God.
(Martin Luther, "Treatise on Good Works,
" J-Atkinson, ed.Luther’s Works, Philadelphia Fortress, 1966, Vol. 44, pages 26-27)
What topics require attention so the people can fulfill their ministry?
Over the last few decades we have witnessed a growth in a theology that focuses upon the people of God and provides them with a greater understanding of what their ministry involves. Although they themselves often shy away from the word "theology," or even the word "theory," the most authentic theological or theoretical understanding of various aspects of life in the church and world will, in fact, provide the best basis for concrete action.
In surveying the theological scene over the last few decades, several contributions come to mind as being more relevant in this connection than others. For example, some of the thinking coming out of feminist and liberation theology, some of the work on personal and social ethics, some of the writing on practical theology and ecumenical issues. Then there is lay theology itself, a diverse, uneven but growing field. This diversity reminds us of an even greater diversity. There is not and will be no single theology for the people of God. Given their gender, social, cultural and ethnic diversity, different theological experiments are required, though this is not to say these will lack significant overlap or a common core. In other words, a theology for the people of God will be pluralistic without being relativistic. Women, minorities, and Third-world Christians will play a significant part in developing both the diversity that is needed and the core that is crucial.
In identifying a number of areas requiring theological attention I speak out of a Western context, that associated with the New World, relevant primarily to cultures with a liberal democratic tradition and strong middle class representation. This context is not unique to Western countries, for increasingly the culture of cities around the world are developing a number of the same characteristics. One perspective on what we need to do is provided by the notion of civil society that has already come before us:
- what are the core cultural values around which a truly human society of individuals, groups and governments, as well as the environment, should cohere;
- how should the fundamental institutions in such a society, such as the family, friendship, and neighborhood be defined and nurtured;
- which priorities, structures, standards, practices and values should govern the workplace and how central is the non-work aspect of life;
- in what ways can a variety of mediating institutions, including voluntary societies, the churches, and lobby groups, be enhanced and protected;
- what kind of economic arrangements, political institutions, bureaucratic structures, and patterns of mass communication are most appropriate in such a society.
Alongside these we can lay a second set of concerns, which I will group under the heading of "everyday life." These occupy and preoccupy people on an ongoing, extremely tangible, basis—and will continue to do so—whatever kind of Western society—civil or uncivil—in which they happen to live. Until now some of these have been more the concern of sociologists and phenomenologists, or of social commentators and sometimes psychologists, rather than theologians.
Topics requiring serious theological investigation if the people of God are to fulfill their ministry in the world satisfactorily include:
- the issue of time: business, the pace of life, regulation by the clock, the increase in and consequences of stress;
- the issue of place: mobility, commuting, the automobile culture and its effects, urbanization and suburbanization;
- the issue of neighborliness: hospitality, friendship, welcoming the stranger, the extended family, housing;
- the issue of work: job pressures & expectations, unemployment, workacholism, the work environment, management;
- the issue of leisure: free or spare time, sport, tourism, the leisure, health and entertainment industry;
- the issue of lifestyle: the consumer society, living on credit, tax systems, personal giving, aid.
These are just some of the topics requiring investigation.
There are substantial connections between these and a number of traditional theological concerns, only some of which are ever articulated. It would be possible to start at the doctrinal rather than cultural end and develop these traditional concerns in the direction of contemporary issues. In some cases—with respect to social implications of the doctrines of the Trinity, Creation, Incarnation, and Kingdom of God—some good work has already been done. But in other respects there is less in evidence.
There are, for example, strong connections that can be forged between:
- the providence of God and the meaning of work, housework, gardening, parks, agriculture, bureaucracy, and the welfare system;
- justification by faith and the work oriented society, business, activism, workaholism, the search for security, and premature death;
- the cross and resurrection and the presence of ambiguity in life, the nature and use of power, downward and upward mobility, servant leadership, ideas of success and failure;
- covenant-making and the role of promises, loyalty, contracts, fidelity, commitment, and voluntary associations. But even these suggestions are not exhaustive.
I do not mean to suggest that starting from these classical doctrines and moving to current realities is the best way to proceed. I have identified some of the connections mainly to show that issues confronting the people of God are not remote from traditional theological concerns. There are resources within our tradition to help us deal with them, even if we need much more than this tradition can alone provide. Approaching the matter this way also reminds theologians that they have not always drawn out the concrete dimensions of these convictions. In the past, at their best, this is what theologians have done, as we see from Luther’s understanding of justification by faith or Calvin’s well-known concern to apply his theology to the whole of life in the city of Geneva. Whether he did this in the most appropriate way or not is another matter!
When it comes down to it, theology is an eminently practical discipline. As the German theologian Eberhard Juengel, has reminded us on page 22 of his book, The Freedom of a Christian: Luther’s Significance for Contemporary Theology, (Augsburg, 1988):
"Everything can become the theme of theology on the basis of its relation to God"
I would only change the verb and express this as: "Everything should become the theme of theology on the basis of its relation to God"!
How do we best express a theology for the ministry of God’s people?
I turn now to how this theology for the ministry of the people of God should be expressed. First we need to remind ourselves that such a theology will only come into being if there is a close collaboration between those with formal and informal theological training. Those of us who have this training must put ourselves at the disposal of the people of God, becoming their servants rather than seeking once again to impose something upon them. It is the people of God who must take the basic responsibility for developing a theology by which they are to live, and—in some parts of the world—to suffer and die.
Some extempore remarks of Juergen Moltmann come to mind here:
"In relation to doctrine we are the experts and lay people are the amateurs;
in relation to ethics we are the amateurs and they are the experts."
Although it is not quite so simple as this—especially in a time when increasing numbers of lay people are theologically educated—his words do contain an important truth. The people of God do have a significant role to play in setting their theological agenda, pointing some of its directions, and in evaluating its effectiveness.
As well as helping to develop such a theology, however, the people of God should also contribute to its presentation, whatever form this happens to take—verbal, written or visual, or any combination of the three. There are all kinds of possibilities here, depending on what is in view and who is involved, for example:
- a theological presenter with laypeople providing case studies;
- a team presentation by a group of lay people and a formally qualified theologian;
- a lay presentation with a specialist theologian in reserve as a support or consultant. A wonderful example of what is possible, even when the lay-people concerned are mentally handicapped or challenged, is provided in the introduction to Henri Nouwen’s . . . book In the Name of Jesus, Harper & Row, 1991).
However it is presented, it is important that such a theology be "user-friendly." This does not mean that it will be a theology made easy; a watered down or discount theology such as we often find on the shelves of Christian bookstores or in addresses to lay groups, sometimes even by professional theologians. We need contributions that will draw from the deepest theological wells, and as deeply from the wells of a wide range of other disciplines, both among the humanities and the social sciences, but that will also be accessible.
It should employ imaginative as well as cognitive means to convey its message. This means that it should be a right brain as well as left brain theology. At times it will take story, or narrative, form; it may have a dialogue or case-study character; it could, like Augustine, embody its central convictions in popular songs or, like Luther, in thoughtful hymns. Paul communicated his profound theological ideas through letters, as later did Dietrich Bonhoeffer some of his. Calvin wrote many of his works, especially his Institutes of the Christian Religion, for the educated Christian public of his day. Wesley developed his theology primarily through sermons and giving practical addresses.
Such a theology should be popular without being superficial. It should be a folk theology without having a parochial character or reflecting narrow prejudices. It should have a strong underlay of wisdom without succumbing to those commonplaces we so often hear. It should be a grassroots theology without settling for the lowest common denominator. A vernacular or people’s theology of this kind has already been modeled to us by a number of lay Christian thinkers. Elton Trueblood wrote books on everyday topics in a style and at a length ordinary people would not find daunting. Søren Kierkegaard invented striking parables, composed devotional treatises and wrote newspaper articles. G.K. Chesterton devised apologetic works that read like detective stories and detective stories that read like apologetic works. C.S. Lewis produced science fiction, fables, and children’s stories. Dorothy Sayers wrote plays, dialogues and novels, as well as inventive apologetic essays. All of these open up possibilities that an adventurous theology by and for the people might explore.
In all this the question of language is central. That has already come up for mention in discussing the way the people of God are drawn into ministry. But in other respects it is also important. Can we go on using the word "lay," since it does so often have pejorative connotations and it is no longer part of the way many grassroots movements talk about themselves? Some Catholic and Protestant writers are already attempting to bypass reference to the "laity," and speak instead of their "ministry in the church" and the "ministry of daily life." But what do we say in other contexts where their work is not the primary reference? This is not an easy matter. While in North America language of "the people" has considerable resonance think, for example, of the depth contained in the phrase "of, by, and for the people"—in German speaking countries echoes of the "Volk" immediately come to mind, with all its negative connotations.
While talking about "ministry in the church" or "the ministry of daily life" overcomes some problems, the word "ministry" itself is alien to many people. While it has the advantage of placing their contribution to the kingdom on the same level as that of those engaged in more traditional forms of ministry, and while the term "minister" and "ministry" are used of politicians in some countries, the term does not always resonate with those whom it is intended to describe. It would not be difficult to replace it. It is, after all, simply another form of the word "service" and means nothing more than that. Or we could simply use the word "work," a term the apostle Paul quite happily employed as the chief way of designating the activities in which he was involved.
For the people of God the word "theology" is also problematic. It is not a term that comes often to their lips. In popular speech it is equivalent to "abstract," "impractical," "irrelevant." For them the word may be more of a hindrance than a help. Would anything significant be lost if other synonyms were used, if we spoke rather of developing a "view," "understanding," or "perspective" on various matters of widespread concern? This is at least worth serious consideration.
What kinds of occasions and structures will best advance changing patterns of the people’s witness?
Many kinds of occasions and structures are required to forward the work of God’s people so that they play their proper role in the changing world in which we live. Some of these will be explored in the coming workshops as groups focus on lay centers, congregational structures, educational institutions and the like. It is tempting here to focus on structures and events oriented specifically to what is happening in society, but I will restrict my reflections to certain structures and events within the life of a congregation that are vital to its witness outside it. There is a danger that we overlook the importance of what takes place within the community of faith for what takes place within the various other contexts we seek to influence.
With regard to the events within the life of the congregation, brief mention should be made first of celebrations of baptism (and, for paedobaptist churches, confirmation). The point is made often enough that a renewed emphasis should be placed upon our baptism. This would stress its implications not only for our behavior as God’s people in the world but for our vocation to serve God in concrete ways as well. But how much attention has been given to actually devising ways of incorporating this in the practice of baptism itself, or in forms of confirmation for those who are restating their baptismal vows? Without changes at this level, all the fine talk about the meaning of baptism will largely remain just that.
But we need more than this. Why not an annual commissioning of people in their congregations according to their main vocational orientations? This already takes place in connection with the appointment of lay elders, officers or leaders in the church. But these have to do only within the inner life of the church not its outer witness. This could take place all at once at a service near the beginning of each year. But it would be far more effective to divide the congregation into a dozen main vocational groupings, so that each month one could be singled out for attention. During the service these would rise, if possible be named individually and their particular contribution briefly explained. A relevant Scripture would be read and then a charge given. This would be followed by the laying on of hands by other members of the congregation for the work of this group during the coming year.
Beyond this there lies the much debated and highly controversial issue of ordination. While some are happy to see baptism itself as the "ordination" of the people of God, given the growing theological consensus on the paucity of biblical support for ordination as presently practiced, may we not consider it in a new light. Not by abolishing it, but by extending it to all the people of God. In this way over a course of time, each person— not necessarily in the whole congregation but in the principal smaller unit within it to which they belong— could receive endorsement of where their main contribution to God’s work lies. Prior to this it would be helpful if they were part of a discernment group, which assisted them to identify their main contributions and also affirmed their capacity to make it. Within that practice the particular role of those with pastoral, evangelistic, or other contributions to make, can still find its rightful place.
Such possibilities, however, and the actual work of God’s people in church and society, will not fully come into their own until in the West we see the development of "house churches" or "basic Christian communities" within or instead of the congregation such as already takes place in other parts of the world. These groupings are only a rediscovery of the "ecclesiolae in ecclesia" that have appeared down through Christian history, and "church in the house" which comes before us in the biblical writings. The presence of "small groups" or "Hauskreise" in the church are a pale reflection of this, helpful as far as they go, but not really providing God’s people with all that is rightfully theirs to give or receive.
Paradoxical as it may seem, it is only when church is given back to the people of God, with those who have particular pastoral or other gifts to contribute in their midst, that they will be able to enter fully into service of the Kingdom of God in the world. These two are integrally related. For it is through developing a sense of ownership of their own life as a community under God that they discover a capacity to take responsibility in the wider communities of which they are a part. In such groups the "priesthood of all believers" comes fully to expression, as the people relate directly to God, share with and relate to one another in authentic ways, and equip each other for their ministry in the world. This should include a sacramental dimension, since being a "corporate priesthood," they have the capacity to share the Lord’s Supper or carry out Baptism among themselves.
Such communities within the church, encouraged and resourced by those with particular pastoral and teaching skills, also express what I like to term the "of all believers," by caring for one another spiritually and practically. And the "teacher_hood of all believers" as, in Paul’s words, they "let the word of Christ dwell in (them) richly, teaching and admonishing one another" (Col. 3:15). In brief, these "little churches" within or alongside the congregation, become the basic "communities of hope" that Fritz-Erich Anhelm discusses, but also of "faith" and "love" as well. In some measure they cut across all three kinds of lay groupings or concerns that he describes, since they largely look after the "inner house" needs of their members, help each other to discern, understand and fulfill their "vocational" contribution, and support or join "advocacy" groups which take up the basic issues which face us all today. It is partly because they embody all three concerns that they are so integral to the whole witness of the people of God.
Communities of this kind provide the basic context through which God’s people equip themselves for their everyday responsibilities. Present structures for equipping individuals or groups through highly focused courses and programs are fine as far as they go. But they fail to equip the whole people of God, fail to equip them wholly for their work, concentrating mostly on imparting knowledge and suggesting methods or techniques, rather than holistic formation and preparation. They fail to equip God’s people in a whole enough way that enables them to equip each other rather than always relying on the expert. For that reason they need to be undergirded by a structure that is more inclusive, organic and participatory. Such communities provide organic ways. For that, reason affirming them should be a part of the work of all lay centers, departments, institutes and academies. While they cannot in themselves do all that is required, what is required cannot be done fully without them. They are the nexus of God’s coming kingdom, the places where it is and should be most visible, the laboratories and advance outposts of a world in which justice, peace and the integrity of creation will receive their full and perfect embodiment.
Conclusion
These are far from the only matters on which further theological reflection is required if the people of God are to fulfill their divine mandate in a changing society. But I do believe these are basic to any such endeavor and, for what they are worth, offer them for your consideration. As I said at the beginning, I do so knowing that they spring out of a particular context but, as I hope my last remarks indicate, I also see significant crossover between the ways God is empowering the people in both North and South to witness effectively in the world. The existence of such an overlap is for me one of the basic indicators that the hand of God is present in the events of our time.
Presented at the Bad Boll Laity Conference, Bad Boll, Germany, June 4 8, 1993
Print
Email
