One of the recent issues of discussion in various places has been the nature of the cpongregational participation in church discussion and decision making. From a Baptist perspective with the mix of Scripture and Spirit in such discussions we can use the language of communal or congregational discernment.
One danger in this discussion about congregational participation is that it is seen only as a means to discuss and discern. To put that differently in some of the discussions the focus becomes on the 'product' - the outcome: decision and discernment. When this is the focus the debate then tends to veer in the direction of the other ways in which decisions can be made - perhaps more 'effective' ways. In turn the question is raised about the role of 'leadership' in guiding and making decisions. There are a number of issues that need to be unpacked here from a theological perspective but here I want to suggest that discussions about congregational participation in discernment need also to consider the value of the 'process' as well as the 'product'.
What I mean by the above: that the 'process' is as important as the product, is to say the value of congregational participation is not simply the product of decision but is itself the 'thing' that helps the congregation become the type of people, the type of community, that we desire to be. Or to put that differently - if we desire to be a congregation that grow up in maturity into Christ the head an important part in the maturing process is our engagement in discussion and dialogue with one another. Viewed in this way the 'time' that such processes of congregational participation take are not then just as slow way to make decisions but an important way in making 'disciples'.
To support the above a couple of ideas from dialogical and conversational studies as discussed in O Wesley Allen Jr.'s The Homiletic of All Believers: A Congregational Approach (Lousiville: WJK, 2005).
''Regardless of whether we end our conversations in agreement or not, I am transformed by my conversation with you, you are transformed by your conversation with me, and so on and so forth. In conversation, as we assume the roles of both speakers and listeners, we are give-and-take convertors and converted. But, as noted earlier, we should not think only in terms of individual conversions. Every time a group engages in conversation and individuals change, the group changes as well. Conversation in the church creates individual and communal transformation; it creates conversion to the church, within the church, and of the church.' (23)
'For any ecclesial conversation to be an authentic expression of the church's call to be the body of Christ, therefore, a certain amount of trust is necessary. The level of trust, of course deepens as partners sustain a conversational relationship over time'. (25)
'Dialogue is not fundamentally a specific communicative form of question and response, but at heart a kind of social relation that engages its participants. A successful dialogue involves a willing partnership and cooperation in the face of likely disagreements, confusions, failures and misunderstandings. Persisting in the process requires a relationship of mutual respexct, trust, concern - and part of the dialogical interchange often must relate to the establishment and maintenance of these bonds. The substance of this interpersonal relation is deeper, and more consistent, than any particular communicative form it might take.' (Nicolas Burbules, cited 25)
The process of congregational participation in discussing and discerning the mind of Christ is therefore, as important as the outcome which such a process produces if the goal is to help people grow up as Church into Christ the head. The task of good leadership, therefore, rather than seeking to bypass this approach in order to get to more 'effective' forms should be to invest in developing these forms.
Recent Comments