This post of faithful witness is a summary of a piece that Ralph Winter, a missionary and then mission philosopher of the 20th century, wrote about the two New Testament discipleship structures that undergird and carry out God’s mission. The first structure is a local church. The second is a team that comes into existence to do unique things that churches are not able-willing-designed to do. I agree with Winter’s thesis and feel he has much to say regarding ministry within our increasingly post Christendom western world as well as to more classical mission contexts such as church planting within unreached people groups. I have copied and pasted his summary to try to capture the main points. The entire piece is superb and well worth your time. The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission by Ralph Winter is available on line
The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission by Ralph Winter
It is the thesis of this article that… there will still be two basic kinds of structures that will make up the ( Christian ) movement. Most of the emphasis will be placed on pointing out the existence of these two structures as they have continuously appeared across the centuries. This will serve to define, illustrate and compare their nature and importance. The writer will also endeavor to explain why he believes our efforts today in any part of the world will be most effective only if both of these two structures are fully and properly involved and supportive of each other.
Redemptive Structures in New Testament Times
First of all, let us recognize the structure so fondly called “the New Testament Church” as basically a Christian synagogue. Paul’s missionary work consisted primarily of going to synagogues scattered across the Roman Empire, beginning in Asia Minor, and making clear to the Jewish and Gentile believers in those synagogues that the Messiah had come in Jesus Christ the Son of God; that in Christ a final authority even greater than Moses existed; and that this made more understandable than ever the welcoming of the Gentiles without forcing upon them any literal cultural adaptation to the ritual provisions of the Mosaic Law. An outward novelty of Paul’s work was the development eventually of wholly new synagogues that were not only Christian but Greek.
The first structure in the New Testament scene is thus what is often called the New Testament Church. It was essentially built along Jewish synagogue lines… embracing the community of the faithful in any given place. The defining characteristic of this structure is that it included old and young, male and female… Note, too, that Paul was willing to build such fellowships out of former Jews as well as non-Jewish Greeks.
There is a second, quite different structure in the New Testament context. While we know very little about the structure of the evangelistic outreach within which pre-Pauline Jewish proselytizers worked, we do know, as already mentioned, that they operated all over the Roman Empire. It would be surprising if Paul didn’t follow somewhat the same procedures. And we know a great deal more about the way Paul operated. He was, true enough, sent out by the church in Antioch. But once away from Antioch, he seemed very much on his own. The little team he formed was economically self-sufficient when occasion demanded. It was also dependent, from time-to-time, not alone upon the Antioch church, but upon other churches that had risen as a result of evangelistic labors. Paul’s team may certainly be considered a structure. While its design and form is not made concrete for us on the basis of remaining documents, neither, of course, is the structure of a New Testament congregation defined concretely for us in the pages of the New Testament…Thus, on the one hand, the structure we call the New Testament church is a prototype of all subsequent Christian fellowships... On the other hand, Paul’s missionary band can be considered a prototype of all subsequent missionary endeavors organized out of workers who affiliated themselves as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.Note well the additional commitment.
In conclusion, it is very important to note that neither of these two structures was, as it were, “let down from heaven” in a special way…These considerations prepare us for what comes next in the history of the expansion of the gospel, because we see other patterns chosen by Christians at a later date whose origins are just as clearly “borrowed patterns” as were those in the New Testament period. In fact, the profound missiological implication of all this is that the New Testament is trying to show us how to borrow effective patterns; it is trying to free all future missionaries from the need to follow the precise forms of the Jewish synagogue and Jewish missionary band, and yet to allow them to use comparable indigenous structures in the countless new situations across History and around the world--structures which will correspond faithfully to the function of patterns Paul employed, if not their form!. As Kraft has said earlier, we seek dynamic equivalence, not formal replication.
The Two Structures of God’s Redemptive Mission by Ralph Winter
It is the thesis of this article that… there will still be two basic kinds of structures that will make up the ( Christian ) movement. Most of the emphasis will be placed on pointing out the existence of these two structures as they have continuously appeared across the centuries. This will serve to define, illustrate and compare their nature and importance. The writer will also endeavor to explain why he believes our efforts today in any part of the world will be most effective only if both of these two structures are fully and properly involved and supportive of each other.
Redemptive Structures in New Testament Times
First of all, let us recognize the structure so fondly called “the New Testament Church” as basically a Christian synagogue. Paul’s missionary work consisted primarily of going to synagogues scattered across the Roman Empire, beginning in Asia Minor, and making clear to the Jewish and Gentile believers in those synagogues that the Messiah had come in Jesus Christ the Son of God; that in Christ a final authority even greater than Moses existed; and that this made more understandable than ever the welcoming of the Gentiles without forcing upon them any literal cultural adaptation to the ritual provisions of the Mosaic Law. An outward novelty of Paul’s work was the development eventually of wholly new synagogues that were not only Christian but Greek.
The first structure in the New Testament scene is thus what is often called the New Testament Church. It was essentially built along Jewish synagogue lines… embracing the community of the faithful in any given place. The defining characteristic of this structure is that it included old and young, male and female… Note, too, that Paul was willing to build such fellowships out of former Jews as well as non-Jewish Greeks.
There is a second, quite different structure in the New Testament context. While we know very little about the structure of the evangelistic outreach within which pre-Pauline Jewish proselytizers worked, we do know, as already mentioned, that they operated all over the Roman Empire. It would be surprising if Paul didn’t follow somewhat the same procedures. And we know a great deal more about the way Paul operated. He was, true enough, sent out by the church in Antioch. But once away from Antioch, he seemed very much on his own. The little team he formed was economically self-sufficient when occasion demanded. It was also dependent, from time-to-time, not alone upon the Antioch church, but upon other churches that had risen as a result of evangelistic labors. Paul’s team may certainly be considered a structure. While its design and form is not made concrete for us on the basis of remaining documents, neither, of course, is the structure of a New Testament congregation defined concretely for us in the pages of the New Testament…Thus, on the one hand, the structure we call the New Testament church is a prototype of all subsequent Christian fellowships... On the other hand, Paul’s missionary band can be considered a prototype of all subsequent missionary endeavors organized out of workers who affiliated themselves as a second decision beyond membership in the first structure.Note well the additional commitment.
In conclusion, it is very important to note that neither of these two structures was, as it were, “let down from heaven” in a special way…These considerations prepare us for what comes next in the history of the expansion of the gospel, because we see other patterns chosen by Christians at a later date whose origins are just as clearly “borrowed patterns” as were those in the New Testament period. In fact, the profound missiological implication of all this is that the New Testament is trying to show us how to borrow effective patterns; it is trying to free all future missionaries from the need to follow the precise forms of the Jewish synagogue and Jewish missionary band, and yet to allow them to use comparable indigenous structures in the countless new situations across History and around the world--structures which will correspond faithfully to the function of patterns Paul employed, if not their form!. As Kraft has said earlier, we seek dynamic equivalence, not formal replication.
Comments
Post a Comment