Theological Praxis
The
ontology of the Positive Deviance Approach suggests it is relevant to the study
of church forms and contexts for the 21st century and beyond. Here
the question must be asked if there is any theological premise for the praxis
of the Positive Deviance Approach in the ecclesial context. The ontological
nature of Positive Deviance develops naturally out of the theology of the missio Dei, the mission of God. The
theological basis of the missio Dei
is defined by the initiative and innovation of God. God is a missionary. The
practices and strategies as represented in the missio Dei, suggest the missio
Dei is the life giving source for the meaning and purpose of the church, Van
Sanders writes,
When kept in the
context of the Scriptures, missio Dei correctly emphasizes that God is
the initiator of His mission to redeem through the Church a special people for
Himself from all of the peoples (τα εθνη) of the world. He sent His Son
for this purpose and He sends the Church into the world with the message of the
gospel for the same purpose. The perspective of missio Dei as the deriving source of the meaning and purpose of the
church flows out of the nature of God.[1]
The initiative for the missional
movement comes from God, embodied in Jesus Christ and passed onto the church
through the empowering of the Holy Spirit. The church is therefore an
incarnational community of Christ-followers participating in the missional
endeavor as part of God’s design. The practices and strategies of the church in
mission reflect the same practices and strategies of the Positive Deviance
Approach. John Hoffmeyer, associate Professor of Systematic Theology, writes,
In the course of
the twentieth century, missiology increasingly made missio Dei its foundational term. According to this development,
“mission” is not just something the church does; mission is God’s own activity.
The mission of the church is properly understood as participation in God’s
mission.[2]
The theological basis of the
Positive Deviance approach as praxis is found within the doctrine of missio Dei. David J. Bosch writes that
the initiative and innovation of the Trinity is witnessed in the missio Dei,
During the past
half a century or so there has been a subtle but nevertheless decisive shift
toward understanding mission as God’s mission. . . . Mission was understood as
being derived from the very nature of God. It was thus put in the context of the
doctrine of the Trinity, not of ecclesiology or soteriology. The classical
doctrine on the missio Dei as God the Father sending the Son, and God the
Father and the Son sending the Spirit was expanded to include yet another
“movement”: The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit sending the church into the
world. As far as missionary thinking was concerned, this linking with the
doctrine of the Trinity constituted an important innovation . . . . Our mission
has not life of its own: only in the hands of the sending God can it truly be
called mission. Not least since the missionary initiative comes from God alone
… Mission is thereby seen as a movement from God to the world; the church is
viewed as an instrument for that mission. There is church because there is mission,
not vice versa. To participate in mission is to participate in the movement of
God’s love toward people, since God is a fountain of sending love.[3]
Bosch collectively engages the
Trinity within the initiative and innovation of God in the doctrine of the missio Dei. This shows the initiative
and innovation within the relationship of the Trinity reflects what may be
considered the Positive Deviance Approach. Innovation is part of Merton’s
analysis of the modes of anomie and here show a reflection the work of the
Trinity through the incarnation. Specifically, Merton’s conclusion demonstrates
that innovation is congruent with the theological praxis of the missio Dei. Merton’s mode of innovation is defined as: participants
accept approved goals, but pursue those goals through other means.[4]
Innovation plays a major role in the Positive Deviance Approach. The practices
and strategies of Positive Deviants are not limited by culturally imposed
norms. Some may argue there is no room for innovation within the nature of an
immutable God because innovation would require change in the character of God.
The initiative of God by means of the incarnation provides room to consider the
possibility of the openness of God in relationship with his creation. The
implication is that the incarnation is the ultimate divine expression of the
Positive Deviance Approach.
Considering
the implication of the incarnation as the ultimate divine expression of the
Positive Deviance Approach, out of the semiotics of Positive Deviance emerges a
Christological question that is embedded in the practices and strategies of
Jesus. The question challenges the prevailing Christological method which is
firmly placed within a modernist analytical methodology as propositional
theology. Anderson writes, “. . . it would be fair to say that there is no
formal Christology in the New Testament, though there are Christological
statements.”[5]
Anderson goes on to write, “. . . the Christology of the New Testament is
descriptive rather than analytical; it is embedded in narrative and
proclamation rather than codified in creedal formulas.”[6]
The conclusion is Jesus, by means of the incarnation, determines all
Christology as described in the narrative of the New Testament. Flemming
writes,
The incarnation
of Jesus serves as a key paradigm for a contextualized mission and theology.
The New Testament declares that the eternal Word of God was enfleshed in Jesus
of Nazareth (Jn1:14). Through his incarnation, Jesus explained or ‘exegeted’ (exēgēsato)
the Father to us. . . . he embraced the human context in all of its ‘scandalous
particularities.’[7]
The Christology of the New
Testament presents Jesus’ practices and strategies were inherently revealed
within the Positive Deviance Approach. This may be a bit repetitive, but reflection
upon the incarnation is critical to theological praxis. As the enfleshed Word
of God Jesus fully identified with humanity and specifically within Judaic
society. Flemming writes, “He was thoroughly immersed in his Jewish culture; He
participated in its celebrations and traditions; he spoke Aramaic with a
Galilean accent; he had distinctive physical features and personality traits.”[8]
The event of Jesus’ incarnation reflects the Positive Deviance Approach of
changing culture from within the culture. Flemming asserts, “Jesus became one
with the weak and the marginalized of his society. As a humble village artisan
from Galilee, he lived outside the mainstream of religious, administrative and
economic power.”[9]
Charles and Marguerite Kraft perceive the incarnation as complete in every
respect. They write, “God in Jesus became so much a part of a specific human
context that many never even recognized that he had come from somewhere else.”[10]
Missiologist C. Rene Padilla states it clearly, “It may be said that God has
contextualized himself in Jesus Christ.”[11]
The Christology of the New Testament is grounded in God’s practice and strategy
of identifying with humanity in the incarnation.
Jesus’ theology of praxis
was context-specific. Flemming writes, “The incarnation of Jesus makes
contextualization not just a possibility but an obligation. It establishes a
paradigm for mediating God’s redeeming presence in the world today.”[12]
Flemming continues and makes an important observation that confirms the praxis
of Positive Deviance in the incarnation of changing culture from within the
culture. He writes, “Jesus’ incarnation, then, in its fullest dimensions points
the way to both a radical identification with each culture in all of its
specificity and at the same time to a conversion of cultures from within.”[13]
Here the how of the praxis is
revealed as not just an outsider adaptation to a culture through observing what is evident in a culture.
Identification is the embodiment of the incarnation.
To this point this paper
has attempted to show the existence and basis of a theology for the praxis of
Positive Deviance as demonstrated in the practices and strategies of Jesus, the
early church and the descriptive Christology of the narrative in the New
Testament. Though the Positive Deviance Approach appears simplistic it is in
actuality very complex. What emerges from the gathered material points toward a
theological praxis of Positive Deviance in relationship to the initiative of
God in the work of Jesus Christ and the church. The original initiator and
practitioner of Positive Deviance are indicated as God in the practices and
strategies of the Trinity in rendering the holistic redemption of humanity.
Jesus’ deviant practices
and strategies engaged the ethnocentrism that was created from the
marginalization within the Judaic culture. Through his practices and strategies
Jesus offered a counter-intuitive agenda for the kingdom of God. Wright in his
own words comments on Jesus’ agenda,
He was telling his hearers
to give up their agendas and to trust him for his way of being Israel, his way
of bringing the kingdom, his kingdom agenda. . . . Jesus was offering a counter
agenda an utterly risky way of being Israel, the way of turning the other check
and going the second mile, the way of losing your life to gain it. This was the
kingdom-invitation he was issuing.[14]
The practices and strategies of Jesus are the basis
for the theological praxis of the Positive Deviance Approach as witnessed in
the New Testament. Jesus as the initiator and exemplar of the new kingdom’s
practices and strategies led to Jesus’ practices and strategies becoming the
praxis of the early church. The trajectory of the Positive Deviance practices
and strategies of Jesus were engaged in the background of the early church that
eventually led to the communities’ adoption of the radical kingdom of God as
Jesus initiated it. The approach to solving the deep seated issue of the
ethnocentrism of Judaism became a community driven practice and strategy that
resulted in the inclusion of the Hellenists and eventually the Gentiles,
thereby, moving the church into a truly multicultural community. The problem
solving engaged by the early church reflects the initiative of God directed by
the Holy Spirit and seen in the theological trajectory within the narrative of
the Acts of the Apostles. These activities reflect the Positive Deviance
Approach.
Conclusion
The results were that the
early Christian church and community were successful in the adoption of the
practices and strategies of Jesus as a Positive Deviance force, setting the
church on a theological trajectory for cultural contextualization. The results
produce a better understanding of the history and doctrine of the missio Dei. The theological trajectory
has implications of morphing the missio
Dei into the mission of Christ, the missio
Christi, and church as mission. The missio
Christi maybe best described as the history and doctrine of the mission of
Jesus Christ engaged throughout the history of the church and in contemporary
times. The ideology of the missio Christi
focuses upon the mission of Jesus Christ of Nazareth as always contemporarily
present throughout the whole of the narrative of both the Hebrew and Christian
Testaments and church history. The emphasis is upon the active presence of
Christ within the church and in pagan cultures and societies, the ubiquity of
Christ as the second person of the Trinity. The theological praxis of Positive
Deviance is reflected in the words of Flemming, he writes, “Through the
presence of the Spirit and the ministry of the church, Christ must be enfleshed
in every contemporary human culture and context. To be true to the nature of
the gospel itself, we must enable it ‘to enter the blood stream of the
people.’”[15]
The theology and praxis of Positive Deviance is sourced from the life giving
blood of a living and risen Jesus, the Christ, and transfused into “the blood
stream of people.”
In
conclusion, the theological praxis of the Positive Deviance Approach presents a
paradigm shift for the modernist institutional church in order to reach the
marginalized within their respective cultures. The efforts of Positive Deviants
in cultural contexts provide the best opportunity to connect with a broader
pluralistic society such as exists in Portland, Oregon. It is important to
remember that Positive Deviance according to the definition is delineated as a
functional approach to define, determine,
discover and design an
appropriate ecclesial construct within any cultural context. The sociological
basis of positive deviance as a practice within the cultural context has
implications and application for the development of the ecclesia amid
marginalized. Since positive deviance works within a culture to identify the
practices and strategies that bring about the accepted goals of the church, a
process of training practitioners should be developed and engaged.
Understanding the praxis of positive deviance comes out of the theology of the missio Dei and is expressed in the missio Christi. Through the initiative
of God by the Holy Spirit the practitioner of Positive Deviance is able to
engage the process of challenging and changing ecclesial forms. The
functionality of positive deviance in each context will produce an
incarnational and missional community that engages the immediate context
according to the unique construct of the culture as evidenced in the Acts of
the Apostles.
A
major component of positive deviance is the semiotic practice of learning to
read the signs that reveal the practices and strategies of the positive
deviants in new forms of ecclesial context. If the abilities of the positive
deviants are discernable and their practices and strategies are reproducible
within their context then it is conceivable the church may flourish in even
broader contexts amid the pluralism within a global society. Learning from the
practitioners of the Positive Deviance Approach amid alternative missional
ecclesia has the potential of empowering contextualization with theological
praxis. Studying the practitioner is necessary and requires a research method
that will take into consideration more than facts, but considers the
non-measurable intuitive intelligence of the practitioner. The research method
that should bring out facts and intuitive intelligence is examined in the next
section of this paper.
[1] Van
Sanders, “The Mission of God and the Local Church,” John
M. Bailey, Pursuing the Mission or God in Church Planting (North
American Mission Board, SBC, 2006), 24.
[2] John
F. Hoffmeyer, “The Missional Trinity,” Dialog:
A Journal of Theology 40, no. 2 (June 2001): 108.
[3] Bosch,
390
[4]
Merton, 193-209.
[5] Anderson,
An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches, 44; C. Norman Kraus, Jesus
Christ Our Lord: Christology from a Disciple’s Perspective (Wipf &
Stock Publishers, 2004), 82.
[6] Anderson,
An Emergent Theology for Emerging Churches, 44.
[7] Flemming,
Contextualization in the New Testament, 20.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.,
20–21.
[10] Charles
H. Kraft and Marguerite G. Kraft, Christianity in Culture: A Study in
Dynamic Biblical Theologizing in Cross Cultural Perspective (Orbis Books,
2005), 175.
[11] C.
René Padilla, Mission Between The Times: Essays On The Kingdom (W.B.
Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1985), 83.
[12] Flemming,
Contextualization in the New Testament, 21.
[13] Ibid., 22–23.
[14] Wright,
The Challenge of Jesus, 44.
[15] Flemming,
Contextualization in the New Testament, 21–22.
No comments:
Post a Comment