Affirming in the Present What We Hope to Be Tomorrow

For nearly a year, N and I have been serving on a Vision Committee at LOCC. We've spent a lot of time thinking, praying, processing, assessing, evaluating, synthesizing, and dreaming. Instead of quickly popping out a list of "brick and mortar"-ish items to be checked off over the next several years, we wanted to create a spiritual vision of who we long to be, bringing together the best of who we are as a congregation with God's intentions for the church and the world in Scripture. To help achieve that goal, we used a process called appreciative inquiry. (Branson's book Memories, Hopes, and Conversations: Appreciative Inquiry and Congregational Change was an invaluable resource to us on our journey.)

Yesterday, the VT presented our vision to the congregation. We have yet to discover the congregational response, what steps our various ministry leaders will take to help us become the kind of church we envision, or how our members will covenant will God and one another to embody this vision in our life together before the world. But, we hope and pray that it will be an exciting journey of discernment and taking Spirit-guided, faithful risks for the sake of the kingdom of God.

Here are the "embodied callings" and "dreams" that we presented yesterday. (As with all statements like this, it was not created in a vacuum. We have dipped deeply into the vernacular of our own congregation, as well as the language of Scripture and missional church theology, and some helpful ideas from insights from other churches and thinkers.):

Embodied Calling Statements:

Affirming Today What We Hope to Be Tomorrow

As the body of Christ in north Oakland County we willingly submit to living under the reign of God for the sake of the world. We choose to live intentionally, committing to work with God in and through the church, to open our lives to the transforming work of God through the Spirit, and to walk the way of Jesus in our community.

Missional Outreach:

We believe that God’s kingdom is a present reality that continues to break into the world. As a people who have submitted to the lordship of Christ through baptism, we proclaim the gospel, the good news of the reign of God, through missional outreach. Through our participation in the mission of God we both strengthen the unity of the body and individually grow in discipleship by imitating Christ’s life of compassionate and sacrificial service to our local community. We serve expecting nothing in return, willingly taking risks for the sake of the kingdom of God.

Biblical Formation & Education:

We believe that the Bible is the narrative of the God who creates and interacts with humanity. The biblical story is our story. In order to better understand our place in God’s continuing action in the world and to grow as disciples, we pursue a greater understanding of faith and discipleship by engaging in the study of Scripture, listening to the proclaimed Word, and participating in classes and discussions with others. As we dwell in the Word of God both individually and communally, the Spirit continually shapes us to embody the mind of Christ in the world.

Loving Family:

We believe that the journey of faith is a shared journey. The church is the family of those who live in relationship with God and one another, a fellowship in and through Jesus Christ. We are a sincere, committed, loving family of Christians who work together to help those who are in need, whether or not they are a part of the Lake Orion Church family. We acknowledge, embrace, and accept diversity as a vital aspect of our life together, and we choose to extend grace in the freedom of Christ instead of judgment, breaking down the dividing walls that separate people, so that we might have a deep and real sense of connection and belonging with one another in the fellowship of the Spirit.

Worship:

We believe that worship is vital to the life of faith and the future of God’s people and all of creation. When we gather in worship, we commune with God and with each other and we re-enthrone God over our own lives and over the church. In worship we praise God for the mighty works God has done in our own lives and on behalf of a world that does not yet know how to praise.

· Singing & Praise:

We believe that God is enthroned on the praises of God’s people. The singing at the Lake Orion Church enhances the congregation’s corporate worship and individual spirituality. In our praise, we retrain ourselves for life in the world, recommitting ourselves to the way of Jesus and God’s mission. Song services are intentional, though open to spontaneity, and dip into the deep well of resources in the Christian tradition, including a blend of older and newer songs. The sincerity, energy, and passion of our worship leaders are a source of the vibrancy of the worship in song.

· Communal Prayer:

We believe that God hears and responds to our prayer. Communal prayer is a vital part of our corporate worship at Lake Orion. We regularly surround individuals and families to hold them up in prayer and bring their physical, spiritual, emotional, and relational needs to God. We also join together in times of celebration, giving thanks for God’s faithfulness. As we come together through prayer, we are strengthened and knit together as a church; we lay aside our differences and unite as one people in the presence of God.

· Preaching:

We believe that God continues to speak to the church through the proclaimed Word. The preaching at the Lake Orion Church of Christ anchors both the worship service and the overall health of the congregation in the Word of God. By intention, the sermon is united with the other elements of worship. In his sermons, the preacher connects with the members as individuals and as a body. His sermons are clear, practical, thoughtful, and edifying. His humility and genuineness are revealed through his openness to share both the strengths and weaknesses of his spiritual journey with the congregation.

Small Groups:

We believe that small groups are vital to the formation of people on the journey of faith. Small groups provide a unique avenue to experiencing a deeper connection with other individuals and with the greater church family. By consistently gathering together with a small group of other disciples, we create and cultivate an intimate, non-judgmental atmosphere that fosters growth in the Spirit through relationships of trust and accountability. Together we share our dreams and our fears, we celebrate our successes and strengths, we confess our failures and weaknesses, and we learn to address and resolve conflict, while seeking the counsel and support of others through conversation, prayer, and the exploration of the Scriptures.

Youth Faith Formation:

We believe that children are an integral part of the life and future of the church. As a congregation we recognize the importance of maintaining an active and welcoming youth program to nurture the growing faith of our children and teens and to empower them to follow Jesus. Through Bible study and discussion groups, we foster an environment that encourages enduring friendships and develops leadership within the group. We invite our youth to join us on the transformative journey of discipleship through shared experiences in missional outreach, fellowship, and worship.

As members of the family of God at the Lake Orion Church of Christ, we covenant with one another and with God to embrace and live into this vision in our life together with God for the sake of the world.

“Our Dream”

We dream of a church…

…where the gospel is not just something taught, but is a reality in and through which people live out God’s intentions for the world; where God’s new creation is breaking into the world; where evangelism and mission are the way of life for all believers.

…where the Spirit of God is present and active in calling us to be the people of God, transforming us and strengthening us as individuals and a community; where people take risks for the sake of the kingdom of God; where people are empowered to live through the Spirit.

…where God’s word becomes a source of hope and life; where Scripture is studied with expectation, taught with relevance, heard with anticipation, and obeyed with passion; where the gospel story lives in us and we live out the story of Jesus in the world.

…where biblical hospitality is a way of life; where God’s beauty is made real in the lives of broken people; where humanity is restored to those who have been dehumanized; where the oppressed and disenfranchised are welcomed and embraced as Christ; where salvation comes and changes us all; where all people and all of God’s creation are blessed through us.

…where people find real help, experience real change, and encounter real answers; where people discover healing, wholeness, and hope; where people find liberation from sin and its enslaving power of destructive choices, habits, and addictions; where grace is both accepted and extended; where forgiveness is offered, divisions are repaired, and reconciliation is experienced in every aspect of our common life.

…where both unity and diversity are expected, received, and honored as gifts of God; where our love for one another springs from our love for God; where diversity empowers deeper discipleship; where comfort, complacency, and seclusion give way to inclusion, welcome, and embrace.

…where God is vibrantly and joyfully worshiped; where worship transforms individuals and the church community to be the people of God in the world; where individuals discover freedom to express their love for and commitment to God, while also honoring and respecting others in the family of faith; where the rich resources of our tradition are celebrated and embraced and form the foundation for the future.

…where prayer forms the rich soil that nourishes everything we do; where prayer leads us both to the heart of God and to the heart of human struggle; where individuals come together to form a visionary community of discernment.

…where growth in radical discipleship is anticipated and expected; where people are free to stretch their wings in faith; where men, women, and children work together to become imitators of God; where transformation into the image of Christ is empowered and the Fruit of the Spirit is cultivated in all people.

…where families are strengthened and marriages flourish; where husbands and wives learn to love one another as Christ loves the church; where children discover the creative and life-giving presence of God; where all people, young and old, are invited to explore life in Christian community.

…where every member is trained, empowered, and entrusted to be a minister; where people embrace their baptismal calling and live the baptized life, life in the self-emptying, self-denying pattern of Jesus.

…where people come together regularly to fellowship in the Spirit and the Word; where small groups and prayer groups form a vital part of our growth in discipleship.

…where people continue to search for God and re-imagine how the gospel speaks into our time and culture; where we serve our neighbors, expecting nothing in return; where we are a necessary resource for our community, both physically and spiritually; where those who are not-yet-Christian find a safe place to ask difficult questions and to explore God, faith, and spirituality; where new church-communities are being planted as people come to embrace the way of Jesus and the life of discipleship.

McGavran's HUP

First, if you find that you are not interested in this post, please feel free to scroll down to the previous post, which you might find more interesting!

Today in assembly at RC, there was a panel of ministers, (Messianic) rabbis, and priests engaging in a dialogue on the subject of racism in the Christian world. It was actually a preview for a larger discussion that the panelists were goinig to have as a part of the House of God series sponsored by RC's Student Diversity Committee. Unfortunately, I was not able to make the panel today and am typing this while the panel is meeting tonight, so I am missing all of the fun. My bride was at assembly today, though, and gave me a great review of the discussion and dialogue.

One of the many topics that broached by the moderator was Fuller missiologist and church growth expert Donald McGavran's "Homogenious Unit Principle" (HUP). As Natalie described the panelists' responses , I discovered that my thoughts on the subject were actually the minority opinion on the panel. So, in an effort to give some of my own opinions on the subject, I offer the following.

Preface: As the summative evaluation for my MDiv, I, along with my compadres, was required to address three case studies (a history case, a ministry case, and a text case) from each of the major fields of study in the MDiv curriculum (biblical text, church history, doctrine/theology, and ministry). Our ministry case directly intersected and addressed McGavran's HUP. The following is a section of my response on that project. Obviously, Blogger won't support the footnotes, so if you are a glutton for punishment and want to read more, feel free to ask. (Just copied in the text. Evidently Blogger does support notes. Go Blogger!):

Got Milk? Church Growth and the Homogeneous Unit Principle

“‘Men like to become Christians without crossing linguistic, racial or class barriers.’ This vitally important principle of church growth explains, in part, why some congregations grow and others do not.”[1] This, in a nut shell, is Donald McGavran’s Homogeneous Unit Principle (HUP), a foundational assumption both in his own missiological “search theology” [2] and in recent church growth thought. McGavran’s homogeneous unit is “a section of society in which all the members have some characteristic in common.”[3] By removing the barriers of language, culture, and class, which hinder conversion, Christians expedite the church growth process.[4] Then, after conversion, people can be expected to practice the teachings of Christ.[5]

Although HUP does ease the process of evangelism, many find McGavran’s approach problematic and theologically flawed. Padilla argues that HUP distorts the Gospel message. “The unity resulting from the Christ’s work is not an abstract unity but a new community in which life in Christ becomes the decisive factor.”[6] This unity is not abstract but is realized in the community of faith where race, social status, and gender are no longer dividing lines, as in the world. The people of God are not “a quotation taken from the surrounding society…, but ‘an embodied question-mark’ that challenges the values of the world.”[7] In other words, the church realizes God’s vision for a new humanity and reveals it to the world at the local level.

Proponents of the HUP counter this critique, suggesting that the homogeneous unit is the primary vehicle through which the new humanity occurs. Wagner suggests the homogeneous congregation should be celebrated because it gives the possibility of healing, rather than creating, social ills.[8] He then suggests that homogeneity actually provides for the most enriched celebration of diversity.[9] Bosch challenges this view by observing real divisions within the church herself. The reality of these divisions suggest that those converted into homogeneous churches actually “become increasingly introverted, xenophobic, and victims of ethnic, class or cultural captivity.”[10]

It is important at this point to critique the homogeneous church growth movement in light of alternative understandings of church growth. For McGavran and HUP proponents, church growth is primarily, though not solely, a numeric phenomenon.[11] What McGavran fails to acknowledge is that the church often goes through important stages of growth that have little to do with numeric increase. The church goes through the continual and active process of transformation or sanctification, which shapes it more into the reality of the new creation.[12] The present crisis with Ansa does highlight the difficulty of heterogeneity. But Bruce must not allow himself, or the church, to choose the easier path toward homogeneity. The community must be challenged to perfect that which they to some extent already embody, a church for all people.

Babel’s Bequeathal: The Dilemma of Human Diversity in the Canonical Heritage

In the beginning, God created the very good creation. Then immediately, the primeval history of the Old Testament turns to a set of four narratives that depict a cycle of human sin and divine punishment.[13] The first three narratives conclude with the intermingling of divine grace that provides some hope of restoration. The final narrative, the events at Babel, confounds the pattern, leaving humanity in hopeless confusion.[14] The question at the end of the primeval history is “How will Yahweh relate to this scattered humanity? Is the Babel catastrophe final?”[15]

The hopeless cacophony of a divided humanity is the point of departure for the rest of the Old Testament.[16] Out of the depths of this hopelessness, Yahweh calls Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3), bringing forth a new grace to address Babel’s bequeathal.[17] The call serves as a programmatic statement for Yahweh’s people. Through Abraham, and his seed Israel, Yahweh will bless the scattered families of the earth (Gen. 12:3; see also 22:18).

The Old Testament is the story of Israel’s struggle to live out this divine program.[18] After her birth as a nation, Yahweh commands Israel to conquer the Promised Land and be set apart as holy, a teacher and priesthood standing between Yahweh and the nations (Ex. 19:5-6; Lev. 11:44-45; Isa. 61:5-7). [19] The nations will stream to Zion to learn, to join her for worship (Ps. 67; 86:9-10; 97; 117), and even to transform their implements of war into tools for producing food (Isa. 2:2-4; see also Mic. 4:1-5).[20] The message reaches its pinnacle in the prophetic literature, especially in Isaiah 40-66. The divine call explodes through the prophet in a nearly utopian vision of God’s new creation (43:18-19; 65:17; 66:22-23): those on the margins of society will be nurtured and protected (55; 58; 61:1-3); Israel will be God’s “light to the nations” (43:1-7); and they will stream to her (42:6; 49:6; 60:1-3).[21]

The New Testament authors embrace the vision of the unifying force of God’s kingdom. The Matthean evangelist weaves allusions to the nations throughout the text.[22] The author of Luke-Acts highlights the universal scope of the kingdom of God in the programmatic statements of both volumes of his work, announcing good news for the oppressed (Luke 4:18-19)[23] and commissioning the disciples to go to “the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Yet, nowhere in the New Testament is this theme as pervasive as in the letters of Paul.

Paul has clearly been captivated by the universal vision of God’s new creation in the prophets. In Christ the kingdom of God has broken into the world and God’s new creation has come (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15). This new creation is realized in the destruction of the social barriers or boundary markers that formerly divided people by race, social class, and gender (Gal. 3:28; see also Eph. 2:14-15; Col. 3:9-11).[24] The driving force behind Paul’s ministry was the realization of this new humanity in the church, so that he could present a blameless and unified church on the day of Christ (1 Cor. 1:8; Phil. 1:6, 10). This does not mean that Paul envisions a church in which all differentiating characteristics have been lost and social distinctions have disappeared. Rather, Paul envisions the church as the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-31), beautifully diverse, though united into a common being (Eph. 4:1-6; Rom. 6:3-6). Paul also envisions those who join the community of faith as a new type of community, in which all people of all races, social classes, and of both genders share this common being and praise God together with one voice (Col. 3:12-17).[25] Bruce’s task will be to cast this vision of God’s new creation in ways that catalyze communal transformation.

Trinitarian Trifocals: The Church as the Image of the Triune God

The vision for a church unified in diversity sharpens when we slip on Trinitarian trifocals. The Christian doctrine of the Triune God provides the theological foundation for the discussion.[26] The doctrine is not mere theological speculation, but the affirmation that the inherent relationality of God demands that the lives of Christians bear similar virtues to those inherent in the life of God.[27] The Trinitarian confession affirms that the eternal life of God is personal life in communal relationship, actualized as self-giving love.[28] The unity of the Trinity preserves the unity of God (Dt. 6:4; Jn. 1:1-4; 10:38; 14:9-10; 17:21-22), but the dynamic relationship of the three preserves their diversity or distinctness and also necessitates their indwelling communion[29] (1 John 1:2-4; Col 1:18; 1 Cor. 12:4-6; 2 Cor. 13:13; Eph. 4:4-6[30]). This communion in diversity reveals three Trinitarian virtues that are helpful for our case: polyphony, particularity and participation. These virtues illuminate the biblical vision for humanity, the revelation of true personhood, and a way of life that is in communion.[31]

The dynamic relationships that exist in the Trinity reveal the polyphonic[32] nature of God. Polyphony provides a creative balance between the unity and diversity of God, realizing that “difference provides an alternative to a monolithic homogeneity, yet without becoming a source of exclusion.”[33] A beautiful example of this is the synoptic depiction of polyphony at Jesus’ baptism.[34] The diversity of the Three comes together at this moment, revealing an inclusive unity in diversity. The polyphonic nature of God is also displayed in canonical attestation that Father, Son, and Spirit worked together in the act of creation.[35] Finally, the Philippian hymn (Phil. 2:6-11) reveals that polyphony does not just include harmony, but also dissonance. Though Christ was in the form of God he emptied himself of power, becoming obedient to death. This kenosis glorified God, and through it God glorified Christ (see also Jn. 17:1; 2 Cor. 8:9).

Trinitarian particularity is closely related to polyphony, though slightly different. Trinitarian particularity is not individualistic but communal, for it is only in relationship that we understand our uniqueness or “particularity.” In other words, Trinitarian polyphony actually highlights Trinitarian particularity.[36] Trinitarian particularity is never wholly isolated, but shaped and developed in the context of relationship or participation, the third Trinitarian virtue.[37]

Trinitarian participation is a mutually constitutive existence, in which each person both dwells in and is indwelt by the lives of others.[38] The Trinity does not consist of isolated individuals, but of three interrelated persons who mutual indwell each other. This perichoretic personhood entails the mutual indwelling and reciprocal interpenetration of each of the Three.[39] Jesus illustrates when discussing his relationship to the Father. In this participation, Father and Son are so interrelated that they are one (Jn. 17:17:21-22; also 10:38), reflecting the image of the other (14:9-10; also Col. 1:15).[40]

The Trinitarian virtues of polyphony, participation, and particularity are realized in the ecclesial community. In the community of faith, abiding with one another in Christ both reveals and sharpens our particularity, but in ways that magnify our polyphony.[41] Incorporated through baptism, the ecclesial/eucharistic community is woven into the being of the relational God and incarnates Trinitarian communion in the world.[42] This realization lays the foundation for the development of authority and structure in the church.[43] The description is seen most clearly in Paul’s metaphor of the church of as the Body of Christ, which highlights the three Trinitarian virtues.[44] It protects the particularity of the parts, refusing to annihilate the differences, but retaining them in a complex network of relationships that work together as a differentiated unity.[45] Here, distinction or differentiated unity is not just a benefit, but a vital part of the body’s completeness. Only through the unified diversity of the church can the Trinitarian virtues, polyphony, particularity, and participation, of God’s new humanity be truly realized in this world.[46] For Bruce, this means helping his leadership understand the importance of polyphony, participation, and particularity, especially the latter, as they interact with the church. If properly related, the Ansa’s particularity would have been understood more clearly.

---

[1] Donald McGavran, “Without Crossing Barriers,” in Church Growth Bulletin, as quoted in Victor Hayward and Donald McGavran, “Without Crossing Barriers?” in Missiology 2 (1974): 205.

[2] Donald McGavran, “The God Who Finds and His Mission,” in International Review of Missions 51 (1962): 303. McGavran’s “search theology” attempts ground missions and conversion to Christianity in a theology of the God who actively pursues and seeks the lost.

[3] Donald McGavran, Understanding Church Growth, 3^rd ed., edited by C. Peter Wagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990): 69. McGavran notes that this characteristic is frequently language or culture.

[4] McGavran, Understanding: 30. See also Hayward and McGavran, 223-224.

[5] Donald McGavran, “The Priority of Ethnicity,” in Evangelical Missions Quarterly, 19 (1983): 22-23. McGavran, Understanding, 177. McGavran suggests that attempting to plant multi-HUP churches can actually be “contrary to the will of God.” See also C. Peter Wagner, “How Ethical Is the Homogeneous Unit Principle?” in Occasional Bulletin of Missionary Research, 2 (1973): 13. Wagner suggests that it is unethical to force people to adopt another culture to become Christians. Although he rightly sees that Christianity is for all people, and therefore transcultural, he fails to see that in becoming Christian, people are, in fact, adopting a new culture.

[6] C. Rene Padilla, “The Unity of the Church and the Homogeneous Principle,” in International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 6 (1982): 23.

[7] Ibid., 30.

[8] Wagner, 12-13. See also Robert L. Plaisted, “The Homogeneous Unit Debate: It’s Value Orientations and Changes,” in EQ 87 (1987): 228-233. Plaisted suggests Paul was the quintessential HUP practitioner. He fails to understand the cultural and social milieu of the early church and Paul’s labor to unify those from different groups.

[9] Ibid., 14. Wagner also suggests that homogeneous churches provide the framework for admiring diversity from afar.

[10] David J. Bosch, “Church Growth Missiology,” in Missionalia 16 (1988): 21. See also Padilla, 23. Padilla suggests that HUP is actually counter to the gospel message because Gospel is about the unity of separated peoples.

[11] McGavran, Understanding, 71. McGavran differentiates three types of church growth: biological, transfer, and conversion. Of these, he gives priority to conversion or ‘discipling’ (124). McGavran’s categories are primarily about the individual. He does utilize the term “perfecting” to describe the process of spiritual growth, but it is a category altogether separate from his understanding of church growth (31).

[12] Lewis B. Mead, More Than Numbers (Bethesda, MD: The Alban Institute, 1993), 42. Mead highlights the need to re-envision church growth as “maturational,” growth that occurs during an active dialogue between who the church is and what it is called to be (51). See also Transforming Congregations for the Future (Bethesda, MD: The Alban Institute, 1994), 43-71. Here, Mead describes the church’s responsibility developing disciples.

[13] An overview of the structure is as follows: Cycle 1 (Gen. 2:4b-3:24) – Adam and Eve sin, they do not ‘surely die’ God makes them clothes; Cycle 2 (Gen. 4) – Cain commits fratricide, God gives him a protective mark; Cycle 3 (Gen. 5-9) –God saves humanity through Noah; Cycle 4 (Gen. 10-11:9) – Babel.

[14] Gerhard von Rad, Genesis, Rev. Ed., in Old Testament Library, ed. G.E. Wright, et al. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1972), 152. Von Rad correctly notes that Gen. 1-11 depict humanity’s movement away from God and the development of a chasm between God and his creation. See also Bruce K. Waltke and Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 176.

[15] Ibid.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Claus Westermann, Genesis 1-11, trans. John J. Scullion (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1974), 555. See also von Rad, 154.

[18] Gerhard von Rad, Theology of the Old Testament, Vol. 1, trans. D. M. G. Stalker, in The Old Testament Library, ed. James L. Mays, Carol A. Newsom, David L. Peterson (Louisville: Westminster, 2001): 164. Von Rad rightly suggests that the climax of the problem of Yahweh and the nations at Babel is the keystone to the Yahwistic primeval history and the whole of Israel’s saving history. Though slightly reductionistic, this approach highlights the importance of Yahweh’s relationship to his creation.

[19] The relationship between Israel and the nations is complex. At times Yahweh uses Israel to judge the nations, while at others the nations to judge Israel. We also cannot dismiss Yahweh’s “ban” against the nations dwelling in the Promised Land. Yahweh sometimes used Israel to bless the nations and sometimes to destroy. In this midst of this tension, Israel testifies to Yahweh’s anxious anticipation of the time when all nations would follow him in obedience and worship him together.

[20] Otto Kaiser, Isaiah 1-12, 2^nd ed., trans. John Bowden, in The Old Testament Library, ed. Peter Ackroyd, James Barr, Bernhard W. Anderson, and John Bright (Philadelphia, Westminster, 1983): 55. Kaiser suggests that universal peace only comes through the universal recognition of Yahweh via Israel.

[21] Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40-66, trans. David M. G. Stalker, in The Old Testament Library, ed. Peter Ackroyd, James Barr, Bernhard W. Anderson, and John Bright (Philadelphia, Westminster, 1969): 424-425. Westermann suggests that this universal salvific gathering by God is something for which there is no precedent. God will even gather the nations together himself (66:18-21).

[22] Ulrich Luz, The Theology of the Gospel of Matthew, trans. J. Bradford Robinson, in New Testament Theology, ed. James D. G. Dunn (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1995): 26-30. Luz rightly notes that four women mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy, signaled by the paraphrase of Bathsheba as the “wife of Uriah,” highlights the universal perspective of his gospel. The Great Commission (28:19) bookends the gospel with this theme.

[23] Here, Luke’s Jesus and interprets the text of Isaiah to show its universal nature.

[24] Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community, rev. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994): 114. Banks astutely notes that Paul’s emphasis is shared integration of different groups. He concludes, “[Paul] is more interested in the unity the gospel brings than in its equality, and in this unity diversity is preserved rather than uniformity imposed.”

[25] Paul utilizes his vision of the new humanity to theologically shape the community into a cruciform people. (Phil 2:1-11; 2 Cor. 8:9). Practically, this means that leadership must not lord their power over others, those with excess must selflessly care for those in need, and those who have rights must defer for the sake of others. This speaks to many different facets of our case, including the need for leadership to empty themselves for others and of the privileged to help others in the community.

[26] Time and space do not permit attempts describe and dissect the metaphysical question of the Triune God. I will proceed, accepting the doctrine and attempting to explicate helpful conclusions from it. The discussion on Trinitarian virtues will hopefully provide a better glimpse into the nature of the relationships within the Trinity.

[27] David S. Cunningham, These Three Are One, in Challenges in Contemporary Theology, ed. Lewis Ayers and Gareth Jones (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1998). Cunningham’s work is an attempt to show how three “Trinitarian virtues” (polyphony, participation, and particularity) should be lived out in “Trinitarian practices.” His “Trinitarian virtues” are helpful, and will guide the discussion here.

[28] Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991): 67, 69, 70.

[29] Cunningham, 115.

[30] The latter three might can be taken at least as proto-Trinitarian thought in Paul.

[31] John D. Zizioulas, Being as Communion, in Contemporary Greek Theologians 4, ed. Christos Yannaras, Kallistos of Diokleia, and Costa Carras (Crestwood, NY.: SVS Press, 1985): 17-19. Zizioulas suggests that the existence of God is an event of communion. Likewise, “there is no true being without communion,” “but every form of communion which denies or suppresses the person is inadmissible.” (18).

[32] Polyphony refers to the mixing of various sounds that work together to achieve something. The various tones and sounds produced by various instruments and voices combine to create the rich world of the piece.

[33] Cunningham, 129.

[34] When John brings Jesus out of the Jordan waters, the Spirit descends on Jesus and God declares that Jesus is his beloved son (Mt. 3:16-17; Mk. 1:10-11; Lk. 3:22).

[35] This becomes evident when creation narratives are juxtaposed (i.e. Gen. 1; 2-3; Prov. 8; Jn. 1; Col. 1).

[36] This particularity becomes clear when examining texts about the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For example, re-examine the texts above or consider the particularity revealed in Jesus’ command to wait in Jerusalem for the Spirit (Acts 1:4, 8; Jn. 15:26; see also Rom. 8:26-27).

[37] Cunningham, 203.

[38] Cunningham, 165.

[39] Miroslav Volf, After Our Likeness, in Sacra Pagina, ed. Alan G. Padgett (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 208-211. See also Cunningham, 180.

[40] Christians also share in this participation through the indwelling Spirit that comes at baptism, drawing Christians into the participation in the life of God, and likewise into the lives of all other Christians.

[41] The obvious challenge is to keep these particularities from becoming barriers to relationship/communion.

[42] Zizioulas, 18-19. Zizioulas goes so far as to suggest that there is no real existence outside of the ecclesial community. True personhood comes into being at baptism, the second birth. The references to baptism and the Eucharist here are intentional. It is in these two acts that Christians most fully participate in the life of God.

[43] Zizioulas, 114. See also Volf, 195. Volf suggests that “correspondence between the Trinitarian and ecclesial relationships is not simply formal. Rather it is ‘ontological’ because it is soteriologically grounded.”

[44] Cunningham, 154-155.

[45] Volf, 145.

[46] Volf, 181. Volf beautifully describes the new humanity of the church as an “‘open’ fellowship of friends and siblings who… summon enemies and strangers to become friends and children of God and… accept them as friends and siblings. Only such open fellowship is commensurate with the ultimate vision of the church as the eschatological gathering of the entire people of God from all tribes and nations.”