Wells or Fences?
THE RISK OF SPIRITUAL GROWTH - BY SHEILA PRITCHARD
A
visitor to an Australian outback cattle ranch was intrigued by the seemingly
endless miles of farming country with no sign of any fences. He asked a local
rancher how he kept track of his cattle. The rancher replied, "Oh that's
no problem. Out here we dig wells instead of building fences."
The
implication is obvious. There is no need to fence cattle in when they are
highly motivated to stay within range of their source of life. Let's consider a
paradigm for spiritual growth which is based on digging deeper wells rather
than on building higher fences. To do this we need first to take a little
excursus into mathematics. I promise it will be brief!
--------------------
The
word 'set' in mathematical terms refers to a group of objects which belong
together because they have some defined similarity which marks them out. For
example, a set of all odd numbers would include 1,3,5 and 157, but not 2,4 or
100. Sets can be defined in various ways. The set of males is a clearly
recognisable set. It can be further divided into subsets of single males and
married males. Or we could define a set in terms of age: the set of those under
thirty five.
Or
in terms of knowledge: the set made up of all those who know what the prophet
Ezekiel was instructed to do with the hair he shaved from his head and beard.
(Ezek 5)
Or
behaviour: the set of those who have not exceeded the speed limit today. It is
possible that some one person might be included in all those sets. On the other
hand any speedy female over thirty five who doesn’t know Ezekiel intimately
will be excluded from them all.
Obviously
the way we define sets determines who or what is included and excluded. Most
sets are bounded sets. In other words the focus is on the boundary: at
50 kph you are within the set of law-abiding drivers, at 51 kph you are not. If
you turn 35 tomorrow you are within the set of under thirty-fives. If your 35th
birthday is today, you are not.
There is another kind of set however, where the focus is not on a
boundary but on relationship to a central goal. The set of those who
are losing weight is one example. There is no boundary defined by a specific
number of kilos, but the central goal is weight loss. All those moving in that
direction are included in the set. Another example is the set of all those
whose marriages are growing stronger in intimacy and communication. Again the
crucial feature of the set is not a boundary, but the direction of movement
towards (what is in this case) a relational goal. This kind of set is called a
'centred set. So we have bounded sets and centred sets.
Or if you prefer stories to mathematics, we have fences or wells. Paul Hiebert,
a missiologist from Trinity Evangelical School of Divinity, suggests that it
makes a great deal of difference to our perspective on evangelism and mission
whether we think of Christianity as a bounded set or a centred set. If we take
a bounded set view, who qualifies? Where precisely is the boundary? Who is 'in'
and who is 'out'? How much must a person know of doctrine and Scripture before
we can call that person a Christian? What differences of lifestyle need to be
apparent as proof of change? At what point has conversion taken place? These
are tough questions.
Hiebert
suggests that it is much more realistic and helpful to think of
Christianity as a centred set: a set defined by movement towards the
centre, the person Jesus Christ. Now conversion is the point at which a person
turns towards the centre and begins the journey. That new fragile follower of
Jesus (about whom he may know very little) is as much part of the set as the
missionary who told him the gospel story. The fact that the missionary has a
degree in theology is irrelevant to defining the set. The fact that they are
both moving towards the central goal is what matters.
Ignoring
the implications for cross cultural mission, what are the implications for
ourselves?
If we view Christianity as a bounded set we will pay a lot of
attention to the boundaries. We will have clearly defined parameters
as to what constitutes a Christian, usually linked to certain doctrinal
statements, understanding of those beliefs and commitment to them. We will have
our ways of determining who is 'id and who is 'out'. Another
feature of bounded sets is that they are static. Once within the
set no further attention to definition or development is needed. For a
non-spiritual example let's take the set of Granny Smith apples. A Granny Smith
apple is a Granny Smith apple whether it is ripe or unripe, rotten or
shrivelled up. Those factors may be very significant to the consumer of the
apple, but they have no bearing on its designation as a member of the set. I
leave you to draw your own parallels!
But
what if we view Christianity as a centred set? Centred sets, you
remember, are created by defining a centre and the relationship of
things/people to that centre. All those attracted to the centre and moving
towards it are members of the set. All those moving away from the centre are
not members of the set. Distance from the centre is not as important as
direction of movement. One can be close to the centre but moving away
from it; another may be less close but moving toward it. Although boundaries
are not the primary focus there is a clear distinction between those moving in
and those moving out. The primary characteristic of centred sets is that they
are dynamic sets. In other words there is always attention to the
direction of movement. It is 'movement towards' that defines the members of the
set.
--------------------
What
I am suggesting is that it is both more Biblical and more risky to entertain a
centred set approach to Christian faith. Centred set Christianity is defined by
active, dynamic relationship to Jesus Christ. There is no place in centred set
Christianity for us to shelter behind the fence of theological orthodoxy,
denominational superiority or verbal assent to gospel values which bears no
resemblance to lifestyle. One of the apostle Paul's most striking victories for
the early Church was his insistence that the 'fence' of Jewish orthodoxy, in
particular circumcision, should not be a barrier to entry to the Christian
community. Paul insisted that faith in Christ alone was the criterion.
And
consider Jesus himself and his scorching condemnation of the Pharisees in
Matthew 23. While affirming that what they taught was orthodox, he says,
"Do not follow them for they do not do what they teach”. "Woe to you,
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you lock people out of the kingdom of
heaven. For you do not go in yourselves, and when others are going in, you stop
them."
Or
Jesus in the sermon on the mount, "Not everyone who says to me 'Lord,
Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of
my father in heaven."
Or
Jesus in his discourse to the Jews in John 5, "You search the scriptures
because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that
testify of me. Yet you refuse to come to me to have life."
Jesus
clearly does not undervalue doctrine or the study of scripture or verbal
commitment. But what he does do is indicate that they cannot be used as
'fences' to define disciples. Disciples of Jesus are identified by a dynamic
lifestyle which is moving towards Christ likeness. The emphasis throughout the
gospels is never primarily on what theological understanding people had, but on
whether they were willing to follow Jesus.
So
who is the true disciple the well churched graduate who can defend Christianity
against all opponents in a theological argument, or the hesitant, barely
literate young woman who comes to the drop-in centre but never to a church
service?
-
From the perspective of bounded set thinking the answer is obvious. The
graduate is clearly 'in'; the young woman 'out'. But from the perspective of
centred set thinking we cannot answer the question without more information. We
need to know about the personal relationship of each to Jesus. If the young
woman is, however stumblingly, moving towards discovering what relationship
with Jesus can mean for her, while the churchman is quietly ignoring all
aspects of personal commitment and prayer, and moving towards increasing self
sufficiency, materialism and disregard for others, what
then?
Our
purpose is not to theorise about imaginary others. The question we need to
consider is this: if Christian disciples were no longer defined in terms of
fences, but only according to their movement towards Christ the centre, where
does that leave you and me?
Let
me suggest five implications for our own Christian Discipleship.
Radical Commitment - We need to take a new look at what Jesus' life
was really like. It was radical, it was non conformist, it involved lack of
security in physical terms. It was characterised by opposition from the
religious establishment and frequent misunderstanding and hardship. It was
marked by an absolute priority given to time to be alone listening to his
father, and by self giving love that cut across all social and cultural
boundaries. Jesus was as much at home with Gentiles and outcasts as with those
of his own race and social standing. His friendship was available to those whom
others would shun and avoid. This Jesus is the centre of the Christian faith
and if our goal is to move towards being like him, then we need to be clear about
what that commitment really means.
Challenging Responsibility - At first living with wells rather than fences
feels very risky. Apparently when ranchers introduce cattle which have been
used to fenced paddocks into an outback situation, the cattle tend to huddle
nervously around the well or water source, fearing to move very far. Fences
provide a feeling of security, but they also allow a certain degree of
complacency. To rely no longer on boundaries which keep me in and others out
leaves me exposed and responsible. Now I cannot doze peacefully in the shelter
of the fence. I must stay alert and active in my connection to the source of
life which alone is my security. And that source of life and security is Christ
and a living relationship with him, not in a theoretical fence which absolves
me from action.
Freedom from Defensiveness - Paradoxically, however, the nearer you are to
the centre the more freedom there is to explore widely. After a while the
cattle on the ranch realize both their security and their freedom and no longer
need to huddle. A deep relationship with Jesus develops in his disciples a
confidence which transcends fearful huddling. It enables us to reach out in
ever widening circles of experience and relationship without defensiveness just
as Jesus did. Confidence in who he was in relation to God enabled Jesus to
cross boundaries of every kind, as I have already mentioned. Christians who
have that kind of freedom from defensiveness and fear seem to attract others to
the well also. This kind of freedom is quite different from license. Neither is
it a grey wishy-washiness. Remember the determining factor is likeness to Jesus
and no one could call him wishy-washy!
Another
aspect of this freedom is that there is always room for growth. Bounded
set thinking can stunt growth. What often happen at transition points
such as adolescence, young adulthood or mid life, or at some life crisis, is
that the previous theological boundary is no longer adequate. Because the focus
is on the boundary, the person faced with this uncomfortable fact feels that
the only choice is to 'step outside' the boundary.
I think many people leave our churches for this reason and are
often labelled as having 'lost their faith when in fact what may be happening
is very faith full The freedom of centred set thinking allows each of us to
expand and explore as each new life experience challenges us. The only
criterion is ongoing relationship to Jesus.
Dynamic Growth - Spiritual growth, from a centred set perspective, is not
optional. We all know that in this life we will never come to the end of the
process of being conformed to the likeness of Christ. In bounded set thinking,
however, it is quite possible to stop moving in that direction at all, without
any great sense of concern. In centred set thinking it is that very movement
from "one degree of glory to another" that marks us out as those
whose life comes from "the Lord who is the Spirit” (2 Cor 3:18). In
Philippians 4: 10~ 15 Paul gives us his own view of spiritual growth. I want to
know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings
by becoming like him in his death, if somehow I may attain the resurrection
from the dead. "Not that I have already obtained this or have already
reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has
made me his own. Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own, but
this one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what
lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of
God in Christ Jesus. "Let those of us then who are mature be of the same
mind; and if you think differently about anything, this too God will reveal to
you." Movement, development, dynamic growth are at the heart of every stage
of a centred set approach to Christian life.
Evangelism by Attraction - Evangelism in centred set thinking is
motivated by personal, life changing experience of Jesus, and focuses on
pointing others in the direction of the source of life. It works by attraction
to the centre. Our lives serve as witnesses to the extent that they
contagiously attract others to what has so captivated us. Sadly, some forms of
bounded set evangelism pay more attention to the numbers of people who can be
corralled within a particular doctrinal or even denominational fence, and do
little to attract folk to the Jesus of the gospels. A very good Biblical
example of centred set evangelism is, interestingly, the woman at the well! Her
own encounter with Jesus so transformed her that she was freed from
defensiveness and fear in such a remarkable way that even those who had
previously shunned her were attracted to the source of life she had found.
--------------------
Are
our lives dynamically connected to their source in Jesus? Do we freely and
fearlessly cross boundaries to attract others to the same well - or have we
lapsed into complacent sheltering inside a respectable theological fence which
hides our own lack of movement and serves mainly to keep others out? "Out
here," said the rancher, "we dig wells instead of building
fences."
--------------------
Sheila
Pritchard lectures in Spiritual Formation at the Bible College of New Zealand's
Reprinted
from REALITY February/March 1994