Wells or Fences (the risk of
spiritual growth)
Sheila Pritchard
A visitor to an
Australian outback cattle ranch was intrigued by the seemingly
endless miles of fanning country with no signs 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 recognizable 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 behavior: 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 to 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 'centered set'.
So we have bounded sets
and centred sets. Or if you prefer stories to mathematics, we
have fences or wells. Paul Hiebert, a musicologist 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 centre 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 in 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 dearly 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 'in' 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!
Focusing on
the centre
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 realise
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 Spirif (2 Cor 3:18).
In Philippians 3:10-15
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 Wee 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 awn, 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 Cod 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."
