An Unstoppable Force by Erwin McManus Review
See the disclaimer and more posts like this at the Seminary Series
“An Unstoppable Force” by Erwin McManus challenges church leadership paradigms and admirably attempts to provide insight into how the church can return to the heart of what God had originally intended.
Moving beyond self-preservation
“Once survival has become our supreme goal, we have lost our way”, the church desperately needs to move beyond a mode of survival to one where she is thriving and transforming the culture in which she live (23). McManus suggests that many churches today are no longer fulfilling their biblical mandate. They have lowered their sights to living for the sake of mere existence rather than mission. This is too small of a goal for the beautiful bride of Christ.
McManus goes as far as comparing the biblical church to “the salmon working its way upstream for the sole purpose of spawning a new generation, even at the cost of her own life” (19). I can see where there may be backlash against this, as there may be people within our churches that are hurting, in crisis, in need of healing, and in no place of sacrificing on the behalf of others. However, I believe McManus opts for this suicide-mission approach because the majority of the church is experiencing a crisis of apathy if anything.
This also suggests the though-provoking possibility that local churches are not meant to live on forever. This may explain why there are so many archaic institutional relics of church buildings that have just enough money to keep the lights on that are in actuality empty and dead inside. There are churches that need to literally give what’s left to God’s mission in the world and simply shut down, or be re-born or re-planted. If the church is a living organism as McManus suggests then it would only have a limited time of effectiveness. Churches need to be continuously future-oriented, constantly spawning a new generation of followers, even at the cost of its own existence.
What if we had churches that were no longer concerned with their own self-preservation? What if we had churches that would follow in the ways of Christ and be willing to even die for the sake of its mission? What if we were no longer focused on fulfilling our own needs, huddling together, as a refuge from the world, rather than a refuge for the world? What if the church scattered rather than gathered?
A practical approach to this would be intentionally canceling our typical Sunday morning worship gathering. People could be sent out, as the church, individually or in groups, connecting with family, friends, acquaintances, the last, the lost, and the least. In some sense the local church would cease to exist during this time, but on a deeper level, maybe the church would be deepest and widest when members are sent out engaging others in this way. This intentional dispora of being Jesus could then re-gather and share their stories, encourage one another, pray for one another, and help develop a practice of being on mission.
Transforming Discipleship
“We equated being a good citizen with being a good Christian” (28). McManus rightly attacks our nominal understanding of what it means to be a disciple. A Christian is more than someone who is simply saved and believes all the right stuff. Every member is not only a minister, but a missionary (166).
Discipleship moves beyond personal holiness as well. “You cannot wash the feet of a dirty world if you refuse to touch it” (23). Many of us have misaligned our focus on maintaining our personal sense of purity and inadvertently abandoning the mission of God. Discipleship is ultimately seen in the context of serving beyond one’s self and in some way advancing the kingdom of God.
A practical structural idea in terms of ecclesiology that comes from McManus’ writings is transforming what it means to be a member. A church can function with two circles of community, one which is radically inclusive of everyone, and one of ‘membership’ where the “only benefit in membership is the privilege to serve” (215). This raises the bar of what it means to be a follower of Jesus as someone who is on-board with the mission of God through service. A member means “that you are moving from being a consumer to being an investor; that you are joining not simply the community of Christ, but the cause of Christ” (215).
An issue with this approach is that it would be difficult to enforce the voluntary service of ‘members’. McManus resolves this by spending the bulk of leadership energy on creating an ethos that would bring people in the best possible place of cultivating a heart for being on mission. Sacrificial giving, community, and evangelism are set as the starting points of being a disciple rather than the end result. Much of this is done through modeling, storytelling, celebrating, and taking risks that reveal what is most valued at the heart of the church.
Another practical method of discipleship might be through providing individual development projects. It seems to be an effective method of learning in secular institutions, there’s no reason why it wouldn’t work within the church. Jesus often assigned his disciples tasks so that they might learn and grow in faith while serving those in need.
This could range creatively from simply giving a bible away to leading a ministry. The point of this would be so that members are not robbed of an opportunity to grow, stumble and serve, while being empowered through the giving of meaningful responsibilities. I dream of when every member is not merely a missionary, but a church planter; who didn’t need funding or buildings, but incarnationally and creatively planted themselves within a community as the presence of Christ. The key is that every disciple begins living life sacrificially beyond themselves as representatives of the church serving humanity.
Connecting with Culture
“We must remove every non-essential barrier facing those who seek God but have not yet found him” (87). McManus suggests that over the two millennia of church history many obstacles to the gospel have been created by the church. He calls for us like the reformers, to once again strip away that which does not help people move towards Christ. The church must continually re-examine our language, or structure, or facilities and allow the gospel to dynamically connect with the culture without losing the heart and foundations of the good news.
The church also needs to re-learn the how it views culture and be able to work within pantheism. McManus subscribes to reading the Scriptures with a missiological template which necessitates the exegesis of culture (25). The church needs destroy the dichotomy between church and culture, and be able to see church and culture from God’s eyes, both affirming what is good and true, but also condemning what is not.
What if the church could find a way to not communicate through labels of Christians or non-Christian, but to communicate to human beings (52)? Might we be able to find a way to articulate things of God and the human condition in a way that is broader and deeper that speaks to people at all points of the journey? What if Christians left their bubble and were able to be a part of the culture again, and not need to exegete culture because they are native to it, bicultural to the kingdom and their current context?
An application for our churches today would be to begin by seeing that culture, media, non-Christians are not altogether evil. They need to develop a practice of examining and affirming beauty within their culture as Paul did on Mars Hill in Acts 17. This can be through assignments on listening to the lyrics of secular music and discovering if there is anything that is true to God within them. Another assignment could be simply taking digital photos in the community of where people see God outside of the walls of the church.
These church-culture interactions can go even as far as believing that people from the culture have something of deep value to offer the church, and inviting them to speak to the church and for members to learn from people outside of the church. The point of these exercises would be allowing people to see that God is at work beyond the church, and that the image of God resides within every human being, no matter how broken.
Embracing Change
“No how much or how rapidly culture changes, the church is designed to prevail” (34). Much of McManus’ text surrounds change leadership within the church. He shares of how the gospel is supposed to be vibrant and dynamic in the face of ever changing contexts. He states one of the key problems with the stagnancy of the church being how current spiritual leaders have been trained, “The reality was that pastors were being equipped to preserve the past rather that to create the future” (25).
McManus advocates not only adapting to change, but creating change. “Great leaders create great problems. If you’re not willing to create problems, you’re not willing to lead. Leaders create problems by changing expectations” (192). This can be an extremely tough reality for those who have are laggards and have an innate need for consistency. However, I believe that what McManus is vouching for here is that we continually move forward, refusing to remain satisfied with yesterday’s effectiveness, and join God in where he is moving.
A practical application of this could be intentionally building change into the DNA of the church. Not change simply for the sake of change, but change to avoid empty ritualizing and to connect to an ever-changing culture. A few times a year it may be helpful to have highly intentional scheduled times of experimentation and innovation. This can involve having people change or swap roles, for example the youth can take over what the ‘adults’ normally do. The setup of the worship service could be changed. Fresh murals and banners can be created. New initiatives can be announced that everyone can engage in such as a street clean up after service or restoring a rundown part of the neighborhood together.
Cultural leadership
“The church should be the greatest revolution ever initiated on this planet” (140). McManus takes the interaction of church and culture a step further and believes that the church should be changing and leading the culture. “The first-century church didn’t keep up with its time, didn’t spend its energy keeping up with its time. The first-century church changed time. It rewrote history. It radically impacted culture” (66).
This is far greater than our typical understanding of the mission of God pertaining only to winning souls and maybe making the world a better place. The church’s proximity to the Creator of the universe ought to make it the epicenter of life, art, science, imagination, spirituality, etc. Rather than adapting and mimicking culture, the church should be the forerunner of culture. It should be creating a kingdom-culture or a cross-culture within the existing culture that everyone else looks to.
What if the church was not a fortress from the world, but a culture-changing force in the world? What if the churches became known as centers of innovation. What if the church was seen as those that pushed humanity forward? What if we were truly cultural leaders – not in the distribution of religion but in the arts, spirituality, creativity, and in service to the community?
Most practically I can see the church leading in the area of service. Unlike a group of people who volunteered to serve at times, the church would be people who are servants at heart. The church could work with city councilors and find ways of being an extension of the service arm of the city.
The church could even start initiatives for people who are out of the city official’s scopes. This could be discussion nights on parenting, suicide, coping with loss. It can be in the realm of helping people get employed in an environment that is true to who God created them to be. The church can hosts events for showcasing human uniqueness, art, music, of those who have yet been discovered. There are many possibilities for cultural leadership, the key here would be a few things that the church can do with excellence, where they would be sorely missed in the community if they did not exist.
Conclusion
An Unstoppable Force is cram-filled with insights that can fuel the movement of Jesus in our current culture. I get the sense that McManus doesn’t care much for his own legacy, as long as leaders can continually point the way towards the future church, even amid risk and failure. Rather than blaming culture, McManus is much harsher towards the church than he is of culture, which is refreshing. He places the responsibility of reaching people with the gospel and transforming the culture in which we live, on the shoulders of the church, just as Christ did.
I also enjoyed McManus warning of how it has taken time for us as leaders to struggle through the church that God had originally intended, and that we ought to expect that it will likely take time for members of our local church to struggle through and embrace as well. This is a very timely book in my current stage in ministry and would recommend it to just about anyone.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I am currently reading this book. It has provided me with a basis for hope and some spark for what it is God has in store for me. I have to agree with him on many of his points. We can only survive as a church if we are culturally valid. Unless we embrace this concept we are destined to become like most of Europe.
Fortunately for me, I belong to a church who sees things this way. I would say that we are cutting edge on being culturally relevant. This is probably due to the foresight and wisdom of our leadership. I would recommend this to anyone. Especially those who are having problems keeping the fire of the great commission going.
Hey Tony – It’s an old book by today’s standards, but I loved it – seminal in shaping my thinking + plus the writing style jived with me – though I know others who didn’t connect with it.