[THO] The Call: Mission and Concluding Remarks

I must admit being a bit disappointed with the Call. I was all excited when it started. I lost track of it when I replied to a final draft with an indication that I was unsure if I could attach my name to it. Not that my name would really carry any real weight, but I see now that the document we ended up with was a far cry from what I would be comfortable with. I do think it raises some excellent points though and perhaps a simplified version would find greater appeal for the future. So I do what I can do, which is simply offer my observations here.

The final statement concerns mission and frames it in a way that I think Karl Jaspers would be comfortable with, I am less so. I think it is full of great stuff, but the evangelical in me says we can't throw out the aspect of calling people into the story. It is not enough to just do good things and live in a way that we can have a legitimate prophetic voice. It is also not enough to ignore how we live either. So for me this statement is too much a reaction to an overemphasis on "saving faith" within evangelicalism. Personally I think the groundwork is already being laid for a more wholistic evangelicalism, at least I see it in my own denomination and in other movements I am able to observe. But it doesn't hurt to reiterate (or iterate in some cases) this restored emphasis on social justice. But if you want to capture the hearts of evangelicals don't miss where it already is - the message of salvation, take what is there and broaden the brush stroke.

Also again the language is overly complicated, 'cruciform holiness' is simply a confusing statement trying to evoke an image that has little meaning for the reader. Did we somehow think we didn't have enough cross references in this document? These out of place statements feel like square pegs hammered into round holes and don't lend credibility to the rest of the document. Sure the cross needs to be part of this section, but there have to be better ways to include that then tacking it onto a buzz phrase and forming a speedbump and the very start of the statement.

Epilogue

Why is the epilogue so much better than the rest of this document? The language is a bit over the top in places, but it is better than any of the statements. In fact if I were to read just the epilogue I might be more interested in reading the rest of the document, perhaps it would make a better introduction.

In closing, I would like to see this document engaged with. Perhaps even reshaped into a usable form. I think without that it is in danger of going the route of the Chicago call, lost in obscurity. When this project started I had a lot of hope that it could be a significant landmark in the emerging evangelical culture. Perhaps some dialogue here can restore that sense of hope. I am eager to hear your thoughts.