|
<< Go back
MODALITY, SODALITY...
MODALITY, SODALITY
& THE PARABLE OF
THE LONE RANGER
"I cannot be more filled with the Spirit
than the community of which I am a part."
(Prof. Richard Lovelace in 'The Dynamics of Spiritual Renewal')
 The temptation to "go it alone" in Christian life is strong. People let us down. We get hurt. No-one seems to understand us. At times it can seem easier to give up on others with their weaknesses, foibles and flaws: "Just me, my closest friends and God," we decide. This posture can easily be dressed up in spiritual language and it's easy to accuse the church of being controlling and compromised.
Trouble is, Jesus never saw it that way. He is the head of a body with many parts, all working together; the cornerstone of a temple, whose every brick is connected to others.
 Zinzendorf, the founder of the original "Order of the Mustard Seed", was adamant that genuine faith can only be worked out in the context of Christian community and his Order never represented an alternative to church. Quite the reverse. Like renewal groups down the ages, from the ancient Franciscans to the modern day cell-church movement, The OMS was never about replacing the church, always about bringing spiritual life through a rediscovery of radically, Christ-centered friendships.
Ralph Winter, an author and scholar of the history of Christian missions addressed the All-Asia Mission Consultation in Seoul Korea in 1973, and outlined two “redemptive structures” that God's purposes have produced in every generation. These two structures he calls: modality & sodality.
Modality
A modality is a complex, structured and diverse fellowship (old and young, rich and poor etc). Terms like denomination, local congregation, parish or diocese all refer to forms of modality. Modal communities are relatively stable and make low demands on their members. Their default is to look inwards towards maintenance. It's easy to criticise modailities for this introversion and the accompanying appearance (or reality) of compromise, but it is as a result of this emphasis that they tend to be inclusive, family friendly and safe. When most people think of church, this is what they imagine.
Sodality
Sodal communities often sit alongside or within modalities but require a much deeper level of relational commitment to the group. The default of sodalities is outward and missional. As a result, sodalities are often exciting, envisioned and have a deep sense of community. However they must always beware the tendency towards exclusivity, a sense of superiority and an unhealthy work-ethic which can cripple any visionary group. Examples of sodalities include missionary organisations, many men's / women's / student groups within local churches and across entire denominations, monastic orders and house church groups. Church planters tend to start off with a sodality (a highly focussed and committed team) that eventually grows into a modality.
Ralph Winter describes the interaction of sodalities (which might include Cymbrogi of the OMS) and modalities, using the metaphor of a town (modality) and the individual businesses within it (sodalities). Members of a sodality can also be members of a modality - in fact they generally make a valuable contribution to that modality and often become the prophetic voices and renewal streams within.
To download a pdf version of Ralph Winter's original address, CLICK HERE.Unitas Fratrum
Zinzendorf's great commitment to church unity forbade him from separating off from the established church. He worked hard to gain the approval of the Archbishop of Canterbury and his Order included Catholics, Anglicans and Lutherans. Moravian converts on the mission field were often 'given away' to other expressions of church (one of the reasons the Moravian denomination is so small today). The Moravian church - of which Zinzendorf was a part - is known as the Unitas Fratrum or United Brethren reflecting their passionate commitment to unity within the Body of Christ.
In 1736, he visited his former school at Halle and met with a young army Lieutenant named Charles von Peistel. In characteristically blunt fashion, their conversation ran as follows:
Z: "Do you love the Lord Jesus?"
P: "Yes, but not so ardently as I should wish to love Him."
Z: "Whose fault is that? Is it the fault of the Lord Jesus, or is it your own?"
P: "I must be my own."
Z: "Do you hold fellowhip with any of Christ's people?"
P: "Here you see two common soldiers who also love the Lord Jesus."
Z: "Do you visit one another?"
P: "Yes; we meet almost every day."
Z: "That is fellowhip: I acknowledge no Christianity without fellowship."
The Two Structures of God's Redemptive Strategy by Ralph D. Winter, ©1995 William Carey Library << Go back |
