The equation of a missional church is quite simple. It involves the interweaving of two types of commitments through the church system. First there are the spiritual commitments of the faith, the second are the cultural commitments of the people you’re trying to reach. The equation looks like this:
Faith + Culture + Church = a missional church.
Simple. The unique struggle of UUism, and what I believe the source of its possible demise, is that in most of our churches the cultural commitments have become so predominant that it has become confused with the faith itself. This is evidenced almost every time you hear your average layperson talk of UUism, for example: “this persons a UU without even knowing about it” is not a theological comment, but rather refers to someone’s cultural status (politically liberal, listens to NPR, middle-class comfortable, has a college degree etc…). In many congregations if you stripped out the cultural commitments, there would be nothing left.
So when UUs talk of reaching out to different segments of the population, one issue that we share with other churches is cultural relevance. The other, is theological. If reading Mary Oliver and supporting NPR isn’t a spiritual commitment, then what’s left? What is the content of the faith? What is the Gospel?
Our unique challenges that are preventing us from having an impact in our world is that our churches are not only dealing with a cultural issue of how to reach contemporary generations, but a spiritual issue of what is the gospel we are trying to reach them with. For mission, growth, and impact both of these questions need to be answered by the local church.
Red Pill Brethren 