{"id":25696,"date":"2020-02-03T08:14:00","date_gmt":"2020-02-03T16:14:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/?p=25696"},"modified":"2020-02-03T08:14:00","modified_gmt":"2020-02-03T16:14:00","slug":"the-need-for-middleware-in-faith-and-practice-and-innovation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/the-need-for-middleware-in-faith-and-practice-and-innovation\/","title":{"rendered":"The Need for Middleware in Faith and Practice (and Innovation)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Vincent Miller\u2019s subtitle of <\/span>Consuming Religion <\/span><\/i>captures an easily overlooked aspect from his book. The subtitle reads, \u201cChristian faith and practice in a consumer culture.\u201d While this book obviously unpacks and critiques consumer culture, it is also (and just as much) an articulation and reflection on the connection between \u201cfaith and practice\u201d with consumer culture as the vehicle or case study of that connection. In fact, two of his three concluding points are void of talk about consumer theology, but highlight the relationship of beliefs and practice. It seems Miller is perhaps more intrigued with helping theology \u201cattend to the structures and practices that connect belief to daily life, [and] attend to the lived, everyday theology of believing communities\u201d (226). Faith and practice; orthodoxy and orthopraxy; beliefs and actions; doctrines and expressions; imagination and implementation. Connecting these two are the aspiration of every minister. If it were simply that easy and straightford. Miller explains, \u201cThe application of doctrine to communal practice [however] is never a straightforward affair\u201d (13).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Assuming there will be much dialogue this week on the consumer culture, allow me to comment more (but not exclusively) on the \u201cfaith and practice\u201d angle. There seems to be something missing when there are only two categories: faith and practice. Miller tries to connect them (in part) with a call to \u201cpay closer attention to the secular practices that inform our general attitudes toward culture as well as specifically ecclesial practices and structures of communication\u201d (226).\u00a0 Others, too, try to give vocabulary and attention to this connection.<\/span><\/p>\n

Tim Keller\u2019s church planting manifesto, <\/span>Center Church,<\/span><\/i> begins with attempting to bridge the same gulf. He inquired why he could see churches of the same doctrinal foundation express themselves in such drastically different ways, while <\/span>at the same time<\/span><\/i> seeing churches with widely different doctrinal foundations expressing themselves in very similar ways. He offers the metaphor of computer hardware (doctrinal beliefs) and software (ministry programs). There is an important layer in between called middleware \u201cthat lies between the hardware and operating system itself\u201d (17). He calls this a theological vision which includes vision and values, ministry \u201cDNA\u201d, emphases, stances, and philosophies of ministry. These are the elements that make a culture, not just a creed. Just as middleware is overlooked in general computer knowledge, so is this space of theological vision in ministry. It\u2019s a challenging space that requires much more thought than is currently given.<\/span><\/p>\n

Jason Clark employs the concept of map-making to the same ends. \u201cThe map-making method of my thesis functions as a kind of heuristic concept map, able to trace correspondence between church <\/span>acts and beliefs<\/b> in order to allow for instruction, construction and evaluation of the context of Evangelicalism within its relationship to capitalism\u201d (Clark, 41). He, too, is exceptionally concerned with building this same bridge.<\/span><\/p>\n

When I interact with entrepreneurial guru, Peter Drucker, I find myself wanting something in between faith and practice in innovation theory, too. Drucker\u2019s definition of innovation has near synonyms for faith and practice: imagination and implementation. If one can flex their imaginative muscles, think outside the proverbial box, and have a means for implementing it, that should be sufficient for innovation (goes the argument). I find the need for something in the middle of the innovation space\u2019s \u201cfaith and practice.\u201d I would suggest integrative thinking as this middleware. Largely heralded by Roger Martin, integrative thinking offers mindsets for approaching complex (or \u201cwicked\u201d) problems. Many of the problems ministries are attempting to solve are these types of problems. Complex problems differ from simple problems (where the answers are fairly obvious), complicated (where the problem is difficult, but there is usually one \u201cright\u201d answers), and chaotic problems (where results have no correlation with their variables). Mistakes are made when complicated problem solving methodology are applied to complex solutions. Fixing a car is a complicated issue. There are many moving parts, and it takes a knowledge guru (mechanic) to find the solution. I recently took my vehicle in and it needed a new alternator. It would be ridiculous to assume the next person towing their vehicle in needs a new alternator. Complex spaces need new problem-solving paradigms.<\/span><\/p>\n

Leading design thinker, Tim Brown, points to integrative thinking as the fountain for design thinking and innovation. He proposes, \u201cDesign thinking begins with …integrative thinking – that\u2019s the ability to exploit opposing ideas and opposing constraints to create new solutions. In the case of design, that means balancing desirability (what humans need), with technical feasibility and economic viability.\u201d Desirability, feasibility, and viability.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

I consider an evaluation of innovation theory an acceptance of Vincent Miller\u2019s invitation to consider and respond to processes of consumer culture. He suggests, \u201cTheology must consider the structures and practices through with religious belief is insinuated into daily life. This requires a level of attention to cultural processes to which theology is unaccustomed\u201d (226). The theology of innovation is one of those potential \u201cunaccustomed processes.\u201d The process of innovating around desirability, feasibility, and viability add to a consumer culture. Only asking the questions, \u201cDoes somebody want it?\u201d \u201cIs it feasible based on our resources?\u201d and \u201cIs it viable in the market?\u201d leave little room for thoughtful engagement. I am constructing an argument to add another criterion to the \u201csweet spot\u201d of innovation. Some sort of ethical question or second-ordered question needs to be added. It may be as simple as asking, \u201c<\/span>Should<\/b> we innovate here?\u201d or maybe something like, \u201cWhat are the short-term and long-term implications for the community in which this innovation will be implemented?\u201d Vincent Miller\u2019s reliance on Augustine and the concept of desire is helpful here. An investigation and reworking of desirability as the impetus for innovation is greatly needed.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Miller\u2019s assessment of consumer culture isn\u2019t entirely negative, but poses the question of how we faithfully respond to the issues within consumer culture. I\u2019m trusting the \u201cmiddleware\u201d of integrative thinking and the inclusion of another criterion for innovation selection and implementation are in step with Miller\u2019s hopes of connecting the dots of faith and practice in a consumer culture.<\/span><\/p>\n

__<\/span><\/p>\n

Brown, Tim. \u201cDesigners — Think big!\u201d <\/span>Ted.<\/span><\/i> Accessed February 2, 2020. <\/span>https:\/\/www.ted.com\/talks\/tim_brown_designers_think_big\/transcript?language=en#t-219694<\/span><\/i><\/a><\/p>\n

Clark, Jason. <\/span>Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship<\/span><\/i>. 2018.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Drucker, Peter Ferdinand. Innovation And Entrepreneurship: Practice And Principles. New York: Harper & Row, 1985.<\/span><\/p>\n

Keller, Timothy. <\/span>Center Church: Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City<\/span><\/i>. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Martin, Roger L. <\/span>The Opposable Mind: How Successful Leaders Win Through Integrative Thinking<\/span><\/i>. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press, 2007.<\/span><\/p>\n

Miller, Vincent J. <\/span>Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice in a Consumer Culture<\/span><\/i>. New York: Continuum, 2003.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Vincent Miller\u2019s subtitle of Consuming Religion captures an easily overlooked aspect from his book. The subtitle reads, \u201cChristian faith and practice in a consumer culture.\u201d While this book obviously unpacks and critiques consumer culture, it is also (and just as much) an articulation and reflection on the connection between \u201cfaith and practice\u201d with consumer culture […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":131,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[1579,255],"class_list":["post-25696","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-innovation","tag-miller","cohort-lgp10"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25696","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/131"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25696"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25696\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25697,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25696\/revisions\/25697"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25696"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25696"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25696"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}