Council on Ecclesiology

Council Background
The council on ecclesiology was birthed out of enormous confusion. As one of the pioneer ministry coaches at Fuller Institute during the mid 1970s, I [Dan Reeves] was called into some unusual and diverse congregational situations.

What a privilege and challenge to travel from group to group and to gain new understandings of how differently the church is perceived. Yet as I came alongside various leaders, I was troubled by the way pastors and denominational executives spoke about each other. For the most part their perceptions seemed unkind, inaccurate and inappropriate.

I wondered why we couldn't be more charitable towards one another. It seemed to me that if we didn't learn to honor and encourage one another we would all lose in our attempts to bear a collective witness that is relevant. On the other hand, what might happen if we were able to integrate some of our provincial ideas?

With God's help could we imagine someday being perceived as a unified force, rather than a pathetic farce. Although most of these individuals had strong convictions about the church, no one seemed to shed much light on how to overcome the deep-seated suspicions and misconceptions towards others. I I began to wonder what might happen if we could have a good face to face talk about the church, without microphones, and without an audience.

Perhaps as we got to know each other as individuals we could bring clarity, which in turn might increase our unity within the Body of Christ. That was over seven years ago. During March 11-12, 2004 in Los Angeles, the Council on Ecclesiology (COE) will be gathering for the sixth time.

It has been encouraging each year to hear the commitments and enthusiasm by those I invite. It has not always been this way. I started by visiting key influencers such as Timothy George, Gilbert Bilezikian, Michael Horton, Peter Wagner and Howard Snyder. I asked them if they would be willing to come to our initial gathering in Birmingham at their own expense.

To my surprise almost everyone showed up, albeit with quite a bit of suspicion and skepticism.We set the bar very low for the first meeting. Our goal was simply to have no one walk out on the discussion for two full days. And with God's help we were able to complete this first baby step.

What a rare opportunity to get to know people from different biblical traditions, to learn to listen rather than speak, and to begin clearing up misconceptions and learning from one another. Towards the end of this first gathering, we began to clarify some of the issues that have prevented greater appreciation and unity. I like to refer to the diverse traditions as tribes, because of my belief that our provincial denominational cultures have distorted our views of one another.One of our aims from day one was to get those on the edge to interact with those at the center.

Before long we were able to identify five strategic edges.
Each of these "edges" have participated significantly in the first five gatherings of the COE:
The New Apostolic Reformation - Peter Wagner and those in his inner circle
The Resurging Reformers - Michael Horton and the Alliance of Confessing Evangelical
The Marginalized Peoples - Bishop George McKinney, the majority of African American congregations, and a high percentage of women in leadership
Postmodern Churches - Brian McClaren and Emergent
Global-multicultural Churches - Erwin McManus and Mosaic

Important issues soon emerged and we began to address them. For example:
· What is our agreement concerning the content and centrality of the Gospel?
· What is the purpose of the church?
· How can the church find its counter-cultural identity and address the culture at the most critical points?
· How do we carry out the spirit of the Great Commission without compromising the faith?
- How do we ensure that methods don’t override the message?
· How to remove the roadblock of race to church credibility and effectiveness?
- How to face up to this issue squarely?