kingdom grace

Because the faster you eat the much.*

To anyone still trying to figure that out, it is not supposed to make sense. The reason for using it as a post title is that is where I am at with the whole church deal. It just doesn’t make sense. I am not too angry, bitter, or hurt to participate. I just don’t see the point of playing that game anymore.

Mega-Vision

In Bob’s post about his experience at Saddleback, he describes an attitude that I am struggling with about church. It is so corporately self-centered. When a church is large (ie successful?), there is this mentality that they need to extend their success to a greater scope, and that is equated with extending the gospel. But rather than impart and release, it is ALWAYS franchise and own. Describing this imperialistic tendency, Bob says:

Church is this campus that we’ve put so much dang effort and money into. Church is also the messages we beam into the school auditoriums of those less-privileged folks who don’t live in comfortable commuting distance.

We experienced something similar when the church we were attending announced that it wanted to provide satellite churches in many of the small communities around here that “don’t have a church.” The reality is that most of these communities do have a church, but they don’t have a McChurch. So instead of supporting whatever work is already happening within the community, this church will swoop in with a satellite venue that will allow the people of this underprivileged community to associate with the Mother Church.

Mono-Vision

Internetmonk had a post about the Sunday service and the unchallenged belief that the Sunday service is church, period. He states that the worship service is not a disciple making process but rather produces passive consumers of church culture. His question:

How did corporate worship, which we now focus on with the majority of our time, resources and efforts as Christians, fit into Jesus’ process of creating a Kingdom movement?

Maybe it’s a phase. Maybe I will get over it. I have tried to maintain an uncritical view of church in its many expressions and to appreciate that God is at work in the various congregations.

For the moment, I am so disillusioned with the end results of the organizational and programmatic aspects of church that I cannot seem to see beyond that.

Murky Vision

My husband and I were talking about it the other day, and I asked him, “What if we really are too far gone? What if we can’t go back to that? Surely doing nothing isn’t the alternative?”

“We won’t always be doing nothing.”

“So what will we do when we are done doing nothing.”

“Something.”

There you have it, our plan. When we are done doing nothing, we are going to do something.

I know that learning to live missionally in ordinary life isn’t doing nothing, but I can’t seem to get rid of the feeling that there should be something more intentional.

Missional Vision

I just ran across this today from Tim Bailey. (ht Darryl) This makes sense to me, but I have no idea what it looks like when it is not a church service. I can’t say that I have seen this in action.

Missionality is DISCOVERED when a church (a people) lives out values and God plants a vision. And a vision from God will always be a picture of the world and its’ redemption, not a picture of a wonderfully “effective” church.

Mapless Vision

The undefinedness of this has bothered me, not in a frantic way but more in a nagging, wondering sort of way. Today these words by Peter Rollins made perfect sense to me.

I am saying that not knowing what ought to be done is to already know what ought to be done. In other words, ‘I do not know what I should do and I must step out and do it’! This is not then some commitment to do ‘church’ better by either improving it or starting a new one. For this reconfiguring will still be taking place in the very waters that sustains it. It is not a saying ‘no’ to one known in favour of another known, rather it involves saying ‘no’ to one known in favour of the unknown.

Have you figured it out? What makes sense?

*(I couldn’t remember the answer to this, so I had to call my husband on his cell phone, “Honey, I forgot, why are an orange?”)

The system of church leadership we inherited from Christendom heavily favors maintenance and pastoral care, thus neglecting the church’s larger mission and ministry. Consequently the A, P, and E leadership functions were marginalized from the church’s leadership structure.

This divorce of APE from ST has been disastrous for the local church and has damaged the cause of Christ and his mission. In my opinion, this contraction of fivefold to twofold ministry is one of the main factors in the decline of evangelical Christianity in the West.

This article by Alan Hirsch was really interesting to me. When I look back on the leadership team that we were a part of, I can see the potential for five-fold ministry. Lack of understanding and appreciation for the diversity of gifts represented among the leadership prevented this from happening. Rather than developing a dynamic APEST team, the senior leader systematically went about getting rid of his APE.

The A (apostle) of the team was the first to go with accusations of not submitting to the senior leader’s vision. He had the audacity to have original ideas. The E (evangelist) was next to be dismissed when it was decided that he didn’t have the anointing for church government. My husband and I were the P (prophet). What are you going to do with them? I am surprised we lasted as long as we did.

Within an immature and dysfunctional team, the differences created conflict as the various perspectives were pitted against one another. The tragedy is that the talents, gifts, and perspectives available on the team were not only disregarded, they were continually belittled and criticized.

I do not believe the five-fold functions always fall into concrete categories represented by specific individuals. However, I do believe that these anointings to equip are always available in the body. We each have a blend of the five with perhaps a natural tendency toward one perspective. We also walk in seasons and circumstances where particular graces in our lives are used to a greater degree to serve the needs that are present.

That is the tragedy of the false apostolic movement. At a time when we should be discerning the grace and gifts of God that are available for equipping the body, we find false apostles and prophets building platform ministries for themselves rather than serving the kingdom. Do not believe everyone who promotes themselves as an apostle or prophet. Learn to discern five-fold ministers according to the fruit of ministry that is actually equipping the body of Christ.

Here are the descriptions of APEs.

• APOSTLES They are always thinking about the future, bridging barriers, establishing the church in new contexts, developing leaders, networking trans-locally.
• PROPHETS They bring correction and challenge the dominant assumptions we inherit from the culture. They insist that the community obey what God has commanded. They question the status quo.
• EVANGELISTS They call for a personal response to God’s redemption in Christ, and also draw believers to engage the wider mission, growing the church.

Now back to our little team. I am not saying that one was “An Apostle,” the other “An Evangelist,” and the other “A Prophet.” These roles describe the perspectives that each one brought to the team.

For example, the A in our APE had strong teaching and pastoral gifts also. However, within the leadership team he and his wife brought an entreprenurial perspective. They naturally had ideas to initiate, but sadly their ideas were perceived to be undermining. They were viewed adversarially as competition and accused of creating conflict.

The E on our team was also pastoral. He and his wife were not respected by the leadership because they were usually off rescuing some misfit rather than paying attention to the important visionary stuff we were implementing.

As the P of the team, our prophetic bent was tolerated in the area of platform ministry and teaching, the things that made the church charismatically attractive. However on the leadership team, we existed under the label of being difficult and contrary.

Leadership theory says that the conflicting agendas and motivations of these five kinds of leaders will tend to pull them in different directions. But if these five could be properly developed, focused, and coordinated, together they would create a very potent leadership team.

The key was learning to manage the dynamic in order to draw upon the increased energy of the team and not be torn apart by opposing opinions.

It was the healthy trust developed on the team that allowed divergent opinions to be expressed without fear of offending one another. It was the strong sense of commitment to one another that gave each member permission to operate out of his or her own ministry biases, and then unapologetically represent their perspectives on the issue at hand.

It is sad to think about what could have been. What were the factors contributing to the failure of a potentially dynamic leadership team?

• Hierarchical leadership structure
• Insecurity and control from the senior leader
• No appreciation or respect for diversity
• Lack of trust among team members
• An unhealthy view of conflict
• Valuing conformity rather than unity
• Lack of commitment to each team member
• Inability to manage conflict

Many of these factors created and perpetuated one another creating a vicious cycle of dysfunction. It is not possible to have an environment where five-fold ministry can function until the ST release their stranglehold of leadership and embrace the diversity of other gifts.

This post by JR Woodward has related ideas about dysfunctional teams, particularly point 1 and 2. Alan’s article ends with a great description of creating a climate for working together as a diverse team. I can only imagine what that might have been like.

Since Brother Maynard needs to keep his blog traffic up while he’s out galavanting around the US, he started a meme about your favorite book of the Bible. I have a long post scheduled to go up tomorrow that I would like to leave open for several days, so I am going to squeeze this in today. Plus I want to be able to tag a few people before everyone I know is already tagged.

I hate having to pick a favorite in anything. I usually change my mind about ten minutes (or less) after I declare a favorite. But for Brother Maynard, here goes…

First the runners up:

I love the Old Testament. Maybe one of these.

• Exodus and Kings - journeys into exile.
• Psalms - of course.
• The Big 3 - Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel - how could I choose between these?
• Jesus-is-my-boyfriend books - Song of Solomon, Hosea - love these.

In the NT, John is also a favorite of mine.

But my very most favorite I think, maybe, at least for this moment, is Galatians.

Probably not a big surprise since the main theme is GRACE.

Galatians is such a comprehensive book covering so many important topics:

• The truth of the gospel
• Freedom in Christ
• Living in grace
• Oneness in Christ
• Our inheritance and identity as children of God
• Freedom from law and religion
• Simplicity of the gospel
• The law of love
• Living by the Spirit
• Walking humbly together
• New creation

No wonder I love this book!

I am interested in what these people might answer:

• Peggy
• Sonja
• Jamie
• Jeff
• Cindy

Actually, I would be interested in everyone’s answers, so feel free to participate in the comments or link to your blog if you post about this. Oh, and be sure to link back to Brother Maynard.

In the book The Critical Journey, (Sheffield, 2004) Janet Hagberg and Robert Guelich propose a stage theory for the Christian journey. It’s a fascinating read and, I believe, is very useful as we think about our Christian life as a journey of faith. Here’s a quick summary of the stages:

1. Recognition of God: God is big, I am little. God is wonderful, I’m a dope.
2. The Life of Discipleship: I find help and identity through a significant leader or mentor.
3. The Productive Life: I can do things for God and there is fulfillment in that.
4. The Journey Inward: I am wrestling with doubts and my own inner life.

THE WALL - A time of significant crisis that can only be resolved as I face it directly.

5. The Journey Outward: I am humbled and have a sense of being loved deeply by God. I can now reach out to others in a new way.
6. The Life of Love: All that I do–inwardly and outwardly–is nested in God’s love.

These stages might be sequential, but people will move back and forth through the stages.

There isn’t a lot of room in the American church for people in stages 4-6. Strugglers, doubters and lovers don’t necessarily make good workers. Churches need people to do things. There are programs to run and volunteer positions to fill. If you want a lot of good attenders and workers, stages 1-3 are good targets.
(Mike McNichols)

We talked about exile last week.

Perhaps the purpose of exile is to transform us into people who have been delivered of our own sufficiency to the point of realizing our weakness. Maybe we are being prepared to function in a way that ministry among the body is mutual so that we can also learn from and receive from the least among us.

The 4th stage and the wall describe the experience of exile. This is the missional threshold - the point in our journey that determines whether we will remain consumers of religious goods and services or allow ourselves to be transformed into missional agents of God’s love and redemption to the world.

I was having coffee with a couple of friends the other day, one who faithfully attends a church she doesn’t like and the other who, having recently left a church, doesn’t attend anywhere.

The faithful attender asked me whether some mutual friends of ours had found a church yet.

While my mental response was, “hell no, they’re not even looking,” my actual response was, “they are enjoying their Sunday morning breakfasts.”

The non-attender friend said, “Yes we are too. Maybe we should start a breakfast club.”

“Next thing you know someone would call it a church.”

“Then there would be disagreements about syrup.”

“And sausage versus bacon.”

“Eventually someone would split off to have their own non-pork breakfast.”

Breakfast. It’s complicated.

~

Why don’t I tell you of the tears that stain my pillow?

The hurts and fears that seem too big to share.

I don’t expect your help in carrying my pain.

Why invite you into my ongoing despair?
~

If there were easy answers,

I would tell you of my need.

Then we could rejoice when I am fixed,

And everyone be happily relieved.
~

When the brokenness endures with no end in sight,

It is asking too much of you to continually care.

When the only thing I have to share with you is pain,

I want you to be free of the burden I silently bear.
~

And when you ask me how I am,

I will answer, “I’m fine, and how are you?.”

~

In a world of mega-church celebrity leaders, where status and strength are esteemed, there runs concurrently a steady stream of people walking away from the popular church culture. Rather than walking into an alternate realm of power and position, they walk into a desolate exile.

Many have found themselves on this journey not knowing if there is an ultimate purpose, often not even knowing if God is a part of this detour from the well-worn path of christendom.

We came from a world where we operated in our strengths. We were valued for what we had to offer - our gifts, talents, energy, vision - whatever we could contribute. Looking back on our participation, we gave it all and then some.

That is what the church needs, right? The movers and shakers, the visionary leaders, the mighty men and women of God who can accomplish His purposes, those with the anointing to build and plant.

When we operate in our strengths, we operate from a position of power. We are the ministers. We are the ones who give. Ministry is always focused downward. Sure I will let you pray for me, but it is not likely I will be vulnerable with you.

Perhaps the purpose of exile is to transform us into people who have been delivered of our own sufficiency to the point of realizing our weakness. Maybe we are being prepared to function in a way that ministry among the body is mutual so that we can also learn from and receive from the least among us.

In order to really be with the poor, the weak, and the marginalized, we must learn to walk alongside them, not distancing ourselves with the power of our strength. This doesn’t come easily or automatically for us. It may require an extended time of deprogramming from the values of the culture of empire.

After enough time in the desert, we come to the place where we are spent, we are needy. It may feel like we no longer have anything to offer. We are finally willing to receive from others rather than always being in the role of provider. Allowing ourselves to be known in our weakness is difficult and humbling.

Could it be that exile is necessary for our development in becoming incarnational?

“They are blessed who realize their spiritual poverty,
for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them.”

Matthew 5:3

Ron at A Hopeful Heretic is going through a difficult time. I know that many of you can relate to the feeling of having the rug pulled out from under you, sometimes one more time than you feel you can bear. Perhaps our community of broken people could extend some love and prayers for Ron today.

We do not need, however, to live together in residential communities in order to orient our lives around God’s vision and purposes. However to move beyond functional atheism and become the people God intends us to be, we do need to foster a sense of shared spirituality and commitment. It is because of our conviction that we are called to reflect, albeit very inadequately, the image of our loving God and to model something of God’s shalom kingdom vision that we believe Christians need to become part of community.

To do mission work is no longer seen as wanting to provide for the spiritual and physical needs of others. Rather it is about learning to “love our neighbors as we do ourselves.” It is a recognition of the fact that we cannot share life with other members of God’s international family as God intended unless we are in loving relationships willing to enter into the life journeys of others—to share their pain and their sorrows, to celebrate their joys and their triumphs.

Christine Sine