Deep Church

Deep Church has a new home

Thu, 03 Jun 2010 23:50:21 -0700

So Deep Church has been migrated over to a posterous site for hosting. All the old content is here, but all the old comments will not be viewable sorry.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

My blogging has moved!

Thu, 27 May 2010 11:17:49 -0700

Dear Friends & Deep Church readers, My Deep Church blog is moving location, back to www.jasonclark.ws. Starting 1st June, all my blogging will be re-locating to www.jasonclark.ws instead of Deep Church.

The weekly newsletter you receive will still come out to you, with a summary of all the new posts at www.jasonclark.ws. If you want to read more about the reasons for moving my blogging, see this post. If you are tracking my blogging in a web browser or RSS reader, make sure you update your bookmarks to www.jasonclark.ws Thank you again for your interest in my writing, your interaction and comments. The Deep Church site will stay live, but is being migrated and archived to a new home over the next month. All details about changes will be made at www.jasonclark.ws. See you over at www.jasonclark.ws. Jason

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Re-imagining Evangelicalism

Mon, 24 May 2010 10:42:19 -0700

So as promised I am moving my main blogging over to www.jasonclark,.ws. Deep Church will still being posted too but with fewer items, and more of a magazine format. We'll have guest authors and be taking on series and topics related to Deep Church. One series that will be taking place is 're-imagining evangelicalism'. Some of the initial questions I am asking as we plan that series are below. What ones would you want to add, ask? 1. What is evangelicalism? 2. Why would anyone still want to be evangelical? 3. Does evangelicalism have its own tradition to draw on for renewal? 4. What might be being lost in the post-evangelical move? 5. What has gone wrong with Evangelicalism? 6. Is Evangelicalism just a passing fad of the last 200 years? 7. Is Evangelicalism inimical to capitalism? 8. Can Evangelicalism be renewed, should it be renewed? 9. What understanding does Evangelicalism have of being 'Church?' 10. How might Evangelicalism be connected to the 'Great Tradition' of the Church?

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Serving Christ Outside the Church

Thu, 20 May 2010 23:03:15 -0700

"There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry: 'Mine!'"

Abraham Kuyper (Dutch Prime Minister 1901-1905) Introduction There are many ways to serve Jesus Christ and in this essay we will be thinking about our talents, gifts and callings. How can we serve the Lord with imagination, flair and courage? How can we invest our lives in God’s kingdom? Too often Christians focus exclusively upon church and church programmes and this stops Christian people thinking outside the church box. Of course some people are called to serve God inside the local church community and this is important and not to be neglected and all Christians are called to worship together. Preachers, pastors, evangelists, youth workers and other church workers are busy doing God’s work. But there are significant and influential Christian callings that go beyond the local church gathering. This essay will help to address this issue and in our conclusion we will turn to you and help you to think through your calling to follow Christ in every area of life. First a story. The Shay Cullen Story Father Shay Cullen is a Missionary priest from Ireland and a member of the Missionary Society of St. Columban. He has devoted his life to rescuing and ministering to child prostitutes in the Philippines since 1969.

He was born in Dublin in 1943 and was ordained as a Roman Catholic priest in April 1969. Later that year he was assigned to parishes in Zambales and Olongapo City in the Philippines. Once there, Cullen became aware of the brutal sex industry that flourishes in this third world country and he began to combat its sordid and corrupting influence. Cullen is famous for his espionage and undercover activities. He can be described as a spy for Jesus. Sometimes he swaps his clerical robes for the guise of a paedophile tourist. Using hidden video cameras, he visits and exposes the hidden places where children are prostituted and abused. On one occasion in 1995 he infiltrated the brothel of an Australian madam who explained calmly and rationally that this was the ‘cheapest’ sex around. After filming these conversations with pimps and brothel owners, Cullen calls in the police, rescues the children and has the guilty people arrested. In the Philippines there are an estimated 100,000 children who work as prostitutes. Some of these girls and boys have been sold by their impoverished families into a life of slavery. In the worst forms of sexual enslavement children are chained to beds, abused daily, threatened and tortured, beaten and bruised and made into a plaything for the rich and powerful. Cullen contends that sexual slavery thrives because of corruption which functions at all levels. Police officers, judges, and government officials are bribed by the sex offenders and their cases never get to court. Cullen has witnessed many abusers and paedophiles walk free from courtrooms and prisons. Consider the following two examples of corruption and injustice in the Philippines. In the 1990’s a Filipino congressman was sentenced to life imprisonment for the rape of a 12 year old girl. The wealthy politician transformed his prison cell into an oasis of comfort and luxury. He took over an entire dormitory, equipped it with television, shower, heater and fan. He employed fellow prisoners as servants who set up a hamburger stand for the politician’s personal use and enjoyment. The congressman was even able to start a tennis club in the prison grounds! All this was made possible by the ancient art of bribery and ‘greasing palms’. What a contrast with the tragic story of 12 year old Jamie. This small boy was arrested by the police because he was playing cards on a street corner after school. The police claimed that the boy was gambling; his family said it was a child at play. The boy was convicted and sent to prison where he was repeatedly raped and abused. His family was unable to find sufficient money to bribe the police and Jamie languished in prison. Fortunately Cullen has now rescued Jamie and he is slowly recovering from his terrible ordeal. Cullen often visits prisons in order to rescue innocent children like Jamie. In 1974 Father Shay Cullen established his Preda Foundation in Olongapo city. Cullen and his co-workers are struggling to eliminate child abuse and his foundation gives rescued children a chance to recover and find healing in a loving Christian community and to enjoy a much happier life free from violence and abuse. Here is one of the many positive stories that highlights Cullen’s work. Jenny, 13, had been abused by her step-father and raped by her cousins. When she was rescued by the staff at Preda and arrived at the foundation, she was sullen and morose. She would not talk or smile and she spurned any attempt to befriend her. In the following weeks, she began expressing her pain, fear and anger. Two months later, she was laughing, playing with the other children and learning to cook. This is a wonderful glimpse of God’s kingdom breaking in and restoring a young girl’s life. Shay Cullen has also been involved in business activity that brings huge blessings to Filipino people. The foil fruit drink pouch is the latest way to deliver and sell drinks in the Philippines. But the foil pouches have a serious drawback as they are an environmental hazard. Cullen’s Preda recycling project turned the hundreds of thousands of throwaway aluminium foil pouches into raw material for lucrative economic projects for abandoned mothers, survivors of sexual exploitation and young people rescued from prisons. All are getting a piece of the foil pouch project which recycles the pouches into high quality shopping bags, back packs, wallets, hats and other attractive, colourful and useful items. Hundreds of poor people are employed and many more are joining the great recycling and sewing project. A business enterprise rooted in biblical principles of justice and stewardship. Although Cullen has saved many lives and helped countless others, his provocative work has made him very unpopular with Filipinos sympathetic to crime and vice. He has received numerous death threats and is under constant harassment. Attempts have been made to deport him because his exposure of the sex trade has been damaging to local government officials who profit from the trade. Cullen has received several human rights awards and has been nominated three times for the Nobel Peace Prize. He has testified before the US Congress, the Philippine Senate and is a well-known speaker at international conferences. The Significance of the Shay Cullen Story As Shay Cullen struggles against the evils of the sex trade we are confronted with both slavery and commodification. Children have been morphed into sex toys. Young people have been made playthings. This is the fruit of a consumerist way of life. When life is exclusively focused on consuming goods and services, people relate far better to things than people. And so often the committed consumerist loves things (watches, cars etc) and uses people. Instead, as our King, Christ calls us to work the other way round: love people and use things. Notice that there are two different kinds of slavery in this story. We can speak about external slavery and internal slavery. The child who is chained to a bed is a slave in an external sense. She does not want to be there. Her freedom has been stolen from her. On the other hand consider the internal slavery of the abuser. This human being is enslaved to a way of life that is deeply sinful and destructive – not just to other people, but also to themselves. The paedophile is addicted to lusts and cravings that enslave them in a vice-like grip. The good news of the gospel is that Jesus Christ, the Liberator, has arrived to set both the abuser and the abused free. Free from the slavery; and free to live the full abundant new life Jesus came to make possible. As already mentioned Shay Cullen contends that the sex slave trade flourishes in the Philippines because there is endemic corruption at every level of Filipino society. He is often shocked when powerful, rich abusers have ‘greased palms’ and hey presto they are set free. Bribery is a form of sinful behaviour that is condemned on many occasions in the Bible. Consider this passage in the book of Deuteronomy:

Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the Lord your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people fairly. Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous. Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the Lord your God is giving you.

Deuteronomy 16:18-20 Shay Cullen shows that in the Philippines there are police officers, judges, business people and politicians who offer and accept bribes. They force innocent children, like Jamie, to languish in prison because his parents cannot bribe government officials, whereas rich, powerful politicians can bribe or pay to have their own burger bars and tennis clubs – even when they are in prison! We could say that even prisons reveal a sort of consumerist caste system: the rich and powerful are pampered and the poor and weak are enslaved. At an international church leaders conference the convenor asked the assembled participants what was the greatest problem in their countries. Almost all included bribery and corruption as the most serious problem they faced. The convenor responded as follows: “If corruption is the major problem, then why are we preparing our young people only to be pastors and evangelists? Why aren’t we training them to be the godly entrepreneurs, economists, police officers, judges and politicians that our countries so desperately need?” It’s worth spending a few moments amplifying this important insight. It is not enough for the church to produce gifted evangelists, youth workers and pastors. We need Christians to be busy serving God in all spheres of life. The job of a politician can be made into a calling to serve those they govern rather than feather their own nests; a judge can serve Christ by being just; a police officer can refuse to be bribed and avoid brutality; a journalist can research and write with honesty and integrity; an entrepreneur can seek profit without profiteering; etc. Jesus understood this broad understanding of calling when he famously spoke about salt.

You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown outside and trampled by men.

Matthew 5:13 In this passage Jesus is calling his followers to be a salty, healing presence in all of life. Consider little Jamie. He needs police officers who care for him and show him mercy. He needs magistrates and judges who refuse to put him in prison because he is playing with cards. He requires godly entrepreneurs who can give his mum and dad good jobs. Of course they need to make a profit but they can do this lovingly and thoughtfully. Jamie also needs politicians who make sure that prisons do not tolerate the abuse of vulnerable children. He requires a justice system that does not rewards guilty politicians with cheeseburgers, mustard and tennis on demand. Jamie needs Christians who serve God outside of the local church congregation. Christians who serve God in their everyday jobs. And, remarkable though it may seem, the witness of Christians doing their jobs honestly, imaginatively and responsibly can have a powerful knock-on effect on others in the work place who may not be Christians. Let’s focus for a few moments on this word ‘justice’. God is just. Consider this verse in Deuteronomy.

He is the Rock, his works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is he.

Deuteronomy 32:4 Psalm 72 is another Scripture which can help us to gain a deeper insight into what this means.

Endow the king with your justice, O God, The royal son with your righteousness. He will judge your people in righteousness, Your afflicted ones with justice. The mountains will bring prosperity to the people, The hills the fruit of righteousness. He will defend the afflicted among the people And save the children of the needy; He will crush the oppressor.

Psalm 72:1-4 Throughout the Bible God is always urging his people to focus on defending the poor, the needy and the oppressed, and at the same time with the punishment of the oppressor. Innocent people must be protected and guilty people must be punished fairly. This is the heart of the biblical teaching. Jesus summed up this biblical teaching in the following way.

Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practised the latter without leaving the former undone.

Luke 11:42 Shay Cullen is an outstanding missionary and his story commands respect but he would be the first person to point out that the church should not concentrate exclusively on missionary activity. Of course little Jamie needs people who can tell him about Jesus: that’s essential. But there are many other needs as well. We could say that in spreading the gospel the evangelist, the youth worker and the pastor depend upon godly police officers, judges and government officials etc doing their bit outside in the world. And these people, in turn, depend upon the evangelists, youth workers and pastors. This is what the New Testament means by the Body of Christ being made up of many parts but all functioning together as one unit (1 Corinthians 12). Thinking through this Story and your Calling As we soak ourselves in this story and its significance, we can learn so much about the many ways in which believers can serve God. Clearly Shay Cullen is a remarkable disciple but, and this is the point of the story for us, he is busy investing his talents and gifts in God’s kingdom. And the story can really help you to think about how to use your life and your gifts as part of your contribution to God’s kingdom wherever you end up working. You don’t have to be a priest in the Philippines to work for God. Let’s think about each of the characters in the Shay Cullen story in turn. Focus for a moment on the callings of politicians and government officials. They have power and authority which they can use for good or ill. They can feather their own nests with bribes and ill-gotten gain. They can do deals with paedophiles, multinational corporations and brothel owners. Little Jamie and his parents will suffer when these callings are twisted and betrayed. God needs disciples like you to take up this kind of work! You could be a modern-day William Wilberforce. You could go into politics and work to help to set captives free (Luke 4:18-19) by championing the plight of the oppressed in society. But perhaps political service is not for you? Think again. Could you imagine yourself as a police officer? You could work powerfully for God in all sorts of ways. You just need a Holy Spirit breathed imagination. As a copper you could have helped little Jamie in the most practical of ways. Instead of getting the hump because Jamie’s mum and dad couldn’t bribe you, you could have rescued the lad yourself and taken him home. As a believer in Jesus Christ your police work could be transformed. God loves justice and mercy (Micah 6:8) and police officers can faithfully serve the Lord by protecting innocent people and locking up the guilty. This is ‘salty’ police work. But you might say – “Sorry but I don’t want to be a copper. I want to be a plastic surgeon. How on earth can I serve Jesus doing a liposuction?” And I would say to you – you need a baptised imagination. Consider little Jamie once again. He has been in prison and he has been abused. Perhaps his nose was smashed to pieces when he was beaten up by a grumpy inmate. In that situation Jamie really needs a plastic surgeon and you could be an agent of God’s healing love. Instead of wasting your talents helping rich women feel more desirable you could sort out little Jamie’s injury. But perhaps I am challenging you too much? Maybe you should only work for the rich and powerful. Jordan is probably a much better client than little Jamie. In that case don’t think about serving God at all. Worship the money god (Matthew 6:24), get rich and buy a yacht! Again there are many people who have no interest in police work or the surgeon’s scalpel. Suppose you want to serve God as a journalist. Well you could waste all your talent and energies writing articles about Jordan, Paris Hilton and famous Filipino celebrities. Yes - you could easily sell your soul to the devil and the old liar would be cracking open the champagne ‘down under’ but you could be a responsible and godly journalist. Get that baptized imagination today. You could write articles about Jenny, Jamie and Shay Cullen. You could expose corruption, bribery and injustice. You could think through an intelligent Christian response to the Filipino situation and write witty, informative and powerful essays. Your pen could humble mighty armies of filth, sleaze, and degradation! Maybe that’s too much of a challenge? Don’t worry, relax and spend your time writing superficial articles for Hello magazine. It’s lucrative and easy. Just cash the cheques. So you lack writing talent? How about serving the Lord as a judge? A perk here is that you can wear an impressive wig (if you live in Britain). Judges can do amazing things. They can imprison paedophiles who prey on little girls like Jenny or they can take bribes and imprison little boys for playing cards. So you want an easy life do you? Take the line of least resistance. Collect the bribes, become wealthy and retire at the age of fifty. Go to Spain and play golf all day long. Crack plenty of inane gags about Bruce Forsythe and Jimmy Tarbuck. Perhaps judging is not for you. You lack the degrees and legal insight. I understand perfectly. How about joining the prison service? You could become a prison warder instead. Think about the good you could do. You could stop rapes, beatings and abuse. You could protect little Jamie from the bad guys. You could pray for him and show him love. This would please the Lord and make Him smile because you’d be spreading His good news. But you might say – “I love cameras and I want to be a photographer! Can I serve God in that way?” Again you need a baptized imagination. Buy one at the supermarket today! You could take the most haunting and poignant photos that tell the truth. Or you could prostitute yourself and become an annoying wasp who stalks famous celebrities and members of the royal family. Don’t waste your life and talent on that cul de sac. Too many fools have gone down that road. It’s well paid but empty and God-forsaken (Matthew 7:13-14). Maybe you are very gifted in an intellectual sense and you long to be an academic. Let’s say a sociologist. How could a clever thinker like you serve the Lord? Again it takes some thought, perspiration and imagination. You could write a discerning scholarly account of Filipino society. You could analyse data and statistics about prostitution and the sex trade. Your ground-breaking book could help people to understand the underground brothels, the corrupt police force, and the stinking, rotten prisons that cry out for sensitive and prophetic analysis. Scholars can serve the Lord in their unique way. Reading their books will build up both faith and understanding. Christian academics can inform and persuade those in power to make positive changes. One more piece of the kingdom jigsaw. But you say all this bores me. It leaves me cold. I want to spend most of my time writing poems. How can the budding bard serve the Lord? Well again the recipe is godly imagination and thoughtfulness. You could craft explosive poems about life in Filipino jails. You could write about little Jamie and his hero Shay Cullen. You could have the whole church weeping and praying. Your musings could evoke strange worlds, desperate men and God’s merciful rule at work. Now you’re getting cross and you start shouting and using blue language. “I’m a fan of the Italian renaissance painter Caravaggio and that’s my passion. How can I serve the Lord Almighty as an artist?” “Calm down” I would say serenely, “You don’t have to paint ‘religious scenes’ in order to please the King of kings. You can paint unforgettable scenes of life in the Philippines. Brush into existence cheeky characters with both their glory and their shame. You don’t need to follow Tracy Emin and focus on just the seedy stuff. Nor do you have to do a Michelangelo and glory in Man’s greatness and Lofty Grandeur. Take a leaf out of Rembrandt’s book and conjure great art that honours the biblical worldview. Both the glory and the shame. Capture this in your paintings. And you say – “But this is not me. I want to tell little Jamie about Jesus. I want to be an evangelist.” And I say to you – “Marvellous, be an imaginative evangelist but make sure you work with all the other members of the Body of Christ. Together you will bear fruit. Together you will build God’s kingdom.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Connecting the Bible with Everyday Life

Thu, 20 May 2010 07:41:01 -0700

If you are looking for a great resource on getting into the bible, do check out Bible Fresh. Bible Fresh is an initiative by the EA UK. I was part of the road show launch to support this, and you can see the video of my talk, 'Connecting the Bible with Everyday Life'. There is a new book of resources, titled 'Bible Fresh', that really is one of the best resources for getting into the bible that I have seen for a long time. I wrote the recommendation below that went out on the press release for the book. "Our imaginations for who we are, are shaped by so many things in our increasingly complex world and culture. Biblefresh brings a host of stunningly supportive resources into contact with that world. This book is a must read for anyone wanting the Bible to shape their imagination and identity in today’s world.”

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Response to Tri Robinson's Position Paper, "Take the Best and Go"

Mon, 17 May 2010 17:26:18 -0700

As a wrap up to our series on vineyard values we are pleased to have this posting from Josh Hopping... I had the pleasure of talking to Tri Robinson (senior pastor of the Vineyard Boise) last week and he mentioned that he recently wrote a position paper about the future of the Vineyard Movement. Seeing that this paper is connected to the recent blogsphere conversation - and seeing that Tri has been in the Vineyard for over 30 years and has served as regional overseer and national board member – I think it is important to read and discuss the concepts in his paper. See “TAKE THE BEST AND GO” Part 1 and “TAKE THE BEST AND GO” Part 2 In a nutshell, it seems to me that Tri is feeling like the Vineyard is becoming more and more "bound" (as in a bounded set) with various doctrinal and organizational mandates (examples: the ruling a few years ago about women leadership; requirements and process for planting churches; etc).

* What do you guys think? Do you see the Vineyard Movement becoming a bounded set? Is this necessarily a bad thing? * What should (if anything) the Vineyard do with those churches who are more Pentecostal (like those following Bill Johnson's Bethel Church)? Or the more conservative ones (like those following N.T. Wright or Rick Warren)? My thoughts: Some of Tri's concerns may come from his experiences in early days of the Vineyard. Back then there was very little to no structure. Leaving plenty of room for pioneers to go out and build something “new” and different with no one standing over them telling them no or giving them a rule book. The attitude was simply, if it works, then God is in it. If not, well, at least you tried. Twently-five years later things are different in the Vineyard. For example, there are now guidelines and rules concerning church planting. Yet, at the same time, there isn't a hierarchy that forbids new leaders from going outside of their region and engaging in conversation with other leaders – something that would be frowned upon in a traditional denomination. My first introduction to the Vineyard Movement was through the Vineyard Boise seven years ago. I came because of the worship and the outreach/mercy ministries of the church. As the years went by, I stayed in the Vineyard because of the Kingdom Theology that underlines everything. This was a conscious decision by my wife and me as we sought the Lord's guidance for our lives. As such as a church planter and leader within the movement, I love the push by Bert Waggoner and Don Williams to define the “center” to which we are moving as it relates to Kingdom Theology. However, I think it would be a mistake if this push led to the Vineyard casting out or pushing out those churches who lean towards Bill Johnson's version of the Kingdom - just like we should not push out those influenced by N.T. Wright. There is room for everyone - as long as we are all running towards the Center. Granted, as mentioned early, the center will need to be defined - but the act of defining the center to which the majority of the churches are running towards does not mean the exclusion of those who want to "play" but have a slightly different view of the center. Tri does have a good point about the USA National Board setting mandates and doctrine. For example, a few years ago the National Board drew a theological “line in the sand” concerning women pastors and leaders. On one hand I can see the need to make this decision as in doing so it would help open up the “pool” of national leaders. At the same time, it feels like there is an unnatural push by leadership to increase the number of women pastors. So much so, that I, as a someone who is pro women leaders, felt at tad uncomfortable at the 2009 USA National Conference in Texas. To me if God calls a lady to be a pastor, let them go and do it - or, in different words, if we are a center set movement, why must the National Board push this issue so hard? Why don't they just let it happen naturally? Or is it? (being a fairly new Vineyard leader, there very well could be things I don't know about...) Again, on one level, I can see the benefits to having a line in the sand for some things... which bring us back to the issue on whether or not the Vineyard is truly a center-set movement or just another Christian denomination?

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Big changes taking place at Deep Church

Mon, 17 May 2010 15:59:44 -0700

Back in February, I talked about the possibility of moving my blogging and with the help of your feedback have made some decisions. By the end of May, I am moving my blogging back over the www.jasonclark.ws. I'll also be moving that site from a wordpress install to posterous. Deep Church will also be migrated into my posterous account, keeping the www.deepchurch.org.uk URL, and become an occasional magazine for theological and ecclesial conversations. My reasons for all the changes have coalesced around: 1. Life Streams: With facebook, and twitter in particular, the integration within Posterous seems too good not to use for my workflow 2. Blogging: The move back to www.jasonclark.ws allows me to blog about a lot more than ecclesiology and theology. I want to get back to church leadership, church planting, christians and mental health issues amongst other topics. I'll have broader base to write from over there. 3. Maintenance: The hungry monster that two wordpress installations has become needs taming, and I'm hoping posterous will sate that. 4. Deep Church: will continue as a less frequent place of posting, with guest authors around topics. In particular once the migration process is complete we'll kick off with a series on the possible re-imgainings of evangelicalism.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Vulnerability: the most attractive leadership attribute

Fri, 14 May 2010 13:29:44 -0700

I remember hearing the aphorism at a Vineyard conference some 22 years ago, 'never trust a leader without a limp'. It was one of those values that immediately impacted me and has stayed with me. Back then I took it to mean, and it was often bracketed as being about leaders who don't have all the answers, who need others around them to move forwards. Leaders who are able to admit their struggles, and ask for help. I took some time to mull this one over, and distilled as best as I can for now, what that value looks like for me over the last 22 years as a series of limps: 1. Doubts: Leaders don't have all the answers, and don't act like they do. Leaders are learners, and learning takes questions and doubts. 2. Apologising: Man is this the rarest of limps. Leaders get so caught up in mission and their identity in that. In the face of mistakes they are unable to acknowledge those and apologise. And more importantly they are unable to call some mistakes what they are, sin. I don't mean just the obvious ones, of blowing your top, and bad decisions. I mean the more invidious issues of character. I wish I could remember where I hear (probably in a movie), someone say that you being right doesn't diminish me. It's a rare leader who says, it's probably me not you, and is willing to listen to how they made things difficult. I do try, and want to embrace this practice. That when faced with someone's pain, I don't retreat behind my mask of being right, but at least pause and say Jesus what have I done here that I shouldn't have? 3. Brokeness: How on earth did we equate leadership with success? A short read of the New Testament should reveal that even Paul was quick to place his brokeness before Jesus and need of others, front and centre. Those who inspire me the most live a life where their weaknesses are on their sleeves, and the need for Jesus close to their actions and life story. What limps do you think leaders need? Which ones impact you the most?

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Wrestling with God and Man: Reflections on Jacob at Peniel

Thu, 13 May 2010 14:05:23 -0700

One of the advantages of not ‘growing up’ in a Vineyard context lies in approaching any discussion of its core values free of presuppositions. ‘Re-imagining’ Vineyard values is therefore perhaps something of an overstatement. A corresponding disadvantage, though, lies in having only a second-hand understanding – and that a limited one – of the significance of those values in their original context, of how and why each one came into being, and what they meant to those who authored and inculcated them within the early Vineyard movement. The opportunity to be an original thinker therefore sits alongside the threat of being wrong. The strength of objectivity is undermined by the weakness of ignorance. This gives rise to a particular risk when one is ‘leading the conversation’ by posting a blog. My hope is that those with a more historically informed perspective will be both liberal in correcting the shortcomings in this posting, and generous in recognising that my aim is to add value to Vineyard values, in conversation with the community, not to devalue or reject those values in criticism of the community. ‘Leaders who limp’ is a clear reference to the experience of Jacob, recited in Genesis 32. What we read here is an extraordinary story, that seems to just drop into the narrative from nowhere, of Jacob wrestling with a man. They wrestle all night. Morning comes, and finding himself unable to overpower Jacob (we are not told why), the man touches Jacob’s hip and injures him, causing him to walk with a limp the next day (and perhaps permanently, though the text does not tell us this). However, Jacob will still not let the man go, “unless you bless me.” The man tells Jacob he is hereafter to be named Israel, “because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.” Jacob asks the name of the man but is not told. He calls the place Peniel, “because I saw God face to face and yet my life was spared.”

What are we to make of this story? Abstracted from its narrative context, it has commonly been uses as an exhortation to fervency in seeking God. It is analogised, for example, to praying through the night, until we get what we are asking God for: “I won’t let you go until you bless me, Lord.” Or as an authenticating mark of the Christian leader, that they have similarly ‘wrestled with God’ in prayer, when facing challenges and opposition, such that they bear the beneficial hallmarks of those close, personal experiences of God in their life and ministry. But is this the message from the text? Is this what’s going on in the story? Or are these simply convenient uses of the text as Christian allegory? We might start with some reflection on this man Jacob. When Yahweh identifies himself to Moses (in answer to the question “which God are you?”) as “the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob”, we could be forgiven for wondering how Jacob made the list! It is no surprise, on all the evidence in Jacob’s story up to Genesis 32, that in his first theophany Yahweh describes himself only as “the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac” (Gen 28:10-22). In Jacob and Esau, the twin sons of Isaac, the Covenant Story – which is the key theme in Genesis and indeed, I would argue, through the whole of the Christian scriptures – was facing a crisis. And the crisis was one of character. Esau had such scant regard for his birthright that he was willing to sell it for a good meal. Jacob, meanwhile, was scheming, lying and devious, someone who would be willing to deceive even his own aged father to get what he wanted, for his personal benefit. Up to this point in the story, Genesis 28, everything we read about Jacob is negative. We see no evidence of any relationship to God, no personal recognition of his destiny in relation to the covenant, and no reason to think of him as a godly person or an example in the faith. Nevertheless, we see two striking things in this chapter: one (in vv.1-5) is Isaac’s blessing of Jacob, despite everything that has happened, as mantle bearer of the covenant promise. However, this is only a wish expressed, not a foregone conclusion; it is for God to determine and to verify to Jacob. And this God does, in a dream (vv.12-15). At first glance, Genesis 28 might be seen as a turning point in Jacob’s life, but really it isn’t. The commitment he appears to make to Yahweh in vv.20-22 doesn’t stand up to closer scrutiny. Jacob’s ‘deal’ is most naturally read as “if you do this for me, God, then I’ll do that for you.” It’s Jacob in charge, Jacob in control, and Jacob’s agenda. Jacob’s offer is conditional. Even his promise to tithe appears to say more about his designs on the other 90%. And yet, as John Walton observes (NIV Application Commentary) “we also see Jacob as a work in process – another of God’s reclamation projects. Jacob has done nothing to deserve God’s attention, yet God reaches out to him at a time when he is probably feeling nothing but despair and vulnerability.” It is ironic that during his subsequent twenty years in Haran, Jacob himself becomes the victim of the very deception and cheating that he had himself earlier used to his advantage with Esau and Isaac. We may detect some slowly growing recognition of the hand of God on his life (e.g. 31:3-5), but deception and scheming continues to be his default approach (e.g. 31:20). Character is still the big issue in his life. Which brings us to chapter 32. Twenty years after running away in fear of his life, Jacob is returning to the land, as God has told him to do (31:13), where he will face Esau again. As Jacob nears where he will encounter Esau, we see evidence of both the ‘old’ Jacob working every clever scheme and plan he can think of to survive (vv.7-8; 13-21), in great fear and distress (v.7) – his fear being exacerbated by the news that Esau has 400 men in his ‘welcoming party’ – and also, of an emerging ‘new’ Jacob, throwing himself on God’s mercy and promises (vv.9-12). The culmination of Jacob’s personal transformation, his real turning point, comes in the encounter with the man at Peniel. Jacob, alone and afraid, is at the end of himself and his own self-sufficiency. He has lived off his cunning, wits and scheming (and suffered as the victim of it too, although scarcely eliciting our sympathy in the process), but now he is at his wits’ end. He can no longer handle the situation. He can’t fulfil his calling in the Covenant Story through the way he has been, up until now. In fact he can’t even face tomorrow. The story tells us that the man (identified by Jacob as an angel, in v.30 – the word means a supernatural being; see also Hosea 12:4) cannot overcome Jacob. But if taken as a literal statement of physical prowess, this is absurd, for Jacob is now 97 years-old, and no match for an angel, as is evident from the ease with which the angel wounds Jacob when he determines to do so (v.25). No, this is speaking about (what we would today call) a ‘spiritual’ wrestling, and the reason ‘God’ cannot overcome Jacob is because the battle is to do with character. The question, for which the battle rages all night, is whether Jacob will surrender to God. It is not a question of strength but of will. This is not a battle that God can win by imposing victory on us: we must surrender willingly, by choice. It takes all night not for the angel to reach a point of overcoming Jacob, but for Jacob to get to a point of overcoming himself. To gain our life, we must lose it. There are now two crucial things to note in the text. The first is when the angel proposes to leave without giving Jacob any assurance of God’s help (i.e. ‘his blessing’). This would mean Jacob is back where he has always been in the past – operating on his own, off his wits and resources, usually resorting to scheming and devious tactics. But these have run out. He knows they are not enough, and they have no place in fulfilling the Covenant Story. This time, Jacob is a changed man. He is at the end of himself. He has begun to walk in the ways of obedience to Yahweh, and he realises that the weapons of the fight are not those he has been used to relying on. He won’t let go of the angel until he is assured that God will be with him; this is what matters. Jacob’s refusal to let the angel leave, without first receiving that assurance, reflects his final complete surrender to God. As Walton puts it, “As always with God, one has to lose in order to win.” The second crucial thing is God’s renaming of Jacob, as Israel. In the ancient world, naming was seen as significant to who a person was (see e.g. Abram to Abraham), and the assignment of the new name affirmed authority over the one renamed. Similarly, therefore, Jacob’s acceptance of this new name reflects both his surrender to God and his changed character. So who are ‘leaders who walk with a limp’ today, and why is it a critical Vineyard value? Is it all-night prayer warriors? Perhaps, in part. Is it leaders who are desperate for God’s blessing, and willing to grasp hold of him until he delivers? Maybe, to some extent (although not in the ‘deal or no deal?’ terms Jacob originally proposed in 28:20-22). Or is it leaders whose character has been changed, who have utterly surrendered to God, letting go of self-reliance as their primary resource, and repenting of all scheming and manipulation in the work of the Kingdom? I think so. And particularly so where that character development, that battle of the will, has been a long and painful process in someone’s life, like wrestling all night, such that the scars of the fight are evident. I submit that this is what it means to “have struggled with God and with men and [to] have overcome.” It might be said that overall, scripture has far more to say about people’s character than their gifting. In the wilderness temptations of Jesus, one might say that the issues and choices he faced were to do with character (this would be unsurprising, given his humanity, and it is perhaps no coincidence that the story appears at the outset of his ministry). This, then, is the message of Jacob and his wrestling with the angel of God, and it is a wrestling that each of us must go through, if we wish to contribute to God’s mission in God’s ways. The battleground is personal character. It is not a fight that God can win, though, not a victory he can impose on us, however long the fight goes on; it can only happen through our willing surrender. If this is what Wimber meant by ‘never trust a man without a limp’ then I couldn’t endorse it more.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Society of Vineyard Scholars Feb 3-5, 2011 Seattle, USA

Wed, 12 May 2010 07:25:57 -0700

We are very pleased to announce that the second annual Society of Vineyard Scholars conference will be held February 3-5, 2011 in Seattle, Washington, USA. The theme of the conference is: "By The Renewal Of Your Mind: Imagining, Describing, and Enacting the Kingdom of God." Our plenary speaker will be acclaimed Christian philosopher, theologian, and cultural critic, Professor James K. A. Smith of Calvin College. A friend of the Vineyard, his astute insight into education, worship, postmodernity, orthodoxy, and the Kingdom of God has much of value to say to the Society of Vineyard Scholars. Six panel sessions spread over Thursday afternoon, Friday and Saturday morning will feature presentations of and responses to papers written by SVS participants, focusing on aspects of the conference’s larger theme. This intellectual interaction around the work of SVS members forms the heart of what we will do together. Alongside our regular panel sessions, we will also have special opportunities to hear from Professor Bo Karen Lee (Princeton Theological Seminary), Dr. Bob Ekblad (Tierra Nueva/Mars Hill Graduate School; author ofReading The Bible With The Damned and A New Christian Manifesto), Bert Waggoner (National Director, VineyardUSA), and others to be announced. We will make time for prayer, worship, and prophetic ministry, as well as allowing plenty of time for people to interact and form relationships. There will be a wine and cheese reception, lunchtime breakouts for people with particular shared interests, and more. Mark your calendars! Book your flights! You won't want to miss this conference! For more details, see the SVS Events website.

SUBMIT A PAPER TO SVS 2011 (THIS MEANS YOU!) (click here to download the Call For Papers) All who are working on or have earned a graduate degree in any field are encouraged to submit a paper for consideration that has general relevance to the conference theme. There are also four specific areas under the general rubric of the conference theme in which submissions are particularly encouraged. They are: Imagining Discipleship, Doctrines of Justification, Epistemology and the Kingdom, and the Formation of Orthodoxy. SVS highly values an interdisciplinary approach; in order to adequately address these themes and questions, it is necessary to hear theologically-reflective perspectives from a wide variety of fields in the humanities, social sciences, and even the natural sciences. No disciplinary perspective is out of bounds. We particularly welcome papers from women and non-white men, voices which have been historically underrepresented in theological dialogues to the detriment of the conversation in general. This is of course in no way to discourage the participation of white men(!) but rather to encourage the full participation of all who believe in the mission of the Society of Vineyard Scholars. For a full description of the general theme and specific foci of this conference, as well as for technical details on how to submit your work, click here to download the 2011 Call For Papers. We hope that you are as thrilled about the establishment of the Society of Vineyard Scholars as we are, and we look forward to developing this nascent community of theological discourse with you. As always, if you have any further questions, please email the SVS at societyofvineyardscholars@gmail.com. Follow SVS on Twitter! http://twitter.com/vineyardsvs Join the SVS Facebook Group!

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Casting Shadow or Light: Discerning Discipleship and Liberating Leadership

Tue, 11 May 2010 08:00:51 -0700

This endeavour we have been doing together – exploring and re-imagining the Vineyard distinctives – was initially stirred by a talk given by John Mumford at the UK and Ireland Vineyard Pastors and Leaders conference. Regarding leadership in that talk, John spoke of a wish that he could wave a magic wand, because he so hoped for, prayed for and wished for maturity for the leaders of the Vineyard. This stirred me as well – and has for some time – and reminded me of some things I have learned from an erstwhile mentor of mine: Parker Palmer.

Maturity. I have heard some of this theme woven in the tapestry of our conversations recently. From the Ephesians 4 passage that we all talked about in "equipping the saints" where it ends with a flourish and encouragement toward maturity to Steve Schenk’s admonition that we make room for failure as a positive, learning (and really) necessary experience in discipleship; like some sort of sacrament of failure, to which we respond in community with encouragement toward maturity. It's a journey. As Steve Schenk also reminded us, and Dallas Willard said recently echoed: we are victims of models and expectations for what “success” looks like, and we need to re-assess our spiritual maturity and our vision for what ‘success’ looks like. I think at times - out of our own insecurity - we teach our children these trite, easy answers...instead of inviting them into the Mystery as partners in it, partakers of the divine so-to-speak, and explorers together. Perhaps we seek to give them security (as well as cobble together some for ourselves), when the security they (and we) truly want/need to embrace is beauty and tension, hope and mystery, suffering and love...not pat and shallow answers. Easy and shallow answers are a wide road that does not lead to maturity. And I know we do struggle and wrestle with the Mystery...as I heard John Wimber used to say, 'never trust a man without a limp'...and I limp just like Jacob from wrestling with the Mystery that is our Living God. For myself and my life of discerning discipleship, I guess it's the contentment with cheap and shallow answers that gnaws at my bones through the night and has me wrestling with the angel until dawn. But there again, our settling for those answers is possibly a symptom of a distracted life of insecurity. We think by being busier, that maturity happens. But alas, can we admit that for all our busy-ness, we are not seeing the fruit of maturity? In fact, our insecurities just grip us tighter. I think we need to wrestle with the fact that a leader is capable of the power to project either shadow or light upon our world and upon the people dwelling in it. In this way, a leader shapes the "essence" of how people live...an "essence" as light as heaven or as dark as hell. A mature leader seeks to have a higher awareness of the interplay of inner shadow and light, so as to cast more light than shadow, so as to empower more good than evil. Too long have we dwelt in the immature and dangerous delusion that our leadership is OK if based in "good intentions" and that makes our power benign; Jesus always called out the leaders for "good intentions" without following through to "good actions" that liberate instead of bound people, themselves included. But to grapple with this Jesus-centric "calling out of leadership" is to join the journey toward maturity. If we as leaders are to cast light and not shadow, we need to embrace the gift of discernment and seek to understand the shadows that populate our hearts in order to bring them to Light and experience the transformation of on-going maturity:

Insecurity. Many leaders are insecure (OK, maybe all of us are!). We become insecure possibly because we don’t think we know enough, aren’t expert enough, aren’t “insert-your-own-insecurity” enough. When leaders aren’t secure in their own identities rooted in Christ, we can often foster an environment that deprives others people of their identities, as we are busy supporting our own insecure place and identity. We need to heed the sacred call to embrace the gift of being ourselves. I keep coming back to the fact that I need to embrace the gift of myself. God wants me to be me, I can't be Moses or David or Wimber, I need to be myself; the ironic thing comes forth at this point: the more I can be myself in Christ, the more I can be real and present to other people and even in embracing who I am, there will be a family resemblance because of Jesus living through me. But I can't be divided…I can’t be two people. Again, as I mentioned before: there is a cruciform-shaped authenticity at the core of servant leadership. Walking with authenticity is walking with a limp.
Pride. Another shadow common among leaders is the pride of “functional atheism”, which amounts to the deep-seated belief that we are responsible for everything and it all comes down to “me.” This sort of pathology “wishes” God might show up, but “acts” in a manner that never expects much from God, but expects almost everything from me. This kind of pathology leads to depression, burnout and can carry us close to “losing our religion”. It is very difficult to lead people so that they follow Someone Else. Full disclosure: Most of the anxiety in my life is focused on “outcome”, and I forget scripture clearly states that the “outcome” is God’s responsibility, and my responsibility is just to be obedient (even if that makes me look like a fool for Christ), as Mother Teresa used to pray: “I do not pray for success, I ask for faithfulness.”
Fear. Related and underlying the first two is fear or perhaps reactions to fear. One primary reaction of leaders to fear is taking control. In this way, we have over the years tangled and bundled power, authority and control. I think it is time we together enjoined the task of unweaving these baselines of leadership. We can see clearly that most of Jesus’ meetings (in which He was clearly the leader) we a mess…messy human need, fear, insecurity, pride, and everything that comes with those. Unfortunately, we leaders try to organize and manipulate and eliminate the mess. But what we might find ourselves doing is organizing the work of God right out of our meetings, and we find ourselves creating an oppressive environment rather than a liberating and empowering environment. The insight of scripture is that almost always messiness is a precondition for creativity. We witness this in Genesis where there was formlessness and void and darkness…as the Spirit was brooding, then life itself emerges from the mess. There is a precarious balance between spirit and structure that creates the condition for life to emerge and thrive. But in order to embrace this good tension of structure and freedom, leaders must through fear, be discerning, and embrace courage. As US President Roosevelt once said: “The only thing we have to fear if Fear Itself.”

The road toward maturity is a road travelled in fellowship. We need to remember that throughout history people matured and “grew in Christ” primarily through relational and communal engagement. This engagement engenders trust and deep relationship that forms us on the way. There is a deep sense that this is about living your life out-loud...walking with your limp, in public. In this journey, we hope to live and lead not out of the insecurities and pride and fear that populates our hearts, but in the midst of our transforming heart that empowers trust and hope and faithfulness. We want to move toward a grace-filled place of possibility rooted in Christ and away from outcome-based anxiety, while we all work out our faithfulness and trust issues in fear and trembling. This is my earnest hope that was stirred again when John Mumford mentioned it. My hope and prayer for all of us is that we move toward maturity and integration, even if, at-present in this now-and-not-yet age, it remains a hidden wholeness in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Leaders who limp...

Mon, 10 May 2010 06:52:54 -0700

This week we come to the last in our series on vineyard values, with the subject of #10 leaders who limp. When I first joined the vineyard, I heard this often expressed as never trust a leader who doesn't walk with a limp. In otherwords leaders should be people who are bruised and battered by life, have struggles and questions and who are not some fake Ken or Barbie christian ideal of perfection. But more than that, they are not afraid for others to see them limping and that they are still on a journey towards God.. I'm not sure if any of our guests will touch on the story but having read it this week I am also reminded of Jacob in Genesis 32 wrestling with God...

23 After he had sent them across the stream, he sent over all his possessions. 24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob's hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, "Let me go, for it is daybreak." But Jacob replied, "I will not let you go unless you bless me." 27 The man asked him, "What is your name?" "Jacob," he answered. 28 Then the man said, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome." 29 Jacob said, "Please tell me your name." But he replied, "Why do you ask my name?" Then he blessed him there. 30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared." 31 The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel, and he was limping because of his hip. 32 Therefore to this day the Israelites do not eat the tendon attached to the socket of the hip, because the socket of Jacob's hip was touched near the tendon.

We have two great guest authors who will be exploring this topic so I hope you'll join in with them and share your thoughts.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Salvation by recreation: 'The Problem of Pleasure', by Dominic Erdozain

Fri, 07 May 2010 08:00:30 -0700

I've just finished reading Dominic Erdozain's new book, 'The Problem of Pleasure'. It's eye wateringly expensive, and I hope a paperback version is forthcoming because it deserves a wider reading. Firstly I found in it a devastating critique of why and how Churches became dispensers of 'religious good and services'. And secondly it provides an explanation for the inane pantheism of Christians who declare they no longer need church, as they now meet God on country walks/playing golf (insert suitable recreation here). Dominic's thesis (as I understand it), is that a secularisation took place by Christians, when salvation was turned into social morality in the 19th century. With the challenge of the development of leisure activities, their was a focus on family and pleasure that the Church had to respond to. Initially the Church broadly responded by relocating salvation as an issue of conduct, equating sin with pleasure, whereby 'leisure' became 'vice'. This led to the mutating of religion into ethics, wherein spiritual values for salvation were substituted with human sources and social values. Sin became less about understanding condition before God, and more about avoiding 'vice'. Or to put it another way sin became vice and 'salvation' became about avoiding vice. A move took place from a God centred vision to a humanistic vision. Evangelical ecclesiologies then became mechanisms for this humanistic vision and the battle over pleasure and leisure. But the Evangelical imperative of mission and relevance meant that this obsession with leisure and pleasure was transformed into the establishment of recreation as an ecclesiastical duty. Rather than let faith order life and leisure, leisure was to firstly be resisted as 'vice' and policed. Then ultimately Christian leisure activities were offered as missional activities themselves as a solution to the problem. Then end result was a focus on the self, and self creation, with a retreat by the church into moral sources for the self instead of supernatural ones. Where the Church didn't try to integrate sports and leisure with Church, there were less problems. Dominic uses the YMCA as a key historical example of this process, of how pleasure becomes defined as Christians mission, until mission becomes barely Christian at all. Conversion becomes transformation of the self through leisure. Now in all this Dominic is no jeremiad against sport and fun, and offers not a critique, but a clarification of the Evangelicals relationship with it. Any reaction to Dominic's work as a damming of leisure probably reveals our captivity to to 'recreation as salvation', and less an interaction with his suggestions. Read his book before jumping to conclusions. (There is also an interesting section in the book on histiographical method, of the current trend to historicism. Dominic explains how too often individuals and cultures, indeed whole periods of time are seen to be subject to forces beyond their control. Individuals are seen to be prioritized but are ultimately obliterated by discourses and conditions that compel them to act. It's the kind of trap I think Phylis Tickle's book, "The Great Emergence' falls into with her 500 year periodisations.) So as I tried to apply this to my experience, and research, I tried to make some connections. And please remember that from here on these are my correlations with Dominic's work, and are subject to my poor interpretations. The Evangelical church with is pragmatic approach to ecclesiology ended up providing an ecclesiology that secularised itself. The role of Church became the support of a vision for life that was something other than missional, and God centred.

The 'good life', great jobs, holidays, and an expansive social life became the vision for life that the Church was expected to dispense services to support. Church was now supposed to mostly be there during a crisis, and to provide prayer support for the things needed for the 'good life'. And Church was relegated to rites of passage, marriages, christenings and death. But it lost it's place as a location for worship, and the construction of identity around the mission of Jesus in the world with others. So the Church trained and facilitated the notion of a 'Churchless faith', that being a Christian was something you could sustain in private, on your own, through hobbies and leisure. For example the pressure on parents to capitulate to the religious humanistic sources of identity in leisure for their kids seems insurmountable. The most virtuous way to bring up our kids is to ensure they have access to all sports, hobbies and leisure, for that is the way that true identity is formed, and anything less is tantamount to abuse. With three teenage kids, I know this pressure only too well. The resources of faith, the supernatural and Christ, are relegated to support that way of life, and Church is something that one can always come back to later in life if needs be. And it is returned to in crises, marriage, and death. Whilst the old mantra goes, 'entertaining ourselves to death', Dominic Erdozain introduces an alternative maxim. That what really has taken place is that we are 'playing our way into virtue'. And it's heart is a theological problem as old as humanity. What is the focus of our affections, and desires. What do we order our lives around, and how does the Christians community supposed provide the resources for a Christ given identity, in mission with each other in our current context? Empire, fascism, nationalism might provide the resources for identity, that the Church has often ceded to for it's social imaginations. Dominic Erdozain shows how all to often it is the resources of leisure (and consumerism) that are now the alternatives to Christ for our affections and church constructions, be they traditional evangelical churches, or new emerging alternatives. So what do you think of Dominic's suggestions, and who do you see this working out today?

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Pastoral vacancies Northern Ireland, Causeway Vineyard Church

Thu, 06 May 2010 12:12:53 -0700

My friend Alan Scott asked me to let you all know about some staff vacancies they have over at the Causeway Vineyard Church, in Northern Ireland. Alan would be a great guy to work with in a happening and exciting church.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Redefining a Successful Local Church: Planting Churches that Plant Churches

Tue, 04 May 2010 20:04:30 -0700

The Lesson from Evolutionary Biology People often have difficulty grasping one of the basic tenets of biology. It is simple to understand, and once you 'get it' it becomes the most obvious truism. The difficulty lies not in the complexity of the thing to be understood, but in the conceptions we already hold that predispose us to other ways of thinking. We are so used to thinking about things in a certain manner, that it becomes difficult to conceive, much less think critically, in any other manner. This difficulty has to do with the evolutionary fitness or 'success' of a particular organism. More specifically, it is the definition of evolutionary fitness that is difficult for people to see. An organism's biological 'success' is determined solely and completely by its ability to reproduce. Reproduction is defined and measured by the ability of the parent to produce viable offspring, the greater the number of viable offspring, the greater the success of the parent. Viability is, of course, defined by the ability to reach mature reproductive age and produce yet another generation of offspring. The reason this can be difficult to grasp is that our own conception of success is so radically different. We are used to thinking of success in terms of strength, size, skill, power, intelligence, virtue, even pleasure; in short, we are used to a definition of success that thinks solely in terms of the well-being of the parent organism without any regard for the relationship of that organism to the future of its genetic code. The parallels to the Church should here become obvious... A Successful Church My main contention here has to do with our definition of success. While it would be pushing the analogy too far to suggest a one-to-one correlation, I contend that our definition of church success must share the same emphasis on reproduction that we see in evolutionary biology.

There are of course, other concerns when it comes to church health and faithfulness to our King; love and devotion to Jesus, deep and powerful ties to each other, practical initiatives to peace and justice in the world; but these can perhaps be seen as the content of the genetic code, whereas success is conceived as perpetuating those Kingdom genes. We must be explicit and clear on this, a successful church is one that produces other churches, in short, it is imperative that we tie organizational success to reproduction. Competing Paradigms This is not, however, the definition of Church success that we have inherited. The Vineyard (and those within it) come squarely out of the 20th Century American Evangelical tradition. We have differentiated ourselves in significant ways from that tradition (without repudiating it), but have yet to significantly differentiate ourselves from the ubiquity of 'Church Growth' methods and theories that hold sway within that tradition. We still largely define success as our American Evangelical cousins do: the strength, size, skill, power, intelligence, virtue, even pleasure, that is present within the local congregation. In short, we are used to a definition of success that thinks solely in terms of the well-being of the parent organism without any regard for the relationship of that organism to the future of its genetic code. I know of too many 'mega-churches' with no value for church planting. They are the envy of all of the churches and christians in the area, yet they are like a wealthy, elite, but aging, suburbanite wife, who has produced no children, and is growing more and more concerned with bridge games, botox treatments, and social events. No one seems to notice, nor to point out, that these healthy churches are not healthy at all. They are sterile... No one I know would point to a young woman who was biologically incapable of becoming pregnant as a model of health, yet we have little difficulty thinking the Bride of Christ is healthy, while remaining barren. So how is it that we can divorce health from reproduction? Practical Methods for Redefinition The real problem, is that we hold these churches up as models to replicate in our own location, when they are incapable of replicating themselves! We are blinded by the sheen of consumerism and the glow of individualism to the reality of God's vision for the church. We must begin to hold up different models. We must stop buying books from large church pastors, we must stop reading their blogs, we must stop placing them in places of denominational leadership, we must stop inviting them to teach at conferences. We must stop counting Sunday attendance, we must stop talking about these numbers. We must stop using these as measurements of success. We must start spotlighting individuals and communities who are planting churches! We must read their books and blogs. Invite them to speak at our conferences and lead our denominations. We must start counting the number of church plants sent out, and the number of church plants that have planted others. =================== For those of you interested in some further reading, I have attached a link to a series of posts exploring three other metaphors for Church that deal explicitly with reproduction and missional success. They came out of a sermon I preached at a friends church a few years back intended to spur on the cause of New Church Planting: Apples, Dandelions, and Horse Manure

Permalink | Leave a comment »

The grammar of equipping...

Mon, 03 May 2010 17:33:55 -0700

11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. 14 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. NIV

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; KJV

Can a Vineyard value really hinge on the inclusion – or otherwise – of a single comma in scripture? Note that in the original KJV translation of Eph 4:12, a comma appears to separate ‘the perfecting of the saints’ from ‘the work of the ministry’, into two distinct tasks for which Christ has given these headline ministries to his church. The ‘work of the ministry’ then becomes a stand-alone task for the minister, alongside the separate task of ‘the perfecting of the saints.’ However, this comma has been eliminated in the 21st Century KJV – and so too in the NIV, NASB and other modern versions – such that the task becomes one: the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry.

The difference can be summarised as this: Is it the role of these ministries, who are gifts of the risen and ascended Christ to his church, (a) to do the work themselves, or (b) to equip the people to do the work? Clearly, there is a lot that can be said here. And it will not do to focus solely on these verses, either to over-rely on them or to over-interpret them; the entirety of the scriptural message must be considered. Nevertheless, without being ignorant of the rest of scripture, constraints of space mean we will concentrate on this passage for now. We might begin by staying with values. There is something I find very appealing about a de-hyped, ego-free, humble approach to Christian ‘ministry’ (an area fraught with temptations to a ‘star culture’), in which the focus is allowed to be on the Spirit’s work, de-emphasising the vessel through which he delivers his work. Popular evangelicalism has a spotty track record for that, having often been very personality-led, from its beginnings in early Modernity through to very recent times. It seems like a value that is very much in keeping with postmodern thinking – negatively, in the de-throning of the individual’s priestly claims to religious hegemony, and positively, in seeing ministry as a community function and the goal of our endeavour as an unmediated direct experience of the divine. Of course, we shouldn’t need a proof text to inform us of this value. Jesus’ own modelling of humble leadership through servanthood, for example, is clear to see; so too, the significance Paul accords to the contribution made by the ‘least’ in the body of Christ, in 1 Cor 12. And part of the topsy-turvy nature of the Kingdom, in God’s way of seeing things, is the last being first and strength being made perfect in weakness (which we usually endorse in theory but correct in practice). So is it the case, then, that leaders – for convenience we will use this term as a collective noun for apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers – should just let the people get on with it? Yes, and no. I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. Preparing God's people (NIV), perfecting the saints (KJV) or equipping the saints (NASB) requires more than simply standing aside. The object is not simply letting everyone play, as if that were enough (even though the proper working of the body clearly requires that to happen too), but the building up of the body of Christ. What is this building up? It’s more than that people feel good about themselves and their contribution (though, again, this is important). It also involves trying to achieve certain objectives. Namely, that the church community achieves a ‘togetherness’ in the Christian faith, a ‘togetherness’ in knowing Christ, and becomes mature – fully Christ-like. What does that involve? That’s partly answered by the alternative state of affairs described in v.14 – whilst there are senses in which we should be child-like (e.g. Matt 11:25, 18:3), the inability to distinguish good and bad doctrine and teaching is not one of them. The function of ministry is not just to ‘let go and let God’, it requires teaching the faith and a right understanding of scripture, as well as training people in how to love others, share their faith and pray for people. It is perhaps inevitable that those trained in theology may have a bias towards the importance of teaching. And, that others may see hands-on apprenticeship and ‘doing the stuff’ as more important. It’s certainly true that ultimately Christianity is not about what you know but who you know. And CS Lewis was surely right in saying that a person can accept what Christ has done without knowing how it works, and ‘the thing itself is infinitely more important than any explanation that theologians have produced’ (Mere Christianity). And yet, these should be complementary, not competing, ideas. Perhaps this need for multiple facets to our teaching and training the saints is the reason why the various ministries listed in verse 11 are given the tasks that follow in verse 12 onwards collectively, rather than separate ones? We have, of course, allowed ourselves to develop a kind of dualism, lurking just below the surface in evangelical Christianity, that separates ‘head knowledge’ (bad) from ‘heart knowledge’ (good), pouring scorn on the former and praising the latter. It’s a particular temptation for hands-on practitioner pastors who lack formal training. Partly, because they are only too aware that academic knowledge, in and of itself, is of limited value, and can even be damaging at the pastoral level. Partly because the academics among us are not always great at modelling Christian faith and attitudes in practice. And partly because of an understandable human inferiority complex. It’s complicated. But this complexity does not justify the anti-intellectualism that has so often characterised popular evangelicalism, particularly in its charismatic and pentecostal expressions. The challenge is to find people who can turn good theology into good popular teaching, so that the body of Christ may be built up, and in so doing to contribute towards all of the goals of Ephesians 4:12-14; to ensure there is no dichotomy between living the faith and understanding the faith. This passage seems to gloriously mix the ideas, so that it is hard to separate the goal of knowing Christ from that of knowledge of Christ, or of becoming a mature Christian in practice from becoming an informed Christian in understanding.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Cameron, Clegg, & Brown attend largest public election meeting today

Mon, 03 May 2010 13:14:01 -0700

The Faith & Public Policy Forum has been very involved in helping to organise and develop the CitizensUK General Election Assembly which all three party leaders will attend today. Luke Bretherton will be one of those questioning the party leaders about their response to the CitizensUK manifesto before 2500 representatives of CitizensUK membership institutions at Methodist Central Hall, Westminster. For further information about the event and the 'citizens manifesto' see: http://www.citizensukblog.org/may3/ The event represents a fascinating example of inter-faith relations as a civic practice.

In what will prove to be a very different kind of political event for most of the media attending, the centrality of faith traditions in securing democratic citizenship will be marked by two things: combined singing from a Gospel Choir, Jewish Cantors and Islamic Nasheeds, and a joint reading from the Book of Nehemiah (5:1-13) by First Lady Millicent Brown, New Testament Church of God; Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, MBE, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain; Lieutenant Colonel Joan Parker, Joint Head of the London Division of the Salvation Army; Senior Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, New North London Synagogue, Assembly of Masorti Synagogues; and The Right Revd Bishop Thomas McMahon, RC Bishop of Brentwood. It will be interesting to see how the media interpret the event!

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Planted churches that plant churches

Sun, 02 May 2010 13:02:03 -0700

So this week in our series on Vineyard Church values re-imagined, we come to #9 of 10, ‘planted churches that plant churches’. We've got two authors posting this week, have fun interacting with them.

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Equipped saints...

Thu, 29 Apr 2010 13:52:02 -0700

THE CENTRALITY OF EQUIPPING

"It was He who gave some to prepare God's people..."

I take it as my basic working assumption that this is one of the essential functions of leadership. (I hesitate to say the essential function because I know I will get pushed back on that, but in my regular daily life, I operate on the assumption that it is in fact the essential function of Christian leadership.) THE PROCESS OF EQUIPPING

"...so that the body of Christ may be built up..."

We must learn a lesson from Barnabas. He stood up for Saul, vouched for him and his faith, invited him along to see what God was doing in Antioch, included him in his own apostolic ministry. It was Barnabas' invitation to Antioch in Acts 11 that leads to Paul's vocation in Acts 13. Barnabas' influence on the life of the Church was never more indispensable, never more valuable, than when he was less concerned with his own influence on the Church and more concerned with Paul's. This is the relational investment of one disciple to another; a master carpenter once said to an apprentice, "the goal is for you to be a better carpenter than I am." THE CONTENT OF EQUIPPING

"...attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ."

We are to equip and empower others to participate in the Divine Nature, connecting to God in prayer and scripture, worship and sacraments.

"...the whole body, joined and held together..."

We are to equip and empower others to share in the common life of the People of God, connecting to each other in service, fellowship, and pastoral care.

" ...as each part does its work."

We are to equip and empower others to personify the Mission of God, connecting to the world in service, justice, and evangelism. This is the basic day-to-day life of the people of God in terms of spiritual practices, essential character, and overarching purpose. THE RE-IMAGINING OF EQUIPPING In my estimation there are two critiques we must take to heart in our praxis as equipping leaders. 1) We are equipping people to lead our church instead of equipping people to be like Christ. 2) Our focus on leadership development leads us to ignore the very people who need to be equipped and empowered for those who can 'get the job done' already.

1) Church or Kingdom We must declare that we are not merely equipping for church work, but equipping for Kingdom work (of course these should be identical, but anyone who has read even a paragraph of church history is not so naive). I often fall into the ubiquitous temptation to treat the Church like my project, and so equipping leaders becomes myopically focused solely on those tasks and responsibilities that build my church organization. I recently met with a local Christian business man, John, who is five years into a housing initiative in our neighborhood; he is the head of a para-church organization. I brought along a woman from our church, Lavern, who is an urban planner for a secular organization in the city. It was great to have all three perspectives at the same table, and we conversed for some time on the need for all three to work together. In reality, the Church already is all three, I just did't get that immediately because I am too used to thinking organizationally instead of organically. Too few of us would be willing to get behind John's parachurch initiative, or Lavern's occupation in a secular organization, but it is exactly this that we must do! We must learn from them, and more pointedly, equip them, and others like them, to do their Kingdom work. We still label everything 'sacred or secular,' and 'ministry or regular life;' their should be no distinction, and we should equip for Urban Planning, just as we do for Church Planting or Worship Leading. To be an equipping leader is to get behind people, instead of getting behind projects. The temptation is to get the person in front of me to leverage everything on behalf of my project, fitting the right people into the right slots in my church, instead I need to leverage everything to help the person in front of me grow into Christ; they need to be the end, not the means. 2) The Importance of Disaster We are fearful of failure. We bore easy at mediocre performance. We abhor ugliness. This is a major impediment to the equipping process! The discipleship process employed by Jesus looks a lot more like little kids being tossed into the deep end of the pool! Sure the life guard is there to resuscitate them, but there is a lot of yelling and splashing, coughing and hacking. But they have to splash and cough if they are going to learn to swim! Learning is a lot like doing... actually, learning is exactly like doing, except its uglier. An individual was asked to be the worship leader of a medium sized church. This person was a talented musician, but struggled vocally. On occasions this person opened songs in one key instrumentally, and a different key vocally. Ouch! Why would the pastor do such a thing? People probably left the church over the decision! My own sending pastor routinely gave me opportunities to 're-create' his church. Not because I had expertise, but precisely because I lacked it! Failure is necessary. If there is no failure, then we are not equipping and empowering those who need it. My pastor was keenly aware of the consumer itch that Christians have; he knew all too well that allowing myself and others to play games with his church would probably have adverse effects on the size of the congregation. He was even more keenly aware that his calling was to his fledgling disciples, even though that meant leaving that itch unscratched...

Permalink | Leave a comment »

Equipping the saints...

Tue, 27 Apr 2010 13:46:15 -0700

The subject of Equipping the Saints is so close to the core of Vineyard values that there was briefly a publication from Anaheim, California with that very title. And not just the Vineyard: one of the great legacies of the Jesus Movement of the 1960’s and 70’s was the rediscovery of “body ministry:” a de-emphasis of ordination and the release of “ordinary Christians” to engage in acts of ministry. I have personal memories of those new-found freedoms. During my high school years a group of fellow students gathered around me one summer night and prayed for me to receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit. In my days at university I was baptized in a swimming pool by other college students--well after midnight because we had just read a New Testament passage about baptism. The clergymen were all in their homes, asleep. Now, decades later, I am a pastor, and the notion of equipping the saints is perhaps one of the most difficult values to fully embrace. I am frequently the one sleeping at home while the Holy Spirit stays out late partying with the young firebrands. The challenge of equipping the saints is a personal challenge to each person who serves as a leader in the church. What is our function? Is there a model of equipping others? How do we discern the difference between equipping and releasing? If you expect well-reasoned presentation answers to any of these concerns, I’m afraid you’ll have to Google Dallas Willard or John Wesley. The phrase, ‘equipping the saints’ of course, comes from the New American Standard translation of Ephesians 4:11-12: “And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ.” I’d like to share two observations about this brief passage, and then share a confession about my doubts.

First, about the “offices” mentioned in the passage: Let’s set aside for a moment our inability to define them to our satisfaction--we have difficulty determining whether we are talking about four or five positions here. For me the great challenge is how these roles should function in our day and time. For example, the traditional function of an evangelist is as one uniquely empowered with a “gift of evangelism.” Bring the Evangelist to your city, drum up a crowd and let the man work! The context of the passage, however, seems to suggest more properly that an evangelist would equip others for the task of evangelism. In my lifetime I have only met one evangelist who was engaged in training others to evangelize. The idealist in me believes that each “official” role should train others to serve the church. What if pastors equipped everyone in the church with the skills to care for those in their charge? What if prophets trained others to prophesy? And, perhaps most controversial of all, what if Apostles denied the temptation to establish “networks of churches” and instead trained others to plant churches and then released them to the task? In short, why do these roles require a capital letter in the front of their name? Second, it is commonly observed that the traditional distinction between clergy and laity frequently produces a professional class of leaders and an unmotivated class of followers. How do we re-cast those damaging roles? In re-imaging the Vineyard for the coming decades, I suggest we should consider presenting a gospel that portrays serving the King as well as receiving the King’s benefits. John Wimber observed that in most churches the members get what they want from the church, the deacons usually get what they want from the church, and the pastor tries to get what he wants from the church--but when does God get what he wants out of church? Each of us is called to lose our lives for Jesus’ sake and the sake of the gospel. In my view we would do well to repeat Wimber’s phrase from our pulpits: “We’re just small change in God’s pocket; he can spend us in any way he wants.” Finally, I would be less than honest if I did not share my doubts with you. The idealist in me wants to see a vibrant church filled with men, women, and children doing works of service and building one another up. Yet in just a few short years of practice, I too easily find myself settling for the art of the possible, like a politician trying to lead by pandering to the expectations of others. My confession is I find the vision presented in Ephesians too grand. I feel like the helpless father who cries out to the Lord, “I believe! Help me in my unbelief!” This magnificent letter portrays a magnificent church, “the fullness of him who fills everything in every way” (1:23); or this: “His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms.” (3:10); or even in 5:27 “a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.” Forget about faith sufficient for signs and wonders--my faith is too small at present to imagine that such a church is possible! This is perhaps why church leadership--in every function--requires connection to the Head, if only so that we can see His Bride through His eyes.

Permalink | Leave a comment »