DownshoreDrift

Church as Organic Collaboration vs. Hierarchical Institution

Gateway is starting a community garden this Spring. The purpose is to grow food for the people who participate in it and have enough left over to give to the poor through our food pantry and other venues. But, I have another reason for it. I hope that it will be living metaphor for how the church is to function and through participating in it, we will learn more about God, each other, the church, and our relationship to the world. God has called us to co-labor with Him and to help steward the earth. We see the original mandate in Genesis 1:26-28 and our experience here on this planet is to be lived in an ever growing relationship with God and others as we find ways to be creative, reflect His glory, and display His beauty. Of course, Sin introduced weeds and thistles and blight and pests into God's Creation, but Christ has come to relcaim the land and to establish His Kingdom through His life, death, and resurrection. Spring is the time of year that we think about resurrection and fruitfulness and sowing and reaping. So, we are planting a garden and I think that the garden is an apt metahpor for the church as we live as the people of God.

I have heard a lot about how the church is to operate like a Fortune 500 company with a CEO and business plans and organizational and leadership strategies. We go to the Willow Creek Global Leadership Summit every year and that is pretty much the value system articulated there. I like a lot of this because I believe in planning and structure and goals and organization. We make a mistake when the think that "organic" means "nebulous."  Nature has structure - highly complex structure, actually. So, The Garden metaphor for church is not opposed to structure and organization and planning. It actually requires it. But, the mistake that a lot of people make is that they try to either drive the church like a herd of cattle or they fossilize the church like a statue to preserve it so stays the same and can withstand the changing nature of culture. The correct response, I think, is to position the church in a way that it can grow, adapt, transform, and reflect what God is doing both in the church and in the community and culture.

Last night, we had a small group leaders training meeting and I told them that THEY were the front lines of ministry for our church. They would be the ones who would be aware of what God was doing in people's lives, what the challenges were, and where the ministry opportunities were found. They could lead, initiate, and spontaneously reproduce. They are to collaborate together to engage in the Misson of God as they sacrificially love God and people everywhere they go. How they do that is basically up to them. Our church is healthy when we have branches growing in many different directions as the Spirit leads and produces fruit. But, when a branch doesn't bear fruit or ceases to produce life, it is probably time for us to put our energy elsewhere. Jesus is the Gardener and He prunes us where we need pruninng and He directs us where we need to go as He positions us to offer gifts to God and the world.

So, I like the Garden metaphor and I look forward to what we will learn together in this experience. I think that we will gain insight into Jesus' ways of living as we work together, sacrifice, stick our hands in the ground, and plant, water, wait, and harvest. I think that the church looks more like a Garden than an assembly line.

 Plus, I really like fresh tomatoes.   

Marriage, Mission, and the Kingdom of God

I think that we often get Christian marriage all wrong and the result is devastating for both Christians and non-Christians. We hold up an ideal relationship of love and fulfillment and we give people strategies for how to go after it so they can be satisfied. Christians get married so they can share their life with their soul mate and when things are not what they hoped they would be (as they will never be), then disillusionment often sets in. But, what if the metric was different from what we thought? What if the goal was not some perfect union where there were no problems and God was invited in to create wedded bliss? What if, instead, we recognized that marriage, Christian marriage, is actually two sinners submitting themselves to God and sharing a life together on God's terms instead of their own? What if the problems faced when two sinners joined their lives together were actually allowed by God so that the couple would experience the Way of the Cross and learn dependence upon the Lord instead of themselves? What if Christian marriage was not about the couple getting the life they always wanted, but rather, was a journey into trust in God, forgiveness, grace, mercy, and self-sacrifice and the life that only God can provide? What if Christian marriage was radically different from what we have thought?

Paul David Tripp has an interesting take on it that is different from what I've heard from many ministers in the past.  He actually roots marriage in the Kingdom of God and explains what it looks like for the Kingdom to come in a marriage and how a marriage becomes a ministry and a place where God shows up.

 

As someone who likes to read more than watch videos, here is part of the transcript of what Tripp is saying:

When you think of the marriage between a man and a woman who are believers as being a forum for great commission ministry there are a couple things that come to mind. If you have these two sinners who by nature are self sovereigns who have little interest in doing anything in life, but building their own kingdom…And if they’re now living in a relationship of real unity, real love, willing self sacrifice, you’re seeing the Kingdom come. It has come in this marriage. There are few places where you can better invite people in to see the King at work and see how His Kingdom operates more than a marriage, because typically you don’t have unity, understanding and love.”

Tripp is saying here that when two Christians, who are by-nature sinners and are bent on getting their way, actually submit their lives to each other and serve one another and forgive one another and bless one another - instead of trying to get their own way - then, the Kingdom has come in that marriage. The Kingdom of God can come in a normal moment of service and love and sacrifice for the other that is not anything dramatic at all - but it is supernatural because it is not what the flesh produces. When one spouse decides not to try and get their way but instead seeks the good of the other, that is the reign and rule (the Kingdom) of God manifesting itself in that marriage and Christ is witnessed to. When the Christian life is simply lived out in the context of a marriage and real sacrificial love replaces real selfishness - that is missional ministry. Then, the world is invited to see something different - the relationship between Christ and His Church.

I do not always do this. I can be selfish and, well, selfish. That pretty much sums it up. But, as I learn to seek God and the good of my wife and my children over and above myself - then I am able to live out the Kingdom mission in my home. God help me. I am selfish way more often than I should be. But, like everything else, it all begins with my walk with the Lord and dying to myself and living to Christ daily. When I look to Jesus, everything else falls into place and makes sense - including my marriage and family. When I look to myself, everything falls apart. God help me.  

Bonhoeffer on the Kingdom of God and Self

Doing research tonight and I was reading about the German Confessing Church during the Nazi regime of the 1930's and 40's. Of course, I ran across Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the German Christian, Pastor, and philosopher who opposed the Nazi regime on the basis of Christian fidelity. Here are some quotes that challenged me deeply:

 “Jesus Christ lived in the midst of his enemies. At the end all his disciples deserted him. On the Cross he was utterly alone, surrounded by evildoers and mockers. For this cause he had come, to bring peace to the enemies of God. So the Christian, too, belongs not in the seclusion of a cloistered life but in the thick of foes. There is his commission, his work. 'The kingdom is to be in the midst of your enemies. And he who will not suffer this does not want to be of the Kingdom of Christ; he wants to be among friends, to sit among roses and lilies, not with the bad people but the devout people. O you blasphemers and betrayers of Christ! If Christ had done what you are doing who would ever have been spared' (Luther).” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Life Together: The Classic Exploration of Faith in Community

“The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children."

“We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the wheel itself.”

“Will not the very moment of great disillusionment with my brother or sister be incomparably wholesome for me becuase it so thoroughly teaches me that both of us can never live by our own words and deeds, but only by that one Word and deed that really binds us together, the forgiveness of sins in Jesus Christ? The bright day of Christian community dawns wherever the early morning mists of dreamy visions are lifting”

“Just as Christians should not be constantly feeling the pulse of their spiritual life, so too the Christian community has not been given to us by God for us to be continually taking its temperature. The more thankfully we daily receive what is given to us, the more assuredly and consistently will community increase and grow from day to day as God pleases” ― Life Together and Prayerbook of the Bible

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” "Those who love their dream of a Christian community more than the Christian community itself become destroyers of that Christian community even though their personal intentions may be ever so honest, earnest, and sacrificial.” ― Life Together

“But discipleship never consists in this or that specific action: it is always a decision, either for or against Jesus Christ...Christ speaks to us exactly as he spoke to them. It was not as though they first recognized him as the Christ and then received his command. They believed his word and command and recognized him as the Christ--in that order.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“If any man would come after me, let him deny himself." The disciple must say to himself the same words Peter said of Christ when he denied him: "I know not this man." Self-denial is never just a series of isolated acts of mortification or asceticism. It is not suicide, for there is an element of self-will even in that. To deny oneself is to be aware only of Christ and no more of self, to see only him who goes before and no more the road which is too hard for us. Once more, all that self denial can say is: "He leads the way, keep close to him.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“No sacrifice which a lover would make for his beloved is too great for us to make for our enemy.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“The Christian must treat his enemy as a brother, and requite his hostility with love. His behavior must be determined not by the way others treat him, but by the treatment he himself receives from Jesus; it has only one source, and that is the will of Jesus.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“Bless them that persecute you.' If our enemy cannot put up with us any longer and takes to cursing us, our immediate reaction must be to lift up our hands and bless him. Our enemies are the blessed of the Lord. Their curse can do us no harm. May their poverty be enriched with all the riches of God, with the blessing of Him whom they seek to oppose in vain. We are ready to endure their curses so long as they redound to their blessing.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“The community of the saints is not an "ideal" community consisting of perfect and sinless men and women, where there is no need of further repentance. No, it is a community which proves that it is worthy of the gospel of forgiveness by constantly and sincerely proclaiming God's forgiveness...Sanctification means driving out the world from the Church as well as separating the Church from the world. But the purpose of such discipline is not to establish a community of the perfect, but a community consisting of men who really live under the forgiving mercy of God.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“Luther had said that grace alone can save; his followers took up his doctrine and repeated it word for word. But they left out its invariable corollary, the obligation to discipleship...The justification of the sinner in the world degenerated into the justification of sin and the world. Costly grace was turned into cheap grace without discipleship.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

“To deal with the word of Jesus otherwise than by doing it is to give him the lie. It is to deny the Sermon on the Mount and to say No to his word...That is why as soon as the hurricane begins we lose the word, and find that we have never really believed it. The word we had was not Christ's, but a word we had wrested from him and made our own by reflecting on it instead of doing it.” ― The Cost of Discipleship

All quotes can be found here: http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/29333.Dietrich_Bonhoeffer

The Apology of Aristides, Fasting, and the Lifestyles of Early Christians

At LIFE Group this past Friday night, we were sitting outside by the fire and talking about prayer and fasting and how the discipline of fasting has a two-fold objective, which is to put away distractions and dependencies to bring us to God and then to give ourselves away to others.  Gabe Posey, a member of our group, brought up The Apology of Aristides, which was a 2nd century writing by the Athenian philosopher, Aristides, that he delivered to Emperor Hadrian as a defense of Christianity.  I had never heard of this, so I asked him to send it to me, which he did.  This is really interesting:

But the Christians, O King, while they went about and made search, have found the truth; and as we learned from their writings, they have come nearer to truth and genuine knowledge than the rest of the nations. For they know and trust in God, the Creator of heaven and of earth, in whom and from whom are all things, to whom there is no other god as companion, from whom they received commandments which they engraved upon their minds and observe in hope and expectation of the world which is to come. Wherefore they do not commit adultery nor fornication, nor bear false witness, nor embezzle what is held in pledge, nor covet what is not theirs. They honour father and mother, and show kindness to those near to them; and whenever they are judges, they judge uprightly. They do not worship idols (made) in the image of man; and whatsoever they would not that others should do unto them, they do not to others; and of the food which is consecrated to idols they do not eat, for they are pure. And their oppressors they appease (lit: comfort) and make them their friends; they do good to their enemies; and their women, O King, are pure as virgins, and their daughters are modest; and their men keep themselves from every unlawful union and from all uncleanness, in the hope of a recompense to come in the other world. Further, if one or other of them have bondmen and bondwomen or children, through love towards them they persuade them to become Christians, and when they have done so, they call them brethren without distinction. They do not worship strange gods, and they go their way in all modesty and cheerfulness. Falsehood is not found among them; and they love one another, and from widows they do not turn away their esteem; and they deliver the orphan from him who treats him harshly. And he, who has, gives to him who has not, without boasting. And when they see a stranger, they take him in to their homes and rejoice over him as a very brother; for they do not call them brethren after the flesh, but brethren after the spirit and in God. And whenever one of their poor passes from the world, each one of them according to his ability gives heed to him and carefully sees to his burial. And if they hear that one of their number is imprisoned or afflicted on account of the name of their Messiah, all of them anxiously minister to his necessity, and if it is possible to redeem him they set him free.

And if there is among them any that is poor and needy, and if they have no spare food, they fast two or three days in order to supply to the needy their lack of food. They observe the precepts of their Messiah with much care, living justly and soberly as the Lord their God commanded them.

Every morning and every hour they give thanks and praise to God for His loving-kindnesses toward them; and for their food and their drink they offer thanksgiving to Him. And if any righteous man among them passes from the world, they rejoice and offer thanks to God; and they escort his body as if he were setting out from one place to another near. And when a child has been born to one of them, they give thanks to God; and if moreover it happen to die in childhood, they give thanks to God the more, as for one who has passed through the world without sins. And further if they see that any one of them dies in his ungodliness or in his sins, for him they grieve bitterly, and sorrow as for one who goes to meet his doom.

This gives us a great picture of the lifestyles of the early Christians. Apparently, they were dramatically different from the pagans around them. What I find of particular interest here is the statement above in bold that says that if there were any who were poor and needy among them who had no food, others would fast for two or three days to supply what was lacking in the poor in their midst.  Those who had food would sacrifice for those who did not.  This goes along with the injunctions about true, Biblical fasting in Isaiah 58:6-9.

⁶ “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:
to loose the chains of injustice
   and untie the cords of the yoke,
to set the oppressed free
   and break every yoke?
⁷ Is it not to share your food with the hungry
   and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—
when you see the naked, to clothe him,
   and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
⁸ Then your light will break forth like the dawn,
   and your healing will quickly appear;
then your righteousness will go before you,
   and the glory of the LORD will be your rear guard.
⁹ Then you will call, and the LORD will answer;
   you will cry for help, and he will say: Here am I.

The perspective of the early Christians was that their life was not their own and that they were to sacrifice for one another. May we have the same perspective.

 

Christian Vocation and God's Benevolent Care

When we think about our "calling," we often think of someone being "called" into full-time ministry. But, that is a very truncated view of what our calling is.  From the Latin word for "calling" we get the concept of Vocation. Everyone has a God-given Vocation, a role to play in their family, church, workplace, and the larger society. God has uniquely shaped, equipped, and placed each one of us to contribute to His overall plan and care for Creation.  We all have gifts, talents, and abilities that God uses as He sovereignly places us in spheres of influence to display His glory and influence. I often say that God is not a character in our story, but rather, we are characters in God's Story. He has a plan for each of us and He exercises His rule through us. It is remarkable, when you think about it.

With this as a backdrop, we are able to look at the concept of work differently from the rest of the world. "Work" is not a way to establish ourselves as independent from God or anyone else. Nor is it a way to accrue wealth so that we will have safety and security. Work is not primarily about money nor is it something to hate or to get away from whenever we can. Many want to be wealthy so that they will not have to work and so they can do what they want when they want to - in other words, independence from others, from society, and from any real sense of responsibility to anyone or anything. All of this is from the Fall where work/labor became associated with the Curse related to sin (see Genesis 3:17-19) and it became something that was often seen as tedious and life denying.

But, there is a different way to see work. We can go back before the Fall and see that God created mankind to work in relation to His will and to be a part of how God rules over and cares for His Creation (Genesis 1:28-2:3). And, we know that in Christ, God is restoring all things to His intention for us and that He is renewing Creation. So, if we are in Christ, we are free to work with meaning and purpose in God's economy as His representatives and co-laborers.  Christ has destroyed the curse of sin so we are free to be creative and to add value to all that we do as we reflect and give thanks for the glorious freedom that Christ has provided us. The concept of Work as been redeemed and retrieved from the effects of the Fall and has been restored to God's original purpose as the way that we live out our calling in this world.

What Is Poverty In America?

Is there real, widespread poverty in America?

The National Review put out an article that claims that those classified as poor in America (approximately 40 million people) are actually much better off materially than we might think. They have things like air conditioners, DVD players, big screen TV's, X-Boxes, computers, internet, refrigerators, adequate shelter, plenty of food and clothing, etc. Yet, they are still considered poor. Why is this?

Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.

Haiti's Suffering: One Year Anniversary of the Earthquake

A year ago today, a massive 7.0 earthquake rocked Port-au-Prince and the surrounding areas of impoverished Haiti and killed an estimated 230,000 people, injured over 300,000, and left over one million people homeless. When the news reports began to filter in from Haiti, most in America were shocked at the devastation that we saw.  The human suffering was on a level that was almost unimaginable.  I really want to credit Anderson Cooper from CNN for telling the story in a way that held up the human catastrophe for all to see. He was relentless with it and mobilized a lot of people to try and help.

A week after the earthquake, I was glued to the continuing story of suffering that was unfolding. I began to feel like I should go to Haiti. I had no idea how I would get there or what I would do, but the feeling got stronger and stronger.  Through a series of events, I found myself in Port-au-Prince by the afternoon of January 26, just two weeks after the earthquake. I went with an organization called Helping Hands from North Georgia and we were there to assist with a medical clinic and other relief activities.

Port-au-Prince was devastated.  We set up shop right next to the governmental palace downtown and we found ourselves in the midst of 600,000 refugees living in makeshift tents, basically piled on top of each other.  The smell of feces and a sweltering mass of humanity was, at times, overwhelming.  Hundreds of people lined up for basic checkups and free medical care. The more serious cases we transported to the University of Miami field hospital.  We did what we could with the supplies that we had, but it seemed like just a drop in the bucket when you considered all the suffering and pain.

Orphans were everywhere.  Thousands upon thousands of children had been orphaned.  We pulled one little girl away from a woman who was selling her on the streets to anyone who would give her money.  We sent her up into the mountains to an orphanage that we were working with.  The number of people wandering the streets who had lost spouses, children, and other family members was overwhelming.  People were devastated.

The tent cities were deplorable.  Hundreds of thousands of people were stringing sheets together to escape the heat of the sun in unending swaths of tents and makeshit dwellings.  When the UN would come by and throw food out of the back of a truck, riots would ensue.  We saw one half a block away from where we were.  We later heard that a couple of people had been trampled to death.  We were thankful for the armed guards that we had hired to provide security as we did our medical work, but we knew that our real security came from God.

I also saw amazing hope and resilience.  People had not given up.  They prayed. They sang.  They cried out to God.  I got to share the gospel with so many people that week.  At one point, someone in the crowd asked me if they were being judged because of Haiti's sins.  I told them the same thing that Jesus said when he was asked such a question.  What happened to Haiti was a lesson to all of us - we should all repent and turn back to God.  In response to the message of hope and salvation through Jesus Christ, I was also privileged to see hundreds of people give their lives to Jesus that week.

Now, one year later, the devastation and despair continues.  Cholera has broken out and violence is growing.  There are fears of a civil war breaking out after the coming election this next week.  Children are still orphaned and alone and gangs are roaming the streets looking for victims.  Very little of the international aid that has been promised has gotten there, and even if it had, there is no functioning government to really do something with it.  Long after the rest of us have moved on to other things, Haiti remains in desperate need.

Let's not forget to pray for Haiti and do what we can to help.  If we can go and/or give, we should continue to do so.  There are thousands of aid organizations down there, however, and many of them are not doing much good at all.  While we should be generous, we should also be smart and do what is effective to help Haiti recover from the rubble.  We need to remember that God can save Haiti. There is hope. 

 

Does the Church Have a Future in Montgomery, Alabama?

Of course, the immediate answer is yes. But, I am asking the same question I asked about a year and a half ago in this post:  http://www.downshoredrift.com/downshoredrift/2009/07/can-the-christian-church-help-montgomery-alabama.html.

Not much has changed in Montgomery in a year and a half except that more people have moved to bedroom communities and more Christians have congregated in megachurches. It will be interesting to see what the new census numbers reveal about regional migration. White flight and middle class flight continue to take hold in Montgomery and Christians continue to run away to nice, safe, secure environments. I really wonder about this. Jesus didn't run away to environs that were safe for Him. He ran straight into a deadly situation out of love for us. Yet, we continue to run away from problems in our community and make decisions based on "what's best for us and our family."  Is that a Christian response to the problems in our neighborhoods, our schools, and our community?  If there is crime in a neighborhood, where is the church?  Can't we run in and address it?  If there is family breakdown, fatherlessness, and hopelessness, shouldn't the church be there?

Anyway, read the post above, if you like. It was written last year, but is still pertinent for today. I think that the days are urgent and we have a generation that will be lost if we don't engage them with the gospel.  If the church does have a future, it will be a future of missional engagement instead of entrenchment for our own safety and security.

In a follow up post on White Flight/Middle Class Flight, I said this:  "we should not just cede other people to the enemy without collective engagement."  It is hard to take the gospel to people who are set against it. It requires sacrifice - maybe even our lives. But, isn't that what we're called to? Where does the church call for that?  Scripture does - but, do we?

Alan Hirsch has a great message on the need for the church to be a community of missional engagement with the powers of darkness. I posted it on Facebook the other day.  Check it out:

 

How NOT to Help the Poor (HT: @timmybrister)

I saw this video over at my friend, Timmy Brister's site. He is also reading the book I mentioned in my post yesterday. In light of initiating a discussion on poverty and Christian solutions, I thought I'd repost it here.

Thoughts?

 

What Are Christians to Do to Help the Poor?

Our church is sending a team to Haiti next Spring and a lot of our youth are going. We have also been very active in India over the past few years and have also done a good deal in our own community to try and alleviate poverty and give aid to the poor. Jesus commands us to do this (Matt. 25).  Still, it is good to think through how we are to really help the poor and not make things worse. Lots of times, our best efforts can be things that we do to make us feel better instead of things that really provide long-term solutions for long-term problems. Plus, we need to consider what our view of "poor" is.  Economic inequality does not necessarily mean that someone is poor. Compared to Bill Gates, I am very poor. But, my basic needs are met, my quality of life is good, and I do not consider myself to be poor, even though I can in no way match his lifestyle. The presence of wealty people in the world does not mean that everyone else is poor by comparison.

At the same time, if basic needs are not met related to food, water, health, housing, clothing, etc., then we have issues. Becoming a real source of help for the poor in these situations means that we need to think through things and provide real solutions that make a real difference. More money, education, and services can be helpful, but if a dependency mentality is created, it does little long term good. At the same time, if someone is sick, hungry, thirsty, or dying, you don't stand over them and preach about long-term solutions. This is what Jesus was getting at in his parable of the Good Samaritan. You help right then.

I am reading a book called "When Helping Hurts:  How to Alleviate Poverty Without Hurting the Poor . . . And Yourself."  You can join me in reading it if you like.  Here is the website for the book that expands the discussion. I think it might have some good insight on how Christians are to really be involved with the poor and help bring transformation. At least it will initiate some good thoughts and discussion.  Along with Tim Keller's Generous Justice that I am also reading, this focus might be a good way to discipline our minds during the Christmas season, where so much buying/spending/feasting seems to be focused on ourselves.

Another great resource is Walking With the Poor by Bryant Myers.

 

More on the Need for Church Structure/Ministry Teams

I'm fairly organic when it comes to the nature and function of the church. The church is a living organism, not a corporation or assembly line. Modernity changed the nature of the church and pastoring from a pastoral perspective to a business model with the pastor as CEO and the church as a business that needed to market goods and services effectively to the consuming masses.  Leadership changed from soul care and spiritual formation to management principles in the search for efficiency, growth, and validity.  You were only valid and needed if you could offer goods and services cheaply, efficiently, and with great excellence and speed. Many (including myself) have rejected this mentality and have moved toward a more organic, Spirit-led approach to church life. I wrote about this yesterday.

So, I come at this from an organic perspective. But, I am also really beginning to see the need for structure, leadership, vision, and focus.  We are supposed to be one in spirit and purpose (Phil. 2:2).  Instead of getting rid of structure and organization because we are reacting to abuses or too much focus on it, perhaps we should see the need for church structure, ministry teams, and focus in a different way. What if the organization existed to serve the movement, instead of the other way around?  When things get messed up, it is when the organization becomes self-perpetuating and exists for its own ends. No one wants that. But, what if organization and church structure could be used well to serve and assist in the movement of the Holy Spirit in the life of a body of believers?  Isn't this why some would have gifts of administration and leadership?  I think so.

This post went to Facebook yesterday and a brilliant friend of mine, Phillip Hannam left this comment. I want to reproduce it here:

Philip Hannam

I think there is a strong parallel connection between form-spirit and works-faith.

Faith without works is ___________________. Spirit-filled life that does not incarnate into something visible in the world is worthless.

Religion is not God. R...eligion is not just a pathway to God. It is the incarnational form we give to faith. It is also our language of faith.

But of course these structures can, and do, become dead--on a daily basis. But isn't that true of our own lives?

It's delusional to think we are somehow closer to a life-giving God if we can reduce 'form' to almost zero--and just have autonomous, organic, individuals, expressing the life of God. We are just as prone to turning our personal prayer life into a dead idol as we are to do the same with a denominational structure.

Structure seems dead when it seems to serve only itself; when it turns all energy in on itself; when it creates a culture that keeps people out or disconnects from the broader world; when it disempowers members of the structure; when it loses integrity (it is not consistent with the faith it expresses); when the structures fail to carry-out life-giving ministry; when leadership is not being nurtured and multiplied through the structures.

If one believes God created us as anarchists or hermits--than one might argue that religious structure is anti-god. If we are to incarnate God's love within a society--within networks of relations--within a highly complex, bureaucratized, organized, specialized, structured society--there are going to be highly structured forms.

We are undergoing dramatice changes in social structure giving rise to much of the anti-structure mood. But it isn't really anti-form. It is calling for a transformation of forms.

Have you ever reflected on these words:

formed
conformed
transformed
informed
reformed
performed
deformed

I find it interesting to just think of the words in relation to faith and structures.

Good words.  What do you think?  How can we use church structures, focus, and ministry teams in an organic, life-giving way to advance the Kingdom and still be led by the Spirit?

How Much Structure Is Needed In Church Ministry?

In many ways, I can't believe that I am writing this post. I'm not that guy. I'm not the guy that thinks that having a good structure for church ministry will solve things.  I firmly believe that ministry is mostly a matter of the heart and that people work best together when they are motivated intrinsically and come together organically. I would much rather have people spontaneously gather, minister to others, and live out the Christian life without church structures getting in the way. I also do not believe that there is some magic bullet of church organization or management theory that will solve the inefficiencies of human social enterprises. You won't see me reading the latest leadership book or spouting off the latest church growth/organization theory.  If church is not organic, life-giving, free, and hopeful, then it is not really church, in my limited opinion.

I've always been the non-institutional, organic, free church guy who happens to pastor and serve in a somewhat more institutional church setting in the VERY institutional church oriented American South.  In other words, not always the best fit geographically, even though I have been blessed with the church I get to pastor. As time has gone by, I've seen more and more people overall start thinking the same way. We are now at the point that much that smacks of organization, structure, programs, discipline, or commitment is being seen by many as being not Spirit-led or stifling. It is not organic enough. Many mature Christians think that they do not need local church structure/ministry to do the ministry that God has called them to.  In the past, I tended to lean in this direction because I firmly believe that God's Spirit that lives inside each Christian is completely capable of guiding believers both individually and collectively and that intrinsic motivation is much better than extrinsic motivation that comes from church structures.

However, I have come to the point that I am beginning to think that we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, to use an old cliche.  More and more, I am beginning to see that structure, organization, and commitment to an on-going ministry is way more important than many of my generation think.  It is easy to say that we all need to be free when we are living off of the benefit of the structure that existed all around us. But, when everyone is free and there is little organization or commitment beyond what one feels led to do in the moment, you can begin to have some problems. Maybe the individual Christian is fine because they don't think they need a lot of reinforcement.  They've been around enough and have a small circle of friends and know how to find the Sunday worship gathering just fine. But, the problem comes in when you begin to try and minister to others or when people try to connect with your church and they don't already know everything. Organic and Spirit-led to them often looks like a disorganized mess. Can "organic" ministry become another way of having church just for us? 

We need ministry teams.  We need for people to come together and develop structures that others can participate in without having to already be best friends with people. We need to keep the relational aspect flowing, but if we don't have the strength that ministry teams provide, then how do others get involved?  How do they know that they could connect with a local church?  I am all for personal ministry. We need people to engage in that. But, we also need for people to come together, make commitments to one another, sacrifice, pray, and begin to carry out ministries that will reach and disciple people beyond their own personal relationships. We need to do this relationally, no doubt. The problem in the past was that we relied too much on the programs and structure to produce disciples. It didn't work. But, now, I wonder if shifting to a full relational, organic paradigm isn't making the same mistake, just in the other direction.

More on this tomorrow . . .  In the meantime, what do you think?  How much structure is needed in church ministry and how to you call people to commit to something that they don't think is life-giving and exciting all the time?

Deacon Ministry, Generous Justice, and Caring for the Poor (Tim Keller)

I just got Tim Keller's latest book, Generous Justice: How God's Grace Makes Us Just. If it is like the rest of his writings, I am sure that I am going to learn a lot. At the beginning of the book, he talks about his motivation to consider the Biblical view of justice. He recalls how he was greatly affected by the hypocrisy of white Christians in the 1960's when they defended segregation instead of siding with those fighting for justice. He thought that "justice" was a secular concern until he was taught more fully on what the Bible taught about justice and God's concern for the oppressed.

While getting a Doctor of Ministry degree, he was challenged to write his thesis on deacon ministry in the church.  His concept of the role of deacons, God's concern for justice and the poor, and the role of the church in all of this was radically changed.  He says,

Deacons had historically been designated to work with the poor and needy in the community, but over the years this legacy had been lost, and instead they had evolved into janitors and treasurers . . . I did historical research on how church deacons served as the first public social service structure in European cities such as Geneva, Amsterdam, and Glasgow. 

What if deacons in our churches revived the role of being ministers of justice and mercy to the poor and needy in their community?  This happens in some churches, and to a great degree it happens in our church. But, I didn't know that this had been a formal approach to how deacons functioned. Keller is right. In many churches, deacons serve as an administrative council for the church and primarily function as custodians of the church building and grounds. But, what if they led us out in mercy ministry to those in need all over our community?

Gateway has a very vibrant benevolence ministry. We have been privileged to help people in all walks of life, from the sick, to stranded travelers, to those needing food, shelter, and basic provisions. We have helped lift people up from the clutches of poverty and have seen them regain a place in society where they are able to take care of themselves and begin to help others. Our deacons have led this ministry and have prayerfully administered the gifts of God's people to the poor and needy.  In December, our deacons will lead our entire church in our annual multi-event outreach effort called, "A Time to Serve."  We will have 6 or so service oriented, outreach events that enable us to give to others during the holiday season instead of just focusing on ourselves. 

I am really excited to read more of this book. I just wanted to stop and acknowledge the ministry that our deacons do concerning the poor and needy in our community as well as those who are in our church.  It is good to know that they serve in a long, historical tradition of deacons who have been a blessng to others as they reflect the heart of God for the poor. 

Why It Hard for the World to Listen to Christians

I am a firm believer that we must contextualize the gospel to our current culture. That is the work of a missionary. Every culture speaks a certain language and thinks a certain way. The Missionary Christian must exegete his/her culture and find ways to declare who God is so that people can understand. Every culture also has built in barriers and bridges to the gospel and the wise missionary (I use this term to refer to every Christian) understands this and travels over those bridges that are present.

However . . .

No matter how much to seek to contextualize the gospel and explain it in ways that people understand and seek to meet felt needs and minister to people on their own turf, you are still in a situation where people who do not know God are actually incapable of knowing Him unless the Lord enlightens them. That is humbling for those of us who seek to spread abroad the knowledge of God.  It causes us to depend upon the power of the Holy Spirit to convict people and draw people to Christ. This is a spiritual work and no matter how much we seek to relate to people, we have no ability whatsoever to cause people to come too faith in Christ. Yes, we are responsible to preach the gospel, love people, build friendships, serve people, and represent Christ everywhere we go. But, we cannot convert anyone.  Only God can do that.

When we were in India back in April, I had a conversation with a woman in the holy city of Rishikesh on the Ganges River. She said that all roads led to heaven and that Jesus was a great teacher, but he was not the only way to God.  I kept talking with her about this and at one point, she asked if I was trying to convert her. I told her that I was not and that I could not.  Relieved, we kept talking about God, Jesus, and salvation. I told her that not to mislead her, but because it is impossible for me to convert anyone. All that I can do is give witness to who God is and to the power of His gospel revealed in the person and work of Jesus Christ. We can tell people what we have seen and what the Bible says, but we cannot save anyone. Only God can.  Yes, He does it through the foolishness of preaching the gospel, but He is still the one who does it.

No matter how much we try to relate to non-Christians (and we should try as we are neighbors together with all people on this planet), at some point we have to recognize that their relationship with God, or lack of one, is something that God must work in. Hopefully, He will work through us, but recognizing that it is His work should not make us passive. Rather, it should remove the pressure of having to perform and should enable us to freely love people who cannot know God unless God draws them.

Should it be a surprise to us when they do not listen to Christians or when they reject our witness?  No. 1 John 4:4-6 says,

You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them (spirits who deny Christ), because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood. 

This is interesting. It is saying that there are Christ-denying spirits who engage in falsehood and they are rampant throughout the world. The "world" represents the domain that is set up against the knowledge of God. It consists of the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes, and the boasting of what he has and does (1 John 2:16).  The things that belong to the world are perpetuated by demonic spirits that also deceive people through an unending array of messages that contradict who God is and how He wants us to live. Then, it says that the world listens to these spirits and it buys in to these messages. Since people who do not know God are from the world and belong to the world, they listen to the voices that follow the viewpoint of the world. They are not from God and do not belong to God and therefore do not listen to God's words or viewpoint or to His people. Whenever we speak from God's perspective, those who are from the world will not listen to us because it comes into conflict with the world's perspective, the view that they belong to. So, we really are talking about a form of spiritual warfare here.

No matter how much we try to appeal to the world, the only way that the world will listen to us (in the natural) is when we begin to speak from their viewpoint - according to the wisdom of the world. Unfortunately, many Christians care more about drawing a crowd than they do about true life transformation in Christ and they are ignorant of what it means to operate in the spiritual power that only comes from God. Because they think that they are called to be successful (the world's view), they partake in the ways of the world to appeal to the people of the world. They speak the world's language and take on the ways of the world so that they can draw adherents to their cause. Then, they call it Christianity when it is actually just a baptized form of the world with some Jesus sprinkled in. Most don't see the problem because they are so focused on numbers and size as a sign of God's blessing. If people are coming, then it must be pleasing to God.

This has nothing to do with styles of dress, music, church forms, etc. I am not saying that. I am saying that there is a way that seems right to the world, and you can find it in our most traditional churches as well as in contemporary churches. It is not about forms and styles. It is about dependence upon God and an understanding that He must work in our lives for us to be born again. We must see life transformation. We cannot just reform the flesh and try and live a better life. We must come to know God. This requires the work of God in our life through the drawing and regeneration of the Spirit that accompanies the preaching of the gospel. Our response must be faith in Christ and repentance from trusting in our own way to make a life for ourselves. We must trust in God. 

Only when we look to God first do we have a real message for the world. Many in the world will reject us. There will be conflict. But, when the gospel is spoken and lived with love and power, God will use that to draw many people to Himself.

How To Have a Real #GCR

So, what about the local church? The Great Commission Resurgence Task Force has given us recommendations for how we are to live Christlike lives and for how some of our entities can be restructured to increased efficiency, but we have not heard very much about what the local church can do to bring about a GCR. Southern Baptists say a lot about how the local church is at the center of God's activity in the world and how the SBC exists to assist the local church in their mission, but we don't see a lot of that. Instead, we see cooperation defined as the local church sending money and people up the line to the state conventions and national entities, effectively farming out to parachurch organizations the mission that God primarily gave to the local church. No wonder we have lost our vision! We are not working according to the design that God intiated. But, what if we did? Here are some concrete proposals that the GCRTF could put forward that would encourage us all and could possibly lead to a real Great Commission Resurgence:

1. Start their thinking with the local church in mind. The GCRTF started with a top-down approach. They got things backwards. If they had started with the local church and worked their way up, they would be in a much better spot right now. But, they went the way that the SBC has been going for the last 60 years and they took a top-down approach.
2. Through state conventions and local associations, identify churches that are already carrying out the axioms for a Great Commission Resurgence found HERE.  Who is already doing the work correctly? Where is God moving? What examples can we hold up to the rest of the SBC locally and nationally? I asked a DOM friend of mine about this and he said that he could think of 10-12 churches in his association that were doing really well in this regard. Let them lead us. Instead of trying to get something going from scratch, we accurately recognize that God is at work in a powerful way in many SBC churches across America. Why can't they lead the denomination?
3. Encourage those churches to partner with a couple of other churches that might be struggling, but who are willing. Again, the state conventions and local assocations are critical in identifying these churches and pastors and in helping to facilitate the connections. Have pastoral and lay leadership meet together in prayer and mutual submission and ask what they could do together locally and globally to impact lostness. How could they help one another? How could they pray for each other? What encouragement could the thriving church share with the churches that are struggling and vice versa?
4. In these clusters of 3-5 churches, introduce the concepts of partnering for global missions involvement. Bring in someone from the IMB that would meet with them and help facilitate engagement with an area overseas that could use their prayer and support. Plan a joint mission trip and connect them with a missionary overseas.
5. Also, introduce the concept of church planting. Have someone from the state convention or NAMB talk with them about helping to support a church plant in an area of need. Prayer, finances, people, and support could be brought out to engage in this work.  Perhaps several clusters could work together. NAMB, state convention personnel, and church planter strategists could help facilitate this, but you still have primary local church involvement.
6. In these clusters of churches, introduce the concept of local community transformation. The state convention and primarily the local association can play a vital role in this. What if 3-5 local churches addressed areas of a community that were struggling? What if they identified the darkest problems in their community and they let their light shine tangibly in some kind of way? I know that God would lead them.
7. As these clusters of 3-5 local churches work together on global missions in some way, domestic church planting, and community transformation, they will have to be praying and seeking God. They will have to be thinking about others.  This will bring renewal to the local congregation as they personally engage in the mission that God has called them to. Pastors will be encouraging other pastors. Lay people will be meeting together to plan, work, and encourage one another. Churches will not compete with one another, but rather, they will truly cooperate. Call in the state conventions, local association, and NAMB and the IMB to help resource all of this. Then, you truly have SBC entities resourcing the local church.
8. Use the best aspects of SBC initiatives like the Acts 1:8 Challenge and GPS in these clusters of churches for training and goal setting. The IMB has some really good initiatives for local church involvement that are not widely known. We don't have to reinvent the wheel. The SBC has been tinkering with these ideas for many years now. Let's bring them out convention-wide and really apply them to local church life.
9. As these clusters become effective in engaging in God's mission both locally and globally, begin to bring more churches into new clusters. As churches that were once struggling begin to strengthen, bring in other churches that are willing to engage. Keep starting the process over again. Create church partnership clusters in pioneer regions on the West Coast and in the Northeast and connect them with clusters in the Southeast. Work to get every missionary adopted by a cluster. Identify 100 target areas for church planting and get clusters to partner with church planter strategists in those areas to fund church plants. Connect with our seminaries to train church planters that are ready to partner with a cluster to plant a church in the target area. Keep encouraging the spread of this like a virus until every SBC church that is willing to engage in this does.
10. Call on our seminaries and Lifeway to project theological education by extension into local associtation and cluster groups all over the U.S. via the internet. Decentralize seminary training so that it is more effectively serving the misson of the local church as they engage in this mission.

Of course, you start with the willing and those who are already working effectively. The GCRTF will say that they cannot mandate anything to the local church. That is true. But, NAMB is autonomous as well, and that hasn't stopped them from completely reorganizing NAMB in their recommendations. If the GCRTF used their SBC-given platform to put forward a plan like this, many local associations and state conventions would pick it up and begin to do it. If you had even 100 clusters of 3-5 churches form and carryout this plan together, that is 300-500 SBC church engaging in this local and global mission in an exponential way because they would be working together and sharing resources. You don't destroy the current structure of the SBC, but rather, you use it help initiate a movement of churches engaging in the Mission of God. As more and more churches engage in this, the things that do not facilitate the movement begin to lose importance and also lose funding. Churches continue to give to the CP because money is needed for church planters and consultants from the state conventions, local associations, NAMB, and the IMB, along with the missionaries/church planters needed to carry out the plans directly. So, you are not destroying the structure, but rather, you are repositioning it and maximizing its effectiveness by creating exponential engagement.

The argument will be that churches won't do this. I think that mine would. I could probably come up with a list of large and small churches in Alabama who would do something like this. What if cooperation actually meant more than sending a check to the CP, but we really did cooperate on a church-to-church basis? What if the church acted as the missionary and initated global and local work in cooperation with a few other churches doing the same thing? Does anyone think that excitement, spiritual life and passion, and the power of God would not spread? Does anyone think that the nations would not be impacted?

The problem in the SBC is not primarily a funding crisis. It is a vision crisis. Every local church has to go it alone. What if we partnered and networked a bit? What if the entities of the SBC lined up BEHIND the local church and helped us? What if the church really did become the frontlines of SBC mission work and every member of every SBC church was considered a missionary because they were directly engaging in the mission of God? What if we flipped everything around?

We might end up with a real GCR afterall. 

Are Multi-Site, Video-Venue Churches a Good Idea?

I have thinking about this quite a bit over the past few months and have decided to weigh in with some thoughts. I'd appreciate any other opinions on this as well. The new trend in church growth is for successful churches with popular pastors to start new congregations in other places by broadcasting their preaching via video to the new site. These sites usually have a campus pastor and small groups. Sometimes, they have live worship and sometimes it is simulcast in as well. Multi-site churches are springing up all over and I have to admit that I don't get the appeal.

I understand the desire for good preaching and to be connected to a successful, well-resourced church model. Americans love to be around and hear from "winners" and successful people. But, getting up on Sunday morning week after week to watch a guy in another city preach on a video screen? You cannot possibly know him and he cannot possibly know you. His message is not contextualized to your context, your community, or the gathering at the satellite site. Sure, you have a campus pastor, but why can't he preach? If he did preach the message and person of Jesus Christ, would people not come because he wasn't the celebrity preacher? If that is true, then why are they coming? I am not against a hub church doing this for conferences or on occasion to disseminate information or vision, but every week?

If we are appealing to America's desire for celebrity now in the local church, that is a problem. Why can't we raise up leaders who can preach and lead? What does it do to the faith of people who are a part of a video-venue multi-site church? Would it reinforce passivity and spectator Christianity? How are the dynamics of biblical community affected by this approach? I agree that it might seem appealing in the 3-5 year span, but how can this be sustainable in the long run?

My wife says that she doesn't see much difference between the video venue church and the megachurch. Good point. If people like megachurches they will probably like video venue churches. But, what does that say about our view of church? At least in the megachurch the man preaching is around. He is a real person, not a TV character. But, if the average person can't know the pastor of the megachurch either, then that is also a problem.

Anyway, I obviously have a lot of questions about this and my opinion of the multisite video venue church is not good.

What do you think? What are the implications of this? Why would people want this? What affect will this have in 10-20 years? Interested to see what others think.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

:Update: I wrote this post this morning and after engaging in discussion with readers in the comment stream, I am learning a lot. I pecked the post out on my phone and just intended to present my initial impressions on the growing surge of multi-site, video-venue churches and some questions that I had about it. Going back and reading it now, those questions presented in machine-gun-fire-staccato makes it look like my opinion against this is much harsher than it actually is. I tend to start from a strong position on something, which is what inspires me to learn more about it while trying to keep an open mind. I'm weird that way. Thanks to all those so far who are attempting to answer my questions and help me see a broader view on why this is working well for many people. No doubt, the way that we have done church in the past has problems and I definitely do not want to shut down creativity. I just wonder where this will lead long-term.  

3, er, 5, no, 7 or Whatever, Steps that Guarantee Successful Missional Church Leadership!

The other day, Andrew, a friend of mine, called me and asked me a question about strategies for missional church leadership (being missional simply means that you live as a "sent" representative of God in the world - a missional church is a church that does not depend on attractional programs to reach people, but rather, it sees its people live dynamic, "sent" lives for Christ in the world as His ambassadors). He is a student in seminary doing a paper on this for a class, and he had to interview a pastor that was seeing his church step out missionally and engage their community and their world. He asked me about strategies and vision and plans. He reads this blog, so let me first of all say that his questions were very fair and I completely understood his assignment. This isn't about the questions. It is about my answers.

My answers were pretty pathetic if you were looking for coherent strategies in the way that most "church" experts talk about strategy.  But, I think that God is showing us some things and while my answers may seem kind of Sunday School-ish, I think that that they are right. Maybe we need some simplicity in this type of discussion.

Book Review: Church Turned Inside Out By Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr

In 1997, my wife and I had just arrived in the San Francisco Bay Area for me to attend Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary. We moved onto campus in Mill Valley (North Bay) and I quickly got a job and started attending classes. I was pretty busy, but knew that I wanted to do ministry in the City during my time in seminary. In March, I was invited to a church planting party at a home near Golden Gate Park. It was a really interesting night where Erika and I met people that would challenge us and shape us for the years to come. One of those people was Andrew Jones (TallSkinnyKiwi) whose storefront church on Haight Street we would start attending a few months later. But, the party was hosted by Linda Bergquist and her husband Eric.  Linda was the church planter strategist for Baptists in the Bay Area and Eric ran the Page Street Baptist Center near the Haight-Ashbury District. This couple would eventually have a profound influence on the way that I thought about church and people who were far away from God.

I worked with Linda and Eric on many different occasions while I was in SF and have continued to keep in touch with them over the years.  My daughter, Ashtyn, and I even stayed in their home for 5 days this past March while we enjoyed a Daddy-Daughter visit to the city of her birth. They are wonderful people. So, I am really excited to begin reviewing Linda's first book that she has co-authored with Allan Karr, the associate professor of missional/church planting at Golden Gate. The book is entitled The Church Turned Inside Out. I am still reading it and plan to start reviewing it in full next week, but until then, here is the description from the back cover to get started:

There are no sacred models of church, no specific molds into which God pours blessings, and no special leadership styles that are holier than others. Too often, though, church leaders attempt to pattern their ministries after either tradition or the successes of a few prominent trendsetting congregations.

In Church Turned Inside Out, Linda Bergquist and Allan Karr push back on the one-size-fits-all approach. They invite leaders of all kinds of churches—new and existing, megachurches and microchurches—to walk through an inside-out design process. Instead of starting with models and methods, they insist that every sphere of church life resonates with and communicates what you really believe.

As the book unfolds, it moves from abstract concepts toward concrete suggestions. It considers the uniqueness of individual leaders, their teams, and their particular communities, cultures, and contexts while taking seriously both spiritual and practical dimensions. This process results in more potent and effectively organized churches. Perhaps more important, it helps church leaders discover ways to live and work more wholly and faithfully, according to how God created them. It really is possible for a church to be so beautifully designed that every structure, program, and relationship reflects what it intends. Sometimes this requires a whole new design, and other times it only takes re-aligning or refining what already exists. This thoughtful and systemic approach opens a wider array of possible church paradigms than most people ever imagine, but the real goal is not innovation but transformation.

Using a blend of theology, biblical imagery, and metaphors from culture and creation, Church Turned Inside Out provides respectful ways to consider adaptation and change. It offers a hopeful vision of what the church can and must become. It not only positions the church for its future mission to the twenty-first century but offers timeless principles for the church of today.

Linda is absolutely brilliant, by the way, and thinks on more levels than I can keep up with. One of my favorite parts about my trip to SF back in the Spring was sitting at Linda and Eric's kitchen table at night and talking with them until we could not keep our eyes open anymore. Like a fascinating kitchen table conversation, this book is opening me up to her (and Allan's) experiences and insight. It is especially helpful for church leaders in the South who have not yet experienced the full weight of the cultural change that is coming, but will very soon. More on that later . . .

Full review coming next week.

Marty Duren on the GCR: If We Were the GCR Task Force

A new series begins today at http://missioscapes.com entitled, "If We Were the GCR Task Force." Marty Duren writes the first of seven scheduled posts by the editors during the month of August addressing the GCR and offering our thoughts on what we would do if we were them. It should be a profitable discussion and I hope that you take a look at it. Leave a comment and give us your thoughts. By the way, I'll be writing quite a few posts like this announcing new articles for missioscapes.com since it is a new site and we are trying to let people know about it.

The Subversive Pastor

I picked up Eugene Peterson's, The Contemplative Pastor the other day and ran across his chapter on "The Subversive Pastor." He says, "I am undermining the kingdom of self and establishing the kingdom of God. I am being subversive." He says that he does not often engage in a frontal assault on the kingdom of self, but he works around the edges, so to speak. I am often a frontal assault kind of guy and it tends to be less effective than I hope for, just arousing people's defenses. Petereson's words here are encouraging and wise:

As a pastor, I don't like being viewed as nice but insignificant. I bristle when a high-energy executive leaves the place of worship with the comment, "This was wonderful, Pastor, but now we have to get back to the real world, don't we?" I had thougt we were in the most-real world, the world revealed as God's, a world believed to be invaded by God's grace and turning on the pivot of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. The executive's comment brings me up short: he isn't taking this seriously. Worshiping God is marginal to making money. Prayer is marginal to the bottom line. Christian salvation is a brand preference.

I bristle and want to assert my importance. I want to force the recognition of the key position I hold in the economy of God and in his economy if only he knew it.

Then I remember that I am a subversive. My long-term effectiveness depends on my not being recognized for who I really am. If he realized that I actually believe the American way of life is doomed to destruction, and that another kingdom is right now being formed in secret to take its place, he would be at all pleased. If he knew what I was really doing and the difference it was making, he would fire me.