IMPACT and Reggie McNeal Consultation
Thanks to everyone who participated with me and Bill at IMPACT -- Jerry, Jim Wilder, Bill Reist, Dan Horwedal, Joe ?, a proud father from Columbia City, Judy Nolt (Doug's wife), and others. I thought the initial discussions were great, but as we reached the peak (talking about leadership changes suggested by Missional Renaissance), the conversation broke down. Oh well, the summit is the hardest to climb!
The next week on July 30 (?), Reggie McNeal came to Findlay to consult with the denom about a leadership initiative. Upon hearing about it, and my obvious fandom for Reggie (who sat by me at lunch!), I asked if I could sit in and my request was granted.
Reggie led the group through the process of defining what a leadership initiative would like with the hopes of changing the culture of the CGGC to be a missional movement. (These are my descriptions of what happened. Whether it is the official view of the CGGC, you'd have to ask them.)
The proposed process is a two-year intensive with the best CGGC leaders we can find. I'll be dead honest -- it was the most hopeful thing I've heard in my 20 years with the CGGC. They hope to start in January.
Here are the two requirements for success. (In my opinion)
1) They have to keep the deal intense. They need to pay the money to get Reggie to lead most of the six gatherings (over two years). Reggie exudes mission and excellence. And it will rub off.
2) They have to get 'buy-in' from 25-50 of the best leaders in the CGGC. I would say the best leaders in the CGGC have made it a policy NOT to get sucked in to denominational initiatives. They will have to be convinced, and that leads me back to my first requirement. It has to be well worth their time.
Labels: Denomination, leadership, Missional
posted by Brian at 10:30 AM
29 Comments:
Good stuff. I believe and hope that there are good things on the coming horizon...
A lot of times the best leaders do not commit to such "intensives" because they are uncertain how it will translate in terms of fruitfulness on the field - and because the leadership demands in their own settings demand a lot of time and they choose carefully where to invest. It is, however, an important exercise and the exercise will have a mediocre response if you cannot tap these leadership/thinkers who are willing to look in-depth, honestly and outside the box.
Brian,
I know that I'm misrepresenting what you meant to say. So, forgive me up front.
But, I see in what you described, one of the ways of thinking we are going to have to repent of.
The idea that there would be a proposed process the time span of which WE can predetermine before the process might even begin is theologically corrupt and very human-oriented thinking.
It is fruit of the old kind of thinking that has dominated us for seventy years.
If this is not a process through which we will give up control and submit to the will and the working of the Holy Spirit, then it is my desire that we save the money and not waste Reggie's or anyone's else's time.
Brian, I have no doubt that you are characterizing the results of the meetings accurately.
What scares me is that, in relaying what you saw and heard, you've just described for us what we have done over and over and over again:
The almost-too-late participation in the latest and greatest fad.
I've watched us do this oodles of times in the past. I have written on this blog that my great fear is that being missional will be nothing more than the next, but certainly not the last, CGGC fad.
You have just described for us our newest and latest program. Ironic, isn't it, that you and I had just finished describing the second Missional Shift that Reggie describes: From Program Development to People Development.
So, here's the ultimate irony: To create a program around shifting from an emphasis on programs.
Brian and all y'all,
Don't get me wrong.
I think that Reggie has a lot to say that can help us.
But, we need to get this from the beginning: Reggie is talking about major changes, complete changes in paradigm, the change from a Christendom culture of Pastor dominated leadership to what he calls A. D. 30 leadership. And, if we're going to do something new, I believe that we are going to have to go about it in a new way--from the beginning.
Please don't let us dillute this and distort it and enmesh it with CGGC dysfunction and, in the end, miss the point and the Spirit's power.
We really don't have a lot of time left.
I hear what you are saying, Bill, but I, for one, am willing to accept that this kind of process will be imperfect from a human perspective.
I also agree that missional as an overarching topic and a catch-all term for what needs to change in the western church of our day will ultimately fade into the background. Even if it represents something of substance, language and nomenclature tend to be faddish anyway.
But "missional" DOES capture part of the change the church needs, and without some banner it's hard to rally the troops. The other things that are missing in todays' church, like community, discipleship, the recovery of APEST, and even a better take on the gospel, can all find a place of intersection under "missional" as a focal theme.
As to putting a plan and a time length to the process, it sounds a bit like you are making the "no planning" argument. In this instance, where the times are desperate, I'm inclined to say (as one visionary fellow in OT times did), "Let's go take out those Philistines, just the two of us. Who knows, maybe the Lord will help us?" Sometimes you have to make the best plan you can, trust God, and make the adjustments as you go along.
I think one thing that is different from past CGGC efforts is that you have a Director who is showing signs of being very serious about change, and about developing leaders who think differently, and who in recent days has shown signs of leading in these directions whether everybody likes it or not.
So I share some of your concerns, but I think Ed is providing a leadership worthy of some support. Some of the things he has done recently, and is proposing, are very different from anything I have seen in the last 16 years, since I came into the CGGC.
Part One
Fran,
Good and useful comments.
Of Ed you say:
I think Ed is providing a leadership worthy of some support. Some of the things he has done recently, and is proposing, are very different from anything I have seen in the last 16 years, since I came into the CGGC.
I agree.
What I have said is intended in no way to be a personal criticism of
Ed nor is it an attack of the leadership he is providing. Like you, I see much that is encouraging.
However...
...my absolute favorite CGGC fad of all time was the flirtation with the Experiencing God concept oh, about 12-14 years ago, if my memory is correct. You were probably around when we went through that phase. I was in Findlay at the time and it was HUUUUUUUUGE out there.
Among the seven realites of Experiencing God are that God is always at work around us and that he invites us to join Him in the work He is doing.
Of me you say:
As to putting a plan and a time length to the process, it sounds a bit like you are making the "no planning" argument.
And, I have to say that you are misreading me--or more likely, my post was so much ranting that I was unclear.
I'm not into no planning.
What I'm into is full repentance from the current CGGC paradigm of planning that has been failing us since I entered what used to be the East Penn Conference and has produced one failed fad after another among us and decade after decade of spiritual decline that is the cause of numerical decline.
I'm into experiencing God. I believe in it.
I'm into repenting of creating the next new hot program and and passionately and corporately and prayerfully stopping.
I'm in favor of doing nothing until there is a clear and powerful sense that our Lord is working and then seeking wisdom in joining in the work that He has prepared for us to do (a little Ephesians 2:10 lingo, there).
You articulated an excellent understanding of repentance over in that other thread that I'm doing. Referring to N. T. Wright, you said,
"Jesus primarily meant "give up your agenda and embrace mine", meaning that a person needs to stop living for what they are living for, and live for something different, for the good, bigger, and better story God is unfolding in us and in the whole world."
That's pretty much what I'm talking about as far as planning is concerned.
We need to stop planning the way we have been doing it--a way that has produced failure upon failure and has never in my 30+ years been actually blessed by the Lord. And, we need to begin to think about planning in terms of His will. We need to give ourselves over to what HE is actually doing and then determining what plan of action HE has in mind for us--to stop braining storming the best wisdom that we can come up with.
When Winebrenner gave his 27 point description of the faith and practice of the Church of God, his fifteenth point was this:
She believes in the propriety and utility of hold(ing) fast-days, experience meetings, anxious meetings, camp meetings, and other special meetings of united and protracted efforts for the edification of the church and the conversion of sinners.
Oh, how things have changed!
According to Winebrenner, there was a day when we, at times like this, actually looked to the Lord for wisdom. We turned to Him for our plans.
So, no. I'm not for no planning. I'm for not planning the way we have been planning.
I'm for--and who here is surprised by this?--for recaptuting the spirit of the ministry of the Church of God which the Lord blessed spiritually and numerically and which, I am convinced, He will bless again.
Part Two
Fran,
You also say,
I also agree that missional as an overarching topic and a catch-all term for what needs to change in the western church of our day will ultimately fade into the background. (emphasis mine)
While I have no notion that we will always be spouting the term 'missional,' there is something about what McNeal and Frost and Hirsch and many others are saying that sets this movement apart from our other recent fads.
They are contending that the times in which we live demand major paradigm shifts. And, with all my heart, I agree. What McNeal is talking about is not a way of tweaking institutional, attractional, Christendom-inspired, shepherd dominated, church focused Christianity.
What we are currently calling the missional movement is of a different nature than the other fads we have embraced. And, either we will make these shifts and change significantly or we will not.
My point is that if this is merely a fad, when we move on we will still be institutional and attractional and we will continue to be enmeshed in the culture of failure that has taken over the CGGC and dominated it for decades.
And...
...we will have lost what may be our last chance to fulfill our new Mission Statement and be establishing churches on the New Testament plan.
Perhaps, I'm naive.
But, I see this missional thing as a fork in the road. While I'm sure I'll not always be using the term missional, I will always be standing for the paradigm changes that it represents. I don't even like the term missional, but I'm all for the radical changes it demands.
I'm convinced that unless we make these shifts, we will be toast. I am convinced that the Lord will do one of the Revelation 2 and 3 things He warns about:
-Come to us and take away our lampstand.
-Fight against us.
-Make us suffer intensely for our ways.
-Come like a thief (to condemn US)
-Spew us out of His mouth.
I honestly am convinced of that.
I believe that this is an important moment in history for the CGGC and the entire Western Church.
One of the passages that haunts me from time to time is Luke 24 and the Emmaus experience.
Jesus was walking away from Jerusalem. Away from the established church; away from the "action" (from the perspective of the two walkers). Often I've heard verse 28 ("Jesus acted as if he were going farther") interpreted to mean that Jesus faked going further.
But what if Jesus acted like he was going farther because he wanted out of Jerusalem; away from the established church; and away from the action? What if the two visitors hadn't begged him to stay? Where was Jesus walking? I know I'm not the first person to read the verse in this fashion, but it still causes me to wonder.
Why do I bring this verse into the conversation? Much of this thread's conversation has been built around the assumption that current pastors are going to be the ring leaders in changing our denomination. Really?
Those who are currently serving are part of the systems in place. Yes, there are those like Fran and Brian who are on the outside looking in, but are there people who are farther out on the fringes?
If the system is broken, then it is probably fair to guess that there are people who have been beaten up by the system. Some stay, longing for a better day (perhaps Fran and Brian fit here). Others have grown weary of the system in place.
I don't know how you find those who are truly on the fringes of the CGGC, but I'm guessing that Fran and Brian aren't as far out as they sometimes think.
I think also of Elijah in 1 Kings 19 who keeps asking "Am I the only one left?" For Elijah, it seems as though there was a fine line between loneliness and arrogance.
PLEASE, I am NOT suggesting that anyone here is either arrogant nor lonely. I guess I am suggesting that there may be more waiting to see if what is going on is truly going on.
My point is to keep looking to the fringes. The temptation will be very real to be pulled back into the church culture, keep walking away. Keep going towards the fringes. Perhaps Jesus realized that the people weren't ready yet. Perhaps he knew that it would take a generation and someone like the Apostle Paul to reach the Gentiles.
If the CGGC needs to change, voices beyond the current leadership need to be part of the conversation. If asked, my guess is that many who are on the fringes will participate.
Maybe I've mispoken - based upon Patrick's comments (after his listening to the latest podcast) there appears to be conversation about seeking ALL leaders, not just pastors, to build the momentum for change. I may have misread the assumptions at work here.
I hope to listen to the podcast soon.
Brent,
I believe that some of the concerns you have are shared by Bill, and me. A lot of this seems to stem from past trends that are largely pastorally and institutionally driven that have proved to be temporal fads. As we read about and begin to understand this post modern shift and the need to be missional, something stirs within us. We are beginning to realize that the very future of Christianity is potentially at stake if we do not shift (or repent of our ways)soon. Part of this shift requires embracing the concept that Christiondom business as usual is no longer an option. Radical shift of thought and conduct is required.
When we hear about consultants, leader conferences, programs, and so forth, it sounds familiar to many (been there, done that, bought the t shirt) and produces fear that this chaotic beauty we see will be reduced, by man, to programs and acronyms and charts that will one day fade away and be forgotten.
It goes without saying that no change or movement can happen without some level of intentionality and planning, but seeing new concepts wrapped around seemingly old methods can be intimidating. It should be intimidating and we need to be concerned. It is that concern and fear of our own methods further confining the will of God that will ultimately keep us humble and keep God in the forefront.
With the exceptions of the letters to Timothy, Titus, Philemon, (potentially) 2 John, and 3 John, the bulk of the Epistles were written to the people...entire communities in need of correction or edification. In our modern Western church culture we have done a pretty decent job connecting leaders, but have done a poor job incorporating the people of the church in the shift. Having the pastor come back from a conference, discuss the changes with his board, and then tell the people about the exciting new program is not incorporating the body.
This leadership initiative can only succeed when the leaders are willing to radically change and when the Western leadership realized that connecting leaders does not equate a connected body.
This is hard to do because it is hard to conceive what this looks like and feels like as we have to do some deconstruction before we can build. Deconstruction is scary. The old ways, as imperfect as they are, are familiar and comfortable.
Though I am connected with some pastors in the CGGC, I am not (at this time) CGGC so I really do not have a pony in this race as it pertains to the leadership initiative. As someone who is part of the body of Christ, though, I do have a vested interest in the survival and future of the church.
Overall, I think a leadership initiative with a man like Reggie McNeal is a step in the right direction. I also agree that men like Ed are taking change and mission very seriously. But I also think the concerns people have of more of the same are valid. It is up to us all, as the body of Christ, to prevent this from being another fad. That happens through prayer, fasting, accountability, and humility.
Patrick
Brent said, "I guess I am suggesting that there may be more waiting to see if what is going on is truly going on."
I agree. I am in fact one of those. But when I saw the glimpse, I thought it important to communicate since most didn't have the opportunity to see what I saw.
I had some concerns when I was invited to the consultation with Reggie McNeal. Here, in short, is one issue.
I have been involved in the Pastors of Excellence program at Ashland Seminary. The emphasis there is on pastoral health. There are a lot of unhealthy pastors in the world. (I have seen one in the mirror.) When I heard about the initiative in the CGGC I thought it would be modeled on the Ashland program. I wasn't sure what Reggie McNeal would bring to that table--it turns out--quite a bit.
In fact I am excited about wedding the ideas of missional and healthy.
There are missional pastors who are not healthy and there are healthy pastors who are not missional. What if the CGGC with the help of Reggie McNeal can develop healthy missional pastors?
As to setting up a time frame--I heard no one say "two years and you're done". It is hoped that inviting pastors and key leaders to commit to a two year event that they will be positioned for critical mass.
Maybe an unsolicited testimonial would be helpful. Two years ago I took several assessments before going to Ashland for the first event (I am trying not to use program.) I failed every component of the stress processing assessment. I was in bad shape. My commitment to this process saved me (with the help of the Holy Spirit whom I saw in this process.)
I am 100 % behind this process.
Hi vieuxloup,
You mentioned that two years ago you took some assessment tests and "failed every component of the stress processing assessment". I know I am taking you back two years, but would you mind elaborating on the nature of the assessment tests and a little more about the components?
-Patrick
"There are missional pastors who are not healthy and there are healthy pastors who are not missional."
Wow! That made me think...simple and profound.
Interesting comments and fears.
"When we hear about consultants, leader conferences, programs, and so forth, it sounds familiar to many (been there, done that, bought the t shirt) and produces fear that this chaotic beauty we see will be reduced, by man, to programs and acronyms and charts that will one day fade away and be forgotten."
Could the whole system be corrupt?
Jesus didn't reform the religious system he established.
He left it.
Not only did he leave it, he called others out of the religious system of the day into a relationship
with Him.
Could the whole system be corrupt?
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice;
and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
John 10:16
There shall be, One Fold, One Shepherd, One Voice.
If Not Now, When?
Be blessed and be a blessing.
I think Frank Viola thinks the whole system is corrupt ;). However, I think it is too broad sweeping to say the entire thing is corrupt. In need of overhaul? Yeah. Straining at some gnats while swallowing some camels? Yeah.
Just as a brief example. Charismatics and Evangelicals have captured the passion of Christ extremely well. Catholics and Presbyterians, meanwhile, have grasped the reverence for Christ and the need to be good Samaritans. Now, there is a laundry list of what Charismatics, Evangelicals, Catholics, and Presbyterians do wrong, but there are clear examples of what each tradition and expression of Christiandom is doing spot on. Finding what we are doing right is as important a part of this process as what we do wrong. I love many things about the emerging church, but one thing I do not like is that there seems to be too strong an emphasis of deconstructing and not enough intentionality to build something. In other words, some are really good at storming castles and knocking down walls, but they are not prepared to build anything.
CaptainTux - part 1
Sounds to me like you love Jesus
and are concerned with unhealthy pastors
and an unhealthy system.
I have also seen the pain inflicted on pastors
by the unhealthy system.
“I believe that some of the concerns you have
are shared by Bill, and me. A lot of this seems to stem from past trends that are largely pastorally and institutionally driven that have proved to be temporal fads.”
So, correct me if I’m wrong, are you saying that
the mess was caused by those who see themselves
as leaders, pastors and running the institution?
“but one thing I do not like is that there seems to be too strong an emphasis of deconstructing
and not enough intentionality to build something.”
Right now, the something I am building
is my relationship with Jesus.
Hearing His voice and obeying Him.
I no longer serve two masters.
Jesus and the denomination.
Isn't this a principle; God takes away the first to establish the second? Heb 10:9
Hasn’t that been our problem,
“Man” doing the building and not God.
“The Church of God” is built and added to by Jesus. It’s His body.
I will build my church... Matthew 16:18
And the Lord added to the church daily
those who should be saved. Acts 2:47
“The Church of Man" is built by man.
With programs, seminaries, conventions, crusades,
tithes and offerings sermons,
guilt and commitment sermons,
bring your neighbor to church sermons,
submission to authority sermons,
change to a missional church sermans,
change from a Christendom culture of
Pastor dominated leadership sermons, etc. etc. etc..
First of all, I love "The Church of God"
that Jesus purchased with His own Blood.
And it hurts to see people who love Jesus
in bondage to a system, an institution,
a denomination, a corporation, pastors,
leaders, that come between them and their Lord.
I love "The Church of God.”
His body, His people, His called out one's,
and I find them and learn from them
wherever they are.
Barnes and Nobels, (free wi-fi, big soft chairs and people with broken hearts.)
(that's where I am as I write today)
restaurants, laundromats, food stores, the streets. Anywhere you find people.
A simple question asked; By the way, do you need prayer for anything?
A whole world of ministry opens up in a moment. (ah, someone cares.)
Just one hungry person showing
another hungry person
where to find the bread of life,
living water and healing for their heart.
Just lifting up the name of Jesus
that he might draw all to Him.
No official training, just giving testimony
of how Jesus healed a broken heart.
And how He can heal yours.
How Jesus wants to speak to you and guide you.
How Jesus wants to be your healer and comforter.
How you can trust in Him and
not lean on your own understanding.
Abraham went out
not knowing where he was going.
Now when they saw the boldness
of Peter and John, and perceived
that they were unlearned and ignorant men,
they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them,
that they had been with Jesus.
Acts 4:13
When you spend time with Jesus.
When you can hear His voice and learn from Him,
people will marvel, you will marvel.
part 2
As “disciples of Christ”
aren’t we asked to teach what Jesus commanded? Mt 28:20
Is this some of what Jesus asked
His disciples to teach?
But be not ye called Rabbi:
for one is your Master, even Christ;
and all ye are brethren...
(Does that sound horozontal?)
Neither be ye called masters:
for one is your Master, even Christ.
But he that is greatest among you
shall be your servant.
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased;
and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
Matthew 23 8-12
Don't titles and positions exalt?
Is this some of what Jesus
asked His disciples to teach?
Yes, you can hear His voice.
Jesus wants to speak with you.
Yes, you can learn directly from Jesus.
He will teach you.
It is written in the prophets,
And they shall be all taught of God.
John 6:45
But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost,
whom the Father will send in my name,
he shall teach you all things...
John 14:26
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come,
he will guide you into all truth...
John 16:13
My sheep hear my voice,
and I know them, and they follow me.
John 10:27
...I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
John 8:28
...as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
John 20:21
Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice,
that he might instruct thee.
Deuteronomy 4:36
But this thing commanded I them, s
aying, Obey my voice,
and I will be your God,
and ye shall be my people:
Jeremiah 7:23
Don’t you also have to
obey the voice of the denomination?
How’s that been working so far?
Doesn’t it sound like Jesus wants
to speak with us and teach us?
That we would be His disciples?
Trusting and obeying Jesus?
If God could speak this whole universe into being
then speaking to you, would be easy, wouldn’t it?
And other sheep I have,
which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring,
and they shall hear my voice;
and there shall be one fold,
and one shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold, One Shepherd, One Voice.
If Not Now, When?
Be blessed and be a blessing.
I think it is fair to say I do love Jesus and I am concerned about an unhealthy system. I would not say that I am concerned about unhealthy pastors. I do have concerns about the unhealthy leadership models we have adopted.
I think most pastors are good men and women with a genuine calling to serve Christ. For me, there is a difference between an unhealthy model and unhealthy people.
So to your question. Am I saying that the mess was caused by those who see themselves as leaders, pastors and running the institution? Yes and no. I think the problem dates back to the 300's. From there, we all have contributed to the problems that face the Western church in our current climate. I hold us all accountable. The problems are numerous. Converting the Great Commission to a sinners prayer for eternal fire insurance as opposed to making disciples, allowing much of the faith to be co opted by a political party, fostering a caste system, embracing the letter of law over the spirit of the law,and placing God into a neat and tidy little box (among other things).
Where does church leadership fall into play? Man! It depends on which group of church leaders we are talking about. The problems that plague the National Association of Evangelicals are different than the problems that plague the Joliet archdiocese or the pastor and board of the First Community Church of Whatever in Anytown, USA.
Overall, I think most leadership has been driven by sincere individuals trying to fulfill the mission of Christ as opposed to a bunch of mustache twirling villains chucking whilst Polly Purebread screams tied to the tracks with the train whistling in the background. Where I think we have gone wrong generally is that we have chased the wrong things. Those wrong things range from butts in seats as opposed to changes lives, making converts to a subculture as opposed to disciples, and putting in so many methods and systems into place that the Holy Spirit has little room to guide and maneuver the church.
I think this Reggie McNeal consultation could be a step in the right direction. If taken seriously, you could see the beginning of leaders who would learn to be more humble, more missional, and encourage their congregations to help them bridge the gap between clergy and laity and replace religious systems with the organically thriving flesh and blood church.
A Amos Love - I appreciate your comments. However we do have a "No Anonymous Post" policy. Please sign your name to your comments.
Thanks,
The Management
Captain Tux - Well said.
No. Very well said.
I respect your zeal and passion
for the things of God.
I too agree that most who have taken on
the role of pastor are good meaning folks.
Didn’t Jesus warn us about;?
The commandments of men?
The doctrines of men?
The philosophies of men?
The traditions of men that
make the word of god of none effect?
Making the word of God of none effect
through your tradition.
KJV - Mr 7:13
Thus you nullify the word of God
by your tradition that you have handed down.
NIV - Mr 7:13
As such, you break the law of God
in order to protect your own tradition.
NLT - Mr 7:13
Don’t traditions blind us to the word of God?
Aren’t most of those good folks, pastors,
blinded by the traditions of men
handed down by the denominations,
and haveing to answer to two masters.
Don’t titles become idols?
Not easily walked away from?
Idols of the heart? Ezekiel 14,
Where God now speaks to you through your idols.
Don’t titles give you power, profit,
prestige, promenence and recognition?
Aren’t these of the world and not of God?
the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes,
and the pride of life, is not of the Father,
but is of the world.
1 John 2:16
Jesus said, I receive not honor from men.
John 5:41
How can ye believe, which receive honour
one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
John 5:44
When you receive that title,
are you receiveing honour from men?
When you have a “pastors conference”
and exclude the rest of the body,
are you receiving honour one of another?
Don’t titles seperate?
Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person,
neither let me give flattering titles unto man.
For I know not to give flattering titles;
in so doing my maker would soon take me away.
Job 32:21
Don’t titles become idols.
And cause walls of seperation.
Don’t titles say, I am, you’re not?
Don’t titles say, we are, they’re not?
Baptist, Lutheran, Assemblies of God; separation.
Reformed, Evangelical, Charismatic; separation.
Clergy – Laity,
Leaders – Followers,
Shepherds – Sheep;
separation.
Apostles, prophets, pastor, teacher; separation.
If someone says their title is not an idol,
just ask them, well if it’s not an idol
then just get rid of it, lay your title down,
lay your power and prestige down,
walk away from your reputation,
become a bretheran,
become a servant, become one with me,
become a disciple of Christ.
Didn’t Jesus make himself of no reputation,
and take upon himself the form of a servant
and humble himself? Php 2:7
Don’t titles make a reputation
whether you want it or not?
Now the Lord is that Spirit:
and where the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is liberty.
2 Co 3:17
And other sheep I have,
which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring,
and they shall hear my voice;
and there shall be one fold,
and one shepherd.
John 10:16
One Fold, One Shepherd, One Voice.
If Not Now, When?
Be blessed and be a blessing.
Brian
Help me out.
A. Amos Love is not sufficient?
Hi Amos,
You leave a lot to reply to and I will be upfront and say that I will not reply to them all. Mostly because to do so would take too much time in my day. :)
I will say this in agreement (kinda) first. I do not think it is the titles that have separated us, but the attitude that lay beyond the titles.
An example is Luther. He still held to the idea that only the ordained minister could preach, baptize, give the lord's supper, etc. He held to this so strongly, that he heavily denounced the Anabaptists who allowed every member to function in the church. Luther was so opposed to this practice of anyone speaking in a meeting he declared that "it was from the pit of hell and those guilty of it should be put to death". This attitude of separation has rendered most laity into spectators who largely take good sermon notes, pass the plate, and maybe lead a small group if they pass Christian Life Development class level four.
Why do I think this leaders conference thing could still be a good idea in the face of all that? Because if you listen to the podcast, you will see this is not just something for pastors to attend. Though the hope is for "leaders" to attend, it is an opportunity for the leaders who do attend to start rethinking their methods and their missions. To radically shift the thought process to something that embraces more of the Gospel and less of the systems of men. Is it THE answer? No, but it is a humble step as a part of a whole process. I think the solutions to steering the church to where it needs to be is going to be a series of steps and this is one of them.
Besides, I am not yet ready to do without some form of leadership and titles. Not for pride sake, but for the integrity of the early church which did have elders, deacons, apostles, prophets and prophetesses and teachers and so forth. Can the roles of APEST be filled without a caste system, without separation of the body, and invite a priesthood of all believers? Yes. It'll just take time and prayer, and humility and intentionality.
-Patrick
PS What Brian refers to is that when those of who are not regular posters post on the blog, they ask that we sign our name to it. I try to remember that, but I do not always do it. :)
Captain Tux and Brian
Have you ever tried jousting with windmills?
Don Quixote had an advantage.
His jousting was with mythical giants.
The giant of the spirit of religion is real,
I can see the folks who blog here are
also battling this giant. God bless them.
Sometimes the giant bites back.
I have suffered from this giant
both while I was in the system,
and since I left.
People do strange things to defend their traditions.
Jesus said, if they hated me they will hate you.
If they persecuted me they will persecute you.
I’m not surprised when it happens,
but neither do I care to give it an advantage
over someones better judgement.
We wrestle not against flesh and blood.
But sometimes flesh and blood can be
influenced to do harm.
Yes, thru the centuries,
Christiandumb has been a bloody sport.
The pages of church history
are covered in believers blood.
Often shed by someone who claimed
to be a believer also. Hmmm?
I’ll ask for an exception to the rule.
To remain A. Amos Love.
If that is not exceptable
Please, let me know.
In His Service. A. Amos Love
P.S. The Impossible Dream
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9y9t5_2003-tony-awards-impossible-dream_music
To dream ... the impossible dream ...
To fight ... the unbeatable foe ...
To bear ... with unbearable sorrow ...
To run ... where the brave dare not go ...
To right ... the unrightable wrong ...
To love ... pure and chaste from afar ...
To try ... when your arms are too weary ...
To reach ... the unreachable star ...
This is my quest, to follow that star ...
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far ...
To fight for the right, without question or pause ...
To be willing to march into Hell, for a Heavenly cause ...
And I know if I'll only be true, to this glorious quest,
That my heart will lie will lie peaceful and calm,
when I'm laid to my rest ...
And the world will be better for this:
That one man, scorned and covered with scars,
Still strove, with his last ounce of courage,
To reach ... the unreachable star ...
Amos,
I'm afraid it is not acceptable. We have heard this argument before that the threat is too great to sign one's name to a blog comment. We decided conversation was damaged by lack of being known.
To the rest,
You don't have to sign your name, but you can't be anonymous. LIFE MATTERS and another recent commenter can be traced to their user profiles and you have some idea of who they are and where they are coming from. That's fine. We know who Captain Tux is or with a little searching you can figure it out.
But no, to fight a fire, you have to take the risk, and anonymous doesn't really help the cause.
IMHO
Which is too bad because Amos's style of writing is very interesting.
Amos,
Your comment above that when you have a "pastor's conference" you exclude the rest of the body is unfounded. There are instances in the NT of church leaders meeting together. Ideas like this pin the problems in the wrong places. If the western church is to change, we will probably have to focus very much on developing leaders, and this will require focused times with them.
And the assumption that leaders gather just to bestow honor on each other... where does that come from?
Sorry guys I have to go.
I really have enjoyed the fellowship
and the discussions.
Be Blessed in your search for truth... Jesus.
If any have a desire to continue the
“come let us reason together” and want to
“keep looking to the fringes.” ala Brent.
Okay, okay, maybe beyond the fringes,
kinda without the camp.
Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify
the people with his own blood,
suffered without the gate.
Let us go forth therefore unto him
without the camp,
bearing his reproach.
Heb 13:12-13
Just click on A. Amos Love in Blue at the top of this comment and it will lead you to a profile page
with an email and a website.
I’d love to hear from you.
Brian
I willingly except your position and I thank you for allowing me to post.
You wrote,
“user profiles and you have some idea of who they are and where they are coming from.”
The website is;
“God’s Words of Comfort and Healing.”
Everything on the site is free for you to use
as you see fit.
Lots of 8x10 posters with just the word of God.
Two free books and free audio downloads.
And lots of info collected over the years.
Freely you have received, freely give...
Brian, I believe if you check out the website
and the books you will know;
“who they are (I am )
and where they (I’m) are coming from.”
by the spirit.
Can I issue you a challenge to do that?
Ooops, too late, I already have.
You just might find something of value.
Or not.
Fran
I’d love to continue our “reasoning together.”
I’m probably not explaining myself clearly to you.
bill bloat said,
“We need to stop planning the way we have been doing it--a way that has produced failure upon failure and has never in my 30+ years been actually blessed by the Lord.”
That has also been my experience with
“so called spiritual leaders” also.
For the leaders of this people cause thee to err;
and they that are led of them are destroyed.
Isaiah 9:16
Thought I was a leader at one time. Ouch! :o(....
Now would like to see Jesus do some leading.
I hear He’s pretty good at it. { ;o )
You know, those that are “led of the spirit”
Those are the sons of God.
Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice,
that he might instruct thee.
Deuteronomy 4:36
See ya all.
I haven't been ignoring the blog intentionally I have been away from computers for a few days. Now back to my desk and a follow up to a question from Captain Tux RE: Stress Processing assessment.
The SPR report was developed by Human Synergistics measure patterns and areas of thought that might limit one's level of personal effectiveness and cause distress.
It measured self-image, approval, snyergy, time issues, trust, view of the future, expectations etc.
I was coming through a difficult experience at the church when I took the assessment and I had not processed it. Actually I needed help to process it and the PoE program at Ashland was a God send in helping me get to a better place.
I just retook the assessment last week and I will see the results in September. I think I will see a huge difference.
vieuxloup,
Thanks for the update and the detail. Here's hoping the next assessment comes back with results that please you. :)
Gang,
I am sad to see A. Amos go.
He is clearly a prophet. I have not yet been able to determine if he is a false prophet. We are warned about them at length.
I'm sorry that he has made the decision not to accept our standards of community.
Post a Comment
<< Home