Freedom of Expression

Several days ago I posted about the role of Bishop in our denomination. I posted that I believe one of the key functions of the position is that of perspective keeper. As I have thought about this I have found it helpful to think in terms of structure to give a picture of what such a position would look like.

One of the strongest desires that we must resist is for a national plan. As I stated in the earlier post I do not believe that this is a very viable option. It relies too much on the charisma of the Bishop and it assumes too much about the abilities (intelligence even) of the top leadership in relationship too the rest of the denomination.

Many have proposed that we are entering a post-denomination era. Whether true or not is yet to be seen. My own prediction is that denominations will at least need to look differently. I dream of a denomination that takes its behind the scenes support role very seriously and allows for multiple expressions of church within its scope. Of course getting people to agree that multiple expression of church are acceptable is a major hurdle.

As I have listened to people talk about our denomination I have been amazed at the fervor with which they promote their perspective of church as the only way. They also are married to organizational/management strategies that have developed in the modern world. The frightening part about it is the degree with which they support such modern strategies with scripture as the only way to do things.

A good example of this occurred during the national board meeting held this month. The proposal was made that the bishop be allowed to hire staff as he sought fit. One example that was presented was that of Director of Healthy Church Initiative. I thought we had been making progress until this example was proposed. In my view the denomination must limit itself to essentials in order to truly allow multiple expressions of church. As soon as it goes beyond essentials it begins to dictate a particular expression over all others.

In my view a position of Director of Healthy Church Initiative could be a wonderful thing. However, such a position should be funded and overseen by those churches that actually want such a director. The current proposal is that all churches be grouped in clusters of about 7 churches. In my view these clusters should network with other clusters that share a similar vision for a Healthy Church Initiative. Once they reach a certain size, say 15 clusters, they can then look into whether it would be beneficial for them to have a Director to serve them. This would eliminate the burden on those churches that had no desire to participate in such an initiative.

Several have expressed a desire to continue with our current annual conference structure. The same principle applies here. If churches want to organize that way they are free to do so. What they can’t do is force churches to join them and therefore they cannot be a burden to them. Free association provides for better relationships, which I believe, should be one of our distinctive features. (This is why I favor allowing churches the freedom to join the cluster group of their choosing and why I support having the Bishop choose cluster group leaders. The working relationships are preserved in both instances. I remember a mentoring program that tried to dictate relationships and it was a disaster.)

The proposed structure has led many to believe that we are centralizing control. Actually just the opposite is true. Our current structure all feeds back to our HQ so we basically are centralized now. The proposed structure has the potential to allow a high degree of decentralization. This also brings us back to the role of Bishop. It is not a position from which to dictate. Instead this person is more of an observer. He looks at the big picture. He watches our back for us. He keeps perspective for us but allows us freedom of expression.

Tears of .....

"In his book Mortal Lessons, Richard Selzer, M.D., writes: "I stand by the bed where a young woman lies, her face postoperative, her mouth twisted in palsy, clownish. A tiny twig of the facial nerve, the one to the muscles of her mouth, has been severed. She will be thus from now on. The surgeon had followed with religious fervor the curve of her flesh; I promise you that. Nevertheless, to remove the tumor in her cheek, I had to cut the little nerve.

Her young husband is in the room. He stands on the opposite side of the bed and together they seem to dwell in the evening lamp light, isolated from me, private. Who are they, I ask myself, he and this wry mouth I have made, who gaze at me and touch each other so generously, greedily? The young woman speaks. 'Will my mouth always be like this?' she asks. 'Yes,' I say, 'it will. It is because the nerve was cut.' She nods and is silent. But the young man smiles. 'I like it,' he says, 'It is kind of cute.'

All at once I know who he is. I understand and I lower my gaze. One is not bold in an encounter with a god. Unmindful, he bends to kiss her crooked mouth and I am so close I can see how he twists his own lips to accommodate to hers, to show her that their kiss still works." - Brennan Manning in The Ragamuffin Gospel

I'm not sure why exactly but this picture has a powerful impact on me. Christ's accommodation of me on the cross is unbelievable grace. But I'm not sure if my tears are of sadness, guilt or joy.

Catching Up

I got behind in my Bible reading for the year. I am using one of the more popular one year plans that has readings from the OT, NT, Poetry, Prophecy. I have skipped a few years in doing this so I thought I would get back on track.

Anyway, I got behind last week, about six days behind. So yesterday I caught back up which meant reading a large section from Leviticus. My wife doesn't like reading Leviticus all that much and admits to skimming. For some reason I like Leviticus and I have preached a few series from it.

I think a lot of people actually like all the rules. They find the rules freeing because they feel they can do whatever they want as long as they don't break the rules even if they have an ulterior motive. Of course, people have also used rules to control and manipulate people down through the years and I suppose not very many people like that. But for the most part I think a lot of people like rules even though they may protest against them.

That's why people don't like "a new covenant written on their hearts." Now you have a conscience to consider. Jesus quoted Isaiah, "These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me." (Mark 7:6) The only way to be an sincere follower of Jesus is to get to know him and develop a love for him. Then you will obey him because it is your true hearts desire.

Suspicious Minds

"We can't go on together with suspicious minds." - Elvis

This happens to be thesis #29 in the Cluetrain Manifesto. Sadly, I think this is very true in church circles. It is sad that we tend to be suspicious and it is true that journeying together with suspicion isn't very productive. The thing that makes this so true is that it is possible to have an agenda without trying to be sinister and we are suspicious of people's agenda if we think it doesn't match our own.

The cure, I believe, is honest relationship. That is why it so important to spend time building relationships. In an honest relationship fewer things are unknown and therefore there is less to be suspicious about.

The Face of the Denomination

I think our denomination has two competing views of what our denomination should look like and I don't think there is clear understanding on this point yet. Hopefully we will reach some agreement at the national conference.

The traditional view sees a central leadership for the denomination that generates vision and then sees that the vision is implemented throughout the denomination. The local churches are expected to fall in line with this vision and this vision/purpose/mission becomes the "face of the denomination." To head up this institution we want a "visionary" leader who has the charisma to get his vision implemented.

I see at least three major problems with this approach. First of all it has a tendency to waste the creative and intellectual capital that is scattered throughout our local churches. We can get some of it but in the end we are limited to those who have been chosen for the highest governing bodies of the denomination.

Secondly, strong visionary leaders with big charisma are extremely rare and the chances of finding one to lead our denomination is quite small. Don't bother talking about a shrinking leadership pool because that misses the point of how rare these individuals actually are. I would bet that they you couldn't name more than half a dozen such denominational leaders from history off the top of your head. I was surprised that Time Magazine's list of the top 25 Evangelicals listed very few denominational leaders. Many were local church pastors who had national influence. To say this is the type of person you want sure sounds good but is highly unlikely.

Thirdly, I think the face of the denomination should be the local churches themselves. The denominal relationship is a background issue that lurks in the shadows. If the denomination insists on being the face of the denomination it is like one of those parents who hog the limelight when their kid has done something amazing.

Instead I want a denomination whose vision is to help local churches reach their vision. Simple ain't it. We have enough good thinking people who will really take off with their vision for their local church. Yes, there will be some churches who don't seem to get it but that's okay. That's between them and God. I say if they want to stay that way leave them alone. Just keep them from being a burden on the rest of the churches. The more time the denomination spends trying to push them the more they are wasting denominational resources. If they do want to change they can take the initiative. In the mean time they will cease to hold back other churches.

The Role of the Bishop

I attended the meetings of our denominations national board earlier this week. I usually avoid such things but since much of their work is for the national conference this summer I thought I should attend since I will be a delegate.

One of the topics that was discussed was the role of the Bishop. It wasn't a long discussion really but I think there is some confusion there. Such groups are often under pressure to produce something that sounds good. We want to give our leader a list of duties that sound important and worthwhile. Unfortunately I think one of his most important duties doesn't fit in a list very well.

It is hard to name what I am talking about. Perhaps "perspective keeper" his helpful. I think we need someone whose job it is is to look at the big picture from an outside perspective and keep us on track. Eugene Peterson uses an illustration of a harpooner in a whaling boat. As the sailors are frantically rowing to get close enough to harpoon the harpooner sits quietly and waits. If he too would row he would not be steady enough when the time came to throw the harpoon. Amid the frantic activity in the boat he must remain calm.

We need that as a denomination. As us pastors are frantically involved with our churches we need someone who keeps perspective for us. We need someone who steps in and helps keep us on course when we start heading in the wrong direction and don't see it because we are to busy rowing.

Peterson also refers to this as "lashed to the mast." There will be times when we will go to him suggesting another direction. It is up to him to hold fast to the Word and insist we get back on track. He can't be about pleasing us. He must help us stay on course.

For this I need a leader who is dedicated to spending vast quantities of time with God in prayer, in the Word and in meditation. I need a leader who takes time to survey the territory and is dedicated to understanding the times. I need a history who knows our story, where we have been and where we need to go.

Every now and then a strong charismatic leader may come along who helps us take large growth steps by sheer force of his personality. That's fine but it's not necessary. We have plenty of creative and intelligent people who just need the right environment to thrive. They just need to know someone has got their back and is keeping watch for them.