• Archive of "consumerism" Category

    Bi-Vocational Ministry & Support Raising

    October 29, 2009 // 4 Comments »

    Earlier this month I began a series of posts on Bi-Vocational Ministry.  I talked about Bi-Vocational Ministry and the Missional Church and then the relationship between Bi-Vocational Ministry and Spiritual Formation.

    For the last few days I have been participating in a seminar on “Ministry Partner Development,” led by my friend JR Woodward through Ecclesia, a missional church planting network.  So, naturally, I have been thinking about the relationship between bi-vocational ministry and support raising.  I am coming away from the seminar with 2 firm convictions.

    1)  Support raising is a ministry in and of itself.  As a nation, we give 1-2% of our annual income to charitable causes.  As a subset of American Christians, conservatives slaughter that statistic at a whopping 3%!  Sad, really sad.  Those who raise support to do works of ministry are ministering to those that they ask to be partners simply by saying, “Hey, would you actually like to do something of eternal significance with your money?”  For a people that ought to be known for our generosity and our refusal to store up for ourselves treasures on earth, we’re pitiful and I am all for more and more and more people who have the courage to take steps of faith and ask others to financially support them.

    2) Inasmuch as it is a ministry in and of itself and because I think our current model of theological eduction is largely missing the mark in truly preparing Christian leaders for the future landscape of the Church in Western culture, I think support raising is a necessary consideration. Leave aside for a moment the idea of support raising as a ministry to those who choose to partner, what other choice do people whose training is theological and ministerial in nature have if they want to practice bi-vocational leadership?  They aren’t really marketable in most of the non-church world and it will take some time if they are to acquire additional skills and training.  Perhaps worse, they take jobs in churches that are spiritually dead, but have some money, or they cave into the forms of church that are successfully marketing religious goods to a quasi-religious, Christendom population.  This is where I think support raising comes in.

    Aside form the personal benefits of learning how to humbly depend on others, being able to pursue what God has put on your heart rather than choosing from the given options, and developing the disciplines necessary to do the work of support raising, developing a team of ministry partners can be a great way to free someone up to minister to those who have no concept of supporting pastors or those who, even if they “get it,” don’t have the means to do so anyway.  And it should go without saying that cultivating a ministry team that is supporting you not only through finances, but by diligent prayer and accountability is a blessing that far too many are missing out on.

    When it comes to church ministry, I think support raising makes the most sense for apostolic and prophetic types of people.

    Apostles are always on the move, charting new territory and plowing new ground.  Having a ministry team that sees and affirms that and says, “Here, we’ll pay your bills, you just keep on following where God leads!” are saints in my book.

    Prophets get stoned and killed.  The quickest way to short circuit the ministry of those who God has called to point out how the Church is failing her calling, is to make them dependent on the giving of one congregation.  Like apostles, they do well to cultivate a team that acknowledges the church’s need for prophetic voices and says, “Here, be free to speak truthful words how the Lord leads.”

    When it comes to bi-vocationality, I think one of the marks of a healthy church is its desire to financially support its leaders.  So, while I think support raising is a good idea in general for many and an excellent idea for some in particular, ultimately, for all the reasons I mentioned in my first post, I still think church leaders working in the community where they minister while being supported by the church they serve is something great to aspire to.

    Posted in bi-vocational, christendom, church, consumerism, leadership, missional, prophets, spiritual formation, theology, western culture

    Bi-Vocational Ministry & Spiritual Formation

    October 24, 2009 // 5 Comments »

    togetherIn my last post about bi-vocational church leadership, I tried to make the point that this approach derives its theological significance from a truly missional approach to theology and ecclesiology.

    I wanted to winnow that thought down a bit further and suggest that the biblical appeal for a bi-vocational approach to leadership (and in my opinion, the biblical appeal for anything that has to do with the church and Chirstian life!) has to do with spiritual formation.

    Far too often people seek to defend their church structures and practices because of their supposed ability to, “grow the church,” “meet people where they’re at,” or “reflect people’s cultural expectations.” These have a ring of nobility to them but are far off the mark biblically speaking. Far worse is when we are forced to admit that we do what we do because, “that’s how it’s always been done,” “if we try to change things people will leave,” “so and so will stop giving if we stop doing things that way.”

    As the Body of Christ, we should have a singular defense for everything we do, namely, its power to spiritually form people and communities into Christlikeness.*

    Here’s why…

    There’s a battle going on. The Church, as a foretaste of the Kingdom of God, through its formational practices and structures, wages war against the principalities and powers at work in the world which seek to “steal, kill, and destroy” all that God would have us be and do.

    In Christendom, the Church equipped itself to fight the wrong battle. Within Christendom, so much is assumed about the nature and purpose of the church, that we tend to ask pragmatic questions. Does it work? But, for those of us who realize that Christendom is crumbling and/or think that it was never a good thing to begin with, these questions aren’t good enough. We need to ask deeper questions.

    Biblical faithfulness is about mission, not models. As one helpful commenter pointed out ;) in a previous post, the Bible does not prescribe one way to lead churches. There are several examples of what that looked like in the New Testament, but even these are not simply models to be copied as if we could then say, “We just do it like they did in the Bible.” The better way to understand biblical faithfulness is as an honest pursuit to join God in mission, not copy models. The Church is charged with the task of making disciples and is not given an exact blueprint for how to go about it.

    This brings us full circle. Those churches whose structures and practices mainly serve the ends of church growth, cultural relevance, and even conversion, miss the mark. They are fighting the wrong battle biblically speaking.

    I am advocating for a bi-vocational approach to church leadership, not because I can defend it as THE RIGHT biblical model or because it’s most effective (Christendom approaches), but because the tendencies in our culture toward consumerism and individualism are so thick that faithfulness to the mission of making disciples, forming people and communities into Christlikeness, make it the most appropriate option (missional approach).

    Hopefully that serves to clarify my thoughts and intention some.

    *I was greatly encouraged today while viewing this seminar online to hear Dr. Darrell Guder comment that, “It was not the mission of the apostolic church to save souls! The apostolic mission was the formation witnessing communities.” This is a far cry from how we commonly envision the role of church leaders, but something we badly need to recover.

    Posted in bi-vocational, christendom, church, community, consumerism, culture, discipleship, individualism, kingdom, leadership, missional, spiritual formation, western culture

    Missional vs. Attractional Equipping

    February 21, 2009 // 3 Comments »

    As a pastor, I spend a lot of my time thinking about and actually attempting “to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up,” – equipping.

    Sadly, the extents to which ministry has been professionalized, consumerism and individualism have distorted our notions of the gospel, and Christendom has undermined the nature and purpose of the church, often serve to confuse us as to what this actually means.

    In attractional models of church, many are satisfied with merely finding people to fill slots so that stuff gets done.  Others lay guilt trips on people for not serving enough.  But even when we do the right thing of helping people discover their giftedness and passions and then inviting them into opportunities where those life-giving things might find expression, we often have a view toward the external mastery and refinement of skills and talents so that their use of them will “attract others.”

    I would never say that getting better at what you enjoy doing is a bad thing, but I would say that missionally, the equipping of others has mainly to do with cultivating spiritual maturity so that gifts and passions may be stewarded well not with being polished and excellent by socio-cultural standards.

    Case in point…

    Last night I and several others of my house group had the opportunity to serve at Calvary Rescue Mission in downtown Memphis.  This is an organization that serves homeless and displaced men by providing food, substance abuse recovery, and the deep love of Jesus.  When we go, we get to help serve food and one of us is invited to share a message.  Last night, my friend Sam had the chance to share.

    On Thursday I called him and we talked a bit about what was on his heart and what he was planning on sharing.  He expressed some nervousness about feeling “qualified to teach form the Bible.”  To which I replied with something like, “That’s probably the very thing that actually does qualify you to do this.”

    Sam doesn’t have a Bible degree.  He’s relatively new to the whole church scene.  And he’s certainly not accustomed to preaching regularly.  But, Sam shared from his heart last night what God has been teaching him through his study of the book of James and the ways in which Jesus is becoming more and more real to him everyday.  Sam (and I’m sure he’s cool with me saying this) is not the sort of speaker that your average church community would put up on stage week in and week out, but sadly it has nothing to do with his not being spiritually equipped to teach.  Rather it’s on account of his inability to entertainingly capture the attention of celebrity-driven, linear thinking, consumer-oriented folks (I don’t excuse myself from often falling into this category).

    sam-preaching

    In the same sort of vein, one of our friends from the mission sang a solo.  His voice was not good.  He had absolutely no stage presence.  And he wore a sweatshirt that read, “Jesus is Awesome.”  Again, this is not the sort of guy your average church would want leading others in worship, but is has nothing whatsoever to do with him not being spiritually equipped to do so and everything to do with our misconceptions of what it means to be equipped.

    guy-singing

    Despite their cultural-defined techincal inabilities, grace, hope and love overflowed from both Sam and our soloist friend.  All those present left encouraged and changed as Jesus met with us through the ministry of these two guys.  It grieves me to think of how often we miss out on the ways in which God uses those we would never expect (or perhaps more shamefully, prefer).

    Posted in christendom, church, consumerism, culture, friends, individualism, memphis, missional, preaching/teaching, spiritual formation

    Consuming Jesus

    January 15, 2009 // 2 Comments »

    I have been looking forward to reading Consuming Jesus: Beyond Race and Class Divisions in a Consumer Church by Paul Metzger for some time.  For the sake of an alternative context and experience, I was even more excited to read the bulk of it amidst my time in Africa and its deep seeded tribalism.

    In Metzger’s words, his aim is to…

    confront the ways evangelical-consumer or niche-church Christianity fosters racial and economic divisions, and I wish to offer an alternative theological paradigm to the one that is often embraced in the evangelical subculture. (11)

    In my words, this alternative theological paradigm comes only by way of rejecting the version of the gospel which has led to a consumer-oriented faith/church and embracing one that prophetically strikes at the very heart of that reality.

    In John Perkins’ words,

    The only purpose of the gospel is to reconcile people to God and to each other.  A gospel that doesn’t reconcile is not a Christian gospel at all.  But in America it seems as if we don’t believe that.  We don’t really beleive that the proof of our discipleship is that we love one another.” (9)

    I love that Perkins understands the gospel by what it does.  Like love, the gospel takes on its true nature only when it is enacted.

    In the beginning of the book.  Metzger insightfully traces the various streams, characters, and events which have so vitally contributed to the dominant expression of Christianity in America.  From here, he probes into the ways in which “the dominant structure of the evangelical church today favors, fosters, and shapes its structures around the key ingredient of individual choice…” (79)  Key to understanding this tendency is his discussion of the popularization of the Homogenous Unit Principle (HUP) by Donald McGavran as a method for church growth.  The remainder of the book features insightful biblical and cultural reflections, helpful examples and a sustained discussion on the vitality of Scripture and sacraments for the formation of communities of reconciliation across racial and class boundaries.

    Of Scripture, Metzger says…

    We must move people with God’s word on Sunday mornings to move beyond their addictions to race and class affinity groups.  Authentic witness to Jesus is at stake, and we must stake our lives on it. (117)

    – a quick aside here: just as the goodness of the gospel lies in what it does, so too the sermon is only good inasmuch as it results in changed lives.  Don’t ever tell a preacher his or her message was good unless you are prepared to also tell them how it resulted in your changed life

    And I love that he includes Marva Dawn’s words on the Lord’s Supper…

    How can we share the eschatological feast if we don’t participate in displaying God’s future, in which all will be equally fed and we will all join together in universal praise?  It seems to be that if we eat the body and blood of Christ in expensive churches without care for the hungry, the sacrament is no longer a foretaste of the feast to come, but a trivialized picnic to which not everyone is invited.

    The end of the book is the author’s attempt to move into a discussion of partnerships amongst churches across racial and socio-economic lines.  His desire is for the church to…

    re-envision its understanding of communal identity in view of its communal and co-missional God as involving solidarity with society at large…. This will entail a radical break from the dominant American individualistic mindset that keeps us separate from others.  It will require that we lay down our lives and die for our enemies rather than try to take back America from them. (149)

    I found this to be a fantastic book.  A bit narrow at places where I though the discussion (at least by way of footnotes) should have been expanded, but definitely a much needed message for the American church.  I suppose the big question I am let with is how to think about local congregations that are seeking to incarnate themselves in places that are intrinsically homogeneous.  If anyone wants to weigh in, please feel free, I’d enjoy the discussion.

    Posted in africa, books, christendom, church, community, consumerism, culture, evangelicalism, gospel, individualism, love, missional, preaching/teaching, review, sermon, spiritual formation, theology

    Change Your Life – Change the Lives of Others

    December 23, 2008 // 5 Comments »

    My church community has been participating in Advent Conspiracy.  The response has been great and I am really proud to be part of a community that has been so willing to embrace a new take on the Christmas season by shifting our focus in some key areas, especially keeping in mind the poor and oppressed here in Memphis and around the world.

    While the Christmas-specific dimension of Advent Conspiracy has been a beautiful thing, it’s my sincere hope that our community (and the numerous others that participated) will carry the spirit of the movement forward, that we’ll maintain our enthusiasm to change the way we live our lives all year round so that we are always seeking to change the lives of others.  In general, one of the best ways we can help others around the world (not to mention ourselves) is to simply consume less.  We think we need way more than we do and we have become accustomed to a lifestyle of excess.  We need to live simpler lives.  But, over and above this, when it comes to making purchases that are just a part of life, we would do well to consider how we can make these purchases in responsible ways.

    I have mentioned Better World Books before, but I just came across this video which speaks of their new partnership with Invisible Children and was reminded of just how great an organization they are.  Please, if you need to buy books, forget Amazon and look to Better World Books.  You might even think about taking up some donations of books!

    Posted in books, consumerism, justice

    Attractional/Missional: From Pragmatics to Formation

    December 18, 2008 // 8 Comments »

    Beginning with Dan Kimball’s “Missional Misgivings,” there has been a recent flurry of discussion over the whole missional/attractional thing in the blog-o-sphere.  Responses by Hirsch here, Cole here, Fitch here.

    A good bit of what is being said in response to the topic (much by patently reformed folks) has to do with “cultural appropriateness.”  Some seem to be suggesting that the seeker-sensitive/mega-church model of the church was a culturally appropriate model within Christendom and in a modern framework.  By implication, this would then be the preferred model of church for areas which still fit this description.  There is also an addition to the discussion pertaining to models for preaching and gathering.  Again, the argument seems to be that we need to allow the culture to determine the right model.  I submit that this the wrong approach to this discussion.  It may appear to be an incarnational approach, but it is anything but.

    My friend Sam reminded me of a quote by Lesslie Newbigin recently,

    …if we begin with culture we are never taken back to gospel, if we begin with gospel, we ourselves are transformed and enter into culture to put flesh on the gospel.

    This is the way we need to understand what it means to be incarnational – gospeling a culture, not culturizing the gospel.

    The primary question church leaders need to always be asking is not, “What is the culturally appropriate way to be the church?” but “What is the most formational way to be the church?” The first question lends itself to our ingrained consumeristic tendencies and begets attractional churches; the second invites us to consider a different goal altogether and serves to cultivate missional communities.

    We ought to always do what we do as the church specifically because it helps people to become more like Jesus. Willowcreek was probably the best example ever of a church that did everything right in terms of cultural appropriateness only to announce to the world how horribly they had failed to actually help people become disciples (my thoughts on their REVEAL study here and Fitch’s here).

    I hope this makes sense.  It is not my intention to question the motives and hearts of my well-intentioned brothers and sisters, but I beleive this to be a pivotal conversation for the future of the Church in the West and when the questions we seem to be asking have more to do with cultural pragmatics than faithful formation, I get nervous.

    Let me end with a quick story.  I recently attended a church planting conference where a supposedly “missional” church planter told those in attendance,

    …the south is home to some of the greatest preachers in the world.  If you are not a great preacher or teacher, you have no business trying to plant a church in the south.

    I can’t even dream up a better illustration of what it means to so completely miss the point of everything missional is about.  For this guy, it’s the culture, not the gospel that determines what you do, how you do it, and who exactly it is that does it.  I just don’t think this is the best way forward for us.

    Posted in christendom, church, conference, consumerism, corporate worship, culture, discipleship, gospel, Jesus, missional, modernity, preaching/teaching, questions, spiritual formation, stories, western culture

    « Previous Entries
    Next Entries »