Articles

The process of thinking about, practicing, re-thinking, re-imagining, and re-experimenting is exactly where the church needs to be today as it struggles to shed some irrelevant outer garments and seeks to uncover the shape it is morphing into.

I have seen the benefits of moving away from more traditional structures and into church forms that are simpler:

* Small, so that community and family can be experienced
* Participatory, so that every person’s gift is valued and developed
* Non-positional in leadership status, so that submission is mutual and leadership is situational and gift-based
* Non-programmatic, so that mission, discipleship, and leadership training is relationally-oriented
* Simple, so that it supports a 24/7, Jesus-following way of life

Dear Rich [1],

As I look at our churches, it does seem that we have become very complex and that you from America have helped us get this way.

There was a time when all that we had was the Bible and prayer.  Those were difficult days for us.  I remember the early 1990’s when ordinary men and women did very extraordinary things.  There was such a spontaneity to our evangelism and starting of new churches – even though many church leaders feared division in the church.  Even small groups threatened many church leaders.

As I began to think about leadership for simple, organic churches, one major thought came to my mind.  Jesus was a cross-cultural revolutionary who came and turned the world upside down.  One only has to read the Sermon on the Mount to understand that following Christ makes no worldly sense – to be poor in spirit, to rejoice when persecuted, and to mourn are all counter-cultural ways of life and thinking.  And, this Jesus is our best example for leadership.  I have always been amazed that during discussions on leadership people so often revert to examples from the Old Testament and examples from successful organizational leadership rather than simply focusing on what Jesus said and did.  Is not Jesus our greatest and best example?  And, His example is that He had no political or organizational power, no wealth, no school, no position, nor any possessions.  He had no authority except that authority which was derived from His relationships.

С того момента, как я начал размышления о природе руководства в простых, органических церквях, меня посетила одна важная мысль. Иисус был революционером, шагнувшим за пределы собственной культуры, перевернувший весь мир вверх дном. Для того, чтобы это заметить достаточно лишь прочесть Нагорную Проповедь, из которой явно напрашивается вывод, что рассуждая лишь человеческими мерками, следование за Иисусом не имеет никакого смысла: родиться от Духа, радоваться, когда тебя гонят, рыдать и печалиться, когда все говорят о вас лишь хорошо – всё это противоречит жизни и образу мыслей в любой культуре. И, этот самый Иисус и является нашим лучшим примером руководства. Меня всегда поражало то, как часто, обсуждая тему руководства, люди ссылаются на примеры из Ветхого Завета и примеры успешных организаций наших дней, вместо того, чтобы обратить внимание на слова и деятельность Иисуса.  Разве Иисус не является нашим величайшим и наилучшим примером? А Его пример заключается в том, что Он не имел никакой политической или административной власти, не имел богатства, не имел образования, положения или собственности. У него не было власти, кроме той, которая проистекала из Его взаимоотношений.

Hello Friends

We keep having this conversation about the several responsibilities that one must accept if any church is to work. Folks join up with a simple community and then discover that the freedom brings responsibility!  It would seem as though some actually prefer freedom from responsibility to the responsibilities of freedom!  Sitting in the stands watching the game carries no inherent risk but actually playing the game carries the risk of failure as one of the prices of the possibility of victory.

The church is the extension of the “missio Dei.”  As Jesus was God in flesh, the church is to be the presence of Christ Jesus on earth.  The mission of Jesus is now the mission of the Church.   Peter Wagner points out that, “The mission of the church is so to incarnate itself in the world that the gospel of Christ is effectively communicated by word and deed…”¹

For years, I’ve tried to put my finger on it—the reasons why I left the professional pastorate. And you know, more than anything, I think it’s this: I lost my first love.

The reality is that much of what we call ministry today is really administration. It’s about adding things—programs and strategies and rules. In my 22 years as a pastor, I often administered more than I ministered, if that makes sense. I’ve come to see that I was an add-minister more than a minister.

For years, I’ve tried to put my finger on it—the reasons why I left the professional pastorate. And you know, more than anything, I think it’s this: I lost my first love.

The reality is that much of what we call ministry today is really administration. It’s about adding things—programs and strategies and rules. In my 22 years as a pastor, I often administered more than I ministered, if that makes sense. I’ve come to see that I was an add-minister more than a minister.

The incarnational aspect of our Lord’s ministry went beyond the theological truth that Christ was literally God in flesh. Jesus came as God in flesh to be with people. He told his disciples that his mission was to seek and to save that which was lost. Jesus did not camp in the temple in Jerusalem and build a ministry around a physical location. No Christ Jesus came to love the masses. Jesus went to the lost and served them. An incarnational ministry means that the church goes to people the way Jesus did!

Recently there has been a lot of dialogue on the role of leadership. What is this thing called leadership? Who leads? Who follows? What difference does it make? Who cares? The question of leadership always leads into a lively debate. The great urgency always comes down to-who the heck is in charge around here?

My intention here is to share some of my thoughts on the role of leadership.