(e)mergent Voyageurs

I have recently been challenged by a series of posts on leadership over at Emerging Grace (Part 1, 2, 3 & 4), with some reflections from Brother Maynard. If you haven’t already, check these posts out. As I have considered Missional Leadership, I have wondered how I would primarily describe such a concept. Each time I return to the characteristics of leadership that were inspired by the late Robert Greenleaf and articulated by Larry Spears. Through the grid of my own understanding, they are as follows:

1. Listening: It is the role of missional leaders to identify and clarify the missional vocation of the community, not to impose their own will. This is only possible if the missional leader is dedicated to listening to both explicit and unspoken heart of the group. As hard as this will be for those in leadership to divest themselves of their power, it will be equally challenging for the community to accept their own responsibility to reflection and articulate their voice. After being led and fed from the top down for so long, this will take time and sacrifice.

2. Empathy: It is not enough for missional leaders to simply listen, but they must also identify with those in the community, even on an individual level. Even when responding to problematic behaviour, they must begin on the assumption of the best about the person. By empathizing with each person, the missional leader stops viewing them as “resources”, but rather as individuals that bring priceless strengths and spirit to the community.

3. Healing: Against the mechanistic worldview that dominates the world that seeks to fix that which is broken, missional leaders must organically seek to heal that which is wounded. Central to this is that the healing we pursue is mutual to us all, not a condescension of the whole person saving the flawed. Missional leaders recognize that our woundedness is not a distraction to the purposes of the church, but a central and shared reality of every member.

4. Awareness: Missional leaders recognize that intentional awareness is essential. This awareness- which includes the individuals, the community and even the larger culture and world- is costly, as it more likely to disturb than comfort. However, ignoring the realities as distractions or as inconsequential has cost the church far too much throughout our history. Missional leaders pursue awareness as a discipline, encouraging it in their communities as well.

5. Persuasion: Abandoning the hierarchal model of commands and orders, missional leaders will seek to lead by persuasion. Seeking to convince instead of coerce, they put aside positional authority for a place of positional mutuality. Further, missional leaders must be as open to be persuaded themselves as they are to do the persuading.

6. Conceptualization: Whether considering the future or facing a problem, missional leaders must be visionaries who can imagine all that is possible for their community. Drawing these visions out of the group, rather than demanding adherence, is what separates missional leaders from others. In the midst of this dreaming, they do not ignore or neglect the daily realities of life, but seek to integrate both together.

7. Foresight: Like the sons of Issachar who understood the times and knew what the people should do, missional leaders use their intuitive insight to see and respond quickly to shifts and currents in the community and the culture. Learning from past, present and the possible futures, they are able to facilitate direction with remarkable insight. While this foresight can be learned to a degree, there are some who are naturally gifted in this and must, therefore, be recognized, released and followed.

8. Stewardship: Like in the parable of the talents, missional leaders practice stewardship with the knowledge that it is not for their own benefit that they work, but for that of God and the community. they are not stewards for their own personal gain, but rather as servants seeking the masters purposes and pleasure. As it is not their own, missional leaders lead in this through consensus and consent.

9. Growth: Missional leaders see the individuals development and growth of those in their community is as important (and sometimes more important) as the larger mission or vision of the church/ministry/etc. This costly commitment means that time, energy and resources (including the limited and coveted funds) must be invested into peoples lives. Missional leaders serve beyond what is required, keeping the person as centrally important, not themselves or the institutions they serve.

10. Building Missional Community: With all the value placed on every individual in the community, missional leaders are warriors against the powers of individualism. This is reconciled in the belief in and commitment to the truth that individuality finds its truest fulfillment in the context of authentic community. Characterized by authenticity and united in missional vocation, the missional leader leads by example in both respects.

For any of you who are unfamiliar with Robert Greenleaf I urge you to get your hands on his books (or read some online material) on servant leadership. His works are essential, crossing the line into every sphere of influence. The emerging-missional church (or movement or conversation) has much to learn from this wise servant.

Emerging Church, Missional, Leadership

Last week I asked for some input to future Friday Art Reflections. In the comment section my friend Greg offered the following suggestion:

“In the fledgling arts group I’m trying to start at Riverwood (“Render”)… we have a lot of discussion around the “why”… why spend time, energy, resources to make art when we could be using those (especially as Christians?) to help the poor, etc. I’d be curious to see how your readers would weigh in to that.”

This is an excellent question, one that is asked by many Evangelicals in respect to all kinds of activities and issues that do not contribute to “evangelism”. Specifically with art, some argue that it needlessly consumes essential time, resources and energy that should be dedicated to “preaching the Gospel” or at best “to feed the poor”. It’s a fair question that should be asked and answered. For me, the answer is “No, it is not a waste by any means”.

However, I should say that there is a great deal that is produced in the art world that is very wasteful, some even offensive. I once read about a woman who received extensive govenment funding for an “art installation” which was a large white apartment painted- floors, walls & ceiling- with a mixture of blood and semen. This is not uncommon. While less offensive, pointless obscurity and elitism also muddy the water of the art world.

That being said, I believe art can serve as a gateway to touching the divine. The most explicit example is the use of icons in religious art. Icons are images and/or symbolic representations of people, events or ideas of spiritual significance. The are not meant to be realistic recreations of actual events, but rather serve as a medium by which, through prayer and meditation, Christians can reflect and engage the divine. Like an icon on your computer desktop, it is a simple, symbolic tool that opens up a rich complexity hidden beyond.

With less explicitly religious art the question is not as simple. Rather than me attempt to answer, I’m with Greg. I want to hear from you. Why is art a justifiable use of time, energy and resources in such a broken world? I believe there are many reasons, so let’s get the ball rolling.

Emerging Church, Missional, Art

This past weekend was a busy one. Missionfest Manitoba 2007 kicked off it’s weekend of speakers and workshops featuring several speakers, keynote being Steve Saint, son of martyred missionary pilot Nate Saint. It was a full and tiring weekend, but was especially interesting to watch our DTS students participate in and consider this Evangelical staple- the missions conference.

Last year I posted about my concern with the nature of Missionfest (and missions conferences in general). While I will not repeat everything, I will reaffirm that, while I have serious concerns, I still affirm the usefulness, even the importance of the missions conference. To better understand this post, I would encourage you to read last years entry first.

My main concern is the way in which missions agencies, already functioning with a tiny fraction of the Churches resources, must pay for the privilege to promote their organizations. The hundreds of browsing visitors puruse the booths, most out of casual curiousity, some considering a source for financial giving and a small number consider getting involved in missional service. In the end, most Christians get entertained and challenged by a good speaker, go home with a bag full of brochures and a few books, with little lasting impact in their lives.

Perhaps I am being cynical, but after many years of attending such events, I have seen two common assumptions towards missions too often perpetuated at such events. First is that missions is a specialty field that a few are called to. While lip service is given to the value that, as christians, we are all called to be missionaries, this is rarely fleshed out. Second is the paternalistic, transactional view of Western Christians in relationship to the “foriegn mission field”. Let me explain this one.

Far too often well intentioned financial giving to missions can promote a condescending attitude of superiority towards “needy nations”. Further, it can give donors a sense of fulfilling their missional obligation by writing a cheque. While I am not discouraging financial support to missionaries (as my wife & I rely on it), it has become, for some, a form of missional indulgences. In desperate need of essential funding, it is too easy for missionaries and agencies to fall into the trap of playing to this pattern, using fundraising techniques that reward it.

Perhaps most troubling is the way we seem to see world missions in terms of economics and investments- X dollars results in X number of souls saved. The relationship with the developing world becomes a transaction of our wealth meeting their needs resulting in our sense of missional fulfillment and affirmation. What is needed, rather, is a relationship of mutual need, support and celebration. Yes, we should give out of financial wealth, but also acknowledge the impoverishment we suffer when we situate ourselves in such terms.

A great deal of the missional movement is a healthy response to these problems. However, there comes the very serious risk of downplaying missions outside our own borders in our commitment to being missional next door. As much as we need to challenge the traditional Evangelical model of missions and missions mobilization, we also need to be intentional about not taking our efforts too far.

So I pose two questions for you:

First, without abandoning the missions conference altogether, how can we reimagine it embrace true missionality in the necessary transitional terms needed to communicate the larger established church?

Second, what does world missions and missions mobilization look like when reimagined in terms of missionality as are being articulated and explored in the emerging-missional movement?

Emerging Church, Missional

One of the things about Harry that I loved was his guts. However, it earned him as many enemies as friends. Sometimes he even made his friends cringe, as we wondered if his passion got the better of his judgment. That being said, I am not sure he could have done the vast good he did if he did take some risks (and occassionally go too far).

The following article is an example of him pushing the boundaries in our city. However, he does not go too far, in my opinion. I think we have a lot to learn from this rabble-rousing preacher.

City Planners – “Lead us not into temptation…” - February 29, 2004 – Winnipeg Sun
by Harry Lehotsky

Can anyone tell me what “city planners” do?

I know the U of M trains them and the City hires them. But what do they really do?

It sounds like a lot of responsibility. The name implies that they make plans to protect and develop the health and prosperity of a city.

I’m not even sure how they get their training.

Surgeons have to study the body as a system before they’re allowed to operate on any single part. And if they mess up, the results are readily apparent.

What about city planners? When the business strip in a neighbourhood struggles, is there an inquest to ask planners why it happened?

Maybe they should try the computer game called “SimCity.” It lets people build and plan a city. I’m sure the computer would scream “TILT!” if they tried to load a community with pawn shops, massage parlours, bars, private men’s clubs and other hangouts.

Certain business uses don’t get unconditional licensing and zoning approval precisely because they can be operated in such a manner that it really hurts communities.

Too many planners, politicians and others assume their bylaws adequately protect communities and that zoning and licensing revenue is good for the City.

But what about the neighbourhood? The “experts” ignore the cumulative effect of clustering these “conditional” or “non-conforming” businesses.

There are certain businesses which entrench and profit from some of the most serious social problems in our neighbourhood. They hinder our ability to diversify the business base of our community.

Do you think Tim Hortons or grocers would be excited about locating between a pawn shop and a massage parlour?

Can anyone tell me how pawn shops, massage parlours and private clubs further the revitalization of communities? Or are there neighbourhoods where we don’t care about such things?

Let’s be honest about what’s going on.

Most massage parlours are not engaged in massage therapy. There’s a big difference between a lusty “stroke and poke,” and a therapeutic massage of the rest of the body.

Yet the City of Winnipeg zones and licenses some parlours which are acknowledged fronts for prostitution. MTS sells them advertising. They beat around the proverbial bush. They play stupid or comment, “At least they’re not working on the street.”

The City essentially ignores the exploited working women and keeps their hands off the exploiting men. Worse than that, they hide behind outdated bylaws which have long stopped protecting the public.

For two years they’ve told me the new improved rules are coming “any day now.” Yet they’re always ready to pick up their annual $2,000 license fee from operators.

Move down a few storefronts and you come to a private club.

Does a concentration of “Private Club – MEMEBERS ONLY” pass a message of a business district that’s “open for business.” Does it further a friendly sense of community? Do leering, lascivious guys coming out for a smoke break improve the status of women in our community?

Maybe I’m wrong. I’ve heard a few of the local clubs make a regular practice of signing some of the local prostitutes in as their guests in the club. I’m sure it’s just for a friendly game of dominoes.

Many of the clubs are simply places where men segregate by ethnicity for a little gambling, chatting and boozing. Who can fault the old guys for having a little manly fellowship?

So why have wives called me, complaining of gambling losses and other problems in the clubs? They don’t call the City to complain. Why would they? It’s the City which licenses the establishment and turns a blind eye to the goings on inside.

Walk a little further and you see the cluttered windows and garish signs of some local pawn shops.

Pawnbrokers will tell you they’re the lenders of last resort. Bankers to the poor folk who aren’t helped by big banks. So they loan folks $100 one month, only to demand a return of $125 to $135 the next month – compounding the same fees monthly. Examining those fees, some might argue that pawnbrokers are more into helping themselves than helping the poor.

But perhaps I should be thankful. One pawnshop down the street was quite willing to sell us back goods that were stolen from one of our work sites.

The experts spend years turning their heads and playing like they don’t know what’s going on. Then later, they scratch their heads, philosophizing about the demise and deterioration of the inner city.

Lately, I think I’ve found a new application for the Lord’s Prayer.

I’ve discovered that my prayer to my Heavenly Father is echoed in my pleas to the City Fathers:

“Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us…”

Emerging Church, Missional

I recently received a copy of Frank Viola’s new book “God’s Ultimate Passion: Unveiling The Purpose Behind Everything” to review here on the blog. As busy things have been, I wasn’t sure I would get through it soon enough to warrant receiving a free copy. I’ll admit that, a very small part of my hesitation was due to the cover design of the book. I know, I know, “don’t judge a book by its cover”, but frankly that is no excuse for poor design (sorry Frank).

However, after only a few pages, I forgot the cover and found myself, instead, on a journey. Viola’s engaging book invites readers to take a journey through Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, exploring a story we are all intimately a part of. Taking three different, but improtant paths, he introduces us to the church as Bride of Christ, House of God, as Household, Body of Christ and the Family of God. Each theme represents a section of the book.

The heart of the book is not to give the church a ego boast, but rather to reflec the nature of a God who is deeply passionate about those He loves. This passion is not some incidental of God’s character, but at the very heart of who He is. While I still believe the book cover art could benefit from a make over, this book is a worthwhile read.

Emerging Church, Missional

After a very intense week of blogging, resulting in some amazing conversations, emails, meetings, etc. I am spent. Adding to it all, I am attending Missionfest Manitoba with our students this weekend. So, I will be taking a break from the Friday Art Reflection this week. Thanks for your understanding.

That being said, I need your ideas for future Friday Art Reflection topics. So far We’ve covered:

-Mark Tansey
-Discarding The Frame
-Vincent Van Gogh
-Get Out There
-Nudity In Art
-Branding & Advertising
-Architecture
-The Scream
-Movies
-Kitsch
-Beauty

Weigh in with your suggestions. Thanks and have a great weekend!

Emerging Church, Missional, Art

This is my third post on the topic of homosexuality this week- the first sharing my personal experience with it and the second discussing a need for a new response from the church. This will likely be my final post on this topic, at least for awhile, as I do not want it to be the subject that defines me. However, I felt this final post was a necessary conclusion to some of the thoughts I have shared about the topic.

Throughout the many comments and emails I have received since my first post on Monday, one of the questions/comments that is consistently emerging is about what Scripture has to say about the topic. There are many within the emerging church conversation who are beginning to look more critically at the traditional interpretations of these Scriptures. This has resulted in an important and necessary penitence and grace to those who are impacted by this issue. Some (though I suspect far fewer than our critics would like to believe) have decided that Scripture does not clearly say that homosexuality is inconsistent with Christianity.

This is an understandable trend, given that many “Biblical” arguments against homosexuality that people cite are shallow, out of context or extremely ambiguous. One obvious example is the use of Sodom & Gomorrah’s destruction as evidence of God’s stance against homosexuality, rather than seeing it as an example of unbridled hedonism finding expression in orgy. Even the Romans 1 reference could be argued to be condemning homosexual lust in the same way as heterosexual lust is wrong.

Now, if you are about to head down to the comments to argue about these points, don’t bother. It is not my point to argue the Biblical texts. The text themselves are rarely at issue in debates, but rather the underlying presuppositions each party brings to the argument. My point, rather, is that while containing some fairly clear admonishons against homosexuality, Scripture often make such statements that we dismiss today as contextually inapplicable. Therefore, we cannot just throw Scripture at the issue as though it closes the matter.

My own position, believing that homosexuality is inconsistent with my faith (a belief I hold with no small amount of uncertainty), is not a product of absolute certainty as to what Scripture has to say on the issue. Rather, I also look to history and tradition to shape my understanding. While imperfect in their own way, they are important guides for us to consider.

Many people, commenting on this ambiguity, decide that they cannot with confidence state that homosexuality is wrong. I understand this. After all, it was not long ago that slavery was justified using Scripture by people who were genuinely attempting to be faithful to God and His Word. And yet, it is in this same example that we must make note, especially those who reject traditional beliefs on homosexuality on the basis of Scriptural uncertainty. There are far clearer references in Scripture in regards to homosexuality than there are about slavery, and yet I have yet to meet a Christian how would use this ambiguity to defend slavery as consistant with the faith.

This stands as a word of caution to people who stand on both side of issue. It neither argues for or against either position, but requires a chastened certainty and a call to faith from all. Again, thank you all for your encouragement and prayer.

Emerging Church, Missional, Homosexuality

When I posted the personal “Homosexuality: A Personal Reflection” on Monday, I could not have anticipated the wave of support, encouragement and honesty that would follow in the comments and emails. Thank you all so much for making this such a positive step for me to make. I know it has been difficult for some, especially those who know and love me and don’t want me to suffer anything for it. I want to honour them for standing behind me in spite of these concerns.

Without taking away from the wonderful responses I received, in a post where I share something so very personal, the majority of the responses were thanking me and encouraging me for my honesty and vulnerability. As a result (and understandably), the comments did not get to involved in engaging the finer details of the issue. So, while I don’t want this to become the over riding theme of my blog, I thought it might be helpful to flesh this out a bit.

I want to start by saying that sexual orientation is an incredibly complex area that cannot be easily narrowed to formulaic understandings. Therefore, while my experience might mirror or parallel that others, as there are underlying similarities for people who experience this reality, every individual comes to it differently. Therefore, while I can help to give general understanding, I cannot and will not speak for everyone who live with same-sex attraction. That being said, many of you commented or emailed sharing that one of the biggest challenges you face is simply an inability to understand. In fairness, how could someone understand something so foreign to them. So I hope I can give you glimpse into this sphere.

Even saying that people “come to it” reveals my belief that, at least for some, it is a reality people arrive at as a result of something. I am not going to go so far as to say this is true of all cases, as that would be arrogant and presumptious of me. However, I do believe that, for many people, it is a resulting reality due to some spiritual/emotional/etc dynamic, albeit very diffent dynamics for different people. But I am getting off track.

One of the areas I wanted to address was brought up by my friend Stuart in the comment section. He shared his frustration with the hostility he has experienced from the homosexuality community as he has attempted to reach out to them. This is a common experience for many Christians and something that really needs to be addressed.

We must first start by trying to understand the perspective of the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered (GLBT) community in respect to the church. For far too long we have treated them with utter contempt, ignorance and even hatred for centuries, all the while justifying our stance in the name if Jesus. They can no more dissociate from that history than we can from the responsibility we have in making things right. To dismiss that as the mistake of others is to ignore the systemic connection between our current religious cultures, freedoms and presuppositions and those who have gone before us in the church.

When we recognize this, it is not hard to understand why we are so often met with such anamosity. while this does not excuse their mistakes or excesses, we add insult to injury by using their emotional response as justification for further mistreatment or abandonment of missional outreach. These are, in part, the fruit of the seeds we have planted as the church, and therefore realities in reaching out to the GLBT community that we will have to learn to work through.

What will it take to genuinely connect with these people? For one, we will have to learn that starting on the premise of the moral and Biblical indictment of homosexuality (which is often our default position, for fear we might compromise) is a useless and ignorant foundation. I am not suggesting that we turn a blind eye to sin, but rather that we recogize the dual mutuality we share with them- first and foremost, that we are all made in the image of God, which comes with the respect that is thus due; second, that we are all sinners, in need of Christ’s grace.

This will likely mean that we will need to intentionally create space for relationship that begins, at least at first, with a commitment to understand, which includes a commitment not to attempt to use it for conversion, debate, etc. Will we stand the risk of give the wrong impression about where we stand on the issue? I doubt it, but even if we do, who cares? Jesus didn’t seem to concern Himself with the gossip-mongering moralizers who questioned the company He kept, so why should we? That said, we will have to be willing to face the judgment of our fellow Christians as an inevitability.

What suggestions do you have on how we can move forward? Tangibly, what must the church do to owns our part, not only in our failure towards the GLBT community, but in our responsibility to move towards reconciliation, relationship and love?

I hope to do another post in the near future about the issue of my response to the Scriptures surrounding homosexuality.

Emerging Church, Missional, Homosexuality