Ever notice that the church has been following predominant secular models since about the fourth century? Oh, we find a way to justify it through a selective reading of scripture, but still, would you believe it coincidence?
We see it in recent years as churches go for "visions statements" "missions", values, etc. This was, still is to an extent, a model borrowed from business. Rick Warren perfected it and tailored it for a church with his "Purpose Driven Model".
We see it in churches where the Sr Pastor and "elders" or what ever a particular church calls it operating awfully similar to a CEO and a board of directors. Hmm.
Looking at older churches, we can see denominations founded in earlier centuries follow predominant models of their time. The Roman Catholic church has its Pope, Cardinals, etc, which if you study the Roman government of the time, you see parallels in the way the Romans ran the politics of the time and the way the Roman Catholic church operates now, with a pope instead of a Caesar, etc.
But I wonder if a new business trend is possibly a very biblical model, and this is a great time for the church to copy again.
In the natural world, there is a beautiful sense of design and order, but no apparent "authority". Social architectures have noted this, and are proposing new social orders that some businesses are starting to adopt. As Dee Hock, founder of VISA notes, "Purpose and principle, clearly understood and articulated, and commonly shared, are the genetic code of any healthy organization. To the degree you hold purpose and principles in common among you, you can dispense with command and control. People will know how to behave in accordance with them, and they'll do it in thousands of unimaginable, creative ways. The organization will become a vital, living set of beliefs".
This is a business management theory, but it comes from a careful study of the order of God's universe. God's universe is both out of control and ordered. There is order in chaos and structure without control. Is this the next model for the church to follow? Was it the one it should have been following all along?
Is this a part of the model of redemptive communities?
To me, from what I read of the underground churches of China, India, and those in Muslim countries, this sounds like what is occurring there.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Is business discovering the right model?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
How do you know that this isn't just your own selective reading of the scripture? I am not trying to be smart but want to be sure you have thought about this point.
Mark, I think this is absolutely true. My company has started to operate this way, and it has created an atmosphere of freedom I've never experienced at work before. Our business planning meeting two weeks ago took on (spontaneously) the air of a revival meeting -- our Marketing director got up and started talking about how glad he was to be involved in our company, and how he can't wait to get here in the morning because he believes in who we are, what we are doing, and who he works with. I thought people were going to get up and start "testifying" :)
All that to say, most American churches don't experience the same power -- perhaps they're using models that the secular business world is already learning to discard!
Another thought -- I heard Tony Dungy speak last year in Indianapolis about his leadership strategy with the Colts. He said that he'd never changed his method -- it's never been different -- he has always tried to pattern the way he leads after the way Jesus shepherded his disciples. He expresses his belief in his guys, he gives them the tools to be successful, and he never gets in their faces to kick them in the butt. He has dispensed with "command and control", and the success of the Colts has shown that it works. He said, "I always wanted to coach in such a way that it could be shown that even in the highest levels of pro football, a team could be led by a shepherd model, the way Jesus leads his people." You could hear a pin drop in the RCA dome as he shared this ...
Jason, I'll get to your point. The short answer is that I've long believed that much of the "structures" of church are driven by a modern definition of "authority". "Authority" comes the same root word as "author", which is a creative word. I'll explain how it connects later.
But I wanted to relay a comment given to me by a former pastor I had breakfast with yesterday. He thought that Rick Warren's purpose driven church model was popular among pastors and leaders, and to a lesser extent the book Purpose Driven Life, due to it being a mechanism of filling volunteer roles.
This in contrast to unleashing people to be who they are.
How do I know the post is not my selective reading of scripture?
I guess honesty and humility would say "I don't". What I believe now about what I believed years ago would say I was biased in my reading of scriptures that justified a kind of "elder board" that I know chalk up to imitating a corporate board of directors structure now.
But what I have observed about such other structures is that they put men (or men and women) between a disciple and God. Is that an invariable outcome of using such structures? I think over time, it kind of is. No matter the intention, it seems within a generation (if not much less) the result is to create a layer between God and the individual.
Galatians talks about the law bringing a person to maturity, then they become children of the estate. I think being under the authority (modern usage) as one is maturing into freedom may be necessary. But once maturity is achieved, there should be freedom to live as a child of the king. That's what i see in this model. We ingrain into a new disciple "Purpose and principle, clearly understood and articulated", then we let go.
After this ingraining, then their are a handful who are about equipping.
I see this model more in keeping with the idea of maturing and releasing. Look at a previous post about the mature in Christ being dissatisfied with church. I think that is because of the common model that tries to exercise control on behalf of God.
So, no, it still could be my unintentional selective reading combined by not hearing God directly properly on this. I seek God on how he wants to build his church. This is where I am on that search, and my latest set of intermediate conclusions.
Mark said: "I see this model more in keeping with the idea of maturing and releasing..."
Of course! Isn't that what we all hope to do with our kids? The saddest thing (or the most laughable, in our culture) is a 40+ year old guy still living with his mother ... he's never matured, and never been released.
Why don't our churches operate on the same principle, if we're the FAMILY of God? Young believers need training, need opportunities to grow, but in the end, the target should be RELEASE. How long must one be in the faith before one is qualified to lead others in a house church? 6 mos? 6 years? 16 years? Does one have to have a Th.D. to do this, for crying out loud?
We have lots of friends with large families -- the older kids help care for and teach the younger ones ... all with the goal of maturing and releasing. The older kids aren't meant to be a permanent layer between parents and younger children -- it's just helpful in the short term, but the REAL relationship that is LONG TERM is the parent/child one ... and even THAT is short-term, spiritually, in that my goal is to lead my kids to know Christ, and then get out of the way.
We call our kids "second stage rocket boosters" -- God helped my wife and I lift off of the ground, and now our kids are going into orbit ... their kids are going out of the solar system ... their kids will be in the next galaxy ...
Post a Comment