| |
I firmly believe
truth is in the narrative; all stories have meaning, function and
direction. All stories, no matter the style, share truth with us.
An example of this is found in the fact that nowhere in scripture
does God tell us "you must have one wife." Yet, an interesting fact
comes to light when we read the stories of the Old Testament leaders;
whenever they have more then one wife, or a wife and a concubine,
trouble comes. No matter who they are, no matter their place in
God's plan, having more then one wife causes trouble. So, on one
hand, a person could say, "you can have more then one wife, because
scripture does not forbid it." Yet, on the other hand, one could
say, "having more then one wife will cause trouble - on many levels."
When I got my mind around it, it came to me - it is the difference
between "modern vision" and "postmodern vision."
MODERN VISION
Vision is based
on one set of plans and goals, with limited flexibility and quantitative
measurements designed to insure that we are "the best stewards of
God's resources" (usually meaning the money they give to the church).
One person, usually the Senior Pastor, declares - "I have a vision"
and everyone else follows the vision for the church. Vision by planned
goals and objectives usually has a five to ten-year plan that must
be followed. All decisions are based on meeting the goals; even
when the ability to deviate from the plan is included in the plan,
deviations seldom, if ever, occur. This system does not take into
account that there can never be enough available information to
make a "right decision." If the "right decision" is based on meeting
future goals, you automatically limit the possibilities because
the decision is based on a desired outcome, and not what is currently
happening. Since Vision by Plan is motivated by meeting goals based
on an uncertain future, we must admit that it is impossible to meet
the plan because we are moving toward an uncertain future. There are several
problems with this concept, zero flexibility,and failure is blamed on
one person (usually the Pastor, after all it is his vision, and
never the Board --- I call this "failure motivation). The outcome
is usually measured with hard numbers and not human involvement. We can see this
system as a "macro-planning" system, but we need to understand that
long range planning (macro-planning) is dead [1].
POSTMODERN VISION
Vision by Narrative,
vision on the story, is very different form Vision by Plan. First,
it is highly collective in nature and function --- vision is not based
on the desires of one person, but that one person's understanding
of the collective vision of the community. But, it is not "vision
via committee;" it speaks to all because it is collective, coming
from all --- the leader needs to be "empathic" at a core level, and
listen to the hearts of the people. While Vision by Plan is based
on a limited understanding of distorted facts, Vision by Narrative
is based on a spiritual connection. The narrative of the vision
is not a concrete plan based on committee and subcommittee, with
plans and rules designed to get us to a place we may not desire
to be. Because of it's collective nature, it changes on a regular
basis - it "goes with the flow" if you will. A community of faith
may believe that God is leading them to a particular ministry setting,
and over time that setting might change. For example, a local neighborhood
Italian Food Store, noticing a change in the neighborhood, starts
to add other items to meet the changing needs of the new people
in the area. If they had been driven by a Vision by Plan method,
they may have closed the doors a long time ago --- because decisions
would have been based on being a "great Italian food store." It
is not failure motivated (one person getting the blame). Because
it is a collective endeavor where people strive to accomplish the
results, the results of the narrative, there is not "one person" to blame.
When we see the narrative is to share the gospel, we can repeat
the story --- we can even add to the story. The bottom line is
this, we share the gospel. Our vision narrative is to share the
gospel, with everyone we know and meet, not just the select few
we believe fit the image of our church, or the numbers of our goals.
DEFINING A PEOPLE
The narrative
helps define who we are and what we do - it is a core part of our
DNA. No matter the story, no matter the ending, truth is in the
narrative. All story is valid, all story, both individual and
group,
can add to the collective of the community. When we see life as
simply a collection of story, we start to understand both our humanity
and God's divinity. The narrative allows for creative, adaptable,
nonlinear thinking with group input and an interactivity based on
transparency and a living worldview. The narrative is, if you will,
a new operating system for the church in the new millennium. It
is both virtual and non-virtual, and it leads us to the future revitalizing
the church.
Some may view
this style of vision development as "vision by chaos," and they
would be right. But out of chaos, God creates order. The problem
is, out of order humanity creates a repressive system based on rules
designed to control, and not motivate. Vision by Narrative seeks
to find the fun side of life, to be crazy, be creative, find the humor.
Vision based on narrative pumps life into the organization, fresh
ideas, current trends, it keeps the life blood red and flowing.
It is the oxygen that fuels the burn in faith. Change, if you will,
is in the air. While Vision by Narrative defines this generation,
it is not the operating system of the Institutional Church [2].
The Institutional Church still operates on the Vision by Plan method,
and does not find value in the Vision by Narrative method-- because
they lose power and control.
THE PROBLEM
The Institutional
Church has become it's own best listener. They have made excuses
for their failures based on the success of others - the old, "blame
the victim" model of management. They develop ways of seeing their
individual Vision by Plan as being effected by outside sources.
I can remember being in meeting with other ministers, when I served
in the United Methodist Church, when the conversation turned to
the then growing "seeker movement" would say, "the only reason these
churches are growing is because they water down the message." They
would all agree, and then they would start saying how "bad" the
seeker model was for Christians. I found it interesting, that a
church that spoke about being inclusive and universal was quick
to condemn a church movement that was working in powerful ways.
That is one of the problems of the current Institutional Church;
they claim inclusiveness while condemning those who think differently.
Another problem-- it's a business.
The Institutional
Church has become interested in only one thing, money. If that
was not the case, it would not be so central to their Vision Plan.
The Presbytery Church, USA actually lists churches based on the
amount of money they give in offering each week [3].
When you check out the stats of any of their churches on the internet
you will be given stats on church growth, growth as it relates to
an offering, average offering given, breakdown of offering to age,
and the history of giving. I remember emailing them about a year
ago asking questions on the average age of their congregations.
I was told that it was impossible to get that information based
on individual congregations. Yet, I could get the giving based on
the age of the people in the congregation, it's all money.
The Institutional
Church is seen as a faceless corporation with limited compassion
where profit is central, no matter what. A good example of this
can be found in their lending money to individual churches for building
projects. Each Institutional Church has a "Loan Program" where Vision
by Plan is central. It is here where you can see Vision by Plan
is action, the Institution changes interest on loans made to congregations
where the Institution actually owns the land and the building. All
this, given the express forbidding of charging another believer
interest on a loan [4] of any kind (in fact,
the Prophets expressly forbid charging interest as a heinous sin
[5]). It is also interesting that the Institution
owns the building and land, meaning THEY benefit from the increased
value of the property after the improvements, and from the interest
that must be paid from the local congregation. This whole reality
is a "twist" in finding truth in the narrative, and shows the corporate
desires of the Institution.
Most Institutional
Churches claim they need to charge interest because they are "simply
being good stewards of the money entrusted to them from God." But
why would God violate is own teachings of no changing interest to
another believer because of stewardship? They also claim that in
two parables [6] (very cool stories) Jesus
taught that charging interest is all right. This is proof of taking
the facts (decisions) and trying to make them fit the goals of the
organization. These stories have nothing to do with "charging interest"
they are designed to teach us other lessons. One, the King's ten
servants teaches us that God has given each and everyone of us gifts
we need to share with others; while the other, concerning the Talents,
is to teach us not to hide our faith, but to express it and share
it with others - the talents are people and when we express our
faith, the kingdom of God grows. It is totally outside the Truth
of the Narrative to express these stories as allowing charging interest,
given the clear expressions of forbidding such a practice - it is
profit over prophets.
THE SOLUTION
So, how do we
move from a "Vision by Plan" to a "Vision by Narrative" way of operating?
I believe the answer is simple, we need to look deeply at who we
are, what we say, how we say it and what we truly mean by it all,
making sure they all match. We need to change the operating system
of the church to allow people to express themselves in opening and
dynamic ways. We need to remove any and all traces of the Institution
from our view. The Institutional Church needs to redefine themselves
to being more of an advisory board, then a controlling organization.
I believe this can happen if we do the following [7]:
Be Creative--
lose control, relax and allow people to develop their artist side.
Churches could sponsor Art Shows and allow their members to show
their art. Churches could publish a book on the writings of it's
members, - essays, poetry, theology whatever they desire. Why not
help a few members develop their music talent? Help with studio
time by picking up the tab.
Think Nonlinear--
Get out of the box and start looking at life deeper and wider. Develop
a peripheral view of life. Become bendable and flexible; seek the
possibilities and not the problems. Allow people to see what they
can do, and not what they cannot do.
Be Adaptable--
Uncertainly rules get ready for the ride of your life. Be ready
to work with accidents and not against them.
Group it
Up-- Get connected into "groupthink" and be p2p. Develop a community
website where members can have a page or two. Develop an "e-list"
of e-dresses to help people keep connected. Sponsor chat rooms and
message boards for people to express themselves and open discussion.
Become tribal, and welcome different people.
Have a Worldview--
Get cultural, and stop limiting the vision based looks.
Become an
"Acts" church-- welcoming people of different languages and
cultures, and learning form them. We need to stop telling those
outside the church to "come on in" and meet us and start looking
at those inside the church and tell them to "go out" and meet the
people.
Be Transparent--
Be ready to express your humanity and accept your flaws. We are
a people who desire to "become" and not live in "one is." We desire
growth and learning, not dogma and doctrine. Transparence means
that there are no secretes in the Postmodern world.
THE CHALLENGE
The challenge
facing us today is "change." We need to remember, everything changes--
everything changes. If it is alive, that change is called "growth;"
if it is dead, that change is called "decay." What I find interesting
about this is, that when something is decaying it first gives the
impression of growth, we can be misled. Since everything changes--
always and everything-- I am amazed at the reaction people have
concerning change in the church. None of us live the way we did
100 years ago, 50 years ago, 25 years ago, 10 years ago, 5 years
ago so why do we expect the church to remain the same? Most do not,
and because the church refuses to change we left, and found faith
in other non-traditional churches and communities of faith. We have
allowed change in every sector of our lives, except the church.
We need to change and change fast. Keep in mind, I am not suggesting
incremental change, I am suggesting exponential change - we do not
need to make small changes designed to give the impression we care.
We need to flat out get off the stick and shake, rattle and roll.
Exponential
change is the upgrade. If you and your church truly desire to reach
a new generation for Christ, you will need to look deep into who
you are and what you are doing. Seek change where change is needed,
and do not sweep anything under the rug. It is now time to get past
the debates of "Are we truly in a postmodern age?" (yes we are)
"Is change really needed" (yes it is) "Do we really need dramatic
change" (yes we do). Len Sweet says it best, "Deal with it, get
over it, or get help [8]."
Notes:
[1] Henry Mintzberg, The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning,
(Free Press 1994)
[2] The Institutional Church is defined as, all Denominational Churches
and Independent Churches who maintain a limited world view.
[3] Go to www.pcusa.org and look
up the stats on individual churches
[4] Exodus 22:25
[5] Ezekiel 18:8,13,17 and Jeremiah 15:10
[6] The parable of the King's Ten Servants (Luke 19:23) and the
talents (Matthew 25:27)
[7] Over time, my desire is to develop each of these areas and place
them collectively into a book entitled Church 3.0, The Upgrade
- redesigning the operating system to minister to a new world.
God willing, and finding a Publisher, this will happen.
[8] Len Sweet, SoulTsumni, (Zondervan 1999), p51-53
|