- The fragmentation of apostolic households have created uncertainty of love and partnership out there in the front lines,
- The call to multi-siting has replaced the bigger conversation as many churches have become imperialistic in their quest for multiplied branding [I do believe in multi-siting - but it is a reason why few folks are responding to the call to the nations]
- The international political uncertainty is not for the faint hearted. This so called 'Arab Spring' has toppled a number of secular Arab governments that have created social uncertainty for many,
- The economic downturn world wide has reduced funds for bigger stories. Churches and believers have cut back on giving on many fronts. Unfortunately, the call to the nations does bow to the need for new buildings and more staff,
- Many of the successful pastors are no longer relocating themselves. They are adopting more of a Petrine model of leadership - remaining in one church. The Pauline approach of establishing a beach head, then moving and doing it again, and again - is no longer a subject of primary conversation,
- Nationalism has crept up the ladder of emphasis among leaders. Here in America, I do agonize, the call to the nations rarely is heard,
- City transformation has captured the hearts of many. Of course that is a good thing. However Jesus simply did not give us an either... or - Jerusalem or the uttermost. He simply said and... and... and...
- Insufficient courageous leaders who are calling believers to a large God adventure but will then walk with them in their simple obedience,
- The missionary model keeps eliminating the call to foreign shores to the 'green beret' christians rather than seeing it as a mandate to all - businessmen and women, teachers, contractors, medical personnel....
Monday, March 5, 2012
Call to the Nations
Saturday, March 3, 2012
The first four years
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Summary of Movements by Tim Keller
With many friends looking to establish their own apo movements, I thought I would run this summary on movements by Tim Keller...
Summary of Tim Keller on Movements:
A movement is marked by an attractive, clear, unifying vision for the future together with a strong set of values or beliefs. The content of the vision must be compelling and clear so that others can grasp it readily. It must not be so esoteric or difficult that only a handful of people can articulate it. Instead, it must be something that all members of the movement can understand and pass along to others.
This unifying vision is so compelling that it takes pride of place. First, the vision leads to sacrificial commitment. Individuals put the vision ahead of their own interests and comfort. They are willing to work without high compensation, power, or perks. The satisfaction of realized goals is their main compensation. There is no more practical index of whether you have a movement or not. If the leader is making all the sacrifices, you don't.
Second, the vision leads to generous flexibility. In movements, however, the accomplishment of the vision is more important than power and position. So people are willing to make allies, be flexible, and cooperate with anyone sharing the basic vision and values.
Third, the vision leads to innovativeness. Movements are flatter because the commonly shared vision unifies and empowers. The vision is what matters - so anyone with a good idea about how to accomplish it is welcome to give it. Ideas flow out of the whole organization, top to bottom, which leads to greater creativity.
Finally, a movement is marked by spontaneous generativity. Spontaneous combustion means energy generated from within - a conflagration without the need for external ignition. A movement is able to generate its own resources, recruit its own new members and participants, and (especially) raise up its own new leaders. This does not mean that movements have no formal training programs. Rather, it means that first, the vision of the movement (especially as its content is disseminated) attracts people with leadership potential, and, secondly, that the work of the movement provides opportunities that reveal emerging leaders through real-life experience and then prepares them for the next level of leadership in the movement. Denominations or church networks that always have to recruit ministers and staff that were raised up in other environments, and that attract them mainly with good compensation, do not show signs of being a movement.
It is natural for new churches and ministries to try very hard to stay informal, non-codified, and non-centralized. But part of what makes a movement dynamic is a unified vision, and that always requires some codification and control. As time goes on, to maintain the main engine of movement-dynamics - a unified vision - a ministry must adopt some of the aspects of institutions. A strong movement, then, occupies the difficult space between being a free-wheeling organism and a disciplined organization.
A movement that refuses to take on some organizational characteristics - authority, tradition, unity of belief, and quality control - will fragment and dissipate. A movement that does not also resist the inevitable tendency toward complete institutionalization will lose its vitality and effectiveness as well. The job of the movement leader is to steer the ship safely between these two opposite perils.