It Takes A Church...

A Child is Born

And the rafters of toil are still gilded
With the dawn of the stars of the heart,
And the wise men draw near in the twilight,
Who are weary of learning their art,
And the face of the tyrant is darkened,
His Spirit is torn,
For a new king is enthroned; yea the sternest
A child is born.

And the mother still joys for the whispered
First stir of unspeakable things,
Still feels that high moment unfurling
Red glory of Gabriel's wings.
Still the babe of an hour is a master
Whom angels adorn
Emmanuel, prophet, anointed,
A child is born.

G. K. Chesterton

Homeless and at Home

A child in a foul stable,
where the beasts feed and foam;
Only where he was homeless
Are you and I at home;
We have hands that fashion and heads that know,
But our hearts we lost--how long ago!
In a place no chart nor ship can show
Under the sky's dome.

This world is wild as an old wive's tale,
And strange the plain things are,
The earth is enough and the air is enough
For our wonder or our war;
But our rest is as far as the fire-drake swings
And our peace is put in impossible things
Where clashed and thundered unthinkable wings
Round an incredible star.

To an open house in the evening
Home shall men come,
To an older place than Eden,
And a taller town than Rome.
To the end of the way of the wandering star,
To the things that cannot be and that are,
To the place where God was homeless
And all men are at home.

G.K. Chesterton   

Christmas Eve

O How Great that Manger was

O how great that manger was
To confine all of infinity
O how great that baby’s skin
to encompass all divinity

O how clean that soiled wood!
O how pure that human flesh!
For there we find the Trinity
(Omnipotence brought near for thee.)

Tod Bolsinger

A Pause on Starfish Ponderings...for...Christmas' Serious Frivolity

I'll return to my recurring, but utterly inconsistent postings on Starfish and Leadership after Christmas.  I don't know if I'll stay away from posting on it all Twelve Days, but I should...

So, here's my post for this day from GK.

People are losing the power to enjoy Christmas through identifying it with enjoyment.  When once they lose sight of the old suggestion that it is all about something, they naturally fall into blank pauses of wondering what it is all about. To be told to rejoice on Christmas Day is reasonable and intelligible, if you understand the name, or even look at the word. To be told to rejoice on the 25th of December is like being told to rejoice at quarter-past eleven on Thursday week. You cannot suddenly be frivolous unless you believe there is a serious reason for being frivolous.

 G.K. Chesterton.  From Advent and Christmas Wisdom from G.K. Chesterton.

Starfish and the Spider #9: Hybrid Fuel for a Missional Journey

I drive a Prius.  I also drive a big 4WD GMC Yukon.  I always joke that one car is for preserving the environment; the other car is for enjoying the environment.  And I choose which car I am going to drive depending on…the environment.  That is the particular type of environment that I am going to be driving in. 

Most of the time, driving the Southern California freeways or shuttling to and fro the church office or meetings, my hybrid-fuel Prius is exactly the car I need.  But when we are carpooling a crowd, taking our teen and pre-teen kids and the two dogs on a road trip, or especially when we head off for skiing in the Sierras, it’s pretty nice to have a big four-wheel drive.  Again, two different cars for two different uses, but for one family with one overall goal to be good stewards of both our family life and God’s good earth.

But this really is just an illustration of a larger point that I want to make about The Hybrid Combo Organizational Structure of The Starfish and the Spider. 

Very often, I am asked about the values of a more decentralized organizational structure.  Why is it necessary?  Is it just trendy?  And really what does it accomplish? 

Decentralization is not a goal, it’s a strategy.  Effective missional communities of faith that reveal the Kingdom of heaven in a particular community is the goal.  (What we call at SCPC being “A Community for the community.”)  “Hybrid combo” structure where there is centralization around the things that need to be protected and passed on (like values, theology, resources and assets) and decentralization around specific expression of ministry, allows churches and other non-profit organizations to have a variety of ministries to match the different needs in a community.  Decentralization, done well, and held together through specific, clear, shared values allows a much greater variety of expression of ministry with greater diversity and creativity.   When the terrain calls for a big, slow 4WD SUV, you can use it.  When not, you can use a Prius.  The terrain, environment, culture or “missional context” determines what strategy you use, not the “vehicles” that you are most comfortable driving.

Let me use another “fuel” illustration to clarify my point.  In one of my favorite passages in Brian McClaren’s book A New Kind of Christian, Neo writes to a seminarian who wonders how churches that were formed and successful during the heyday of modernity are going to be able to change and adapt in a post-modern world. Neo uses the illustration of gasoline stations that had to offer both “leaded” and “unleaded” fuel back in the days when some cars still ran on leaded and the change hadn’t been entirely made to unleaded. Until there all the cars made the transition to the new fuel, stations had to offer both.

For the past few years, since reading that passage, that is the way that I have seen the work of bringing renewal in mainline congregations.  As long as we have “leaded” folk whose faith and faithfulness is “fueled” by more “attractional”, “programmatic”, and church-campus focused ministries, we’ll  offer them.  But as we seek to reach out to more unchurched “unleaded” people, we’ll have to find other “fuels” to ignite and empower their faith journey.  A church that only offers "leaded fuel" will soon run out of people to energize.  A new church can determine with "fuel" to offer based on its missional intent and environment. But a church that is trying to bring renewal within an existing church structure (like my own denomination), will need to offer a variety of fuels. (Something that is even more dramatized by the rise of all kinds of “alternative fuels”, is it not?  What a great metaphor of the varieties of spiritual experiences that are out there today.)

So, for example.  As a church we have wanted to have a more "missional Advent and Christmas season."  We have offered our congregation a number of ways to express their faith in service and generosity.  Have highlighted The Advent Conspiracy and encouraged families to refocus on simplicity, giving and service.  

In the past two weeks we offered two distinctly different Christmas “outreach” events.  One was a pretty traditional, “leaded”, Christmas concert.  Choir, orchestra, carols, a message.  It was beautiful, and our people sang their hearts out.  Over 1000 people came out for it.  Mostly older folks, many with tears in their eyes as they heard the old carols sung by a choir.  Some families, mostly there to hear their children sing.

But the second event, while still focused on outreach, was pretty different.  Our English-speaking congregation, partnered with our new Hispanic Congregation and offered a “Christmas Festival” in a local neighborhood park.  Santa, music, crafts, bounce house, face painting, a woman in our church just showed up and offered caricature drawings.  We made 1000 tamales.  Everything was free.  Just a big free Christmas party in a mostly Hispanic neighborhood park.  500 people took part.  (Which we thought was pretty amazing for the first time doing this.)  A lot of church members did both events.  But do you know who was front and center involved in this event?  Many of our young families, young adults, and teenagers… with our Hispanic congregation in the lead.  In other words, a lot of people who wouldn’t come out for a concert were “fueled” by a service project.  (And the attendance at our Hispanic service went up by 30% the following Sunday.)

As we move forward with a missional vision, attempting to shape a church out of the "environment" where the mission is launched (to use Michael Frost's description), we will need many different strategies, many different circles of relationships, many new experiments and endeavors if the Mission of the Kingdom is going to be the “central organizing principle” of our church.  At the same time we are going to need to continue to protect our shared values, faith and Kingdom commitment so as not to become competing factions.

What is so encouraging to me is that whether it was a group of senior citizens inviting their neighbors to hear some good Christmas music at the church, or a small group of teenagers serving in a park, their faith was “fueled” by very different experiences, but they were oddly enough heading in the same direction. 

Starfish and the Spider #8: Moonlighting and The Hybrid Combo.

With the economy being the way it is this year, our family savings taking a big hit and a growing concern that we could be in this for awhile, I decided that instead of simply plopping more debt on the credit cards this Christmas, I would undertake a very simple new business endeavor, a little Christmas “moonlighting” as it were: I am selling some of my barely read books.  In the past two weeks, I have been able to make enough cash to help our family buy some of our Christmas gifts and have been pleasantly surprised at how easy it has been.  Now, did I take a few boxes down to the local used bookstore?  Did I advertise in the paper and run my own “Garage Sale” type book sale?  No.  I am selling them through Amazon Marketplace, the E-bay-inspired “peer to peer” sales program that is both safe and easy. 

Notice: I said “safe” (both for me as the seller and my customers) even before "easy". 

Amazon and Ebay are two of the classic “Hybrid Combo” examples that Brafman and Beckstrom use in the Starfish and the Spider as the future of organizations.  The key to the combo is that no matter how “easy” it is and “fun” it is (not to mention far more affordable) to shop through a completely decentralized network (Like Craigslist), there are always going to be those who are wary of giving their financial information to complete strangers where there is no guarantee of security.

So, E-bay (a decentralized “Starfish”) bought PayPal (a secure “Spider”) and made a “combo” company that has now been copied by others like Amazon.  When I sell a book on Amazon Marketplace, I list it on the website, I wait for it to be sold, when it is I package it and send it.  Amazon collects the payment and then pays me every two weeks (minus a small commission). I never see a credit card number, I barely even interact with my customers and they with me.  They don’t even see my real name unless they go looking for it. 

I am part of the decentralized “Starfish”, Amazon provides the secure “Spider” for financial information and millions and millions of dollars and products pass from one person to another.

In an increasingly decentralized world with lots of potential for illegal mayhem, Security is the one item that must remain centralized.

(A personal illustration: Just two weeks ago, we had our credit card number stolen and someone in India tried to buy a really nice new global satellite telephone.  Thankfully, our credit card company noticed that the purchase was unusual and stopped it from going through, they have since given us a new credit card.)

What does this have to do with Starfish thinking in churches and other non-profit organizations?  It shows the beauty and necessity of thinking in terms of the “hybrid combo”.

While simple organizations, house churches, and “organic networks” can function entirely as “Starfish”, as soon as there are “assets” to secure (and not just financial!), there needs to be some kind of centralized system of security and accountability.  (What Richard Chait and his colleagues have deemed “fiduciary” responsibilities in the best book on non-profit governance that I have read, Governance as Leadership). 

By “fiduciary” matters, I don’t simply mean our money and our stuff (like property, equipment, pension accounts, insurances and the like), but everything that we must “faithfully” (that is the root word in “fiduciary) protect and pass on.  For a church that is also the theology, the traditions, the values and vision (what Jim Collins and Jerry Porras refers to as “what will never change”).  These are the “spider” concerns; the matters that require a “head” person or organization and they are matters of utmost trust that require utmost accountability and security. (As I told my Session, the governing board of our church: “If we fail to in our fiduciary responsibilities, we will lose our positions, our jobs, our ordination, and maybe even our freedoms.”)

But once those things are clearly secured in a centralized structure, then EVERYTHING else can and should be decentralized.  Once fiduciary matters are securely centralized then nothing else need be.

Nothing else?  Then how do we keep one “cell” from taking over the whole body in a “cancer-like” mutation?  How do we insure unity of purpose and principles?  How do we keep each decentralized circle working in a healthy network together?  What keeps everything from breaking down and breaking apart?

The answer is in what else gets “distributed” from the head: Not just power, authority and control, but also values, vision and mission.

What makes a Starfish different than a Spider, is that while a Spider has a head that controls the actions of the limbs, in a Starfish, every cell has within it the “organizing energy”, the “intelligence” or “brain” of the whole Starfish.  And the fundamental leadership task of a successful hybrid-combo organization is getting that “intelligence” into every cell.  Which is where I will pick up next post.

Flipping Presbyteries

Here is a snippet of presentation I made at the Los Ranchos Presbytery meeting framing up a different way of thinking about the kinds of meetings we have in "governing bodies".  This is part of the ongoing work of the LRP Odyssey Group.

Starfish and the Spider #7: Case Studies and A Case for the Hybrid

In a recent article featured in Leadership Journal, there is an interview with Neil Cole and Ed Young, Jr. about two different styles of mission and church organization.  In Starfish and Spider terms, you couldn’t get a better comparison and contrast:

Ed Young, Jr. with 20,000 worshippers in five different sites (in two different states) all projecting one of his sermons is the self-proclaimed: “Dude with the food”.  He is the pastor, the visionary and the chief influencer of the mega church.  For Young, this doesn’t mean as the Senior Pastor that he is all controlling, but in his own words: “I believe churches are led by leaders. I believe God gives one person the vision—the pastor. I don't believe a committee-led church can be as effective as a pastor-led church. That doesn't mean a pastor shouldn't be accountable to anyone. It's not a dictatorship, but there needs to be strong leadership.”  Young’s Fellowship Church is the consummate, successful “Spider”.  The worship service is the “port of entry” and his creative sermons are the central strategy for engaging the unchurched.  Young, Worship Services, a highly structured ministry and a “pastor-led” vision are the ingredients for a successful “Spider” ministry. 

Neil Cole, is a pastor and the director of Church Multiplication Associations, it has one and a half full-time employees and yet it is responsible for helping start hundreds of new churches around the country.  These small, “organic” churches are not necessarily gathered in worship centers, they are just as likely to be found in coffeehouses or in diners.  The central strategy for discipleship are Life-Transformation Groups that meet once a week for an hour of study, prayer and confession of sins to each other.  Each member covenants’ to read 30 chapters of scripture a week and they have the missional objective of leading another person to faith.  By the way, they don’t start “Coffeehouse ministries”, they go to existing coffeehouses and start building relationships.  Cole’s approach couldn’t be more “Starfish” if it had barnacles.

While Young’s strategy for starting a new ministry in a new city would be to send in a team, rent space and bring a video-feed sermon into a creative worship service aimed at unchurched people who would come, Cole’s strategy is to “infect” a local area with a Christian “virus” by putting in two praying people who would work as a partnership prayerfully seeking out networks of people where they could begin to build relationships.  Cole refers to Jesus’ sending of the disciples

Cole: “In Matthew 10 and Luke 10, Jesus sends his disciples out. He tells them to stay in one house, or oikos. The word really means a household; a social web of relationships. That's where they find the man of peace. When he comes to faith, rather than extracting him from his oikos and into a church, he is positioned to transform his original oikos. That transformed network becomes the church.” 

It would be hard to find a better definition of a “Starfish organization” than Cole’s:  Catalytic people build on pre-existing networks (coffeehouse clientele for example) to develop circles of shared (Christian) values.

This comparison is often referred to in “missional” speak as the difference between the “attractional” model (Young’s) and the “missional model” (Cole’s). (A distinction that I find quite imprecise: Didn’t Jesus ‘attract’ followers by doing mission?  Shouldn’t ‘mission’ ultimately seek to ‘attract’ people to the Kingdom?)  I want to suggest that the Starfish and Spider comparison is much more helpful.

First, true confession time:  I have been trained at and somewhat ‘successful’ in a model that is much closer to Young’s than Cole’s.  However, I am far more attracted to the more organic model that Cole suggests as closer to a strategy for reaching a rapidly changing, post-christendom world.  But ultimately,  I contend that neither model as they are purely put forth the is the best for helping the church in the West today move into the future. 

Secondly, the organic “missional” approach that Cole suggests has, to my limited perspective, yet to figure out what it will do with “success”.  What happens when a church develops “buildings and budgets” (let alone the “big shots” that he sagely warns stops all church multiplication)?  And what should the church do with the resources that we already have available to us?  (And what will we do with all these "consultants and coaches" that are now the new "stars" of the church instead of preachers?)

For another thing, while it is easy to denigrate the mega church movement as an attractional approach that is quickly closing out its ‘market share’ of “unchurched people” who are willing to go to a creative worship experience, in fact, there are some people who have the skill sets to keep this form of church going (especially in settings where Christendom is still the norm).  Spiders are big because they are successful in some areas in some standards.  (As one of my professors once said about criticisms aimed at Rick Warren and Saddleback church: “It’s pretty bad to say, ‘I don’t like the way they do evangelism better than I DON’T do evangelism’.”)

Perhaps most important to me personally, both of these models are for starting NEW churches, not renewing the Church of Jesus Christ around the world today.  Viewing the comparison of these two forms of church life in the grid of “Spider and Starfish” allow us to see both as two different strategies for furthering and initiating the mission of Christ.  But I contend that NEITHER of them, as they are, are applicable in most settings. 

As unlikely as most pastors, (including myself) are to be the kinds of “star” preacher who can build a huge following through creativity and personality that a successful spider-led church requires, equally unlikely are there many church leaders (including myself) who have the entrepreneurial, relational skills to build discipleship circles out of thin air very naturally. 

In short, the genius and giftedness of both an Ed Young, Jr. and a Neil Cole point to why they are such effective leaders themselves, but why neither of them can be the model itself (and to be sure, one of the most encouraging parts of the interview is how neither of them put themselves up to be so).

While all are called to make disciples, it takes a community to do it best.  The church is usually built through communities of people with lots of different skills, abilities and giftedness all working together in as many modes as possible.  We need lots of one on one conversations as well as evangelistic messages like on Mars Hill.  We need to see both the disciples in the marketplaces and in the temples furthering the Kingdom.   We need both “apostles” like Neil Cole and his compatriots and “Pastor-teachers” like Ed Young.  (And every other gift in those famous lists from Ephesians 4:11-12, and Romans 12:3-8.)

Instead building upon the “hybrid-combo” idea of centralizing what needs to be protected and passed on (theology, values, ideology, resources—not personalities, by the way) and decentralizing strategy and tactics to fit different settings allows the church not only to develop new church plants, but to renew and reinvent current churches. 

The best comment on the story, for me didn’t come in the article itself but from Rick at Blind Beggar who tipped me off to it. 

I wonder how much more of an impact Young’s “church” would have if they split into 200 one hundred member local neighborhood faith communities? Of course they can’t do this (I’m conjecturing here) because they don’t have 200 mature pastoral leaders (indictment of the model) and many of the people wouldn’t stand for it because they like/want to be consumers, not disciples (an indictment of the average American believer and the model).

As Rick’s indictments point out: the key for any church to move into a more missional frame is both the development of more--and more mature--pastoral leaders (whether laity or clergy), as well as a clear cultural shift in the church away from a consumeristic frame to a discipleship frame. 

And again, the “hybrid-combo” approach offers us a way to do both.  Which is where we’ll pick up next post.