Information or Incarnation?
Yesterday, I was at a gathering of leaders from our movement. We had a time of discussion with our facilitator (someone from outside our movement...HS are we a movement?). In that discussion, we explored some of the shifts in the church today. We had a brief discussion on the shift from informational church (i.e. preaching and pastoral authority) to incarnational church (missional based ministry where a free flow of discussion, cell based). There was a very strong reaction by a couple of people to that thought. There was some push back at the thought that their preaching may not be as important and their authority was not a great as they thought.
This is a great stretch for many of us in our movement. This is not to say that preaching and teaching are not necessary, but their importance may not be as great as we make them. In fact, most people at this gathering could not remember the top three sermons that impacted their lives.
This discussion followed a weekend experience that really caused me to think deeply about my ministry. Janet and I were teachers (Bible studies and preaching) at a retreat for our rehabilitation centers. I will tell you that the testimonies of changed lives and community helping in that process was touching to say the least.
The way these men shared in prayer, support of each other and in encouraging the Body, was unbelievably touching. Their leaders were there. You could tell that these leaders were incarnational. They live, eat and work in the midst of these men looking for changed lives and model Christ while doing it.
I think we are very comfortable in our movement with informational leadership. Informational leadership is tough to challenge. Informational leadership leaves very little room for debate. It is also very easy to not be vulnerable or transparent.
Incarnational ministry calls for us to be open. It shows us as we are. It is open to sharing flaws and its short-comings. It longs to journey with its members. It admits freely, it does not have all the answers. It lives among and not away from the people. It encourages mission and experience and is less concerned with head knowledge then with hearts that embrace their theology and Christ.
I believe our early roots were incarnational. Now, I believe that we are more informational.
This short post seeks to ask a question or two. So are we more an informational movement or incarnational? Is it better to be informational or incarnational? Is it better to have a mixture of both?
So with all my posts I ask you, what do you think?
This is a great stretch for many of us in our movement. This is not to say that preaching and teaching are not necessary, but their importance may not be as great as we make them. In fact, most people at this gathering could not remember the top three sermons that impacted their lives.
This discussion followed a weekend experience that really caused me to think deeply about my ministry. Janet and I were teachers (Bible studies and preaching) at a retreat for our rehabilitation centers. I will tell you that the testimonies of changed lives and community helping in that process was touching to say the least.
The way these men shared in prayer, support of each other and in encouraging the Body, was unbelievably touching. Their leaders were there. You could tell that these leaders were incarnational. They live, eat and work in the midst of these men looking for changed lives and model Christ while doing it.
I think we are very comfortable in our movement with informational leadership. Informational leadership is tough to challenge. Informational leadership leaves very little room for debate. It is also very easy to not be vulnerable or transparent.
Incarnational ministry calls for us to be open. It shows us as we are. It is open to sharing flaws and its short-comings. It longs to journey with its members. It admits freely, it does not have all the answers. It lives among and not away from the people. It encourages mission and experience and is less concerned with head knowledge then with hearts that embrace their theology and Christ.
I believe our early roots were incarnational. Now, I believe that we are more informational.
This short post seeks to ask a question or two. So are we more an informational movement or incarnational? Is it better to be informational or incarnational? Is it better to have a mixture of both?
So with all my posts I ask you, what do you think?
posted by Larry at 7:27 PM
7 Comments:
I wonder if we are less incarnational in the years since we 'moved out of the neighborhood?' That's how John describes what Jesus did - moved into the neighborhood. As for the sermon question, we're free for some give and take during the sermon time - more of a conversation than a speech, and that seems to help.
While I understand what Gene was saying, somehow the informational - incarnational paradigm doesn't seem to be totally opposite tensions. It would also seem that William and Catherine were inspirational sermon-givers - and you better be ready for a long one. And definitely lots of authority issues in those early days. So I'm not sure that we were incarnational at the start organizationally as you're defining it , although there have been many throughout the SA history who have lived in such a way.
And, to your first question, if we define ourselves as a movement, does that mean that our primary action is to move? (and I don't mean farewells)
For me, and like so many other questions facing the church these days, the question really comes down to, "Whose idea was it?" If it's God's idea, then keep it. If it was man's idea, and it's no longer working, move on. Why is this so freaking difficult?
Many will argue that "preaching" is God's idea but, in truth, preaching was just one of the many cultural methods that God has used to deliver the gospel. Nowhere are we given an outline for the Sunday service. We're only told that, as Christians, we should be worshipping, fellowshipping, growing in our faith (which we generally translate to mean "discipleship"), and loving and serving others. Mind you very few of us are serving others, very few of our Sundays services provide for much fellowship at all, and, let's be honest, our church has fallen face down in the mud when it comes to discipleship. I'd also argue that our worship leaves quite a bit to be desired, no matter what your view is of worship. So what are we left with?
We've talked about it for years Larry. We've sensitively tried to bring it up and address it with those who would disagree yet also don't seem to mind that our church is dying. So what do we do?
Larry, sometimes I get really excited when I read your blog. This is one of those times. To answer your question, I think we are best to keep both information and incarnation, but probably have been a little informational heavy and lite on the incarnational at times (including myself in there).
I like what Tim said about us not being given an outline for the Sunday service. It makes me think God trusts us. He equips us with the vitals in His word and then leaves it up to us - through His Spirit - to creatively work out the future! That is exciting stuff. :)
To quote Natasha Bedingfield, "the rest is still unwritten". That gives me hope as I "journey" on with fellow ardent worshippers like you, Tim and JoAnn.
Incarnational leading draws me to the gospel of John, Jesus our creator "moving into the neighborhood to live among us". It is one of the most inspiring sections of John, most motivational, most convicting. Everything within Jesus' ministry points back to this verse within the Logos hymn - transformation, redemption, forgiveness, restoration was all called into play because of this. Christ came with the plan of redemption, and this plan was ignited because He lived among us.
Christ's commission to His disciples before leaving this earth was not, "Wait for the Holy Spirit and then go and make sacred vocational professions." Jesus stated clearly, "Wait for the Holy Spirit and then make disciples."
We need information to do all we need to do, and to be efficient, but an informational emphasis saps the strength, power and vibrancy the Holy Spirit brings to worship. The Holy Spirit invigorates PERSONAL CONNECTION and brings God's divine power to the connection that is made.
There is a giant difference that has been made with my own ministry which has me living less than 1 minute drive away from my corps and less than an 8 minute drive away from 90% of our congregation. There is a closer connection with these people we are privileged to be with than with anywhere else I have ever served.
Incarnational living and worship is not automatic or simple.
And its messier.
And its more dangerous.
And its convicting to how important it is to live within a community - to be near, to encounter with authenticty to depth of circumstances.
(And has unforeseen benefits. I know more parole officers in town because they are regularly around my corps.)
Incarnational is what Jesus represents and calls us to.
You're right, remember three sermons that impacted your life...not as easily done as naming three people who impacted your life.
I regret I was not able to be at these meetings, JoAnn showed me the outline (and her well constructed notes) and his "information" sounded very exciting and invigorating.
jessie,
the dialogue and challenge of the day were what were stimulating..the whole idea of fresh vision and change excited me.
tim,
you know i am with you...discipleship in its many forms takes one main thing...relationship that is built on trust. it is not dogma that informs which is important. it is lovingly journeying that is the most important thing.
phil...i wonder, as a guy who is known as a "worship leader" how does this style of incarnation resonate with you. i know it does. i am just not sure how it all works for you..knowing your heart...i know you desire relationship..like to hear more..
joann,
you are right in your observation about sermonizing and the booths...it was, at that point though, more culturally relevant in their time. they did live among their people. i think therein lies the difference..you know how far i live from the closest corps...it is a very long way.
To answer your question, Larry, the hardest and most rewarding thing for me as a "worship leader" is making sure my incarnation (life I'm living) matches my information (lyrics I'm singing). I know this is true for all of us, but the information part hits me on so many levels (songwriting, biblical study, worship team practice planning, singing, etc.) that I'm that much more aware of the need to live it.
As a practical example, singing "Take My Life and Let It Be" on Sunday morning is good, but "take my silver and my gold" really hits home for me at about 10:30 Monday morning - do I really need that large iced coffee with extra cream and extra sugar? Or maybe I could go without and use that money instead to help buy clean water for someone halfway round the world.
Relationally, I'm really put to the test when I am met with someone I really have no natural inclination to spend time with. It is then that I think to myself, "Do I really want to be 'more like Thee'?"
Great comments above . . .
I feel that the flow from the top (THQ to DHQ to Corps) down is merely informational. “Here’s the information . . . now do it.”
For me, “making disciples” should be at the top of our list. I think that discipleship requires both information and incarnation. Another way to say it is ‘living out and demonstrating the example we are teaching others to follow.’ People need a model to follow . . . and we follow Christ.
As far as trying to remember three sermons . . . this may be the wrong question. But rather, what impact has the preaching/teaching had on a congregation over the course of time?
I have seen much fruit in this area. Even though people can’t remember my sermons, they act different, think different, and their priorities change over time.
It’s about transformation and not so much about ‘conversion.’ A community will be transformed by its people.
Blessings,
Bret
Post a Comment
<< Home