Complementarian or Egalitarian?

It's hard to talk about this subject without everyone agreeing on the definition of each word. For example, the words "head," "authority" and "submission." These three words can get bandied about and change definition from person to person.

So for "head," I see the man as the "head of the line" in his family, not like the head on top of the neck (reference "My Big, Fat Greek Wedding"). He leads the way, but not because he is better, or smarter, or anything-er. He and his wife are in fact both foot soldiers of equal rank and the general is the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ has put one of His foot soldiers at the front of the line. In fact, the smart man has his wife right next to him, not stuck behind him, as they go along the way. In a healthy marriage, in my opinion, there is no need for the man to pull rank (since he has none), or to demand that he get the heavier vote when there is a dispute (as submission is so often described to me). In a healthy marriage, both foot soldiers inquire of the general when there is a dispute and wait until both agree they've heard Him "rightly."

For "authority," I see Jesus carefully pointing out that arguing about who gets to be at the top of the pyramid really doesn't "get" what being in Him is all about. We all of us would actually be already "eldering" each other and not really concerning ourselves at all with who is eldering more, who has been noticed as an elder, or anything like that. As to making decisions for a group...whatever way we believers do this, it really is not to look like the way the pagans do it; that's what the Lord Jesus told His disciples. But we've adopted the way of the pagans anyway, some lording it over others, creating these man-made authority structures.

People gravitate towards those who have a natural authority in them. We've all met people like this, who are good at leading, building up the group, drawing out the best in everyone, making being a group together something bigger than the sum of its parts; someone who people enjoy following. A leader of leaders is the same way, though that kind of leading is different than a leading a group of followers. Getting a diploma, having hands laid on, neither of these things make a person a leader. People naturally follow real leaders, and the love it. That's organic "authority," as to mechanical authority which is contained in a role that can be filled by anyone (whether well, or poorly)

In the microcosm of a family, the natural leader may very well be the woman. If she is worth her weight, she will bring out the best in her husband, and build him up in faith, and help in every way she can to reach his full potential. And if he is a wise man, he wil recognize her strengths and celebrate them. I think that's what David saw in Abigail. I think that's what the writer of Proverbs 31 saw in his wife (I know, I know, Solomon. But perhaps he collected these sayings, and remembered many of them from his own father). Perhaps that's what Lappidoth saw in Deborah, and Aquilla saw in Priscilla, and Andronicus saw in Junia. I think it takes a powerful man who is settled in who he is to be able to do that.

As to submission, this word has often been used as a club (as in heavy item with spikes on one end to pound down the impertinent) in my hearing. Sometimes heavy handedly, and sometimes ever so gently. But still.

All the effervescence, joy and sheer thrill of living by faith and love is gutted from this word when it becomes a legal transaction. I don't think this word means the wife has to "give in" to the husband's decisions. The way it's taught, even if the wife is the one who is educated in an area, has experience there, has connections, or ability or domain in a particular are, it's her husband who lands the decisions, and she must "submit" to what he wants. But he's the man, you see. he's the head. He has authority. So she, with all her experience and education, is shut down. She has to "submit."

This kind of "submit" is bereft of all the beauty I see elsewhere in the description of living by faith, abiding in Christ, Philippians 1 and 2 and so on. The church has done a real disservice to this otherwise intelligent and God-fearing woman and her husband. How much better for them to explore this idea one step at a time, asking God to show them each next thing to do, and wait for His response.

Submission is mutual in a marriage. One to another, Philippians style. If a husband and wife are in every way seeking to build each other up in the Lord, helping each other, and together looking to Christ as their mutual Head...this is what I think best illustrates the living parable that marriage is. What Jesus did for His church was set aside all the privileges and dignity of His glory, became a servant and lay down His life, for He loves the church so much. Husband lays down his life. What the church does in response is to become vulnerable to Christ, setting aside all ego to belong entirely to Him because she can trust Him. Wife does that. Neither one "stands on their rights," but rather sets all that aside to be one with each other, serving each other. If this dynamic were always in play, there would never need to be an argument about who gets to make the decisions, pull rank, be the boss, "submit" to the club and so on.

So in the whole complementarian / egalitarian thing, the questions of authority and submission, and who can hold office and so on revolves around this man-made structure of roles in the church. The reason why Phoebe is an outlier is right there in many translations of the Bible, notably the NIV, where she is not acknowledged as a deacon, but as a servant. Stephen is a deacon because men can hold the man-made role of "deacon" in today's church structure; but since women can't in several denominations, Phoebe can not be a "deacon."

Junia can't be a woman if Paul is talking about apostles because women "can't" be apostles. Therefore Paul (or somebody) made a typo and it's "Junias," or "Junia" was simply highly regarded among the apostles.

Lydia is an outlier if she was one of the leaders of the church who met in her home.

I've had my emotional upheavals, trying to come to grips with the teaching (today teaching) on these passages. It's a relief to know that there are strengths and weaknesses in both the complementarian and egalitarian approaches, and probably, as with many things, the truth is somehwere in the middle!

If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation

"The Rabbit and the Elephant"

..."Why Small Is the New Big for Today's Church"

Tony and Felicity Dale start their book with this signature story from its title -- the difference between rabbits and elephants. I don't want to spoil the story for you, so suffice it to say, in their words, "Something that is large and complex is hard to reproduce. Something that is small and simple multiplies easily."

The whole rest of their book is filled with the same kind of refreshingly simple and sound wisdom, astute observation and sensitivity to what God is doing among the church today.

The real movement of simple church didn't actually begin with us in the west. Many of us know it started in the east, in China, spread to Korea and is also growing south of us in Southern America. Simple churches are springing up in Greece, in Africa, in eastern Europe (where newly built churches buildings are being torn down under all kinds of pretexts), and even in some Muslim countries. How can God multiply the church in countries that are actively, and increasingly, hostile to Christianity?

And just as importantly, in our own country, where sentiment towards traditional Christianity is changing from warm acceptance to open and active dislike, how can God revive His church here?

By bringing the center of attention onto His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who has managed to keep a good reputation among nonbelievers.

By bypassing the institution of church, which has lost its reputation with the general public.

By putting the gospel, worship, fellowship, and mission back into the hands of the people.

There are many excellent themes running through this book, including:
* The vital importance of Ephesians 4 unity among all believers,
* The beauty of simplicity,
* The importance of following God's lead,
* The critical necessity of prayer first and last,
* The supremacy of God's word, living and active,
* And trusting in what God is doing

Here's what's going to happen, though.

For one thing, non-charismatics may curl up into defense position because the Dales are clearly charismatic. I can tell you as someone who has never operated in any of the "sign gifts," and who could not be properly termed a charismatic, I found the Dales' approach to be completely scriptural, solid and seasoned with salt. In fact, they several times, throughout the book, reassured the reader that you do not have to be charismatic to be involved with what God is doing in the "micro-church movement."

In fact, I had to agree with them when they said, on page 82, "In our experience, God seems to be blurring the distinctions more and more between charismatic and non charismatic believers." That would describe me and all the believers I know - and I know hundreds and hundreds of believers.

For another, those who have made orthodoxy (read "my church's catechism") of supreme importance may not like the Dales' methods. In fact, the authors have made a conscious decision to allow people to discover what the scriptures mean by applying God's word first to their lives, rather than to be taught what a particular catechism would say.

Personally I see this as an endorsement! But watch out for cranky naysayers who will shrill "heresy!"

The Dales also clearly support women's involvement in every aspect of church life, which may greatly bother those who feel women have been given only a limited role in Scripture.

Finally, those who are deeply invested in traditional church -- referred to as "legacy churches" in "The Rabbit," with gracious respect -- may find this book threatening, even though the authors repeatedly express their thanks and honor for what God has done through the institution of church. Those who prefer to remain in their traditional church can still start a simple church that meets at another time than their church service (as my husband and I are now doing).

In fact, the Dales' particular ministry, House2House is being actively supported by two mega churches, which they mention on page 194, and several more churches are described in "The Rabbit" which either support and encourage house churches among their members, or have transitioned into a network of house churches.

One aspect of "The Rabbit" which I particularly appreciated was the realistic approach. What God is doing right now is breath-taking. Thousands of churches worldwide are being started every year. Hundreds of thousands of people are becoming born again, and entering into an active living by faith. This is not merely lip service to the idea of salvation. This is the real thing! Still, in real life, there is also hard work, troubles, sometimes even death.

The Dales' do not hold back on cautionary tales and words of gentle warning. There will be those who go back to traditional church because simple church won't feel "right" after a while. There will be churches that blossom, grow, then die away ("We would rather have a church without the presence of the Holy Spirit be decently buried than maintained on life support indefinitely." I wish all of us had such practical and humble wisdom concerning dead churches). There will be churches that change from simple to traditional as a charismatic leader takes the glory and the control.

But, in balance, you will find in this book everything you need to start a simple church -- as the Lord leads!!!

The methods "The Rabbit" explains come straight out of Luke 10, four simple steps. The format for the Bible study is so simple it's mind-blowing!! I will be starting an in depth look of "The Rabbit," chapter by chapter. Yet, along with warm encouragement, engaging illustrations, and statistics provided by the Barna Group, "The Rabbit" offers an exciting tale that really, you would do yourself a favor by reading.

If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation

"Is Your Church Asking 'How'?"

The ninth and final organizational tool that can be used in a mechanical or organic order way is resources.

This is a continuing series by Michael Fleming, working from the book "Organic Community" by Joseph R. Myers.

Previous posts in this series are:
1) Is Your Church an Object?
2) Is Your Church a Clone?
3) Is Your Church a Body?
4) Is Your Church a Scoreboard?
5) Is Your Church a Factory?
6) Is Your Church a Hierarchy?
7) Is Your Church a Collaboration?
8) Is Your Church Old Covenant?
9) Is Your Church A Noun

Mechanical plans begin with the question “Where are we headed?” followed immediately by “How are we going to get there?” They are intended to secure safety, but really they result in a plan that prescribes the “how” prematurely. They believe that all questions will be resolved by going through the process of asking and answering “How?” But many times the question “How?” isn’t a question at all. Rather, it is a comment rooted in a spirit of scarcity. It is a belief that we lack the right tools and the right methodology to know enough and be enough.

But with organic order, the question “How?” is skipped and people jump straight to the possible solutions. They don’t ask “How are we going to do this?” They say, “This is what we can do.” There are many possibilities and we can operate in whichever one is appropriate for right now. They realize that what they are to do is be who and what they are right now. With organic order, you don’t pre-determine how problems will be solved and resources will be allocated. You decide in the present how you should solve problems and allocate resources amidst the many possibilities in whatever way is appropriate at that time.

One way the church has promoted a spirit of scarcity is in its efforts to assimilate people into the mechanical plan of the church. This is a scarcity view of how the church is to be a part of people’s lives. A better way is to think about what the church should be doing to be the One New Humanity that it is meant to be, not a copy of the Old Man we see operating in the world.

Myers, Joseph R. "Organic Community"

If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation

"Is Your Church Under God's Control?"

How can an organic environment where community and belonging can emerge be developed? By using an organic order approach rather than a mechanical order approach. Mechanical order is appropriate when it comes to manufacturing inanimate objects. But developing something with life requires organic order.

This is a continuing series by Michael Fleming, working from the book "Organic Community" by Joseph R. Myers.

Previous posts in this series are:
1) Is Your Church an Object?
2) Is Your Church a Clone?
3) Is Your Church a Body?
4) Is Your Church a Scoreboard?
5) Is Your Church a Factory?
6) Is Your Church a Hierarchy?
7) Is Your Church a Collaboration?
8) Is Your Church Old Covenant?
9) Is Your Church A Noun
10) Is Your Church Asking "How"?

Nine organizational tools that you can use in a mechanical or organic order way are:

1. Patterns
   Mechanical – attempt to force the realization of a plan that worked somewhere else by controlling people and processes to get there. You try and make people into parts that will fit together to look like what you envision creating.
   Organic – allows individuals and groups to grow and become uniquely themselves in each situation. The group looks like the body of Christ when the parts connect and do their special works for each other. This will be a literal spiritual expression of Jesus Christ on the earth in His second body. (Ephesians 4:15-16)


2. Participation
   Mechanical – trying to get people to participate in created positions that serve a plan. Participation is usually forced and people feel uncomfortable and out of place.
   Organic – individuals feel free and responsible to act uniquely as themselves for the good of the group as a whole. They find out what special graces they’ve been given by God and they use them to accomplish the works that God prepared in advance for them to do. (Ephesians 2:10)


3. Measurement
   Mechanical – value is found in numbers related to an end point to be reached. People are assessed based upon the health of the organization.
   Organic – value is found in the story of the life of the group. Success is found in the health of the organism from its individual parts.


4. Growth
   Mechanical – measured in outward evidences of numbers, resources, activities and other inanimate measuring sticks.
   Organic – takes small steps forward at the community’s own pace. Growth is based upon individual’s maturity to completion in Christ. (Colossians 1:28)


5. Power
   Mechanical – delivered through permanent positions. Man is trusted with control of the body of Christ through the assignment of permanent power, no matter where the wind (Spirit) blows.
   Organic – revolves through the parts of the whole depending on what is being demanded by the life of the organism. The Spirit gives power to the parts that need it to accomplish His will in a progressive fashion as time goes on. (John 3:8)


6. Coordination
   Mechanical – asks people to cooperate by falling in line with a plan to make it work. People become commodities to be maneuvered toward a person’s vision.
   Organic – self-organization through collaboration of parts based upon their connection. The vision is from the Head through all of the parts together. (Ephesians 4:15-16).


7. Partners
   Mechanical – accountability to hold people responsible for their actions. The focus is on performance in relation to sin.
   Organic – edit-ability to help on the journey to wholeness. The focus is encouragement toward allowing God to live in and through the person ever-increasingly. (Ephesians 5:17-18)


8. Language
   Mechanical – words are noun-centric. They turn dynamic words into static words.
   Organic – words are verb-centric.


9. Resources
   Mechanical – pre-determined allocation based upon the question, “How are we going to do this?” People assume future events can and should take place and make pre-mature decisions based upon those assumptions.
   Organic – moment-by-moment allocation based upon the thought, “This is how we can do this.” People do what they are able with the graces they’ve been given.
   
   Humans can’t build living things. When they build something, whatever it is; it is dead. It may serve a good purpose and show tremendous creative abilities, but only God can create and sustain something that is living. This is where we’re breaking down in the Church.
   At the root of who is doing the building of the Church is the issue of control. The sinful nature seems to want to take it from God and other people in an effort to deal with the fear that comes with unpredictability. The fear that if we let God have control, He won’t live up to His promises and take care of us. The fear that if we let Christ be the Head, He won’t know how to animate the Body and it will find itself in chaos and utterly destroy itself.
   
   God’s eternal purpose was to create One New Man that would be alive by the life of God with Christ as the Head (Ephesians 2:14-22). Because this One New Man is a living organism, it grows and develops organically, just like all living things. But, because of man’s fear rooted in the sinful nature, they tend to take control away from God and try to build the One New Man themselves, in their own power. This is like trying to engineer an animal in a laboratory. It just can’t be done. You can’t engineer the genetic code of God, the DNA of the Church. The best one can do is create something inanimate that looks and acts like the living thing they are trying to engineer.
   
   I’ve found that many times a conversation about giving up control gets translated into a conversation about giving up leadership. But, an important distinction must be made here. True biblical leaders don’t control. “You don’t lead by pointing a finger and telling people some place to go. You lead by going to that place and making a case.” (Ken Kesey) Then, watch and see if people do it. Many leaders today are pointing to a place of organic community and telling people to go there, and waiting for people to go there, while at the same time doing the same things over and over again in a mechanical way. They won’t admit it and they may not realize it, but they are afraid to give up control. The true leaders are the ones that are not afraid to go to a place of organic community and make a case for people to come along, even if it means going there alone.
   
   Is there order in God? Yes.
   Is there structure in God? Yes.
   Is there government in God? Yes.
   
   But God’s order, structure and government are diametrically opposed to the worlds (John 15:18-19). It’s alive and always evolving. Sadly, many of those that are considered “leaders” today are attempting to engineer the Christian life according to the world’s system, which is what we need to identify and move away from.
   
   Creating an organic environment for community to grow is just like creating the environment for any other living thing to grow. The right conditions must be met. The more you use the nine organizational tools in a mechanical way, the worse the conditions become for life to grow. When used organically, the nine organizational tools create the environment for the organism to grow, thrive and its life (Christ) to be shared with all.
   
   Myers, Joseph R. "Organic Community"
   
   If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation

"Is Your Church a Noun?"

The seventh organizational tool that can be used in a mechanical or organic order way is language.

This is a continuing series by Michael Fleming, working from the book "Organic Community" by Joseph R. Myers.

Previous posts in this series are:
1) Is Your Church an Object?
2) Is Your Church a Clone?
3) Is Your Church a Body?
4) Is Your Church a Scoreboard?
5) Is Your Church a Factory?
6) Is Your Church a Hierarchy?
7) Is Your Church a Collaboration?
8) Is Your Church Old Covenant?
The words that we use reflect what is in our hearts, expresses social structures, shapes worldviews and shapes the way we behave and believe. Language matters. Words matter. They are symbols for ideas that we are trying to communicate. When I say the word “tree,” what you and I think of for that word will be different unless you and I are looking at the same tree at the same time and from the same perspective. But, typically our ideas are similar enough to have the same understanding of what the word means.

Another factor to remember is that language is living. Words and their meanings evolve. A word can be a noun and get turned into a verb and vice versa. “Bad” actually can mean “Good.” “Shut up!” and “That’s ridiculous!” are actually used as compliments. And “Blackberry” is not just a fruit anymore. Plus, we make up words like “internet” and “download.”

What is beginning to change is that we are moving from a noun-centric language to a verb-centric language. Words like “church,” “community” and “gospel” are becoming more verb-like because we are looking more to describe the process, the experience, and the “being.” These words are becoming more dynamic and less static.

Let’s take the word “fire,” for example. Fire is not an object. It isn’t a person, place, or thing. Fire is an ongoing process. It has no substance. However, when we talk about fire we must objectify it and make it a noun so that we can structure a sentence around it. Much the same could be said of words such as church, congregation, worship and God.

When we take words that should be verbs and turn them into nouns, we show our need to objectify, limit and even control the ideas set forth by them. God is easier to get our minds, concepts, and theology around if the Godhead remains only noun. But God describes Himself with the verb “I am.” The Trinity is not three objects. The Trinity is a dance of three verbs. Three “I ams.”

Verbs describe an ongoing process. Human beings, for example, become. We are constantly in motion; constantly changing; we are not still and unmoving.

Do you view words like “church”, “community”, “gospel” and “God” as nouns or verbs? Your answer to this question will affect your language, your processes, your structures, and your outcomes. For example, if you view the word “church” as a noun, it will allow you to treat it as an object that we can control at some level. This view gives us permission to think that if we could come up with the one way of structuring a church, then everyone would want to be involved. Everyone and every group then becomes a widget that we can mold, maneuver, organize, direct, and control.

Myers, Joseph R. "Organic Community"

If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation

"Is Your Church Old Covenant?"

The sixth organizational tool that can be used in a mechanical or organic order way is partnerships.

This is a continuing series by Michael Fleming, working from the book "Organic Community" by Joseph R. Myers.

Previous posts in this series are:
1) Is Your Church an Object?
2) Is Your Church a Clone?
3) Is Your Church a Body?
4) Is Your Church a Scoreboard?
5) Is Your Church a Factory?
6) Is Your Church a Hierarchy?
7) Is Your Church a Collaboration?

Accountability is the buzz word du jour. These days, any company that develops a master plan of accountability and demonstrates they can keep everyone in line and behaving well will find a receptive hearing among stockholders and stakeholders who nervously seek to protect their investments.

Accountability happens by mechanical order. An individual or group decides that accountability must be in place and then works up a plan in an effort to “create” it. It is a system where laws are in place and those that are disobedient suffer the consequences put forth by those given the power to hold us accountable. It amounts to manufacturing relationships that hold people responsible for his or her actions in a way that is:

Hierarchical – one person is obedient to another
Abrasive – the accountability partner practices “tough love” by being caustic and insensitive
Unhelpful – progress toward an integrated life does not happen
Harmful – the accountability is psychologically and spiritually damaging

In ways big and small, people get “audited.” These means of monitoring seem to work well when they are applied to business. But what happens when we apply similar measures to people? We put them under law, not grace. This is Old Covenant thinking.

Organic order is about grace, not law. It’s “Edit-ability,” not accountability. An editor’s function is very different than that of the accountant. They help wipe away errors while keeping the voice of the author. The author will submit a rough draft. The editor makes suggestions, even disagrees at times with the author. The author considers the editor’s suggestions, and will often make adjustments. The author and editor continue to go back and forth until the project is complete. The entire process is one of give-and-take collaboration lived out in the moment.

An accountability partner focuses on sin and the individual’s cooperation with a standard and expectations in relation to sin. A partner in Christ focuses on being there for someone in relationship to help them along on their journey to wholeness.

Myers, Joseph R. "Organic Community"

If this post got you to thinking, please leave a comment and join the conversation