Origins Cohort Conversation

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:08:00 +0000

I loved this statement. “A theology worth smuggling serves the church well because it is based on listening to God rather than just talking and writing about God – the kind of reflection that cultivates intimacy with Christ, the core of the missional life.”

Opportunity: The Discipline of Making Room

Three dimensional space: Heart, Venue, Spirit. All three are required to create space.
Spirit – “Sensitivity to this dimension comes from realizing that, no matter what the depth of relationship with the sought, only in relationship with the Seeker are we ‘Called out of darkness into wonderful life.’”

Many times throughout the book Dr. Creps makes the point that we need to rely on God for the work to be effective and real.

Chapter 11 Sacrifice: The Discipline of Surrendered Preference

I am not sure of the relevance of this chapter to our community. We have already made the transition from middle-aged to very young community. To try now to develop age diversity would be forcing a value on the group that would raise doubts of it’s authenticity. It should be allowed to develop naturally as the adherents themselves age. Dr Creps’ experiences in the early part of the chapter highlight the need for vigilance needed to maintain diversity. If truth were told the overwhelming majority of the boomer leadership is reluctant to release power, fearing what might become of “Their Ministry”. Creps does not address a major issue. Most contemporary churches are organizationally structured the same as businesses with a ladder or pyramid hierarchy. This structure is also supported by our culture. In such a structure the only motivation is to move up the ladder until you retire. That doesn’t leave much room for the younger generations to develop, and when the time comes to pass the baton, leaves the older generations with a big question of “What comes next?”, or “What value am I if I don’t continue what I have always done?”. If ministry has been their life they may feel that they only know how to do what they have done for 35 years. This would leave them without meaning in life, and perhaps even destitute if the church has provided little or no retirement fund. I also suspect the overwhelming majority of the next generation don’t see the value of the boomer generation being a part of their existence, as illustrated in the scene of younger leaders being dismissive of the elder’s place (page 158). “Like some other groups I visit, the congregation’s often-verbalized commitment to diversity and inclusiveness labored under an invisible boundary: a gray ceiling.” For me I don’t feel thrown out but I do feel a lack of place in the new order but I choose the mission! I will search for a way to facilitate the success of this new order. There are enough conventional churches in or near Boulder.

Chapter 12 Legacy: The Discipline of Passing the Baton

We have already handed off. The realization that the current leadership will someday need to also hand off the ministry will be an eye opener. Maybe they should keep the book around!

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:11:00 +0000

Assessment: The Discipline of Missional Efficiency

We may not like the concept of assessment, but we use it all the time without even thinking about it. For example when you meet someone and begin talking, you begin assessing the other person using indirect metrics. What are they like as a person, what do they think of me, are they worth getting to know better, etc. We use body language, words, voice inflections, etc. I have always been a person that has wanted to know if what I am doing is producing results. That sort of perspective requires you to have a mission. Some kind of measurement is necessary to assess the health or progress toward the mission. That sounds like a mission statement. That in turn begins to sound like a Modern with Mission/ Vision/ Values statements as a way of focusing our efforts. The post modern culture seems to have an aversion for such. When it comes to the church, the traditional measures of attendance and offerings are only a poor set for understanding the progress of the church. In the past we at least had a count of the # of conversions and baptisms, but those are harder to come by and in more recent times were fabricated. The metrics we have some value but we need to do some soul searching to arrive at metrics that are worthy of measuring. Dr Creps is right to say “So when we measure, we need to take extra care that we are evaluating things that need and deserve it, not just things that are easy to count”. I would add another caution. The act of measuring helps us focus our efforts. However, if we focus too much the measuring can become the goal instead of the activity we are measuring. We have seen this in our schools where teachers will teach to a standards test instead of letting the test evaluate the teaching. We should not try to make the metrics look good. We need the metrics to help us tell the truth.

Harmony: The Discipline of Blending Differences

I like the analysis of the types of conflict that occurs in the church. I wonder if the underlying reason for the rigidity of many is due to the ownership for “the way we do church” that comes with having been a big part of the development of those methods. A challenge of that would be viewed as a personal challenge. There seems to be a perpetual existence of a generation gap that rolls forward in time as the generation coming up tries to find their way. In this way of looking at it the current innovators will in time become the traditionalists. On page 104 Dr. Creps indicates this when he said “A final irony of Church life takes the form of the inevitable aging of even the most progressive among us, raising the possibility of one day sitting among the preservationists.” I think this raises the possibility of the whole process over several generations my very well form a circle on some things. One thing that concerns me is expressed by Dr Creps “Constant morphing, however, carries the risk factor of absorption into the very culture the gospel seeks to transform.” I appreciate his conclusion that the key to harmony in the body is for each to operate from their strengths and be willing to recognize and appreciate the strengths of the other brands in the community. (ie. be positive)

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 22:39:00 +0000

Perspective: The Discipline of POV

I am not sure what to take away from this chapter. I seems that a definition of “Postmodern” is elusive and depends on your point of view. I believe he is also arguing that we don’t need a definition because we would then proceed to develop programs and methodologies to reach postmodern people. Instead we should focus on our dependence on God to navigate the postmodern culture .Many statements in the chapter require further thought. “The problem is that most postmoderns would rather die than have the church (or God) meet their needs.” “Since the postmodern preference for diversity and tolerance tend to repel dependence on a monolithic religion, the path to the spiritual may involve compound spiritualities, sometimes side by side with formal religion.”

Learning: The Discipline of Reverse Mentoring

Reverse mentoring is a very interesting concept that requires further attention and challenges old paradigms. I have actually on occasion engaged in it without having a name for it. Undoubtedly I could engage in it more often and be more deliberate.

Witness: The Discipline of Spiritual Friendship

A few years ago I began hearing terms like “the ministry of conversation” and “hanging out” and many others like these that were foreign or had little meaning to me. I have made some progress. I can also see how the terms we use to describe non-Christians are not very helpful. But when he described “Invisible People” as the mental model some use to view them – ouch – that described many of the unconscious perspectives I have. His discussion of having relationships that are almost exclusively Christian also hit home. But how to change that is the real question.

Out with the Old and in with the New

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:39:00 +0000

In a lot of Earl's discussions within the first 6 chapters in regards to older churchgoers/pastors learning from the young, I felt kind of sad. It sounded to me like there is this idea of having to let go of all the life, experiences, and way of doing things of older generations in order to move forward as the church. While I certainly think it is appropriate and necessary for people to humble themselves to learn from others, I don't think this means completely abandoning the old ways of doing things. I think I perhaps come from a very different church background than what Earl describes. I was raised Episcopalian, attended a Catholic middle and high school, was influenced by whatever kind of Christianity seems to be dominant in Lynchburg, Virginia (where I was raised-- where Jerry Falwell lived, worked, and influenced) and had the pleasure of being part of a community of Christians who saw unity as very important in college, but with my specific Christian fellowship being Chi Alpha (a student ministry associated with Assemblies of God churches). So.. I am not someone whose family has been in the Pentecostal church for generations, and I value the diversity of the church and what its different parts have to offer.

I don't want older Christians to lock up all their life history and experiences to try to become new and hip and in vogue... I'm not sure being young and hip is something that will cause non-Christians to flock to the church. I think people being genuine is what any other human being can appreciate and connect to. When I am around a genuine person, it sets my heart and spirit at ease. I think the young have things to learn from the old, and the old have things to learn from the young, and I don't think this is a new concept. I think it is necessary for older generations to come to grips with their experiences as the world around us changes. And I think this is a part of entering into a new era of postmodernity-- it should not mean that the old people just get erased but that their history and experiences become knit into how others (young people) are viewing and experiencing the world around us.

I can understand a necessity to submit to the culture around you in order to be a servant to the people within it, but if we try to mesh postmodernity into 1 culture, I think we miss what it actually is. The United States is a unique place in that we have so much diversity among people here-- whether it be based on region, ethnic group, country of origin, socioeconomic class... With globalization and lots of different people from very different backgrounds being tossed into the mix together, there are so many cultures and subcultures present and intersecting. How do you submit to just one? Do we have an underlying, unifying culture in the United States as a result of our political system?

I know I am a mesh of a lot of different ideas and perspectives and it can become hard to 'follow the lines' in my life. I know that in receiving love, I want to be loved at my core despite the mesh of ideas and experiences that I am, and have had to learn to accept myself as this instead of trying to allow one line/background/theme dominate over others. Also, I believe that the core of who I am as a person is deeper than all of that and disagreeing with someone's ideas/beliefs does not have to be isolating because love goes deeper than those things. Maybe that is part of what the church in postmodernity is- seeing people as human beings and loving and accepting them as such instead of seeing them as a race or an occupation or one who associates with a certain political party or denomination. Postmodernity is paradoxical-- opposites find unity within it. Where is Christ in this? He encompasses our diversity and seemingly opposing parts because He is all these things-- more expansive than the categories our Western history has developed, and we are all welcome in Him.

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:48:00 +0000

Chapter 2 Truth: The Discipline of Spiritual Realism

Dr. Creps refers to the “aging out of so many ministries”. I do not want to be aged out. I guess that is one of the reasons why I hooked up with this fellowship, even though it is hard to be in a place where things seem so unsettled with no real horizon for reaching stability.

I am not sure what he meant on page 24-25 by “Skipping the negative phase of acceptance could have preempted the positive side from ever materializing.”

Paradigms

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:43:00 +0000

Off Road Disciplines by Earl Creps
Chapter 1 Death: The Discipline of Personal Transformation

I was intrigued by Earl’s use of the term “paradigm crashes”. It is a good description of my personal changes over the years. I am afraid I owe Brad a public apology for my reference to his age at our first session. My reference was not meant to refer to his youth or inexperience. Rather it was intended to illustrate the long journey I have taken and the difficulty I have in trying to understand and communicate with the current generation. I have had many “paradigm crashes”, though mine have been more gradual or less spectacular than Dr. Creps’. My current paradigm as it relates to the church is very thin and incomplete. I keep trying to draw in more of it but keep finding I am really copying a piece of an old paradigm. Paradigms are not bad, in fact they are necessary to our sanity and function within family, community, and culture. They are usually in the background where we are unaware that they are guiding us in our interactions with things and people. Without them we would spend enormous amounts of emotional energy as we navigate those interactions. Over the years a small but essential part of my religious paradigm has changed very little. That is the part about who Jesus is and why he came. We say change is inevitable but we seem to hang on to our paradigms until they are no longer useful and perhaps have not been working for some time. In Business there is an axiom that there is a need to change the organization every 5-10 years. People work better and are more comfortable when they know the organization and how it suppose to work to support the business. But when it stays in place for too long it becomes corrupt and begins to serve those in the organization more than the company. It is then it needs to change. I recall a conversation I had with Brad about needing to get everyone on the same page, which is kind of like trying to get everyone’s paradigm adjusted so that they at least resemble each other. Then I remarked that that is precisely what the modern church had done. Now I am not saying that this is wrong, but we do need to be aware when it is time to turn the page, or maybe we need to learn which pages need to be primary and stable and which need to be temporary and be willing to replace them

His reference to the Brownsville revival brings back memories of three different kinds of people who attended. First there were those who wanted to know what they were doing so they could replicate it. The church even created a school to teach those how to do worship. Then there were those who were curious about the phenomenon and went to be spectators. They returned home unchanged and unimpressed. Then there were those like Dr. Creps that were moved by the Spirit to begin a process of change.

Getting the Conversation Started: A How To

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:57:00 +0000

As you're certainly aware, this blog is a great place for us to bring our thoughts and conversations around the learning cohort. The cool thing about this is that you'll find as you write your thoughts, they will become more clear and you'll learn more.

Here are some suggestions to get started:

Reading Review. What struck you about what we're reading? Was it something that you thought was just plain wrong? Or was it inspiring? Tell us?
Continuing where we left off. We have limited time when we gather and we simply don't get to finish everything that we start. What were you thinking about last time we met that we didn't get to talk about?
Teaching Response. When we bring in people like Rob Morris and Dr. George Hunter, they give us great teaching during the weekend. But for some of the gatherings, it's a one way thing (by design). Tell us all your thoughts on their teachings.
Questions. Where is all this going? What would it look like if we did this? Great questions to hash out together. Start them here.

Remember that we're not trying to do a peer-reviewed essay journal here. No need to stress over having killer writing. We're just talking about ideas that are important to us.

Also, don't forget to participate in the comments!