1) Bi-Vocational Ministry

2) Bi-Vocational Ministry & the Missional Church

3) Bi-Vocational Ministry & Spiritual Formation

4) Bi-Vocational Ministry & Support Raising

Thinking on this topic has stirred up a number of thoughts, ideas, and connections that I think will take shape in a next series of posts, so I won’t say too much here.

What I will say is this…

In 2004 when I began my education at Fuller Theological Seminary, I was on the fence about doing an MDiv.  I wasn’t sure that my future was going to be in professional, paid, church staff ministry.  I also wasn’t so sure that the structure of the degree was all that well equipped to prepare people for that sort of ministry given the trajectory of the Western church anyway.  To my utter shock, I soon discovered that these sentiments were widely shared and many of the people who would have been the best candidates for MDiv’s were opting for less traditional and more flexible routes. (FYI – Fuller has since done some major and commendable course correcting regarding all their programs, including the MDiv!)

My hesitations confirmed by the sentiments and decisions of my peers, I chose to do an MA in theology which gave me the ability to take 1/2 my classes out of Fullers’ School of Intercultural Studies enabling me to craft a degree that explored a missiology of Western culture.

In contrast to the average School of Theology student, many of the students doing degrees in the School of Intercultural Studies had widely marketable skills and trades.  Whereas the average SOT student was there to get an academic credential in order to get a job, the average SIS student was in school to learn how to be better a better missionary or to do more study regarding a particular area of interest.  Unlike their SOT counterparts, they weren’t looking for a degree to get a job.

Now, Fuller as a school didn’t create this reality per se, they were merely filling two different needs, augmenting on the one hand, and preparing on the other.

If, as I have tried to say, churches being led by a team of bi-vocational leaders is more sustainable, healthier for leaders and congregations alike, and all-around positively spiritually formative, then theological schools would do well to intentionally structure themselves for the sort of education that Fuller’s SIS was offering de facto.

There is a lesson to be learned here from Christian Liberal Arts schools (yeah Malone!) which prepare men and women of God for service in all areas of life… AS FOLLOWERS OF JESUS.  That people would “graduate” from this sort of education to one of specialized, professional theological training is a regrettable reality.  I say this as one with the highest of value for theological rigor and advanced training.  But, I also say it as one who thinks these things should never come at the expense of extending to Christian leaders the opportunity to lose touch with “the world.”

A missional ecclesiology calls for a missional approach to theological education that would be best described in terms of formational training.  This is what I hope to explore further in my next series of posts.

1) I had to get up at 4AM to make a flight.

2) Dumb TSA lady said my carryon, which I had carried on before, was too big so I had to check it for $20 bucks.

3) American Airlines then proceeded to break that bag.

4) Hertz, since they had my credit card number, decided to OVERNIGHT the sungalsses I left in our rental car to me.

5) FedEx squashed them.

6) Driving my in-law’s van home from the airport, I got a speeding ticket that within 100 yards would not have been a ticket.

7) I was late for a meeting when I figured out that my car battery was dead.

8 ) I found an angry note on my car, probably from a drunk teenager, who didn’t like my parking job, which had been forced by the bad parking job of someone else 10 days ago.

9) Someone stole and cashed a $700 check intended for us and recovering the funds will probably be a big pain.

10) Oh yeah, and my wife (also having a bad day) is working a conference a thousand miles away and I won’t see her until late Saturday night.

Time for a long hard run.

For the last few days I have been participating in a seminar on “Ministry Partner Development,” led by my friend JR Woodward through Ecclesia, a missional church planting network.  So, naturally, I have been thinking about the relationship between bi-vocational ministry and support raising.  I am coming away from the seminar with 2 firm convictions.

1)  Support raising is a ministry in and of itself.  As a nation, we give 1-2% of our annual income to charitable causes.  As a subset of American Christians, conservatives slaughter that statistic at a whopping 3%!  Sad, really sad.  Those who raise support to do works of ministry are ministering to those that they ask to be partners simply by saying, “Hey, would you actually like to do something of eternal significance with your money?”  For a people that ought to be known for our generosity and our refusal to store up for ourselves treasures on earth, we’re pitiful and I am all for more and more and more people who have the courage to take steps of faith and ask others to financially support them.

2) Inasmuch as it is a ministry in and of itself and because I think our current model of theological eduction is largely missing the mark in truly preparing Christian leaders for the future landscape of the Church in Western culture, I think support raising is a necessary consideration. Leave aside for a moment the idea of support raising as a ministry to those who choose to partner, what other choice do people whose training is theological and ministerial in nature have if they want to practice bi-vocational leadership?  They aren’t really marketable in most of the non-church world and it will take some time if they are to acquire additional skills and training.  Perhaps worse, they take jobs in churches that are spiritually dead, but have some money, or they cave into the forms of church that are successfully marketing religious goods to a quasi-religious, Christendom population.  This is where I think support raising comes in.

Aside form the personal benefits of learning how to humbly depend on others, being able to pursue what God has put on your heart rather than choosing from the given options, and developing the disciplines necessary to do the work of support raising, developing a team of ministry partners can be a great way to free someone up to minister to those who have no concept of supporting pastors or those who, even if they “get it,” don’t have the means to do so anyway.  And it should go without saying that cultivating a ministry team that is supporting you not only through finances, but by diligent prayer and accountability is a blessing that far too many are missing out on.

When it comes to church ministry, I think support raising makes the most sense for apostolic and prophetic types of people.

Apostles are always on the move, charting new territory and plowing new ground.  Having a ministry team that sees and affirms that and says, “Here, we’ll pay your bills, you just keep on following where God leads!” are saints in my book.

Prophets get stoned and killed.  The quickest way to short circuit the ministry of those who God has called to point out how the Church is failing her calling, is to make them dependent on the giving of one congregation.  Like apostles, they do well to cultivate a team that acknowledges the church’s need for prophetic voices and says, “Here, be free to speak truthful words how the Lord leads.”

When it comes to bi-vocationality, I think one of the marks of a healthy church is its desire to financially support its leaders.  So, while I think support raising is a good idea in general for many and an excellent idea for some in particular, ultimately, for all the reasons I mentioned in my first post, I still think church leaders working in the community where they minister while being supported by the church they serve is something great to aspire to.

I wanted to winnow that thought down a bit further and suggest that the biblical appeal for a bi-vocational approach to leadership (and in my opinion, the biblical appeal for anything that has to do with the church and Chirstian life!) has to do with spiritual formation.

Far too often people seek to defend their church structures and practices because of their supposed ability to, “grow the church,” “meet people where they’re at,” or “reflect people’s cultural expectations.” These have a ring of nobility to them but are far off the mark biblically speaking. Far worse is when we are forced to admit that we do what we do because, “that’s how it’s always been done,” “if we try to change things people will leave,” “so and so will stop giving if we stop doing things that way.”

As the Body of Christ, we should have a singular defense for everything we do, namely, its power to spiritually form people and communities into Christlikeness.*

Here’s why…

There’s a battle going on. The Church, as a foretaste of the Kingdom of God, through its formational practices and structures, wages war against the principalities and powers at work in the world which seek to “steal, kill, and destroy” all that God would have us be and do.

In Christendom, the Church equipped itself to fight the wrong battle. Within Christendom, so much is assumed about the nature and purpose of the church, that we tend to ask pragmatic questions. Does it work? But, for those of us who realize that Christendom is crumbling and/or think that it was never a good thing to begin with, these questions aren’t good enough. We need to ask deeper questions.

Biblical faithfulness is about mission, not models. As one helpful commenter pointed out in a previous post, the Bible does not prescribe one way to lead churches. There are several examples of what that looked like in the New Testament, but even these are not simply models to be copied as if we could then say, “We just do it like they did in the Bible.” The better way to understand biblical faithfulness is as an honest pursuit to join God in mission, not copy models. The Church is charged with the task of making disciples and is not given an exact blueprint for how to go about it.

This brings us full circle. Those churches whose structures and practices mainly serve the ends of church growth, cultural relevance, and even conversion, miss the mark. They are fighting the wrong battle biblically speaking.

I am advocating for a bi-vocational approach to church leadership, not because I can defend it as THE RIGHT biblical model or because it’s most effective (Christendom approaches), but because the tendencies in our culture toward consumerism and individualism are so thick that faithfulness to the mission of making disciples, forming people and communities into Christlikeness, make it the most appropriate option (missional approach).

Hopefully that serves to clarify my thoughts and intention some.

*I was greatly encouraged today while viewing this seminar online to hear Dr. Darrell Guder comment that, “It was not the mission of the apostolic church to save souls! The apostolic mission was the formation witnessing communities.” This is a far cry from how we commonly envision the role of church leaders, but something we badly need to recover.

Here’s the twitter stream for the #ecclesia hastag

It was just over 3 years ago that I “met” Todd. I was in Norway studying and writing my masters thesis. In my search for resources, I came across Todd’s blog and was excited to find someone else who was thinking about missional living in suburban contexts. We developed a collaborative friendship in the blog-o-sphere and I finally got to meet him face to face when his church community, The Well, in suburban Philly, was hosting a small seminar with Al Hsu regarding “The Church & Suburbia.”

Through our respective church communities, Todd and I are both affiliated with Ecclesia, a missional church planting network which gives us even more opportunity to interact.

Todd is living the dream as a bivocational (or bioccupational as he prefers) pastor and draw some income from doing web design. I have always admired his work with crafting wordpress themes and when I saw some of his latest work on the blog of one of his friends, I jokingly told him to send me the zip file. He took me seriously and 30 minutes later, I am enjoying the beautiful goodness you see before you (unless you’re reading this through a reader – if you are, do yourself a favor and click through to check it out).

Anyway, Todd didn’t ask for any money, but I am gonna give him some anyway cause he’s my hero!

For the sake of your own soul, you should get to know Todd. For the sake of your blog, you should hire him to rock your world.

I used to want to be the next Rick Warren or Bill Hybels.  What student pastor in the late 90’s didn’t?  As I look back, my misaligned, youthful arrogance was fueled in large part by the national conferences I was attending.  Predicated on the modern notion that bigger is always better, these conferences communicated and celebrated the paradoxical and lamentable reality of “Christian celebrity.”

These conferences sprang up from and in turn sought to facilitate the modern megachurch phenomenon.  And, in my opinion, did/do more harm than good.  In the Christian world, when it comes to conferences, the national variety tends to capitalize on the “cool factor,” something that seems grossly out of place to me now for those who follow a crucified Savior.

At national conferences there are typically big name speakers, higher attendance and more bells and whistles.  (Maybe even a dude jumping into a foot of water from 35 feet up?)  National conferences, at least the better ones, can have value for inspiring people I suppose, but I would venture to say that regional gatherings possess far more power and value in terms of their ability to help shape and equip the church and her leaders.  Here’s just a few reasons why I say that.

• Relationships are more easily cultivated and sustained
• With greater ease and interest, topics of conversation move from the theoretical to the practical
• Traveling costs are much lower
• Conference costs are much lower (if not free like Verge LA which my friend JR Woodward (@dreamawakener) is helping to put together
• Conversations regarding context and culture gain more immediate traction
• The loss of the “cool factor” translates into a higher caliber of fellow attenders
• Virtually everyone gets to participate in meaningful ways
• There is greater access to gifted people who would probably never get invited to present at a national gathering because they are w/o book deals and cult followings
• There is no hype to distract from the more important issues being addressed
• Young and impressionable leaders aren’t made to feel inadequate or handed delusions of grandeur

For these reasons and still others, I am hopeful that we will see more and more groups who exist to strengthen the missional church and her leaders investing in regional gatherings.  And where and when national gatherings continue, my hope is that they will focus on supporting regional networks, leaving the hype behind.

So, who’s got the 411 on Boston and the surrounding area?  What and where do we need to make sure to check out?  What’s our best bet for scenic, yet affordable accommodations?  Looking for any advice anyone wants to throw our way, thanks.

I love books, and I get excited whenever someone recommends a book they think I’d be interested in.  But I have to be honest, every time I see a book referenced with a link to Amazon, Google, or some other corporate giant that isn’t doing anything unique and creative for the good of others, I get a little sad.  So here’s my pitch for you to make Better World Books your Go-To place for shopping, referencing, selling, and checking out books.

They’re into recycling.

They buy books back from you.

They work for global literacy.

They are committed to social awareness and sustainability.

They never charge you shipping!

—————————————-

You can subscribe to their blog.

Follow them on twitter.

Connect on Facebook.

Check out their stuff on YouTube.

Grab a gift certificate for someone.

And if you get really inspired, you can get me something off my wishlist

The video is worth your time, but there’s in inherent flaw in the question.  Asking if megachurches* can be missional is sort of like asking if a diesel truck can run on unleaded gas.  Or if someone with type A blood can receive a donation from someone with type B blood. On the surface, it might seem like a legitimate question, after all, diesel and unleaded are both automobile fuel and unless you have the right tools, A blood looks just like B blood, but that’s just the problem – the superficial appearance is where it stops.

Megachuches and missional churches, while superficially similar in some regards, are so intrinsically different that the question loses all meaning.

The model of the megachurch relies upon Christendom as a cultural context while missional churches (as I said my last post) see Christendom as a debilitating cultural condition and therefore seek to subvert it.

The very medium of megachurch so distorts the message of the gospel, that it’s left virtually powerless to shape a people for fully and authentically participating in the mission of God in the world – the hallmark of missional ecclesiology.  Note: I am not saying that God cannot or does not impact and change peoples lives in the context of megachurches.

Another version of this question is probably more worthwhile.  Can megachurches become missional? Maybe, but we need more people who are willing to be honest about the full scope of what a shift like this will mean.  There is just too much money and and too much popularity to be gained from going around and telling megachurches that they too can hop on the missional bandwagon without monumental shifts in identity and practice.  Like telling those who are wealthy, happy, healthy, and powerful that they are in fact poor, confused, sick, and weak, most people who lead “successful” megachurches simply don’t have ears to hear or eyes to see.

So, my experience tells me not to bank on it.  But my wife tells me that if I believe in the power of the gospel to restore the world, I might not want to be so quick to discount its power to transform churches!  Good thing she’s around

*my comments on megachurches are limited to a Western context.  I simply don’t know enough about megachurches in non-western contexts to speak intelligently about differing cultural factors.  However, I’d be quick to ask, “Who taught them to do church like that anyway?!”

I’ve got a few ideas for follow up posts on the subject – thinking about how and where this practice intersects with theological education, community/spiritual formation, support raising, stewardship & sustainability, etc.  However, I think it might be most helpful to clarify how I understand the relationship between bi-vocational ministry and missional ecclesiology.

As I have said numerous times before, being missional is no mere add-on to current church practice.  Nor is it a shift any particular church community might make without rethinking those things which are most fundamental.  A truly missional ecclesiology arises out of a particular way of doing theology and the understandings of things like the gospel and salvation that emerge as a result.

While I can see why people from various ecclesial backgrounds might resonate with bi-vocational ministry as a model for church leadership, I think it makes most sense within a truly missional framework.  Here’s a few reasons why.

Missional churches gain their identity from the Missio Dei.  Their understandings of the gospel and salvation are defined by the very notion of participation in the life and mission of God in the world.  Appropriately, they would happily embrace a model of church leadership which creates a participatory context.

Since missional churches see Christendom as a cultural condition which distorts rather than enhances Christian discipleship and witness, it is no wonder that they would shy away from models of church leadership predicated on its very existence. As Christendom continues to crumble, the viability of multiple full-time church staff will continue to crumble with it.

Because missional churches seek to shape a people who are passionate about God’s redemption of the whole world, it would be second nature for them to embrace a kind of ministry in which the leaders of the community model the practice of vibrant Christian witness in the marketplace.

For me anyway, it’s the theological connection and not the pragmatic rationale of bi-vocational church leadership that is most motivating.

Life on the Vine

Some may take issue with the phrase bi-vocational, arguing that followers of Jesus, who may have multiple occupations, actually have a singular vocation – living as a Christian witness or something like that and I’d say that’s understandable.  However, if it passes to understand vocation as “a compensated way in which our singlular calling gets lived out” I think it’s just as easy to defend an argument for bi-vocational Christians.

That’s all actually kind of beside the point.  Here were our main talking points and my summary from our time together last Friday (via an article written by DF)…

1) Bi-vocational ministry breeds congregational participation in the life of a church.

When those who lead a church community are bi-vocational, they are more easily seen as those entrusted to guide and direct, as opposed to “get everything done.”  This returns ministry to its rightful place, the corporate body.

2) Bi-vocational ministry guards against excessive organization and programming.

Without full-time people to create and maintain all sorts of programming options, the life of a congregation is able to be more relational and organic, drawing on the heart and commitment of the community.

3) Bi-vocational ministry fosters a church culture that is outward focused.

Bi-vocational ministry affords those who lead local church communities the opportunity to invest more of their time and energy in the marketplace.  This, in turn, serves as a model for the rest of the congregation of living out a faithful witness in all areas of life.

This didn’t come up, perhaps because it’s so obvious, but when those who serve church congregations as leaders can supplement their income with alternative sources of revenue, more money is freed up for the community to meet the needs of others.

I tend to agree with these statements, but as a friend brought up in the course of discussion, embracing an ecclesiology which practices bi-vocationalism probably makes for all-around healthier churches and healthier pastors.  The reason is that the inverse of these marks is typically true.  Having full-time paid pastors stymies congregational participation in the life of church communities (why do it when you have people that you pay to do it?), encourages excessive organization and programming (afterall, if you’re paid full-time, you have to come up with stuff to do), and fosters an inward focused church culture (because apparently being a ‘professional’ minister is what those who are really serious about their faith do!).

Can you practice an ecclesiology predicated on one or multiple full-time paid staff that accomplishes the same ends as this bi-vocational vision?  I am quite sure that many people will read this and try to make the case that multiple full-time paid staff just have that much more time to give to doing just that.  The problem is that the medium doesn’t match the message.  I think this is what we are after at Life on the Vine – embodying a style of congregational leadership that itself communicates (if not necessitates) our commitment to fostering a church in which the responsibility for equipping people for ministry to one another and the world falls to the body and not paid professionals.

Lots of discussion to be had on this topic, so I am interested and anxious for feedback, pushback, and further thoughts and questions.

We wanted to say a HUGE thanks to those of you who sponsored us, to Stephanie and the Olson’s who let us borrow their bikes, and to the Tebbe’s for their bike rack and helmet!

We raised $700 of our goal of $1000!  Not bad for just beginning to get sponsors 5 days before the race.

If you were still interested in contributing to the assistance of refugees by sponsoring our team, you can do so here until the end of the month.  Maybe we’ll meet that goal yet!!

It was a cool morning and the expected rain managed to hold off until close to the end of the race for those who were doing 60 miles.

I got caught up helping with traffic and parking duty and missed the 30-mile wave of riders, but rode with Amy for the 15-mile wave.  When we got back, we switched bikes, and I went and did the 15-mile circuit again.

My cousin Gwen and her husband Rob joined our team at the last minute.  They showed up later in the morning and each did the 15-mile ride as well.

Here’s a few pictures from the ride.

When Amy and I got engaged, we went round and round about whether to be in Memphis where I was pastoring or in Chicago where she was just getting settled into a pretty major career position.  Through lots of prayer, discernmnet, and discussion, Chicago won out.

I moved up here at the beginning of May and since then, beside keeping myself busy with wedding planning and then getting us settled into a new apartment, I have been teaching an online class, The Emerging Church in the 21st Century, for Fuller Theological Seminary.

With the wedding behind us, the apartment pretty much in order, and the class coming to an end, I am getting more focused on looking for work.

Both because we are so at home in our church community, Life on the Vine, and because we are trying to make decisions that offer us the flexibility to be part of birthing a new missional comminity, I’m not looking for church staff positions.  Instead, I have mainly been looking for staff positions at colleges and universities as well as with non-profit organizations whose work in the Chicagoland area I could get excited about.  I have also given some consideration to working my way into the world of web development through project coordination and information architecture.  I am definitely open to continuing to be involved with online education.

While I am conducting the job search 1.0-style (job boards, websites, and other manner of non-relational means), I’d rather go the route of Job Search 2.0, via relational connections, leveraging the power of social connectivity.

So, at the risk of this being misinterpreted as some sort of act of desperation (IT’S NOT), but because I tend to be a relational networker, I thought I would open my search up to a broader audience to solicit your ideas and feedback.  Anyone, especially those of you who know me well, have any bright ideas about jobs, resources, or people I should try and connect with?  If it helps, here’s a basic resume and CV.

You can see the details of the Ride for Refugees here.

You can visit out pledge page here.

The Facebook Fan page is here.

If you’re a Twitterer, you can follow here.

Thanks for checking it out and for your help.  I’ll try to throw up some pictures and thoughts on the event next week.