Leadership roots

It is a matter of history that much of the development of Britain came from the Roman Church.  Early into the second millennium these Islands became a vassal of the Holy Roman Church.   A vassal is a nation who are allowed to conduct themselves with their own character and tradition yet be firmly under the control of the powerful force over them.  An example was in Jesus time when the Romans were in the lands.  The nation kept its general modus operandi, yet, it was under the iron fist of Rome.  A basic bible course would speak of the 'pax romana' the 'Roman peace' that occurred because of their presence but it was always under the threat of being nailed to a tree for defying their statutes.

The influence of the Holy Roman Church however was not all negative.  Britain developed in many ways and the foundations of what Rome called 'greatness' was sown into the culture, character and practices of the nation.  Make no mistake, the reason we are in the position we are in on a global scale is founded on the influence of Rome!  In the construction of a nation there were obvious problems.  Because Rome was a form of Godliness but nullified by ritual and sacrament, God was unable to work through people.  This led to The Dark Ages and these times were horrific for the common man. It was at this time that leadership developed.  It primarily developed in the Monarchy and churches.  It is no coincidence that after the Reformation, incredible leaps of progress were experienced (and still are) because people were incrementally becoming more free to contribute and the overarching influence of Rome was opposed.  God can work through people now the oppression of the Church was lifted.

Leadership works by replicating the way someone leads.  If Henry the Eighth, for example, wanted a subordinate rank of leaders, he would bestow upon them his powers.  This means that Henry would replicate his leadership to others.  They would then do likewise, bestowing their powers to others.  In the dark Ages the only form of societal rank anyone would get was by being part of the dynasties of influence in the land.  That, or be connected to The Holy Roman Church. Of course you always have the 'peasants' who aspired to become, not because of personal sense of achievement and notoriety, but the way you rose through society directly affected personal wealth and the ability to eat, drink and live securely.  So rising in status, profile and notoriety was encouraged and it was how society worked.  It is in this system we find a present day problem in the way people lead, especially in Church.

Britain's interaction with the Holy Roman Church has dictated a way to lead and practice leadership.  To examine this we need to expose the mindset of the Papal role.  The Pope is the 'papa,' the Father of Roman Catholics.  The fundamental confusion is over the following text:

¹³ When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?”

 ¹⁴ They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

   ¹⁵ “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”

 ¹⁶ Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

 ¹⁷ Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. ¹⁸ And I tell you that you are Peter,^[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades^[b] will not overcome it. ¹⁹ I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be^[c] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be^[d] loosed in heaven.” ²⁰ Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah.

Catholics see Peter rise from among the disciples and see him as leader. They take the above passage to mean that Jesus was saying on the man, Peter, Jesus will build his church.  Except... Jesus was saying that 'based upon the revelation of this truth, Peter, I will build my church.'  So if a man has been bestowed the type of leadership Jesus has over people then all authority, power and glory has been passed on!  The Papal succession then, assumes it has the ability to work beyond the Bible, and assumes authority over people and even nations.  It is what leadership means that is still strongly prevalent in our western cultures.  Through the history of Britian, through Popes, Kings and Nobility these elements have become institutional givens in our society of leadership:

• authority over people
• superiority
• elitism
• rank
• 'protect the realm'
• the right to dispense justice
• the right to create legislation
• the right to be right without question

Leadership has authority but it is among people not over people.  Jesus was clear about this to the sons of thunder in Mark 10.  Brothers and sisters are not superior or inferior, have no rank or elitism.. we are family!  The new 'protect the realm' is when 'vision' is 'my way or the highway.'  To be clear:  these qualities have been central to the development of the nation for in industry, to get people to produce.  But the church is not about production it is about being.  Today our Monarchy dispenses its will through Parliament and you and I unquestionably carry out this will!  Think about it.... since school it has been taught and we practice things that came from where?

All the countries that have subsequently been invaded by, discovered by, or whose constitution has been replicated on Britain, are all affected by this scourge of church leadership.  There are degrees by which westerners work in the way described above and common sense says that we cant be dictators.  While some do dictate, many are wanting to find a way where we can be family, abide in Christ and even be salt and light to this world.  My hope is the insight into how we lead can inform us and allow us to identify what it is in our leadership practice that makes us do what we do.  The problem is that all the above attributes of leadership directly appeal to the flesh in such a powerful way, the Christian will fight tooth and nail to protect it.

The problem with our sinful condition is that we replicate the pride that was found in the heart of Lucifer.  Our flesh is yet unredeemed and it wars against the Christian's redeemed spirit, the battlefield being the mind. In our flesh we want to be in charge, superior, elite, the decision maker, the one to set the pace, cadence and attributes of other's comings and goings.  We want to control, make the rules, be over. Every Christian on planet earth is either on a journey to realising this, knows this and it isn't as important as 'leading' or is doing everything possible in partnership with God to live opposite to this. 

The good news is that people can lead and this be less a problem.  However, to eliminate all the things that support this problem in leadership we need to address the environment of leadership in church.  This is a vast subject and involves de-constructing the special halls, special titles, special rituals that even the forward thinking warehouse churches have.  Then the difficult part is truly hating that which will strive to be over, superior, ranked etc over others.  Choosing to be servants of others as a lifestyle means living opposite to the lust of the flesh for power and the culture of the nation we live in.  Turning this around, I believe, is a key to God's future for the western world.  If we cannot live beyond self, we will sentence our children and theirs to a downward spiral of a disintegrating empire.  

Not on my shift!

' Core investment' and the church 2

In the first part of this blog I outlined the biblical position that Paul the Apostle (and all the Apostles taught the same) and Jesus both stated that the old thing, the done thing and just anything (ODA) leads to wrong practice.  And what we do in this world always leads to processes and conclusions.  God wants us to grow, transform and thrive and thus be different in this dark world.  Now here is a problem to this plan:-

Many churches today have leaders who are core invested into the done thing rather than God's plan for his people. It is difficult for Christians who feel they must lead because like the first century Christians, they asses the environment they are born into and repeat the generalities around 'church.'  However, the practices constitute part of a change that is taking place over hundreds of years. The Reformation was a change in Theology and the last hundred years rise in the work of the Spirit is a restoration despite the outrageous excesses and abuses we see. What was never reformed from the Roman Catholic Church was their practices.  Good people with good theology are enjoying the working of the Spirit but in a context that was of the old ways (thanks to Constantine's standardising Christianity to the old practices).

So people experience a measure of 'blessing' because some elements of God's will and purpose are in situ. However, it's a little like Manchester United turning up with Chelsea at a cinema. The players run around the seats trying to score yet it is a nonsense.  The teams are there, the football is played, much is in place and we can say for sure, 'A football match is in play.' But while this is outworked in a cinema, we all know it does not lead to the purpose, a competitive game of football.   In the same way, God's people meet together, God is praised, the wine and bread are there, the word is preached.... it has all the elements of Church!  However, it isn't effectively outworking the purposes of God.  It can't, because while we are doing things to outwork our faith, we are not 'being'  who we are.  We keep doing church when we are, intrinsically, church! So if we are the genuine article, why do we set about doing things that underline, qualify, re-iterate, complicate this fact?

So many are core invested in doing church and this hinders being church. God wants his people to be core invested in their brothers and sisters because we are all in Christ.  It is my challenge to today's Christians communities to examine this reasonable call to reform church practice.  There are no badges, profiles, status or hall of fame.  It's about being who you are, and just that.  You can't just start a biblical house group either.  We all need to let all the 'doing' blee out of us.  It's hard but God will lead you in this.  'Being' is freedom, joy, peace, love... much more rooted in Christ that some of the things we do to produce these things.  If you conclude that this can't be right because 'what's in it for me?' That is exactly what 'doing' church does! It makes you invest in IT instead of investing in HIM. Many hold these two in tension.  Being what you are makes you invest in HIM then, by default you invest in HIS... your brothers and sisters!  There nothing more beautiful and amazing on the planet than people prioritising the 'inchrist-ness' of each other and valuing, celebrating 'family.'  Place a 'doing' mentality in the middle of this and we revert to 'task.'  Let me be clear, there is 'task,' 'function' and 'works' in our faith.  But without being the church together and being met by our brothers and sisters, works are done by people who are not contrasting the world.

 "Hey Christian, I can hear your words and see your good works but YOU are not changed!"

BEING changed is what changes this world.

Most of us defaulted into doing church and there's nothing wrong with the smaller biblical home groups meeting monthly, say, to have the big praise parties, communal prayer or an event.  Having practised what God wants for ekklesia, we can enjoy a life together doing all sorts of things to celebrate our faith, but lets not define these things as church/ekklesia.

I challenge the communities of Christians in the UK to meet to fully debate this issue in brotherly love and unity in Christ.  Just please be prayerful that your objections to part 1 and 2 of this article are because of my error in scripture / outlook  and not because you feel offended.  My motives for bringing this to your notice is not to question motives or cast aspersions.  It is mainly to appeal to the reasonable conclusions that when the church do what the word of God says, God's power can explode through this foolish, weak and pathetic vision of 'church.'  Let us not forget that a naked, bleeding, battered body nailed to a tree looks foolish, weak and pathetic yet Salvation itself lies here.

feel free to pass this on and explore these observations which are rooted in the New Testament.

Blessings,

Gary Ward
Brother.

The church and 'Core investment' 1

Our core investment is a way of describing what you are committing your time, resource, finance etc to.  Obviously you wouldn't be doing this if you were not somehow utterly convinced (to the core) that it is a valid pursuit. For many Christians their core investment comes from a clear leading from the Lord and most are happy to say it is their 'calling.'

Lets park the core investment of the individual for a moment. Most Christians believe that the meet in a prepared hall, have leaders to preside over the meeting and preach the word of God after singing songs, taking an offering and sharing bread and wine,  is generally church. (give or take a few testimonies, drama, psalm reading etc etc).  However contemporary or not defines how progressive you are but essentially the same basic elements. The form of church then, seems a constant.  We must also include the Roman Catholics here because however skewed their Theology, add the smells, bells and extra sacrament around 'church pie,'  it's still the same elements of practice. We are going to see why this matters shortly.

In the Old Testament God wanted people to core invested into the practice of meeting together to symbolically because all that was tangible about God was symbolic.  That means while people could experience their Lord, the mechanism where he would really save them and really live within to outwork his purposes was impossible until Jesus completed his work at Calvary. So faith and practice was being core invested in meeting in special places, observing the priesthood, singing, listening to the leaders, carrying out prescribed acts etc.  This would have created a shared sense of community, a shared sense of purpose, a oneness like much of the church experiences(and in doing so feels blessed). However, this is not God's purpose for the church age.

Jesus' death, resurrection and ascension meant the Holy Spirit could come and live in us.  Previously there was no way of having our sin-state dealt with. Now we can live a life of repentance and God really lives in us.  With this in view, there is no need to symbolise or ritualise God in any way.  Paul the Apostle warns the Galatians about doing the 'old thing' and 1 Corinthians warns about doing 'the done thing' and it is just common sense that you cant just do anything. But in some ways, we can't blame the first Christians for defaulting to what they knew, or doing the thing they saw around them.  The Jews were in error for thinking they needed to distinctify their origins but mostly the first Christians looked around them and did what they had learned from an early age.  Their culture was full of Greek wisdom in practice.  This was man's reasoning and conclusions from the thoughts of men.  It led to a logic in leadership and practices that honoured the celebrity of the age - the orator, philosopher, the sage.  So they defaulted to that and Paul corrected them, clearly pointing out in the first 4 chapters why they do this.

So what do you do when your entire background and upbringing is based on the plan of man's reasoning and wisdom?  Perhaps it would be good to find what God's plan is?  In order to both avoid the old thing, the done thing and just plain anything (Old/Done/Any), the Apostles all taught to meet as described in 1 Corinthians.  The net result of this is meeting in a non-O/D/A environment with the basics of what would foster 'family.'  So the bare bones of the New Testament church practice of meeting in homes with a meal, leaders but not hierarchy and open and equal sharing was taught by all the Apostles.  But when all said and done, the point of this more what would come of interacting as brothers and sisters rather than the form in which the meet.  Because of the completed work of Christ, it was more about not doing the O/D/A and facilitating our spirit filled life.  A cursory view of the scriptures will show that our purpose of being saved is to do with the Spirit's work and leading within us as we interact with our brothers and sisters. if you like, the only contract we have as Christians is to outwork our common 'inchristness' as brothers and sisters.

It is  matter of fact that whichever way up this lands, Jesus did tell his disciples at the Last Supper that whenever you meet together , THIS DO in remembrance of me.  So no surprise that Jesus puts forward the idea to the Apostles that meeting as discussed is the way church should be done.

In terms of 'core investment'  I wanted to outline my reasoning for part 2, which is the next post on this blog. 

Jesus, CEO?

  I only know of a few leaders who have discovered that they need to do what the bible says and practise church biblically which means the leaders are not central to the show.  It results in less likelihood that the leaders will 'accidently' have their profile raised, their status enhanced and their notoriety expanded. I can understand the logic - bigger profile = bigger platforms = more people reached.  But, the logic is flawed.

To think that spirituality works the same way as a company or business is profound error. I have a business and the challenges are around visibility, marketing and image.  I want my product to become notorious for its value. If the way we think people can be won relies on the Christian becoming notorious we are simply wrong.  Jesus did not speak of marketing, or visibility or image.  "But we are supposed to be light!"  Yes, but this is what we are before we attempt to gain notoriety.  The very act of having a level of notoriety and telling others to aspire to this creates a debilitation to the Christian in most Churches.  If we ask someone who already is light and salt to aspire to the leaders levels and measurements they miss what they are already, just by being in Christ.  The way the early Church won the known world was because each individual had leaders who didn't ask them to aspire to anything but taught them to be who they are in Christ.  In this way everyone knew they were entirely capable of going into their own contexts and winning people over time for Christ.  Spirit filled and met by the Christian family in ecclesia, they had no-one telling them they needed "XYZ" to become more effective or "ABC" to validate their Christian life.   Preach Christ, and people will be shown why they are light rather than feel they need to arrive at 'pastordom' or something.

In our western context, to look to the leader who is stood at the front is natural. Since being 5 years old this is how leaders have presented themselves.  People who become Christians or experience church see this form of leading and do what they did since the conditioning started at 5 years of age in reception school.  They sit and accept that because the person at the front is...er... at the front, they must know what they are doing and if a few more people are also sat listening to the leader then 'who am I to question this?'  Leadership in other contexts involves a person talking, instructing or proposing but the difference is those listening are able to question, debate, correct, comment, validate and cheer the leaders contribution.  In other words leadership is not always done the same and there are freedoms across the board for everyone in the conversation.  In this way people feel they are in the process, valid, affirmed by their presence and important to the group.  The Bible says that people should 'be persuaded by"  leaders.  This was made into 'submit' by King James in order to have a level of control over the people.  Strange how things have changed little, even that particular text.     Let us not forget also that Britain was a vassle of the Holy Church of Rome and in this time of great development, the 'way to lead' was lifted straight from the way the RC Church leads.  They got their leadership from the ungodly tribes and cultures. So, if your church has people with titles, status or profile, you are practising a Roman Catholic structure.  If you meet in a special building that has chairs lined up to face the front where a series of praying, singing, talking, preaching takes place, this is the RC Church practise. Then there's hierarchy and so on....

So Rome had a developing influence but with a cost.  Business, if modelling Rome, will have the structure to see success.  The church however does not exist for the same reasons as a business.  Business revolves around product or service.  The church has neither unless you invent one.  Evangelism is seen as the product of the church.  While a Christian's heart needs to be broken at the thought of someone spending eternity without God, evangelism is not the primary reason for the church's existence.  The enemy has told Christians that evangelism is the end product of the church and this is a lie. Christians being encouraged and built up is the end result of church.  Evangelism is the consequence of this.  Because most churches believe evangelism to be the product, they fail to prioritise the encouragement and up-building of the brothers and sisters.   The result is Christians going about their lives not having been met by God's extended family.   Unable to be a contrast (light) they have a message without substance.  Someone who has been met, affirmed, loved, cared for, validated, understood etc... will be a contrast and therefore any message will be backed up with an authentic witness.   This can only occur within the context of the church practise Paul and the other apostles taught and with people who are losing their own life not setting up an environment where, 'oh I never realised this would draw attention to me me me!'.

To finish, it would be good if the business-like-church was actually like that.  At least be a business if you're going to say this is how God is leading you (which he isn't).  Leaders, we are told, measure their leadership by who is  following them.  Surely this is not true if the people following are not able or wanting to think for themselves or challenge the system?  True leaders gain following from free thinkers who have their own opinions yet find a leader able to accommodate them unconditionally.  What is difficult about having people who agree with you stand in a room every week?  Incredibly I know some leaders who cant even keep that going!

Also, it is my understanding that business was about creating an economy with a product or service.  Most churches rely on giving to run their comings and goings while the leaders act like they are ingenious business leaders.  Iv'e seen Pastors talk to each other like they created their own wages by ingenuity, hard work and acumen.  In reality all they have done is extracted people's money and forgot to explain that the Tithe was Israel's taxation system meant for Israeli's who live in Israel.   Giving?  Yes.  But if the individual wasn't compelled by OT Law to provide a set amount the leader wouldn't know how much was coming in.  Wow!  Maybe then the leader would have to live by faith.  Imagine that!

An open letter to the Christian Family

Church: The Dilemma

Gary Ward

If you are reading this it may be because you have heard that our family have some ‘other than’ view about Church.   We are keen that no-one get the wrong end of the stick and we don’t end up in the ‘nutter’ department, at least for our church-views anyway :>)    In a nutshell, we believe that the church that the Apostles championed in the first century was more like the light groups than what happens on Sunday morning.  We like the vision of the light church because Sunday morning and light groups are both termed ‘church,’ and we agree with this.  Our position however is that light groups are church scripturally whilst Sunday morning is church socially and culturally.  Whichever way up these land, people meeting together to worship, pray and hear the word of God is ALWAYS good and none of the approaches are ‘wrong’ per se.

Our reason for meeting together with other Christians is because we are in Christ and we are brothers and sisters.  It matters little if that is on Sunday or Thursday or the set up of the meeting.  However, if God wanted Christians to meet in a certain way as seen in 1 Corinthians, we believe we should listen.   My exploring this area has spanned 10 years doing  The Century One Project and hopefully these observations will help.  Check them out, all Major Christian scholars agree with this -

The New Testament Scriptures, especially 1 Corinthians, shows a group of people meeting possibly in several different places or maybe a larger group.  They gathering centred around a meal  and they had open and equal sharing. The church had leadership but echoing the words of Jesus to the sons of thunder in Mark 10, Paul underlines that hierarchical leadership is not what God intends for his followers.  We also need to take note that the Bible only describes believers meeting in homes.  So,

Non-hierarchical leadership.     Centred around a meal.     Open and equal sharing.   Home based.   Sounds like a light group to me!  But here’s what happened historically in the ensuing centuries- After the Apostles died the next important leaders were the early church fathers.   These did amazing work to defend the emerging doctrines we have today.  They fought tooth and nail in an environment of hostility and persecution.  One thing that occurred however was the church Paul and all the Apostles agreed and taught  began to change its form.  Some of the early church fathers, either as a compromise to help the times or for more earthy reasons based on Man’s pride, did the ‘done thing’ when man sets up a group.  Paul reminds us that the culture and system of the world is very strong and the church must push against this. The Early Church Fathers set up provincial Bishops, had the church meet in prepared halls and professional ministers came to teach people the things of God.

 “So?” you may ask, “what’s wrong with that?”  If we observe what happened to the Law at the hands of the Elders we can perhaps see what occurred with the Church Fathers.  Jesus was asked constantly why he allows the disciples to flaunt the ‘Tradition of the Elders.’ Jesus did this on purpose because the Tradition of the Elders (halakah) were rules that Men had invented to stop people breaking the Law of God and thus incurring God wrath.   So, for example, the Law says people cannot grind wheat on the Sabbath.  So that no-one accidently walks through a field and wheat drops into their shoe and they unknowingly grind wheat, the elders banned people from fields on the Sabbath! In scripture we see Jesus purposefully leading his disciples through a field on the Sabbath.  These ‘fence rules’ then, were supposed to help people avoid breaking the Law of God but over time they became a rigid set of traditions that OVER-RULED the 613 Laws of God.  Not only that, but over time ANOTHER set of fence rules were made to protect the first set!  Crazy, but true!  In the same way the Early Church Fathers departed from the Apostles teaching  that was teaching to be held to and followed the established way to conduct a group of people.  The instructions for Church practice were ignored and Man again built his own version of what Church should be like.  The Church Fathers motives may have been to protect Christianity in the same way the elders wanted to protect the breaking of God’s Law.  A good idea but not what God wanted.

Gradually church met in special temples with special people leading the service.  The meal had been replaced with bread and wine whilst the leaders taught the people what the word of God means. The distinctive of the church that the Apostles taught disappeared in this order:  First church practice, what people do for church changed.  Secondly the gifts departed from the church.  Lastly the theology went away. This became the standard way to meet and in the fourth Century a ‘Christian’ Emperor made this the state religion.  From here, the Catholic Church grew and the world had 1000 years of dark ages.  

In the 16^th century there were widespread rumblings in the known world.  All over Europe, scholars were waking up to the fact that the Catholics were stealing from poor people, controlling people but more importantly, their teaching had little to do with the Bible.  The more famous of the ‘reformers’ was Martin Luther.  His cry was ‘sola scriptura’ which means ‘by scripture alone’ (we live out our Christian lives). From here grew the ‘Protestant’ movement, people who protested against the Catholic Church practises.  So Theology was being restored to the church.  In the early 1900’s strange things were occurring in churches and this became clear that, for some reason, the gifts of the Spirit were returning to the church. Ironically, this also heralded histories most significant progress in industry and technology – the 20^th century! 

It appears that God is restoring the church in the reverse order to how it lost its distinctive... Theology with Luther, the Gifts restored circa 1900.  The thing that has yet to be restored to church is Church practice, what people actually do for church.  We believe that God wants people to meet how the Apostles taught.  But here’s the problem- Britain’s heritage includes Catholicism in the very weft and weave of its development.  The way we lead, the way institute behaves and the society we engage every day is steeped in Rome! It has other influences but anyone born in Britain has been brought up with the cultural, educational and societal hangover of the Roman Catholic Church.  

This is also true of what we accept in our Church practice.  Ouch!  I know it’s hard to hear but it’s a challenge I believe we all have to face.  The long and short of it is none of us are responsible for how we meet, we were born into it and accept it.  My own journey started with asking the simple question, “If Jesus said we will see greater things than these” {things he was doing!} then where are they?  Where are the days of acts where 5000 people are saved in one day?  My conclusion is that like a radio that has many pieces of circuitry, they are no good in my hands!  It needs to be in a form where when power flows through it, it produces sound.   The amazing truth about the church that the Apostles taught was that in its foolishness, its weak-looking existence, it is placed firmly in Jesus’ hands!  This way, He can flow through it.  Basically that’s the reason why light groups are ‘church’ scripturally for us and Sunday morning is ‘church’ culturally.  Light Church then, for us, is not just a good idea that promotes community, it is God’s idea in form!

My heart is that the Church returns to meeting in homes.  It seems to me that people can experience God’s extended family in an environment that encourages this – the home.  Also, encourage the idea that we are all one under the head of the Church, Jesus.   Open and equal sharing has everyone able to express themselves and minister to the body in smaller groups where it is easy to do so.   Becoming elevated either by self promotion or by people putting others on a pedestal is blindingly obvious in such a small group where Christ is centre to the subject matter.   Furthermore, When people are met by people who love them and are able to express this through the body, they are built up and encouraged.  When people are met with affirmation, affection, love, warmth, understanding and all the characteristics of a Godly community, they don’t need the motivation or directives to go and win people.  They are tangibly different to this cold, dark, mean, loveless world.  Different attracts, especially when it is a different that everyone is looking for. 

Lastly, it would be ideal if Jesus told us that this is what we are to do for church.  He did!  The last supper was what we are to do when we meet together.  We are to remember Christ with a meal that includes bread and wine.  We are to have him central and no individuals directing, but all are able to share.   “Whenever you meet together, this do”  said Jesus, “in remembrance of me.” 

Love in Christ

Gary Ward and Family. 

Authentic Christian Living - more thoughts

Jesus said the entry level requirement for discipleship is to be 'losing your own life.' What a negative marketing strategy for something that God wants to be embraced by the lost!  "Come to Jesus and DIE!!! However, the only way God can have us become a transformed individual is by this process.  The problem is a little like the present position of the England football team after the world cup 2010.  To play for England you have to be English.  The strange thing is, the manager is Italian and the idea is that his success can be imported to the team. They were very poor in the world cup and this confirmed my thoughts.  I would rather see an English manager lead the team and the team find its own true level that attempt to bring in outside influences that may bring about imported success at some stage.  To me there's no point in winning if the entire outfit didn't reflect the true state of English football.  Its cheating!  In the same way, many Christians import things from the outside to aid Christian living.  This doesn't allow the individual to have a reality check on the true state of their heart, like the England team, it draws from foreign elements to gain authentication.  Jesus has an authentic way that involves 'losing your own life.'

So what mechanism has 'losing your own life' got in God?  There are two ways in which we can live our Christian lives.  Firstly, we can change our behaviour and practices in order to live like God wants us to.  This seems fine until we realise that we are able to bypass the real state of our core self  and change behaviour based on expectations of the pastor, pride, people, performance etc.  God didn't tell us to be-have, he told us to be-changed!  The way 'losing' works is by eliminating all the elements that would protect our core self.  God sees our core self but he wants us to see it!   So here's an example-  Peter: "ill never deny you Jesus" (bypassing core self)  Pete later : "Jesus who?" (the core self). When this was revealed to him, and I'm sure many things not recorded, he was able to be changed.  The reason is because when we see the true state of our hearts we are broken and crumple to our knees in repentance before our Lord. This way we can offer our core self to God, not just perceived behaviours that we think constitute a Christian walk. The result is that when God has worked in a transforming way, practices and behaviours naturally pour from the believer. These become the catalyst for change in this world rather than just surface adjustments, expected Christian nuances and controlled temperament which leads to 'having a form of Godliness, but denying it's power.' 

The way we can ensure we are aware of our core selves is to ask ourselves a series of 'ouch' questions:

• Am I committed to give up the conditioned responses of Christianity to be ACTUALLY changed?
• Am I ready to undertake the process of exploring my true heart motivations, warts and all?
• Is my Christian environment asking me to be-have or allowing me to be-changed?
• Does  preaching, leaders or discipleship courses change my core self or just ask for a change of behaviour?
• Do I want to be changed at core level to perhaps NEVER be a prominent minister/ministry?
• Can I distinguish between God's expressed will for me to be transformed and the expectation on me to perform?
• Have I imported 'managers' to play karaoke to Jesus in my life?

The challenge to Christianity is authenticity.  We have rightly appealed for Godly character to be formed but have we settled for Caricatures?  Does our insecurity or lack of faith lead to being more like a Christian than more like Christ? Do we fail to question our church environment because it perpetuates 'self' when self needs to be cross-bound?  I don't want England to win the world cup with imported help and I don't want to take another step in Christ unless it is entirely managed by my Creator.

Gary Ward

The Ego's need for Genius

One of my main passions is to refocus the nature of gifts in the church.  Many Christians have been taught that they are a gift to the church, an idea that has led to inflated ego and a value system being imposed upon God's children.  The bible says we are given gifts and like all gifts they need to be passed to the one they are meant for.  Taking on the identity of a gift is error in the church as God is the giver of every gift and we simply pass it on to others as led.

I was recently watching a talk by writer Elizabeth Gilbert and she pointed out something very interesting.  She said that genius used to be something that was detached from your being and the genius would work through you to create.  If God works through Christians then it could be fair to say that this idea fits with Christianity.  I have no problem at all imagining that a third party such as an angel can work through us in our general field of creativity and this also applies to demonic forces should we let them.  I wouldn't force this into a doctrine  and right now I am just playing with ideas.

That said I have always been struck with Eph. 2:10 For we are God's workmanship...   the word workmanship is 'poema' in the original Greek.  The word 'poem' comes from this.  Amazing!  God's creativity is worked through us!  You have a genius working through you and he is the great 'I Am.' we need no other!   The drive for Christians to develop some kind of identity for themselves is driven by the misconception that a gift is their own identity.

The idea that 'genius' was a third party working through a person disappeared as Europe strove for self importance in the Renaissance .  Instead of 'having' a genius people 'became' a genius!  Identity was taken on by the person and if you take this to its logical conclusion you will agree it can lead to  the 'have's' and the 'have-nots.'  From here we then have a class system imposed upon gift, talent and ability.  Does this sound familiar?  Isn't gift, talent and ability rewarded at different levels in this world?  Of course,  that's how society sees our roles, tasks and functions on earth.  When this set of values is imposed on church we have a problem.  How can a 'have' and 'have-not' system work amongst brothers and sisters?

It doesn't, yet millions of Christians exist within these wrong attitudes to 'ability'.  The truth is that God is your Genius!  He wants to work through you and your only challenge is to find how God can work through YOU! Don't be fooled into thinking that others are somehow superior or you are less-than amongst brothers and sisters.  And don't be thinking creative genius is just how you paint, act or sing.  God's Genius does not fit into our narrow perspective.  It is far reaching and involves every step of our interaction with this world.  Enjoy being you.