Comments on: following jesus into leadership part 2

By: emerging mosaic » Blog Archive » following jesus into leadership part 2

Sun, 01 Jul 2007 05:00:04 +0000

[...] This entry was posted on Thursday, August 25th, 2005 at 12:18 pm and is filed under emerging church. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. [...]

By: ::my four walls:: » 2005 » September

::my four walls:: » 2005 » September — Mon, 24 Oct 2005 04:25:12 +0000

[...] wow, i had no idea i was a far out radical extremist… ok it’s true i am. apparently my comments on jesus and leadership ruffled the feathers of some. i think it’s from a misunderstanding of what i said and what was read into it. ahhh the difficulties of communication. emergent mosaic and john frye both responded to what i’ve said and seem to think i’ve “swung too far”. i’m not sure where i’ve swung though. [...]

By: lucas

lucas — Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:19:30 +0000

that’s why i’ve said that the model frost and hirsch draw from ephesians 4 is not implying things about jesus leadership “style”. ephesians is paul talking to the church in ephesus about distributions of gifts. i’m not sure why you keep insisting this implies something about jesus.

i didn’t quite understand your last sentence. sounded like something about it being reactionary. i will check out the link.

By: Andre

Andre — Tue, 06 Sep 2005 12:21:02 +0000

Lucas,
I still have the same question. If I take all this and frost at face value. Does it mean I don’t see in Jesus patterns of leadership, etc that don’t fit the flat model the espouse. I think one reason am I reacting with just hesitation is that this feel more like a reaction to a (ecidingly NA) human distortion, than an expression of a holistic faith.

I am more drawn to the kind of distributed servant leadership that is described here.

By: lucas

lucas — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 23:38:02 +0000

thanks andre… i should give john the benefit of the doubt too. you should read frost and hirsch’s book. i know they feel pretty strongly about the APEPT model, but they do a good job of explaining it with solid research and biblical reference. i’m certainly open to other ideas, but they’ve done an excellent job explaining this model.

the APEPT model has less to do with who jesus was and more to do with how the church functions. if you could just read hirsch and frost’s chapter on APEPT i think it would help clarify a lot for you.

By: Andre

Andre — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 23:23:30 +0000

Lucas,
Don’t mean to bale on John but that was his language not mine. My concern was what seemed to be an assumption that the flat model is defacto the most appropriate leadership model for the emerging church.

I have not read Hirsch and Frost’s book yet, so I hesitate to draw final conclusions. But what has been communicated to me about it makes me reluctant buy into their view of the shape of things to come. It feels disconnected from many things (including a biblical view of Jesus leadership categories and all, which BTW was hardly democratic) that I believe are essential as we evolve toward the expression of ecclesia we currently call the emerging church.

As for dialog in the biosphere it is certainly different than anything we have had before so we just need to keep talking as we have to resolve miscommunication.

By: lucas

lucas — Mon, 05 Sep 2005 22:41:30 +0000

please comment on the blog. i love the dialogue. unfortunately the comments came off as dismissive. especially john’s comment that i’ve “swung too far”.

i’m not sold out to any models for leadership. just like categories for jesus. but i do think we have to rethink leadership and hirsch and frost make a pretty strong case for the flat model. this doesn’t mean there are no pastors or leaders. it means that they are just part of the broader leadership model.

i also blogged recently about the difficulties of dialogue online. part of it is a lack of prior personal relationship that is sort of a basis for the dialogue. if knew you or john better this probably would never have happened. so hopefully i will and we can avoid miscommunication better in the future. water under the bridge my friends.

By: Andre

Andre — Fri, 02 Sep 2005 14:58:47 +0000

Lucas,

When I ask questions like was Jesus a pastor or leader they are meant to be rhetorical and the foundation for a more substantive conversation which I think we are having. I agree that jesus is beyond our categories. I don’t agree on what that means for the leadership model we use in emerging faith communities. I think there are several options that need to be explored (ex. distributed leadership) rather than defulting to the flat model approach.

I appreciate your thoughts even if I disagree. I was trying to dialogue about what you’ve said on your blog, nothing personal. I have not been offended by anything you’ve written and you have every right to believe it. I just disagree.
I’m sorry if you feel misunderstood. I’ll not comment on your blog in the future if you prefer.

By: lucas

lucas — Thu, 01 Sep 2005 17:05:55 +0000

i think you guys have misunderstood what i’ve written and i would appreciate the conversation happening WITH me instead of ABOUT me.

i was responding to a comment where someone asked, “was jesus a pastor or a leader?” in that context i chose to emphasize the fact that jesus is always beyond our categories. never did i say that i think we should not have pastors or leaders.

in my response to john’s comment on my blog i agreed with his distinction between an american cultural understanding of pastor/leader and the characteristics of those that jesus displays in the scriptures.

careful with your words fellas and i will be with mine as well.

By: John Frye

John Frye — Mon, 29 Aug 2005 12:53:38 +0000

Andre, I went to “my four walls” and responded to Lucas’ post. I appreciate the balance you’re trying to bring to the conversation about Jesus being a pastor and leader. I agree with you that Lucas has swung too far the other way. Check out my site for a post on “One Chief Pastor: Many Under-Pastors.”