Final post on church transition.

I am not an expert in the realm of transitions and organisational change but as far as established church expressions are concerned let me suggest two aspects.

Develop a twin track approach

There are two opposite ways of approaching change. One way is to blow up what is here as it is past its sale by date. This often means that we lose what the Lord wished to transition. (We might, however, well be able to blow up the structure if the relationships of the people can hold together.) The other way is to hold tightly to what we have in the hope that it will move forward. I cannot say I have any optimism for the second approach as it seriously underestimates the power of organisations to pull toward a negative ‘steady-state’ scenario.

In contrast to the above two approaches I suggest a third way that can be profitably explored. It is that of working along two tracks, provided we act within the boundaries of the following phrase

• don’t abandon what is here but invest into what is rising, into the future

When we abandon the future but invest into what is here we will be in enormous trouble. The future only belongs to those who prepare for it and invest in it. So what do I mean by twin tracks?

There is a track that is already established and many people are on that. In shorthand I can call it church as we have it, normally congregational church. There might be no need to abandon it, but to use it where seed for transition can be sowed and to encourage dialogue so that people engage with the issues. However, if we simply put our faith that what we have will transition I think we will find with hindsight that we were somewhat naïve. It is for this reason that I suggest we begin to invest in a second track.

The second track is not an alternative version of what we have, some trendy up-to-date congregating of people. Rather it is more like an alternative landscape alongside the existing one, and on this landscape we begin to encourage new experimental shapes that relate to the gates that have to be occupied and to the dreams within people. It is not an alternative church meeting, but an alternative setting where church people are involved in doing kingdom work in the world.

As an investment is made into those settings, stories will filter back of what God is doing in his world. Stories have always been what feed movements and the purpose of the stories (from ordinary people) is to stir the belief that others too can step out in what is in their hearts. By working in this way we are not demeaning what we are currently involved in, but we are certainly not working to preserve it (remember Abraham’s test of Gen. 22 was to go beyond the level of self-preservation: only then was there an authority released to occupy the gates). Through investing in the future alternative landscape we will be helping to accelerate a movement from a reliance on the congregational setting to an involvement in mission.

Will it be successful? There are of course no guarantees but effective leadership will mean that we have to withdraw support from certain aspects. By so doing we will undercut the dependency culture that can arise so easily. Even Jesus spoke of how it was better that he withdrew so that the disciples could then develop. In that sense, he made sure he was not the centre. The leaving of vacuums where something can either collapse or come to a new level is a brave but necessary step.

We must also make sure we do not hold up new examples as the way to do it. We are not looking for a new thing to replace the former way, but of living (and tentative) examples of what can happen when people are empowered to pursue what the Lord is putting on their hearts.

Allow and encourage conversations

Conversations take time. They also take place best when we do not have a preconceived idea of what the outcome can be. Hence they are better earlier in the process rather than later. For them to be profitable they need to be taking place by the time there is the coming apart at the seams stage (and preferably before this).

A possible way for conversation to take place is to set aside time of at least a few hours. To let people know that there will be an open forum looking at the way forward, to which all are welcome. At the appinted time here is a suggested process (adapted and a pale summary from The Power of Spirit: by Harrison Owen):

• a chair person simply outlines why the people are together without making any comment about what the outcome should be (we are going to have to trust the Holy Spirit with the outcome)
• as far as possible it is helpful to have everyone sitting in a circle – no hierarchies and no ‘back rows’
• people are invited to write down every issue as they see it that should be addressed. Those are placed by each person on a large blank board. This process will probably take about 40 or so minutes
• once those are placed there the issues need to be grouped together
• once grouped together there needs to be a recognition of the issues that are particularly ‘hot issues’ and ones that need to be prioritised
• this all needs to be fed back, and from there times and places set for the discussion of those by action groups. Such groups need to be led by a suitable facilitating person
• at a future stage those groups will report back with their work, from where priorities will be set and action

Another way of facilitating conversation is to set people in small groups on a table and let them discuss, doodle etc. there (World Cafe style, from the book of that title). Then move to a new table and let the richness of conversation develop.

However, true conversation is facilitated it all takes time, and it is vital that hearing all the voices is encouraged with centralised control being absent.

The future?

Perhaps there can be a meeting of the two pathways at a later stage: the pathway where there is the hoped for new mode of being, and the one that had the growth at the beginning of the transition do cross one more time.

My perception is that many people and groups are in the dusk / dawn situation; others are beginning to find themselves in a situation where the old way of working is no longer producing the same level of fruit it used to. Seems this points to a few interesting years ahead – new modes of being arise!

A map for change:

Selah…. or I am about to take a break for a few days. Hope you enjoyed these past couple of weeks.

The chaos, the questions, the pain: worth it all?

A new mode of being: what this new mode will be cannot be predetermined, although there are some elements that will manifest. It must be marked by a new level of incarnated mission. Not simply mission in the sense of activity but in the sense of being: an immersion in the context through identification and love. There will arise new language to articulate the new mode, and any leadership that emerges will be from those who are able to take on the responsibilities in the new phase. Such leaders will not be living from position or appointment, but from their sense of vision and therefore anointing. They will also discover others coalescing around them who are ready to pioneer fresh things.

The vision element within such groups will be very fresh. Although the vision will be coherent across the group it will not be centred in a neat vision statement (indeed it will not need to be centred in such a statement as the people will embody the vision). They will become the statement of the vision, and so the vision(s) can also be quite diversely expressed.

The good news is then that a transition can occur. The journey, as always, seems to be down before there is a rising to a new level. Disturbance and trouble will precede the well-being that can be experienced later. Church change is challenging and it is often wise to have objective skilled people involved in helping in the process (just as it is most helpful to have a mid-wife involved in the birth scenario – my great medical knowledge coming forth yet again here!).

Before a final post (tomorrow) on a couple of elements that might be helpful to have in place through the change, let me again emphasise where I began this series. Change is effected:

• when we focus more on the release of the body than changing the church, and
• that we need whatever the Lord is doing in the world to help us embrace our ‘conversion’.

Is the light going or is there a new day rising? Sometimes that is hard to tell and in many senses the answer in this transitionary sequence is both.

Dusk and dawn

The process we are considering (and it is important to remember that it is not marked by neat crossing over points) continues and there comes a time when the former phase of being is almost gone, but a new mode has not yet emerged. More has gone than has appeared – hence the lack of clear light.

How this time is worked with is very important.

Temptations arise to find something that works. This can be a solution from within, or the adoption of a model that seems to work elsewhere. To move to a solution too quickly must be resisted. In the chaos of not knowing the way forward the space and environment for creativity appears. The pain and even the confusion are the framework that will become the birth canal.

Premature births, and even still births, can take place, but this phase will teach us to learn to trust God and to enjoy being (seeking to resist the temptation of doing). Conversations will become so important in this phase, and the ability to listen to one another will become paramount.

There will also be some voices that probably raise a sound calling for a return to the old ways, or quickly push for a re-inventing of what has been.

However, there is no going back. There has been too much movement for there to be a return to the former thing. For those who are courageous and willing to take a risk (or for those who cannot do anything else!) there is another stage to come. It will not, and must not, come quickly for there has to be an effective detoxification from the old ways.

Inevitably there will be a sense of ‘two steps forward and one back’ and also of ‘one step forward and two back’. Overall though there will be movement forward and then clarity will begin to come into aspects of what needs to take place. The clarity will not be over the whole spectrum but into parts of the future. It will not be a time for a new ‘vision statement’ to be drafted, but a few green shoots will begin to emerge in a few random places. Take hope from that, but do not seek to make bold statements about what is taking place.

The process of questions being asked, a realisation that certain observations calls into question the accuracy of the ‘success’ story of the organisation is where both the crisis and the journey toward a new mode of being begins.

As the process continues there is an increasing manifestation of things coming apart at the seams, at the places where things have been joined together. In this prcoess there rises a greater expression of individuality. This expression will both be bad, in the sense of independence and also good, as fresh creativity of thought comes through. However, whether bad or good, it is necessary.

Typical events that take place are of:

• new relationships forming (and old ones weakening or dissolving
• some people spinning out of the organisation
• at the same time as others solidify around current leadership.

And if there is no recognition of the process (and there seldom is ) then leadership becomes even more centrist. Talks of vision, new shapes, we are family / relationally-oriented not organisational become more common.

All these signs mark the beginning of a new beginning, for the process is not going to stop there, but will proceed to further stages. It does though often mark a point of division, for some will want to go on (or not be able to go back) while others will solidify around what has been. This normally means a redefining of the organisation, with it becoming both smaller, but often also with a tighter vision statement to hold it together.

If there is no recognition that an old way of being is over and there has to be change, and a process put in place, that has a commitment to find a new way of being, then the natural process of shaking and questioning will continue. Those tensions can become so evident that the organisation cannot hold together and at this stage there are organisations that split right apart.

As we make our way up the growth curve I have put a marker in: Beginning of crisis. As noted yesterday this will not be very evident as the ‘growth curve’ is still headed in an upward direction. However the destabilising is beginning.

Instability: the questions arising

This process has a reasonably gentle beginningand is not normally recognised in the early stages. It begins when certain events do not fit into the meta-narrative that has held the organisation together. These aberrations can be ignored as they are not seen to be significant. Those that voice the questions have, after all, never really fully fitted. For those who are closer to the centre nothing changes. Leadership, often has a strong vested interest in the overarching narrative being true, they are often too tied to the organisation and its success to notice that there might be a problem. It is this strong alignment that blinds them.

It is rather those on the edge that notice that all is not well, and it is there that the shaking is experienced first. Questions are formulated that challenge the current practices and, of course, the identity of the organisation. If the vested interest at the centre is high the questions will be silenced and those raising the questions marginalised.

However, this phase is what marks the opening of a doorway and the possible beginnings of a journey to a new mode of being. The questions do not disappear but become even more acute (and adding God to the mix!!) God will not allow what is being shaken to stabilise again.

Change then is in the air, but it is seldom that the change is going to be led by the current leaders because of their alignment (and also, in some cases, their vested interest). Leaders, for their part, now have to work harder to produce the same level of results and their inner tension increases. As the process slowly gains momentum some leaders experience burnout, a few will even jump ship at this stage, but the majority tighten the shape of the organisation.

Sounds like fun? Not at all, the tensions are increasing. If the process is not halted then there is pressure on the places where the organisation has been held together. ‘Oh, no, quick someone, a needle and thread, that seam is coming apart!.’

There is a default (and not a bad thing in itself) for organisations to move toward stability. The problem arises when the stability of the organisation causes the organisation itself to become resistant to change. For change to occur the stability will have to be disturbed if there is to be any  real progress.

The famous words of ‘we have always done it this way’ become the voice that resists the future.

Prophets are welcome in the organisation when they prophesy its success, but often become marginalised as the growth phase continues, for they are becoming aware that everything is about to be shaken. (Prophets need to be responding to the coming phase not basking in a current phase.)

During the time of stability roles are easily understood. Leadership is clear, both in the sense of who the leaders are, and they are also clear in term of vision. There is an overall resonance between what is set out as the vision and what is the vision of the body of people. There will always be those who do not fit the organisation (the mavericks) but generally speaking there will be a good healthy fit for most people. This ‘happy’ phase releases an effective energy and leads to effectiveness and to growth: real or perceived.

In this phase virtually everyone knows and understands their place and operate within it successfully, although there are a few who need to be ‘put’ in their place. Only a very few find themselves leaving the organisation because they did not fit. Such an organisation has a good feel to it and there is an overall sense of fulfilment. However, change is coming. The change comes before there is real evidence of any crisis. In our map of yesterday the ‘growth’ curve is still on the up: it will take faith to believe that changes are needed, or we begin to observe the signs: signs that are happening, not at the centre, but more so at the periphery.

The only constant is that there will be constant change. Such theories as chaos theory is both challenging: we do not like chaos; and comforting: chaos can produce an order all of itself (and without our help) that is life- and releasing-focused. When we decide that we are going on a journey to a place called ‘there’ the one thing we know is that ‘there’ is not ‘here’. We might always be ‘here’ but are always going away from ‘here’ to ‘there’.

Maybe I am using language that confuses but perhaps the language is helpful because I am seeking to say that we have to be real and not ideal. We will always be where we are – accept it thankfully, and humbly; we will never ‘arrive’. But don’t lose sight of a vision of a new scenario rising. God is a God who answers prayer – I am so optimistic that there will be a shift in the Western world, and in the Western church.

Change is constant but not always at a constant pace and in the first quarter of this century there will be major changes in the church in the Western world, so I trust that what I outline here will help give some understanding to the common uncomfortable pathway during times of great change. If we can understand how to traverse major change then we will be better equipped to cope with the adjustments that are needed during less traumatic times.

I write with a perspective that not all groups of people are asked to journey in the same way and at the same pace. This does not make one group further on than others, or superior to others. As Jesus said to Peter (John 21) ‘what is that to do with you?’ We each must make the response we have to make, so I am writing to those who have found themselves being disturbed from top to bottom.

A map for change:

I have borrowed and adapted a common curve used in explaining growth and development. Here is how I am reading this:

Stage 1: a stable state leading to growth or fulfilment of vision. This is when leadership is clear, everyone knows their place and what is expected of them. Can life get any better than this – for we all belong to something of significance?

Stage 2: the beginning of crisis. And yet the curve is destined to go up further – so the question comes from some ‘what crisis?’ It takes faith to see that major change must take place. The conviction is also re-enforced in some because of the questions that are being raised. Why these questions arise and for whom they are an issue we will have to explore further.

Stage 3: now the world views are pulling people in two different directions. And overall there is a coming apart at the seams – there can be no holding of it together in the old framework.

Stage 4: for those who have allowed the questions to continue to disturb them they enter the hardest time yet. I think ‘dusk and dawn’ is a good description. Is it the disappearance of light or the beginning of a new day? The answer seems to me to be both. If there is a willingness to persist with the journey then there is the possibility of another stage.

Stage 5: a new mode of being. What does it look like? Well it won’t be ‘here’ and it will never be ‘there’ so we have to journey and discover.

Over the next few days I will try and post on each stage.

I have had a number of comments regarding the issue of time-lines that have been very helpful. I had tentatively put ages next to the phases, and that has been queried; I have also had comments asking if it is really as linear as I have put it; as well as other astute observations. I have decided I shoudl at least try and modify what I have written.

I have also had a comment in from John Riddell on the March 24-28 Southdowns prayer week and because this might be lost in the past here is a link to that should you wish to read it.

Time line: running, walking, sitting – some modifications

The (rough) age guide:

1. Although these were rough approximations, and if we compare ages now with the lives of some of the OT patriarchs / matriarchs we would have them sitting a long time, and conversely age expectancy in our culture is considerably longer that other cultures, so we have a mismatch. I am particularly looking at the Western (our context) scenario – God works within culture (he is incarnational). So I could have written about 3 phases of life and not suggested any age alongside the phases; and it might have been better to have done that. However, I chose to give rough approximations.

2. I think that the three phases can be applied wider than just to three phases in our lives. Perhaps it can be applied to our involvement in a project / situation. We might begin with the running phase – lots of energy and activity, then walking as we work it through with partners and there grows a steady momentum, through to a later stage of being more in a sitting / resource stance to the project/ situation.

3. Then there will also be a personality aspect that comes to play in the mix. There will be those of us who are more naturally runners – get involved earlier in something, are always looking for the next thing; walkers – come join in later and are essential to get it moving; sitters – who come with the wisdom and help move people into their most fruitful place etc.

(In the above situations again it is worth noting that we are talking approximations: there is no wonderful box to be used to define people or phases by… not everything is in life is as linear as we might suppose.)

4. With regard to those who come to Christ later – so for example they have not had the Lord deal with the issues that might have come up in their late teens-early thirties phase. Perhaps two perspectives here: God is at work before we come to Christ, so he is not simply at work in those who know the Lord; and secondly, he is a redeemer. What has been done to us, he will work on to redeem and we will develop a life message there. Even in our weakness and damage there will be a work of God that will mean that what he does in us will become what he begins to do through us. In saying this I would be looking for an acceleration of of God’s work there. We will look to the ‘thief’ to have to give back what he has stolen.

5. In all the above perhaps the age apect is very relative and perhaps it is better simply to talk of phases that approximate to what takes place in time-spans of our lives.

6. And finally: perhaps in one situation we might be running, another walking, another sitting. However, I still think the three phases broadly hold together across one’s lifespan.

There is one other aspect I wish to comment on again, and that is on the issue of relative maturity. Maturity is becoming more Christ-like, but there is another aspect to it and that is to do with being mature relative to the phase in life I am at.

I had the privilege of living in a three-generational house. I was the first of three generations. The reason why there was a house to live in was diligent work, discipline over finances, and such. I coudl have said: the reason why there is a house here is because of me, so respect it, I will have your life here because that is a good thing, but do not change the furniture nor the decoration. I can appeal to history and my work – but to do so would be to be immature. I might be more mature than the other generations, but maturity is relative, so more is expected: basically the generation that I represent in the house in that situation is the generation that has to make the changes.

In the work of the kingdom, as we move through the generational phases the more we become the first of three generations the more we are the ones who need to be willing to change. We desperately need the second adn third generations to be the ones who do change the furniture and the decorations. We will become less comfortable not more so with what goes on – if we make a mature response. Too often it is the younger generation that is expected to make the changes to fit with the former generations.

There needs to be respect for the wisdom that the older generations carry but they have to also grow and not stagnate in their maturing process. Hence my question about whether we can have a more mature (relatively speaking) younger generation than older generation.

I really value the comments – they help provoke me.

The last series of posts have been on transition: personal ones and how we respond, then also on how we inevitably adjust and move into new phases as we grow older (and hopefully more mature). Transition is not easy, but I believe it is vital that we learn how to respond, and how to find a new level of security in the Lord.

At this point in time – for Western society, and certainly for the Western church, there are many transitions to face. The style of leadership, the purpose of being in community and how that is expressed is pressing in on us. We truly are in a post-christendom phase. Where christendom still reigns it seems to me that the demise of that will be speedy. I shed no tears over that, although the insecurities that are raised are many. We are being called to a journey that has many pitfalls.

I have often thought about how do we change the church – and of course the language is wrong – only God can do that. But laying the language on one side, there are two main convictions that have grown within me:

1) we need to emphasise the release of the body. It was in Liquid Church that Pete Ward suggested rather than say ‘the church is the body of Christ’ that we begin to say ‘the body of Christ is the church’. So we do not start with what we think we understand, but give our energies to the release of God’s people and only when they are released do we have the church.

It seems to me that much ‘mission-shaped church’ is still a central organisation that encourages mission. Surely mission-shaped is where the body of Christ is permissioned and encouraged where it is, rather than somewhere else.

2) the second aspect is to consider what I have termed ‘double conversions’. Peter or Cornelius who is converted? The Bible is very provocative to evangelicals for Peter says that prior to Cornelius’ conversion to Jesus he was accepted… maybe the narrative is more about Peter’s conversion – three times he has the vision, the number 3 being a major marker in Peter’s spiritual journey.

So the second way in which there will be a change is when the church is converted by what God is doing in the world. The world needs Jesus, but the church needs the world.

I was planning on putting up a series of posts on organisational change, but have decided to rather put it a little more provacatively and write about church. There are connecting points to organisational change but there are also some differences:

• the church, in the sense of a distinct community of believers, is a voluntary organisation. Wages and job descriptions are not part of it – or at least not part of it for the 80% (the 20-80 rule) so there are large numbers who can simply walk away.
• the Holy Spirit is responding to the prayers of the saints, that the Imperial spirit come down. And even when there has been no direct prayer for that, once prayer is launched against ruling powers it is not long before we find ourselves being shaken.
• 1994 was when the voice of the Lord was heard to say very loudly ‘I want my church back’, so we are living in the aftermath of that. (BTW: I had an email this morning:

I thought you may be interested in this; I was driving in North Wales and listening to a science programme on Radio 4. It said that in1994 there was a movement of the tectonic plates deep within earth that caused the earth to wobble or vibrate. Such was Its effect that it released the sound of a bell or a chime from the earth that lasted for weeks!!! Awesome.)

My plans then are to put a few thoughts together on church transition – will keep my head down low as might not be to every one’s liking!!

I cannot profess what I have written is totally accurate – or maybe I should say I can profess that it is not totally accurate. Accurate or not the real issue is catching up on what the Lord is doing.

Thank God he is the redeemer and gives back the years that the locusts have eaten.

In facing the tests along the way it is easy to see if we do not deal with the internal tests in the running phase we will find it hard to deal with the relational tests of the walking phase, and the call toward (public) anonymity in the sitting phase.

If we fudge issues then we will be trying to move on but will find that we are being dragged back.

Repentance is very powerful, and a calling on the grace of God to restore what we were unable to hold on to. If there are tests that we should have won through on in one phase but have not, we can face them later and in a shorter period of time we can win through. In months we can deal with what might have taken years for us to deal with at an earlier stage.

In using the running, walking, sitting analogy I am aware that life does not compartmentalise itself in nice neat portions. However, it is also clear that if there are distinct phases that one can grow in maturity throughout life but become less (relatively-speaking) mature. I might be more mature now as a 52 year old than when I was 22 – that should be obvious for all to see; however I might have been a more mature 22 year old than I am as a 5 year old. Potentials that were obvious might not have been realised.

In church / community life I ask who should make the adjustments? The younger or the older? Hezekiah messed it up for the future – he did not adjust for future generations. Should it not be that as we get older that we realise we are graciously allowed to connect to those younger, that we are allowed to be inconvenienced, and as a result find that even we are being renewed.

Here’s to a rising generation of runners, walkers and sitters. 3generations in maturity, not judging one another, but moving throughout the land.

Rough age frame: 55-?

Before beginning to write I want to emphasise that this is not retirement: but a change of phase. It will mean less visibility but becoming a greater resource to others: to those running and those walking.

(If the former posts were too subjective – maybe projecting my experience on the rest of the world, this one might be totally presumptive and way off. I might revisit in a decade or so!)

In the sitting phase the tests are ones of finding a new place in relationship to others. It will be very demanding particularly with a measure of muteness when seeing the mistakes (and potential mistakes) of others and also then standing with them once they have made mistakes as well as becoming part of the solution for them.

Abraham not only gave way to Lot and took the humble pathway, he was there to rescue him when he found himself in trouble.

In this phase there is tremendous opportunity to connect people and the real connections are made when we are often simply the catalyst in the mix.

• We learn how to strengthen those who have walked into failure and disappointment

we have new resources to believe in people. That once they turn they can strengthen others.

• The faith that is developed is expressed as:

communicating the big sweep of God at work in history. That the work of God has wonderful inbreakings but with / without those inbreakings we labour for the ‘long haul’.

This big picture faith means we are willing increasingly to act small. To find the few to release what we have to without any strings attached. The work we are involved in becomes truly God’s work not ours.

• Success is not now personal, nor simply corporate

‘I’ has given way to ‘we’ but now is being shaped as a legacy for the future. This legacy is not one with our name on it.

• We carry one message that has many expressions
  

The days of being influenced by many become less, the streams of influence are now flowing more as a river, and in one sense there will not be a lot more change to take place. (Of course continual changes of attitude, growth of humility, etc., but by this phase we have become the person we essentially are.

It is not unusual for there to be a strategic shift at this stage into a new place that releases the person we are. (Or there can be a shift due to the tiredness of the previous years.)

In this phase we will sit, rejoicing when we see others go much further than we do. Our words to criticise will be few, liekwise there will be few words of correction – we will have learned that the Holy Spirit requires our silence more than our speech. The key to this phase is allowing those coming up to be the ones who change the furniture and the decoration of the house. Connecting to the few and many times only on a few occasions will be understood as investing in the future.

The weakness that will try and grip us in this phase is of either trying to hold on to what has been or to slow everything down through our ‘wisdom’. I think this can be the least visible phase, but by the grace of God the most influential.