We often find ourselves running from the system.  The system creates for us an unbearable expression of authority, crying to be deconstructed and reconstructed.  To do so would require the approval of those who operate the system and thrive in its authority.  Deconstructing the system affects control.  When you have fought so long for control, you do not easily give it up.

I found this past week a flawed system.  It needs to be deconstructed and reconstructed.  Power and control need to b in the hands of those who live within the context of the system, not those who hardly interact within it.

Being a systems guy, a macro-leader, and a believer in complexity (or chaotic systems), if I were asked my opinion of how to deconstruct the system, an opinion would be offered.

 Todays thought regards strategic planning, which has become prevalent in ministry.  Some argue that strategic planning is way too CEO and corporate, though strategic planning is fading even in the business world.  In addition, it can deter us from the move of the Spirit as we want to stick to the plan.  It’s one thing to be prepared, it’s another to stick to the plan.  Consider this thought:

If you want to know what happens to “planners,” check out the story of the 10 Bridesmaids in Matthew 25:1-13. 5 were strategic planners, and kept “to the plan” and trimmed their wicks accordingly. 5 were Scouts  – “Be Prepared”  -  since they had now way of knowing when the bridegroom is going to arrive. You always have to be in a state of expectation and awareness, constantly paying attention.  And the ones who went to the party were the Scouts.

The strategic planners have one of the most horrid things ever spoken about anyone said of them: “And the door was shut.” The doors of the future are being shut to us because we think “planning” not “preparedness.”

Do you plan or prepare?  Preparedness organic, an aspect of complexity or chaos theory.  It is sensitive to the moving and wooing of the Spirit.  Planning is wooden and rigid and structured.

Talk about that…

I love the book The Starfish and the Spider. I blogged through the book this past summer. It is certainly worth reading. Recently, I received an email that excited me because one of the authors of the book will be available to us as part of a live vodcast, (that’s a video webcast for those of you in Rio Linda) with Spencer Burke. Here’s part of the email I received:

Join us for a free webcast this Thursday at 9pm Eastern (6 Pacific) with Spencer Burke and Ori Brafman, courtesy of Soularize.net and Shapevine. Come experience firsthand the content and technology of this year’s learning party!

Ori Brafman is a peace and economic development consultant and activist. He is co-author of indie business cult favorite The Starfish and the Spider, about leaderless groups and what makes them so powerful.

Spencer Burke is a “pastor alumnus,” author, speaker and founder of TheOOZE.com. In Thursday’s interview Spencer will talk to Ori about the Church that primarily running as a Spider organization in a Starfish world; together, we’ll investigate Starfish front-runners and Hybrids—can organic and institutional models can live in harmony?

You can ask Ori and Spencer question, take live polls, and more. We’ll pull your questions from the chat window and answer them live via streaming video. There’s no software to download—Mac AND PC compatible; use any web browser with high-speed internet access.

WHEN: This Thursday, October 18—at 6pm pacific/9pm eastern

WHERE: http://Soularize.net/feedlive. Just click the “Preview” button and you’re in.

This will be worth your time.

To achieve a decentralized system, the right leader must be in place.  The character required of the person that can allow such a decentralized and messy organization to exist is great.  It requires a person who is not worried about his own success apart from the success of those around him.  It requires a humility that not only realizes that the leader does not have all the answers, but also that the answers can be found in the creativity of those around him.  It also requires that the leader share the spotlight.

Leadership like this is leadership modeled.  That modeling is reflective of the character of the leader.  If the leader is not humble, he will not model humility.  If he does not have a genuine love for the success of others, he will not model it.  However, if humility is modeled, if shared success is modeled, and if the leader allows others to be part of or fully in charge of a creative solution to whatever issue arises, that modeling actually inspires and invigorates creativity within the organization.

Unfortunately, the contemporary models of leadership elevate the star, the one who had rocketed up the leadership ladder.  These men look good, talk well, and have a personality that can light up a room.  They are charismatic, charming, and powerful.  Sadly, many of them have little substance to compliment their style.

The ideal candidate for decentralized, messy leadership is one who heeds the words of the Apostle Paul in Philippians 4:13:  “I can do all things through him who strengthens me.”  In this passage, Paul gives us the ingredients of leadership in a decentralized culture.  Those ingredients are courage, confidence, and humility.

Paul says that the Christ-follower can do all things.  A Christ-follower exhibits confidence that all things can be done.  This is not an expression of arrogance, but of confidence.  The courage to attempt “all things” comes from the strength of Christ.  The person’s confidence is rightly placed, not in his own efforts but in conjunction with the Other.  His courage comes from the strength drawn from the Other.  Paul then defines the Other as Christ, and when one realized nothing can be done except through Christ, not only has he found the secret to living, but the ingredients for effective leadership.  For Christian leadership, the emphasis is placed on a God-developed charisma, not the transient aspects, such as personality, looks, and intellect.  It is based around substance not style.

In this model, a person realizes that apart from others nothing gets done well (humility).  Confidence is placed not solely in oneself, but realizes that others can accomplish great things as well.  When a leader appropriates these two ingredients, he can muster the courage to risk, experiment, innovate and even fail.  Modeling that confidence, humility, and courage often leads to an emboldened organization free to be creative and responsible.

Since everyone else who blogs on SBC issues is taking a break, and since I have chosen not to post on the SBC in months, I’ll comment on the latest blog from Bob Roberts about what might be a great way to re-organize the SBC. Bob says (emphasis mine):

So as I’m sitting there, at the SBC last week a spiritual child and descendant of all these people, my heart began to break. What are we doing with all we’ve been given? How are we making the world different? How are we changing with the times so that we will be a convention that one hundred years from now will have more than a hundred million constituents? What would it look like if the SBC one and only mandate was to extend and live out the Kingdom of God in all domains in the entire world mobilizing the entire body of Christ? These are questions I focus our church on and our church planters on and other groups I work with. What if you focused 16 million people on that – but alas – others have tried to do the same thing, and it winds up being programs, and etc. and so on and so on and so on.

What would it look like? OK, just for fun – let’s dream . . .

First, we would re-orient the Cooperative Program. The largest amount of money we spend, and the most important budget our 45,000 churches focused on would be every single churches mission budget. If they’re going to feel that, they have to develop that. They can’t just send in their money and read stories of what other people are doing. Our greatest days that planted the greatest seeds were done without the Cooperative Program – it didn’t come on the scene until 1925 – long after our decades long movement had been going. It was a great program – it centralized things and allowed everyone to get to play a role. BUT, the world has changed. Everyone is connected, and everyone wants to play, and theologically as Baptist especially with our belief on world evangelization and congregational life we more than any group on the face of the earth we should do all we can to engage every Baptist to reach the world. The old paradigm of pray, give, and some go must change – and it is changing with new and younger pastors across the country – and as the early 20’s come into leadership it will change even more because they are more global and hands on than any generation we’ve ever seen. This is good not bad for us – it insures we’ll have a narrative and leaders – if we allow them to play ball. People want to be a part of an exciting story. It has to be their story – it can’t be someone else’s story of someone who lived a hundred years ago, or who is doing it now. They want their hands dirty – they long to be hero’s and we should as “religious” leaders use all we can to make them the heroes, not us. But, if they can’t because the funding issue prevents them from being involved because they have to give x % to the denomination, or they give the money but their members can’t be involved, – what is left for them to give. The CP has become very expensive for local churches wanting to do missional things. It comes to feel like a tax, I don’t think we’ll ever see a Baptist tea party – I do think young pastors will just quietly ease out in favor of playing ball with other networks and groups that allow and even encourage local churches to engage aggressively. If missions is the most important budget in the church, and God can speak to every single local church, why shouldn’t that church develop that 10% plus? At NorthWood, over 25% of our total receipts generally goes to missions – but not the CP in Nashville.

Second, we would begin to work collaboratively – which we don’t do a lot of now. The place in the convention where they do try this more than anywhere is the IMB – some churches are acting as strategy coordinators for countries – but what if every church was trained, mobilized and engaged in a city or people group around the world? This is the goal – no one would disagree on that. In the new book Wikinomics, Don Tapscott describes in brilliant form how the world is going to communicate and network in the future. Can you imagine what would happen if we had networks of doctors, educators, plumbers, electricians, janitors, and politicians who were using their jobs in every single local church to engage cities and they were networking – the smartest urban thinkers in the world around domains to engage it. This is going to happen, it is happening – why not the SBC? Can you imagine with our receipts of probably more than a billion dollars how we could change the world it that was put full force? Can you imagine large groups of laymen being the spearheads of solving many of our global concerns versus a small group of elite that hold the reigns to everything?

Third, we would we become an international movement – not a convention – not an American denomination. Why not be the first denomination to do this – let’s get out front and beat the rest! The Anglican church worldwide is making herself known – the American Episcopalian church has realized she can’t force her agenda of homosexuality on the rest of the Anglican world. The center of Christianity has shifted – we need the rest of the world more than the rest of the world needs us. We have much to learn. I heard yesterday we are the 3rd largest unreached nation in the world behind India and China. I don’t know if that’s true, but it wouldn’t shock me at all. We are a mission field, and yet we are operating as if we are the ultimate sending place. Twenty years from now, I have no doubt the mandate of the IMB will not be to just be a “sending agency” for SBC missionaries, but a “receiving hub” of other missionaries wanting to come to America – as well as a mobilization hub to connect every single Baptist with every domain on all of society in the world. We will work collaboratively networking together Baptist(and probably other denominations and networks as well) worldwide to interactive, viral, decentralized movements.

Fourth, our leadership would be global. Yesterday I sat and listened to a significant international pastor meeting with a group of Dallas pastors, sharing how God has called his church from another country to reach out to America. He’s already starting churches here (a black African training white young men to plant churches in America!) and was challenging us and telling us where we were wrong. Wow, the tables have turned! His grandfather accepted Christ through American missionaries and he said he couldn’t stand seeing the American church continue in it’s current direction – that he was going to do something about it. He was in your face and at one point I didn’t know how to take him. Then, I began to think, how does an Eastern pastor feel when we show up and in our “American Bravado” we do the same thing. I though, I need to not be defensive, but listen to this guy – and wow, it was good. I’ve met Koreans, Indonesians, Egyptians, Jews, and other people from other nations who are coming here to plant churches – and not for ethnic people – but white people!

Fifth, our approach would of necessity have to be decentralized. This strikes fear in the hearts of institutional leaders – but I believe it’s because we misunderstand decentralization. It isn’t leaderless, someone at Google, Ebay, Wikipedia, Facebook, and Myspace is making money and driving stuff. It is speaking more of operational and engagement philosophy. This does not mean the institution dies – it can’t – that would be bad. I used to think institutions were bad – they’re not. As I began to work around the world I realized the importance of the institution of health, economics, governance, communications, etc. Faith needs her institutions as well. What does an institution do? It holds the narrative and the values of a movement. This is what I got from being a Southern Baptist – it lead to all that my church and I are involved in. Where institutions miss it, is when they confuse the methods with the values and stifle the move of the people with bureaucracies and power politics – then we have a large institution that ultimately will decline – because those who would continue the story go elsewhere where they can be a part of an on-going narrative.

Sixth, it would require a different kind of pastor and church leadership. We would move from great pulpiteers to great mobilizers, from studies to ditches, from committees of the elect to relationships of the hopeless and most needy, from reading the hottest religious books to reading God’s word along with history and sociology and current events so we can be as the sons of Issachar, from meeting to prioritize opportunities to everyone grabbing what God is sticking in front of their face. It is an utterly fantastic time to be alive and to be in the ministry. The opportunities and world that we live in today is like no other time save the days of the early church. I’m having a blast and I’m seeing all these young pastors having a blast – it’s because of the shoulders of ancestors long before us. We’re standing on their shoulders, they’ve hoisted us up, as they were in their day – so we must have in our day, young prophetic voices and old godly men who will let those young men stand up on their shoulders and drive the future.

Often I’ve been told when I challenged people, “we’re already doing this” but when a leader of an institution has to tell a constituent that – it ain’t happen’ a whole lot! These things will happen, we all know it, the only question is why and when will they happen? Will they happen because our convention has been driven into the ground because we don’t want to change and wind up loosing exceptional young pastors, churches, people, and money? Or will it happen because as in the early 1800’s as Baptist we felt the shifting of the wind on our face and jumped out in front.

Now THIS is a denomination I could get excited about.  This is great stuff, and I can’t think of anything I would add to his words.   And since this may be the last thing I ever post about the SBC, I thought this would be a good last post!