The sky is falling...
Roxburgh's book on leadership is worth a read if you find yourself trying to make sense of an alien set of attitudes within church and ledaership when faced with what he calls 'discontinous change'.He identifies that when faced with 'discontinuous change' there are one of two responses as leaders vie to maintain stability and control. There are those that 'attempt to return or recreate the organisations prior traditions, habits and way of life', or 'there are those that abandon the old and create a new future'. These two familiar tribes he terms Liminals and Emergents.
Liminals are guided by a framework shaped by loyalties that lie with church systems that flourished in the past. Liminals reflect liminality an anthropological term which captures the sense of separation from a known world. The Emergents, a collection of younger leaders that have little sense of loyalty to the denominational systems of the past.
"They are deeply suspicious of the value of the educational systems of the past. They are deeply suspicious of the value of the educational systems set up in the 20th century to prepare leaders for the church and have an almost reflexive reaction to anything they identify as the institutional church"While his dual analysis is probably a tad simplistic and in places repetitive he does make some stricking observations. Here are some of the areas that made me think:
- On the training of such leaders:
"Many of these people are no longer willing to jump through denominational hoops in order to be recognised as leaders. They believe such hoops no longer make sense in today’s world. For them, seminary (or “cemetery” as some mockingly refer to it) education is suspect. It seems so distant and abstract. It demands that students be uprooted and placed in an unreal, disassociated, ivory tower environment for several years – only to end up serving in settings where, once again, they have no previous relationship."
"The development and training of leaders requires more than traditional seminary programmmes"
- On the danger of rampant individualism:
"It is not sufficient to simply experiment and then move on to other experiments. This only postpones the inevitable creation of new sets of confusion and pain to somewhere down the road instead of honestly facing them today."
- On the difference of change and transition
"Even though the current levels of change alone are profoundly disruptive, they can only be understood within a larger framework....Leaders need to grasp the nature of this larger framework of change and transition. Without a basic grasp of their dynamics, leaders will continue feeling out-of-control and driven by tumultuous change into constant disorder."
"Leaders too often make the mistake of assuming that strategic plans or more information is all that is required to move on to the next change phase. This is a serious mistake."
- On the need of each other
"...the potential for people to discover one another on a very different level of identity and role than from the previous period."The core of the book is to point out the importance and then encourage an environment of creativity through a process of dialogue and understanding. Both Liminals and Emergents have much to offer each other in terms of learning and experience as they face the challenges of social fluidity. Roxburgh upon a strong biblical and theological foundation builds a means of such engagement through which leadership today can flourish through a mutual investment found in communitas.
"...the best way to counter this moment [new sets of confusion] is for the Emergents to reconnect with the Liminals and start talking these issues through."
How to categorise this book could be a challenge. Leadership yes; cultural contextulisation yes; training yes; but above all this books emphasis is missional. There is no mistaking that this book is about helping the church to live out the values of the kingdom.
To any 'dig your heels in'; budge me if you can'; 'partisan' theologians and leaders this could represent an uncomfortable read. To those trying to make sense of a different culture of style of leadership there is hope!
Roxburgh, A.J.(2005)The Sky is Falling - Leaders Lost in Transition
Comments
This sounds like the ‘Radical’ versus 'primitive' debate currently raging in the Army but here applied to the church universal. I have a serious problem, not just with the content of the debate, I struggle even with the need for it.
You say that this 'dual analysis is probably a tad simplistic…' – however, I am going to take the whole issue to even more simplistic level.
Take just two examples of successful church – one biblical and one historical (I am defining ‘success’ as quantity/quality of converts and speed of growth).
The first example is Pentecost and the second example (inevitably) is The Salvation Army 1865-1890.
Neither of these phenomenon were the result of human strategy but they rapidly grew out of revival. (Just to be clear – my definition of revival is – God’s response to the repentance, consecration and active faith of a group of like-minded individuals.)
I hate labels but I suppose by definition I am a ‘liminal’ in the same way that I am probably a ‘primitive’. However… as I have argued recently elsewhere it is not the methods of yesterday we seek to replicate it is the sentiment.
One of my concerns with most modern approaches is that they usually only ever produce ‘trickle ministry’. Take for example ‘Alove’ or ‘Roots’ undoubtedly successful and productive when compared against other contemporary missions but when set against a backdrop of Penetcost or The Christian Mission 1870 their rate of success suddenly appears less impressive. As a probable ‘liminal’ I have no desire to halt progress as long as progress delivers the same results (or even better) results than the past.
I recently posted the following at ‘www.joenoland.blogspot.com’ the following comment: (hopefully we’ll get two debates on leadership simmering).
“the move away from biblical/prophetic leadership towards ‘management’ is symptomatic of three things.
1) Leaders need people to lead – if the spiritual quality and sacrificial willingness to obey is not there then leaders will fade away – leadership feeds on the active and supportive obedience of the led – without that it will starve.
2) Followers need to be led, discipleship feeds on perceptive, courageous and exemplary leadership. Points 1 and 2 are like the ‘chicken and the egg’ we could argue forever about which came first! The truth is that when you get both together you end up with an emaciated, anorexic, weak organisation.
3) In a spiritual army both the ability to lead and to be led depends upon spiritual gifting and corporate consecration. If the movement stumbles then sin will always be the culprit.
I genuinely believe that the tide is turning, sin is being acknowledged, hypocrisy is being challenged, leaders are starting to lead, Officers are rediscovering the power and joy of obedience, repentance is taking place and revival is on the horizon!”
Am I so wrong to honestly expect coming revival to sweep away many of our current problems and difficulties? Surely it is not dialogue between factions that is needed but dialogue with and direct input from God? When I talk about impending revival do I sound like a vainly optimistic and unrealistic 1970’s shop steward who meets every criticism or obstacle with ‘come the revolution’?
If ‘liminals’, ‘primitives, ‘emergents’ and ‘radicals’ really do exist then they should be culled by revival and not cultivated by dialogue – am I so naïve if I expect victory not to be found in human wisdom but ‘on our knees’.
PS With regard to your new appointment try implementing the sentiments of GSR!
“Our Cathedral is the open air, our college is the prayer room, our library the bible, our sanctuary the theatre, our diplomas the blackguards turned into preachers at our services. We have only to drill suitable men and women to use daringly and persistently the Sword of the Spirit in the way it has been used by The Army all along, and then send them off to conquer wherever they go, and this they will do as long as they put their trust in the whole armour of God.” (Heathen England)
Is there any hope for me Gordon?
Yours, set apart, by Christ, for the lost, in the Army!
A
Funny thing is that I would see you as being 'emergent' more than liminal...simply because of your mindset. Your passion for all things GSR is an inspiration for how 'good' the Army could be...whereas my readin of what Gordon noted was that liminals are more about systems, and in TSA that means 1950s-1970s rather than 1870s etc.
Gordon - your right - I've had to learn the whole gently softly thing - evolution vs revolution - but interestingly more with local church folk (including the youth!) than with officers - who generally want to look forward but are often restrained by their settings.
It struck me at our last into-officership seminar that so many of us were called to the same thing - and if God was calling this generation of officers then the Army had to listen to what God was doing. Do you know what I mean?
M
Thanks for that - I feel that there is hope for me after all!
I accept your point - Railton would fit into today's Army - one could easily see him heading up one of the 614 networks, opening the work in Eastern Europe or China or as an eccentric (but very effective) Officer in the UK.
Whereas the stereo-typical stand-up collar DC of the 1950's would probably find our laid-back (undisciplined?) approach difficult to adjust to.
At the risk of dismissing whole generations of Salvationists (there are always exceptions to the rule) I think there have been two specific periods where the Army sustained serious damage - one followed the deaths of Booth and Railton (1913-1926) up to the departure of Bramwell. The other was post second world war 1945 -1965. Both of these eras were followed by attempts at renewal which had some limited success.
The truth, however, is that we've been taking on water ever since and are now drifitng aimlessly. My opinion is that many of the new projects we have recently undertaken signify the departure of lifeboats rather than structural repair to the main ship.
Revival is not 'going into dry dock for repair' (Booth's metaphor for death) but is repairs at sea.
To follow ththis maritime analogy Jesus is begging permission to 'come along side'. The only thing that will allow him so to do is repentance, prayer and fasting.
Love and prayers Andrew