I want to make a few things clear:
- I love my church, Rothesay Vineyard.
- I feel called to be a pastor.
- I want to pastor this church.
- I am grateful to be her pastor.
Methinks I don’t protest too much. Let me put it this way: it is as though I came across an extraordinarily beautiful rose in the wilderness. My task is to appreciate, protect and praise its rare beauty. Along come the developers to suggest digging up this rose’s roots in order to plant a whole garden of them. I chase them off because this one rose is all that is needed. I will not kill it for a bigger idea. Along come the horticulturalist experts to tell me how to make it even bigger and more beautiful. I chase them off because they don’t appreciate the rose as it already is in all its splendor. I will not change this rose into another one. Along come the insecticide and herbicide specialists and gene-manipulators to tell me how to develop this rose into a stronger strain. I chase them off because they don’t realize that letting it be is its best protection. It is strong enough if left alone. Along come the reporters and spin-doctors to make deals on how to publish its praise in a more professional, profitable and marketable way. I chase them off because the rose reports its own beauty.
It is the same with this community. I’ve seen, I’ve tried and I’ve done all kinds of programs and agendas and visions and strategies. They all without exception, I’ve concluded, do not appreciate what is. They all try to change it and add to it with the best of intentions and the best of efforts, but they do not realize that in the process they destroy it. I feel my primary job as a pastor is to just allow the rose to be the rose, to enjoy it, to praise it, and to let it be. Nothing more. Nothing less. This, in my opinion, is love. This, in my opinion, is what a pastor does: he or she loves his or her people and cares for them. Simple… simple as that!
The fine art photo is the creation of my friend Jorgen Klausen.
My name is David Hayward, and I am the nakedpastor. I am a graffiti artist on the walls of religion.
They plant roses in the vineyard near the vines as “canaries in the mine.” It’s the test plant–if something is wrong with the soil or the air, the rose will die sooner than the vines; soon enough that something can be done to protect the vines.
The roses are beautiful.
But they aren’t the plants that matter in the vineyard.
The plants that matter are the vines because, although the roses are beautiful, it is the vines that bear fruit.
Whew, I’m glad it’s only your opinion and not the truth.
David, I love the pic, most especially in this conTEXT.
John,have you considered thats your opinion,(and not the truth?)
As an outsider…I find this view a complete mis-fit. Christians claim that God loves people. But, then he proceeds (as Christians claim) to completely tear them up from the inside out in order to “perfect” them. Almost in the army way of “break ‘em down and then build ‘em up in our image.” Loving them “as-is” is hardly a Christian notion; and in many ways is antithetical to the one of the central doctrines, human depravity.
The NT lists rules and regulations for how a church is to be run, and ORDER is the order of the day. This includes a hierarchical system of leadership and prescribed disciplinary actions to regulate believers’ lives and the congregation as a whole. It’s not a love-fest. It’s a training ground. It’s a base of operations for battle with the World. From there I think it’s safe to extrapolate that a church that isn’t doing all it can to gain converts is failing in its mission. To grow, I imagine, you need all those “experts” that you’re chasing away.
Just my two cents.
Wow Dave that’s beautiful!!
And thank-you for chasing them all away, hopefully some of us can learn to stand beside you and chase too!
Love what you said and how you said it.
Polly, which NT are you finding all those rules, regulations and such in? Mine is pretty wide open on a lot of topics and I’ve never read about a hierarchical system of leadership. But then, I suppose you find what you’re looking for?
Ah to simply love….that’s such an offense to some people’s minds, as if love is not enough.
Polly,
I love my kids as they are. That doesn’t mean I want them to stay as they are. They don’t have to change in order to garner my love. But they have to change in order to grow, mature, etc.
Would I really love them if I didn’t help them to change?
We are not talking about the negativity of change. Not at all. Left alone, the rose will change… the roots will go deeper, the plant will grow, the blossom will open, close, whither, die. I’m talking about how change happens.
I think some of your recent posts may have given the impression that you were going through a lot of questioning about many things. This post sounds very different. This one sounds (to me) like you are confident in how you feel, but maybe tired of all the “bigger, better” marketing stuff coming your way. I would sure agree with that. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
Yes, np, and change happens so much better when it is motivated by pure love rather than a desire to control.
I see it. It’s letting change happen the way it’s meant to, without manipulation. As Polly observed (although I don’t find hierarchy in the NT, either), we seem unable to resist the temptation to train the shoots in the direction WE think they ought to grow. Keeps us distracted from looking at our own growth, conveniently enough.
AB: I think you’re right.
Brian M said:
The NIV. I have provided scriptural references below:
Regarding hierarchy:
1 timothy Chapter 3 – ****Spells out rules for overseers and deacons. Clearly a hierarchy existed already at this time.****
1 Timothy 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
**** Teaching seems to have been a position of authority and women seem to have been at the lower end of this hierarchy.****
Titus 1:5The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint[a] elders in every town, as I directed you. 6An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7Since an overseer[b] is entrusted with God’s work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.
****If appointing elders and delineating criteria for candidacy for the office aren’t signs of an established hierarchy, I don’t know what would be.***
1 Corinthians 9
1Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? 2Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
3This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. 4Don’t we have the right to food and drink? 5Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? 6Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?
7Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? 8Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? 9For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.”[b] Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?
***Clearly by this point, there was a religious leadership caste. Even if Paul and Barnabas wre not enjoying the benefits of it.***
Regarding Rules and regulations:
1 Corinthians 14:26-39
26What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.
29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
36Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command. 38If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.[i]
39Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.
1 Corinthians 5:11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
1 Corinthians 11:3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head,[b] since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.
****Clear procedural rules and regulations that are unrelated to morality. As I mentioned, notice the emphasis on ORDER****
Re: Church Discipline
1 Corinthians 5 1It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has his father’s wife. 2And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? 3Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. 4When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.
12What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”
2 Corinthians 2:5 If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you, to some extent—not to put it too severely. 6The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient for him. 7Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. 9The reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything.
****Paul passes judgment and then tells them when to forgive the man. He’s in charge and surely he wasn’t intended to be the last. That’s why he was grooming TImothy and why Timothy was “appointing elders.”****
Please be assured I don’t really look for anything in the Bible. But as I was reading NP’s post, these passages propelled themselves to the forefront of my consciousness quite of their own accord.
I wouldn’t have thought my statement to be controversial as there exist hierarchies in every church today.
@Fred said:
(Wow, I really didn’t expect this much backlash from a fairly innocuous assertion.)
Of course you want them to change and mature. So, what do you do? You send them to experts to educate them. You send them to experts to monitor their health. You probably read books about how best to raise them. In other words, you do exactly what the post is railing against.
I’m not arguing with the Bible or Christianity, here. I’m simply pointing out that NP’s view of organization is at odds, IRONICALLY, with the Bible and I would say (NO OFFENSE, REALLY) common sense. But, hey, it’s your church, your business.
BTW – I would apply the same critique to the “Vision” post(s). Without vision, there’s no impetus for forward momentum, just a milling about. Direction and focus are prerequisites for effecting change. Like a laser, power is the result of focus and focus is the result of setting specific goals. (OK, I’m going to stop before I really start to sound like a powerpoint presentation)
I think a big part of the recent series of posts is just NP venting, that is, blowing off steam… resulting possibly from burn-out?
does it make it right because paul said it? paul is a man of his culture (a patriarchal one at that) trying to deal with cultures who are up to all sorts. if you cover your head you are clearly not selling yourself as a prostitute… stuff like that. it’s a minefield! although it is possible that things paul says are relevant to our circumstances, they are not what we should be building our theology on, are they? they are not the word of god, are they? aren’t they the words of a man replying to certain people and churches in response to specific issues? he’s not specifically speaking to me or you, although much might be relevant… he is not laying down any new laws for us to follow… or am i just a liberal and wet christian? …if i am, i have to say it’s harder living a life without loads of things prescribed for you… but that’s life!
np. i love this post. nurture in a nutshell!
Polly,
How do you do that cool quote feature?
I hope my post didn’t come across as “backlash.” I meant it simply as “response.”
I don’t count on “experts” to educate my children. I count myself responsible for their education and I try to keep tabs on what is happening at school. Do I look to “experts”? Sure, I suppose.
I agree with your response that what np is trying to do (“just leave it”) is not what the Bible says to do.
I agree that there is effort to change others. I just think that there is a subtle shift in motivation between harmful and helpful change. There is a difference between how God changes people and how “Christian culture” demands change.
Something like that…
sorry for being a blog-hog (made that up… for people who take up too much space on the blogs of others)… but…
it’s a bit like battery farming and force feeding livestock… you get bloated chickens and constipated cows and pigs… i can almost hear jesus saying, “FEED MY LAMBS, DON’T FORCE FEED THEM!”
in this country assault and battery is a crime… it should be in the church too!
Polly,
Some interesting observations you make. However I would be hestitant to label the responses to your comment as “backlash”, perhaps “counter points” might be a more suitable word to use.
With respect to the quoted scripture. I think it would be wise to do a little exegesis on them, and to gather some information to help put them into context. Iw ill not be able to do this fro every quoted reference, simply because I don’t have access to 2000 years of Chirstina dicsussion on the subject right now!
We know that the Church in Corinth was undergoign a strong period of preaxis and doctrinal influence from many forces when Paul wrote these letters to them. Paul’s instructions are speaking within the context of a specific historical problem. This mean, hermeneutically spekaing, that the “instructions” are not necessariy applicale to all Christian communities.
With respect to the verses from timothy, these are among the most strongly contested pieces of writign in all Chirstendom! In fact the NIV has been criticised for editing out references in other places to influential female characters in the new testament church, so don’t be surprised if a male bias has been favoured here too!
I quote from some random website somewhere: “is VERY important to point out here that it is PURE FOLLY to base an entire doctrine affecting half the human race (!)–”women should not have authority over men”–on the basis of ONE SINGLE VERSE, and even worse–a single verse where the most important verb is (1) unusual; (2) negative; and (3) not even understood clearly! ”
And another quote:
“In the case of 1 Timothy 2:12 that is particularly important because the word translated “have authority over†is what scholars call a hapax legomenon. The word used in that verse for “have authority over,†in other words, occurs only once in the whole New Testament ” – Dr. Leslie Robert Keylock
Some great disussion on this topic has occurred recently at http://www.jesuscreed.org, see the ‘women in ministry’ subject posts there. Alot more is still to be said on this issue, and it would be unwise of me to suggest that the case is closed!
In any event I don’t read into NP’s post that he is looking for a place devoid of authority. He is wanting to establish a place that doesn’t feel pressure from other people to do something – as in som thing in particular. I’m of a lke minded opinion that “circustantial vocationalism” has influenced the Church in the same way that it has influenced universities. And that the church is primarily about “being a people” not “doing a thing”. Of course, that’s not to say we should not do anything, but it does mean we don’t identify outselves by what we do.
I also don’t think NP’s post is a protest against order. Order by nature, I would argue, is morally neutral. The motivation or imposition and result of that order is potentially moral. NP is protestign against people from the outside wishing to impose an order based on their own success models, which might be growth driven. It is not the role of all communities to be evalgelistic – but some individuals may be invovled in this. It seems to me that a community of love is exactly that which Jesus treasures, and Paul promotes.
I hope this has helped to clarify, or add to confusion. Either way, thanks for the conversation!
The spelling in my previous post was truly awful. I apologise.
My response to Jill: John,have you considered thats your opinion,(and not the truth?)
Yes I do..but NP has made some statements that are not “i think” as much as he has said “its wrong” therefore setting himself up as one who is not in process, but has detemined what is right and wrong.
Thanks. Wonderful analogy. I wonder if anything is, “simple as that!” The four letter word seems to be rosed with complexity and perhaps the opposite of simple.
Phill_Style
If you’re British, I just chalk any anomalies up to that!
I realize some of the quotes I included were misogynistic. That’s a different argument for a different time. Mainly, I was marshalling those and others to support my main point that church hierarchy and regulation are biblical concepts in response to Brian M and (though I didn’t see his post at first) Dorsey. I believe that the references to deacons and overseers (I Tim. chap. 3) could stand on their own, if the others are a distraction from that theme.
@Fred: You can quote someone by using the tag “” with the word “blockquote” inside and then terminate the quote (at then end of the quote) with ““. Hope that helps.
Perhaps “backlash” was too dramatic, I just didn’t expect anyone to pay much attention. I’m just really surprised the concept of biblical hierarchy was disputed. The church was an organization, and no organization succeeds without intentional effort. As I hinted in the last post, I realize NP might simply be frustrated and that he doesn’t really hold as anarchic a stance as he sounds.
greg… i think things could be ‘simple as that’… it is we who complicate things.
phil_style… thanks for putting proper meat on the mis-shaped bones of my post. context is everything, and so many theologies have been created out of these bits of the bible… i guess that if you have authority and you love power then it’s tempting to hang your security on anything you find that appears to back you up.
phil style, you rock!! Thanks for serving up such a nice plate of meat to chew on. Love it!
Polly,
I take your point, and I agree, the Church does owe some sort of allegiance to a Biblical structure. I also, like you, don’t think that NP was being anarchic. I think he’s just expressing frustration at “organisational models” when what he really desires is loving fellowship. And I say Amen to that!
BTW: I’m not British (yet), but a Kiwi (with a British passport mind), and am moving to the UK later this year.
phil_style… the uk welcomes you with open arms!
That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.
By the way, Dave, that rose you were admiring has been bred to look that way…genetically engineered the slow way.
okay, i think the analogy is stretched about as far as it can go.
I’ve grown so weary of the “institutional church”.
My pastor neither knows me, nor loves me. (I tried to correct this by sheduling a one on one meeting with our senior pastor…..the meeting is in five weeks.)
NP, I long for church to be as you’ve described, and you know what? There have been moments when I’ve touched upon such a thing; but, it hasn’t happened within the body of Christ as it’s been displayed in our neighborhood churches. Rather, it’s happened when we’ve opened our home and our lives to embrace the lives of our neighbors.
We had a bbq on Memorial Day. We invited homeless families from the neighborhood shelter, along with our other friends and neighbors. It was such wonderful time filled with genuine conversation, good food and the laughter of our children. It was a rich time, warm and inviting and full.
After everyone went home, I commented to my husband that our afternoon felt like church ought to feel.
NP, you are on to something here, just as I believe our family is on to something by inviting our neighbors into our lives. Whatever “it” is, it’s organic and good for the body, mind and soul.
yes anonymous! organic is a good word. i also like to use “native” or “indigenous”. well said.
Fred, you’re like a dog with a bone!
Chew, chew, chew.
Speaking of taking analogies too far, what do you make of the thorns? ;D
@Fred: AAAAGH! I just noticed that the codes disappeared from my post! Here it is again just remove the quotes-they’re to confuse the board software into displaying the tags.
“” your quotation here “”
OK, hopefully the board doesn’t try to parse that.
You’d be a thorn, Fred
Didn’t work.
Surround the word “b l o c k q u o t e ” witht the angled brackets and to close, add the forward slash plus the word “b l o c k q u o t e.”
[blockquote]sort of like this?[/blockquote]
I guess not.
With these Fred: (now what that not come through.
Oh for Pete’s sake. It’s the “less” and “more” symbols from math….lol!!
\blockquote
Let’s see if it works…
By the time we’ve all figured it out, nakedpastor will have the highest numbers of comments ever on one post!
Nope. I’ll have to try again later.
[blockquote]sort of like this?[/blockquote]
Almost, except that instead of the square brackets, use the angled ones. Or, if you like math, the “inequlaity signs”, “greater-than/less-than”.
quoting Corinthians about how to do church is a little like watching the Simpsons or Family Guy for parenting tips. Paul wrote to Corinth to deal with issues specific to Corinth. It’s like developing theology from the Psalms, it just doesn’t do.
And elders and deacons are only a leadership structure if you subtract relationship. With relationship it’s a matter of recognition. In fact I’d suggest the word in used for ‘appoint’ even indicates that. It’s not a world structure, Jesus forbade that, it’s a kingdom structure that acknowledges that those who are willing to die for the rest of the flock are worth turning to for help and guidance.
I also don’t agree with your conclusion that there was a leadership caste relating to the apostles, that is purely a looking back from here and 2000 years of church history notion. Paul, the apostle, is left hanging at the end and is begging Timothy to just stop by, say ‘hi’, and do him a favour and bring his coat along ’cause it’s cold where he is. Paul is merely making the point that as a leader he could insist on his ‘rights’ but to emphasize what he’s just been saying and about to say, that’s NOT the Chrisitan way, he has refused to hold on to his ‘rights’ and that’s how they should live with each other. Equals, regardless of claim, title or role. Level ground, one body even, with many parts but only ONE head.
Or so it seems to me.
I’m inclined to agree that the hierarchy may not have been as formal as it is now. But, as you say yourself “2000 years of church history notion” indicates that early church leaders left a definite legacy that was to establish an organization. I would also say that it was intentional. An organization that mandates love across its chain of command is not thereby excluded from the definition of a hierarchy.
From the standpoint of pragmatism, I see no fault in this. Any movement that hopes to effect change or even merely survive needs to be organized. Moreover, the added complexity of religion (any religion) needing to maintain and propagate specific, sometimes esoteric, doctrines makes an organized structure indispensable.
“Equality” is a loaded term. All human beings are equal but different ranks are needed for the purpose of establishing order.
Regarding Paul, I would say 2 things: (1)He certainly seemed to believe in the “right” to worldly compensation for spiritual work. The fact that he didn’t demand it on his own behalf, in this context, was gracious. I would interpret his words to mean that it’s above and beyond the normal call of duty to decline succor in the work of God. (2)Others, those to whom Paul was referring, recognized and took advantage of material support. That supports the idea that, regardless of how Paul may have felt, there was a defacto “priestly” caste. I use that term only in the sense that they seem to have been professional ministers and, in that capacity, were harbingers of the future Catholic and Orthodox churches – the two “big players” up until Luther.
(I find the Bible to be an interesting topic mainly because the Church has impacted history to a great extent and I’ve read it so many times and have devoted countless hours of thought/meditation to its words. While I think it has some downright nifty ideas, e.g. the Golden Rule, I don’t believe in or subscribe to the majority of its truth claims. I only mention this because I don’t want anyone to get the wrong impression about me or my interest.)