On Being an Ordained Minister

I got an e-mail from my old friend Doug Holt today. He offered some advice on getting ordained:

"Always remember re diaconate, priesthood and episcopacy that the being of the one is not defined by the doing of the job."

I've struggled with this one a lot, as you might imagine. That I will be a different person when I am ordained is now obvious to me because my identity is, in part at least, continually being co-created in the relationships in which I participate. Since others will obviously see me differently after ordination, I must change my identity.

The question about whether my relationship with God will change after the laying on of hands is one to which, at present, I am minded to offer a tentative "yes". If so, my identity will change even further.

But then, once one leaves the notion of identity as a state and sees it as a pattern which emerges from all the relationships into which an individual enters, it is obvious that identity is always subject to change. (Indeed, it is stability which needs more explanation!)

Identity involves both continuity and change. I know that I am not the same person as I was twenty years ago (or even yesterday) and I also know that I am the same person as I was twenty years ago (and even yesterday). The interesting questions are around the influences which lead to both the change and the stability.

Doug also wrote that, "I find the old ontological: functional distinction re orders unhelpful, but I know that the psychology is so strong always to build an identity on one's role or function, and that is not helpful."

I must admit I struggled with this one: will ordination change the very nature of my being; my ontological status, or will it do no more than give me permission and authority to perform certain tasks? But perhaps a dichotomy between 'I am what I do' and 'I do what I am' isn't helpful. Perhaps, like the photon, both are true in a quantum sense and one or the other only becomes actuated in specific contexts - but the actuation of one does not negate or destroy the validity of the other.

It will be especially interesting for me because I will continue to play my professional role. I am currently working with Dublin City Council, helping them with a participative approach which aims to involve a lot more people in the process than they had last time. I will be ordained in the middle of the contract (it runs until the beginning of December) and it was a bit weird when I first realised that I will change by title and my mode of dress half way through. (Though, of course, this will remain hidden from them unless I choose to disclose it).

The above makes me sound (and feel) like a bit of a prospective cross-dresser: appearing like a 'normal' man to my client but dressing in strange clothes and assuming a new identity when in secret! There is a frisson to this:that I will have a secret identity about which my clients may know nothing unless I choose to self-disclose. This seems very childish - I need to deal with it pretty quickly I think.

Contextualisation

I'm reading Frost & Hirsch's The Shaping of Things to Come; a very stimulating book. As an aid to my thinking I try to consider the implications of the ideas in it with reference to any possible work I might do with the 'new age thinkers' around here. Something which struck me profoundly was the notion of contextualisation (chapter five).

There I came across the C1 to C6 spectrum proposed by 'John Travis' (a pseudonym for an evangelist amongst Muslim people). There's more at a couple of articles by 'Joshua Massey': "His Ways Are Not Our Ways" and "Misunderstanding C5". Basically Travis argues that, in Islam, there are six possible types of Christ-centred communities (C) in an Islamic context.

C1 is a typical transplant of a church from one country to another. Inside a C1 church, everything is almost exactly the same as it would be in its country of origin, including the language.

C2 is basically the same as C1, except C2 uses the local language. C2 doesn't use any Islamic religious vocabulary, but instead has a distinctively "Christian" vocabulary for religious description.

C3 is essentially the same as C2, except C3 uses local music styles, dress, art and other native cultural elements. C3 makes a clear distinction between practices that are purely "cultural" and those which are "Islamic." Islamic forms are rejected. C1-C3 believers all identify themselves as "Christians."

C4 is much like C3 but has also adopted biblically permissible Islamic forms and practices (e.g., praying prostrate; washing before prayer and before touching the Bible; abstaining from pork; etc.). C4 believers do not call themselves "Christians" but "followers of Isa (Jesus)." However, the Muslim community does not generally see C4 believers as fellow Muslims.

C5 is much like C4, with the primary difference being self-identity. Whereas C4 believers identify themselves as "followers of Isa," C5 believers identify themselves as "Muslim followers of Isa"—much like Messianic Jews, who call themselves "Jewish followers of Jesus." Islamic theology incompatible with the Bible is rejected. In contrast to C4, Muslims may view C5 believers as Muslim, though perhaps a "strange kind of Muslim."

C6 is a secret believer, who may or may not be an active member in the religious life of the Muslim community. (Taken from "His Ways Are Not Our Ways")

Does this typology have any reference to other 'faith communities' in the UK - specifically those who are 'New Age' worshippers? I think that I have been hovering around a C2 or C3 approach: you have to 'do church' but you can do it in ways which are more congenial to you (candles, incense, meditation, etc.) This is basically a "we'll change the trappings if you'll change your fundamentals" approach - which fits well with the notion of metanoia, or turning around, to be found in concepts of repentance and conversion, but may not be culturally appropriate.

The question is, what would a C4 or C5 New Ager look like? I don't know the answer but it is worth thinking about. I have a sense that they would reinterpret some forms of prediction as prophecy and some forms of clairvoyance as words of knowledge and so on.

Whether notions such as chi or chakras could be 'baptised' seems less certain. Quabala or Tantric yoga also seem a long way from authentic Christianity, even for C5.

Spirituality 4 - Lessons Learned

To close this little chapter on spirituality, I'll just reflect on some of the lessons I learned from my 'tent experiment'. Two things were against it: firstly, it was put together in a hurry and more importantly, it poured with rain for the whole afternoon while the fete was happening.

This latter fact meant that a lot of church people used the tent as a shelter and for a time it became a sort of base for the fete organisers (mainly because my wife, Shirleyanne, was one of the key organisers). Other church members wandered in for a chat. This had the effect of making the tent a place of busyness rather than peace. Largely this was because I had no time to tell church people about the tent or its aims, so they came in.

In fact, I'm not sure that there should have been anyone in the tent at all. I had this notion that I would sit quietly in the tent, meditating, and that this would model an atmosphere for any visitors. Perhaps one or two might want to talk; if so, I would engage with them. If not, I'd just sit still. But maybe my presence was both an attractor to church people to come and chat and an inhibitor to non-church people.

I was also concerned that the tent was too large but this led me to prepare four 'stations' and the end effect was that it was actually a little too cluttered. I don't know if this mattered but I was aware that the forgiveness station (inviting you to put a stone into a bowl of water if you wished to put away something that you regretted) was rather exposed if there was anyone else in the tent. In addition I had to put two stations (prayer & meditation) on the same table which was not ideal.

Finally, a practicality. Because it poured with rain nonstop and the wind got up from time to time some of my cards got wet and the ink ran. A laminator (which I've now ordered) would have been a great help.

And—was it worth doing? Yes, it was. If nothing else I learned a lot. But I do believe that it was some kind of a marker; unashamedly Christian but in a manner which many would not associate with the church. It was a start, a small one perhaps, but a start nonetheless.

Spirituality 3 - Chill Out

My thoughts about needing to do something to start making contact with those who are seeking but not looking at church came to an action point about two weeks ago.

On the Wednesday before the village fete a woman phoned asking to have a stall for her tarot readings. This suddenly triggered a passion in me: we, the church, must have a presence too. Remarkably, I had three clear days ahead of me with little other work to do; the opportunity seemed heaven-sent. I decided to have a "St Andrew's Chill Out Tent", not as an evangelistic opportunity but simply as a marker; an attempt to say that we know something about spirituality, too.

I managed to get hold of a tent, about 18' by 12', and designed four areas or stations to go in it:

• A prayer station, with a bowl with floating candles, a prayer leaflet which I put together with some prayers (mainly Celtic) for different occasions, a prayer box into which people could put prayer requests, a couple of books on prayer and a brief introduction to prayer which I wrote.
• A meditation station, with incense, some books, a handout and an introduction.
• A Jesus station with an introduction, some books, night lights in the shape of a cross, pictures of Jesus from "The Christ We Share" and a few copies of 'footprints'.
• A forgiveness station with pictures, an introduction, some books and an art nouveau lamp.

The tent was decorated with a series of bible texts on suitable images and music played in the background - Arvo Part, Gregorian Chant, and so on.

I wish I could say it was a huge success but it poured with rain all afternoon and very few people went to the fete. But it had some effect - a few visitors entered and lingered and at least one church member was put off because she thought it was a new age thing! One man hovered outside the tent for about two or three minutes before deciding not to enter.

I learned quite a lot from this. Perhaps I'll write a bit about this tomorrow.

Spirituality 2 - David Hay's Spirituality Research

I've just read David Hay's Understanding the Spirituality of People Who Don't Go to Church (you can download a Word version here). It's based on research he did with Kate Hunt in Nottingham. They found 31 people who described themselves as either 'spiritual' or 'religious' but who had no contact with any church. Then, using both focus groups and follow-up conversations, they explored a number of topics:

• Experience of Church or Sunday School as children
• What does it mean to be religious or spiritual?
• Is religion/spirituality a private concern, or does it have social implications?
• What relevance does the notion of 'God' have in society and in their own lives?
• What relevance does prayer have to life today or to them personally?
• Do they ever read the Bible?
• Do they talk to their children about their beliefs?
• Why do they not go to church? Was it a conscious decision?
• Why do they think people still go to church?
• How would they change the Church if they could?
• What is the media's attitude towards the Church?
• When does the Church come across either positively or negatively?
• What image of God/religion does the Church portray?

The results of the research are fascinating, especially in the context of declining church attendance and increasing admission of 'spiritual experience' (figures are from 2000 survey, those in parentheses from a 1987 survey):

• A patterning of events 55% (29%)
• Awareness of the presence of God 38% (27%)
• Awareness of prayer being answered 37% (25%)
• Awareness of a sacred presence in nature 29% (16%)
• Awareness of the presence of the dead 25% (18%)
• Awareness of an evil presence 25% (12%)

The study offers three case studies, offering some depth to the further findings. There seem to be many misconceptions about church and Christianity (at least, I would like to think that they are misconceptions) such as having to believe with certainty, being obsessed with control, living in the past and failing to be concerned with humanity as a whole.

Coupled with the findings from Nick Spencer's Beyond Belief: Barriers and Bridges to Faith Today David Hay's work offers a fascinating glimpse of the mindset and worldview of some of those who are beyond the church (both dechurched and unchurched).

One of the big challenges for the church is to develop a way of engaging with some of these people - hence my own current interest in the new age approach. The new age appears to have developed a more effective apologetic than the church; it has tapped into the growing interest in spirituality. (Actually, there are a few unexamined assumptions here - it may be that the new age has helped to make admissions of spiritual interest and experience more acceptable.)

Think about horoscopes - for years they were an object of fun, only to be found in women's magazines and tabloids. Now the secularist Observer can devote a whole page to its horoscope, together with sections on holistic medicine and other new age phenomena.

Perhaps humour is a route in; perhaps just offering something with no strings attached is a way in - after all, so many people seem to be afraid of the commitment they perceive we will demand from them if they contact us. And this, of course, is not commitment but coercion - whether we mean it to be or not.

Spirituality 1 - The New Age in our Village

I've been thinking about 'spirituality' and new age a lot recently. There seems to be quite a lot of new age interest in our village. There's the 'David Andrew Sanctuary', which meets every Sunday evening in the village hall. I'm not really sure what they do but it seems to include some clairvoyance, mediumship and other stuff. Then there are the weekly classes in clairvoyance, readings, et al at one of the chalet parks here and there are also occasional clairvoyance evenings as, for instance, a fundraiser for the playgroup.

You could see all this as an evil perversion (and in some ways I must admit that I do) but Paul's approach in Athens seems more authentic and missional ("I see you are in every way very religious" he said after being shocked at the number of idols) . So I prefer to think of new age stuff as an attempt to walk the same journey as I am walking; as a sign of a longing for meaning and an apprehension of the divine.

The really sad thing is that they do not see the church as having a role to play in their journey. In part it's because we do not speak their language (and I don't just mean words; we don't use their symbols or rituals). In part it's because we don't listen or try to get alongside.

So, I wonder - what can we do; what can I do? I did try something last weekend and I'll write a little about it in part 2. But here I just want to set out my current concern: should I, and possibly others from our church, go to the David Andrew Sanctuary? Could I face it? I went to a Spiritualist Church a few times when I was younger just out of curiousity's sake and it was excruciating. So phony, I thought in my young arrogance, so many sad and desperate people being manipulated by charlatans.

Would I find the same here? Would my presence be seen as legitimising their activities. What would other people in the village think? What would my rector think? What would the bishop think? But if we don't go, how can we come alongside; how can we be authentic; how can we have the kinds of conversation which might lead to change? It's a real puzzle to me. I don't know of anyone else who is doing this kind of work but I'm sure there must be.

Any thoughts would be most welcome.

Leadership and the Emerging Church

I got an e-mail from someone today who wondered if I had ever used my professional skills within the church, especially in the filed of leadership development. I haven't actually but leadership and new expressions of church seems a crucial issue to me. The church's leadership models are firmly rooted in the feudal world picture, modified with a strong dose of modernism. This simply will not do today for a number of reasons:

* It is not Biblical and models a false gospel;

* It does not relate to postmodernist people, who will only follow those they trust and relate to;

*It is unable to provide the depth or breadth of leadership currently needed by the church.

It seems to me that leadership in the church must be visionary, servant-focused, relational and facilitative. The tasks of the leader are to hold the vision, both of the gospel and of its local proclamation in word, deed, and presence; to model the kingdom values which Jesus came to initiate (Luke 22:24-26; Phil 2:5ff; etc.); to offer authentic relationship; and to facilitate the development of new leaders.

How to achieve this? Partly through teaching, but mainly through experiment and support. Church leaders seem to me to be ill-informed, ill-equipped and low on self-esteem (though that often manifests itself in a kind of authoritarian arrogance).

The most powerful approaches in leadership development seems to me to focus around coach-mentoring and action learning. The action learning set is like a learning laboratory where leaders can experiment with ideas and concepts without getting their fingers burned. Coach-mentoring offers the opportunity for stimulated reflection, supportive challenge and attentive encouragement. All leaders should have access to coach-mentoring; this is not generally true for many leaders, especially in the church.

I have just completed a three-year course of study in Norwich diocese and am due to be ordained deacon on 2nd October. There was nothing on my course about leadership, yet it is crucial especially as we begin to grasp the fact that we have to be a missionary church in the West. There is already a certain amount of experimentation with leadership forms in the emerging church.

Cell Church, for instance, has a huge requirement for leaders, though these are of a rather traditional nature. Base Ecclesial Communities have a different leadership model; which could be described as distributed and participative. Alt.worship groups tend to operate with a consensual opt-in style of leadership. Each has something to offer the church yet I suspect that most ministers have been completely untouched by these developments.

Changing the syllabus in theological training courses will help but there is an urgent need to do something now. The challenge is great because so many ministers have a vested interest in the present structures and feel threatened if asked to move outside their comfort zones. Yet the risk is even greater since the lack of effective and appropriate leadership is the single greatest factor in holding back the development of the church in the West.