Back to school: working on teamwork

About fifteen years ago I observed that "we talk about teamwork but we can't get teams to work."

I have since learned that staunch individualism combined with the firm convictions and drive needed to do church planting often result in poor teamwork wherever American missionaries are found.

But rather than rejoice in the fact that we may be averagely bad, GBIM Europe decided to tackle the problem. So Tom Barlow led 17 of us "back to school" to work on teamwork.


Tom first had us interact with Philippians 1 noticing that the personal pronoun "you" is systematically plural.

And Paul says to the Philippian church, “But whatever happens, you must live in a manner worthy of the Good News about Christ, as citizens of heaven." Here's how: "standing side by side, fighting together for the Good News," literally "in one spirit, one soul, side by side."

Then, Tom used Roger Peugh's doctoral thesis, "God and Teamwork: Implications of the Unity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit for Christian Ministry Teams,” to guide us along the path of healthy teamwork practices, practices found among the members of the Trinity:

love
trust
submission
honor
respect
fellowship
communication
mutual support
faithfulness
loyalty
clarity regarding personal identity

I found these principles insightful and practical; they allowed my teammates from Paris and me to work out some bugs in our communication.

I echo the words of one participant who said:

"I very much appreciated the training that Tom provided, defining God's priorities for the functioning of a team. I now see that I have some real work ahead of me to be up to these standards."

Workshop on teamwork
Château of St. Albain / November 18-19, 2008

Back to school: teachers' workshop

Many of us were trained to teach monologically; this was presented as the "Biblical" way of teaching. E.g. in Acts 20:7 one might get the impression that Paul soliloquized so long that Eutychus fell asleep and out the window!

Some people monologue rather well…

The verb dialegeto, however, is variously translated as “spoke” (NIV), “began talking” (NASB), “kept on talking,” “dialogued” (Birkey, 54), or “conducted a discussion” (BAGD, 185).

F.F. Bruce (425) comments, "A conversation rather than an address is indicated, a 'sermon' in the etymological sense of the word (Lat. sermo, 'conversation')."

Birkey (56) reminds, “We must not forget that the New Testament ideas of Christian education are built upon a ‘Hebrew model’ of the Old Testament, which placed the responsibility in the locus of home life (cf. Deut. 6:1-9),” the head of the household informally teaching those under his roof. Also in the Hebrew tradition, rabbis were known for their Q&A approach to teaching.
So some GBIM Europe teammates went back to school, sort of, to explore dialogical, interactive teaching.

(Note: We began gift-based workshops a few years ago to hone our skills and cultivate the gifts the Spirit has given us. Other workshops this year: apostolic, shepherds' and evangelists'.)

Susie, Tom, David, Roy, Scott, John & Louise
November 2008 Teachers' Workshop - Dublin, Ireland

Tom in action

Organizer Tom Barlow had us read articles on dialogical teaching and Günter Krallmann’s book, “Mentoring for Mission.”

He also asked us to share interactively on one of the following:

• What is the sermon you remember the best? Why?
• What person had the greatest impact on your Christian growth? What made their impact so powerful?
• Who is the person you have impacted the most? What methods did you use? What are the signs of your impact?
• What methods did Jesus use to teach / influence others?

Was the workshop helpful? Here are a few teammates comments:

I just want you to know that I had one of the best workshop experiences with all of you this past week! What a joy it was to be able to hear and glean from your rich experiences. Thank you all so much for letting God use you in my life this past week! God is using you in the European body of Christ to help me to grow. What a fantastic week!!! Thank you all so VERY MUCH! And Tom, Thank you for leading us in this great experience.
...

Let me add my thanks and appreciation to all of you for your part in making for a super experience during our days together in Dublin. Special thanks to Tom for creating an atmosphere in which everyone could feel free to share openly.
...

I will add my kudos and appreciation to the teammates who were [in Dublin] last week. It was a great time together and to experience some of what we were talking about, i.e. "withness". Great job, Tom, for prompting us and spurring us on. I am still trying to figure out which of the cats in the cat-herder clip I seem most like.

Some highlights that I mentioned in my presentation from Günter Krallman's book, Mentoring for Mission.

Spend quantities of quality time together
The “essential with-ness principle.” (19)

Mark 1:14 “that they might be with him.” (52-53)

“On the basis of such with-ness he generated a dynamic process of life-transference which was meant to foster wholistic maturity in his friends.” (13)

Consociation - togetherness
“Hence he made the experience of his with-ness the pivot of their training. 'Jesus had no formal curriculum'… no classroom syllabus. Instead, he called his disciples to be with him.” (53)

Coleman, “Truth was not taught in abstract doctrines or regulations; it was caught in the experience of their shared life.” (53)

“He first majored on making friends and only later on sending out apostles (Mk 3:14).” (55)

Discipleship
"The favorite image and the technical term Jesus chose for this action-charged procedure was ‘to follow’ (Greek akoloutheo) him as Master. He viewed discipling as life-transference through the channel of relationship, and not a mere intellectual absorption of certain theoretical precepts." (57)

Priority people come first
“Jesus made himself more readily available to them than to anyone else (Mk 9:30-31), took a special interest in their understanding of his teaching and mission.” (54)
“The time which Jesus invested in these few disciples was so much more by comparison to that given to others that it can only be regarded as a deliberate strategy.” (54)

CM: the reluctant bride

While postmodern Christ followers may condemn inherited church people of being Borg-ish (see last entry), modernist church leaders condemn emerging church people of being a reluctant brides.

Last year I team taught a course entitled, “Guiding Principles for the people of God in a postmodern world.” The most FAQ was how to make disciples — people who obey Jesus from a heart of love — among people between the ages of 20-30. Here is how participants expressed their frustration:

“Here is one general frustration I have: A lack of genuine commitment. Not just to spiritual things (church, personal study, etc.) but a lack of commitment in general. Commitment to work, to relationships and family.”

“Frustrations: They have a lack of commitment.”

“Frustrations [from a pastor under age thirty]… HIGHLY CAPABLE…yet low overall commitment… My frustration is in connecting with this group of people. Not just seeing them connecting for a while then disappear then re-appearing…they are a fluid group…which is cool and frustrating!!”
So can the Bride remain uncommitted?
Would that not frustrate the Groom?!

Marriage involves commitment that leads to greater depth of relationship and birth of society. Marriage represents the ultimate unity of spirit and soul, culminating in bodily oneness. From this union children are born.

Oneness requires the security of righteous acceptance, selfless encouragement, fidelity (no competitors) and unconditional love that “always protects, always trusts, always hopes, [and] always perseveres” (1 Cor. 13:7). Such security requires commitment.

One’s wedding day represents the ultimate commitment in human life, a decision of total partnership and sharing “for better or worse.” But for postmodernists, commitment and submission have resulted in the worst.

Translation: "You are divorcing dad. Why can't I divorce my brother? I can't stand him either!"

Many young people fear commitment because they have seen vows broken by their parents. Rampant divorce has hindered them from understanding the value of commitment, submission and sacrificial love—necessary ingredients to enter into the deepest of all relationships.

Invariably in the definitions of church that I have seen, some variation of the word “commit” shows up.

“believers who are committed to being a church…”
“committed to the authority of the Word of God…”

I attempted to define the church once (see Sept.8, 06 entry “homework assignment”). And quite frankly, the definition was not bad (as I unabashedly pat myself on the back). Yet, it was singularly unhelpful (as I slap myself on the back of the head) because it was unwieldy and uninspiring to me and incomprehensible to others.
As I reflected on this dilemma, it occurred to me that the apostle Paul described the church as a “she,” as a woman, a bride (Ephesians 5:22-33).

I realized that asking for a definition of the church would be like someone asking, “Paul, could you define your wife for me please?” The question just doesn’t sound right. Now, “Tell me about your wife,” that’s completely different.


You see, woman is the apex of creation—the beauty that reflects and appreciates God’s beauty, the holistic personality, the completion of all that was lacking in Man. Who will deny that women are not more beautiful, more complex and mysterious than men?!

The perfect woman…
And woman, specifically a bride, is what Paul uses to help us understand the complex nature and beauty of the Church. This metaphor challenges both the modernist tendency toward an institutional church and the postmodernist tendency toward an ephemeral church.
Jesus’ Church is not a business (contra some modernist views). Though the bride’s beautiful body is highly organized with organic systems, I cannot say that internal medicine has ever been the focal point of my relationship with my wife.
Jesus’ Church is not amorphous (contra some postmodernist views). As any groom will appreciate, the bride’s beautiful body has form!

And for local church to be Church, the postmodern allergy to commitment must be overcome so that the story can have the proper French ending, ils vécurent heureux et eurent beaucoup d'enfants jusqu'à la fin de leurs jours. (And they lived happily ever after and had many children)!

CM: Borg or bride?

“Every few hundred years in Western history there occurs a sharp transformation…. Within a few short decades, society rearranges itself—its worldview, its basic values, its social and political structure, its arts, its key institutions. Fifty years later, there is a new world. And the people born then cannot even imagine the world into which their own parents were born. We are currently living through just such a transformation.”
Peter Drucker, in Postmission, 74.

Drucker is in essence saying that fifty years from now we could be facing a world as starkly different to us as the Enlightenment would have been to the Middle Age monk. The West is undergoing tectonic cultural change. While these changes are fundamentally the same in Europe as in North America, the ramifications and outworkings can nonetheless be dissimilar.
A mentor of mine, Tom, would here interject his refrain, “You realize that we are living in significant times!” Indeed, and we church leaders therefore have a tremendous responsibility in guiding the people of God through the vicissitudes of the postmodern period into the pre-whatever-it-may-be future.

So let’s take a look into the future, and specifically, at the Tendara Colony in the year 2348…

This is story of Annika Hansen. Annika's parents were unconventional scientists who left Federation space, in their vessel the Raven, to perform experiments in pursuit of some unique secret theories. On Annika’s sixth birthday, they encounter a Borg vessel.



(Note: The Borg are a race of humanoids in Star Trek. The Borg claim to seek to "improve the quality of life for all species" as they pursue their quest for perfection. The Borg function as automatons, their minds are collectively connected to the Borg Queen. They are characterized by relentless pursuit of targets for assimilation, thus the show describes the Borg as "the ultimate consumer" against whom "resistance is futile.")



Annika’s parents studied the Borg ship for a long while, but Annika didn’t have a good feeling about all of this. With reason, because the Hansen’s scientific curiosity pulled them in to a trap! (add your own scary music here)

They are detected. Annika’s parents appear to have been killed. She is assimilated and raised as a Borg. Her Borg name becomes "Seven-of-Nine."



So, when she was very young, Annika lost touch with her human side. Seven-of-Nine has had no experience of socializing as part of an adult group. In fact, any individual characteristics she once possessed are now suppressed.


Many postmodern people feel this is what has happened to the Church, a beautiful young girl, the bride of Christ, has been assimilated by a sinister culture—modernism. Today, they feel, the church is more Borg than bride, more machine (read institution) than woman. She is emotionless, without community, and in the collective only one way of thinking is allowed.

But there is hope!


When the Borg are compelled to form an alliance with the crew of Star Fleet's U.S.S. Voyager, Captain Janeway requests that a single Borg act as a representative of the collective. Guess who is chosen?!

During a conflict, the Voyager crew is forced to sever Seven-of-Nine’s link to the Borg collective. She goes into shock and her human side starts to reassert itself, rejecting her Borg implants. With her human and Borg elements in constant conflict, Seven-of-Nine is in physical danger!

Her first instinct is to return to the Borg, but the Captain won't allow it. So the Doctor replaces many of her Borg components, making her far more human than she has been for nearly 20 years.

THE END (play your own happy music here)


To be continued…