what kind of leadership is this?
Returning to our series on TFW: I want to take up the theme of Apostolic Environment. But before we go there, let me just touch base with the question that started my journey to writing TFW in the first place. Its all about the remarkable Jesus movements of history. Ones that seem to grow exponentially without the normal resources that we take for granted. The question that bugged me then, and continues to do so now, is ‘how did they do it?’ One of the clear answers is that they didn’t do it without significant leadership. But that just merely begged a further question: ‘what kind of leadership?” We have all sorts of leadership and training resources today and yet we are in serious decline. So, what was/is the difference? It’s a good question and it begs an equally good answer in response.
In every manifestation of Apostolic Genius there is a powerful form of catalytic influence that weaves its way through the seemingly chaotic network of churches and believers. There is no other substantial word for this catalytic social power other than to re-invoke biblical language and call it apostolic. And this is not just the power of the gospel/apostolic doctrine (as powerful as that is in sustaining the faith) but also that of a certain category of leadership, namely that of the apostolic person. I can find no situation where the church has significantly extended the mission of God, let alone where the church has achieved rapid metabolic growth where apostolic leadership cannot be found in some form or another. In fact, the more significant the mission impact the easier it is to discern this mode of leadership.
Apostolic leadership, as in all types of influence, is both identified and measured by the effect it has on the social environment in which it operates. And in these terms it is always present in periods of significant missional extension. Such people might not always call themselves ‘Apostles’ but the apostolic nature and effect of their ministry and influence is undeniable.
More soon…
Comments
9 Responses to “what kind of leadership is this?”
Leave a Reply
The Books
Affiliates
Recent Blog Entries
Recent Comments
-
the reason for god
- Amanda said: Wow, looks like an... the last thing to convert…is the wallet
- Richard Clarke said: The version I heard had...
- Andrew Park said: Money on a different...
- Andrew said: Relates directly to...
- Dan Lowe said: You know, if this was a...
- Amanda said: hehe, it's funny because...
- Lucy J said: Kinda reminds me of a...
- Eric said: The story goes that... the role of theology in faith
- Ed Magee said: thanks Janet, intersting...
- Janet said: "Are people looking for...
I think this is a word that needs reclaiming and redeeming in some places… there have been branches of the church (and some cults outside of it) that have used the word “apostle” in the context of control: “I am the apostle of this group and you’d better do what I say… or else… you’ll be defying God.”
More mainstream Christian groups have neglected not only the term, but sometimes the biblical practice of apostolic leadership… to their detriment.
The other interesting dynamic is that apostolic leaders can be difficult characters for more pastoral/maintenance types of leaders. They tend to see the world differently to others… think Paul in the New Testament and his assorted conflicts with not only religious and secular rulers, but with other members of the church! What was true in the New Testament era is even more true in the current institutional church world… it’s easy not to “get” (and therefore to marginalise) apostolic leaders… to the impoverishment of the church. All the more reason to have this conversation!
Alan,
This is still all part of thoughts in progress so forgive any lack of clarity.
Right this second I’m listening to to the mp3 of your talk on exponential growth and organic leadership from Grassroots so these thoughts are both comming from the post above and the mp3.
I did the APEST test and got TPAES (which feels right)
Teaching: 46
Prophetic: 33
Apostolic: 21
Evangelistic: 16
Shepherding: 4
As I listened to the mp3 I became convinced that if I am ever going to achieve anything I need an EASPT and an SETAP etc. etc. to work along side.
I’ve just started trying to start something in my own community with my wife and another couple and already I can see that between us we have T P and S in one form or another but it seems at this point the A function is falling to me.
It’s not my strongest result on the test and yet on the mp3 you pointed out to one guy that no matter what functions you got on the test we all (like the star fish) would have each within us.
I guess I’m wondering how to go forward, do I accept that it’s up to me or find another who is strongly A? How do we do that? how do we recognise it?
In your last paragraph above you say Apostolic leadership is identified by the:
“effect it has on the social environment”
What does that look like in a individual.
BTY at the end of your first 60 min talk the mp3 continues, with you talking to people as you had coffee before going into the second talk. Did you know that? Was that intentional?
Hey Ben, I hope I was not inappropriate in the coffee talk! No, it was not intended. Where did you get the mp3 from bro…the ideavirus team? I should tell them. And what talk was it exactly…what day, etc.?
As to your question, my assumption bro is that they are already present in any decent community of faith. Only they are ‘in the closet’ so to speak because they have no legitimacy. If it is in your power to legitimize the A ministry, that is a good place to start. they are already there…. Use the APEST profile to identify them if you must.
Actually, I am writing a book on Eph 4
with Neil Cole and Wolfgang Simson. I do believe this is a critical issue and needs more work. It will be out next year sometime. 
Woo Hoo, Alan! In Aussie slang, that’s a highly excited whoop of exultation designed to be an exhilarating exhortation, too. I’ve been “exploding”, bursting out, whatever, on Eph 4
and Romans 12
for about 7 years now… to see you and your missional-minded mates publish some material on that would be wonderful.
I’m in a situation in a local Aboriginal church facing HUGE issues because the denominational hierarchy that previously allowed a good measure of self-determination has recently taken back control without due consultation. The leader who is a true Apostolic type, but a bit weak on the developing leaders factor, has a great foundational understanding of Christ’s teachings and ecclesiology, but unfortunately is leaving due to lack of understanding and appreciation of the sponsoring denomination. It is also disheartening to realise that the people who can add the other PEST ingredients have come onto the scene too late to rectify the situation because when this leader goes, it will be even more difficult to establish a hub for releasing people “into all the world” of that community and beyond.
We’ve had some great discussions on the need for all the diverse gifts and functions to be allowed space to operate… one of the most helpful character traits of the kind of leadership to co-operate with God in the work of in-breaking the Kingdom, would be to provide the example of being constantly in a process of getting to KNOW God and getting to KNOW themselves and other people better. The best leadership is relational, with a view to serving and releasing others into what they are called to be and do. Whether A, P, E, S, or T is the dominant ministry outworking/type, constant humility before God and others (appropriately) provides a foundation from which to spring into the works that God has already initiated in the world, and in which we as individuals, are potentialled to participate. By the work of the Holy Spirit, our thinking, feeling, and doing is constantly in a process of re-alignment to God’s intents and purposes, and if current leaders encouraged others to contextualise that into their lives and situations, then we wouldn’t have the decadence and decline rampant in too much of the ‘western church’ today. We would have humble leaders who would be more interested in constantly and lovingly establishing a God-centric world for a creative and diversely harmonious humanity than in maintaining the wealth, power and control of a paralytic and parasitic status quo! Conversely, the lead-ees, if I may coin a term, need to take some responsibility… the status quo also exists because the people will have it so! Revolutions tapped into and released the power of the masses… people who are being led need to be awakened to their responsibilities and destinies in the great mission of Jesus’ words… As in Heaven, so on Earth (direct translation of the Aramaic in what we call The Lord’s Prayer!). If that came through the leaders and through the lead-ees, maybe we’d have more of a revolution… ‘the church’ would be revolving in a more God-centric and less ego-centric manner and maybe being and doing things more in line with what God intended/intends!
Looking forward to it!
Lucy J
What “kind?” What kind of leadership, indeed?
Alan, kudos for the studies. And missives on apostolic function.
The coalition of biological foundations (DNA, etc) overlain with apostolic movements in real time (e.g., I “random walked” years ago into Chuck Smith’s baptisms of 500 per month in the Pacific - early days), and notions of missional are helpful. And expanding for me. So again, thanks.
What kind? What kind of apostolic leadership? There’s a strong presumption (or, an ignorant unchecked assumption) to biological replication as primary over biological metabolism in most paradigmatic analogies to apostolicity. The few I’ve seen. My bias.
What “kind” means we’re assuming replication based on some germline (DNA) of replicating kerygma. With the “kind” of apostle taking latent monomers of individual potential power and polymerizing individuals into community catalytically.
But, it’s all still replication. A replicative model. With a replicative leader.
But, it could be wrong.
Metabolism could trump replication. As for replication after metabolism, “what’s that to you … you follow Me.”
See next.
For one, replication models don’t conform neatly to what the ciliate oxytrichia does in entirely disassembling its own germline (DNA) only to reassemble the germline again in novel order, while keeping morphological identity. Is this apostolic ciliate the “kind” of agent of radical decomposition in the germline? – how does such a replicant preserve its morphological unity despite random decompositions in its germline? – is replication a “stable’ kind of model for apostolic function?
For another, is Lordship better or equally fitted to metabolic origins of life (see Freeman Dyson) wherunder replication is only a late comer? – or worse, where replication is perhaps even parasitic to metabolism (Margulis)? – what if a “kind” of apostolic function sensitive to biology (not derivative: just sensitive) might just catalyze people to plug in to the Holy Spirit for the sheer metabolism of Life? – rather than plug into parasitic genetic creeds, hell-bent to replicate their own?
Forgive me if this is how I see George Fox (Quaker) presenting the case. Old hippie that he was. Or, the “fat man for Jesus” - Wimber - whose rather robust appetite for food and metabolism for Jesus seemed larger than the sum of his replicating parts. What else is “power evangel” if not Metabolic? Or what of the early Calvary Chapel/Vineyard movements as apostolic catalysts of oceanic Metabolism? – less so, but with some replication.
These gratuitous remarks to Fox, Wimber, and the early Smith (not the later Smith) aside, we really don’t know life’s origins.
Only the etiological history of life after it began.
It’s your choice, of course, how much or little you want to borrow from neo-Darwinian syllogisms.
It’s not Fox, Wimber, nor the early Smith (to survey my ecology), but rather, Freeman Dyson who makes a case for Metabolism. As prior in agency. Though this result might be implied in Margulis (Gaia as one “tough bitch” - and what that, I’d agree!) . It would be fun to question Dyson whether his metabolic speculation translates for him into a theology. Since he’s a believer.
And so, what “kind?”
I don’t have a settled view on this. Nor does a speculation in favor of a metabolic paradigm (over a replicating one) invalidate your apostolic hailing to Jesus as Lord. It asks only what “Lord” means? And what “Life? “ My sense is that replication without Metabolism is … dead. Dead works. Just my take. From a biophilaic. And from a home church worker and participant (through my own missional in free poverty law services through house calls); but, egalitarian. And quasi-Quaker at that.
As to what “kind” — my own universe is too flat (or infinite) for me to be an apostle. Unless, metabolism in the Spirit ….
Better, just a friend. And that only on a good day.
Cheers,
Jim
Alan - a p.s. ..
I forgot to note that a metabolic metaphor (paradigm, blah, blah, blah) feels better suited than a mere replicative paradigm alone for your initial explosions.
Bursts of metabolic energy in the heat of our metabolic ovens if tied to questions about the origins of life (the origins of our life) mostly depend on strong outlays from external sources – Lightening Strikes (not that Lee Travino is an apostle - or?), or deep thermal vents of extreme boundary conditions, or perhaps external meteoric impacts on the geologic surfaces of our lives. Just some mix of External Catalyst in the rest of the jazz, zoom-vertigo, compositional mix. An external Grace of Force. Taking the Kingdom by Force.
The Explosion (not, as you say a necessarily Big Bang) … it just seems that Metabolism (with out without replication) generated by explosive Force holds some promise for your own explosions …
Cheers,
Jim
Lucy J, you wouldnt’ be in the vacinity of Red**** would you? If so might be interesting to catch up.
Funny you should mention it, Matt, I was thinking it might be nice for me and my husband, Andrew, to catch up with you for a coffee or whatever, since you live in this part of the world. We live in the suburb where Koorong is. I just hang out at R**** on Sundays and generally “do life and friendship” with a couple of the folks who either live there or are connected with there. If you mail your phone number to Lucy J, PO Box 943, Lane Cove, NSW 1595, I’ll give you a call to T up a time!
Wow, Jim, I really like your informed bio-scientific thoughts on the subject. I couldn’t possibly have put it in the same way, but I do so appreciate the metabolism/replication conundrum! And it’s very fascinating to apply it to the APEST concept.
Looking forward to further developments
Lucy J
I’m only near there during the week unfortunately. Koorong probably better. I won’t be in a position to snail mail anything for a few days but you’ll find an email link at my blog if you click through via my name here. If you want to drop you’re email address in there privately I can email you back a contact number. Always up for a coffee. Would need to be a few weeks time however as the next 3 are spoken for.