the great giveaway
David Fitch’s book The Great Giveaway is a real gift to the church at this time. No, perhaps more than a gift; it is rather like a much needed splash of prophetically icy water for a church inebriated by the seductive forces of our age. Let the subtitle speak for itself: reclaiming the mission of the church from big business, parachurch organizations, psychotherapy, consumer capitalism, and other modern maladies. No mucking around there eh?
The Great Giveaway is a no-holds barred, intelligent, passionate, and spiritually insightful, analysis of so many of the patterns of prevailing church practice. Fitsch’s analysis leaves nothing strategically important for the Western church untouched. He rakes over our false, numerically driven, definitions of success, chides our morally failing leadership, pokes fun at the production of hyper-real productions that mask for true worship, chides us to our over-reliance on preaching as the primary means of Gospel communication, challenges our ideas of justice, spiritual formation and moral education. And so it goes on!
It has been said that the best critique of the bad is the practice of the better. If this is the case, then this book does give us positive ways forward. Thank God! For without it this book would very hard for many current church leaders to take, and would therefore probably be dismissed as a mere rant. But Fitch is not a heckler shouting from the sidelines of the church. He is an active practitioner living in Long Grove, Illinois and so his prophetic broadsides are also filled with positive, practical, correctives for us to consider and hopefully apply.
The only reserves I have about the book are that the idea of ministry described in it more decidedly pastoral (one-dimensionally traditional if you like) than I am personally comfy with. I prefer (as you might know) a more full orbed typology of leadership–APEST (Eph.4) at least. Secondly Dave aligns himself explicitly and wholly in the postmodern camp. I am no personally longer sure whether the lines between modern and postmodern culture are really that clear, and I think that a missional church deals with culture no matter what culture that might be. I prefer to talk about emerging global culture which will include modern, postmodern, glocal, etc ..
Other than that, I like this book…lots! And I have no qualms in recommending it to you.
For a really excellent overview of the actual content of the book, see Len’s at NextReformation
Comments
25 Responses to “the great giveaway”
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...
Alan, I’ll get the book! I follow Fitch blogs and have been wanting to get the book.
Alan, I’ll get the book! I follow Fitch blogs and have been wanting to get the book.
I am also with you on the APEPT typology of leadership.
Alan, have you ever read Bob Sjogrens 1992 “Unveiled at Last” If you haven’t this will stir you and confirm much of what you are seeking to accomplish missionally in America. It’s a mind stretcher, I must recommend to you.
Will check it out Bob.
“a missional church deals with culture no matter what culture that might be” - agreed.
The other problem is of course is that “he who marries the spirit of the age will be divorced in the next” (Karl Barth). If we ally ourselves with only one form of culture then we find ourselves stranded pretty soon.
I completely agree with your words here…
“I am no personally longer sure whether the lines between modern and postmodern culture are really that clear, and I think that a missional church deals with culture no matter what culture that might be. I prefer to talk about emerging global culture which will include modern, postmodern, glocal, etc ..”
It’s a point that is true and visible, but few recognize it. I’ve seen the postmodern label used to write off some cultures that still need to be engaged with the message of Christ.
Truth is, we’re not becoming one postmodern culture - we’re splintering into hundreds of thousands of different cultures. Many have postmodern characteristics, but to use the label can oversimplify.
Looking forward to reading Fitch’s book. It looks great.
Thanks Alan…
In our journey forward we do need to deconstruct, but a comprhensive approach that also approaches reconstruction is far more useful than one that simply destructs!
To paraphrase… “the church is dead… long live the church!”
May God be Trusted more in the USA, as a consequence of you and Debs responding to His calling to mission there…
Slainte
A Celtic Son
Thanks CS for the best wishes. We leave on the 10th, but in a interconnected world, we still remain close.
reclaiming the mission of the church from big business, parachurch organizations, psychotherapy, consumer capitalism, and other modern maladies. - sounds like a great sales pitch!!!!
Ahh Jonny, why so cynical?
And so young too!
Good to have you visit.
Alan, Thanks for passing this on…will have to get Fitch’s book - very provacative title…all those things he mentions in the subtitle sprang up because the church stopped Being the church and Doing what churches are to do…may it be reclaimed.
You mention “If we ally ourselves with only one form of culture then we find ourselves stranded pretty soon”…wouldn’t that sort of explain why the seeker oriented/boomer driven mega church movement hasn’t really impacted society for the better? Christians have about as much divorce as non, don’t handle money any differently than non, etc. While such churches are great for boomers, haven’t the Gen x and Millenials been “stranded” quickly?
Good start to a conversation. Just before I dive in, I want to add dittos to looking forward to Alan and Deb joining us here on the ‘left’ coast of the US!
As a late boomer, I think I might be allowed to speak to some of the paradigms involved here. My generation in America, according to the sociologists, felt that they had to struggle for everything. So, they tried to take that away from their kids and provide good things for them without the struggle. That became the goal. Our vision of church took a parallel course suggesting that the ‘mega’ church, seeker model that offers to do everything for us including mission fit our generation to a T. What it did not fit is the Bible which commands us to ‘work out our salvation’, as a part of taking on the character of Christ. A four week class on what we believe is supposedly equivalent to the 3 year sojourn that the disciples traveled with Jesus to gain an understanding of the New Testament ethos.
The next generation quickly found out that the ease with which they survived their early years did not translate well to independence. Not surprisingly, they questioned everything else we espoused as well, including the church. And the institution came up short. Not the community of Christ we all espouse to, but the institution of the church. Tweaking something that doesn’t work without fixing it, does not work with worn out brakes on a car…and it does not work for the church. New parts are required.
Alan, I believe that your books suggest that another church is not enough. That we need a movement.
One of the quantifying qualities of a movement is the involvement of all the individuals in it to a much higher level of commitment to the movement itself…versus the attend and satisfy mindset of the Christendom model. This extends to others that are partnered with them in its purpose. Another factor you have mentioned is the lack of a follower component. Everyone in the movement is expected to move, to act, to commit to the same level of activity (action dare we say) in the name and goal of the movement. And anyone in the movement at any given point in time may have a significant say in the next step. Does not sound like most churches as we know them today to me.
You have recently quoted Kierkegaard in several of your posts that have generated some interesting discussion. This suggests to me that you believe that the community is a framework for the individual to work their own mission within a symbiotic framework. It suggests that the mission parameters are set, but the playing out of the boundaries within which an individual may generate movement towards the mission are not. The core beliefs, if you will, are solid, but the way in which they are lived in real time may not be.
Am I hearing your thoughts correctly on this? Is this one of the forgotten things you believe typified the early church?
I found the book full of some great thoughts & ideas…some really helpful stuff. But it was terribly written and tedious to read in my opinion (each chapter stated the same thing at least 3 times).
Lots of good thoughts here, Richard. Thanks for sharing. Many images of what could be are dancing around in my head…may God bring them into reality sooner than later!
Be blessed.
Richard, you wrote:
“It suggests that the mission parameters are set, but the playing out of the boundaries within which an individual may generate movement towards the mission are not. The core beliefs, if you will, are solid, but the way in which they are lived in real time may not be.”
Exactly, I think. This was the genius of early Methodism (my heritage)– small groups with clear communitas (and boundaries in and out!). And it’s the same impulse, I think, that drives the success of open source software development– clear kernel that is stable but amenable to development plus all kinds of things that can be developed and implemented with or on top of it by anyone, anywhere.
These are two kinds of communities that ought to be in greater dialog with each other– because sociologically we’re doing a lot of the same kind of work– emerging missional folks and Linux developers– especially from what I can see of how Ubuntu Linux development works. I think we’d both have a lot to learn from each other.
Peace in Christ,
Richard, Taylor said it well here. If discipleship focuses primarily on the individual and demands the direct response to God, communitas places that discipleship within the context of a community of comrades. The model I suggest in TFW is that all elements of mDNA have to be in the mix to make the movement magic happen. Its not just one or two, its all six that must interact and inform each other to make the whole thing go ‘kaboom.’
Trevor, I did not find it to be a badly written book, but I did find it a tad repetitive. But whatever one might think of the style, I think the analysis is pretty accurate and insightful.
Oh, Alan why did you have to say repetitive? I hate repetitive.
You guys and gals just talked me out of buying the book. I’m going to read Alan’s next book while re-reading “The Forgotten Ways”.
I need to get into the heart of Alan as He comes to America. Alan, when can we connect? When will you conference over here?
You keep me intrigued, I keep coming back for more. I mean all of this. Even though I have been a pain in the butt. Recently I got an elbow infection in my right arm -very painful, before that I got burns with skins grafts on my left arms. Recently I got 4 shots in my butt for the infection. Does this me I am a pain in the butt and both arms?
Bob,
I am sorry to hear of your continuing health challenges…praying that things will turn around for you soon.
And having pain from arm injuries and infections and getting shots in the butt doesn’t make you a pain in the butt and both arms–at least not to us. You were never more than a slight pain in the neck…tee hee, bro.
Repetitive isn’t all bad…hate to see you throw away Alan’s recommendation baby with some less than pristine bathwater….
Click on the “connect” at the very top of the page and take a look at the calendar for Alan’s schedule…but it’s looking pretty busy until the New Year.
Blessings,
Oh heavens, be still my heart! Taylor, you sound like you may be close to my own vocational industry, software. Very well said. I live only 40 miles from the heart of Billville, and do all of my development work in Open Source venues.
On the topic at hand, I agree totally with what you are saying Taylor, and Alan of course. My comments were focused, not on the content and nature of the type of community, but at the idea that community was ascendent against individual expressions of mission. As expressed in TFW, I feel that communitas is used as a qualifier in order to keep the individual centered on the core principles, but not in the co-dependent way that many of the more denominationally focused churches function. That was the point I was trying to make. Thanks for the follow up and clarification.
Bob, I feel that same way about getting some time to talk with Alan, especially after getting to sit and listen to him in June in Vancouver.
I can also relate to the health issues sometimes getting in the way of other priority things we want to do for ministry and fellowship. I have been invited to go to Kenya to help set up a computer lab in a church there with a local minister I met when he visited Tacoma. And I am spending my time thinking about whether or not I can get from the airplane to the car, whether or not my scooter will operate over there and if I can recharge it, blah, blah, instead of concentrating on the ministry and fellowship opportunities. What a figurative and literal pain. Sigh, I will pray for your infections and a quick cure or healing!
Blessings to all as we follow the way.
1. Business is profoundly different from church and is, in it’s nature, good. Big business is also good. Business that does evil is of course wrong. Let’s not confuse Big with Bad, lest we forget how big some churches are. And no, big is not always equal to bad. The important thing is to understand the difference between church and business.
2. Parachurch organisations. Most missions organisations consist of groups of people reaching other groups people. Sometimes this is with the gospel, other times it is in the area of relief and social justice. Apart from the fact they might not have a church building, why would a ‘para-church’ organisation be different from a church. Maybe they don’t fit into a specific denomination, model of doing a service, or most incredibly don’t meet on a Sunday…
suggests that Jesus thought it might possibly be better to work together. But what does he know?
Mark 9:38-39
3. Psychotherapy is a fancy word for counselling, which can be biblical or not. Sure it’s often from a philosophical naturalistic world-view but it isn’t all bad.
4. Consumer capitalism? Is there any other kind? Maybe he isn’t selling this book? Maybe the people that publish aren’t getting paid? It’s easy to take pot-shots at business and it’s true that money is the source of all kinds of evil but that doesn’t mean it’s inherently bad.
5. and other modern maladies… so these are all bad?
Lincoln,
I don’t think the point is that “these are all bad” so much as that the church (read: those who are Christ-followers) has all too often abdicated or “outsourced” much of what it should naturally be doing in all relationships and interactions. It should be a both/and not an either/or kind of thing.
Jesus certainly embraced all those who were doing the work as being “for us”–and we’ve got to do a better job of collaborating as well. Certainly that is what I have been experiencing here at TFW.
It’s all the attitude/spirit in which things are done that makes or breaks the embracing of the so-called “modern maladies” isn’t it? We are created to “consume”–does that mean that “consuming” is to become the focus of our lives? I don’t think so. I think we must continually be remembering the great privileges we have from God are given for the purpose God has given them. And when we “use” them in other ways, they can become idols as well as things that hinder and quench the Spirit.
And my personal experience of over 30 years is that too few people understand that business (organization) and church (organism) are profoundly different…and they want church to be “just business–not personal” when it treats the mission of God–and the people of God–as an action item or a “tool” to be used for their current best interest and then “discarded” for a new tool when it no longer suits their “need.”
When the church of God is seen as an organization that consumes God’s people for its own advancement, that is a real problem….IMO.
Peggy: Your ‘IMO’ is right.
Thanks.
Bob, nooo! Buy the book. If there is repetition, it is neccesary to get the point across. As for getting together bro, you can check under the ‘connect’ ‘calendar’ menu for upcoming gigs. I need to update it a bit though. Hoope we can meet.