God as Supreme Situational Leader

While I wait for Scott to flesh out more of his book as to what it means to be siblings in the Kingdom, I want to revisit a concept that just keeps getting more focus for me ... and today got the 3D treatment!  Wow!

When I was getting my Organizational Management degree, we used an amazing textbook that introduced me to the Hersey and Blanchard theory called Situational Leadership.  (Even though the most current hardcover edition is really expensive, an earlier paperback edition will get you everything you need to get a grip on this important concept without breaking your book budget.)

During that particular class, it dawned on me that this is so right because this is a descriptor of the way God leads.  (It doesn't hurt that Blanchard is a follower of Jesus.  I don't personally know about Hersey.)  Wow ... this insight back in 1994 was very important to my thinking about leadership.  (My experience with managers and leaders has left much to be desired, as recounted in my chapter of Volume One of the Wikiklesia Project.)

And, much like Chesterton's famous quote that Christianity was found difficult and left untried, this concept is the same.  Our ideas of leadership and management gravitate more to the few telling the many how to think and what to do.  We tend to lead according to our style and strengths, rather than leading according to the readiness level of those following.

When Jesus called on the fathers to put down their right to dominate, he was asking them to influence instead of coerce.  It is so much harder having to consider each individual and how you can best empower them to do their best to accomplish God's will....

It is the way of love, this leading by influence.  Equipping.  Building up.  Supporting.  Releasing.

Sometimes you have to simply tell folks what to do, step by step, because they lack the skills to know what to do. 

Sometimes you have to engage folks, because they have some skills they can use, but just aren't able to take on the responsibility.

Sometimes you have to collaborate with folks, because they are skilled and able to take on tasks, but aren't confident enough to take on responsibility.

And sometimes, yes, sometimes you are able to delegate to folks, because they are both competent and confident enough to take the ball and run with it.

...and then we have to remember that God meets us at each of these various stages in our own lives, depending on the task that has been laid out before us!

So, relax!

Lighten up!

Trust Papa! 

His faithful cHesed will always provide what you need to accomplish the task.  The buck stops with him, actually....

Blessings,

Abi

Moderation in all things ... Bummer!

The Abbess awoke this morning to find a string of spam comments not in English on 20 different post from the past.  Well, there was ONE word in English that was common to them ... and it is not one you would expect to appear on the blog of an Abbess, virtual or no.

What a drag.

So, it appears, that this blog will now have to be set to moderation ON.  :^(

No big deal, really, since we are not a spot for rapid repartee...

Abi

Jesus' Radical Good News Requires 3D Glasses

So my husband and I were talking today about my new cHesed glasses: they are not only purple, they are 3D! (And no, I don't know to represent that with my already photo-shopped picture.)

Anyway, let me try to explain these 3D glasses. (Get a refresher on my old glasses here.) All the properties of my old glasses remain intact ... but the 3D component makes otherwise ordinary words of the Scriptures (especially in the New Testament) jump off the page. The first part of the 3D factor is the context provided by understanding first century Mediterranean society's foundational patriarchy, which Jesus (and Paul) subverted.

I started talking about this in my last post. And I'll be talking about it for a long time as I continue to process Dr. Bartchy's research and upcoming book, Call No Man Father. Stop and think for a moment what it meant for Jesus' followers to hear him say that they were to call no man father but their heavenly Father. The implications for this one statement are played out through the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. I want to look at one today.

Now you're ready to slip these 3D glasses on so that you look out with this context:

• Fathers, who were used to being the dominant figure in their families and society, were asked by Jesus to give up their right to dominate their wives, children and slaves -- and other less powerful men -- in order to become children of the heavenly Father.
• This new status would appear to be "weak" in their society, but in the Kingdom of God, it would be "strong" in the power of cHesed's love, grace and mercy. The "greatest" in this Kingdom would be the "least" and the eager servant of all. This was the stance Jesus took and he expected it of his followers.
  
• The ones given admittance to the Kingdom of God would be those who were like a child -- one who has no status, no power, no influence ... but lots of love and trust and devotion to the Father, as well as to the brothers and sisters in Father's family.

Okay, got 'em on? Take a read through Matthew 18 (here it is in The Message).

Have you ever read through this chapter with a single context in mind?

How does 3D change what you see?

...oh, there will be lots more. Later.

A Tale of Two Words....

Okay...the Abbess has been driven from her silence! Jonathan Brink asked this question on Facebook: Is it possible to be both complementarian and egalitarian in gender relationships. And there were 75 comments! There seemed to be a significant amount of talking past each other ... and instead of tacking something on to the end of a conversation that is over, I decided to break my silence here.

While busy doing lots of things that I promise to blog about ... later ... I have begun reading through the manuscript of my ministry mentor (I will be blogging a lot more about this.), giving him another set of eyes with a different view as a way of checking whether he is connecting with his intended readers. This is fabulous work and I am pleased to get to see it as it is being fashioned into a book.

One of the articles Scott sent me to review before sending actual chapters had this section title: Egalitarianism Is Not the Opposite of Patriarchy. Well, that got my attention! He goes on to say that scholars (and their readers), "have largely ignored the fact that patriarchal systems in general and the ancient Mediterranean system in particular socialized men not only to dominate women but also to gain the upper hand over as many other men as possible. Along with social analysts and journalists, they have also mistakenly assumed that the terms egalitarianism and patriarchy describe opposite ends of the same social-political spectrum. Inadvertently, they have blurred the distinctions between two ancient social institutions: politics and kinship. These two missteps lead inevitably away from comprehension of Paul's implicit and explicit critique of the patriarchy of his day."

He goes on to say that the opposite of egalitarianism is not patriarchy as such but monarchy, oligarchy, or despotism. Complementarianism is a term invented fairly recently by Fundamentalist Theologians to disguise the patriarchialism it represents. It is almost as if they vaguely understand that there is a problem with patriarchy ... but the cost of dealing with the problem is too high.

Dr. Bartchy continued: "On the one hand, the term patriarchy belongs to the semantic field of kinship, the realm of the family. On the other hand, the term egalitarian belongs to the semantic field of politics and refers to such things as equal access to the vote, to positions of public leadership, and to ownership of property."

I wrote in the margins of the article this comment: "Perhaps it (egalitarian) is confused because women were largely seen as property being freed from patriarchal tyranny."

Rather than acknowledging that Jesus, and Paul, were first freeing women (and other men) from the domination of patriarchy, complementarianism continues to embrace patriarchy (missing much of Jesus' and Paul's point). Egalitarians mix their apples with oranges when trying to mix kinship with politics ... largely because there is not an opposite to patriarchy that is to be embraced.

Which leads to the title of Scott's book: Call No Man Father. We who believe in Christ Jesus are called to be joint heirs with him as children of our heavenly Father. There is only one Father. Everyone else is a brother or sister.....

This is just the first of many posts to come as I ponder this anew.

Stay tuned.

* * * * * * * *

Update: For some reason I cannot post a comment! This is the first time this has happened to me... maybe Google Chrome has an issue. In the meantime, I would like to add my comment here:

Welcome, gracerules!

If the big shift Jesus called for (and Paul echoed) was for those who were the patriarchs to put down their privilege, the sisters and the children and the slaves and the brothers were not supposed to have an uprising against the fathers -- but those who were fathers or husbands or slave-owners were to radically change the way they interacted with those who they formerly were welcome to dominate.

Subversion of patriarchy was an inside job. ;^) Which also means that it can only be defeated from the inside as well.

Perhaps this is why the church is where it is today ... too many have not heard the call for the fathers to become brothers?

Thanks for visiting and for your comment!

...A Quiet 2nd Blogiversarous

It has been a very long summer and this wee purple abbess has been very, very busy tending to her home and family. It has been good to do this, after being so very limited these past nine years. I have set myself a deadline of Christmas to have gone through and made each room "orderly" ... not to be confused with "pristine" ... and I am happy to say that I am well on my way.

In addition to bring order to the physical house, I am endeavoring to bring some much-needed order to the character development process with my three growing boys. It is wonderful to see the progress ... it really is exhausting work (no wonder I have been so hit and miss all these purple years).

I am hoping to gain a sense of balance between all the areas in which I have the opportunity to exert influence ... and am hopeful that Papa will grant me both the grace and the wisdom to accomplish that which is necessary.

It is almost impossible to comprehend the things I have done these past two years following the Seabeck conference. But they have all brought me to this day, and I am grateful to be where I am.

Mostly, I am grateful to have come across Wayne Jacobsen and learned a bit about what it means to live loved. I am hopeful that I will be able to share more of what that means in my third year of blogging ... and I will have to schedule some time for that processing.

In the mean time, I have much to do concerning the practice of living loved. It is a kind of daily office for me, but one much different than I experienced at Seabeck....

Before living cHesed, before living the Jesus Creed, before living Missional, before living CovenantClusters ... there must be a true and deep and pervasive sense of living loved by Papa -- just as I am right now ... as I am actively being perceived by The Perceiver who holds all things together.

I do not know how this primary reality has gotten lost ... and I have learned, instead, to live condemned, disappointing, unworthy ... unable to hold on to his love long enough for me to be filled -- and so unable to overflow onto the dry and thirsty land all around.

Living loved seems, for me, to take the form of being more quiet. And that means less talking in general and more listening ... not necessarily to the many I've been listening to in the past, but to the still small voice of the one who completely and utterly loves me.

Leaning into the reality of Papa's love is the foundation for everything else. It is the provision for all needs. It is the power for all actions. Without it there can be no true cHesed for others ... and there can be no true Good News:

For God so loved the world that he sent his one and only son -- so that those who believe in him might have eternal life; for God didn't send his son into the world to condemn it, but that the world, through him, might be saved. (John 3:16-17)

Blessings to those of you who have been Abi's friend over these two years ... she is counting on your prayers as she continues to walk with Papa (and Jesus and Sarayu, of course) into the unknown. It will all work out ... I still don't know how ... it is the Divine Mystery, indeed.

The Fields Are Ripe For Harvesting...

This wee abbess is very happy to again be involved in the wonderful collaborative effort knows as The Wikiklesia Project! Please do take a moment to look at the page for Volume Two and see what we're up to with this --

• See Cynthia La Grou's article in the July edition of the Next-Wave Ezine

• Read the first chapter post by Felicity Dale over at Missional Tribe

Join us as we consider the impact of women in the the Kingdom Fields!

On Being Grounded....

I have been spending a lot of time journaling in a couple of notebooks ... and I find that things I think I have blogged about, um, I actually haven't. So, to remedy that, I will be going through those notebooks and bringing out some of the things that continue to resonate.

One that I will get to soon is my personal "ah ha" moment about "living water" and just what it is. But before I do that, I want to talk about feet and holy ground and grounding and perichoresis. No, really, it's must easier to understand than it is to explain. Really.

For those of you who know me better, you will know that I have been learning a lot about resonant frequencies and their importance to health over the past 12 years or so. And while there is a lot of nonsense written, there are some gems to be found by those willing to dig and sift diligently.

While some have chosen to discredit theories of "electromagnetic/electrostatic pollution" over the years, the science is beginning to be collected about these subtle, invisible fields and their effects on life forms (human, plant, animal).

Quick disclaimer break: I am so not a scientist, but I do have significant doses of common sense and intuition and have read some important books about this. You will have to go and do your own study without being unduly prejudiced by the nay-sayers. Take a look at this interesting article for more pondering about this.

Okay, here's the bottom line for this meandering post: the best way for humans to discharge their accumulation of electrostatic charges is to "ground" themselves by walking barefoot on the, um, ground -- grass, sand and dirt are the best. Going barefoot also allows the body's diverse neurological systems (especially the brain and digestive tract) to become better entrained to the earth's resonant frequency -- which is tuned for relaxation and harmony. Which means, of course, that wearing shoes interferes with this connection.

All of this has come into focus for me as I pondered the wonders of walking on the beach and standing in the surf and allowing my feet to be buried in the sand ... and how much better my feet and ankles have felt as a result. When I mentioned this to my chiropractor, she said that I had been experiencing the ultimate in "grounding" therapy.

So, today I was out working in my garden ... and decided to bury my toes in the pile of sand that was left over from tilling sand into our clay/soil in preparation for planting. And as I was wiggling my toes and settling my feet into the sand, this thought popped into my head. "This is why God required Moses to take off his shoes by the burning bush -- God did not want there to be any interference from his connection with Moses. He wanted Moses to be fully grounded and entrained to God's resonance." There was nothing "unholy" about Moses' sandals that required that they be removed. It was God inviting Moses into a special relationship -- one that turned into an amazing "friendship" -- of Moses being called the friend of God, who talked with him "face to face".

I imagine that God had a similar relationship early on in the Garden with Adam and Eve -- walking in the garden together in the cool of the evening....

Being barefoot is the quintessential state of being comfortable, isn't it? I love the thought that our loving Father wants us to walk with him in such a way that we are able to "ground" the "static" we collect all around us and be entrained to the calming resonance of this wonderful earth he created as our home.

But more than being physically barefoot, Father invites us to dance with him and Jesus and the Holy Spirit -- a dance free of shoes that hurt our spiritual feet ... that desensitize them from being stepped on or stepping on another ... that make it easier to trip or twist an ankle ... that even take over the focus with brands and colors and styles of shoes ... that track in dirt or mar the floor ... that make such a clunking and clinking racket.

So I'm going to go to the store and buy a couple of bags of "sandbox sand" and pour it into the wading pool on our deck ... and I'm going to take off my shoes and stand in the water and let my feet sink into the sand. I'm also going to think about ways I can take my spiritual shoes off so that I can dance more freely and more in tune with the music of the Great Dance.

Join me?