Comments on: New Wineskin – Visionary Leadership http://www.derekmooney.com/2008/01/new-wineskin-visionary-leadership/ derekmooney.com Tue, 12 Apr 2011 02:11:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Derek http://www.derekmooney.com/2008/01/new-wineskin-visionary-leadership/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Derek Fri, 01 Feb 2008 02:59:00 +0000 http://localhost/?p=178#comment-145 I don't see a problem with that general approach, but the problem comes when the "elders" are the gatekeepers.<br/><br/>If each member is functioning the the church gatherings, then there's little for people to make decisions about, actually. Most decisions in most churches today have to do with buildings, staff, or programs. All of which were absent in the New Testament.<br/><br/>I totally agree that consensus includes trust. This happens in marriages all the time - where one partner has a strong feeling about something, but the other is not so sure but trusts in their partner anyway. Consensus doesn't necessarily mean that I'm 100% convinced. It means that I'm willing to submit to the rest of the group in love and unity. I don’t see a problem with that general approach, but the problem comes when the “elders” are the gatekeepers.

If each member is functioning the the church gatherings, then there’s little for people to make decisions about, actually. Most decisions in most churches today have to do with buildings, staff, or programs. All of which were absent in the New Testament.

I totally agree that consensus includes trust. This happens in marriages all the time – where one partner has a strong feeling about something, but the other is not so sure but trusts in their partner anyway. Consensus doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m 100% convinced. It means that I’m willing to submit to the rest of the group in love and unity.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.derekmooney.com/2008/01/new-wineskin-visionary-leadership/comment-page-1/#comment-144 Anonymous Thu, 31 Jan 2008 03:09:00 +0000 http://localhost/?p=178#comment-144 Very interesting, but I don't quite understand what you mean by visionary leadership: If leaders persuade and advise, surely they will do so from a vision of the purposes of God? In my church it is those with a recognised prophetic gift or spontaneous but consistent prophetic messages from the church body in general that provides vision and focus, but it is interpreted by "someone" as Corinthians requires. Who? The elders. They also take the things they see are good elsewhere that are not specifically prophetic and bring them to the church, after prayer. We all then pray about it and go for it. There are generally adjustments here and there but it seems to work. We have had issues at times, and people still have reservations, but we have enough trust in each other as people to keep going, and enough honesty to admit to mistakes. So just a message of hope from an anonymous dude? Not only, as this example shows how elders can be at the center of decision making because they mostly put Jesus's purposes before their own. Pretty visionary and directed, and still mostly involves consensus. The difference is that trust replaces total consensus. Think about Paul, how could he ask them to be unified if every decision already required total consensus? In our church we want to come to one mind, but we know we aren't their yet, so sometimes we go along with someone we disagree with out of love, although we still try to show them their error, again out of love. At every stage we talk and discuss, but we forgive rather than bog things down in democratic politics. This means that the minority that doesn't get the vision doesn't scupper all motion, but does get heard. What do you think? Some sad times it hasn't worked and people have left, but that happened among the apostles so we can't be too surprised. But its better they honestly leave or honestly stay than backbite etc. Ahh you probably know all this already, but I thought it would be good to state it! Very interesting, but I don’t quite understand what you mean by visionary leadership: If leaders persuade and advise, surely they will do so from a vision of the purposes of God? In my church it is those with a recognised prophetic gift or spontaneous but consistent prophetic messages from the church body in general that provides vision and focus, but it is interpreted by “someone” as Corinthians requires. Who? The elders. They also take the things they see are good elsewhere that are not specifically prophetic and bring them to the church, after prayer. We all then pray about it and go for it. There are generally adjustments here and there but it seems to work. We have had issues at times, and people still have reservations, but we have enough trust in each other as people to keep going, and enough honesty to admit to mistakes. So just a message of hope from an anonymous dude? Not only, as this example shows how elders can be at the center of decision making because they mostly put Jesus’s purposes before their own. Pretty visionary and directed, and still mostly involves consensus. The difference is that trust replaces total consensus. Think about Paul, how could he ask them to be unified if every decision already required total consensus? In our church we want to come to one mind, but we know we aren’t their yet, so sometimes we go along with someone we disagree with out of love, although we still try to show them their error, again out of love. At every stage we talk and discuss, but we forgive rather than bog things down in democratic politics. This means that the minority that doesn’t get the vision doesn’t scupper all motion, but does get heard. What do you think? Some sad times it hasn’t worked and people have left, but that happened among the apostles so we can’t be too surprised. But its better they honestly leave or honestly stay than backbite etc. Ahh you probably know all this already, but I thought it would be good to state it!

]]>