Exactly Who is Doing the Giving?

Bartley brings up the issue of Government funding the church to carry out welfare services. This is a hot topic for many missions of the church including youthwork.

Whilst there are many considerations around the matter, I would like to merely ask: Who is doing the giving?

This is a hard question, but we all need to be careful that we consider it and are aware of it in our own situations.

As Christians, God has asked us to give our lives, as a sacrifice, to put others first. We show love in what we do, because it is our resource that we are giving.

If I give and in my giving I employ someone else to do the work, is it me who is giving or is it my employee? Well, it is me – surely. Sure, there may be the case where my employee is adding his giving on top of mine, perhaps putting in extra hours. That would be the his giving, not mine.

Our love needs to consist of giving of what we have got. Being a ‘professional Christian’ doesn’t mean that you are giving anything – it is only when you go beyond your job that you are giving, or when you receive ‘tiny pay’ (I knew that there was a good reason for such low pay! 🙂 ) – just the same as a shelf-stacking job down at Tesco’s, it is only when you go beyond the requirements of your job that you begin to give.

(note: how fantastically tax efficient it is to be a low paid youthworker and to make your giving your time rather than your money! Alternatively you could give money, but be taxed on the extra income you would need to receive before giving the money away. There isn’t a rule on this though – we just individually have to know God’s calling, and sometimes that can be to make money, possibly…)

When we think about giving let’s start by looking at what we have to give. It doesn’t need to be ‘silver and gold’ of which you may ‘have none’, but it does need to be something that you have.

Don’t seek merely to be an unloving, ungenerous, ungiving conduity of someone else’s love or giving. Don’t seek to merely be an paid arm of the state, or a paid arm of other Christians.

Sure, join with others who want to give, join with those who want to fund (as long as they have the same ultimate aims and wish to use the same methods as you), but don’t forget where your giving ends and someone else’s giving begins.

Ultimately it is giving what God has freely given us that matters.

Youthwork is a fantastically important thing to be doing – do make sure that the youth can see that you are not just giving other’s resources, but that you are giving your own too. It is that that gives you authenticity.

As an aside, I’ve just come across a case where (non-church) parents were given a letter by the youthwork explaining that as so much money went on upkeep of the church building it would be useful for parents to contribute to the youth activities. I was a bit bemused that the church felt it worth saying that the building was a higher priority than the people and that, whilst the church was willing to spend hundreds of pounds a week on the building, it wasn’t willing to spend a much smaller amount on people…

Mission and Inclusion

I have been discussing with a student, issues around Mission and Inclusion. On further reflection the issues for inclusion when we have a Kingdom based approach are vast. Impacting practice and theology around church, language and choice(see last post), mission etc. It can be hard to remember when at the coalface of trying to get involved with God in building the kingdom, that it is already here. This dual paradigm, and living as an in-between people has all sorts of issues. For a long time I have been trying to grapple with the issues of inclusion and kingdom, and it is still so easy to forget the God given image that young people maintain in their DNA. How far this may be a key to working in this kingdom which is now and not yet. I am wondering if we might borrow from education theory which has two basic approaches; banking knowledge or drawing out learning. Much of our history of mission sees banking as the way, inputting the gospel story (or evangelical theological takes on it) and then seeing young people respond. How much can we draw out the image of God within? Some traditional evangelical language talks about people having “a God shaped hole in their life”. Maybe we can turn this on its head, and see young people as having a small God shaped light already in their life and our role is to encourage that to shine into the rest of their life. A helpful metaphor???

Choice and faith

When we are working with people to look at issues, it seems to be increasingly important for people to maintain a sense of control over decisions made and this is the basis of all good one to one work. Yet when we talk about choosing to become a Christian we use language such as giving over you life to God. This can lead to people seeing faith as something that will have the effect of changing them reguardless of what they think or their part in the process and thus for some becomes a stumbling block.
Do we need to think more about our language in contemporary society and encourage people to see that the choice is theirs and resides with them. They have the choice to change and God will take their loaves and fishes and do with it as S/He will, but that following God and the changes that result are always dependent on our choosing to bring forward the loaves and fishes each day.

Great!

Been doing quite a bit of networking and traveling recently. Keep hearing great stories and meeting people doing creative things with concepts of church, youth work, detached stuff all sorts. Many of the people who I met have never heard of fresh expressions, emerging church etc, or read any of the books, some people may have come across bits and pieces but the great thing is that they are proactive and responding in ways that are not just following what they have heard others doing but following God into new missionary activity.

Slope and Control

With regards to Richard’s piece on ‘slope‘ and the comments about it:

I was thinking about the time I spend with the youth of our local church. Am I:
1. Running a group with the agenda of communicating Christ to them
OR
2. Running a group with the sole agenda of enabling them to be a group and have their own agenda’s, and just being Christ to them.

Certainly the pressure is on me (from tradition) to do (1) and sure I hope that I do communicate Christ to them, but is that my agenda?

Hmmm, is there a condition that I attach to attendance that they must allow me to control a certain amount of the time we spend together? If so, do they come in spite of that? If so, is that a positive thing?

Would it be better to relinquish any attempt to control and just to be there on their terms?

Whilst I’m tending toward the idea of a lack of control I’m not sure that this is a lack of slope. Surely if I practise ‘being Christ to people’ then I am always a slope, always a way in?

But this is slope without hidden agenda, without control, without events – just me being the new me.

Hmmm…

Can Words bring change?

Words and definition of words shape our meaning and response, and the outworking can corrupt the meaning of words. I am throwing out a challenge for us to rethink how we use certain words to be more authentic to their orginal meaning and stop misusuing them. I am thrinking particularly of the christian words that have been corrupted, so tomorrow I am going to meet with the CHURCH, where we may do some singing, but this will not be a time of WORSHIP any more than eating lunch later that day will be. I wonder if enough of us took more care with our language how quickly peoples perception of these two misinterprited concepts would be reclaimed or redeemed?

Structures and Kingdom

Two contrasting recent experiences. Both working with structured organisations, but one willing to use the structure for accountability that does not get in the way of building kingdom and one where the structure got in the way of kingdom and then using the structure as defense. I can live with structures and like accountability and even understand the need for some but find it hard when people cant see beyond the structure to the opportunity. Then I find myself on the precarious on the edge of being judgemental of people whose hands are probably quite tied. The freedom of the kingdom is a spacious place, but the different approaches remind me of the now and not yet.

Missio Dei Bosch info

Some of the stuff we will be looking at through the session is basic missio dei stuff:-

Mission is not a program of the church but rather an attribute of God. Mission comes first from the heart of God and we are caught up in it rather than initiating it.

Mission is primarily the work of God and we participate with God in what He is doing.

Missio Dei sees our mission as stemming from the Triune God: The Father sends the Son, The Father and the Son send the Spirit, The Father and Son and the Spirit send the church.

As the Father sent me, so I send you. (Jesus)

Therefore one of the things that Bosch highlights is the role of church in the process Bosch would say “Mission denotes the total task God has set before the church.. To love, to serve, to preach, to teach, to heal, to liberate the world� Continue reading

Missio Dei Bosch and tacking

Been doing some prep for a lecture on mission. I always liked Bosch transforming mission and found it very shaping but somewhat heavy going. However in prepping for the lecture I have been using Nussbaums reader which is excellent and have found it helped having Nussbaum highlight particular quotes. I can’t help wondering where Bosch’s work on church and mission would have eventually taken him if he had been able to continue his work. If you are unfamiliar with his stuff or found it to hard work I would thoroughly recommend Nussbaums Reader.

Where is the Centre?

Thinking more about effect of post Christendom church and mission, I think finding the new centre of our culture will be important. As the meta narrative (overarching story or worldview) has been lost the question is what has replaced it. Currently I think it has been replaced by interactions with popular culture and so in true post modern style there is no single centre but a centre that is formed by a collage of people interacting through popular culture. So the idea of Sunday papers as a metaphor for church fits well.

I was discussing this with some guys on the train back from London. They don’t know each other but often travel together as they get on and off at the same station, often their conversation centres around what is the news or papers that day. More on this another day but my battery is about to die.

Ideas on where the centre of culture is now, greatly received