Heretic
Heretic, the one word that you never want to be associated with you as a Christian or ministry worker. OR IS IT?
Rather, maybe we need more heretics. Those challenging the status quo in Church. Just maybe we need to think more unorthodox thoughts when it comes to ministry. (Notice I said ministry, not theology; though there is a conversation there).
Of course, most people call others heretics when someone else’s views don’t align with theirs. Meaning, they think that they have a corner on the “right theology”, and the “right way to do ministry”, and of course everyone else is just wrong. I even have some friends I think who wish they could still burn heretics at the stake today…just to teach them a lesson and prove a point.
I know this is a serious word and I’m somewhat playing with it. But maybe Seth Godin is right, maybe we have been entrapped by the status quo, and been caught up in the trappings of Church culture, politics, hierarchy, etc. Godin’s idea of heretic goes beyond Church, but involves corporations, non-profits, politics and more.
Heretic & Ministry
But what I’m interested in is the idea of the heretic in ministry.
For argument sake, I’m not talking about heretic when it comes to theology. I’m not debating the orthodox views of the faith (virgin birth, death, resurrection, etc.), though I know people disagree on those. I’m interested in the role of the heretic who challenges the trappings of the Church. The facade, roles, hierarchical authority that is built over 1000′s of years of faith.
Is it possible that the Church culture has enslaved us, and keeps us from actually doing what our faith asks of us? So rather than living out our faith and theology, we are captured by the status quo. Reminds me very much of being caught in The Matrix and deciding which pill to swallow.
Godin says:
Challenging the status quo requires a committment, both public and private. It involves reaching out to others and putting yourideas on the line. (Or pinning your Ninety-five Theses to the church door). (pp. 49)
and later in the book, Godin says:
Religion and faith are often confused. Someone who opposes faith is called an atheist and widely reviled. But we don’t have a common word for someone who opposes a particular religion.
Heretic will have to do.
If faith is the foundation of a belief system, then religion is the facade and the landscaping. It’s easy to get caught up in the foibles of a corporate culture and the systems that have been built over time, but they have nothing at all to do with the faith that built the system in the first place.
Change is made by people, by leaders who are proud to be called heretics because their faith is never in question. (pp. 84)
Thinking Heretical Thoughts on Ministry
In the next several posts I would like to challenge, raise questions, debate some areas of Church ministry that need some unorthodox thinking in them. Maybe we need more heretics in our midst to help us re-think/re-imagine how the Church could be.
These are areas that I have struggled with a long time as I know many of you have, many of you are beginning to, and others will just think, well, that’s heretical thinking. I’m simply bringing them up to raise discussion and conversation, not because I have all the answers to these. That’s why I want your input.
- The Sermon: Primarily in its current form (1 person; usually a male; talking at people for 45 mins).
- Church Leadership: Primarily as it pertains to top-down, hierarchical, male driven committees.
- Worship (music): Primarily as it pertains to “the rock star”, performers on stage.
- Communication: Primarily in its top-down, non-inclusive/non-participatory of the Church body.
There are more, but those 4 are enough for me to look at. If you have others that you think should be on the list, add them in the comment section and we can explore them together.
What would you add?
I like this post. Don’t get me started. We need to have another coffee!
Haaa. Greg, at least I know if they wanted to burn us at the stake, we would probably go down with some good friends as well
rhett
Rhett,
I’m excited to see where this is going. I like to think of myself as a heretic (as defined above). Looking forward to your thoughts.
Agree Ryan. I’m quite orthodox in my theology (though I’m sure I could find those who disagree). But would also like to see myself as a heretic in the way Godin describes.
I totally understand your point here I think and I totally agree with it. But I understand heresy to be an unBiblical interpretation of the Bible. I don’t think challenging tradition and re thinking the way things are done (outside of Biblical mandates) would qualify as heretical.
Tyler:
Yes. Heresy usually has to do with the Biblical interpretation of the Scripture…and whether or not someone is orthodox.
Godin uses the word differently, and I like how he uses it as well.
Also, you can see where it gets really tricky also, very quickly, when we ask, “Well, what are the Biblical mandates?”
For example. I believe in the ordination of women…so does that make me a heretic. Some might say so…others would not agree. Or is heretic too strong there.
That’s why when I use it, I am playing off Godin’s definition…more about structures and practice, rather than belief.
But the two are inherently tied. We we believe influences our structure I think.
You know the old story about moving the Church organ out of the sanctuary and making way for the piano, guitars and drums….those were heretics
Well at least many have thought so.
later,
rhett
Rhett – first off, Godin’s (and your) use of heretic seems to fit in with the general definition and is probably more appropriate now than ever. Certainly, in certain circles, the WAY we do things is significantly more important than the WHAT that we actually believe.
As for those 4 areas…
1. The Sermon: 45 minutes is TOTALLY a context thing. If I went over 25 I can promise people would begin leaving. And I’ve come around to believing that preaching a sermon and TEACHING are two TOTALLY different events.
2. Church Leadership: Actually, the idea of “committee” is the greatest foil to hierarchical leadership. The “reformed” (can’t believe I just referenced that) idea of God working in community, not merely speaking to individuals, is played out in a committee – provided they have a real voice. Committee is really just a group of people sitting around a table at a pub sharing ideas – with the addition of a history (last mtg minutes) and a plan (agenda). Maybe it’s time to re-work the language, eh?
3. Worship (music): THIS one, seems to defy context, unless you’re in that tiny church with a horrible organist and not enough people to form a choir or song leader. Other than that, it doesn’t matter what kind of music – organ, piano, guitar, choir – they’re all “rock stars.” My thought – close your eyes when you sing – look only at the words when you need to. And don’t clap FOR the musician, clap TO God – if necessary.
4. Communication: This one’s probably the toughest, ’cause the method of communication is dictated by the type of goal/purpose of those communicating. If you simply start with “public space” – where no rules apply, what ends up happening is whoever is biggest & loudest communicates best. But if you really want two-way dialogue, you need to figure out a way to create space to make that happen – and it may require the ruthless elimination of some communication. If we’re ruled by the gospel, while it is GOOD NEWS, it’s good news to some and bad news to those profiting from the subjugation of others. I think communicating with this knowledge is essential – or it all simply becomes noise.
I’m not trying to provide ANSWERS, just furthering the discussion on the 4 areas you put out…
Wow Don,
“the ‘reformed’”….you are a Presbyterian. What happened to the Jr. High director next door I used to work with.
Anyways…great thoughts on all of this. This will definitely help stir the conversation.
rhett