|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: NewFrontiers after Terry Virgo
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by David Matthias:
quote:
The reason for this parting of the ways was, essentially, that by promoting another 'stream', this leader was no longer representing Terry Virgo (not NewFrontiers, Terry Virgo).
I think that risks being a touch of creative translation.
In the situation I'm referring to, what I wrote was as faithful a repetition of what I've been told as I can manage. I don't intend to go into the specifics on this thread, though.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Black Labrador
Shipmate
# 3098
|
Posted
This looks like a recipe for chaos to me. Virgo steps down, and is succeeded by a group of people who seem to have geographical regions to look after but no clear hierarchy or accountability.
What happens if individual apostles go in different directions? What happens if some churches wish to come under the direction of an apostle outside their allocated region? Who does someone make a complaint about a specific apostle to?
I can only see New Frontiers fragmenting from here.
Posts: 629 | From: London | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It's likely to go the same way that Covenant Ministries - arguably its antecedent in terms of modus operandi - did. To be fair to NFI, it did seem to learn some lessons from Covenant Ministries' mistakes ...
My guess would be that a hard-core rump will continue pretty much as before but some peripheral groupings will form and some other allegiances will develop with groupings outside of what is now NFI.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
I'm not sure whether these quotes from Adrian Warnock's blog clarify things or muddy the waters still further.
In his account of Terry Virgo's "fireside chat" at Together On A Mission, he writes:
quote:
The apostles will often meet together, for a season Terry will still join with them. Gathering of equal interdependent apostles which Dave Devinish [sic] will facilitate. Some apostolic figures will travel between the teams.
On the other hand, the same blog reports David Stroud at the same conference saying quote:
David Stroud will be leading in a very different way. This isn’t his team. It is just that he will be gathering the spheres. They will be mutually responsible to each other.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Matthias
Apprentice
# 14948
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
Well, I did wonder why every 'sphere of influence' happens to be more or less geographic, when in fact it's all 'relationally based'.
That is an interesting one. I agree to an extent. Part of that is always because of who you see most often, and you tend to see people you are geographically closer to.
There also tends to be a link with people who have left your own Church to go and plant a new Church and quite often people go to the neighbouring town or city.
ast tiem I heard Stoke is not in the Northern Region. Stafford is.
Nottingham is not. Derby is.
Not all the Manchester Churches are but all the Shropshire Churches are.
Birmingham Churches relate to a guy from Oxford. Coventry to a guy from Worcester.
If you go down south there are even more cross overs.
Posts: 29 | From: Shrewsbury | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I know of one city in the north of England where there were two NFI church plants which had little, if anything to do with one another ...
The situation with the NFI 'jurisdictions' is just as complicated as that of the Orthodox where you have overlapping Greek, Russian, Romanian, Serbian, Antiochian ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The situation with the NFI 'jurisdictions' is just as complicated as that of the Orthodox where you have overlapping Greek, Russian, Romanian, Serbian, Antiochian
Splitters!
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
What I can't understand, if you don't mind me asking, is why so many people allow themselves to be manipulated and controlled in the way that some posters describe? Surely if everybody stopped going to those churches (as many posters have said they have done) then there would be nobody left for the leaders to have power over.
In my observations in a quite different set-up (a powerful group within an anglican church), this was achieved by giving power (and the thirst for power) to some quite naive, new members, who didn't really understand what was going on, but they were told that they had received God's anointing to become great leaders. Is this the sort of thing that new leaders are being trained to think in NewFrontiers, as well? Are they being flattered into staying, with promises of power and control? Or is the reason quite different?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I use the frog in the saucepan analogy, Chorister. If a frog hopped into a heated saucepan it'd immediately hop back out again. But if it hops into a saucepan of cold or tepid water it sits there comfortably while the heat is gradually applied and before it realises what's going on it's been boiled to death.
In my own case, and with lots of my contemporaries, I was young, earnest, genuinely seeking some kind of 'radical Christianity' and, despite some initial alarm-bells and reservations, the whole new-church thing appeared to offer that in spades. Other people I knew took one look and skedaddled. But I was young, naive and theologically ignorant for the most part.
There's a great sense of community and a high level of mutual support in many of these outfits and that goes a long way - particularly if you've moved to a new city to study or work or are dislocated from your original setting for some reason. The mileage varies, and as Eutychus says, the level of 'hail fellow, well-met' camaraderie and apparent informality masks what is often a heirarchical and authoritarian structure.
Some people don't have any problems with it and seem to thrive in that sort of environment. Bully for them. The kind of people who don't are the more lateral and discursive thinkers, rather than the 'directive' ones. They aren't all naive fundamentalists though, but there is a particular party-line and way of doing things that you transgress or cross at your peril in terms of being able to survive or subsist in such a setting.
Looking back, I'm amazed I lasted 18 years. But I'd been on a trajectory that was bound to take me outside of a setting like that for a good dozen years or so before that and I'd always maintained good and eirenic relations with Christians right across the board. And there'd always been aspects I'd never fully signed up to right from the word 'go'.
It's difficult to convey to anyone who's not been involved with a group like that ... but eventually your whole social life and identity revolves around it. Which makes it harder and harder to leave. It took us a long time and it was very painful when it finally happened. We went to a mildly charismatic Baptist church afterwards and we found that like a breath of fresh-air ... although I'm not sure it'd be where I'm 'at' now.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
OK, thanks, that makes sense now. In many ways that's quite similiar to the example I gave - it particularly resonates about being in a strange environment away from home. I've heard about 'love bombing' where people are befriended specifically as a recruitment technique.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
What I can't understand, if you don't mind me asking, is why so many people allow themselves to be manipulated and controlled in the way that some posters describe?
Well, if you don't mind me saying, thinking you're too smart to be conned is a great way to qualify as a mark.
quote:
some quite naive, new members, who didn't really understand what was going on, (...) were told that they had received God's anointing to become great leaders. Is this the sort of thing that new leaders are being trained to think in NewFrontiers, as well?
I would say this certainly was practice towards the end of my time at NF. One apostolic leader said he deliberately over-promoted young men to make them insecure and thus more dependent on him.
Besides, once you're in past a certain point, getting out is not trivial. You'll have invested hugely emotionally, financially, spiritually... when I left I lost my livelihood and my raison d'être. I turned my back on fifteen years' worth of blood, sweat and tears building a church. I and my family lost most of our friends (or people we thought were our friends, anyway). Our kids, who were teenagers at the time, have suffered indescribably in ways I'm not going to go into here, and seven years on each of them still does in their own way.
As far as I'm concerned, I think I was conned because (and again I think this is fundamental to all con tricks) I, or some part of me, wanted to believe. I wanted to believe in a glorious, restored church. And yes, I guess there was a part of spiritual pride and ambition in me in believing I could contribute to that!
I also believed that I was dealing with people who were up-front, honest, and transparent.
I think there are plenty of people within NewFrontiers who are that, and in my own recent developments some senior figures have apologised very handsomely and I believe wholeheartedly to me on their own account.
I've tried to take good things from my time with NewFrontiers and all our family looks back with fond nostalgia to the Stoneleigh Bible Weeks which we attended every year from 1993-2001. It wasn't all bad or corrupt.
However, I think that a lot of power is (or was) wielded by people who exploit the lack of clear boundaries and procedures, along with christians' implicit trust of other christians, to further their own agendas. Like a lot of con artists, I believe they may well be at least partly self-deluded, but that doesn't make it right.
Theological considerations aside, the one thing for which this new development opens up the potential is for NF to equip itself with some sensible and responsible form of governance.
[x-post]
[Forgot to add: best allegory for understanding what it was all like remains, in my view, the film version of John Grisham's The Firm. Some of it is almost verbatim NFI: "the Firm encourages children and isn't against wives working"...]
[ 17. July 2011, 19:31: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
And, let's hope, some sensible and responsible theology too, Eutychus. Of all the new-church groups, NFI always struck me as the one that prided itself on meatier doctrine ... and interestingly, I've come across more reformed evangelicals who respected NFI more than some of the other outfits because it appeared to be more reformed and Calvinistic.
My own view now is that it often combined charismania with a form of popularist Calvinism that is of a different - and inferior - order to that espoused by people like Jengie Jon and other capital R Reformed people I've encountered here on the Ship and in Real Life.
I don't doubt that there are bright and theologically astute people involved with NFI though. And it'd be good to see some of them getting a chance to make a difference.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daisymay
St Elmo's Fire
# 1480
|
Posted
I was in our church that joined the same organisation as Gamaliel, and it felt quite awful although it wasn't 100% wrong - and when we left it, and later heard Terry Virgo and his wife, we enjoyed that better, and later we shifted away from both and became independent, with women being as important and useful in the church, sermons, communion, leading house groups etc etc and women and men not always being separated.
Lots of our church people had left, and never came back. And my husband who was told and expected to be "ordained" in that style, he totally rejected it, and he and another who led the bible study I was in, used to get me always to lead and teach, without telling the minister.
So are many in NF pretending to follow their "ideas"? Will that make it more likely to change now? Or will those in charge be very rigid when they discover people not always following their "beliefs"?
--------------------
London
Flickr fotos
Posts: 11224 | From: London - originally Dundee, Blairgowrie etc... | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
I heard Terry Virgo preach many times in the 1970s, and attended a few services at Clarendon in the early 80s. I was never strongly tempted to join their church - though a lot of people I knew slightly did, and at least one good friend, who is still a friend - and I had all sorts of doubts about them, but they really did not strike me as some kind of baseless controlling cult. There was real love for God there and real knowledge of Scripture and Christian doctrine. A lot to disagree with, but a lot of solid teaching that's become part of how I think. I'm sure lots of things went wrong (as in every church) but fundamentally they weren't the bad guys.
But then I'm a soppy Open Evangelical Anglican.
I suspect that some of the things I keep on coming out with here about ordained women is me channelling the Arthur Wallis/Terry Virgo line on Ephesians Four ministries. Even though my conclusions differ from theirs.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
And, let's hope, some sensible and responsible theology too, Eutychus. Of all the new-church groups, NFI always struck me as the one that prided itself on meatier doctrine ... and interestingly, I've come across more reformed evangelicals who respected NFI more than some of the other outfits because it appeared to be more reformed and Calvinistic.
Part of this might be that they came to prominence at the same time as the whole Young, Restless and Reformed thing was kicking off.
Then again their Reformed credentials extended to a very loose adherence to the Calvinist doctrines of grace (and in the case of some pastors, not even that).
There are people in their organisation with theological nous, however I suspect that at the broader level they've run into a very British aversion to theological positions (or firm ideological commitments of any kind).
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
The year before my first Stoneleigh, I went with my family to the first Ichthus Revival Camp, in 1992. I think Roger Forster is a great (if idiosyncratic) theologian, but there wasn't much theology among the conference-goers.
This came home to me when, in the queue for the showers at Stoneleigh the following year, I got engaged in high-falutin' theological debate within minutes. That was certainly an appeal to me at the time, and led to me shifting my theological ground significantly (before shifting most of it back, or at least elsewhere, again post 2004...)
[ 17. July 2011, 20:42: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'd broadly concur with that, Ken.
It wasn't all bad and it ain't all bad.
It isn't all bad, but I suspect at least some of the visceral reaction to it comes from disillusionment when it turns out not to be the new new thing.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I'm not sure whether these quotes from Adrian Warnock's blog clarify things or muddy the waters still further.
In his account of Terry Virgo's "fireside chat" at Together On A Mission, he writes:
quote:
The apostles will often meet together, for a season Terry will still join with them. Gathering of equal interdependent apostles which Dave Devinish [sic] will facilitate. Some apostolic figures will travel between the teams.
On the other hand, the same blog reports David Stroud at the same conference saying quote:
David Stroud will be leading in a very different way. This isn’t his team. It is just that he will be gathering the spheres. They will be mutually responsible to each other.
I had a little chuckle over this quote from David Stround.
quote:
Some will work across the spheres, a bit like Barnabas in the NT.
And have "no small dissension" with the "bit like Paul"s over the pastoral dimension of the vision, no doubt.
Mischievously, I wondered how they would get on as hosts in Purgatory ... Maybe they might consider modifying the 17 principles with some blends from our 10 C's? Or at least C1. "Don't be a jerk" particularly over one of the "isms"?
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Or a bit like Flying Bishops in the CofE?
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
It's all a 'bit like ... bit like ...'
And a lot like bullshit.
But then, that applies right across the board ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
It's all a 'bit like ... bit like ...'
No, no.
It's "progressively transitioning into an exciting new season on the cusp of the apostolic as it multiplies into new missional spheres, with a number of local men on the front foot to be raised up to tuck in behind translocal ministries - but very much at a 'suck-it-and-see' stage".
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I think Roger Forster is a great (if idiosyncratic) theologian, but there wasn't much theology among the conference-goers.
Let's hope NFI cope better with TV stepping down than Ichthus did when Roger did (or didn't).
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
My understanding is that bits of Ichthus broke away unilaterally (internal name: "nickthus") from a rump which is still overseen, globally, by Roger.
As far as I know (and I think I'm pretty well-placed to comment), Ichthus never claimed apostolic authority in the same way NewFrontiers did and they explicitly didn't seek to adopt churches outside the UK in the same way NF did. But Ichthus would be another thread anyway.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Just to highlight the reasons Ichthus is a different kettle of fish to NF restorationism, Roger would frequently (and deliberately!) upset restorationists by saying "let's have as many denominations as possible!". He's never seen apostles and their spheres in the same way as the likes of Terry.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
As far as I know (and I think I'm pretty well-placed to comment), Ichthus never claimed apostolic authority in the same way NewFrontiers did and they explicitly didn't seek to adopt churches outside the UK in the same way NF did.
True - perhaps it's not a very good comparison.
I was just thinking of other examples from the House Church movement who are dealing with the handover from the pioneers ... pun intended... I'll get my coates.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm the only one here who has been putting Covenant Ministries forward as a more exact analogy. The fact that no-one else has is perhaps significant. It shows how invisible to the rest of the Christian world, even the charismatic evangelical Christian world, Covenant Ministries had become once they'd closed down the big Dales/Wales Bible Weeks.
For the record, there were groupings that had been part of Covenant Ministries in Glasgow, Cambridge, up in Yorkshire and in various parts of the East Midlands and the North West.
Destiny Church in Glasgow was formerly part of Covenant Ministries and now has a more pronounced health/wealth flavour.
Abundant Life in Bradford the same.
I've forgotten the name of the Cambridge lot but they effectively split.
Covenant Ministries had lost most of its South Walian base to SGM/PDI or whatever it was called ... but retained a base in Cardiff.
Life Link under Alan Scotland has held together.
Keri Jones continues with his group of churches under the Ministries Without Borders banner.
Comparisons with Salt and Light under Barney Coombes might also be pertinent.
I'm still in touch with some Life Link people and know some of the rump that was left in Yorkshire ... but I've lost touch with the former Covenant Ministries scene for the most part. My impression is that some are trotting out the same-old same-old but with lower numbers and others have effectively thrown off the restorationist emphasis to plough a more US-flavoured health/wealth furrow. That was never far below the surface within Covenant Ministries so I'm not surprised ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Covenant Ministries had lost most of its South Walian base to SGM/PDI or whatever it was called ... but retained a base in Cardiff.
Umm. SGM/PDI is tiny in Wales - two churches of not particularly significant size.
Alan Scotland and Keri Jones continue in the vein of restorationist churches led by people with 'Apostolic' giftings.
quote:
My impression is that some are trotting out the same-old same-old but with lower numbers and others have effectively thrown off the restorationist emphasis to plough a more US-flavoured health/wealth furrow. That was never far below the surface within Covenant Ministries so I'm not surprised ...
I think any time the Bible gets reduced to the functional narrative of 'everything will be okay real soon now' or 'victory is just around the corner' the health/wealth furrow is always a danger. Which is why it keeps popping up like weeds in pentecostal and charismatic circles.
NF are not going to be immune to this either, see their embrace of Bethel etc. in the South.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, Chris ... but there were ex-CMI people who ended up in SGM/PDI. The size might not be important, but what's left of what used to be Covenant Ministries isn't particularly large either. I doubt if Alan Scotland and Keri Jones have that many people to rub together, truth be told.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
Few thoughts from inside the "evil Empire" ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
If there's even a sniff of Prosperity I'm slinging my hook! (Can't see it happening myself)
In the UK the regional infrastructures seem pretty secure so I don't see much significant change immediately.
Terry is speaking at our regional as well so it's not like he's vanishing off the scene.
On the ground its worth remembering that there are some differences between local churches (Irish Lord seems to have lucked out!!). A number of friends have loved our church and not got on at other NF churches. A chap I know relocated recently and tried two or three NF places before settling in one.
Also in any given NF church there will be a range of people some of whom are NF from birth, some are NF by choice later in life, some don't like NF but like the local church etc etc It's not a homogeneous situation.
As a church we've recently hosted some folk from an African NF church which has been a very positive experience all round (the Twanglets enjoyed it too). The NF connection does help preserve us from parochialism.
The Salt and Light transition seems like it was successful.
Not having a "successor" helps keep things organic and avoids (sorry Mudfrog)any comparisons with post William Booth Salvationism (you can tell I'm not thinking of lady preachers!!!)
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I doubt if Alan Scotland and Keri Jones have that many people to rub together, truth be told.
An acquaintance wandered into a Without Borders church while church-hunting in Coventry a while ago, he hadn't heard of the movement before and when he enquired he was told they were led by an 'Apostle in Wales' - everything was more or less as expected, except the women covered their heads while speaking.
I'd assumed from that data point that they had started to spread again.
Interesting that some of the churches ended up in SGM territory - though I wonder what doctrinal form that actually took.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Matthias
Apprentice
# 14948
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
Few thoughts from inside the "evil Empire"
If there's even a sniff of Prosperity I'm slinging my hook! (Can't see it happening myself)
In the UK the regional infrastructures seem pretty secure so I don't see much significant change immediately.
Terry is speaking at our regional as well so it's not like he's vanishing off the scene.
On the ground its worth remembering that there are some differences between local churches (Irish Lord seems to have lucked out!!). A number of friends have loved our church and not got on at other NF churches. A chap I know relocated recently and tried two or three NF places before settling in one.
Also in any given NF church there will be a range of people some of whom are NF from birth, some are NF by choice later in life, some don't like NF but like the local church etc etc It's not a homogeneous situation.
As a church we've recently hosted some folk from an African NF church which has been a very positive experience all round (the Twanglets enjoyed it too). The NF connection does help preserve us from parochialism.
The Salt and Light transition seems like it was successful.
Not having a "successor" helps keep things organic and avoids (sorry Mudfrog)any comparisons with post William Booth Salvationism (you can tell I'm not thinking of lady preachers!!!)
That is a fair post.
Yep: head down the name it and claim it prosperity stuff and I am out of there too. However, I certainly don't anticipate that.
Agreed re: the differences between Churches and between people in Churches. I certainly would not be happy in a Church just because it had newfrontiers on the badge.
Our lead elder did a dissertation recently on new Church movements and transition. It was fascinating. Salt and Light are a decent parallel.
I really admire TV for not just putting a crown on someone else's head.
Posts: 29 | From: Shrewsbury | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twangist
Shipmate
# 16208
|
Posted
quote:
That is a fair post.
Thanks I try!!
Is this thesis available on-line?
I do find the transition stuff and 2nd generation issues interesting (esp. as having come into restorationism as an adult)
--------------------
JJ
SDG
blog
Posts: 604 | From: Devon | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Matthias
Apprentice
# 14948
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I doubt if Alan Scotland and Keri Jones have that many people to rub together, truth be told.
That is the interesting thing about newfrontiers just now.
230 Churches in the UK is it? That is far from insignificant. Yet in reality TV has had little hands on involvement for at least a decade.
800 Churches across over 60 countries is where a lot of energy of the original figures has gone.
I think the UK scene may actually benefit from being more focussed on the UK, if that makes sense.
That said: the three people already identified in the UK having apostolic "spheres" are also working into Canada, Scandinavia and India respectively. So it will always be looking overseas too.
Posts: 29 | From: Shrewsbury | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think that one of the (few) very interesting things about NFI is that the mileage varies so much in terms of people's experience. The experience can range from the fairly benign to the ultra-toxic.
I don't think you'd get as much variation in terms of experience within some of the older denominations ... say Methodism, for instance.
I certainly don't regard NFI as an 'evil empire' though. It's 'good in parts' like everything else.
Chris Stiles: a number of former Covenant Ministries people (and one or two churches) did move in a more 'reformed' direction - rather PDI-ish. I could name names.
For the most part, though, people who left it either:
- dropped out entirely
- went to a more moderate setting, such as the Baptists
- joined NFI or similar groups
- went off into complete health/wealth prosperity gospel land ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
I think there's a really important tangent to his discussion regarding the danger of one person becoming so important that his / her departure (or potential departure) from the scene is a major trauma. Sure, some people are immensely gifted in leadership etc. but isn't it better if those gifts are used to equip others for greater works?
After all, Ephesians 4:11, AIUI a key verse for many movements like NFI, says that the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers are there to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church. They aren't meant to do all the work themselves!
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I think there's a really important tangent to his discussion regarding the danger of one person becoming so important that his / her departure (or potential departure) from the scene is a major trauma. Sure, some people are immensely gifted in leadership etc. but isn't it better if those gifts are used to equip others for greater works?
To play the devils advocate for a moment, if Terry Virgo agreed with you there and came to think that he himself had been too much the authoritarian leader, and too interfering and micro-managing, what would he do? Presumably he'd step down, and not appoint someone else to make the same mistakes.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
It's not that they do all the work, it's that they can, at their discretion, exercise control without any of the usual checks and balances.
[ETA to SKK. I'll answer ken in a minute when RL has stopped interfering]
[ 19. July 2011, 12:25: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
To play the devils advocate for a moment, if Terry Virgo agreed with you there and came to think that he himself had been too much the authoritarian leader, and too interfering and micro-managing, what would he do? Presumably he'd step down, and not appoint someone else to make the same mistakes.
Ha ha, yes; you're probably right! Although, I guess there should also be a public repudiation of the top-down, micro-managing approach.
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
It's not that they do all the work, it's that they can, at their discretion, exercise control without any of the usual checks and balances.
Good point. I should have said 'directing all the work' rather than 'doing all the work'. As you say, it's about the level of control and authority vested in one person.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Although, I guess there should also be a public repudiation of the top-down, micro-managing approach.
You made my point for me.
[ 19. July 2011, 13:36: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
On the ground its worth remembering that there are some differences between local churches (Irish Lord seems to have lucked out!!). A number of friends have loved our church and not got on at other NF churches. A chap I know relocated recently and tried two or three NF places before settling in one.
I'm not sure how I've "lucked out" unless that term means something different where you're from (where I'm from it means to be very lucky).
I fully understand that within any given denomination there will be some individual churches that are different from the norm or whatnot, so I don't expect all NF churches to be homogenous. I fully understand that a person can like one Baptist church and not another. What does bother me about NF is not that they have a variety of different churches, but rather that they tend to deny that they are a denomination, instead insisting on the phrase "family of churches." In doing so they tend to brush off responsibility for those churches under the NF banner that behave less than ethically.
I have no doubt that there are many wonderful and well functioning NF churches, but the problem I've had so far is that in the dysfunctional churches (which are well testified to) have no higher court of appeals or denominational authority to appeal to when one feels that the local leader is abusing his power. It's sort of like they act like a denomination when it's profitable for them, but then deny that they are a denomination when that works out better.
In the end they have to make a decision, either they will take responsibility for the churches under their supposed 'apostolic authority' or not. Maybe with the current shake up they'll finally be able to make up their minds on what they are? That would probably be good for them in the long run, for me it's too late: I don't think I'll ever have anything else to do with them.
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twangist:
Not having a "successor" helps keep things organic and avoids (sorry Mudfrog)any comparisons with post William Booth Salvationism (you can tell I'm not thinking of lady preachers!!!)
I'd be happy to discuss this - not quite knowing what you are implying.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
Quote: Terry is speaking at our regional as well so it's not like he's vanishing off the scene
This point has been made by a number - for me it sums up the problem. If he is going, he should go.
It is common practice in CofE churches, I understand (and also in others) that when a vicar retires he/she moves away. Of course, the CofE is not at all like NFI but the point is a good one to follow, IMO.
On a personal level, when I was called to my first church I followed a man who had been pastor for over 30 years - and he stayed during the time I was there. In my second pastorate, I followed a man who also had been in post for over 30 years but he had died two years previously (not a lot of difference between the two ).
The main charge I would lay at the door of NFI is that the churches are good at empowering their memebers - up to the point that they become a threat to the leaders, then they get enfeebled (thesis at Lancaster University for anyone who wants to PM me). If Terry hangs around, this will be perpetuated ISTM.
All this is fascinating to watxch but I guess it will end in tears one way or another.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:
Quote: Terry is speaking at our regional as well so it's not like he's vanishing off the scene
This point has been made by a number - for me it sums up the problem. If he is going, he should go.
It is common practice in CofE churches, I understand (and also in others) that when a vicar retires he/she moves away. Of course, the CofE is not at all like NFI but the point is a good one to follow, IMO.
On a personal level, when I was called to my first church I followed a man who had been pastor for over 30 years - and he stayed during the time I was there. In my second pastorate, I followed a man who also had been in post for over 30 years but he had died two years previously (not a lot of difference between the two ).
The main charge I would lay at the door of NFI is that the churches are good at empowering their memebers - up to the point that they become a threat to the leaders, then they get enfeebled (thesis at Lancaster University for anyone who wants to PM me). If Terry hangs around, this will be perpetuated ISTM.
All this is fascinating to watxch but I guess it will end in tears one way or another.
It’s a rule of thumb but it very much depends on the person.
Some previous ministers who still attend their old church are a nightmare because they will not accept that it’s not their monkey anymore. (Or, as in at least one independent evangelical church that we know, they “retire” and hand over all weekday and Sunday tasks, but refuse to let go of the decision making or financial control. They were the only person who was remotely surprised when both the congregation and the successor voted with their feet due to concerns over accountability and their retirement was cut short. No names to protect both the innocent and the not so much).
Another church we know has a previous minister in the congregation who is utterly delightful. Happy to offer advice, help and an opinion when asked, but fully aware of the need to keep himself out of day to day church politics and let the new minister do the job.
Let’s hope Terry models himself on the latter rather than the former. Only time will tell. As always, I hope for the best.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Matthias
Apprentice
# 14948
|
Posted
Almost all of the responses I am reading about "he should go", "why is he still there" and the like seem to be coming from a perspective of institution, structure, role etc. Billy has been doing this job description for these people. Now Geoff will do this job description for the same people.
What is happening within newfrontiers is a whole lot more organic than that. There are strengths and very obvious weaknesses (hence questions in this thread re: appeals and governance etc) with this approach. They still don't really know how it will all pan out.
Much of what has recently been made public has been happening in practice for a while now, it is that now they have been intentional in trying to explain what it all means. For example the newfrontiers UK office is in Fulham. The office to support overseas mission is in Bedford. The new people already named as having clear apostolic responsibility moving forwards are based in Manchester, Bournemouth and Lowestoft. The days of everything being in and from Brighton are long gone.
Although you are certainly right there is nothing worse than someone "stepping back" but still holding the reins. I know Icthus found the future with / without Roger Forster a painful process.
Posts: 29 | From: Shrewsbury | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Wuntoo
Shipmate
# 5673
|
Posted
Although you are certainly right there is nothing worse than someone "stepping back" but still holding the reins. ......the future with / without ...... a painful process.
But(without)it is likely to be healthy and potentially a growth point, a new opportunity.
--------------------
Blessed are the cracked for they let in the light.
Posts: 1950 | From: Somewhere else. | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by David Matthias:
Almost all of the responses I am reading about "he should go", "why is he still there" and the like seem to be coming from a perspective of institution, structure, role etc.
I suspect that most of the problems we see emerging over the next few years in NF circles will prove to stem from this decision to carry on pretending not to be an institution.
I'm willing to be proved wrong.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well, it pretends not to be a denomination too, so pretending not to be an institution is simply the next step ... ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
In my experience, groups like NFI can be more 'denominational' than the denominations they criticise. That was certainly true within Covenant Ministries.
I always thought that NFI was a cut-above Covenant Ministries in the way it behaved and the way it treated people, but, sadly, it doesn't seem that much different. The mileage varies, of course ... but it struck me as a case of same piss, different bottle ...
That's a tad unfair ... but not that wide of the mark.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leprechaun
Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
I have no doubt that there are many wonderful and well functioning NF churches, but the problem I've had so far is that in the dysfunctional churches (which are well testified to) have no higher court of appeals or denominational authority to appeal to when one feels that the local leader is abusing his power.
To be honest, while I'm sure that there are dysfunctional churches in NF (and SGM) this due process complaint I do think is unfair. Why should they have due process? Why should people be able to complain or feedback and expect to be heard? That is not the model of church government these churches use. They believe God sets people aside to take decisions for the church.
If you want to be in a church with due process where the members can publically make decisions about how the church is run...join a congregational church!
A lot of the SGM complaints seem to me to be "we said things and the leaders didn't do what we said". I agree that leaders should do that - but if that matters to you, don't go to a church with an "apostolic" leadership model!
--------------------
He hath loved us, He hath loved us, because he would love
Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
A lot of really good points here. Let me address this challenge:
quote:
Originally posted by Leprechaun:
To be honest, while I'm sure that there are dysfunctional churches in NF (and SGM) this due process complaint I do think is unfair. Why should they have due process? Why should people be able to complain or feedback and expect to be heard? That is not the model of church government these churches use. They believe God sets people aside to take decisions for the church.
The problem I encountered (and that's putting it mildly!) was that yes, there was a sense of apostolic authority, but I had perceived it in much the same way David Matthias and Twangist still do: as something benign which I voluntarily recognised, within the context of the 'organic' ambiance mentioned by several; man-to-man, brotherly, horizontal, two-way relationships with give and take.
In short, an informal environment in which you respected the leaders but in which leaders were also willing to admit their mistakes and learn from those 'under' them. You couldn't imagine a dispute which wouldn't gain a fair hearing or be referred to others.
I would never have believed the degree to which this appearance was shattered when I somehow got on the wrong side of more senior leadership. It was as if the horizontal, 'your friend' environment got turned through 90° into a ruthless, vertical one. I got accused, condemned, and ostracised - and that was that.
[ 19. July 2011, 18:05: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
