October 30, 2023 • 52 mins
Join us as we welcome our distinguished guest, JR Woodward, the author behind "The Scandal of Leadership". In this episode, we navigate the maze of issues surrounding domineering leadership in the Church, a problem JR insists needs immediate attention. We discuss how these leadership styles align with worldly powers, in stark contrast to Christ's submission to God.
With the Church hemorrhaging from leadership scandals, we discuss the importance of understanding the root cause instead of dismissing these incidents as bad apples. JR shares how his book, "The Scandal of Leadership," explores systemic issues of domineering leadership, in which mimetic desires and rivalry become obstacles to Godly humility.
This episode is for anyone who feels dismayed by the predictability of church scandals! Those seeking hope for the church's future will benefit from JR's discerning robust theological work.
The solution, as JR Woodward put it so eloquently, lies in humble obedience and imitation of Christ. As the church embarks on this canonic journey, it holds the promise of reformation and growth, leading us closer to the non-rivalous Father and fostering a healthier leadership model.
We're so thankful for JR Woodward!
Check him out on https://jrwoodward.com/
You can purchase The Scandal of Leadership on Amazon https://www.amazon.com/Scandal-Leadership-Unmasking-Powers-Domination-ebook/dp/B0C356M3YT/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3MKNLZQA7JA68&keywords=the+scandal+of+leadership+jr+woodward&qid=1698447080&sprefix=the+scandal+of+leadership+%2Caps%2C188&sr=8-1
Thanks for listening!
Follow us on
Instagram
Facebook
Leave us a review & subscribe on Apple Podcasts
Support Us
Join the Reconstructing Pastors Cohort
Check out the Bridge & Rhino Coaching Website
We're super grateful for all of you!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Reconstructing Pastors
podcast.
I'm Ruth Lawrenson.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
And I'm Kirk Romberg.
We're recovering pastorstalking about what it looks like
to make sense of our callingand community expression on the
other side of deconstruction.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Our hope is to create a safe space to explore the
bigger picture of the church,both the present state of the
American evangelical church andwhat the future may hold for
those who are searching for abetter way.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
We're really glad you're here.
Let's get started.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
We are so excited to be doing this episode of the
Reconstructing Pastors podcast,kirk, because today we've got a
very special guest that we'resuper excited about having in
this space, jr Woodward, who isa catalyst.
He's an author, teacher, heco-founded the Misiola Alliance,
you're also a national directorfor the V3 church planting
(01:03):
movement and you've just broughtthis incredible book out called
the Scandal of Leadership, andwe really want to spend some
time talking about that.
But first, jr, we just want tosay thank you for being so kind.
We know you're really busy andyou've decided to spend this
next hour with these two randomrecovering pastors to talk about
(01:26):
your book, so thank you so muchfor being here.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
Hey, it's a pleasure to be with you guys.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
When Ruth first brought your book to my
attention I think it was shortlyafter it came out I was
immediately interested,obviously because the subject
matter is so relevant and isaddressing a problem that is
probably one of the mostpublicized, internationally
publicized problems that thechurch is facing.
(01:53):
It's not the only one,obviously, but it certainly is a
big one and you don't justaddress it from a surface level,
but it really seems you get tothe root.
In fact I think you even usethat language in the book as
getting to the root.
But one of my curiosities as Iwas reading through your book
was wondering if, for those whoaren't familiar with your book
(02:15):
or haven't had a chance to readit yet, I'm wondering if you
could just kind of kick us off alittle bit by telling us what
is domineering leadership andwhy is it a problem that needs
to be addressed.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean I would kind of definedomineering leadership as kind
of this command and controlapproach to leadership, which
kind of can involve bullying,coercion, manipulation, the
desire to be first, maybe usingone's own status to push an
agenda, and a sense ofself-importance.
(02:50):
And I think it exists becauseleaders, either unknowingly or
knowingly, imitate theprincipalities and powers, and
submission to Satan instead ofimitating Christ and submission
to his father.
And so, in a lot of ways, whenwe don't take the temptation
that Jesus faced in thewilderness as both are typical
(03:11):
and meaningful we are likely tofall captive to the domination
system and therefore becomedomineering leaders, which is
kind of why, in the words ofWink, we need to kind of name,
unmask and engage the powers,because the powers ultimately
shape the social and personal.
So if we only hit it from apsychological or sociological
(03:33):
viewpoint, we're not going toget to the heart of the problem.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
When I spotted the fact that your book was out, I
remember thinking, like you know, there's a number of big cases,
right of people, of scandalsright now and even in just very
recent times we've seen that andI remember just observing some
of those cases.
(03:57):
There was one very recent in theUK that came out, but anyone in
the UK understanding whathappened with Mike Palomavacci
was really difficult to gothrough and but I remember some
of the response from thatparticular incident that's still
unfolding actually, and theresponse from a lot of prominent
Christian leaders was thatthat's awful.
(04:19):
But you know, there's just onebad apple and I remember that
being around kind of Instagramand Twitter and all the rest of
it.
And I think the thing that wasvery appealing to me about the
scandal of leadership was it was.
It was it was like actually nohang on a minute.
This isn't about one bad apple,this isn't just a random thing.
(04:39):
There is a, there's a system,systematic issue here and that's
a cause of domineeringleadership.
So I'm just curious if you cantalk to what led you as you
studied for this book, what ledyou to that approach?
What were some of the thingsthat led you to that space?
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Yeah, so really kind of initially, what in?
The reason why I kind offocused in and studied on this
is probably back in, you know,just before 2000.
So the end of the 1990s thishas been a book in me for a
while that probably just comesout a particular cultural moment
.
But within our largerorganization it feels like the
(05:23):
when when the leader became thetop leader, president or
whatever.
It seemed like there was a goodleader that became just a
little less good as a result.
And I was asked one time tospeak to to the Pastors
Gathering, which I did quiteoften, but they were asking me
to speak on spiritual warfareand and I.
(05:45):
That was really where I startedto link domineering leadership
and that problem with kind ofunderstanding the powers.
It was.
It was somewhat, you know, justserendipitous moment and from
that point I realized I neededto focus on this more.
So that's that's where Ieventually kind of worked a PhD
(06:07):
on it.
Because I did, I neededsomething to kind of scream at
me to say invest in this, focuson this a little bit more to
good understanding.
So that's a little bit of thebeginning of that.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
I appreciate your holding the tension between
what's happening in the cultureand what's happening in your
media context and yoursensitivity.
It seems like in following theHoly Spirit, even in pursuing a
PhD candidacy, in your work,which, which is fascinating, at
some point in the, the earlypart of the book, you, you, you
(06:46):
give a an analogy that I foundto be very helpful for the
entire work by maybe, maybe aloose comparison between
domineering leadership and theLord of the Rings and the idea
that the Ring of Power was thisenticement, this temptation that
(07:08):
you know, if I just put this on, then you know everything is
going to go the way that I want.
It's going to be, you know,cleaner, more efficient, more
productive for me to reach myends through these means, and
I'm guessing that's probably notthe thought process of someone
who is moving into a position ofpower, but I'm guessing that
(07:30):
there is some, some morphingthat takes place in the heart
and I'm wondering if you cantalk about that a little bit
more.
You referred to it a moment ago, but, but at some point you
talk about memetic theory, whichwas fascinating to me, by the
way, and the idea of memetictheory not just being the
(07:52):
example outwardly portrayed, butthe idea of mimicking desires.
And then you connect the dotsbetween memetic theory and the
powers and church leadership,which which combines to create a
system of dominance.
And I'm reading that and I'mthinking how did he, how did you
(08:13):
connect these dots?
At what point?
Was it?
One light bulb moment Was it?
Did it?
Did this idea just kind ofevolve slowly or through
interactions with people?
I mean, it's a brilliantconnection of dots that I find
to be super helpful andenlightening and I'm just
wondering how did that?
begin to emerge for you.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, yeah, you know so the the initial time when I
was speaking on the spiritualwarfare, that's really where I
kind of connected with Wink andWink kind of gave me really a,
you know, a new perspective atthat time.
And then, you know, I had alwaysheard a lot about Gerard from
(08:52):
all different angles and it wasprobably more as I started my
PhD that I started reading him.
But what I think, before Gerard,I, you know, I read the kind of
like James K Smith on Desiringthe Kingdom and there was this
kind I would say it's a journeyas I look back, you know, seeing
(09:12):
the, the importance of desire,you know you got Sarah Coakley
who also speaks highly of theimportance of desire in her work
.
And so when I, yeah, when Istarted the read Gerard deeper,
it just really grabbed me andand and, for the fact that this
(09:33):
whole memetic cycle that I can,you know, I can give you a
little bit more detail on forGerard is kind of the
deconstruction of Satan.
Well, that, you know, that waskind of the thing that really
pulled them together, becauseyou could say that Gerard's work
is really kind of all all aboutSatan, because it's all about
(09:55):
the memetic cycle and hisunderstanding of Satan, who's
been the murder from thefoundation of the world.
That was a little the journey,the journey I can.
I'd be glad to kind of get intomemetic theory a little bit, if
that's helpful.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
Yes, please do Give us some.
Give us some examples so thatwe can kind of access it.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So you know, gerard, hediscovered Gerard met Exire
really by looking at some of thebest novelists, and so his
first book, in the French title,was the romantic lie.
And the novelistic truth and,and and what he was saying is,
like the romantic lie is that wegenerate our own desires.
(10:36):
So if you want to kind of putit like on a straight line, you,
you know, there's the person,the object of their desire, and
there's just a straight line.
And what he found in the bestnovelist, what was most common
with them, and it was usually atsome point in their life they
became a great novelist, not the, not all of their work, but he
kind of studies both the, the,the life and the work of the
(11:00):
various people.
He engages five differentnovelists in that first book and
what he realized is what'scommon with all of them is
desire is not self-generated.
But the novelistic truth isthat we desire the desires of
our models and so whoever welook up to, we, we imitate their
(11:21):
desire, and so that's whatmemetic desire is, which is kind
of foundational To his wholeproject.
You know he wrote over 20 books, scores of articles.
There's really three Basicthemes that it come.
You know it can be reallysimple.
There's the memetic desire toscapegoat mechanism and the
uniqueness of the Bible.
(11:41):
All of his work just goes tothe greater depths, to those
kind of simple truths.
So memetic desire, like youcould kind of I Mean again, it's
something that happenssubconsciously.
Think about.
You got Madison Avenue, what.
What does what does it operateoff of?
(12:03):
You know it's kind of we'redesiring the desires of whoever
is in the Advertisement right,they're trying to create those
to be our heroes in some way.
They're, they're, they'resharing some type of life.
Usually advertising is notsuper direct.
Now right, it's kind ofindirect and you could say the
market, most everything in life.
If you kind of look atinternationally right now, you
(12:26):
know, think about the China andUS, you know a lot of things are
kind of still those are the twobig countries behind a lot of.
You know the current wars andrumors of wars and you know
there's this memetic desire tobe number one, if you will, from
a nation-state standpoint.
(12:47):
So you see it everywhere.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Yeah, I think one of the things that I was struck by
was that this is a mimicking ofdesires, not just behavior, and,
as just you know someone who'slike a general reader here, that
was like a little bit of an ourhome, our harm moment of like
oh, hang on a minute.
Actually our desires getschanged or Distort or can become
(13:12):
distorted, because actually Ithink what's hard when it comes
down to the Scandals ofChristian leadership is that
most people, I'm sure, don'tstart out that way.
You know there's, there'ssomething that happens in the
course of that Trajectory, andso when you mention the fact
that actually we can mimicdesires, I think that that for
(13:35):
me was like ah, okay, I can seehow that very slowly and surely,
our desires can becomecorrupted or aligned with
Desires that are not the desiresof Christ.
Is that?
Is that a good Representationof what you said?
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and maybe a way to kind of think
about.
Let's just say that the three ofus were part of a congregation.
We weren't the lead pastor, butmaybe we're on staff, right,
and let's say the lead pastorWants to be the lead pastor,
desires that title, notnecessarily the work of, but
(14:14):
just the title.
If we happen to look up to themSubconsciously, we will also
desire to be the lead pastor.
Now, in this case, if, whensomebody, when the model, has a
desire that they're, they eithercan't share like a spouse or
won't share like a position,this will create mimetic rivalry
(14:35):
, right and so Because now therethey become an obstacle,
literally, to us getting thevery desire that they gave us.
Does that make sense?
And so rivalry.
All the sudden we become anantagonistic toward them, we
don't even know why, and theysense that and they desire the
(14:58):
say, in this case the title,even more.
And so this, when, and let'ssay there's three of us, they're
all kind of desiring now thesame thing, the this Gerard kind
of basically points out howthat that is the scandal.
The scandal is literally meansan obstacle.
So in this case, the leadpastor become an obstacle to
(15:18):
each of us getting the verydesire that they gave us.
So as these scandals multiply ina congregation, it eventually
leads from a medic rivalry to amimetic crisis, and the way that
the human societies hasresolved that in particular is
your arch kind of looks, studies, anthropology, mythology, and
(15:40):
so ancient societies, you know,prior to there even being a
judicial system, the way thatthey would resolve this crisis
is that the all against allbecame the all against the one.
Mimetically, they landed on ascapegoat and they killed them
and this created a temporarytranquility.
It basically it was a catharticrelease of the violence that
(16:03):
was building in the community.
And and then Gerard would say,you know, eventually, you know
rituals and and Even the law waskind of built to hinder, you
know, this mimetic rivalry fromhappening, and so, or the in the
case of the rituals, it was toreenacting through rituals.
(16:23):
You know this kind of catharticexperience until it didn't work
anymore, in the processrepeated itself.
And I think today we don'tnecessarily kill people, but we
probably just as much do becausewe kind of kill them in our
mind and Jesus kind of equatesthat with murder as well.
So we just, you know, and youkind of see this with Mark
(16:44):
Driscoll, right like his.
He's kind of captivated byhimself.
He kind of says I am the brandand and Along the way, a lot of
people get scapegoated when theyare really trying to disrupt
that whole system.
And he talks about proudly howhe kind of throws people off the
(17:08):
bus, runs them over, andProbably about this big pile of
dead bodies behind the Mars Hillbus.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Well, he's kind of to me very clearly talking about
scapegoating people and he does,you know, and he did that
because that's what A veryunhealthy desire leads to and I
think, if I can just interjectthere, one of the things for me,
jr, when I you know I think thewhole of the Christian nation
(17:35):
Listen to the rise and fall ofMars Hill and most of us did,
and it was incredibly, it wasincredibly pivotal for me I was
in pastoral ministry at the timebut I think one of the things
and in its, I mean, you know,there's obviously giant church
and big personality and it'salmost like again this like one
bad Apple approach, but Iremember listening to that and
(17:56):
thinking, actually the samethings happen on smaller levels
all around the country in someof these spaces, because they're
we've almost mimicked Mars Hill, but on smaller levels, and so
it's.
Maybe it's not, maybe it'swrapped in different packaging,
or you know, there's some nicerpersonalities in the mix.
(18:19):
But actually me and Kirk rightnow we're working with pastors
all over the US who are in thatReconstructing space and a lot
of them feel like they have beenscapegoated, or you know that
there's this kind of cost,there's this, this price that
those systems Pay, and oftenit's people, often it is that
(18:41):
trail of dead bodies that haveleft, and I would, I would argue
that that happens far more on alocal level than we'd like to.
That we don't.
We don't see those things asmuch as as the big Scandals that
like like Mark.
So yeah, what?
What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (19:00):
I think you're absolutely right.
I mean, I think what you know,the whole memetic cycle for
Gerard is Satan.
So think about Satan is the Godof this world.
When you kind of have aTheology of the powers, you kind
of realize they operate at thiskind of mythological space
which shapes the social and thepersonal.
(19:21):
None of us are kind of outsideof the influence of the powers.
None of us are outside theinfluence of kind of this
Negative memesis.
It's a part of what it means tobe human.
We're captive to imitation andand we don't always know and
understand maybe how are Even Iwas talking to a guy recently
(19:45):
who you know he asked he'spreparing his dissertation, kind
of writing the last fewchapters on shared leadership,
which I think is a super goodthing, and and he kind of what
about a person who's in thechurch?
And?
But they don't necessarily lookup to their pastor as a model,
(20:06):
as if that somehow keeps themfrom absorbing the potential of
the desires that they have.
I think that what I kind ofsaid is like, even if somebody
doesn't like their model,they're influenced by them, by
pure position and and andSubconsciously none of us want
to usually admit to the factthat our desires are mimic from
(20:30):
others, that that would be a bigdiscovery, and it would be
Somewhat of a humble stance torecognize that I'm ultimately
shaped by other people's desires.
I am not an island, I am.
My identity is sociallyconstructed through the lives of
those that are closely, mostclosely, around me, and so none
(20:51):
of us can leave that space.
In fact, I would say that thegroup that we choose to be a
part of most closely not onlyshapes our desires, but our
rationality, what we can believeand not believe, our kind of
plausibility structure of whatwe think about reality in the
world.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
I mean, it really is fascinating because I think we
all like to think, and myselfincluded, that no, I am the
captain of my ship, I am themaster of my own desires, and
yet Jesus has cleared that thewheat and weeds grow together,
that, yes, I've got some puredesires.
But you know, I'm deceivingmyself to think that there
(21:33):
aren't some impure desires atwork at the same time, and
awareness of that is probably areally good friend to me and I
could probably stand to be moreaware of that and how impacted
we are by the desires of thosearound us, how much more so in a
culture like an organizationalculture where desire gets
(21:57):
mimicked.
And I think it's fascinating toconsider the fact that I think
you mentioned at some point inyour book that a leader
ultimately has two choices thatwe either intentionally mimic
the self-empting ways of Christ,which include his desires, not
(22:17):
just the outward actions butwhat's going on in the heart, or
by default it's not like youknow we accidentally will
stumble into mimicking thedesires of the powers which are
ultimately destructive anddehumanizing, which we see
outwardly in, at least in theevangelical church, with.
(22:39):
I imagine that has a maybe notthe only reason, but a good
percentage of the reason has todo.
You know that affects 40 millionpeople leaving the evangelical
church over the last 20 yearsand a lot of that maybe not all
of it is maybe connects back tothis domineering, you know,
(23:00):
command control model whichultimately is dehumanizing and
people look for value worth,life and other sources than
maybe the institutional church.
So you talk about that and yougo a little bit deeper into how
(23:21):
those desires of the powerstempt us to subvert our
leadership.
Of three contours of leadership, you talk about identity and
praxis and talos, and I thinkyou connect the dots to Jesus'
temptation experience in thewilderness.
So I've just covered a lot ofground there and I'm wondering
(23:41):
if you can lock onto a part ofthat.
Speaker 3 (23:44):
Yeah, yeah, and you know the way I put that is,
we're captive to imitation, andthis is true for every human
being on the earth.
So if we don't imitate Christ,we will ultimately imitate the
powers.
Maybe a way to concretely bringin how the powers seek to
subvert us, stringfellow kind oftalks about image, institution
(24:05):
and ideology, as you know,trying to subvert our leadership
.
Or I tie his ideas andprincipalities to the identity,
praxis and talos of the leader.
But image is kind of this idea.
We're all accompanied by animage, and Stringfellow gives
the example of.
There's Marilyn Monroe, theperson, marilyn Monroe the image
(24:26):
.
There's two distinct identitiesclaiming the same name.
And so while Marilyn Monroe theperson is long dead, her image
is probably more alive todaythan ever.
And so public image is aprincipality, that in that,
while it bears one's name, itexists independent of the person
, and our public image liesbeyond our control and is in
(24:46):
conflict with us until we giveour selves over to the image.
So the principality of image,like any principality, desires
full devotion.
It seeks to possess us insteadof us possessing our image in
God.
You can kind of see with Drisco, for example, when the Marcel
paid $210,000 to result to thisfirm that basically gets your
(25:12):
book on the best seller list,because it's not about how many
books you buy, but they have tobe bought from every different
part of the country to get onthe best seller list.
But then you have institutions,which they seek our ultimate
allegiance right From everybodythat lives in its domain.
And so the dangers ofinstitutions, where we all tend
to work, is that when it existsfor itself or its own survival,
(25:39):
Stringfellow said it becomesdemonic and it seeks all who
live under its domain tosurrender their lives so that
the institution lives on, andwhile promising benefits, it
leads to bondage.
And then ideology, which isprobably the most recognizable
principality today, the manyisms that take people, and
sometimes whole groups of peoplecaptive.
(26:01):
But you have communism, fascism, racism, nazism, nationalism,
but you also have humanism,capitalism and rationalism.
And what's interesting is,mature ideologies have really
developed their own sociology,their accounts of sin and
redemption, as well as their owneschatology.
And ideologies claimsovereignty, and so you can
(26:24):
apply those to Margriskell, toArlize.
These are concrete ways, and Ido tie these to the three
temptations, which I think aretypical.
We could talk about how they'retied to there, but essentially
you could say this our deepesttemptation.
You find it at the end of theLord's Prayer.
You know the Lord's Prayer islike lead us not into temptation
(26:47):
, but deliver us from the evilone or the evil.
And then, after that, what doesit say?
You know, for thine is akingdom, the power and the glory
, forever and ever, amen.
I think our deepest temptationis to seek our own glory or,
excuse me, to build our ownkingdoms by our own power, for
our own glory, and in a lot ofways that would be one way.
(27:07):
I would sum up the temptationsas well.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
That's fascinating.
I just, you know I'm applyingthis to all of so much stuff
right now in my own experienceof church, but I think you know,
thinking about the, especiallythe evangelical church in
America, you know, when you'retalking about these
principalities of image,institution, ideology, it seems
(27:35):
to me that is pretty rife, youknow there's there's some strong
elements of those things.
You know, even when you thinkof, like you look on Instagram
on Sundays and it's full of leadpastor preaching or the worship
leader, I mean that's prettymuch boom, boom, boom, boom,
boom, boom.
That's what I say on Sundaysand I guess it's like, well,
(27:58):
we've got to get in the game to.
You know that's as part of ourworld.
And I guess what I'm asking JRis like, how do we learn from
this in the, in the leadershipright now for the evangelical
church?
What are what, what are some ofthe lessons?
Because how do we apply thisstuff so that we can see some
change?
Because we are seeing scandalsleft, right and center.
(28:22):
So we all know that this is anissue now and I think that I
think a lot of people are givingup on it.
But is there hope?
Is there a way?
Is there a way of changing, andwhat does that look like?
Speaker 3 (28:36):
Yeah, yeah, so you know, in the book I take nine
chapters to really diagnose theproblem because I think if we
don't have a proper diagnosisit's hard to have a robust
remedy.
But as I go into the remedy,one of the things I do in the
last two chapters which I thinkare really the best chapters in
(28:58):
the book but could only beunderstood if you have the
knowledge ahead of time is Ilook at the book of Philippians
through a Zyardian lens, becauseI do think that what we see
happening in Flip-Eye is kind ofwhat we see happening in any
church.
That's kind of where divisionand kind of some leadership
rivalry is kind of cultivatingan unhealthy space.
(29:21):
And so when and here's kind ofmy, you know again it was kind
of fascinating to build thisstudy, this book, more through
with with a Zyardian kind of amedic theory in mind.
Right, I think what's importantto understand with Flip-Eye
which is also true for ourcontext but what people wanted
more than anything was honor andprestige.
(29:43):
They wanted honor for them andtheir household.
If you had money, you used itto purchase honor for you and
your household.
It was a very stratifiedculture.
There was a big gulf betweenthe elite and non-elite.
That couldn't be bridged, butyou could move up the social
ladder within those spaces.
And so archaeologists havefound over 7,000 inscriptions
(30:03):
that were purchased to give aperson and their household honor
right, and those inscriptionshad a pattern they always
started with the ascribed orinherited honor and then they
moved to their achieved honor.
So this is important toremember because when we're,
what we're talking about, Ithink, is how we construct our
sense of self, our identity, andI think keep in mind that our
(30:26):
identity is foundation to ourpractice.
Our identity and telas will, inmy understanding, determine our
practice or how we use power.
And so if you look at the bookof Philippians, it's a book
where Paul's he's addressingmany things, but one of the
important things is thisdivision that has developed
within the congregation.
Most commentators rightly put aheavy weight for this division
(30:49):
on the leaders of the church whowere battling with each other.
Yudia and Sintika were leadersin the church of flip I, likely
co-founders of the church withPaul, and so this conflict and
rivalry that they were having,like any leadership conflict,
created division and rivalry inthe church.
And so we're we're not givenkind of the nature of their
(31:10):
conflict, but I kind of.
I kind of presume that it'smemetic rivalry, maybe a very
innocent rivalry.
These were, you know, women, butthat Paul appreciated right,
and it's very rare that he namespeople he appreciates for some
type of you know Negative things.
(31:33):
So let's just say that you doit, wants to be the best leader.
Nothing seemingly wrong withthat desire.
But then imagine that Sintikasubconsciously imitates this
idea of wanting to be the bestleader, and so such desires
often happen without ourawareness.
So Sintika does nigh's herimitation of Yudia, but as she
(31:53):
desires to be the best, yudia inturn Desires to be the best
even more, and there's asnowball effect that takes place
as they enter into this memeticrivalry with each other and
Then through their mutualimitation, each one believing
their desire to be unique.
So I think the paradox thatstarts to occur when two people
become rivals is that the objectof their desire in this case
(32:15):
let's just say to be the bestleader Disappears and they
become memetic doubles wherethey're both repelled by each
other and attracted to eachother at the same time.
And so maybe one of the reasonsPaul doesn't point out the
details of their conflict isbecause when people enter
memetic rivalry, the object ofrivalry disappears and the focus
(32:35):
becomes on being the very beingof the other person.
In other words, they desire tobe the other person.
And so when Paul is addressingYudia and Sintika which, by the
way, were again his friends andcorrecting them in tire, the
whole kind, in front of thewhole tire congregation, this
letter he says I plead with you,yudia, I plead with you,
(32:57):
sintika, to be of the same mindin the Lord.
And what happens when we get inmemetic rivalry that George
talks about, is we becomememetic doubles of each other.
And so I think the Paul's firsttask is to actually separate
them by naming them individually.
And then he points them toDifferent models.
You could say that the wholebook of Philippians in my Jardin
(33:20):
reading is about positive andnegative models.
Paul is wanting them to gettheir eyes off each other and
put them on the positive modelsand be aware of negative models.
He first gives them theultimate model, jesus Christ,
then he gives Timothy as a model, then a Papaditis, and then he
talks about the negative modelof the Judaizers who were trying
to use their circumcision toexclude others.
(33:40):
And then Paul gives himself asa model.
I'll kind of stop there.
That's a lot to digest.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
And it's fascinating as well, and, as I'm listening
to that, it's not, it's not toodifficult to you know, connect
the dots to today andenvironments that I've been in
over the course of However manynumber of years that have been
in pastoral ministry, and it'salso not hard for me to connect
(34:08):
the dots to myself.
So, which is the humbling partof reading your book I can't
just read it and say, wow, thisis about so-and-so.
It's a book about me.
It's a book about how I'mhardwired and what my pitfalls
are and, consequently, what mycorrectives need to be.
Which, which you say in, youknow, in what you call the best
(34:35):
part of your book, you know, butyou have to do all of the
legwork to get there is talkingabout the canodic way of Jesus,
the self-emptying way of Christ,and I got to admit.
Obviously you know this is not athat's a new idea, and yet it's
not a new idea.
Obviously Paul introduced it.
When I was a younger believer,we talked about being
(34:55):
Christ-like, but I think theidea of being canodic or
self-emptying really gets to theheart of what it is to be like
Jesus.
It's not just to be nice orkind or serving those.
Those are manifestations of theself-emptying way of Christ.
But what is it?
What would it look like for meas a leader To actually, in a
(35:16):
practical sense, follow the theway of Christ in my desires, and
what would that look likeoutwardly, in practice?
Speaker 3 (35:27):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think you know there's so many
books that you know and, likesaid, none of us are unaware,
necessarily, of Philippians too.
I do think that, like that,this particular reading and
getting concrete on what itmeans, this canodic journey, is
important, and I do.
I I, while not kind of enteringinto the all the academic
(35:51):
arguments of the book, Iobviously take a stand by the my
own interpret you know the waykind of interpreting this.
But you know, we're kind ofgiven Jesus as this model, right
, like he, even though he wasGod, he didn't reckon it to be,
you know, he didn't use it tohis own advantage, right, he
became a person and so this kindof, in fact that not only
(36:16):
became a person but he became aslave.
So he, he's particularlyTalking about like this kind of
social space, right, this class,and in fact it says I became
nothing.
Now, when I kind of think aboutthat, what does it mean?
And what's Paul?
You know, what does it meanwhen Jesus became nothing and
(36:38):
then God made him something?
Are we supposed to be nothing?
But I think, when I normallythink about that, does that mean
like I have no sense of values,no sense of worth?
I don't.
I don't think it's saying thatbecause Jesus, in his Right,
before he went to thetemptations right and to the
wilderness, we see the baptismand the father saying this is my
(37:00):
son and whom I'm well pleased.
Jesus found his sense ofidentity, his full sense of, and
the way he was constructing hissense of self was ultimately
Through his father, and that waswhat was uppermost in his mind
I and so he could, with thatkind of understanding of the
(37:20):
love and security and theapproval of his father, he could
become the lowest in society.
You know what the world kind ofcreates as this lowest in
society become nothing.
Because inevitably, like howsociety determines what's great
and not great, meant nothing tohim, and so he had to let go.
(37:44):
I think of, like all of thesocial pressures of growing up
in a Jewish context, of what'shonorable, what's dishonorable.
He had to let go of that and tohold on to Christ, and so he
not only did he kind of notrefuse to exploit his status as
God, he regularly emptiedhimself, letting go of trying to
(38:06):
construct an identity in theway of the world, but there was
this revolutionary humbleobedience where, even to the
point of death, and death on thecross, he was able to follow
the Father.
And so it's not just about,like, washing the disciples feet
, which he was easy able to do,which, by the way, like, if we
(38:26):
can't do that type of you knowwork in some way, that's you
know, relatable for today, thenthat probably shows that we
still have a high view ofourselves.
Being emptying ourselves isdifferent than the opposite
would be full of ourselves,right, having a sense of self
importance where we exaltourselves above the other, based
on our ascribed or achievedstatus.
(38:49):
And the way that I think this,this kind of interpretation,
makes sense is because,ultimately, I see Paul doing
this as he's kind of describinghis own conodic journey.
We see this when he's givinghis autobiography in chapter
three, you know, to theJudaizers he says, well, hey, I
(39:09):
was circumcised on the eighthday, I'm the part of the tribe
of Benjamin.
He starts with his ascribedhonor, those honors that he was
born with, and then he kind ofmoves to his earned honor.
Right, his achieved honor, youknow, as a result of the law, is
faultless.
I was a Pharisee of thePharisees.
As with the church, Ipersecuted it, but this is a way
(39:30):
he gained his, his sense ofidentity in the Jewish culture
that really made him a hero,right?
These are all the details.
He's ascribed and achievedhonors, and what does he say?
I consider all of that garbage.
I consider that like nothingcompared to knowing Christ, the
(39:52):
power of his resurrection andthe fellowship of his suffering.
And I think we see here is thatPaul has is saying I am trying
to reconstruct my identity in atotally different way and it's
nothing like I grew up with.
It's nothing like like that.
You know whether it's a cultureof large or the Christian
culture.
Now you know who we honor andhow we honor who we honor.
(40:14):
It's a totally different systemand it is quite a job to live
in that different domain.
But that's what we're called to.
So I just think that a big partof this canotic journey is a
radically different way of self,of kind of constructing our
sense of identity.
And it starts with, you know,the very, the very words that he
(40:38):
gave the union, sintika'sleaders, to have the same mind
of Christ is this way he startsthe passage in Philippians 2.
And so maybe a very practicalway for us to live.
And, by the way, I don't thinkthis is something that can be
done individually because, again, we're all shaped socially and
so he's speaking to the wholecommunity.
(41:01):
You know to consider others moreimportant than yourself.
That might be a good place tostart.
You know to celebrate otherswhen we want to be celebrated,
to encourage others when wemight want to be the one that
courage.
In fact, you know you could saythe whole golden rule.
(41:21):
You know love others.
You know do unto others as youwould have them do unto you.
I think most of us, if we thinkabout what we would want
somebody to do to us and we dothat to them, that's probably a
great start.
And if you do that as acommunity, I think there's some
hope to becoming the people ofGod that are not divided and
(41:44):
torn up by envy, which is a rootsin, but we are able, with the
mind of Christ, to really kindof imitate Christ.
And, by the way, as we imitateChrist, we'll fall in love with
the non-rivalous Father as well.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
I love that and I'm just curious.
I have a curious question herebecause I know that what you've
just presented to us is this waytowards the way of Jesus, to
walking in a way where we regardourselves as nothing.
So it's very different from youknow the ways of those powers.
(42:24):
But I'm just curious, jr, abouthow I might be rewinding here a
little bit in terms of gettingback to the problem.
But I'm wondering about howmuch of this is the system of
church where we've got a leadpastor model, we've got
(42:45):
celebrity culture, we've got allof these things.
I remember, you know, like inEngland back in the day, to go
into the priestly ministry youtook a vow of poverty, I mean,
it was really about that.
But now you kind of you've gotyoung people who were going into
ministry and they think theirimagination is like oh, I get to
go around conferences and flyaround and have this nice little
(43:07):
bubble.
If I can make it, if I can makeit as a leader in the Christian
, maybe I can have a book out,maybe I can do this and maybe
and I'm not saying that all ofthose things are necessarily
wrong but I'm curious about howmuch our system almost doesn't
give us much of a chance forthat kinetic journey.
You know Like how much of it isso stacked against us when we
(43:30):
have these models and systemswhere in some ways it's like,
without some of those structurescoming down, those systems
coming down, do we really have achance to kind of go against
that?
I'm just curious what you haveto say there.
Speaker 3 (43:50):
Yeah, no, and now I appreciate that question and I
think you can only have thatquestion if you understand how
bad it is right.
And it's not just bad for thechurch, it's bad for the world.
The church exists for the sakeof the world, but I think if we
cannot figure out as a church,as a people of God, with the
(44:11):
Spirit, with the guidance of theScripture, then the world
doesn't have much hope.
So, number one, I think we needto find it and figure a way out
and I would say, just likethere's always been a remnant,
that we're able to stay faithful, right and remember who was it?
(44:35):
Like Elijah, or which one ofthe prophets where he felt all
alone, like nobody is kind ofstanding for God except for me,
and he's reminded that there isthis kind of remnant and I think
it starts with a few people.
You just need a small number ofpeople, even understanding that
(44:57):
we might mimic each other'sdesire.
We really want to follow Christ.
I think we have the talents, thecurrent status quo of the
church that we've inherited.
I can talk about probably whereand how, but I think both in
the way we approach leadership.
I'm a big proponent ofpolycentric leadership or shared
leadership and, I think, themethodology of what it means to
(45:21):
be the church.
I think we need to movediscipleship from the peripheral
to the center and that meansthere's different structures.
A lot of our training at B3 isjust a whole other way to be the
church and I think we have tolook at the message.
So the message of messengersand the method, I think all need
to be challenged in our currentspace and even that again
(45:46):
doesn't guarantee anything.
But I do feel I do have a hope,knowing that it's possible, but
it's going to be superdifficult.
Speaker 2 (45:55):
So I appreciate even just listening to how you're
responding to Ruth's questionwith just a real level of depth
in your thought process, which Ifeel like we can.
If you had the time, you wouldkeep going in answering that
question, knowing that this is amulti-layered, multi-tiered,
(46:16):
complex problem and that ourcurrent model of the prevailing
model of church, if you will,and leadership is not presently
disposed to the self-emptyingway of Christ and it takes maybe
a complete, as you say, namingof and then redirecting of a
(46:40):
different model that encouragesnot self-promotion but the
promotion of Jesus and theservice of others and a better,
healthier way of the heart thattrickles down to the desires of
other people.
So I love the word hope.
I think what Jesus alwaysoffers is hope.
(47:02):
That clearly I also hear workand intentionality that we don't
just launch out, start a churchand mimic, to use your word,
what we have seen before, butintentionally doing something
different at the core.
That our practices on theoutside need to begin with a
(47:26):
strong theological base, which Ifeel like a lot in the modern
church.
We just start with what we'redoing and maybe we work backward
to a theology that supportswhat we're doing.
When I read your book I hearlet's start with theology and
work our way forward to practice, which sounds hard, but it also
(47:46):
sounds.
It rings true, it lands well onthe heart.
Let's start with a well-foundedtheology of the heart of God
for the world and for people andwork our way out to what that
looks like in practice andcommunity.
It's super refreshing.
My mind goes to the person whomight be sitting on a church
(48:07):
staff somewhere.
They're hearing thisconversation, they're reading
your book, they're connecting tothe dots to command, control,
leadership and might feelpowerless to do anything about
that.
What word of encouragementwould you give to that person?
Or maybe you already have, inmultiple settings, given that
word of encouragement to people.
Speaker 3 (48:28):
Yeah, I do think it's important to understand the
things we've been talking aboutwith a greater depth.
I do encourage people to reallyread through the book, maybe
together with a community withinthe community that they're a
part of, because I think we haveto build a name and unmask
what's happening in order toengage.
(48:54):
By the way, I should have beenfinished with this already, but
kind of like a book club guidethat will not only kind of say
how to have a good book club butalso provide some potential
questions that could be used indialogue and also willing to
kind of jump in in a Zoom waynear the end if we can find a
(49:15):
common time that meets.
Again, I would say that it'snot an individualistic journey,
it's a communal one.
We have to, number one, findgood models ourselves, whether
both distant and local, becausewe're ultimately going to become
(49:37):
like the people that we'reclosest to.
We have to really need acommunity of people that we're
willing to take this kineticjourney with us so that we can
figure out ways where we cancommunally imitate Christ
together.
That can happen within acongregation, it can happen in a
(49:59):
church plant, but I thinkfundamentally we have to know
how the powers operate, so thatif we can't name them well then
we're not going to unmask themand engage them.
Speaker 1 (50:12):
Yeah, I love that, JR .
Thank you for sharing that.
As we're wrapping up, I justwant to ask how long has the
book been out for now?
Speaker 3 (50:24):
I guess close to six months, maybe six months, yeah,
close to now.
Speaker 1 (50:34):
You've already shared that this is a developing space
, so there's going to be somemore resources there for church
staff teams, for leaders.
We, as myself and Kirk, we justwant to speak to our listeners
right now and just say we highlyrecommend this book.
We feel like this is.
There's a lot of books outthere and I always appreciate
(50:57):
people who spend the timewriting, but I think this seems
like just such.
I mean, obviously it's justthoroughly researched, but it's
at a pivotal time, I think, forus in history.
We just want to encourage ourlisteners to go out and get it.
I love the idea of reading ittogether in a team.
I think that that could be souseful, so helpful.
(51:19):
Jr, we just want to thank youfor being with us.
It's been a rich, richconversation.
Thank you for your time and wewill keep tracking with you.
Speaker 3 (51:31):
All right, thank you.
I appreciate being able to hangwith you guys.
I appreciate what you're doinghere with this podcast as well.
Speaker 1 (51:40):
Thanks for listening to the Reconstructing Pastors
podcast.
If you enjoyed this episode andyou'd like to help support the
podcast, please share it withothers, post about it on social
media or leave a rating andreview.
Speaker 2 (51:54):
If you're interested in leaning into this
conversation further, we'd lovefor you to be a part of a
special online communitycoaching space called
Reconstructing Pastors Cohort.
For details, visit our websiteat bridgeandrinocom.
See you at the next episode.
You're listening to the Reconstructing Pastors
podcast.
I'm Ruth Lawrenson.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
And I'm Kirk Romberg.
We're recovering pastorstalking about what it looks like
to make sense of our callingand community expression on the
other side of deconstruction.
Speaker 1 (00:22):
Our hope is to create a safe space to explore the
bigger picture of the church,both the present state of the
American evangelical church andwhat the future may hold for
those who are searching for abetter way.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
We're really glad you're here.
Let's get started.
Speaker 1 (00:40):
We are so excited to be doing this episode of the
Reconstructing Pastors podcast,kirk, because today we've got a
very special guest that we'resuper excited about having in
this space, jr Woodward, who isa catalyst.
He's an author, teacher, heco-founded the Misiola Alliance,
you're also a national directorfor the V3 church planting
(01:03):
movement and you've just broughtthis incredible book out called
the Scandal of Leadership, andwe really want to spend some
time talking about that.
But first, jr, we just want tosay thank you for being so kind.
We know you're really busy andyou've decided to spend this
next hour with these two randomrecovering pastors to talk about
(01:26):
your book, so thank you so muchfor being here.
Speaker 3 (01:29):
Hey, it's a pleasure to be with you guys.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
When Ruth first brought your book to my
attention I think it was shortlyafter it came out I was
immediately interested,obviously because the subject
matter is so relevant and isaddressing a problem that is
probably one of the mostpublicized, internationally
publicized problems that thechurch is facing.
(01:53):
It's not the only one,obviously, but it certainly is a
big one and you don't justaddress it from a surface level,
but it really seems you get tothe root.
In fact I think you even usethat language in the book as
getting to the root.
But one of my curiosities as Iwas reading through your book
was wondering if, for those whoaren't familiar with your book
(02:15):
or haven't had a chance to readit yet, I'm wondering if you
could just kind of kick us off alittle bit by telling us what
is domineering leadership andwhy is it a problem that needs
to be addressed.
Speaker 3 (02:28):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean I would kind of definedomineering leadership as kind
of this command and controlapproach to leadership, which
kind of can involve bullying,coercion, manipulation, the
desire to be first, maybe usingone's own status to push an
agenda, and a sense ofself-importance.
(02:50):
And I think it exists becauseleaders, either unknowingly or
knowingly, imitate theprincipalities and powers, and
submission to Satan instead ofimitating Christ and submission
to his father.
And so, in a lot of ways, whenwe don't take the temptation
that Jesus faced in thewilderness as both are typical
(03:11):
and meaningful we are likely tofall captive to the domination
system and therefore becomedomineering leaders, which is
kind of why, in the words ofWink, we need to kind of name,
unmask and engage the powers,because the powers ultimately
shape the social and personal.
So if we only hit it from apsychological or sociological
(03:33):
viewpoint, we're not going toget to the heart of the problem.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
When I spotted the fact that your book was out, I
remember thinking, like you know, there's a number of big cases,
right of people, of scandalsright now and even in just very
recent times we've seen that andI remember just observing some
of those cases.
(03:57):
There was one very recent in theUK that came out, but anyone in
the UK understanding whathappened with Mike Palomavacci
was really difficult to gothrough and but I remember some
of the response from thatparticular incident that's still
unfolding actually, and theresponse from a lot of prominent
Christian leaders was thatthat's awful.
(04:19):
But you know, there's just onebad apple and I remember that
being around kind of Instagramand Twitter and all the rest of
it.
And I think the thing that wasvery appealing to me about the
scandal of leadership was it was.
It was it was like actually nohang on a minute.
This isn't about one bad apple,this isn't just a random thing.
(04:39):
There is a, there's a system,systematic issue here and that's
a cause of domineeringleadership.
So I'm just curious if you cantalk to what led you as you
studied for this book, what ledyou to that approach?
What were some of the thingsthat led you to that space?
Speaker 3 (04:59):
Yeah, so really kind of initially, what in?
The reason why I kind offocused in and studied on this
is probably back in, you know,just before 2000.
So the end of the 1990s thishas been a book in me for a
while that probably just comesout a particular cultural moment
.
But within our largerorganization it feels like the
(05:23):
when when the leader became thetop leader, president or
whatever.
It seemed like there was a goodleader that became just a
little less good as a result.
And I was asked one time tospeak to to the Pastors
Gathering, which I did quiteoften, but they were asking me
to speak on spiritual warfareand and I.
(05:45):
That was really where I startedto link domineering leadership
and that problem with kind ofunderstanding the powers.
It was.
It was somewhat, you know, justserendipitous moment and from
that point I realized I neededto focus on this more.
So that's that's where Ieventually kind of worked a PhD
(06:07):
on it.
Because I did, I neededsomething to kind of scream at
me to say invest in this, focuson this a little bit more to
good understanding.
So that's a little bit of thebeginning of that.
Speaker 2 (06:20):
I appreciate your holding the tension between
what's happening in the cultureand what's happening in your
media context and yoursensitivity.
It seems like in following theHoly Spirit, even in pursuing a
PhD candidacy, in your work,which, which is fascinating, at
some point in the, the earlypart of the book, you, you, you
(06:46):
give a an analogy that I foundto be very helpful for the
entire work by maybe, maybe aloose comparison between
domineering leadership and theLord of the Rings and the idea
that the Ring of Power was thisenticement, this temptation that
(07:08):
you know, if I just put this on, then you know everything is
going to go the way that I want.
It's going to be, you know,cleaner, more efficient, more
productive for me to reach myends through these means, and
I'm guessing that's probably notthe thought process of someone
who is moving into a position ofpower, but I'm guessing that
(07:30):
there is some, some morphingthat takes place in the heart
and I'm wondering if you cantalk about that a little bit
more.
You referred to it a moment ago, but, but at some point you
talk about memetic theory, whichwas fascinating to me, by the
way, and the idea of memetictheory not just being the
(07:52):
example outwardly portrayed, butthe idea of mimicking desires.
And then you connect the dotsbetween memetic theory and the
powers and church leadership,which which combines to create a
system of dominance.
And I'm reading that and I'mthinking how did he, how did you
(08:13):
connect these dots?
At what point?
Was it?
One light bulb moment Was it?
Did it?
Did this idea just kind ofevolve slowly or through
interactions with people?
I mean, it's a brilliantconnection of dots that I find
to be super helpful andenlightening and I'm just
wondering how did that?
begin to emerge for you.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Yeah, yeah, you know so the the initial time when I
was speaking on the spiritualwarfare, that's really where I
kind of connected with Wink andWink kind of gave me really a,
you know, a new perspective atthat time.
And then, you know, I had alwaysheard a lot about Gerard from
(08:52):
all different angles and it wasprobably more as I started my
PhD that I started reading him.
But what I think, before Gerard,I, you know, I read the kind of
like James K Smith on Desiringthe Kingdom and there was this
kind I would say it's a journeyas I look back, you know, seeing
(09:12):
the, the importance of desire,you know you got Sarah Coakley
who also speaks highly of theimportance of desire in her work
.
And so when I, yeah, when Istarted the read Gerard deeper,
it just really grabbed me andand and, for the fact that this
(09:33):
whole memetic cycle that I can,you know, I can give you a
little bit more detail on forGerard is kind of the
deconstruction of Satan.
Well, that, you know, that waskind of the thing that really
pulled them together, becauseyou could say that Gerard's work
is really kind of all all aboutSatan, because it's all about
(09:55):
the memetic cycle and hisunderstanding of Satan, who's
been the murder from thefoundation of the world.
That was a little the journey,the journey I can.
I'd be glad to kind of get intomemetic theory a little bit, if
that's helpful.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
Yes, please do Give us some.
Give us some examples so thatwe can kind of access it.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So you know, gerard, hediscovered Gerard met Exire
really by looking at some of thebest novelists, and so his
first book, in the French title,was the romantic lie.
And the novelistic truth and,and and what he was saying is,
like the romantic lie is that wegenerate our own desires.
(10:36):
So if you want to kind of putit like on a straight line, you,
you know, there's the person,the object of their desire, and
there's just a straight line.
And what he found in the bestnovelist, what was most common
with them, and it was usually atsome point in their life they
became a great novelist, not the, not all of their work, but he
kind of studies both the, the,the life and the work of the
(11:00):
various people.
He engages five differentnovelists in that first book and
what he realized is what'scommon with all of them is
desire is not self-generated.
But the novelistic truth isthat we desire the desires of
our models and so whoever welook up to, we, we imitate their
(11:21):
desire, and so that's whatmemetic desire is, which is kind
of foundational To his wholeproject.
You know he wrote over 20 books, scores of articles.
There's really three Basicthemes that it come.
You know it can be reallysimple.
There's the memetic desire toscapegoat mechanism and the
uniqueness of the Bible.
(11:41):
All of his work just goes tothe greater depths, to those
kind of simple truths.
So memetic desire, like youcould kind of I Mean again, it's
something that happenssubconsciously.
Think about.
You got Madison Avenue, what.
What does what does it operateoff of?
(12:03):
You know it's kind of we'redesiring the desires of whoever
is in the Advertisement right,they're trying to create those
to be our heroes in some way.
They're, they're, they'resharing some type of life.
Usually advertising is notsuper direct.
Now right, it's kind ofindirect and you could say the
market, most everything in life.
If you kind of look atinternationally right now, you
(12:26):
know, think about the China andUS, you know a lot of things are
kind of still those are the twobig countries behind a lot of.
You know the current wars andrumors of wars and you know
there's this memetic desire tobe number one, if you will, from
a nation-state standpoint.
(12:47):
So you see it everywhere.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Yeah, I think one of the things that I was struck by
was that this is a mimicking ofdesires, not just behavior, and,
as just you know someone who'slike a general reader here, that
was like a little bit of an ourhome, our harm moment of like
oh, hang on a minute.
Actually our desires getschanged or Distort or can become
(13:12):
distorted, because actually Ithink what's hard when it comes
down to the Scandals ofChristian leadership is that
most people, I'm sure, don'tstart out that way.
You know there's, there'ssomething that happens in the
course of that Trajectory, andso when you mention the fact
that actually we can mimicdesires, I think that that for
(13:35):
me was like ah, okay, I can seehow that very slowly and surely,
our desires can becomecorrupted or aligned with
Desires that are not the desiresof Christ.
Is that?
Is that a good Representationof what you said?
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and maybe a way to kind of think
about.
Let's just say that the three ofus were part of a congregation.
We weren't the lead pastor, butmaybe we're on staff, right,
and let's say the lead pastorWants to be the lead pastor,
desires that title, notnecessarily the work of, but
(14:14):
just the title.
If we happen to look up to themSubconsciously, we will also
desire to be the lead pastor.
Now, in this case, if, whensomebody, when the model, has a
desire that they're, they eithercan't share like a spouse or
won't share like a position,this will create mimetic rivalry
(14:35):
, right and so Because now therethey become an obstacle,
literally, to us getting thevery desire that they gave us.
Does that make sense?
And so rivalry.
All the sudden we become anantagonistic toward them, we
don't even know why, and theysense that and they desire the
(14:58):
say, in this case the title,even more.
And so this, when, and let'ssay there's three of us, they're
all kind of desiring now thesame thing, the this Gerard kind
of basically points out howthat that is the scandal.
The scandal is literally meansan obstacle.
So in this case, the leadpastor become an obstacle to
(15:18):
each of us getting the verydesire that they gave us.
So as these scandals multiply ina congregation, it eventually
leads from a medic rivalry to amimetic crisis, and the way that
the human societies hasresolved that in particular is
your arch kind of looks, studies, anthropology, mythology, and
(15:40):
so ancient societies, you know,prior to there even being a
judicial system, the way thatthey would resolve this crisis
is that the all against allbecame the all against the one.
Mimetically, they landed on ascapegoat and they killed them
and this created a temporarytranquility.
It basically it was a catharticrelease of the violence that
(16:03):
was building in the community.
And and then Gerard would say,you know, eventually, you know
rituals and and Even the law waskind of built to hinder, you
know, this mimetic rivalry fromhappening, and so, or the in the
case of the rituals, it was toreenacting through rituals.
(16:23):
You know this kind of catharticexperience until it didn't work
anymore, in the processrepeated itself.
And I think today we don'tnecessarily kill people, but we
probably just as much do becausewe kind of kill them in our
mind and Jesus kind of equatesthat with murder as well.
So we just, you know, and youkind of see this with Mark
(16:44):
Driscoll, right like his.
He's kind of captivated byhimself.
He kind of says I am the brandand and Along the way, a lot of
people get scapegoated when theyare really trying to disrupt
that whole system.
And he talks about proudly howhe kind of throws people off the
(17:08):
bus, runs them over, andProbably about this big pile of
dead bodies behind the Mars Hillbus.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Well, he's kind of to me very clearly talking about
scapegoating people and he does,you know, and he did that
because that's what A veryunhealthy desire leads to and I
think, if I can just interjectthere, one of the things for me,
jr, when I you know I think thewhole of the Christian nation
(17:35):
Listen to the rise and fall ofMars Hill and most of us did,
and it was incredibly, it wasincredibly pivotal for me I was
in pastoral ministry at the timebut I think one of the things
and in its, I mean, you know,there's obviously giant church
and big personality and it'salmost like again this like one
bad Apple approach, but Iremember listening to that and
(17:56):
thinking, actually the samethings happen on smaller levels
all around the country in someof these spaces, because they're
we've almost mimicked Mars Hill, but on smaller levels, and so
it's.
Maybe it's not, maybe it'swrapped in different packaging,
or you know, there's some nicerpersonalities in the mix.
(18:19):
But actually me and Kirk rightnow we're working with pastors
all over the US who are in thatReconstructing space and a lot
of them feel like they have beenscapegoated, or you know that
there's this kind of cost,there's this, this price that
those systems Pay, and oftenit's people, often it is that
(18:41):
trail of dead bodies that haveleft, and I would, I would argue
that that happens far more on alocal level than we'd like to.
That we don't.
We don't see those things asmuch as as the big Scandals that
like like Mark.
So yeah, what?
What do you think about that?
Speaker 3 (19:00):
I think you're absolutely right.
I mean, I think what you know,the whole memetic cycle for
Gerard is Satan.
So think about Satan is the Godof this world.
When you kind of have aTheology of the powers, you kind
of realize they operate at thiskind of mythological space
which shapes the social and thepersonal.
(19:21):
None of us are kind of outsideof the influence of the powers.
None of us are outside theinfluence of kind of this
Negative memesis.
It's a part of what it means tobe human.
We're captive to imitation andand we don't always know and
understand maybe how are Even Iwas talking to a guy recently
(19:45):
who you know he asked he'spreparing his dissertation, kind
of writing the last fewchapters on shared leadership,
which I think is a super goodthing, and and he kind of what
about a person who's in thechurch?
And?
But they don't necessarily lookup to their pastor as a model,
(20:06):
as if that somehow keeps themfrom absorbing the potential of
the desires that they have.
I think that what I kind ofsaid is like, even if somebody
doesn't like their model,they're influenced by them, by
pure position and and andSubconsciously none of us want
to usually admit to the factthat our desires are mimic from
(20:30):
others, that that would be a bigdiscovery, and it would be
Somewhat of a humble stance torecognize that I'm ultimately
shaped by other people's desires.
I am not an island, I am.
My identity is sociallyconstructed through the lives of
those that are closely, mostclosely, around me, and so none
(20:51):
of us can leave that space.
In fact, I would say that thegroup that we choose to be a
part of most closely not onlyshapes our desires, but our
rationality, what we can believeand not believe, our kind of
plausibility structure of whatwe think about reality in the
world.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
I mean, it really is fascinating because I think we
all like to think, and myselfincluded, that no, I am the
captain of my ship, I am themaster of my own desires, and
yet Jesus has cleared that thewheat and weeds grow together,
that, yes, I've got some puredesires.
But you know, I'm deceivingmyself to think that there
(21:33):
aren't some impure desires atwork at the same time, and
awareness of that is probably areally good friend to me and I
could probably stand to be moreaware of that and how impacted
we are by the desires of thosearound us, how much more so in a
culture like an organizationalculture where desire gets
(21:57):
mimicked.
And I think it's fascinating toconsider the fact that I think
you mentioned at some point inyour book that a leader
ultimately has two choices thatwe either intentionally mimic
the self-empting ways of Christ,which include his desires, not
(22:17):
just the outward actions butwhat's going on in the heart, or
by default it's not like youknow we accidentally will
stumble into mimicking thedesires of the powers which are
ultimately destructive anddehumanizing, which we see
outwardly in, at least in theevangelical church, with.
(22:39):
I imagine that has a maybe notthe only reason, but a good
percentage of the reason has todo.
You know that affects 40 millionpeople leaving the evangelical
church over the last 20 yearsand a lot of that maybe not all
of it is maybe connects back tothis domineering, you know,
(23:00):
command control model whichultimately is dehumanizing and
people look for value worth,life and other sources than
maybe the institutional church.
So you talk about that and yougo a little bit deeper into how
(23:21):
those desires of the powerstempt us to subvert our
leadership.
Of three contours of leadership, you talk about identity and
praxis and talos, and I thinkyou connect the dots to Jesus'
temptation experience in thewilderness.
So I've just covered a lot ofground there and I'm wondering
(23:41):
if you can lock onto a part ofthat.
Speaker 3 (23:44):
Yeah, yeah, and you know the way I put that is,
we're captive to imitation, andthis is true for every human
being on the earth.
So if we don't imitate Christ,we will ultimately imitate the
powers.
Maybe a way to concretely bringin how the powers seek to
subvert us, stringfellow kind oftalks about image, institution
(24:05):
and ideology, as you know,trying to subvert our leadership
.
Or I tie his ideas andprincipalities to the identity,
praxis and talos of the leader.
But image is kind of this idea.
We're all accompanied by animage, and Stringfellow gives
the example of.
There's Marilyn Monroe, theperson, marilyn Monroe the image
(24:26):
.
There's two distinct identitiesclaiming the same name.
And so while Marilyn Monroe theperson is long dead, her image
is probably more alive todaythan ever.
And so public image is aprincipality, that in that,
while it bears one's name, itexists independent of the person
, and our public image liesbeyond our control and is in
(24:46):
conflict with us until we giveour selves over to the image.
So the principality of image,like any principality, desires
full devotion.
It seeks to possess us insteadof us possessing our image in
God.
You can kind of see with Drisco, for example, when the Marcel
paid $210,000 to result to thisfirm that basically gets your
(25:12):
book on the best seller list,because it's not about how many
books you buy, but they have tobe bought from every different
part of the country to get onthe best seller list.
But then you have institutions,which they seek our ultimate
allegiance right From everybodythat lives in its domain.
And so the dangers ofinstitutions, where we all tend
to work, is that when it existsfor itself or its own survival,
(25:39):
Stringfellow said it becomesdemonic and it seeks all who
live under its domain tosurrender their lives so that
the institution lives on, andwhile promising benefits, it
leads to bondage.
And then ideology, which isprobably the most recognizable
principality today, the manyisms that take people, and
sometimes whole groups of peoplecaptive.
(26:01):
But you have communism, fascism, racism, nazism, nationalism,
but you also have humanism,capitalism and rationalism.
And what's interesting is,mature ideologies have really
developed their own sociology,their accounts of sin and
redemption, as well as their owneschatology.
And ideologies claimsovereignty, and so you can
(26:24):
apply those to Margriskell, toArlize.
These are concrete ways, and Ido tie these to the three
temptations, which I think aretypical.
We could talk about how they'retied to there, but essentially
you could say this our deepesttemptation.
You find it at the end of theLord's Prayer.
You know the Lord's Prayer islike lead us not into temptation
(26:47):
, but deliver us from the evilone or the evil.
And then, after that, what doesit say?
You know, for thine is akingdom, the power and the glory
, forever and ever, amen.
I think our deepest temptationis to seek our own glory or,
excuse me, to build our ownkingdoms by our own power, for
our own glory, and in a lot ofways that would be one way.
(27:07):
I would sum up the temptationsas well.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
That's fascinating.
I just, you know I'm applyingthis to all of so much stuff
right now in my own experienceof church, but I think you know,
thinking about the, especiallythe evangelical church in
America, you know, when you'retalking about these
principalities of image,institution, ideology, it seems
(27:35):
to me that is pretty rife, youknow there's there's some strong
elements of those things.
You know, even when you thinkof, like you look on Instagram
on Sundays and it's full of leadpastor preaching or the worship
leader, I mean that's prettymuch boom, boom, boom, boom,
boom, boom.
That's what I say on Sundaysand I guess it's like, well,
(27:58):
we've got to get in the game to.
You know that's as part of ourworld.
And I guess what I'm asking JRis like, how do we learn from
this in the, in the leadershipright now for the evangelical
church?
What are what, what are some ofthe lessons?
Because how do we apply thisstuff so that we can see some
change?
Because we are seeing scandalsleft, right and center.
(28:22):
So we all know that this is anissue now and I think that I
think a lot of people are givingup on it.
But is there hope?
Is there a way?
Is there a way of changing, andwhat does that look like?
Speaker 3 (28:36):
Yeah, yeah, so you know, in the book I take nine
chapters to really diagnose theproblem because I think if we
don't have a proper diagnosisit's hard to have a robust
remedy.
But as I go into the remedy,one of the things I do in the
last two chapters which I thinkare really the best chapters in
(28:58):
the book but could only beunderstood if you have the
knowledge ahead of time is Ilook at the book of Philippians
through a Zyardian lens, becauseI do think that what we see
happening in Flip-Eye is kind ofwhat we see happening in any
church.
That's kind of where divisionand kind of some leadership
rivalry is kind of cultivatingan unhealthy space.
(29:21):
And so when and here's kind ofmy, you know again it was kind
of fascinating to build thisstudy, this book, more through
with with a Zyardian kind of amedic theory in mind.
Right, I think what's importantto understand with Flip-Eye
which is also true for ourcontext but what people wanted
more than anything was honor andprestige.
(29:43):
They wanted honor for them andtheir household.
If you had money, you used itto purchase honor for you and
your household.
It was a very stratifiedculture.
There was a big gulf betweenthe elite and non-elite.
That couldn't be bridged, butyou could move up the social
ladder within those spaces.
And so archaeologists havefound over 7,000 inscriptions
(30:03):
that were purchased to give aperson and their household honor
right, and those inscriptionshad a pattern they always
started with the ascribed orinherited honor and then they
moved to their achieved honor.
So this is important toremember because when we're,
what we're talking about, Ithink, is how we construct our
sense of self, our identity, andI think keep in mind that our
(30:26):
identity is foundation to ourpractice.
Our identity and telas will, inmy understanding, determine our
practice or how we use power.
And so if you look at the bookof Philippians, it's a book
where Paul's he's addressingmany things, but one of the
important things is thisdivision that has developed
within the congregation.
Most commentators rightly put aheavy weight for this division
(30:49):
on the leaders of the church whowere battling with each other.
Yudia and Sintika were leadersin the church of flip I, likely
co-founders of the church withPaul, and so this conflict and
rivalry that they were having,like any leadership conflict,
created division and rivalry inthe church.
And so we're we're not givenkind of the nature of their
(31:10):
conflict, but I kind of.
I kind of presume that it'smemetic rivalry, maybe a very
innocent rivalry.
These were, you know, women, butthat Paul appreciated right,
and it's very rare that he namespeople he appreciates for some
type of you know Negative things.
(31:33):
So let's just say that you doit, wants to be the best leader.
Nothing seemingly wrong withthat desire.
But then imagine that Sintikasubconsciously imitates this
idea of wanting to be the bestleader, and so such desires
often happen without ourawareness.
So Sintika does nigh's herimitation of Yudia, but as she
(31:53):
desires to be the best, yudia inturn Desires to be the best
even more, and there's asnowball effect that takes place
as they enter into this memeticrivalry with each other and
Then through their mutualimitation, each one believing
their desire to be unique.
So I think the paradox thatstarts to occur when two people
become rivals is that the objectof their desire in this case
(32:15):
let's just say to be the bestleader Disappears and they
become memetic doubles wherethey're both repelled by each
other and attracted to eachother at the same time.
And so maybe one of the reasonsPaul doesn't point out the
details of their conflict isbecause when people enter
memetic rivalry, the object ofrivalry disappears and the focus
(32:35):
becomes on being the very beingof the other person.
In other words, they desire tobe the other person.
And so when Paul is addressingYudia and Sintika which, by the
way, were again his friends andcorrecting them in tire, the
whole kind, in front of thewhole tire congregation, this
letter he says I plead with you,yudia, I plead with you,
(32:57):
sintika, to be of the same mindin the Lord.
And what happens when we get inmemetic rivalry that George
talks about, is we becomememetic doubles of each other.
And so I think the Paul's firsttask is to actually separate
them by naming them individually.
And then he points them toDifferent models.
You could say that the wholebook of Philippians in my Jardin
(33:20):
reading is about positive andnegative models.
Paul is wanting them to gettheir eyes off each other and
put them on the positive modelsand be aware of negative models.
He first gives them theultimate model, jesus Christ,
then he gives Timothy as a model, then a Papaditis, and then he
talks about the negative modelof the Judaizers who were trying
to use their circumcision toexclude others.
(33:40):
And then Paul gives himself asa model.
I'll kind of stop there.
That's a lot to digest.
Speaker 2 (33:47):
And it's fascinating as well, and, as I'm listening
to that, it's not, it's not toodifficult to you know, connect
the dots to today andenvironments that I've been in
over the course of However manynumber of years that have been
in pastoral ministry, and it'salso not hard for me to connect
(34:08):
the dots to myself.
So, which is the humbling partof reading your book I can't
just read it and say, wow, thisis about so-and-so.
It's a book about me.
It's a book about how I'mhardwired and what my pitfalls
are and, consequently, what mycorrectives need to be.
Which, which you say in, youknow, in what you call the best
(34:35):
part of your book, you know, butyou have to do all of the
legwork to get there is talkingabout the canodic way of Jesus,
the self-emptying way of Christ,and I got to admit.
Obviously you know this is not athat's a new idea, and yet it's
not a new idea.
Obviously Paul introduced it.
When I was a younger believer,we talked about being
(34:55):
Christ-like, but I think theidea of being canodic or
self-emptying really gets to theheart of what it is to be like
Jesus.
It's not just to be nice orkind or serving those.
Those are manifestations of theself-emptying way of Christ.
But what is it?
What would it look like for meas a leader To actually, in a
(35:16):
practical sense, follow the theway of Christ in my desires, and
what would that look likeoutwardly, in practice?
Speaker 3 (35:27):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think you know there's so many
books that you know and, likesaid, none of us are unaware,
necessarily, of Philippians too.
I do think that, like that,this particular reading and
getting concrete on what itmeans, this canodic journey, is
important, and I do.
I I, while not kind of enteringinto the all the academic
(35:51):
arguments of the book, Iobviously take a stand by the my
own interpret you know the waykind of interpreting this.
But you know, we're kind ofgiven Jesus as this model, right
, like he, even though he wasGod, he didn't reckon it to be,
you know, he didn't use it tohis own advantage, right, he
became a person and so this kindof, in fact that not only
(36:16):
became a person but he became aslave.
So he, he's particularlyTalking about like this kind of
social space, right, this class,and in fact it says I became
nothing.
Now, when I kind of think aboutthat, what does it mean?
And what's Paul?
You know, what does it meanwhen Jesus became nothing and
(36:38):
then God made him something?
Are we supposed to be nothing?
But I think, when I normallythink about that, does that mean
like I have no sense of values,no sense of worth?
I don't.
I don't think it's saying thatbecause Jesus, in his Right,
before he went to thetemptations right and to the
wilderness, we see the baptismand the father saying this is my
(37:00):
son and whom I'm well pleased.
Jesus found his sense ofidentity, his full sense of, and
the way he was constructing hissense of self was ultimately
Through his father, and that waswhat was uppermost in his mind
I and so he could, with thatkind of understanding of the
(37:20):
love and security and theapproval of his father, he could
become the lowest in society.
You know what the world kind ofcreates as this lowest in
society become nothing.
Because inevitably, like howsociety determines what's great
and not great, meant nothing tohim, and so he had to let go.
(37:44):
I think of, like all of thesocial pressures of growing up
in a Jewish context, of what'shonorable, what's dishonorable.
He had to let go of that and tohold on to Christ, and so he
not only did he kind of notrefuse to exploit his status as
God, he regularly emptiedhimself, letting go of trying to
(38:06):
construct an identity in theway of the world, but there was
this revolutionary humbleobedience where, even to the
point of death, and death on thecross, he was able to follow
the Father.
And so it's not just about,like, washing the disciples feet
, which he was easy able to do,which, by the way, like, if we
(38:26):
can't do that type of you knowwork in some way, that's you
know, relatable for today, thenthat probably shows that we
still have a high view ofourselves.
Being emptying ourselves isdifferent than the opposite
would be full of ourselves,right, having a sense of self
importance where we exaltourselves above the other, based
on our ascribed or achievedstatus.
(38:49):
And the way that I think this,this kind of interpretation,
makes sense is because,ultimately, I see Paul doing
this as he's kind of describinghis own conodic journey.
We see this when he's givinghis autobiography in chapter
three, you know, to theJudaizers he says, well, hey, I
(39:09):
was circumcised on the eighthday, I'm the part of the tribe
of Benjamin.
He starts with his ascribedhonor, those honors that he was
born with, and then he kind ofmoves to his earned honor.
Right, his achieved honor, youknow, as a result of the law, is
faultless.
I was a Pharisee of thePharisees.
As with the church, Ipersecuted it, but this is a way
(39:30):
he gained his, his sense ofidentity in the Jewish culture
that really made him a hero,right?
These are all the details.
He's ascribed and achievedhonors, and what does he say?
I consider all of that garbage.
I consider that like nothingcompared to knowing Christ, the
(39:52):
power of his resurrection andthe fellowship of his suffering.
And I think we see here is thatPaul has is saying I am trying
to reconstruct my identity in atotally different way and it's
nothing like I grew up with.
It's nothing like like that.
You know whether it's a cultureof large or the Christian
culture.
Now you know who we honor andhow we honor who we honor.
(40:14):
It's a totally different systemand it is quite a job to live
in that different domain.
But that's what we're called to.
So I just think that a big partof this canotic journey is a
radically different way of self,of kind of constructing our
sense of identity.
And it starts with, you know,the very, the very words that he
(40:38):
gave the union, sintika'sleaders, to have the same mind
of Christ is this way he startsthe passage in Philippians 2.
And so maybe a very practicalway for us to live.
And, by the way, I don't thinkthis is something that can be
done individually because, again, we're all shaped socially and
so he's speaking to the wholecommunity.
(41:01):
You know to consider others moreimportant than yourself.
That might be a good place tostart.
You know to celebrate otherswhen we want to be celebrated,
to encourage others when wemight want to be the one that
courage.
In fact, you know you could saythe whole golden rule.
(41:21):
You know love others.
You know do unto others as youwould have them do unto you.
I think most of us, if we thinkabout what we would want
somebody to do to us and we dothat to them, that's probably a
great start.
And if you do that as acommunity, I think there's some
hope to becoming the people ofGod that are not divided and
(41:44):
torn up by envy, which is a rootsin, but we are able, with the
mind of Christ, to really kindof imitate Christ.
And, by the way, as we imitateChrist, we'll fall in love with
the non-rivalous Father as well.
Speaker 1 (42:02):
I love that and I'm just curious.
I have a curious question herebecause I know that what you've
just presented to us is this waytowards the way of Jesus, to
walking in a way where we regardourselves as nothing.
So it's very different from youknow the ways of those powers.
(42:24):
But I'm just curious, jr, abouthow I might be rewinding here a
little bit in terms of gettingback to the problem.
But I'm wondering about howmuch of this is the system of
church where we've got a leadpastor model, we've got
(42:45):
celebrity culture, we've got allof these things.
I remember, you know, like inEngland back in the day, to go
into the priestly ministry youtook a vow of poverty, I mean,
it was really about that.
But now you kind of you've gotyoung people who were going into
ministry and they think theirimagination is like oh, I get to
go around conferences and flyaround and have this nice little
(43:07):
bubble.
If I can make it, if I can makeit as a leader in the Christian
, maybe I can have a book out,maybe I can do this and maybe
and I'm not saying that all ofthose things are necessarily
wrong but I'm curious about howmuch our system almost doesn't
give us much of a chance forthat kinetic journey.
You know Like how much of it isso stacked against us when we
(43:30):
have these models and systemswhere in some ways it's like,
without some of those structurescoming down, those systems
coming down, do we really have achance to kind of go against
that?
I'm just curious what you haveto say there.
Speaker 3 (43:50):
Yeah, no, and now I appreciate that question and I
think you can only have thatquestion if you understand how
bad it is right.
And it's not just bad for thechurch, it's bad for the world.
The church exists for the sakeof the world, but I think if we
cannot figure out as a church,as a people of God, with the
(44:11):
Spirit, with the guidance of theScripture, then the world
doesn't have much hope.
So, number one, I think we needto find it and figure a way out
and I would say, just likethere's always been a remnant,
that we're able to stay faithful, right and remember who was it?
(44:35):
Like Elijah, or which one ofthe prophets where he felt all
alone, like nobody is kind ofstanding for God except for me,
and he's reminded that there isthis kind of remnant and I think
it starts with a few people.
You just need a small number ofpeople, even understanding that
(44:57):
we might mimic each other'sdesire.
We really want to follow Christ.
I think we have the talents, thecurrent status quo of the
church that we've inherited.
I can talk about probably whereand how, but I think both in
the way we approach leadership.
I'm a big proponent ofpolycentric leadership or shared
leadership and, I think, themethodology of what it means to
(45:21):
be the church.
I think we need to movediscipleship from the peripheral
to the center and that meansthere's different structures.
A lot of our training at B3 isjust a whole other way to be the
church and I think we have tolook at the message.
So the message of messengersand the method, I think all need
to be challenged in our currentspace and even that again
(45:46):
doesn't guarantee anything.
But I do feel I do have a hope,knowing that it's possible, but
it's going to be superdifficult.
Speaker 2 (45:55):
So I appreciate even just listening to how you're
responding to Ruth's questionwith just a real level of depth
in your thought process, which Ifeel like we can.
If you had the time, you wouldkeep going in answering that
question, knowing that this is amulti-layered, multi-tiered,
(46:16):
complex problem and that ourcurrent model of the prevailing
model of church, if you will,and leadership is not presently
disposed to the self-emptyingway of Christ and it takes maybe
a complete, as you say, namingof and then redirecting of a
(46:40):
different model that encouragesnot self-promotion but the
promotion of Jesus and theservice of others and a better,
healthier way of the heart thattrickles down to the desires of
other people.
So I love the word hope.
I think what Jesus alwaysoffers is hope.
(47:02):
That clearly I also hear workand intentionality that we don't
just launch out, start a churchand mimic, to use your word,
what we have seen before, butintentionally doing something
different at the core.
That our practices on theoutside need to begin with a
(47:26):
strong theological base, which Ifeel like a lot in the modern
church.
We just start with what we'redoing and maybe we work backward
to a theology that supportswhat we're doing.
When I read your book I hearlet's start with theology and
work our way forward to practice, which sounds hard, but it also
(47:46):
sounds.
It rings true, it lands well onthe heart.
Let's start with a well-foundedtheology of the heart of God
for the world and for people andwork our way out to what that
looks like in practice andcommunity.
It's super refreshing.
My mind goes to the person whomight be sitting on a church
(48:07):
staff somewhere.
They're hearing thisconversation, they're reading
your book, they're connecting tothe dots to command, control,
leadership and might feelpowerless to do anything about
that.
What word of encouragementwould you give to that person?
Or maybe you already have, inmultiple settings, given that
word of encouragement to people.
Speaker 3 (48:28):
Yeah, I do think it's important to understand the
things we've been talking aboutwith a greater depth.
I do encourage people to reallyread through the book, maybe
together with a community withinthe community that they're a
part of, because I think we haveto build a name and unmask
what's happening in order toengage.
(48:54):
By the way, I should have beenfinished with this already, but
kind of like a book club guidethat will not only kind of say
how to have a good book club butalso provide some potential
questions that could be used indialogue and also willing to
kind of jump in in a Zoom waynear the end if we can find a
(49:15):
common time that meets.
Again, I would say that it'snot an individualistic journey,
it's a communal one.
We have to, number one, findgood models ourselves, whether
both distant and local, becausewe're ultimately going to become
(49:37):
like the people that we'reclosest to.
We have to really need acommunity of people that we're
willing to take this kineticjourney with us so that we can
figure out ways where we cancommunally imitate Christ
together.
That can happen within acongregation, it can happen in a
(49:59):
church plant, but I thinkfundamentally we have to know
how the powers operate, so thatif we can't name them well then
we're not going to unmask themand engage them.
Speaker 1 (50:12):
Yeah, I love that, JR .
Thank you for sharing that.
As we're wrapping up, I justwant to ask how long has the
book been out for now?
Speaker 3 (50:24):
I guess close to six months, maybe six months, yeah,
close to now.
Speaker 1 (50:34):
You've already shared that this is a developing space
, so there's going to be somemore resources there for church
staff teams, for leaders.
We, as myself and Kirk, we justwant to speak to our listeners
right now and just say we highlyrecommend this book.
We feel like this is.
There's a lot of books outthere and I always appreciate
(50:57):
people who spend the timewriting, but I think this seems
like just such.
I mean, obviously it's justthoroughly researched, but it's
at a pivotal time, I think, forus in history.
We just want to encourage ourlisteners to go out and get it.
I love the idea of reading ittogether in a team.
I think that that could be souseful, so helpful.
(51:19):
Jr, we just want to thank youfor being with us.
It's been a rich, richconversation.
Thank you for your time and wewill keep tracking with you.
Speaker 3 (51:31):
All right, thank you.
I appreciate being able to hangwith you guys.
I appreciate what you're doinghere with this podcast as well.
Speaker 1 (51:40):
Thanks for listening to the Reconstructing Pastors
podcast.
If you enjoyed this episode andyou'd like to help support the
podcast, please share it withothers, post about it on social
media or leave a rating andreview.
Speaker 2 (51:54):
If you're interested in leaning into this
conversation further, we'd lovefor you to be a part of a
special online communitycoaching space called
Reconstructing Pastors Cohort.
For details, visit our websiteat bridgeandrinocom.
See you at the next episode.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.