She's Done it Again

Kingdom Grace has a way of facilitating the best dialogues on her blog. I love these kinds of forums since I learn so much from everyone who contributes, and I have a chance to throw in my .02 for feedback as well. Dialogue is a much more effective learning environment than monologue, don't you think? Anyway, Grace basically asks if toxicity is inherent in institutional systems or not. There's some great thoughts on the clergy-laity divide, the politics and power-plays within institutional systems, the knowledge=power colonial mindset, and a whole bunch of other concepts. You can read the discussion on her post "What do you think?". Thought-provoking stuff! This was my conclusion (having digested and pondered the question and the other contributor's comments):

The only “power” we should respect and fear is the power of God. The “power” of man should not impress us or intimidate us. We may submit to the Holy Spirit in another person, but never to that person. We are all fallible as humans. So we need discernment to know the difference between the Holy Spirit manifesting through someone and what is just their personality or humanity coming through. (1Cor 10:15, 1John 2:20,27, John 16:13, 1Thess 5:21)

Institutions major on the power of man, and minor on the power of God. Institutions are inherently designed to protect the power of those who hold “leadership” offices conferred on them by the institutional system (clergy). Institutions themselves are not designed to empower those who “follow”(laity) in the institution. The leaders in institutions may have the heart desire to empower, but the nature of institutionalism itself actually hinders this and makes it an uphill battle (partly because people embrace the passivity of their laity role - they believe their job is to sit and listen, and to serve someone else's vision. Not exactly empowering).

Our ‘church’ institutions in Western Christianity are modelled on our university institutions (which in turn are modelled on a Greek paradigm of learning and development - which is about linear mastery of knowledge which leads to a know-it-all and we’ve-seen-it-all-before kind of arrogance). This is a faulty foundation since it is built on a cultural heritage (sand) rather than on Jesus, who is the Rock and the living Word. And it does not produce disciples of Christ who learn to obey all that He has commanded us, and learn how to hear Him and follow Him (thereby becoming transformed into his image).

The 'vision' is 'cast' from above, and the laity are there to serve the 'leader's' vision. I believe this is backward. Leaders help people identify their own visions that God is calling them to, and then seek to empower and facilitate the fulfillment of that vision. So leaders serve those they're leading, not the other way around. This is the servant model that God provided through Jesus (and then re-iterated through Paul). This is the heart of the Father. But it goes against the ideals of power inherent in institutions.

Instead, our institutions primarily teach people how to follow other men, and how to follow the institution. So the power of man is respected and feared more than the power of God. Or rather, the power of man (and institutions) is confused with the power/authority of God. I’ve actually heard people recount their ‘testimony’ and it was all about how they had stopped going to church, but now they are back in church. There was no mention of their relationship to Jesus, only talk of their relationship to the institution. Grieved my heart!

PS. Another noteworthy link: Christianity Today's interview with Alan Hirsch.