Zebras and Zebroids: Why we need to encourage a mixed ecology rather than inbreeding

Talk on Fresh Expressions for the Fresh Ways Consultation Hinkley Hall, Leeds; 1-2 June 2015

Factoid for today 

In biological terms, horses and zebras share the same genus. However, they are different species. Horses have better balance, can run faster and have been domesticated. Zebras have much better hearing, are more energetic, leap about all over the place when they get excited, and can change direction quickly when they are fleeing from predators. The reason that these two species are different is of course because they adapted to survive in different habitats. And I think there is a link here I think between fresh expressions communities and some of the communities that exist in the wider inherited church. Fresh expressions are like Zebras.

Allow me to introduce myself for those of you who don’t know me. In my previous circuit, I had oversight of fresh expressions and mentored those in leadership. I am also doing research through Durham University on how as Methodist ministers we can best enable the development of fresh expressions. I have been doing this for about five years now.

I have been asked to set us off thinking about how fresh expressions might be integrated into circuit structures, or the circuit zoo as I would prefer to think about it. The first thing I want to say is that horses and zebras tend not to share the habitat – and they definitely do not interbreed. You can create a Zebroid’s but you have to go about things artificially, and when you do create offspring, they are stunted and infertile. My view is that whatever we do with fresh expressions it would be wrong to subject them to some kind of artificial ecclesiological insemination in the hope that we can create something that is easier to handle. At the same time, we do need to make sure that the fresh expressions we have are safe, can grow, and can reproduce. -just as we would do for any other congregation. But I would suggest that in oversight terms, the needs of newly emerging congregations are different from the needs of inherited congregations.

I want to make five observations about the nature of fresh expressions so we are clear on what we are wanting to incorporate within the structures and disciplines of the wider church.

1/ Fresh expressions are forms of ‘church’ intended to reach those who are not yet members of any church.

The Fresh Expressions website provides a much more detailed view of what this might look like. The definition has always been a work in progress. Most recently, this phrase appeared – fresh expressions encouraging congregations alongside traditional churches. I think that this is helpful because as a Methodist, the word church – as in ‘fresh expression of church’ has a significance. Legally, church means 12 members all who need to be locally resident. Churches need stewards, a treasurer, a church secretary, and class leaders – whether or not this has indeed been how we have planted church in the past – and by the way, I would really appreciate a research conversation on that. But talk of ‘congregation’ is, I think, more helpful because anyone can be a congregation – congregations are not bound in quite the same way as churches, who are legally required to conform to a quite particular ecclesiological construct. This aside, what fresh expressions do require, irrespective of how they structure themselves, is good oversight. Oversight being everything we do to enable the people of God to fulfil the calling that God has placed upon them. In our Methodist understanding this involves mutual accounablility – looking over, and looking after each other. The key thing for Methodist fresh expressions is how we balance Locality (when and where something happens), Intensivity (in that there is an intimacy within fresh expressions communities) and Connectivity (how are we linked to each other). This is one of the helpful points in Fresh Expressions in the Mission of the Church – although if you are going to read it, I would encourage you to read the Anglican report Anecdote to Evidence, and the accompanying report Strand 3b, by the Church army, which criticises some of our thinking and expectations of what makes church, Church.

2/ Fresh Expressions can come about through –

a local church redeveloping (but not rebranding) and existing act of worship which is changing mindful of the needs of newcomers

A new venture where the church sets out to nurture a new Christian community

A circuit mission project – note that the purpose of the Methodist Church is to advance the Christian faith and allows us to find us the most appropriate way to do things.

Note that our purpose as The Methodist Church is to advance the Christian Faith. This gives us a very broad remit. Our responsibility is to ensure that appropriate oversight is in place, and in that we can draw from members of the wider church at every level. And we are encouraged to exercise our disciplines with a light touch lest we suffocate this new work. I think that is something worth discussing.

3/ The other point for discussion is how the mixed economy is working. The idea of a mixed economy is that what is inherited and emerging can live alongside each other and from each other, rather than what is emerging being constricted and swallowed-up by the inherited church. In my view, one of the markers of a healthy fresh expression is that it looks to develop from within, rather than seeing itself as a stepping stone to something else. There are very limited examples of where this has happened but on the whole, horses and zebras don’t mix. However, I think that we secretly hope that we can get them together and breed zebroids? Another critical marker is where baptism and communions take place. If we are serious about fresh expressions developing their own ecclesial identity then we will put our rites of passage where the community meets, and find sensitive ways of conducting them, rather than in effect, telling them that they are not grown up enough yet to stand on their own. Linked to this, I think we need to look at the mixed economy working – what power balance exists between those who lead and are part of fresh expressions and those who are in the wider church. Are we at risk of getting a church shaped mission rather than a mission shaped church? This was one of John Hull’s concerns at the beginning of the movement but I think he was concerned about the evangelical wing of the church of England giving rise to, in his view, and unbalanced approach to mission. My view is that the opposite is true, that the inherited Methodist Church will hold back fresh expressions development. We need more Bread Churches and Zak’s places.

TOP FIVE 

I want to close by spicing up the debate by giving you my top five chart of fears and realities that I think surround fresh expressions:  

5 Fear: A fresh expression will lack diversity and only reach one group of people.

Reality; yes they might, but I think we will find, if we look at the present diversity in the church, that things are pretty monochrome as they stand! Besides, there is such a thing as positive discrimination in favour of those who are being overlooked.

4 Fear: Investing in fresh expressions leaves some declining congregations feeling overlooked.  Reality; In my limited experience, this is just not true. Declining congregations want nothing more than to hear good news stories about what God is doing in other places. About people who are coming to faith. In fact, they can’t get enough of I and will even get involved. At the same time, they realise that their own context is different. And if declining churches do kick, I would suggest that this is part of the grief process – think anger, disbelief and lostness and also realise that such congregations are just as likely to kick out about fresh expressions are they are about anything else.

3 Fear: Fresh expressions are fellowship groups – they are not really ‘church’ are they?  Reality: There is an argument that relationships rather than practices are the foundation of church development and from this, practices that embody and fortify those relationships will come. What we should question is our tendency evaluate fresh expressions in such a way that if we applied the criteria to many of our existing inherited congregations, they would not quality. Where is the Holy Spirit at work in our churches and how is our biblical literacy getting on?

2 Fear: Fresh expressions cost a lot of money.
Reality – There are two answers to this. When do the parents stop paying for their children? Answer – given by Steve Lindridge, ‘In my experience never’. The other fresh expressions cost very little but they do mean putting the right resources in the right place at the right time. Besides, I think we should be looking at more volunteer lay ministry.

The number one 1 Fear:

Having a fresh expression is like having a blender without a lid on it. …Someone else has to tidy up a great mess. 

Reality: Most fresh expressions are led by ministers, lay employees or, in the main, mature and experienced members of the Methodist Church who are moved by compassion and are very loyal. They also give financially to the work of the Church. Personally, I would be more worried about negotiation with other groups in the Methodist Church such as a choir, or an organist who struggles to play new material, or the folk in the kitchen who view a filter coffee machine much like a nuclear reactor that they are not trained to use.

To discuss:

What does it mean to interpret the disciplines of the church with a light touch?

What would help the ‘mixed economy’ to work better?