[The] tension between order & freedom is not an imagined tension, nor is it the case that a particular ecclesial structure by itself could do the work of alleviating the tension. Changing ecclesial structure does not necessarily change ecclesial culture. One quick example of the negotiation of this tension between order & freedom alongside the modification of ecclesial structure can be found in our own history during the Todd Hunter years. It might be said that Todd Hunter tried to strike the balance of this tension by focusing on the structure of hierarchy within the Vineyard. Hunter eradicated middle management and flattened the leadership structure with the hope that we might bypass the routinization of charisma and release a whole new generation of spiritual entrepreneurs. The assumption here was that middle management would squelch the prophetic move of God’s Spirit, and it is in that assumption that we find the tension rearing its head: order, or freedom? The decentralization of leadership was meant to encourage risk-taking and movement. This paper, though, isn’t about hierarchy or structure, or anti-structure for that matter. I simply want to draw our attention to the fact that in our attempt to address the ecclesiology itch we might be tempted to scratch at a change in structural organization. We’d be scratching in the wrong spot.
The full paper is attached to this post as a PDF.
Note from administrator: Your SVS membership dues must be up to date in order to see the attached file.
