The Great Commission Task Force gave its preliminary report to the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention last night.  To listen to the rearrangements proposed, you would have to consider that they did choose to deconstruct… I wonder if they deconstructed everything.

This is not an endorsement or even a commentary of whether or not I agree with their report.  It’s not a response in any way.  But it is a recognition that in moving the SBC from one thing to another, the group responsible for the initial direction has had to go through some similar processes as Pastors and lay leaders do when transitioning a church.

You do have to deconstruct – that is break down the elements that make the whole, understand how they work and why, comprehend the intended result and the actual result.  Then, knowing where you need to go, you can map out a change.

*Please note that deconstruction is not destruction.  I had one person message me with that misunderstanding and, of course, the two things are quite different.

The question I posed the other day was when transitioning, do you have to deconstruct EVERYTHING… or could you just process through the major systems?

While I asked for opinions, the only ones I received were in email form and twitter direct messages.  On the other hand, it was read at a much higher rate than any of my other posts in the year.

Nevertheless, even if everyone else is shy, I promised my answer and so I’ll give it now:  Yes.  You must deconstruct everything.

Truly, there will be things that you will not think to evaluate, but that you really should.  Simply put, the better you understand it all, the easier it will be.  While solid deconstruction and the understanding it produces does not guarantee success or even ease and failure to accomplish the process of deconstruction does not promise failure in the transition, the fruit of your efforts is greater and sweeter to all when a sweeping inventory is undertaken.

As you may know, I’ve been pastor of Skelly Drive Baptist Church for three and a half years now.  The stated intent when I was called, by both the church and myself, was to transition the church from what it was into a church more effective at reaching today’s society.  You can read more about what I think that church might look like here: IVM.

While the specific form of the church is not the subject of this series of articles, the act of transitioning a church is.

Transitioning anything, especially an organization of people joined around a common perceived purpose, requires some level of deconstruction.  You must look at what the systems are, what they intend to produce, what they actually produce and what you want them to produce.  Only then will you be able know what to change to get them from one inefficient or misapplied system (if they need change) to the more efficient system.

But the process of deconstruction is a dangerous one.  Not everyone, particularly in a church that has it’s own history and exists within the American church culture, is a fan of change or is even capable of it.

And the nature of deconstruction in the collective mind is to explain to everyone why the way they’ve been doing it is WRONG.

That’s the way it is perceived, anyway, and it creates resistance.

All of this begs the question(s):  When transitioning, must you deconstruct everything?  Must all deconstruction be revealed to the full organization?  What is public and what is private?

I’ll leave you to opine on this today (if you will).  My thoughts and experiences later.

Rick Jenkins posted this on Facebook this morning and I thought it was definitely worth a repost…

The Big Red Tractor from Jacob Lewis on Vimeo.

Yesterday, I wrote an article on forgiving others that was spurred by a conversation with a good friend.  The conclusion of that article suggested that it is simply more relaxing and enjoyable for you to forgive than to do anything else.

This conclusion, though, begs the question, “When I forgive, does everything go back to the way it was?”

The answer is, “No. Never. Never in a million years.”  But more on that in a moment.

We first must differentiate between forgiving and reconciling, which is fairly easy to do.

To Forgive is something you can do with or without the offending party’s participation.  Forgiveness is completely within your grasp.  Nothing but you can stop you from forgiving.

To Reconcile is something that you both must do.  It is the restoration of love, trust and friendship.  To reconcile you must be able to accept your failures, their failures and whatever offenses have been (usually this goes both ways) have got to be made right.  Either you or they make reparations for the offense(s) or they are intentionally forgiven by the offended party.

To reconcile, both parties must be mutually satisfied with the restoration.

Which brings us back to the question of whether or not things go back to the way they were, and my answer: No. Never. Never in a million years.

Whether or not you simply choose to forgive or are able to reconcile, you are never the same.

Forgiving instead of reconciling implies the offender hasn’t made things right, which means they haven’t earned back our trust.  That relationship is never the same.

I have numerous relationships with people that I have forgiven, that are congenial and friendly, but I don’t trust them anymore.  I give us all the gift of forgiveness so that things aren’t tense or mean spirited.  That doesn’t mean that I am open to being taken advantage of repeatedly.

When you reconcile, on the other hand, things are never the same again either… they’re better.  Like the schoolyard fight between children, we can shake hands and become best friends afterward.  It takes us to a new level that is not possible without us both being honest, accepting our responsibilities and doing whatever we can to make right what we’ve done wrong.

Just by the way, Jesus (and the rest of the Bible) encourages reconciliation.  Forgiveness is the second best option and only when the other person won’t participate.

I suppose that the key to being able to forgive just might lie in the ability of the wounded party to understand what pardon brings to them.

It’s human nature to nurse a grudge and it just feels good.  For a while.  I always enjoy that (self)righteous feeling of the moral high ground.  Too bad, I suppose, that it’s just an illusion.

No matter how innocent I am within the dynamics of any particular situation, the truth is that I am just as capable… just as guilty… of taking advantage.  Twisting the truth.  Improving my own situation at the expense of others.

There is no moral high ground within humanity.  We are all quite wicked.

Still, this is not the most important mental gateway to forgiveness.  Rather, that would be the realization that failing to absolve another only enslaves you.  For the most part, the object of your wrath will be ignorant of your opinion, but even if they are not, they are most capable of creating their own Moral Mountain on which to stand, matching your viewpoint with an equal opposite.

And yet, even that pales in comparison to the impact dispensing clemency has on you.  It is liberating.

A grievance is a burden.  Feels great for a while, but after that brief moment of self delusion wherein you have some sort of unassailable virtue, your rancor begins to exhaust you.

Every time you see your offender, you are right back in the prison of a self generated unpleasant mood.  Every time you think about them, you are oppressed by this obligation to anger.

And you don’t have to bear it.  It is completely up to you whether or not you continue in your animosity.

Only don’t suppose that I suffer from the misconception that mercy is an easy thing to dispense.  Just because it’s good for you, doesn’t mean we like it.  Still, it is medicine for the soul, no matter how difficult it is to swallow.

To sum up:  Let it go.  It’s exhausting to play “King of Moral Mountain” and it’s a comfort to be happy instead, so do it because it makes your own life better, not to mention that it improves the lives of those around you – maybe even your nemesis.

I have been driven from my bloggy slumber by this awesome and short two minute video on the Missional Church.  If you already get the difference between a missional church and an institutional church, repost it for others to share.  If you don’t get it, then by all means, spend the two minutes to watch.  It is as simple a representation as you might possibly ever see & hear.

First seen by me on Todd Littleton’s blog, but then seen on Ed Stetzer’s blog just a few minutes later.

Yes, I read Todd’s blog before I read Ed’s.  Sorry, Ed. ;)