Prophet and Poet

I've been dreaming lately. It's probably because I've been on The Island for a little bit now, but in any case, I've been considering what life after seminary will look like. So when we were able to take this assessment during class yesterday, I jumped on it.

This particular assessment laid out four leadership styles: Pastor, Apostle, Poet, and Prophet. It turns out I'm a Prophet first and a Poet second. I was a little surprised by the "poet" tag, but it made me think. Here's a description of each one:

PROPHET

The prophet wants to see the church shaped by God’s kingdom vision for the world.

They are drawn to the speaking the Word into the cultural context.

Hearing what God is saying about being a biblical people is of the highest importance.

They want the church to recognize its captivities to our culture and discover a more radical, biblical way of life.

The prophet wants to move people toward a vision of how God is shaping them in the midst of transition.

The prophet brings that Word that comes from the outside and addresses the people with a fresh sense of direction.

They thrive in the world of vision and a big picture of the future, they find it hard to spend much energy in the here and now.

Planning and strategy are secondary to vision and creating new futures.

They are future directed, the immediate is a gateway to tomorrow.

POET

They love to connect people’s confusion and struggle with the stories of God’s purposes in Scripture so that they can see things differently.

Poets call forth that which is hidden.

They listen, giving words, images and experiences that help people see things differently.

They don’t criticize nor judge but bring God’s story into the reality of people’s longings and pain.

Poets listen beneath the surface levels of the attractive and trendy changes in the culture and the church.

They focus on people touching the feelings and inner drives forming their lives.

Poets are not strategists with solutions or plans.

Poets take time, they immerse themselves in the multiple stories of the culture understanding their power and critiquing their claims.

They use words with reverence, get immersed in everyday particulars, spy out the glories of the commonplace, warn of illusions, attend to the subtle interconnections between rhythm and meanings and spirit.

They work with the question: How can I help people to see differently?

They stimulate, give hints, paint pictures, and create imaginations that run counter to the dominant ideologies.

read more...

Confessional-historical

I know, I know, it's a seminary textbook, but it's fascinating stuff. To submit the Scripture as God's authoritative revelation and also hold to its historical facts is great for me to read. Christian Hartlich says it like this:

The fundamental theological axiom at work here can be understood in one sentence: Without an objective, ontic grounding for Christology in the resurrection event Christian faith has no basis. At the same time, however, there is also the desire – so far as possible – to proceed in a historical-critical way, in order to make the event of the resurrection of Jesus historically plausible.

In short, I believe that Christ imparted grace to me by defeating death in the resurrection, but I also believe that Christ's resurrection was an actual historical event. It might not sound like a big deal, but it's a big deal.

The fact that this guy said it in 1978 is also humbling because I am just now coming to these realizations. Slowly.

read more...