Good question. I’ll work on a post to answer that this week, since it’s something I’m thinking through a bit anyway.

Nice summary and contrast. Good application of John Frame’s theology. One challenge to the ideal of decentralizing is the fact that laity, however invested, must sometimes put their own full-time work ahead of their church leadership commitments. Time and again, my attempts to decentralize break down on this point. At critical times, even some of our most invested elders simply punt to staff. Certainly, if staff provides a stop gap each time, elders are trained to rely and even rest in this safety net. If we agree that staff is not to rescue where laity drops the ball, it might elevate the value of lay leadership. But it feels a little utopic that busy professionals would expect that level of commitment of each other. I want it, they want it. But it often seems that only retired and extremely guilt-ridden people are willing to take on levels of responsibility usually assigned to staff. I’d love to hear how you or others have progressed (stages?) from a centralized staff-elder paradigm to the fractile model you propose.

Regards,

Tim

Think you might like some of the missional resources at Allelon.org. Al Roxburgh’s Roxburgh Journal has some great conversations, including one with Mike Goheen. There’s some interesting missional conversation video as well with people like Eddie Gibbs, Ryan Bolger, Pat Keifert and Craig Van Gelder.

Al’s June 1st Roxburgh Journal will be a conversation with TSK, Andrew Jones. (BTW, I’ve dubbed you the Tall Thin Californian on my blog.) I produce the video and audio resources for Allelon. The Roxburgh Journal can be subscribed to through iTunes.