At the turn of the year, Newfrontiers UK, the UK part of the "apostolic sphere" of Terry Virgo, formally ceased to exist in it's previous form. While the relationships and future plans had been under development for a couple of years, that was the moment, when something really final happened.
"Newfrontiers" is now a collection of "apostolic spheres" all over the world, of which there are six relating in the UK, around familiar (within newfrontiers) names of Jeremy Simpkins, Mike Betts, Guy Miller, Dave Devenish, David Holden and Steve Oliver.
Names for these new church groupings have sprung up: "Relational Mission", "Catalyst", "Christ Central".
Many of these spheres involve Churches all over the world; USA, Dubai, Canada, Ukraine, Russia, France, the list goes on.
Other places in the world have seen apostolic teams released: such as John Kpipi in Ghana, Edwards Buria in Kenya and PJ Smyth in South Africa, and several more.
Out of these come new conferences, new Church planting, new Ephesians 4 ministries.
But what impresses me most of all, is what it actually says about newfrontiers.
WE NEVER WERE A DENOMINATION
So often people accused newfrontiers of being a denomination by any other name. Which it wasn't. And isn't. And now a myriad of new Church movements spin off from what we were together, it proves it once and for all. Instead of the legal, the bureaucratic, the centralised, all that is left is the relationships.
(EDIT: I am not saying this is a fair reflection of what a denomination is!)
IT WAS NEVER ABOUT ONE PERSON
Out of one person's ministry comes tenfold of what he started 40 years ago. That is real fruit.
TERRY VIRGO WAS WILLING TO LET GO
He could have appointed the next "pope" to rule over the whole thing. That is what many people thought would happen when he handed over to a "successor". But he didn't. He released his children to forge their own future.
But what now? It reminds me of the moment when parents stop hosting the family Christmas, and the children become the hosts. In this case spiritual children held together by common ancestry and identity, but forging their own lives and destinies, while still occasionally meeting up and carrying the family name.
I am not sure many Church movements have ever done it this way before. I don't know what will happen. I can see challenges ahead.
But ultimately, I think it's a really, really exciting time.
4 comments:
I know this is a bit after the event, as there has been a subsequent post and debate, but this section begs several questions for me:
"WE NEVER WERE A DENOMINATION
So often people accused newfrontiers of being a denomination by any other name. Which it wasn't. And isn't. And now a myriad of new Church movements spin off from what we were together, it proves it once and for all. Instead of the legal, the bureaucratic, the centralised, all that is left is the relationships.
(EDIT: I am not saying this is a fair reflection of what a denomination is!)"
1: If this isn't a fair reflection of a denomination, why make the comment?
2: As a denomination isn't a Biblical word (much like other names for church types, 'Network of churches in relationship,' stream, etc) why worry whether we are one or not?
3: If there is no Biblical definition of a denomination, how do we know we aren't one?
4: Is there a danger of self satisfaction in defining all denominations as negative, something to avoid being defined as, and then stating that we are not one?
i.e. those are bad, we're not one, hence we're better, and at last the cavalry has arrived to demonstrate to all those inferior denominations what a good group of churches should look like.
etc!
I don't know why we should be fussed about being called a denomination, or pretending we're not one. If it's a group of churches with broadly common doctrines, practice, structure and government, then that's what we are and it's no problem.
Also it's worth bearing in mind the rich heritage in church history and in key scholars and church leaders drawn from the various denominations in the past and now.
No CofE? No Alpha.
No Methodists? No Wesley.
No Salvation Army? No Booth or soup kitchens.
No Baptists? No Spurgeon.
No Pentecostals? No charismatic renewal.
No Anabaptists? No Sermon on the Mount - well that one's probably the other way round, actually!
... as well as the many denominational figures who have taught in our conferences and churches.
i.e. relax - all church groups look like denominations from the outside, and we're no exception. It really doesn't matter, but to claim otherwise smells ever so slightly of arrogance, which misrepresents the movement we're part of, so can we have a little more humility and care with our choice of words?
Thanks, Jez
I guess it depends on where you arrive at the discussion re: denominations, but I take the point made by you and others about how I express things on here.
As for my attitude to denominations, I point to http://theroadtoelderado.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/5-things-i-love-about-anglicans.html
http://theroadtoelderado.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/5-things-i-love-about-methodists.html
http://theroadtoelderado.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/5-things-i-love-about-baptists.html
which are not only posts, but pointed to in my "best bits" section, which means I am prioritising saying nice things about them.
So if there are strengths to be appreciated and drawn from in all church traditions and denominations - as you outline elsewhere - why is it important to say that we are not one?
Denominations now, like 'The Monks/Monastries' in the past, are often caricatured in a negative light, as you did in this post, and then used in a contrast that seems to say 'I thank God I am not like one of them' in a dangerously Luke 18:11 style, that is not accurate even within your own opinion elsewhere.
Why is it important for us not to be something that has no single agreed definition, and which has evident strengths?
If we want to be appreciated by others, and to work in fellowship with them, then I think we need to drop the need to see ourselves as different as it can create barriers, and give the accidental impression of a superior attitude???
Just sayin' ...
I don't think it is a case of seeing ourselves as different, but then I think you can recognise where you are different without being accused of arrogance.
Newfrontiers is very similar to Salt and Light. Similar to CMIC. In the same family as Pioneer, Vineyard, Cornerstone, Plumbline.
They are church movements too ;-)
Post a Comment