Good post.

I, too, have been trying to find more quiet time to listen to God lately. My friend Aaron has a saying, “Nothing gets done unless it gets done on purpose”, meaning that we can’t just stand around and wish for something we want to happen, we have to make it happen. Which is going to be seen as ironic a few sentences down.

Toward that end I’ve started attending a small “centering prayer” group every Monday. We practice lectio divina, which is basically sitting and being silent and softly bringing a sacred word (”Lord”, “Jesus”, “mercy”) into our mind. It isn’t meditation, per se - the word is not a mantra. Instead, in your silence, every time you recognize that you are thinking, you just gently acknowledge those thoughts and then let them go (”like a leaf floating down a stream”) and re-center on the sacred word you are using for the day, inviting God to be with you. [This is obviously a very high-level flyover - you can find more resources on this on the web or ask me and I’ll forward you some.]

The interesting point being that nothing gets done unless it gets done on purpose, so I am going weekly, and need to figure out how to integrate the practice into my life daily. However, the actual practice itself is quite gentle. It gives up on the idea of trying to “discipline our silence more”, if by that we mean wrestling with our thoughts. Instead, as with Buddhist meditation, we just gently label those thoughts “thinking, thinking” (not, “Thinking! Thinking! Bad dog! No biscuit!”) and then return to the practice. So, yes, “discipline”, as in “practice”, “commitment” (and “disciple”), but not “discipline” as in “control” (or “punishment”). Discipline as in practice, not perfection (thinking about Heidi’s latest blog post here).

Per people who can’t stand silence or being alone, I think that’s the classic extrovert/introvert difference, as described in an excellent Atlantic article some years back. FWIW, I am an introvert, which as the article points out, does not mean “shy” or “reticent”. Instead, the article defines extroverts as people who get energy from being with other people and introverts as those who expend energy in the same situation. Read the article, it will make sense (it was a real “A ha!” moment for me - especially since at the time I was working for a real extrovert, with whom I immediately shared it, so we could better understand each other - it helped).

Thanks for your thoughts Jim. I’ve just recently purchased Keri Wyatt Kent’s new book whch is based on the practice of Lectio Divina - haven’t got around to reading it yet though! I’ll take a look at the article, it sounds good. I think I’m an introvert as well!

I am at another one of those transitional stages. I found ‘Caring for your Introvert’ very encouraging.
I found ‘My vision is to have no vision’ (NakedPastor) absolutely amazing - and interesting how many ‘leaders’ just could not understand what was being said! Is there a connection with why Len has received so few comments?

I have been following the ‘emerging church’ debate for several years now. One thing that has always been so obvious is the way in which leaders recognise that there is something wrong with traditional churches and are looking for ways to change what is wrong. But it never seems to occur to them that the whole concept of their own leadership positions might be one of the causes of the problems. Is Len suggesting that maybe there is a need to listen to those who may never have been in leadership positions?

I don’t know where this might be leading - I need a sounding board.

As I’ve said on my web site, it was in 1998 that I found ‘Houses that change the world’ by Wolfgang Simson based on Fifteen Theses towards a re-incarnation of the Church. Wolfgang has real enthusiasm for the five-fold ministry. I was struck then by what he said about prophets:
“A prophet’s perspective is radically different from that of a pastor. He hears from God and quite mercilessly questions everything, including the pastor, from God’s perspective. That however is his healthy and God-given duty… one is a defender of the status quo … the other questions everything and is seen (rightly) by many as a threat, because he disrupts things and wants ‘movement now’”

Any thoughts would be appreciated.