Retelling others stories so that we can process our own. Believing that the trellis could be as beautiful as its vine.

Stories of a broken trellis is a series of anonymous blogs showing the impact of the “Blokes Worth watching” culture. These are written in response to an article written by Glen Scrivener in EN called “The Blokes Worth Watching Conveyer belt”. Glen’s article depicts favouritism and elitism in the church. His examples are historic and specific, yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic. Each account so far is from a different UK church network.

Matt’s story

Nay Dawson has provided a helpful guide as to how to identify “Blokes Worth Watching”.

As she says, women, by definition do not qualify, but it caused me, unquestionably “a bloke”, to question whether I had ever also been one, “worth-watching” or perhaps not. I have a suspicion I’m not the only one who has had such a thought.

From this end of life’s telescope, I loathe the whole idea, but there was a time when that was certainly not the case- the lure of the (male) “inner ring”, even if the young me didn’t fully understand it that way, was very enticing. And if I’m honest, even now, to never have been and now never to be, a BWW gives rise to the same small sense of possible failure, of envy and stimulates my desire to “belong”. At the same time there is a modicum of guilt- was I something I should never have been and did I use such privilege, to the detriment of others? That is why Nay’s analysis made me feel so uncomfortable.

It is right to say too that I am still impacted by intrusive BWW thoughts. What (certain) others might (theoretically) think of me matters much more than it should because I haven’t succeeded in leaving all of BWW behind.

I think a few of my male contempories never had much doubt that they were a BWW – but they would be a minority of a minority. To hold a “full house” from among being: “converted”, boarding school educated, trained at the right camp, articulate, “sharp”, sporty, “sound”, wealthy, from a pukka Evangelical family and recipient of early patronage, is, after all statistically, surpassingly rare. But there are a handful of such golden boys and undergraduates with such a hand in each generation- the types who are known as “captain of everything”.

The justification for this is that if, “…not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth”, that must of necessity mean that some, however small a minority, must, when called, be all those things. And that his how the little, but essential, elite inner ring of BWW’s is formed and supplemented.

The next issue is how proximate might a boy/bloke be to joining these core BWW’s at any given time in his development? Would holding three of a kind or two pairs do it? Can everything be trumped by one really strong card? 

So, not being English might be a ‘no, no’, but holding the card of being an excellent rower could compensate. Cambridge as university is perhaps to hold a King. Attending the “right” theological college is a stronger card than one deemed not sound. Not being at the right camp might be mitigated by being from a very prestigious day school. Being overtly, even aggressively “complementarian” is a strong suit. Not now being in a rich/flagship urban (and therefore “successful”) church could be offset by having the card to play of once been a CU President or marrying the “right” (petite, “submissive”, rich, connected maternal) wife and so on. 

This is the course the not yet BWW has to navigate from, at the latest being an undergraduate, but ideally since early teenagehood. It is a constant calibration and recalibration of schooling/ family/ university/ church/ patronage/ ministry status/ camp/ appearance/ dress/ athleticism/ accent. 

A talent for giving or willingness to accept a clever put down can make-up for one’s parents not owning a gite. Admitting preferring football to “rugger” or badminton to tennis might be fatal to ministry-prospects- so better not to admit it. The language has to be learnt quickly- “camp” does not mean Boys Brigade, or any other camp, but the “right” camp, “reading with someone” is not assisting with adult literacy, knowing who “Revds Rupert”, “Conrad” and “Andrew” in the inner ring are, who is married to who’s sister and all their Evangelical lineage is show’s ones connections and an understanding of proper deference within the hierarchy. 

It might all sound slightly absurd, in fact it is anything but. The stakes are high- succeeding as a BWW opens the way to desirable jobs in nice locations, excellent schools for the children (or well-off parishioners willing to help with school fees), prestigious platforms, high influence, more chance of access to the inner ring for the next generation and the one after, and a world of evangelical wealth where chalets, villas and holiday homes can be borrowed and so on.

Of course, if someone says things like these like this, or raises such questions they have automatically proved that they are “not quite the thing”, “chippy”,” disgruntled” or ”don’t get the culture” etc and therefore must accept responsibility for having disqualified themselves. For it to be said of someone, “I don’t think I know him” is to be damned- of course all the “right chaps” know all “the right chaps”- if you minister in a desperately poor area, can’t afford to go to the “our conferences”, are inarticulate, or simply feel unwanted by them- how can the chaps be expected to know you? My story as I have told it will be met with all sorts of nit-picking about details, “well it wasn’t quite lack that”/”he doesn’t really get it”, simply because that is how the BWW inner ring works- identifying who is in and who is out by tiny details and making sure they know it.

To conclude, like Nay did – why does this matter? It matters because a besetting sin and defining mark of this culture, especially, is to define itself by exclusion. Only 7% of English children ever go to a private school and yet we have kids’ camps that wouldn’t even admit all of that proportion. We have at least one church that runs Bible teaching weeks for those who do sufficiently well remunerated jobs. Organisations describe themselves as “churches” but do not resemble and do not want to resemble what the local New Testament church looked like in all its economic, social and other diversity.

And perhaps consider this- some of the BWW traits can be acquired or cultivated- not the core ones which come by virtue of birth- but the accent, intonation, dress, preaching/praying-style, relationships, all of which are arguably, trivial. But what is worrying is that wives, patronage and roles can be “acquired” too or certain “approved” theology “adopted” in order to have a few more cards from the pack and that has really worrying personal and pastoral implications. This stuff matters.

Nepotism, favouritism, lack of transparency, fear and preference for loyalty over merit distort leadership, deprive the church of the shepherds it needs and gives the church shepherds it doesn’t need and that matters.

It also matters because blokes like me need to undertake a season of painful reflection to see what harm this culture has done to us and how it affects how we do ministry but much so how we have enculturated it to the detriment of others.

If I ever was a BWW the Lord was immensely merciful to me. Put simply: while exclusive elitism prevails, the fullness of the gospel is denied and abuse in all its forms is enabled.

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Nay has written a response to Glen Scrivener’s article in August’s edition of Evangelicals Now, read it here.

Retelling others stories so that we can process our own. Believing that the trellis could be as beautiful as its vine.

Stories of a broken trellis is a series of anonymous blogs showing the impact of the “Blokes Worth watching” culture. These are written in response to an article written by Glen Scrivener in EN called “The Blokes Worth Watching Conveyer belt”. Glen’s article depicts favouritism and elitism in the church. His examples are historic and specific, yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic. Each account so far is from a different UK church network.

Mike’s story

Recently, the leaders of my church said they’d like to work on “vision” and “strategy”. Where are we heading and how do we plan to get there? “Can you write something down?” 

This is not the type of thing I am good at so I asked a friend about it. He said; (I summarise) “You have to write this type of stuff down because you have to make transparent decisions about how you are spending money! But you can write anything you like on that bit of paper, God works in his own unexpected way. Look back at anything you think your church has achieved  – it will all have been God surprising you.  You run a mission, but a non-Christian actually becomes  a Christian through dating a Christian (which we don’t approve of!). That young person learns more from a quick chat after church with an older woman than they do from your carefully planned sermon series. Someone dies who seemed so central to how your church would run, you don’t know what you’ll do without them, but the witness of their hope is incredibly powerful. Whatever strategy you have needs to accept God working mysteriously outside our plans and expectations.”

This is just true. It shouldn’t be surprising as it’s the pattern of every person who God actually uses to bring change in the Bible – David, Hannah, Gideon, Ruth. No one would have strategised them into leadership – it’s God surprising everyone. They are jars of clay, their weakness is his strength and other Bible truths we have read. God working through the tragic death of someone who doesn’t deserve it – well that’s not exactly a new idea for anyone who’s met Jesus.  

I am a white conservative evangelical man. While I’m not posh and so felt left out of BWW,  this discussion has made me face up to the fact I have probably benefited from BWW culture without even knowing, whilst others who had more to offer than me were overlooked.  And it seems to me that if there was anything in its favour at least the strategy was honest. Certain people were identified, and it wasn’t hidden that these were the future leaders of the country and world tomorrow, so it’s more important to get them evangelised and trained. Others were deliberately and unapologetically excluded on the basis of background or sex or potential “future impact”. 

The problem with strategies is, as my friend says, is that you easily strategise out of the picture the way God actually works. So if you have a strategy that does not involve you learning from Christians different to you, from the poorest or “weakest” or most untaught Christians speaking prophetically into the lives of others,  or people’s weakness and failure (rather than their strength and social standing) being what God uses, well if your strategy excludes that, you are at risk of obtusely trying to push out the way God says he gets things done.   

Some of the critique of all this has just been basic natural law. It’s unfair. I have been excluded. My gift wasn’t used. That matters but Jesus goes further – he says whatever power anyone has should be used to elevate “outsiders.” It’s not about me and how I may have been hurt – right now how am I using my power (which I undoubtedly have) to find, elevate, invest in the places where God works?

Here’s two things I’m trying. 

First I’m trying to learn from people who are supposedly there to be trained. I went to a session once for church leaders about investing in international students so they can return to their country well taught. Well, yes. But my experience, which I’m trying to treasure and step into, is that people from other countries where the church is actually growing, or where they are already Christian in a highly anti religious environment might have something to teach me. Even the ones who aren’t Christian will observe blind spots in my discipleship. 

A person from a central African country once visited our church and asked why we don’t preach more against pensions! Confused I asked why I would do that and he said “doesn’t the Bible say that serving the poor matters to Jesus? How can you justify saving up money that if you die won’t even be used, when there is so much poverty?” Leaning into insights from “outsiders” will open us to God’s work more than spying out insiders worth watching. 

Second, I am trying to do, and get others I am training to do, things we know we are bad at. Great at studying and preaching? Do that, but also get out and knock some doors and chat to people. Good at working on your own? Be disciplined in getting into a team. Love corporate prayer? Set aside time to pray by yourself. I find this a deeply unsettling experience, putting myself in places that I feel deskilled and awkward and where I do things embarrassingly badly. But do I really believe that strength comes through weakness? Is God’s power made perfect as he stoops in grace to help me? Is this better ministry if I am weak and in prayer at every step? Is it good to be in situations where what I am doing is not worth watching and I get no praise and affirmation? 

That’s the upside down way the kingdom works, and I really don’t want to strategise myself or my church out of living there. 

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Nay has written a response to Glen Scrivener’s article in August’s edition of Evangelicals Now, read it here.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here…

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ

Retelling others stories so that we can process our own. Believing that the trellis could be as beautiful as its vine.

Stories of a broken trellis is a series of anonymous blogs showing the impact of the “Blokes Worth watching” culture. These are written in response to an article written by Glen Scrivener in EN called “The Blokes Worth Watching Conveyer belt”. Glen’s article depicts favouritism and elitism in the church. His examples are historic and specific, yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic. Each account so far is from a different UK church network. Here is Kate’s story.

On worth and watching

I’m not entirely sure how I ended up at theological college. It was somewhat against the odds. I wasn’t a Bloke Worth Watching – and I wouldn’t have been a girl worth watching either. Too much input required.

So in as much as I was useful I was used – when I fractured I was swept out with the trash. That was my experience of church-based ministry.

You see, when I was barely out of adolescence, I learnt the hard way that working within a faith community is precarious. When it goes awry, you may lose everything. By the second time I experienced this, it was hard not to assume I was the problem. Perhaps, reading this, your instinct is to suspect I was.

Despite this, I couldn’t shake the conviction that Jesus was different – kinder and safer than the churches I’d known. I wanted to learn how we might do church better. I needed to know if the Jesus I thought I’d known could be trusted. That was what led me to theological college.

I arrived close to (not quite) wrong everything. Wrong gender, wrong school, wrong church background (mostly), wrong summer camp/events, wrong hometown… I could go on.

It had never occurred to me that you might read Calvin’s books (though I was at least aware he existed). I knew there was another Martin Luther, though I was hazy on the details. As for Augustine, that would be a stretch. I started college already behind.

I also felt chronically uneasy, surrounded by men who could physically dominate me. They did nothing to warrant that, but as a girl who wasn’t worth watching, I felt on constant display.

By my final year, I was sometimes the only woman in a room of twelve or thirteen men. I did not enjoy this dynamic – I was glad whenever a female lecturer came to join us.

But these weren’t the dominant threads. The brighter thread throughout was kindness, shown by staff and students alike. The principal, at that time, had a habit of dignifying each and every student’s questions – however inane, he never made you feel small. He found the value within the question, and taught a bigger lesson about kindness besides. In that small way, he created a context of safety.

I’d spend some hours with him over the years. Some, more anxious than others – but he was perceptive, gentle and unfailingly kind.

For a while, his kindness frightened me. I didn’t know where it was headed. I knew I was not a girl worth watching, but I was aware that he was watching me.

Later he’d apologise for this. Not because his kindness was anything but, but because he realised of his own accord it might have scared me. Now I might call this mentoring – back then I couldn’t see why he’d invest in me.

On days when I wondered if I belonged at college at all, he and I spoke at length about what makes an individual worthy of investment in a Christian framework. For him, it was more about whose I was, than whether I was value added. This alone meant I was worth watching. His kindness to me (and others) was rehumanising in the deepest sense.

“Value added” has been shown to be a terrible model for evaluating teachers – it’s just as bad for evaluating whom we should train for ministry. Productivity is not our ultimate end. Finiteness is inevitable, not inadmissible. A leader unaware of their limits will be a bad one. These principles I learned at college, from him.

Neither he, nor college got everything right. Some mistakes were costlier than others. But they apologised, and it was life-giving.

There are clearly problems with how some in my context have failed to value, train and enable women in ministry, and with what we’ve valued most in leaders across the board. I see glimmers of change, but we’re still a way from where we should be. But these problems are not unique to one particular strand of evangelicalism”

Outside my church network, it’s often assumed my time at college must have been terrible. My experience is mine alone, but for me, this does not ring true. In fact, I was treated far better at college than by churches at both ends of the evangelical spectrum. In those churches, I encountered “kindness” you wouldn’t recognise as such. “Kindness” that broke me into a thousand pieces.

Earlier, in a church that wouldn’t own the term, I’d known another Bloke Worth Watching. Nothing he would do to me mattered more than that. They said, “He was trying to be kind” and then, “but he got in over his head.” I didn’t have words for it then, but I learnt his career mattered more than my wellbeing. He was celebrated whilst his fingerprints still burned on my skin.

The churches I told later were more concerned about my orthodoxy & their productivity, than about his predation. My questions and I were in the way, and I was told not to come back. He was still the Bloke Worth Watching – I was the girl whose shame needed to be kept out of sight.

It was at college I began to relearn what kindness means. I was given space to grow, and ask questions. I was watched and gently pieced back together – though I didn’t think I was worth watching. It was partial, sometimes clumsy, but a start.

If we wish to be a community that values women, we must relearn what makes any one of us worth watching, and let that sink deep under our skin. We must also learn to listen better to different voices, not only those with whom we feel at ease. We must learn that we’re not the arbiters of who is worth watching – the watcher of all has dignified us each, beyond price.

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Nay has written a response to Glen Scrivener’s article in August’s edition of Evangelicals Now, read it here.

Retelling others stories so that we can process our own. Believing that the trellis could be as beautiful as its vine.

Stories of a broken trellis are a series of anonymous accounts showing the impact of the “Blokes Worth watching” culture. These are written in response to an article written by Glen Scrivener in EN called “The Blokes Worth Watching Conveyer belt” depicting favouritism and elitism in the church. His examples are about a historic, specific situation. Yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic across the church. Each account so far is from a different UK church network.

Ruth’s story

I am a 45 year old woman of mixed African descent. Around 2004 my vicar encouraged me to commence theological training as he thought I had Bible-teaching gifts. I did enrol at a theological college on a non-accredited basis for three years, but did not pursue a formal qualification for childcare reasons. I thought I could do this a few years later on. 

But in 2006 we joined a new church, which was, unbeknown to me, strictly male-leadership only. Women are not allowed to lead worship or to teach mixed-gender small groups. Over and over, I noticed that the people who were selected for ministry training were white middle-class men. They were fast- tracked into senior staff positions and given opportunities to lead and preach even prior to any theological training.  Women and black people were largely ignored.  

For example, a few years ago a new family joined. The husband/dad was known to our vicar because of his close association with the camps Glen Scrivener mentions in his article. On the first day the new family attended, the vicar and two associate ministers made a point of welcoming them exceptionally warmly. To my knowledge, no other new joiners had been given such a welcome. Within a few months, the dad was preaching at our church and leading a small group.  A fast-tracking because the dad of that family was in the right ‘club’.  

I have been in the same small group since 2006. I love the Bible and am more than capable of leading a small group study, yet am not allowed to do this because I am female. By contrast, untrained men are routinely invited to lead small groups and to teach in the church. My small group leader has on more than one occasion thanked me for my contribution to the discussion, yet it has never occurred to him that I would be able to lead, and indeed that it might be good for the group to get a different perspective.  

Recently I thought about registering for theological training. This is mainly because, in the past year, I have started writing freelance for Christian publications and teaching the Bible informally to a group of students outside the church. The application to start training requires the consent of my vicar. Sadly, he refused, mainly because he said that he has no knowledge of my Bible-teaching skills. He has asked me to wait a year before he revisits the issue of theological training as he says he wants an opportunity to look at some of the work I’ve been doing. This is fair enough, but my small group leader was also present at the meeting. He has first-hand experience of my biblical knowledge, he knows I have been teaching a group of students outside the church and is also aware that I write theological articles (he’d even read one). Yet it had never crossed his mind that I’d be a good candidate for theological training. He’d just never seen me that way. This is probably because there’s a policy of mentoring men and ignoring women for bible-teaching purposes.   

 
In our church women are routinely invited to serve by making meals or teaching Sunday school. There is a women’s fellowship which meets regularly to learn together. The women learn books of the Bible like Esther or Ruth, while the men’s group learns Romans or themes like God’s sovereignty and human free will.  No prizes for guessing which group I want to join ha ha.

 
This is where the rubber hits the road. The so-called biblical picture of man and womanhood has been distorted to become a means of silencing women and keeping them from learning in ways which Paul never intended. How could Paul have meant that women should not lead at all when it’s clear from Romans 16 that they did? How do we reconcile such seeming conflicts in the Bible unless we are willing to read the text with open minds without preconceptions passed on by respected church leaders?  

I love my church and believe that God has placed me here for a purpose. It saddens me that the leaders do not see me and value my gifts, but I know ultimately that it is God who chooses, and I’m trusting Him to set before me an open door that no-one can shut.  

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Nay has written a response to Glen Scrivener’s article in August’s edition of Evangelicals Now, read it here.

Retelling others stories so that we can process our own. Believing that the trellis could be as beautiful as its vine.

Stories of a broken trellis are a series of anonymous accounts showing the impact of the “Blokes Worth watching” culture. These are written in response to an article written by Glen Scrivener in EN called “The Blokes Worth Watching Conveyer belt” depicting favoritism and elitism in the church. His examples are about a historic, specific situation. Yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic. This is Karen’s story…

Blokes worth watching and disability

“That was really good for a disabled person!”

That’s a phrase I’ve heard a few times when I’ve spoken or done some training somewhere.

I hear it most in Evangelical Churches.

I’ve also not been allowed into a venue at a conference because “The speaker’s not here yet”….when I was the speaker.

As a woman in ministry, I find being female can be an issue. But, I find my disabilities to be an even greater issue.

I have much experience, a lot of qualifications, and yet I regularly get the totally amazed look that there’s actually a disabled person doing ministry stuff. Firstly because it’s rare in the Evangelical world and secondly because of the way disability is still viewed.

I’ve been brought up in ‘Evangelical Free’ churches. I still attend and am a mission partner in one and I’m grateful for the Biblical grounding those churches have given me, but reading Glen Scrivener’s article that mentions ‘Blokes Worth Watching’ (BWW), I saw that this wasn’t just an issue for women. It affects disabled people, those with additional needs and the vulnerable too.

For example; the style of mentoring these young men are given requires the ability to read. We recommend a book, which more often that not won’t be in an accessible format.

Whether they have a visual impairment, dyslexia, autism or any number of things that makes reading and comprehension hard, there is rarely any other style available for them.

As an aside, I once asked a couple of evangelical book shops if they had some specific theology books in an accessible format. One said “can’t your husband read it to you” and the other said no, “But we do have the wordless book (coloured pages to explain the Gospel) – would that work for you?”

I’ve always had a passion for making church more welcoming to children and young people who have additional needs or are disabled, as a result I trained as a children’s nurse in the area of disability and complex medical needs just so I could learn more.

Starting out in ministry as a children’s evangelist a few years later, I was advised not to go into the additional needs side of my work too much, but build a name for myself in ‘mainstream’ children’s evangelism first – so I could “gain the right to speak into this very specific ministry”. This was because I was a lone voice speaking into this area at the time and not being heard. It was also wise advice.

But.

Being a woman, ‘building a name for myself’ wasn’t possible. This was mostly due to the BWW ethos and occasionally due to others who thought a woman shouldn’t be teaching about “The Cross”. (Somewhat crucial for an evangelist!)

Thankfully, I didn’t want a name for myself, so I wasn’t disappointed!

As a 14 year old on a camp for children with physical disabilities and life limiting illnesses, I could see there was a disparity between the way they were treated in a church compared to how other children and young people were treated.

Even today people in our churches will question me about how some of the children I work alongside can have a real faith. I even have my own faith called into question on occasion!

I often receive emails from families who have children with additional needs and have been asked to leave their church. These emails come from all denominations – but the larger bulk of them are Evangelical churches…. And I’ve never dared to say that publicly before.

The ‘Trellis’ that Glen speaks about isn’t just broken – it’s inaccessible.

It’s rare to find a BWW who has a disability. There maybe some who have hidden disabilities, but as soon as they become apparent – they are often no longer considered worth watching.

At a conference, where there was some discussion on how we mentor young people into leadership, I asked if anyone mentored disabled young people or those with additional needs. The question was greeted with blank looks, some goldfish like mouth movements and more than a few “err’s”.

I know many disabled young people and people with additional needs who have gifting in many areas of ministry and service. Most don’t believe they can serve because they see no one like them – and that is a very sad reflection on the church.

There are 1 in 5 disabled people in this country. It is the largest and most diverse diversity and rarely mentioned or talked about, and even then – not positively.

Even if the term ‘Women Worth Watching’ existed, I know I wouldn’t be on that list. Being disabled would be one issue, and the other one would be (and is) the fact I politely challenge how the church thinks about disability and ministry.

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Glen Scrivener wrote an article in EN called the Blokes worth watching conveyer belt. There has been a huge response to his article and it seems to have touched a nerve.

His examples are about a historic, specific situation. Yet the comments I’ve read and the experiences I’ve seen show that this is current and endemic. I want to share stories that show the impact of the “Blokes Worth Watching”(BWW) system. Other people’s stories help us process our own, others stories help us identify problem, others stories show us that change needs to happen.

Glen I totally agree “Parts of the trellis have let us down – at times, dreadfully. Yet Jesus never will. In this moment of crisis it is the perfect opportunity to think on Him, sing to Him, call on Him, abide in Him – to discover, perhaps for the first time, what true theology, worship, prayer and discipleship means“. If you haven’t read Glen’s article, please read that first.

Mark’s story

“I’ve been in a leadership team that obsesses over raising leaders, and by leaders I mean elders, and by elders, I mean men. We spent time discussing a book called ‘The World Needs More Elders’, focusing on the need to raise men to ‘build the church’. Very little time was spent discussing raising women leaders. When it came to a small group to support the eldership in strategy and vision of the church, it was only men who were picked. I can’t recall a discussion around how to choose the ‘right’ man but in practice it was those who gave up a lot of time and were known to the leaders. 

The environment I was in is not unique, it was a model repeated through many churches in the group of churches we belonged to. Now I am outside of it, it is easy to sound critical, but I was in that church because there was much I loved. As Glen states in his article, the vine, Jesus, was clearly visible, until the trellis, the church systems, became so wonky it no longer held much of what was once so beautiful. I was pushed out because I was pointing out how wonky the trellis had become. 

While God has been gracious to many churches that do have a model of BWW, BWW easily creates a culture of idolising the trellis rather than guiding people to the vine. It highlights an unhealthy obsession with leadership and promotes the idea that leaders are “leaders of leaders” and ‘their’ churches are “leader factories” (quotes are used because I’ve heard these phrases used positively by leaders). In my experience this has led to pastors ignoring those who don’t fit an ideal of leader quality and having limited discipleship for the whole church. It also sets an unhealthy hierarchy in eldership teams with the “lead” (the paid one) being in charge instead of the mutual submission that is needed. The pressure builds to ‘raise’ leaders and character easily becomes secondary. Much can be ignored if you focus on all the good a person does for the church.

Scrutinising the trellis and being honest about its wonkiness is a start to being able to repair it but some churches won’t even get that far. Much of what Glen describes seems to highlight an underlying culture, a structure holding up the trellis, of comfort, control, and insecurity. We stick with what worked before and we train people in the same way we were taught without question. We pick leaders that look like what we think the trellis needs – the charismatic preacher, the person that serves on all the rotas, the person that can play the guitar and sing well, and so on. How many do we overlook because they don’t fit the current leadership mould? Perhaps we stick with BWWs because anyone else would be risky, we might offend those who prop the trellis up, financially or otherwise.

How do we fix this? How do we fight against comfort, control, and insecurity? Glen focuses on the centrality of the gospel and states a deep transformation of character is needed. This is something that is worth digging into further but it needs to be discussed alongside discipleship. Both character and discipleship are assumed to be a natural part of the Christian life, especially by those in leadership, but I’ve found they are not often prioritised in preaching or practice.

Character isn’t about being perfect, as we all know, we all fall short of God’s glory. Because of this truth, it is about being humble, to be able to hear where we are falling short without knee-jerking into defensiveness, it is about being able to repent. Hurt caused in churches is often compounded by leaders who defend rather than repent. Character is also about being known, not just to the leadership, but to the congregation. Many leaders aren’t vulnerable, they don’t share their doubts and struggles due to various fears. Some share just enough in a sermon to sound relatable but never enough to highlight their insecurities. 

Acts 6 gives a solution to BWW and a lack of accountability in the church – if anyone was a bloke worth watching it was Stephen, but instead of the leaders picking Stephen, he was chosen by those around him not by those ‘in leadership’. He was known to all, not just fast tracked by current leadership. When it comes to potential leaders, are they accountable to or even appointed by the congregation or are they just picked by the elders/leaders? Are they known for what they do for the trellis or are they known for how they love others and point to the beauty of the vine? 

Discipleship is practised when one is known by other Christians who are devoted to scripture and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayer (as per Acts 2:42). Discipleship is for every Christian and is where we challenge one another to be more like Jesus together. I emphasise ‘one another’ because many churches will have discipleship in a manner where one is discipled and the other is a discipler. Leaders lead and everyone must follow, challenges regarding character and theological conclusions only go in one direction and heavy shepherding becomes an issue. A healthy view of discipleship is not hierarchical but a disciple helping another disciple get to know the Rabbi. This form of discipleship seems to be quite rare but through it people become known and trusted as leaders out of relationship not through BWW.

Fixing the trellis requires us to go back to the basics of being a Christian, reprioritising humility that we won’t get everything right, repentance when we don’t, and a heart for people that leads to discipleship. It is by doing these things that we find, in the kingdom, a healthy trellis is supported and built up by the vine and not the other way around”.

Read more accounts of others impacted by the BWW culture here.

Nay has written a response to Glen Scrivener’s article in August’s edition of Evangelicals Now, read it here.