Samson and the Pirate Monks by Nate Larkin is a fascinating and challenging book on a number of levels.

At first glance, it’s yet another book on discipling men. Larkin tells his own story of growing up as a preacher’s kid and then his serious sexual addiction while in church leadership himself. He’s a good story teller, who’s style reminded me of Donald Millar in Blue Like Jazz. He isn’t one of the stories of someone who was found out and “fell” publicly, but rather he gave up ministry as his addiction became more and more desperate. Eventually he found himself at an AA type group, aimed at recovery from sex addiction, where his healing began. In the process he discovered levels of community, spirituality and openness amongst his fellow recovering addicts that had been utterly lacking in his experience of church.

The journey leads to Larkin and others setting up the ‘Samson Society’, which is explicitly Christian and for any men, not just addicts, who are willing to courageously face their own issues together. They seek to become more like Jesus, as they recognise that they tend to be “loners, wanderers, liars, judges and strongmen”.

There are parts of the book and the Samson society which are very tied into American Evangelical culture, but there are others that are challenge and even subvert it.

Three in particular…

1. It deeply questions the assumptions of Western individualism, where my personal “quiet time/devotional” is the basic building block of discipleship.
2. As the Samson society grows and multiplies it goes for a totally decentralised (starfish) form of leadership and control. Along with many others I’ve been fascinated by the starfish idea in recent months and this is the clearest example I’ve come across so far in a Christian movement.
3. Larkin powerfully exposes the temptation for church members to want to see their leader/pastor as their “father” and the ways that many of us collude with that.

I’d very strongly recommend reading the book. Like any book it has its own cultural baggage, but it challenged parts of me that other books didn’t reach. It certainly asks some big questions and offers some powerful insights that the cell movement can benefit from.

Richard White

by Phil Pawley

It’s 7.30 on Wednesday night and the first couple arrive with their 4 year old son. There’s food and drink on the table, beanbags on the floor, and a bit of pop music playing in the background. The DVD player is primed but may not get used. Over the next 30 minutes another 7 people arrive and the conversation drifts slowly onto matters of faith. JOURNEYS began somewhere during that timeframe.

The group is quite mixed – we, the hosts, are in our 50’s, the rest are in their 20’s, apart from the 4 year old and our 14 year old foster daughter. It’s also mixed in terms of faith. At least three have had no prior Christian input and make no profession of faith in Jesus. The others are a mix of occasional Catholics, Congregationalists and one ever so slightly backslidden Pentecostal. The group has one clear uniting factor. They are professional sportsmen and families.

JOURNEYS began as a forum for discussion about anything to do with life and faith. Between 15 and 20 people have been involved during its short lifespan of 1 year. Over that time conversations have ranged from evolution to healing, faith in Jesus to other world faiths, the place of faith in sport and superstitions. There have been discussions about fears. There have been times of tears. People have grown in their faith. And this by most measures has been a successful ‘cell group’.

Except for one thing. It’s not a cell group. Well, not if Cell Group is defined by what you might discover in some “cell churches”. There are no 4 W’s. No one has a clue who Uncle Ralph (Neighbour) is. And there are no fancy booklets to work through. Occasionally the group watches part of the JOURNEYS series, or one of Rob Bell’s Nooma DVDs. But even these have not always been helpful. We’ve never sung a song together, and most of the group have never prayed out loud nor read a passage of scripture publicly. In fact no one would consider they’d done anything that might be deemed religious – apart from talking about God, faith, Jesus, church, and life in general. And what’s more, this group has no recognisable links to any other church group. So you might be tempted to say it is a bit of a cell-disaster.

Or is it?

For one thing, it’s a work in progress. Secondly, it is tailor made to suit the network it serves –sports people at their pinnacle. For instance it’s seasonal to suit their particular sports year, and it’s flexible to suit their playing schedule. Thirdly it’s relationally based. It is within an existing community rather than trying to be a substitute community. Fourthly, no one is pressurised to ‘evangelise’. And yet there has been a slow stream of new people coming along. Fifthly, the best part is often around the table having a scoff. Some of the deepest discussion happens over cheese, crackers, salami and bread. And occasionally an accidental communion takes place.

As the hosts, we are well aware of cell principles. But our vision is not to start another cell group. It’s to enable people who are already within a definable and tight knit community to have a place where they can meet together and explore the God stuff without embarrassment, or being ‘on show’ to fans. So it is ‘cell’ - but not as you might know or recognise it.

Multiplying this group is not an objective. If it happens, so be it.

Getting participants to ‘attend’ church is not an objective. In fact several of them consider JOURNEYS to be their ‘church’, whilst one couple attend elsewhere on Sundays.

Getting them to bring their mates along is not an objective – again, if that happens so be it.

In fact, the group has no greater reason for being than simply ‘being’. It is there for all involved in the sports club to make use of should they so choose.

It is enough for us that we might demonstrate something of the life and love of Jesus to those who happen along. Through hospitality, and by being available to gently answer (and ask) questions, we hope that we might play some small part in the lives of these people and be a discernable spiritual presence in what is often an irreligious and faith-poor environment

Phil & Diane Pawley host JOURNEYS and Phil is chaplain to the sports club referred to.

by Richard White

I’m not very fond of the word “cell”.

It has so much negative baggage. My friends who aren’t into church think of either prisons or terrorists. Many of my church friends on the other hand think it means a very prescriptive form of the Singapore or Columbia models of cell-church.

In Dream, the network I work with, we never use the word. We just have “groups” that are building community and learning to be like Jesus.

So why on earth are we calling this network Anglican Cell UK?

A few reasons…

-The movement that grew out of Singapore, etc brought us values that live on. Without it most of us would still be stuck in inward looking home-group bible studies. It also started many of us down a path of a radical new understanding of what it means to be church.

-We can’t think of anything better. “Small missional communities” may be better description, but that’s pretty longwinded and not really any sexier.

-We’ve had a wonderful relationship with Cell UK and want that reflected in our name.

-Sometimes it’s good to have a name that keeps you humble!

Certainly Church Mission Society who are behind this network don’t have the most a trendy and useful name anymore. Neither do Youth With A Mission who launched Cell UK (I was a YWAM’er for eleven years and know that lots of us weren’t exactly “youth” anymore!)

Often the cool new names quickly become just as dated and useless in a few years.

So (for now anyway), we’re going for the Columbo approach to subversive image management.
“Anglican” (The hunched up, greasy-haired detective) + “Cell” (with a crumpled old raincoat)

What do you think about the term?

…now just before I go, could ask you one more question about the night of the murder…

Andrew Attwood, one of our consultants, challenges our vision and commitment to reaching the poor.

Question: Given that Jesus seemed to spend quite a lot of his time with the rejected and disadvantaged people in his society, how come a large number of our churches are still predominantly filled with the wealthy or middle classes? And since Jesus even included some of them in his core team (like Tax Collector Matthew and Dodgy Mary Magdalene), how do our churches compare when selecting leaders from such backgrounds?

For those who wish to read further, I’m keen to admit to you just how hard and exhausting it is trying to develop a small-group based church that has a heart for the poor. For those brave enough to go beyond tokenistic ministry, to be committed to a full integration of needy people, to roll out the red carpet for the most messed up people and help make church accessible to them, I’ll keep writing.

It’s a pain.

Let’s be honest, for most of us, reaching out at all can feel awkward and hard work. Despite moments of passion, a lot of reaching out is down to obedience rather than nice feelings. So we fight to get over the hurdle of awkwardness and lack of skill, and have a go at reaching neighbours, friends and new contacts. And I say ‘well done!’- you make Jesus smile. However, to be asked to reach out to the poor, especially if you yourself are not poor, well that’s yet another additional major struggle, which is why so many churches don’t bother. I don’t condone this, but I understand.

I work as the Associate Leader at St. Mary’s Church in Leamington Spa, a church of around 140 with a commitment to serve and bless the needy in particular. Out of a straightforward response to Christ’s manifesto in Luke, Chapter 4, we aim to seek out the hidden and broken people in town, the addicts, the homeless and the relationally torn. It needs to be said that our church community also includes professionals, students and functional families, and when we are all mixed up together with the shop floor workers, the unemployable and the damaged, church feels pretty real. You get a fantastic range of wisdom and life experience to share in all directions. You also get exciting levels of honesty and courage emerging, which allows us to have a go at new ideas and projects at the drop of a hat.

But the process of reaching out through groups and as individuals to people who are not middle class is different and often a tiring task. The middle classes have calendars and diaries, but the underclass folk don’t, and tend to prefer to just turn up when they want you for something. Diets are different, and T.V. watching is different. They often view the establishment as the enemy, after being justly or unjustly treated by those in authority. Benefit culture has low aspirations and people need a huge amount of training and encouragement to imagine leading anything. And they go pear-shaped at unexpected moments, after hours of input and support. Arghh!

Small Group meetings can have high levels of intensity, with life stories that beat ‘East-enders’ hands down. Life change can take longer than with stable people. Folk routinely have a fag-break outside during our main Sunday services. The whole long journey of change requires us to be both more patient and also more challenging.

But on the upside, our present youth-worker, who used to be addicted to heroin a few years back, recently married the vicar’s second son. They make a formidable team and he will help her spearhead our work in one of the more deprived estates in town. This gives us a clear advantage in breaking into tough territory – we have the people who have been there. People from such backgrounds also understand the powerful community bonds among the poor, and help to teach we socially isolated folk how to share life better. They read the bible in a different and revealing way. Straightforwardly. Simple and powerful.

So, if you’re feeling stirred to explore this area, or if you’re weary of trying, let me challenge you. This kind of stuff makes church extremely rewarding. We are used to torn edges and messy ministry – it isn’t pure cell church, but we do see real changes. Go for it. King Jesus did; it hurt him too, a right royal pain, but he knew it would turn the world upside down.

Andrew Attwood

Small Giants is a secular business book that challenges the “big is best” and “grow or die” assumptions of many business guru’s.

Bo Burlingham (cool name!), uses case studies of fourteen companies that deliberately turned down opportunities to grow big and maximise profits.
Instead of quantity, these “small giants” chose to maximise quality. Quality of their product, quality of their work relationships, quality of life outside work and quality of impact on their communities.

“Cell” has always said that small is beautiful, but we have also tended to see small groups as an efficient tool to achieve mega growth. Truth is, I reckon I’d rather belong to a “small giant” church.

Richard White

Cell UK magazine are looking for stories from cell members of how they have been empowered through cell and have influenced/ included their friends through their journey to faith.

The deadline is 20 September. The number of words: anything between 100 and 400.

Plus a head and shoulders photo of yourself.

Please email both photo and contribution to:
Penny Weighman: penny@weighties.net

At last week’s European Cell Symposium, Phil Potter spoke about the conference title, “A New Kind of Leader”. He drew together five images from recent books, articles and discussions about the need for changing approaches to leadership in a changeing world.

To wet your appetite, we were invited to move from…

1. lighthouses to rafts (attracting to attaching)

2. diving boards to surfboards (restructuring to reimagining)

3. orchestras to jazz bands (orchestrating to improvising)

4. generals to gardeners (controlling to cultivating)

5. spiders to starfish (retaining to releasing)

The full transcript is available todownload by clicking here. It raises lots of questions and issues, so please do add your comments.

(In his later session, Ben Wong, beautifully drew together all five points under the observation that the people of God have always craved a king, and the “senior pastor” tends to be happy to play that role - but God is into theocracy!)

Next week (Wed & Thurs) is the Cell UK Annual Leadership Symposium. That sounds pretty unappealing unless you point out that in Greek, “Symposium” means “drinking party” (or so I am reliably informed by a friend Jeremy, who writes Greek textbooks for fun!)

Actually last year’s event was excellent in terms of both networking and input. If Ben Wong is half as inspirational again this year, it will be well worth worth going.

Phil Potter is also doing some input - but don’t let that put you off coming! We’re going to post a transcript of his talk about new paradigms of leadership on this site straight after the event to allow feedback and discussion.

richard

I’m enjoying watching Paul Merton’s travels around China. In this week’s episode, it was fascinating to see him visit an underground Chinese “house church”.

The house was packed with scores of people jammed into every room with the service relayed by video from the main meeting room.

hmmm, don’t they realise that they’re doing “cell” all wrong? Too many people and you can’t build authentic community you know! You have to divide multiply as soon as you get to ten people in the group.

They might be risking prison to meet (the pastor had spent over twenty years in prison), but they’re obviously still “transitioning” to a full cell church model.

Maybe we can find a way to share our Western cell church strategies, systems and models so that they can become a vibrant, committed, growing, New Testament church like us.

Chris Neal writes in his article on this site that “the cell church model as expressed in the 90’s well may have reached it’s sell by date”.

-Do you agree?

-If so, why and in what ways?

-If not, why not?

Add your comments below and lets get a decent argument discussion going as this site kicks off.