Church does not often like to compare itself to other societal organizations. We declare theologically that we are the Body of Christ drawn together by Christ‘s call upon our life and the striving of our shared ministry. While the Body of Christ is a this is surely what we hope to be, I contend that we must also acknowledge that we are an organized group of people by virtue of culture, denomination (or lack of it) and our context. For this reason, the rigor of Complexity Perspectives in Innovation and Social Change is worth the church’s time and review.
A challenging work, the book provides a look at organizational life from some of the keenest scientific minds. These authors are actively bridging the gap between biology and sociology. The importance of this bridge is that historically, sociology has rested upon the research and assumptions of Darwin’s biological research. Lauding Darwin they note that his work allowed scientists to “parallel evolutionary research: laboratory scientists explored the genetic basis of variation mechanisms, while field researchers investigated the past history and present operational changes through selection.” (18) Most exciting to me is that authors of Complexity Perspectives are also critiquing Darwin’s work which has now become orthodoxy for so many.
Their critique is a splicing of variation at the molecular level from selection at the sociological level. They splice variation and selection as they detail the rise of dog breeding. Breeding on the one hand is a manipulation of the genetic of dogs. On the other hand, there is a culture and a context that rises up in the “dog fancying” culture that has nothing to do with genetics but everything to do with interpretation and information sharing. That is, dog breeders began to make decisions about what was preferred among genetic variations. “They were less interested in producing dogs well-adapted to hunting than in satisfying the growing demand for household pets, and so they selected for features that appealed to the non-sporting dog-loving public: “cute”, human-like facial features and a glamorous full coat.”
Leaving many important details out of their first chapter, suffice it to say that I believe that Complexity Perspectives. Has great relevance for the church will may also rest upon assumptions of organizational development theory that in turn rest on Darwinian orthodoxy that has collapsed the biological and sociological. The most powerful example may be found in copious Google images charting a congregation’s (or another organization’s) “life cycle” beginning with birth moving through a prime toward an ultimate death. 
Such biological assessment of the church has contributed to a bias toward new church development or revitalization as resuscitation. Both these models are becoming increasingly difficult for the church. New Church development is difficult because of economy and increasing religious competition. Revitalization is difficult because it is understood as reversal of the life cycle process.
Complexity Perspectives offers another way to view organizational vitality when they draw you and I into the dog breeding metaphor. The vitality of organized life is not just at the molecular, genetic, biological level. There is something unique about the sociological life that is under-addressed by Darwin and by the church. That is a flow of information and communication that allows organized groups to invent tools, understanding and ascribe meaning to those inventions . These inventions can then present new challenges that then require new tools, understanding and most importantly a new ascription of meaning.
It seems to me that the church of a living God is evolving but those of us that manage the church are using outdated tools, understandings and meaning to try to manage the evolution. We are not actively participating in the sociological selection process of adapting tools, understanding and meaning. (Even secular organizations do this better than us) What is worse, we refuse to be as nimble as Jesus was in the realm of investigating sociological context. Issues of membership, tradition and finances are just some of the subjects that I hope to approach with the help of editors, David Lane, Sander van der Leeuw, Denise Pumain and Geoffrey West.
Read Full Post »
Leslie's Theology 