Kingdom Christian and Charity Movements

[joshuabgood]

(And of course as a musician, I can't get behind their approach to music.)

What is their approach to music?

Well...FOTW's position is that musical instruments must not be used to "worship" God. And certainly not in the assembly. In a personal conversation with Finny, he explained that he doesn't have a problem with instruments being played if it is say "Happy Birthday" but not in worship. I pressed him what about if I use my guitar or violin to play a spiritual song as an act of worship, even informally...at that time in that convo he noted he wouldn't be comfortable with that re regulatory principle.

Later, about a year ago, at the church planters forum I pressed him around whether I could start a FOTW subsidiary group and have instruments in the assembly his answer was "no."

[mike]

(And of course as a musician, I can't get behind their approach to music.)

What is their approach to music?

Well...FOTW's position is that musical instruments must not be used to "worship" God. And certainly not in the assembly. In a personal conversation with Finny, he explained that he doesn't have a problem with instruments being played if it is say "Happy Birthday" but not in worship. I pressed him what about if I use my guitar or violin to play a spiritual song as an act of worship, even informally...at that time in that convo he noted he wouldn't be comfortable with that re regulatory principle.

Later, about a year ago, at the church planters forum I pressed him around whether I could start a FOTW subsidiary group and have instruments in the assembly his answer was "no."

Interesting. Is there any reason why a startup church would need or want to be a FOTW subsidiary?

[Ernie]

Where am I different? I also am not in the same place on closed communion...

I think they practice "close communion", just like most OO and CA Anabaptists. I only know of one church, a Beachy Amish-Mennonite congregation, that practices closed communion. The reason they are "closed" is to make decision making more simple. Either you are a member who communes or you are not. There are probably more like this that I am not aware of. Reformed Mennonite, Holdeman, conservative Apostolics, etc.

[Ernie]

Is there any reason why a startup church would need or want to be a FOTW subsidiary?

You get the same benefits as being part of a CA fellowship or conference.
You get to be part of something bigger than your own little congregation. If your church starts dying out, they will move more people in to keep it going, etc. There are lots of questions you never need to decide (and split the church over) because they have already been decided by the larger constituency. Many CA's feel more comfortable joining something that seems to have some nationwide momentum, rather than something local that could die out in a few years.

[mike]

Is there any reason why a startup church would need or want to be a FOTW subsidiary?

You get the same benefits as being part of a CA fellowship or conference.
You get to be part of something bigger than your own little congregation. If your church starts dying out, they will move more people in to keep it going, etc. There are lots of questions you never need to decide (and split the church over) because they have already been decided by the larger constituency. Many CA's feel more comfortable joining something that seems to have some nationwide momentum, rather than something local that could die out in a few years.

So how is FOTW organized? Does it have leadership with oversight over multiple churches? Who sets the criteria as to what church may be a FOTW subsidiary?

[joshuabgood]

Where am I different? I also am not in the same place on closed communion...

I think they practice "close communion", just like most OO and CA Anabaptists. I only know of one church, a Beachy Amish-Mennonite congregation, that practices closed communion. The reason they are "closed" is to make decision making more simple. Either you are a member who communes or you are not. There are probably more like this that I am not aware of. Reformed Mennonite, Holdeman, conservative Apostolics, etc.

I guess there are "shades" of close/closed as you are noting. Theirs is rather closer to the closed side of things than what I would idealize...that's all.

[joshuabgood]

Is there any reason why a startup church would need or want to be a FOTW subsidiary?

You get the same benefits as being part of a CA fellowship or conference.
You get to be part of something bigger than your own little congregation. If your church starts dying out, they will move more people in to keep it going, etc. There are lots of questions you never need to decide (and split the church over) because they have already been decided by the larger constituency. Many CA's feel more comfortable joining something that seems to have some nationwide momentum, rather than something local that could die out in a few years.

So how is FOTW organized? Does it have leadership with oversight over multiple churches? Who sets the criteria as to what church may be a FOTW subsidiary?

Yes...Milioni and Kuruvilla do the leadership oversight work. They are the ones that work through the FOTW standards/faith and practice/rule of life or whatever you want to call the specific naming of the things they believe and practice with prospective future leaders/members et al.

There are also corporate "city-wide" meetings that are sort of like conference meetings.

[EDITED at poster's request - DZ]

[barnhart]

Are they actually calling their leaders "Apostles"...

Does anyone have first hand knowledge of this practice at FOTW? If it is so, what powers or responsibilities come with this title that are distinct from "shepherd" or "pastor".

[mike]

Yes...Milioni and Kuruvilla do the leadership oversight work. They are the ones that work through the FOTW standards/faith and practice/rule of life or whatever you want to call the specific naming of the things they believe and practice with prospective future leaders/members et al.

There are also corporate "city-wide" meetings that are sort of like conference meetings.

Interesting, thanks.

[joshuabgood]

Are they actually calling their leaders "Apostles"...

Does anyone have first hand knowledge of this practice at FOTW? If it is so, what powers or responsibilities come with this title that are distinct from "shepherd" or "pastor".

Yes...they are fully bought into the "five-fold ministry" model. (Well available online.) They would advocate for it as the model ordained by God and outlined in the NT. It goes something like this:

1) Apostles - these folks are like entrepreneurs with the gospel. They go and start up churches etc. They are movers and shakers. After they start something they move on like Paul and write letters back and visit...but go on to start the next thing. Finny has a lot of this trait.

2) Prophets - these folks are good at calling sin sin. And see things with a moral black and white clarity. They are bold and unafraid. They speak God's Word to the people. Milioni is one of these.

3) Teachers - these people are good at teaching the word and explaining it for the common man. They break down the simple life giving truths of God's Word. Finny also has this gifting.

4) Pastors/Shepherds - These people are the counselor types that care for peoples emotional and spiritual individual needs. They pray for people, are mercy givers etc.

5) Evangelists - These folks are story tellers regarding their testimony. Bringers of Good News etc.

And you can google Five-fold Ministry test and take a personality profile and find out what giftings you have. Finny personally told me these giftings, in his view (with which I agree) apply to men and women. Finny referred me personally to the test, which I took. I came out part teacher part prophet.