Discipleship or cruise ship

I've been thinking about two pieces I recently read on following Jesus.

First, Mike Slaughter has an interesting post 'Discipleship or Cruise Ship?' I think it hits a lot of us square on the head. Here's a snippet...

A few weeks ago I addressed the whole issue of the church setting a low bar of involvement that calls people to make a decision for Jesus rather than make a commitment to become a disciple of Jesus. I fear that we have given people a false and simplistic view of salvation. The churches that grew in the 1980’s and 90’s were based for the most part on a seeker-attraction model rather than a costly call to renounce the predominate culture (worldview) and claim the worldview of Jesus (I refer to this as the “Missional Church”). The result has been “born again” church attendees (vs. servant-participants), who have brought Jesus into their own worldview rather than being transformed into his. Many of our mega churches have created programming that mirrors that experienced on a cruise ship rather than Jesus’ relational-missional model of discipleship.

I also read in Fran's church newsletter last week some of his thoughts on the difference between being a "Christian" and a "follower of Jesus." He says...

It seems these days that people talk easily about being Christians. The polls tell us that a huge number of people in America consider themselves to be Christians. In some sense, that is good, because it means that most of them, in some way or another, have some kind of affection for Jesus Christ.

But have we seriously considered whether we want to follow the Jesus of the Gospels? He himself was always telling people how much it would cost them, and that they better think hard about it. Why? Because to follow Jesus is not just to accept him in some heartfelt but largely inconsequential way, or to go to church, or to hold to a conservative morality, or to vote a certain way. To follow him is to say that we agree with how he sees things (us, others, the world). To follow him is to begin to see what he saw, to value what he valued (and didn't), and to live as he lived.

To follow Jesus Christ is largely to conclude that we as human beings have become blind and taken a very bad turn that has left us terribly lost, and then to let him be our guide back to all that is truly good human living...

I think both of these point out the great need FOR the church. It's a place to learn about Jesus; it is a place to feed and be fed; but as Reggie McNeal pointed out, it is not the destination. Sometimes cruise ships are necessary - to help us heal and rejuvenate and whatnot - but I think a lot of church leaders have tried to make the ship the point just to get more passengers. And too many passengers can lead to sinking.

I dunno... just thinking.

To emerging and beyond...

I have heard talk lately of Scot McKnight and Dan Kimball spearheading some kind of new movement, sort of for those who are 'emerging' but not necessarily 'emergent' (I think; maybe; I dunno). It has something to do with the Lausanne Covenant, which I have heard of, but am linking here because I don't know that much about it and should probably give it a read sometime.

Anyway, I guess I am interested to see what Scot and Dan work out, because I have a great deal of respect for the two of them. I have actually met Scot, and emailed a few times, and we both came from north-central Illinois; and Dan has been kind enough to comment on my blog before, and we share similar tastes in music, and I have always admired the way he patiently explains things and his commitment to evangelism. So I am anxious to see what they come up with.

I wish we could just be called 'Christians' or 'Christ-followers' though. But I suppose that's a bit too idealistic. Just don't call me Shirley. We'll see what's next.

Tangible quotes

Here are my highlights (or things I wanted to remember) from The Tangible Kingdom. Sorry it's long. I tried to trim it down, but... you know. Hopefully my lowlights won't be quite as long.

** p. xxii – “…create new places of belonging, benevolence, and blessing…”

p. 27 – “We used to be told that the number one indicator of a new church’s success is how many people they have when they start. Now we say, the number one problem you’ll have will be based on bringing too many people with you. Why? Because a good majority of the Christian world is unconsciously a Milo or a Mitten (his cats). They have good hearts, but they hate change, they’ve gotten used to being provided for, and many will take too much of your time and energy to try to keep on the mission with you.”

** p. 30 – “We must realize that slight tweaks, new music, creative lighting, wearing hula shirts, shorts, and flip-flops won’t make doing church more attractive. Church must not be the goal of the gospel anymore. Church should not be the focus of our efforts or the banner we hold up to explain what we’re about. Church should be what ends up happening as a natural response to people wanting to follow us, be with us, and be like us as we are following the way of Christ.”

** p. 34 – “Would it be okay to consider that there are degrees of missionality? That some will be sent to cross the blue seas, cross cultures, and go to the far reaches of paganism in order to find the one lost sheep, while others may just need to be sent across the street? Is it possible that God doesn’t need nor ask everyone to start something new? Is it possible that God needs millions of leaders to care for a host of Christians who won’t be able to make the turn into new forms of church? I think so… I think we must. The transition within the U.S. church doesn’t require that we all travel on the same ship, but we must all sail on the same sea.”

All of chapter 6 is good – POSTURE.

p. 38 – “Missional has an inseparable twin. It’s called “incarnational.” The root meaning of incarnational means ‘any person or thing serving as the type or embodiment of a quality or concept.’ Specifically, it means to ‘embody in the flesh.’ John 1:14 gives us the picture: ‘And the Word (Jesus) became flesh and made his dwelling among us.’ The missional part was Jesus leaving his Father’s side in the heavens and coming to us in the form of a human. The incarnational part was how he took on flesh and lived with us. Said another way, missional sentness is focused on leaving and everything related to going, but incarnational represents how we go and what we do as we go.”

p. 39 – “This (previous) is where a missionary starts. And the first thing that must change is our posture.”

p. 39 – “Words communicate what we know; posture represents what we believe and feel. Therefore, posture is the most important part of relationship and communication. Posture shows true emotion and the intent of our heart.”

p. 41 – ”In North America, people don’t have any sense of the true Christian message any more because the face of that message looks so unlike the founder. Christianity is now almost impossible to explain, not because the concepts are intelligible, but because the living, moving, speaking examples of our faith don’t line up with the message. Our poor posture overshadows the most beautiful story and reality the world has ever known.”

** p. 42 – “What makes the gospel good news isn’t the concept, but the real-life person who has been changed by it.”

** p. 44 – “Henri Nouwen puts it like this: ‘The friend who can be silent with us in a moment of grief and bereavement, who can tolerate not-knowing, not-curing, not-healing and face with us the reality of our powerlessness, that is the friend who cares.”

** p. 46 – “Our main contention is that what drew people to Jesus, surprisingly, was not his message. It was him. His face, the softness in his voice, the whimsical look he gave the children, how he laughed, and how he lived. His message repelled people. Many people who were drawn to him as a man would leave after he let them in on the message. This is quite a switch for most of us. We try to draw others by soft-pedaling the message and end up repelling them by how we live our lives.”

pp. 52-54 – The kingdom values of Sacrificial Community, Confrontation, and Inclusive Community…

p. 54 – “We really don’t need more converts; we need people who are willing to act upon the basics that Jesus taught. Things like caring for the poor and oppressed, the hurting, and the confused.”

p. 61 ff – The three paradigms of Westernism, Easternism, and Postmodernism. (good)

p. 67 – “Remember, there’s one thing that is just as important as truth, and maybe even more important. That is whether or not someone is willing or ready to receive truth.”

p. 89 – “…blessing, as we have said, means the ‘life of God flowing tangibly onto his people.’”

p. 90 – “What was the gospel? What is the gospel? It is the tangible life of God flowing into every nook and cranny of our everyday life.”

p. 101 – “Where we have people, and vision, and a common call (especially if that call is from God), we have to commit at some level to structures, even if we’re helping coach the neighborhood soccer team.”

** p. 101 – Question to church planting candidates who don’t feel structure is necessary: “What happens if it works?... You know, what if all your spontaneous, natural, relational, nonreligious ways affect someone’s heart and they want to join in? And what happens if that keeps working the same way for hundreds of people?”

p. 109 – “The Scriptures call for people to trust, work with, respect, give to, and even submit to godly leaders.”

p. 110 – “Most pastors we work with would love to lead from the front instead of from above, from the streets instead of from the office. But they don’t because so many people still expect them to keep the spiritual vending machine spitting out all the goodies!”

*****p. 111 – “So, who are the missional people? They are the individuals committed to forming their character and lifestyle after those of Christ and who are compelled to live out their faith in the context of a community.”

**p. 112 – Dietrich Bonhoeffer (Life Together): “He who loves his dream of a community more than the Christian community itself becomes a destroyer of the latter, even though his personal intentions may be ever so honest and earnest and sacrificial.”

p. 118 – “I’d get questions like, ‘But what happens if someone from the clubs comes in and sees pagan Pete playing his tuba to ‘This is the Air I Breathe’ and yet the night before he saw Pete smoking a joint? Won’t that send the wrong message?” My response is, “What is the message you want to convey?” If you want to convey that someone who is up on the church stage has to prove a certain level of spiritual stability, then fine. That is your choice. But if you want to convey that your community is a place where anybody, in any phase of spiritual curiosity, can be in an environment in which God can touch their hearts, then you may try something like opening up your music group to include some Sojourners.”

p. 140 – Jesus prayer from John 17:15: “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.”

p. 144 – Selfishness is the enemy of “Leaving.” Fear is the enemy of “Living Among.” Arrogance is the enemy of “Listening.” Expectations are the enemy of “Loving.”

p. 148 – “We believe that whenever you see a group of people who find a rhythm or balance among communion, community, and mission, you will always find the Kingdom. It will be tangible!” (good section on the primary spheres of Incarnational Community).

p. 151 – “We win out over individualism by discipling togetherness, through gentle confrontation, and by eliminating spiritual services that allow people to remain autonomous or invisible.”

p. 151 – “If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other.” (Mother Teresa)

p. 167 – How they do “Bible and Discussion Times”:

Stretch out your right hand as far as you can. Next, measure the distance between your thumb and pinky. Read that much scripture only. Preferably a contained story or idea. Like the second chapter of James, or a parable, or one of the Psalms like chapter 23. After you have read the scripture, ask these five questions and let people answer as they feel led:

1). What did you like about what we just read?

2). What didn’t you like?

3). Was there anything you didn’t understand?

4). What did you learn about God?

5). Regardless of where your faith is at right now, if you were to apply what we learned about God to something in your life this week, what would that look like?”

p. 168 – “Church gatherings were never the intended goal; they were the natural result of people finding others who were living their alternative Kingdom story. The goal of our missional life is not to grow churches. The goal of church is to grow missionaries. The goal of the gospel is not to get people to church. The result of the gospel is that people will find each other and gather because of the deep meaning of a common experience.”

p. 168 – Hebrews 10:24-25 explanation…

** p. 173 – “True transformation happens only when God’s heart becomes a habit in our normal Christian community.”

Church as a natural result

I got this quote from The Tangible Kingdom from Grace. This is the next book I want to read.

Church gatherings were never the intended goal; they were the natural result of people finding others who were living their alternative Kingdom story. The goal of our missional life is not to grow churches. The goal of church is to grow missionaries. The goal of the gospel is not to get people to church. The result of the gospel is that people will find each other and gather because of the deep meaning of a common experience.

This is why we encourage church planters not to start the church by launching a church service. Instead, we advocate that they launch people and add the gatherings as needed. When people are bent on mission first, the gathering takes on different purposes. We have found that when the primary values are outward mission and incarnational life, the gathering becomes more about connecting people, corporate storytelling, vision casting, and celebration.

The church is not the destination

I've watched Reggie McNeal give his talk "It's AD 30 All Over Again" twice now. He is speaking to the Reformed Church in America at their One Thing conference. There is a website HERE.

Overall, he's kinda saying that the church is not the point. The kingdom is. And we need to quit looking at the kingdom through church lenses, but start looking at the church through kingdom lenses.

He also talked about our job as being to bless people. That's the covenant; that's the role we were given in Genesis 12. "Don't have an evangelism strategy - have a blessing strategy."

McNeal says that Christianity is, in fact, still the fastest growing religion in the world, with tens of thousands coming to faith every day. But it's not in the USA. China is where there are more people coming to Jesus in any 24 hour period than in any other country. But he jokes that they don't know what they're doing, because it's happening in "house churches." :)

He also said that 80% of Christians in the world are now non-white, non-western hemisphere.

One thing that I really wanted to remember was at about 23:20 into the talk. He referred to church being a connecting point rather than the destination. This is roughly what he said:

When an airport confuses itself as the destination it thinks it's winning when all the planes are on the ground close to the hub, and the concourse is throbbing with people. But every time it does that, it screws up peoples lives. They're frantic, desperate to try to get out of there. When the church thinks it is the destination it screws up the scorecard...

The airport is a connector to get you somewhere you want to go. You never wake up wanting to go to an airport; but you're glad to go THROUGH an airport to get to where you want to go...

The church is not the destination, but it is a connector... to get people where they really want to go - which is 'life'. That's what Jesus came to give us. He didn't say he came to give us 'church'... but LIFE. The destination is the kingdom, because that's where life is; that's where the king is.

Good stuff. It's not that the church is bad, or wrong, or unnecessary. It's just not the point. I really liked listening to Reggie. I had never heard anything by him. I liked his book The Present Future, and I like his speaking style too. I wish he had a blog (maybe he does, I dunno).

Come september

I've had this post stashed as a draft for awhile. Son Isaac has this long, long, long post HERE that is a speech from Arundhati Roy of India entitled "Come September." I had to print it out on paper to read it, and it is 11 1/2 pages, but it is some pretty powerful stuff. I know that some who read here will not like what it has to say, but... it is what it is. It's nothing personal.

I finally decided to post this because John McMahon sent me an email trying to convince me to vote for him for President. He said I should vote for him because he cares about the American people more than anyone else. I will be the first to admit that I am not the most politically knowledgeable person in the room, nor do I care about politics all that much. And please don't get the idea that I am un-American either, because I am not. But I am first and foremost a Christian, and that means I am pro-God, and therefore pro-people. So my concern is not someone that just cares about the American people, but someone who cares about ALL PEOPLE in general, and even all of the planet. And that's what scares me about Mr. McMahon.

Anyway, I thought this was an interesting speech. I appreciate Isaac posting it. I don't understand all this stuff like he does, but I think it's hard for people of any nationality to try to look at things from someone else's perspective. So it's not that I think someone from another country knows any more or any less than someone from America... but it doesn't mean we do either.

Here are some random quotes I thought particularly interesting:

"...'The American Way of Life' (Donald Rumsfeld's reasoning for the War on Terror) is simply not sustainable. Because it doesn't acknowledge that there is a world beyond America."

"...today the world is run by three of the most secretive institutions in the world: The International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization, all three of which, in turn, are dominated by the U.S. Their decisions are made in secret. The people who head them are appointed behind closed doors. Nobody really knows anything about them, their politics, their beliefs, their intentions. Nobody elected them. Nobody said they could make decisions on our behalf. A world run by a handful of greedy bankers and C.E.O.'s whom nobody elected can't possibly last."

And, the closing remarks from the speaker (who is from India):

"I just want to say that, you know, I was so terrified of coming to America, because, when you read the papers and when you watch whatever you get to see on TV, which is Fox News, you know, in India, you know... this corporate media just makes out as if everybody in America is, you know, a clone of George Bush. I'm just so glad that I came because it just reaffirms my faith in humanity to see you here and to not have tomatoes thrown at me."

Peace out; and in.

Kimball's "missional"

I have always liked the way Dan Kimball thinks. In fact, I think he is my favorite church thinker. I wish I could be more like him. Balanced and patient in his explanations, but not afraid to speak his mind. I would rank he, Scot McKnight, John Ortberg and Jim Martin as the top four guys I look up to in my "field."

Scot had a post yesterday asking if the two terms "Emerging" and "Emergent" should be used for two different and differing segments of the larger emerging movement. Personally, I don't really even care anymore. I'm burned out on the whole thing at the moment. But eventually Dan had a long, long comment that included this definition of the term missional:

I personally see missional as meaning you are foremost living as worshipers of God and following the teachings of Jesus, but your whole life blood and decision-making and intentionality as a Christian community is designed around evangelism - that of course includes social activism in helping with the physical and holistic emotional needs of people locally and globally and it also includes the eventual Spirit-produced action in seeing those who weren’t Christians becoming Christians.

Howeber, I am more and more finding it a paradox that in my experience, a significant amount of the missional talk that I personally have been hearing is not including or giving specific stories or examples of people who were not Christians becoming Christians as an eventual result of being missional. I am not embrassed whatsoever to say in as I think of missional and what that looks like in our church - is that we pray, hope, dream and passionately long to see God move in people’s who are not aware of the grace of God and salvation through Jesus and what happened on cross - discover who He is, repent, trust in Him and become Christians (in the healthy definition of “Christian”).

I think he was maybe in a hurry, as the spelling and grammar look like mine, but... I like what he had to say. We're either sharing the Good News or we're not. And there are boatloads of ways we can do it. But whether it's in big ways, small ways, loud ways or subtle ways... we need to be doing it if we're following Jesus.

I think I will start going by the name "Dan" myself, since he's so smart. So from now on please call me Dan. Okay?

My APEST assessment

So, I forked over the cash and took Alan Hirsch's APEST test. There's a nice little article HERE that gives some explanation and definitions, and also a pdf from his book The Forgotten Ways that goes a little more in-depth. The letters represent the five-fold ministry structure from Ephesians 4: Apostolic, prophetic, evangelist, shepherd, and teacher. My scores were:

Apostolic: 34
Prophetic: 30
Teaching: 19
Evangelistic: 16
Shepherding: 14

Not quite sure what to make of this exactly, as I wasn't expecting Apostolic to be the highest and Shepherding to be the lowest. Hmm. I did always like that movie with Robert Duvall in it.

All the time

Another pastor recently asked me: "Do you ever worry - what if I'm wrong and am leading these people astray?"

I answered, "All the time."

We both looked at our coffee, and neither one of us said anything more about it.

I've been thinking about that, and I still don't know what to say. I remember several years ago listening to an old pastor explain how he has stayed in ministry for so long. He said, "I just get up every day, put on my clothes, and go to work."

I suppose I should get dressed...

Pastor's wisdom

Scot McKnight is doing a nice series I'm enjoying where he asked some seasoned pastors: "If you knew then what you know now, what would you have focused on? Or, in light of what you now know, what would you advise young pastors to focus on?"

It's kind of odd, because I *feel* like I've been pastoring for a million years; I feel like I've got a lot of miles on me and the compression's not so good anymore. But the truth is I've only been doing this occupationally not yet a full 9 years. So I'm still pretty wet behind the ears. I hope to be able to do it at least one more day.

Anyway, there has been a lot of good advice shared by a variety of respectable pastors, but two that have especially clicked with me - by two pastors I have always had a HUGE amount of respect for - are these:

• John Ortberg shared how he would seek to become a healthier person, emotionally and spiritually. His struggles with fitting in and needing people's approval hit close to home.

• Jim Martin has been one of my favorite bloggers for a long time. He shared how he would be more concerned with "self-care" - in areas of the mind, soul, emotions, and physical body. As he said, "Such self-care is not a luxury but is a God honoring investment in long-term ministry."

I really need to read some positive, encouraging stuff like this right now. So I appreciate Scot for doing the series, and all the pastors who have taken the time to respond.

APEST is a pest

So I've started reading more about the APEST test to see if I'm more of an Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Shepherd (pastor), or Teacher. The Shaping of Things To Come calls it an APEPT, but it has apparently now been changed to APEST, so as not to have two "p's" - Shepherd replaced pastor. I did find it helpful when they compared them sociologically as:

The entrepreneur = the apostle
The questioner = the prophet
The recruiter = the evangelist
The humanizer = the shepherd/pastor
The systematizer = the teacher

But, I don't know... Basically the whole thing has me depressed now. I am debating about whether to spend the $10 to take the test, but I've taken so many of those stinkin' tests and being a bit on the manic side I can test out so differently depending on my mood at the time. And I actually think I am more of a prophet-type than anything, which is depressing in and of itself - nobody likes a questioner. Plus, it just seems that sometimes I am a little bit of all of them, and sometimes a little bit of none. I always thought that's what made me the perfect small-church pastor. Sort of a renaissance-type who could do a lot of things a little bit, but didn't do anything real well. But now I'm told there is no place for people like me, and that people like me are the cancer of the church at large. Yeah, that's about right. Of course, the truth is probably that I just don't understand it correctly. Which seems to be more true of more and more things anymore.

ADDED LATER: Yes, this is a whine (if you don't know I'm a whiner then you haven't read here very much). The thing is, I'm not saying the APEST ministry model is a bad idea, or unbiblical. I'm just not sure how it works in church leadership, and that it will work in each and every local church out there. So if you have some light you can shed - shed away.

Hope for dying churches... faith...

Remind self: read William Willimon's blog more often. He has a great post on The Practical, Organizational Relevance of Resurrection. I love the story at the end about the dead church, and the quote:

"To tell him a pastor or a church is dead means nothing to him. He just sees death as an opportunity to see what Jesus can do.”

Yep... Need to get me some o' that.

I think this is why we need leadership in the church, and even organizational structure. I believe God is a God of order. That's why he gives people certain spiritual gifts. Sometimes we need someone to remind us what it's all about and why we do what we do and stuff like that. To me that's the value of denominational leaders and pastors and elders and whatever you wanna call your church leaders. That's what I appreciate about Will. Someone to say simple things like:

We serve a God who lives to raise the dead--even us. Therefore, we work with hope--not hope in ourselves and our efforts, but with hope in Christ.

Amen.

ht to Milton Stanley

Hmm...

I have been directed to Eugene Echo's blog many many times in the past. I finally added him to my sidebar after reading his post: my pastor is a janitor. We seem to share a similar twisted sense of humor, and he's not near as mad at the world as me. I need to read more people who are less mad.

This also helped me in an area I often wonder about: exactly what does a pastor do if he/she decides to leave pastoring? For people like me - I'm only trained in one area, and not particularly good at it. So this wasn't too encouraging in that regard. But I wish seeing someone act on their faith wasn't so out of the ordinary for me (I'm pointing the finger at myself for those of you who think I'm picking on my church again).

Hmm...

The weight: crosses, calls, and kindred spirits

For those of you aware of my most recent meltdown last week, I feel somewhat obligated to try to offer a bit of explanation if I may.

I suppose, in a way, it's kinda like one of my all-time favorite songs: The Band's classic "The Weight." If you're not familiar, HERE is a clip of it from the movie The Last Waltz. According to the wiki site, "The Weight" takes the folk music motif of a traveler, who arrives in Nazareth in the Lehigh Valley region of Pennsylvania. Once there, he encounters various residents of the town, the song being a story of these encounters."

Although, according to Robbie Robertson (the song's composer), "The Weight" was somewhat inspired by the films of Luis Buñuel, about which Robertson once said:

He did so many films on the impossibility of sainthood, people trying to do good in Viridiana and Nazarín, and it's impossible to do good. In "The Weight" it's the same thing. Someone says, "Listen, will you do me this favor? When you get there will you say 'hello' to somebody or will you pick up one of these for me?" "Oh, you're going to Nazareth, do me a favor when you're there." So the guy goes and one thing leads to another and it's like, "Holy shit, what has this turned into? I've only come here to say 'hello' for somebody and I've got myself in this incredible predicament." It was very Buñuelish to me at the time.

That's the part that connects with me. See, being a pastor was not my idea. Especially being a pastor in a small traditional-looking country church. Not that I don't think it's where I'm supposed to be, but... let's just say that following Jesus almost always results in some incredible "predicament's." I guess that's why it requires a child-like faith, otherwise we would never go there. I'm not sure how you can read the Bible and think that surrendering yourself to God is ever going to be easy. Whether it's as a pastor, or living up to whatever "calling" you have received in life. I think at some point every Jesus-follower finds themselves thinking, "Holy shit, what has this turned into?"

I thought it interesting that while thinking about all this I happened across the program from my ordination service (July 23, 2000). On the back I printed this quote from Frederick Buechner's, The Alphabet of Grace (109):

The most crucial thing is always the thing that is not said. They are simply getting on with their lives, and it is not so simple. Maybe that is the most crucial thing.

"I hear you are entering the ministry," the woman said down the long table, meaning no real harm. "Was it your own idea or were you poorly advised?"

And the answer that she could not have heard even if I had given it was that it was not an idea at all, neither my own nor anyone else's. It was a lump in the throat. It was an itching in the feet. It was a stirring in the blood at the sound of rain. It was a sickening of the heart at the sight of misery. It was a clamoring of ghosts. It was a name which, when I wrote it out in a dream, I knew was a name worth dying for even if I was not brave enough to do the dying myself and could not even name the name for sure.

"Come unto me, all ye who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you a high and driving peace..."

Buechner became one of my favorite writers during seminary. That piece, along with "The Weight," seem to unexplainably put everything into perspective for me.

Sometimes I think we think the "rest" that Jesus talked about, and the "peace" he gives, is something that will come easily, or that it means a life without predicament. But filtered through the cross and our call... it would seem it's rarely if ever a swift journey. And just like with this latest fall o' mine, maybe the "come unto me," isn't some sort of prayer we don't vocalize... it could very well be something like a public blog post (that opens us up to our kindred spirits). For, even though I am still fairly weak, it is those of you who offered prayers, and emails, and comments, and hugs and looks and shaky-voiced calls who have helped get me through. Maybe you meant to, maybe you didn't. But I think it's things like that that make the church the church. It's when we hum, "Take a load off Fanny"; we say some "hello's"; we pick up a few things here and there... and it's not at all found in thinking about ourselves, but simply following, and serving, and being mindful of others. And the risk is that sometimes we will find ourselves in a quandary and we need to share our load... and that's what we do, until we can get up again.

I don't know... this probably doesn't make much sense. It wasn't my idea anyway. But I think it's why this walk we call faith isn't meant to be done alone. I appreciate those of you who have allowed me to join the journey with you, or you with me. Mmmm... whatever. I dunno.

Peace out, peace in.

The pastor's responsibility

I originally called this post "Auditioning For Congregants." It was going to read as follows:

I've been thinking of starting a new church that will take the world by storm. Anyone interested in joining, please contact me. We can set up an appointment to meet where you should be prepared to answer these questions: What is your talent; what will you contribute to our group; why should we let you join; and just what makes you think you're so stinkin' special anyway? Please leave a comment below with your name, telephone number, and email address if you would like an audition.

Of course I was being sarcastic (it's my gift, you know). I don't really even know what I was thinking about. I guess sometimes I think I get tired of hearing about how church needs to always be about DOING something. And, I know, the church doesn't do near as much as it should - we have been irresponsible, lazy, and self-centered. But I think many people are like that because they've never allowed God to DO SOMETHING inside THEM. That's why I like Eugene Peterson so much. I started re-reading his book "Working The Angles: The Shape of Pastoral Integrity." I AM a pastor, after all; and I think integrity is somewhat important (and not just for pastors).

On the very first page he jumps right in with this: "American Pastors are abandoning their posts, left and right, and at an alarming rate. They are not leaving their churches and getting other jobs... But they are abandoning their posts, their calling. They have gone whoring after other gods..."

Gulp. Um... yeah... I remember this now.

Page 2 has this awesome quote that I think sums up so much of the problem. Too many people (again, pastors and non-pastors) want to be part of a "successful" church, and it just ain't gonna happen. Eugene says:

The biblical fact is that there are no successful churches. There are, instead, communities of sinners, gathered before God week after week in towns and villages all over the world. The Holy Spirit gathers them and does his work in them. In these communities of sinners, one of the sinners is called pastor and given a designated responsibility in the community. The pastor's responsibility is to keep the community attentive to God. It is this responsibility that is being abandoned in spades.

Hmm. Yeaaah. I really think this is what I've been missing. What so many churches are missing. Even the one's trying to have an impact in the world - too often it's of our own doing; rather than being attentive to God and allowing the Holy Spirit to guide and direct us.

I used to have this friend who would always ask, "So what's God been saying to you lately?" Sometimes it made me real uncomfortable - because I hadn't really been paying attention. But it always made me start thinking about it. So... what's God been saying to you lately?

The challenge of church leadership

The other day Scot McKnight posed an interesting question on his blog. He asked:

"What was the biggest change of perspective from the time you were anticipating and reading about pastoring in seminary (if you went that route) and to, say, 2-3 years after you had been pastoring?"

It's funny, because I had actually been thinking about this (kind of). I had been thinking about how so many people seem to know exactly what churches, and church leaders, and pastors ought to be doing, and they write and write and talk about it.... And, you know, I would love to be able to read all the latest books, attend all the cool conferences, blog all kinds of interesting thoughts, study the Bible for hours and hours, map out my theological position on every little thing, but..... I just don't have time. And I'm glad there are people who can do these things, but there are just too many people involved and too many things that need done for me (as a small church pastor) to be able to do all that.

Anyway, I thought this comment left on Scot's blog pretty much summed it up. Erik said:

The biggest change for me is that the ideas and theology have faces, names, and a story to which I must now attend, rather than just making sure my theology is properly stated. Its messier, with probably the same amount of questions, just less easy answers.

Yep. And I don't know that that's a bad thing.

Are we done - the myth of leaderless church

Yesterday during our worship gathering someone had a small child who, at the end of each song/prayer/whatever, would say loud enough for everyone to hear, “Are we done?” I thought it was cute the first time…. But pretty soon it started to be quite the little distraction. And I know there were probably some adults who were thinking the same thing, but I also believe there are many people who really want to worship God, to sense the Holy Spirit's presence, and learn and grow, and they (as well as the kingdom) truly do benefit from our gathering together each week.

As a church leader perhaps I am over-sensitive to all the talk in the blogosphere about *leaderless churches.* If I were a better blogger I would cite a few examples, but… I’m not. And I suppose everyone has their own definition, but I think what most people mean by “leaderless church” is a church where no one tells them what to do. You know, “Why can’t we all just get together and talk about God and follow Jesus in community and everything will be peachy keen cool.”

Hey, I’m all for not having to tell anyone what to do. That would be great. But…. What freakin’ planet do you live on?!? I mean, do you really think you can get a group of people together and things are just going to *happen*? My experience is – there are people just waiting to pounce on opportunities to make things all about THEM. People who want to dominate conversations, who want to air their dirty laundry, who lack social and emotional skills and the maturity needed to keep things from deteriorating into a demonized demolition derby. “Are we done?”

I have led and attended way too many gatherings where one or two people have done more than just create a distraction - they’ve derailed the group entirely. And it’s always funny, because what often happens in those situations is…. the very people who complain about leadership are often the ones demanding “Why doesn’t somebody do something?!?” You know, “I don’t want anyone telling ME what to do, but would you please tell THEM what to do.”

I guess my point is: I don’t think leaderless church is the answer; I think we need better leaders. By *better* I mean humble servants who not only have the spiritual gift of leadership, but the humility and character to lead from a heart surrendered to Jesus Christ.

Let’s face it, there are some terrible leaders in some of our churches. I don’t know that it means the church is beyond hope (I don’t believe we could kill it if we tried). But I also know there are some good leaders out there – young and old – and we need for them to step forward. In order for good leaders to be developed it’s also going to take some good followers to step forward. People who will give them half a chance, who will encourage rather than tear down, who will offer to help rather than hinder, who will listen rather than trying to manipulate and control.

We are NOT done yet, my friends. But we can’t just idle along and *hope* things turn out. No, we press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called us heavenward in Christ Jesus (Ph. 3:14).

So…. GO!

My son's problem with the church

I was going to title this "What the church should be bitching about." I mean, God knows we Christians like to bitch and moan. But it's usually about stuff that doesn't really matter. Son Isaac has a powerful-nice rant Anxiety As A Result of Being A Rich White Male Christian. He says he may never smile again. It's from reading Migeul A. De La Torre's book, Doing Christian Ethics from the Margins. I have not read the book, but Isaac lays a good dose of it out in his post (Um, yes, you should read it). And please understand, this is not just some 19-year-old college kid spouting off. He's spent time with the homeless, goes weekly to the youth prison, has been to D.C. more times than I've dreamed of, and... well, other stuff too. Here's a snippet from his post:

This is my problem with the Church, and especially the "emerging" church. In their attempt to really understand what the gospels are saying they have neglected to ask the very ones Jesus came to save. Instead they write their books and make money, they go on speaking tours, they sip coffee, they surf the net. I can't even begin to say how this effects my view of the mega-church...but I think you get the idea.

I would suggest Jesus came to save all of us, but according to Isaac, "De La Torre's argument is that we must start to understand the world through the eyes of the marginalized...there is no other way to fully realize the gospel message..." Because, as De La Torre says, "Jesus can never belong to the oppressors of this world because he is one of the oppressed. The radicalness of the gospel message is that Jesus is in solidarity with the very least of humanity."

Absolutely(!).... and well done, son. Thanks for not being afraid to speak what most of us in the church REALLY need to hear (Now if I could just get him to come and preach...).

Peace out; peace in.

Jesus McDonald

I finished Raines & Geiger's book Simple Church. It was a good book - even if it's not the best read. At the end they referred to Morgan Spurlock's movie Super-Size Me where Morgan is showing just how effective McDonalds is at impacting upcoming generations. He meets with schoolchildren and shows them pictures of famous people. Most of the children recognized George Washington. All recognized Ronald McDonald (who isn't even real). But none of them recognized a common depiction of Jesus Christ. NONE OF THEM!!!

The authors of Simple Church said this:

Yes, we know the depiction is probably inaccurate, but you get the point. Most children in America are growing up without any knowledge of Jesus. We are living in a post-Christian culture. For upcoming generations Christ is no longer the starting point. Children and teenagers no longer rebel against the standard. Today there is no standard.... McDonalds is influencing future generations. Churches are not.

Hmm. How do you respond to that? The authors suggest the church must either change or die. I couldn't agree more. And if churches need to change or die, doesn't that mean the people need to change or die?

I think it's time we put up or shut up. For instance, the other day I read a comment left on someone else's blog. The post was about being missional-minded, which is something I believe we need to be/do (and it was a good post, btw). But the commenter stated how her and a friend had "skipped" church that morning and spent the hour talking on the phone about that subject. She was all proud about "skipping church" and for some reason apparently thinks TALKING ON THE PHONE ACTUALLY HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE MISSION OF GOD. I think not. Now, I will admit, sometimes it might actually do some people good to skip church and go do something. BUT NOT TO TALK ON THE PHONE! I mean, is that the point of being missional... or being the church?!?

I think what the church needs is for people to quit being so self-centered and actually give a flying fhoot about what's happening around them. It's one thing to not like your church and to want to improve things, but it's another thing entirely to do nothing but bitch and complain about those who are actually trying to make a difference.

I could go on, but.... I think you get the idea. Does the church need to change? Absolutely. Is bashing or leaving going to bring it about? I don't think so (please note: I'm talking about leaving church altogether, not just going to a different one. Some churches should be left, but not THE church). I suppose some people would argue that it needs to die before it can change. But I don't believe you can say you love Jesus if you don't love his body. I don't know how many times I've heard people say they don't like church because the people are so unloving. Hmm... and if you don't like them, then what does that make you?

Lord, give me love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. And a Big Mac to go, please.

Simple church - 2 - programming/process

In ch. 2 of Simple Church they compare two different types of churches: First Church and Cross Church. First Church does a lot of *things* but they are not *simple.* Cross Church is committed to just a very few *simple* things. They say what is missing in most churches is a simple process that moves people toward spiritual maturity. Too many churches aren't programmed around their process.

At Cross Church their goal is to: love God, love others, and serve the world. According to one of the leaders: "We ask people to do three things a week here. Come to a worship service to fall more in love with God and His Word. Go to a small group to love others in community. Serve in a ministry to impact others. Love God, love others, serve the world. We really try to keep it that simple."

On pp. 43-44 they explain how their programming is also their discipleship process. They say:

The simple process is experienced weekly through the programs the church offers. The weekly programs are tools to help people love God, love others, and serve the world. If the programs were not used to move people through the process, then the vision/process statement would be meaningless.

The first step in the process is to love God, and the weekend worship services are used to help people do so. The worship service is where guests, new people, and nonbelievers enter the church. It is also the weekly event where believers draw close to God through inspiring worship and dynamic biblical teaching.

The second step in the process is to love others, so the next program in the process is designed to help people connect relationally. The weekend services do not connect people to others very well. Like most churches, people sit facing forward and have little interaction with one another.

The staff concluded that small groups were the best environment for people to love one another in biblical community. Some small groups are on campus on Sundays or Wednesdays. Some groups meet off campus in homes or restaurants. People are encouraged to plug into one group.

The third step in the process is to serve the world, and ministry teams engage people in ministry. People enjoy camaraderie in a team environment while experiencing the joy of serving others. Some of the teams focus on the church while others focus on the community. New members are told at the new member's class that they should not join the church if they do not plan on serving.

At Cross Church, there are three main programs. One for each phase in their process. They are placed strategically and sequentially along their process. The goal is to move people from program to program (but never out of a program) so people naturally progress through the process of spiritual transformation. People who attend worship services are encouraged to move to a small group. People in small groups are challenged to serve on a team.

It seems to be all they do. Three weekly programs. It is a simple design.

I actually like this idea *in theory.* I mean, it sounds great! But... you know... sounding good, and happening, are usually two very different things. Hmm.