October 28, 2005
How Emergent Are You? McLaren's Seven Layers of the Emergent Conversation
Islam has its five pillars. Buddhism has its eight-fold path. Evangelicalism has its four spiritual laws. And now the Emerging Church has its seven layers of conversation.
Last month I was part of a small gathering of church leaders that hosted an evening with Brian McLaren. And the conversation turned as hot as the chutney. A number of participants were eager to discuss the criticisms that have been levied against the emerging church in recent months. The hijacking of the emergent movement by those merely interested in new worship trends rather than more substantive issues aggravated others. Everyone was looking to McLaren to chime in.
Always more likely to defuse than to detonate, McLaren entered the spicy conversation casually while slouched into the sofa with beverage in hand. He cautioned us against judging where others were in the "emergent conversation." Leaning forward, he outlined what he saw as the seven layers of the emergent conversation. "We all enter at a different layer," he said, "but everyone should be welcomed into the conversation no matter where they may be."
Based on McLaren's description, I've outlined the seven layers below.
I've added my own titles and used the imaginary "Seeker Community Church" to illustrate each point.
Layer 1: Style
Seeker Community Church realizes they're ineffective at reaching the coveted 18-32 year old demographic. They send a few staff members to a conference and they come back with goatees and candles.
Layer 2: Evangelism
After trying every facial hair permutation, Seeker Community Church discovers that to actually communicate the gospel to a younger generation they've got to learn to speak their language. They hire a former youth pastor to start an evening worship service with an "x" in its name.
Layer 3: Culture
It gradually dawns upon Seeker Community Church that the new challenges they are encountering are not limited to the younger generation. The entire culture is shifting away from the modern presuppositions their church was built upon. Some of the language and practices of the "x" service trickle into the rest of the church.
Layer 4: Mission
The emergence of Postmodernism causes Seeker Community Church to reevaluate the effectiveness of their mission strategy. Altar calls and gospel tracks are left behind in favor of community groups and relationships. Conversion is accepted as a journey and not merely a point of decision.
Layer 5: Church
Seeker Community Church begins to wonder if a multi million-dollar building housing a theatrical production every weekend is the only way to do church. Drawing from new and ancient forms of church, they launch alternative communities - one meets in a bar on Sunday night, and the other is a liturgical gathering. The church also partners with an inner city monastic group to reach street kids.
Layer 6: Gospel
The leadership of Seeker Community Church is stunned when the senior pastor confesses, "I'm not sure I've really understood the gospel." He begins to wonder why Jesus never said God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life? And why Paul never asked anyone to invite Jesus into your heart? He starts to realize that the Good News is much more than he'd ever imagined.
Layer 7: World
Maybe the mission of the church isn't simply to become a bigger church? Maybe, like Jesus, the church is to engage the larger world to reveal that the kingdom of God has drawn near? To their amazement, Seeker Community Church discovers significant swaths of the Bible (such as the Pentateuch, prophets, gospels, and epistles) talk about justice, poverty, and compassion. The church begins to speak about social issues and participates in efforts to combat poverty, AIDS, and global injustice.
So, how emergent are you?
Posted by Skye Jethani at October 28, 2005 | Comments (38) | TrackBack
October 27, 2005
Darned Sox: An Exercise in Rebuilding a Team
Marshall Shelley becomes a fan of the newly well-led White Sox.
Though I've lived in Chicago more than twenty years, when it came to the White Sox, I was only a casual fan (is that an oxymoron?). Until recently.
Yes, I attended games in both old Comiskey Park and more recently "The Cell" (it's still hard for me to endorse a telecommunications product every time I want to refer to a ballpark). I rooted for the South Side Hit Men of the 1970s and witnessed the infamous Disco Demolition night.
I understood the Sox' inferiority complex. They frequently voiced sour irritation over a city that gives preferential treatment to the Cubs. But let's face it, in a long-term relationship, lovable losers are easier to identify with than sore losers.
But all that changed this year.
The White Sox emerged as baseball's best team, sweeping the Houston Astros in the World Series and winning an utterly impressive 11 out of 12 postseason games. When a friend of mine from Denver Seminary managed to snag tickets to Game 1 of this year's World Series, I pounced on the opportunity to cheer on my new favorite team.
Their record wasn't what won them their fans - in Chicago or elsewhere. Other teams have had dominant records but not inspired the imagination. Catch my drift, Mr. Steinbrenner?
What caused the turnaround - both in the team's fortunes and in the public's excitement? For me, anyway, it was the team's exercise of creative leadership.
It started with general manager Kenny Williams's imagination. He reshaped the Sox, who were overstocked with power hitters a year ago. He traded away home run producers like Carlos Lee and Magglio Ordonez and brought in speedster Scott Podsednik and sparkplug A.J. Pierzynski and versatile Tadahito Iguchi. He recognized the need to try a different approach and pulled together a new team, less "impressive" but more likely to work together.
Coach Ozzie Guillen brought a delightful combination of intensity and fun. I remember watching Guillen as a shortstop back in the early 1990s. He wasn't the most powerful hitter, but he hustled, played great defense, and clearly had fun playing. As a manager, he brought that spirit to his team, and it was contagious.
This year "Ozzie ball" came to be understood not as waiting for someone to hit a home run, but as small steps toward making something happen - base hits, bunts, steals, aggressive base running. His brand of baseball wasn't something just for the studs; it was performed by relatively normal players who disciplined themselves to master the fundamentals.
I kept thinking of the leadership principle: "Excellent leaders get extraordinary results from ordinary people."
Ozzie inspired workmanlike players to do the little things. In the World Series, we saw free swinging Carl Everett lay down a perfect bunt. We saw Aaron Rowand smack a hit and run. We saw Jermaine Dye foul off pitches to work the count. We saw Juan Uribe dive into the stands for a foul ball. Joe Crede, benched earlier in the season for inconsistent play, was spectacular on defense and timely in his hitting. Coming off the bench, Willie Harris, Geoff Blum, and the entire bullpen played key roles. A total team effort, they did the little stuff that makes the game fun to watch.
In the end, Houston's Killer B's (Bagwell, Biggio, Berkman, et al) were no match for Chicago's Killer P's (Podsednik, Pierzynski, and Paul-eee Konerko).
It was a case study in effective leadership. At least for one formerly casual fan.
Marshall Shelley is editor of Leadership and a recent immigrant to the White Sox Nation.
Copyright ? 2005 Christianity Today International/Leadership Journal.
Posted by Marshall Shelley at October 27, 2005 | Comments (4) | TrackBack
October 26, 2005
Ministry Taxidermy: Don't Stuff the Dog
(Our friend Angie Ward is a writer, mentor, and ministry leader in North Carolina. She is the founder of Forward Leadership, a ministry coaching ministry. She is also a regular contributor to Leadership journal and our e-newsletter, Leadership Weekly.)
When I worked at a camp in northern Wisconsin, my fellow staff members often told a story about a cat that had lived on the campgrounds for many years. When the cat died, one prankster decided to have the cat stuffed, then placed it in strategic locations to startle other staff members and visitors. (I swear I am not making this up.)
Apparently, the cat appeared serenely napping on a car dashboard, cuddled at the feet of a secretary, and propped up with a sign directing visitors to the camp office before it was kidnapped (or should I say cat-napped?), never to be seen again.
I was reminded of this story when I read that actor Alan Alda, most famously of the TV show "M*A*S*H" and more recently of "The West Wing," recently wrote a book entitled, Never Have Your Dog Stuffed: And Other Things I've Learned. In it, Alda talks about how he had a beloved pet dog when he was eight years old. When the dog died, Alda was so sad about burying it that his father decided to have the dog stuffed instead.
"We kept it on the porch and deliverymen were afraid to make deliveries," Alda recalled in an interview with Newsweek. He then continued, "There are a lot of ways we stuff the dog, trying to avoid change, hanging on to a moment that's passed."
Churches seem to have a special proclivity toward "stuffing the dog," maintaining programs, buildings, and even members in an attempt to forestall necessary change. In the short term, it's sometimes much easier to stuff a church's pets than to acknowledge their death, grieve their loss, and give them an appropriate burial.
Like Alda's dog and the camp cat, stuffed animals might bring temporary comfort to those inside the organization, but they may actually turn off or even frighten newcomers who aren't familiar with the history and meaning behind them. Whether it's a particular worship style, a ritual, an outdated program, or even a powerful clique within the church, visitors will usually be quick to notice that something's not quite right. They may not stick around to find out what, or why.
One of the key tasks of a good leader is to acknowledge reality. Sometimes, that means burying a beloved pet, rather than propping it up in denial of its passing, even if it's your pet.
For the ministry leader, a potential danger is to bury the ministerial dog without telling anyone that it died, or worse, without even acknowledging that it existed. Burying a dead dog does not diminish its significance to the church family. On the contrary, a proper burial should include celebration of the metaphorical pet's impact, as well as acknowledgement that some people will need to grieve the loss over a period of time. Even when everyone agrees that an animal is dead, a wise leader will allow time to process the loss, instead of just bringing home a new pet.
This is especially true for young leaders like me, who can be quick to implement change without fully understanding the history of an organization or acknowledging the emotional and spiritual impact - both positive and negative - of past pets. Whether a church's "pet" is significant to you personally, you need to realize that there may be a lot of emotion stirred up by its passing. Recognize the loss, but celebrate the life, as well.
But keeping your dog's picture on your desk is much different than keeping the actual dead dog on your desk, at your feet, or propped up in your leadership meetings or even the church foyer. In a healthy church, only the nursery will have stuffed animals.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 26, 2005 | Comments (4) | TrackBack
October 24, 2005
Why James MacDonald Is Not Emerging (Part 2)
(Here is the remainder of James MacDonald's commentary on emerging culture. MacDonald is pastor of Harvest Bible Chapel in Rolling Meadows, Illinois, and its several satellite locations. He is also the featured preacher on the radio program Walk in the Word. )
4. Because the answer is Jesus, not cultural analysis.
Several times in the past few years we have baptized more than 200 adults in our church in a single weekend. When you listen to so many concurrent stories of conversion to Christ in such a short period of time, you get a clear picture of how it happens. "I was going along thinking I was ?too sexy for my shirt,' and God dropped a boulder on my life to break me down and get my attention." While the label on the boulder may change, the story does not. Bottom line: God uses the painful circumstances of life to soften human hearts and bring people to faith in Christ.
In the past few years we have analyzed our culture ad nauseum. Cultures don't come to Christ, individuals do and the fields are more ripe for harvest than ever before.
Our endless discussion of culture has become just an elitist substitute for rolling up our sleeves and getting the Good News to the people who are hurting right now! Baby Boomer, GenX, Postmodern, blah, blah, blah. The discussion itself is modernistic and we're just talking to ourselves. How about a more compassionate extension of our own life in Christ and please . . . a lot less perpetual babbling about culture, which even when rightly observed is not the answer, duh - Jesus is!
5. Because Jesus is the purpose for the party, not the surprise hiding in the closet of respectability.
If you have not traveled to the places in our world where the Gospel of Christ is spreading like wildfire, I covet that opportunity for you. What you find there is not careful connoisseurs of some Rodeo Drive Jesus, but flag-waving, flame-throwing, on-fire followers of Christ. The power of God's Spirit is moving because Jesus is experienced, adored and proclaimed in all of His transcendent glory.
Why do so many of the emerging church websites speak of God/Father and less overtly or not at all about Jesus Christ the Lord? Claiming to be postmodern we are still marketing Jesus and hiding Him in the closet of respectability until we feel like people are ready to handle Him. Jesus can't be handled and He doesn't need spin doctors. I know we're pretty fussy about music forms, but let's bring back an old chorus, This Little Light of Mine, and in case we've forgotten the answer to "hide it under a bushel?" is NO!
Anyway . . .
I am thankful for the honest and often accurate critiques of current western Christianity flowing from the emerging church movement. I strongly desire to see them show greater promise in the arena of solutions or at least be more open to analysis from outside their community than they have been to date. (Witness the harsh rejection, rather than careful analysis of D.A. Carson's book, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church on many emergent blogs.)
These are some of the factors affecting my decision not to emerge. What I am doing is hoping, praying and spending myself, along with many others, for "revival in the church in America in our lifetime." The problems in the western church are extreme: legalism or license, dead orthodoxy or compromised consumerism, professional entertainers with pop psychology or angry disregard for the sinful world Jesus weeps for. The western church in our lifetime has become an awful mess, but Jesus is not giving up on her and neither should we.
Now hear this: the answer we desperately need is a fresh move of God. We need a renewed vision of God's exalted, infinite holiness. We need an overwhelming sense of our own pride and personal sinfulness. We need our eyes lifted from the bankruptcy of cultural reflection to the crucified, risen, glorified Christ. There must be a returning to the centrality of the unadorned Gospel and the power of God's Spirit to redeem, restore and rebuild broken lives. We need men and women on fire with passionate confidence in the power of God's Word proclaimed; not because pagans say they want it, but because God promises to bless it. In short, what we need, what we desperately need is a renewing work of God that will cut a swath of revival across our land like a tornado across a Kansas wheat field.
That's what we need and nothing else will do. In fact, anything else is window dressing.
Most urgently I am praying that we will repent and turn from the horizontal, man-centered focus that grieves God's Spirit and prevents the presence of Christ from emerging more fully in our midst.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 24, 2005 | Comments (23) | TrackBack
October 21, 2005
Flowbee, Jesus, and Me: A Catalyst Echo
My hair stylist cancelled my appointment yesterday because of a schedule conflict, and for a few minutes afterward I searched the Internet for the Flowbee, the vacuum-attachment haircutting system that lets you give yourself a buzz cut. (I really, really need a haircut.) Very popular on the infomercials a decade ago, the Flowbee is still manufactured, and if the testimonials are to be believed, still giving great haircuts. But few people are buying them anymore. After a couple of recalls and too many jokes about the product, the Flowbee just isn't selling.
Oddly, the Flowbee reminded me of what Donald Miller said at Catalyst in Atlanta earlier this month. At the pre-conference session, Miller (of Blue Like Jazz and the Campus Confession Booth) pondered the growing consumerism in our society and in our faith. I was prepared for him to deride the consumerist nature of churches, especially megachurches, but I didn't expect this one comment:
We've turned Jesus into a product, and we've become products ourselves. (That's an indirect quote, but it's pretty close to his exact words.)
Our churches are products, he said predictably, and we sell them to church shoppers based of the quality of our programs, the relevance of our preaching, the coolness of our worship, and even the authenticity of our community.
(Louie Giglio's later message on worship echoed this theme, that worship has become a product rather than interpersonal communion with God; we can have superior worship experiences and still be deficient in relationship with God, because it's become all about the worship rather than the One we worship.)
But Miller caught my attention when he said we've turned Jesus into a product - the healer of hurts, the soother of raw feelings, the better-than-a-brother friend. In my part of the world, we'd say he's the WD-40/duct tape combo pack: all you need to fix almost anything. And thus, Jesus has become a product. (Am I guilty of selling Jesus? I wondered, thinking back to my last sermon. Sure, the televangelists with their Scripture key chains and Jesus pins and healing hankies and Protestant holy water are guilty, but am I?)
And Miller stopped me cold when he said we, as believers, have become products.
Is Miller correct? Have we become not trophies of grace, but the by-products of a product-Savior and his product, the church? Are we the fixed, the recalled-and-repaired, the better-than-new, the but-wait-there's-more, and the soon-irrelevant - like so many Flowbees?
I think I don't want to be a product.
But I still need a haircut.
Posted by Eric Reed at October 21, 2005 | Comments (5) | TrackBack
October 17, 2005
Why James MacDonald Is Not Emerging (Part 1)
(James MacDonald is pastor of Harvest Bible Chapel in Rolling Meadows, Illinois, and its several satellite campuses. His preaching is featured on the radio program Walk in the Word. His is another perspective in the postmodern, emergent church dialogue.)
Let me begin with a word of personal appreciation for the current leaders of the emerging church movement. I am deeply grateful for your courage in standing against the many shortcomings of the modern Western church. Thanks for insisting that authenticity in relationship is the foundation of genuine Christian community. Thanks for standing against the formulaic/instant Gospel which fills our churches with tares and insulates the human heart from a genuine transformational encounter with the living Christ. Thanks also for daring to believe that failure is not final and that Christ yet longs for His bride to function with the health and wholeness He created it to enjoy.
In case you are wondering why my gratitude for the leaders of the emerging church does not translate into enthusiasm for their current emphasis and direction let me take a few words to explain why I am not emerging.
1. Because observing the bad is not a credential for guiding us to the good.
Even if every placard-carrying protestor across from the White House has a legitimate complaint they will not soon be invited to cross the street and participate in governing our nation. The hippies of the late sixties told us that the choice to "make love, not war" would go a long way toward solving society's ills. We now know however that free love is a fast track to rampant perversion and escalating victimization of the innocent among us. History is replete with proof that those most articulate about our shortcomings are often least able to bring balanced, objective solutions.
I resonate deeply with much of the criticism flowing from the emerging church against current Western Christianity, but I am deeply grieved to see the emergent remedies accepted so uncritically by those who feel gratified by the accuracy of their critiques. Knowing the soup is bad does not make one a chef. If successful diagnosis was a license to treat the patient every lab technician would be a surgeon . . . scary.
2. Because God is looking for obedience to revealed truth, not just sincerity.
I have had numerous interactions with and time to personally observe several of the key emerging leaders such as Chris Seay, Carol Childress, Dave Travis, Leonard Sweet, Brian McLaren, and Rob Bell. Some I have only spoken with, others I consider to be dear friends, but each that I have been exposed to gives strong evidence that they are sincere and genuinely committed to Jesus Christ. If all that Christ asked of us was a gracious, kind demeanor they would be exemplary indeed; however the Lord is asking for much more.
In John 14:21 Jesus taught "he who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me." We are expected to obey our Master and to accept His Word without equivocation. Cavalier questioning of the explicit statements of Scripture regarding the necessity of the new birth, the priority of biblical proclamation or the binding authority and sufficiency of Scripture cannot build a stronger, more Christ-honoring church no matter how sincere the messengers. Critiquing the church is good; disregarding or diminishing the revealed truth of our Founder is not good, no matter how ?nice' the people are who do it.
3. Because Christ's is a kingdom of substance, not style.
Candles and bells, paintings and sculpture, incense and chanting--great! Let's bring back the best of all those offerings of worship, but let's not confuse style and substance. According to Jesus it's still truth that sets you free, not artistic expression. Wearing suits and ties is certainly not necessary and it can be contrived and unnatural, but wearing jeans and sandals is not a means to the revealed presence of Christ. John 14:21 teaches that obedience to the substance of Christ's teaching brings His "manifest presence," not forms--old or new. In most of these discussions we are simply inserting an ancient-dead form in place of a modern-dead one. The former feels new because it's so ancient, as in "wow, we lit candles and sat in circles at church--that was so powerful." Or wait, was it the form that was powerful or just the broken routine that allowed my heart to worship with fresh sincerity? The renewed, ancient forms of worship are powerful if they are offered in spirit and truth and will become just as worthless as they become routine.
The power of Christ is not experienced in style, but in heart-felt substance and to miss that point is to set the stage for Emerging Church II when our kids get sick of the currently cool. Style is fun and fresh methods can promote sincerity, but the manifest presence of Christ which is the life of the church comes in response to biblical substance from the heart, not surface adjustments which can quickly become an end in themselves.
Coming: Part 2
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 17, 2005 | Comments (32) | TrackBack
October 13, 2005
Should I Rock the House or Preach the Word?
Ben Folds' song "Rock Star" includes these lyrics:
You need their approval
To tell you you're cool
Hey, but look how you pay for it
Give the people what they want
You've got to give the people what they want
Got to give the people what they want
Rock star
I'm a pastor and not a rock star (despite the blurring of those roles in recent years). Still, every time I retreat to the bookstore coffee shop to write another sermon I face the subtle temptation to tickle ears, to preach for approval, to be cool, and give the people what they want.
Next Sunday I have the responsibility to preach on one of the most challenging and disturbing texts in the New Testament. Matthew 7:21-23 has nothing to do with how to have a better marriage, discipline your kids, or any other felt-need people want scratched. It is a bold warning about the "many" who will be turned away from God's kingdom.
My struggle in preparing this message has not come from interpreting the text, or wrestling with theology and doctrine. My struggle comes from seminary instructors, church consultants, ministry books, and other pastors who have told me, explicitly and implicitly, to "always preach positive!" Decades of market research have shown that people don't like being told "thou shall not commit adultery," but rather "marriage is a blessing from God." They are put off by God's "commandments" and would rather ponder his "instructions."
It may be popular to keep things positive, but is it right? Are we handicapped in the pulpit by limiting the breadth of scripture's emotions to the uplifting and happy? A famous English sociologist/nanny taught us that a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. But are we in danger of focusing so much on sugar in the American church that we neglect to add the medicine?
In the end I find myself fleeing from the temptation to people-please with the aid of two convictions. First, I am not ultimately accountable to the people I teach, but to the One in whose name I teach. And secondly, God has not only inspired the content of Scripture, but also the form it takes. Matthew 7:21-23 is a sober warning from Jesus about the danger of missing his kingdom. The form of this passage should also direct the manner in which I teach it. After all, I'm a pastor and not a rock star.
Posted by Skye Jethani at October 13, 2005 | Comments (24) | TrackBack
October 11, 2005
Campolo and McLaren 2: Radio Orthodoxy
Tony Campolo and Brian McLaren are influential among church leaders, although their influence is often from a negative position. Some would say their value is in how many people they make mad. Both men have taken contrarian stances on many topics, from homosexuality to hell. In the second of our four-part interview, Campolo and McLaren discuss the feedback they're getting.
What are you hearing from pastors and leaders who are in the trenches who are reading the kind of things you are writing about?
Campolo: One thing I hear, and I'm sure you do too Brian is, ?I'm so glad you're saying what your saying - I wish I could say it, but I'm afraid to.'
I think we have a huge number of pastors who are scared to speak their convictions because the religious media has created a mindset that if you step out of line you could be out of a church in no time flat. This is what I'm hearing. And I'm hoping we will have more pastors stand up and pay the price of speaking out of their convictions.
McLaren: I often use the term "radio orthodoxy" for this mass consensus that is imposed on most evangelical churches. It doesn't matter what the pastor says on Sunday, if the radio preacher on Monday through Friday says something else. I felt this way for many years as a pastor, and was so thankful for the words of Tony to say things I felt challenged in saying to my own congregation. You see if a pastor speaks up and no one else is saying what he is saying then the pastor looks out to lunch because what the Christian media ultimately says is what's really right. I think this is why Tony and I probably receive such favorable support, because we are creating more than just a monologue within churches and opening up a healthy dialog or conversation for Christians to engage in.
Campolo: Another reason we receive support is, I think we both break the stereotype the "religious right" would like us to have, namely that we aren't interested in leading people to Jesus. You see, most nights I'm out there on the road preaching evangelistic messages, inviting people to come to know Jesus, and give their lives to him. And I know this is important to Brian as well, but this doesn't fit the image of what a social activist is into, but both Brian and I are into a holistic gospel, we are not into neglecting the salvation of the individual even as we talk about the transformation of society.
McLaren: And what you have just said Tony I hope will stir evangelicals up with a little more courage when they realize that there are certain people who want the word "evangelical" to become narrower than it has ever been before.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 11, 2005 | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 9, 2005
Erwin McManus at Catalyst: Formulas Don't Work
The following is from Jennifer Oxford, one of our Leadership team in Atlanta for the Catalyst Conference.
Erwin McManus took stage and continued to expound upon the very clear message of the entire Catalyst event...that it's not about formulas...the church, I mean. That there are no formulas that will enable a church to structurally meet every person's needs. Currently, when a new believer joins a church they are plugged into the structure where the church needs them most. They are discipled and led in ways that make them all look the same. For people outside of the church, who inherently know (and cling to the fact that) we are all unique, the sameness of the church, and the structure that they are potentially being asked to fit into doesn't work.
God made us each with our own passions, desires, visions and gifts. As with any Erwin message I've heard before (which sums a total of three including this one--all of which I have cherished by listening to and sharing the CDs long after the live version) he hits many different topics all in the same vein, and addresses them all singly to culminate in a full circle message.
Erwin underlined the idea that in order for a church to meet the needs of such a diverse group it needs to give up being so structured around what a church "needs" to look like, or the programs it "ought" to have or the formulas that it "should" use. He shared stories of his daughter and son to demonstrate on a small scale how different people in the same family (i.e., body of Christ) have been made. Mia is kind-hearted and filled with mercy; she feels badly if she doesn't kiss and hug every stuffed animal in her bedroom good night, for she might hurt one of their feelings. His son demonstrates a gift of maturity and wisdom beyond his years, in some senses, and has the gift of great foresight, offering his dad reasons why certain actions in his hockey game might not be the best because they "won't matter in 20 years." Erwin also presented some pretty cool film-like videos from the Mosaic team hitting home the message that we need to look outside our safe structures and limit what a Christian looks like (just like ourselves, of course!) in order to be Christ to a hurting world.
Another thing he said really resonated with me. It concerns a world the church has been using quite often lately. It sounds like a good word (probably in the same way the world uses the word "peace" to mean different things that Jesus would mean) but ultimately implies things that we don't really mean to mean. The word is revelant. Erwin said that the church tries too hard to be relevant. He expounded that the word in itself implies that someone else has already arrived or done something; that anyone thereafter must link or join to. Anyone after the first has to also find ways to add on some value to the foundation already built. He said that the church (who has all of the power of Christ, and inherently the ability to do anything in God's will) should never try to be relevant. Instead the church should be setting the curve for the culture to follow. Wouldn't it be great if the church was doing so many great things that the culture took notice and was in hot pursuit to add on to what we were doing? I agree: Jesus was not relevant, he was real, he was revolutionary. He was not connected to anything else, except the Father, and that is what made him so much more than anything that was, or is, relevant.
Next he moved on to the thought that we only have churches that look like ourselves. Whomever we are, we only invite people to join in our lives that look, talk, act like us. One church sought Erwin out saying of their 5,000 all-white members, they didn't know how they could start seeing diversity. He asked them if they had any friends who were of different races. From the blank stares he apparently got, I guessed the answer was no. He offered them the idea that if they only wanted to do church, and not LIFE with peole of other races, then the church they were trying to build was a fake. If they weren't willing to allow diversity into their lives, why would their church be any different?
A final video summed up all of these ideas so well. In fact, I heard people talking about its impact while lunching at Blimpie's afterward. The video featured a rock star who was all consumed with himself and couldn't see others as anything but a way to get things done for himself. (Note: He symbolized the church). He was not truly interested in others except for when he could see their talents as useful to him.
Enter a little girl who told him that he should be nice to others. Without giving away too much of the story (in case you see it), the pop star sees in the little girl a way to become truly selfless and provide for her in a way that only he can (and we know this by the way the video plays out). He is able to serve her with gifts from his heart that he didn't even know he had. Seekers and others who observe the church are not the only ones who will benefit from a church that seeks to use gifts from the heart, rather than formulaic systems as ways to attract and plug people in.
One final note: this conference has been great. I've been very, very pleased with the respect that I see from the attendees for the evangelistic forefathers, while also not being afraid to cast their own visions and chart new waters, and return us to thoughts of simply serving others as a way of doing church, and loving others into Jesus' arms. I love it! And I suspect that Jesus does too.
Jen Oxford
in Atlanta
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 9, 2005 | Comments (4) | TrackBack
October 7, 2005
Theology Is Back
Leadership editor Marshall Shelley offers this report on his conversations with young leaders at Catalyst.
"It's funny. It's like theology is back," said Rusty, who is planting a Methodist church near Auburn University in Alabama. The church is meeting in a skate park, mirror ball on the ceiling and all.
Rusty put his finger on a reality that many at the 2005 Catalyst Conference identified with. Theology and a skate park don't seem like a matched set, but theology is increasingly a subject of great interest to younger leaders, in fact, it's of great interest to younger people in general.
My colleagues Eric and Carol and I were talking with several young leaders about the place of theology in their ministries. Surprisingly, theology isn't something they have to apologize for - it's of great interest to their youthful congregations.
"We're dealing with a new breed of college students coming in with a lot of questions. And they're theological questions," said Rusty. "They're looking not so much for answers, but for discussion, for acknowledgement of the legitimacy of the questions." Questions such as: Where is God? Is a tsunami an act of God? Was Katrina a random consequence of weather patterns or an intentional judgment by God - and if so, what exactly was he judging? Why is my sister dying and I'm not?
These questions are unlike the theological questions of a generation ago (Is the Bible best described as ?human' or ?divine', or by the term ?authoritative,' ?infallible,' or ?inerrant'?) Many of the theological questions a generation ago proved divisive, separating Christians into competing camps.
Today's questions are about understanding the nature and character of God, and how we as human beings stand in relation to this world and where God is in relation to the world.
"Theology is back," agreed Jason, who's planting a church in Florida, "but the theology is on a missional level. Our people want to know God, but they aren't interested in systematizing things. It's more relational. My generation and younger is sick of systematizing. How can you love or relate to a God that you only know in a systematized way?"
Much of God is a mystery - and today's young lay theologians are okay with that. They want to search that and ask the questions, and get to know God along the way.
Marshall Shelley
In Atlanta
Posted by Eric Reed at October 7, 2005 | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Catalyst Dispatch: Andy Stanley on Integrity
(Here's a post from Cory Whitehead, editor of the Building Church Leaders newsletter, one our Leadership guys on site at the Catalyst conference here in Atlanta.)
Integrity. We hear all about it today, or at least the lack thereof. Enron, Martha, fallen church leaders. We hear about the breakdown of integrity constantly, but we don't hear much about the upright, about those that do not and will not compromise their integrity. Those stories usually have to come out in our personal conversations and experiences.
At this year's Catalyst Conference, Andy Stanley spoke about integrity. In 1 Samuel 24:1-4a, David had the perfect opportunity to kill Saul, stop living like a bandit, and take over the leadership of Israel as God had promised. David had the opportunity to put an end to it when, in the only place in the Bible that it speaks of "relieving oneself," Saul enters a cave to do so. Consequently, Saul enters the cave that David and his men are hiding in.
But David didn't take offense. The perfect opportunity to move forward, to make progress, to "follow God's will," but he didn't take it. Why?
He showed tremendous restraint. He decided to wait on God to crown him king, not to take matters into his own hands. He didn't kill the king because, after all, God had a law against killing. He didn't bypass the law and principles of God. And He trusted God's greater wisdom and plan.
We like to take matters into our own hands and to progress. We like to call some opportunities "open doors" in order to make progress. But "open doors" aren't always an invitation from God, said Stanley. Not when they're against God's laws, principles, and wisdom.
Stanley reminded me that I'm not too good at evaluating my circumstances. I get emotional and saturated by my environment. Stanley made a good point, something I need to remember when it looks like the stars are aligning and "God is opening a door." He said "opportunities must be weighed against something other than the uniqueness of the circumstances surrounding them."
We like to make progress, so when something looks, feels, sounds like a God thing, we chalk it up to what? A God thing. But in 1 Samuel 24, David says this to Saul, "May the Lord judge between you and me. And may the Lord avenge the wrongs you have done to me, but my hand will not touch you.
David waits. And through waiting, his situation later turned out better than if he would have been crowned king by means of assassination. Stanley and King David reminded me that the most direct route to what I want is RARELY the best route.
How have I comprised my integrity lately and chalked it up to a God thing? How have I practiced the God-talk, but really I was compromising my integrity by defying the laws, principles, and greater wisdom of God. How have you?
Cory Whitehead
From Atlanta
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 7, 2005 | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Catalytic Conversion
Leadership editor Marshall Shelley reports from Catalyst, a conference for young leaders.
After two days at the 2005 Catalyst Conference in Atlanta, I've picked up the mixed feelings that the emerging generation has about leadership. Even though Catalyst is billed as a conference for "young leaders," the attendees I've talked to don't openly aspire to leadership, at least not "the strong, dominant leader" model.
No one openly and forthrightly says (as I heard young people say 20 years ago), "I want to be a leader." Or "I hope to be a person of great influence someday." Instead, the conferees at Catalyst carefully parse the meaning of the word leadership. The attendees see the importance of good leadership, and everyone appreciates being in a group that's well-led. But when picturing such a group, very few mentally picture an individual leader. The mental image of a group that's well led doesn't have a clear and established leader. In fact, a person who identifies himself or herself as a leader, too openly, is viewed with suspicion and maybe even scorn.
The attitude is reminiscent of "the tall poppy syndrome"
of certain cultures - if anyone rises too much above the level of everyone else, and is deemed to be calling attention to himself, he'll be chopped down.
So why are 8,500 people attending a leadership conference if no one wants to be seen as "the leader" of a group?
"I'm not interested in the position of leader, but the process of leadership," one young man told me. The assumption seems to be that no one is a leader; leadership these days demands more than one person. It's about being on a team. Leadership isn't about exercising individual influence or power, and certainly not control. It's about sharing the vision and the load. It's about team building, drawing out the strengths of everyone involved, and pointing attention anyplace but to yourself. It's an exercise in community.
Maybe this generation has heard those lines about "it's lonely at the top" and decided that leadership, like much of their social life, is something best done in groups.
Marshall Shelley
From Atlanta
To sign up for Catalyst's free enewsletter, click here.
http://www.catalystconference.com/post/register/enewsletter.aspx
Posted by Eric Reed at October 7, 2005 | Comments (5) | TrackBack
October 6, 2005
8,000 Whoopee! cushions
Hello from the Catalyst conference in Atlanta. I just heard a new Guiness World Record set: more than 8,000 people sitting on Whoopee cushions simultaneously. It was explosive!
I am hopeful that the rest of the Catalyst conference will be as exhilerating, if not more substantive. If Andy Stanley's message this morning is any intication, it will be. More on Andy, other speakers, and the whole Catalyst experience later. Editor Marshall Shelley is here. He's taking good notes will share some thoughts. Carol, Cory, Jennifer, and Jesse from our Leadership team are also here. We're giving away 2 free copies of the Journal to the first 1,000 people who visit our booth, and one of them will receive $300 in iTunes.)
Five characteristics of a Catalyst leader:
1. Courageous in calling.
2. Engaged in culture. (Culture is not the enemy, but rather the environment we serve in, says Andy.)
3. Passionate about God.
4. Uncompromising in integrity. (The subject of Andy's message.)
5. Intentional in community.
More later....
Posted by Eric Reed at October 6, 2005 | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 4, 2005
Campolo and McLaren: Prophets or Agitators?
Tony Campolo and Brian McLaren have much in common. They have been hailed and hammered, venerated and vilified. Lately they are said to have an orthodoxy that has become too generous. The pair was interviewed by Keith Matthews, former lead pastor with McLaren at Cedar Ridge Community Church in Cedarville, Maryland, and now a professor of theology at Azusa Pacific University. This is the first of four parts in our blog conversation.
Matthews: How do you both see yourselves - your calling within the evangelical church? Are you prophetic voices, reformers, or just agitators and rebels to the status quo?
McLaren: I think I'm more aware how others see me versus how I see myself in the evangelical world. I think a number of people see me as a problem, but I hear from an awful lot of other people who say they can't stay evangelical with the rising "religious right" identity - they are embarrassed to be associated with a lot of the people that they see on television representing evangelicals, they are embarrassed by the strident language, they are embarrassed by their narrowness, and they are looking for someone who speaks for them, someone like a Tony, or Jim Wallis or myself and say there's at least some alternative.
Campolo: I don't particularly know if we've become prophetic as much as returned to what we used to be, but now, the evangelical community has moved much farther to the right and has left many of us out their stranded - I think that's the best way to describe it.
You know, I basically believe the same stuff I did thirty years ago, but the world has changed and the sense of commitment to the poor and oppressed has taken on a different form.
The evangelical world is doing a great job of picking up the casualties of the political and economic world we live in.
If there are people on the street homeless, or if there is a need to set up a reading program for needy kids, evangelicals are out there doing a great job. But, when you start to think about changing the system evangelicals get very angry, they really want it to stay as it is, and there are many of us that think that the Bible calls upon us not only to minister to the poor and oppressed, and to be the good Samaritan's who pick up the casualties along the road. We think the Bible also calls us to in the words of Ephesians 6: 12 to "wrestle against the principalities and powers, and the rulers of this age," and try to bring about the kind of changes that will move this world a little more in the direction of being the kingdom of God.
Matthews: Given the complexities and changes in our world today are we adequately training future pastors for ministry in a postmodern context?
McLaren: I think that many of our colleges and seminaries are perfectly training people to keep the status quo of the 1950's going, but they are not training them to deal with ministry for the 1980's much less the 21st century. The other piece to this, and I know how hard this is since I'm a pastor, is that having a diverse congregation politically and theologically is very hard. I think it will be a great sign of the kingdom when we in our churches can gather together, under Christ and worship together in spite of our political diversity.
Campolo: My sense is that to be a pastor today is very difficult. It's hard to do a good job with all the expectations pastors face. In the Old Testament there were the priests and the prophets. The priests maintain the congregation, counseled people, preformed weddings and funerals, did everything pastors do today. The prophet came dawn from the hills every so often, and yelled and screamed at everybody and told them of the evils they were purporting on the poor and oppressed, and then retreated back to the hills.
They were two distinct roles. Somehow in the modern church we expect the pastor in a local church to be both the priest and the prophet, and they are conflicting roles. This is quite problematic for pastors, and my sympathy for them is really huge . . .
Matthews: How do we reckon with this in the local church then?
Campolo: Well, if the pastor isn't going to be prophetic, which is quite understandable in the local context, he or she must realize the need for the prophetic voice and not close it off within their congregation. If the pastor isn't going to be prophetic, at least make sure that they hear it from somebody else, maybe in the form of a study group so they can be challenged to think in deeper ways about critical issues.
Pastors don't have to play both roles, but they better make sure tough issues are being discussed somewhere in the church, otherwise their best and brightest people will say, "I'm sorry, this doesn't jive with what Christianity is all about."
The congregation needs to know their pastor is aware of issues that he might not feel comfortable dealing with but that there are voices of other knowledgeable people who can help them traverse the tougher issues from a Christian perspective.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 4, 2005 | Comments (11) | TrackBack
Introducing Url and the Urthlings
Meet the contributors and moderator of Out of Ur.
Url Scaramanga is the facilitator of Out or Ur and an adjunct professor of interdisciplinary pseudonymology at the College of Creative Writing in Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin. He is the son of circus performers but left to pursue ministry. Url nearly earned a seminary degree but was "encouraged to seek another calling" after an unfortunate incident in hermeneutics class involving a pigeon. He retains a keen interest in issues of theology, culture, carnivals, and ministry, and believes blogging is the best use of his gifts for the church.
Dave Gibbons is the pastor of NewSong Church in Irvine, California. NewSong is a multi-ethnic church with locations in Irvine, Los Angeles, Northern Orange County, and Bangkok, Thailand. Gibbons is helping NewSong shift from a megachurch model to a church of smaller congregations called "verges." He first met Url one night in Bangkok.
Collin Hansen is an editor at large for Christianity Today. He is currently a seminary student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School while continuing to report for CT, Out of Ur, and author books. Hanson has also been seen on Fox News regarding issue of faith, politics, and culture. Collin first met Url during a toga party at a Reformed theology conference.
http://bobhyatt.typepad.com/bobblog/Bob Hyatt is lead pastor of the Evergreen Community - a church that meets at two pubs in Portland, Oregon. Apart from planting churches, helping other church planters, and blogging proficiently, Bob also edits the online e-zine, Next-Wave.org. Bob first met Url in Haiti where Bob was facilitating a water-purification project, and where Url was chasing chickens.
Skye Jethani is managing editor of Leadership. He also serves at Blanchard Alliance Church in Wheaton as a teaching pastor, a role he has occupied since 2002 after graduating from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He hold degrees in history and comparative religion, and has spoken and written widely about Christianity and consumerism. Skye first met Url at an ashram near Varanasi, India, where Url served as a short-term missionary/masseuse.
Scot McKnight is the Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies at North Park University in Chicago. Dr. McKnight has written many books and is a recognized authority on the New Testament, early Christianity, and the historical Jesus. He speaks widely and has been featured on television and radio stations across the country. Scot first encountered Url in 1986 while working on his Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham where Url served as sheriff.
Brandon O'Brien is assistant editor of Leadership. He also contributes to BuildingChurchLeaders.com, and has worked on the PreachingToday.com editorial team. His writing has also been featured in USAToday. Brandon has served in pastoral ministry in Arkansas, and carries degrees in Biblical Studies, Christian History, and Literature. He first met Url at The Slug and Lettuce, a pub in Edinburgh, Scotland, although both deny the veracity of the official police report.
Marshall Shelley is editor of Leadership and an editorial vice-president of Christianity Today International. Marshall joined Leadership Journal in 1982 after developing journalistic skills at Cook Publishing Co. and The Denver Post, and after serving as a pastor in his hometown of Denver, Colorado. Marshall met Url while they both served as understudies to Patrick Swayze in a short-lived musical stage production of the film Ghost.
David Swanson is Community Life Pastor at New Community Covenant Church in Chicago's Logan Square neighborhood. Prior to his gig in the big city, David served on staff at a church in an affluent Chicago suburb. He is the son of missionaries and spent his formative years in Costa Rica, Venezuela, and Ecuador. David first met Url in Peru, where Url worked as a Sherpa leading tours of Machu Picchu.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 4, 2005 | Comments (7)
October 1, 2005
Introducing Url and the Urthlings
Meet the contributors and moderator of Out of Ur.
Bob Hyatt is lead pastor of the Evergreen Community—a church that meets at two pubs in Portland, Oregon. Apart from planting churches, helping other church planters, and blogging proficiently, Bob also edits the online e-zine, Next-Wave.org. Bob first met Url in Haiti where Bob was facilitating a water-purification project, and where Url was catching chickens.
Skye Jethani is managing editor of Leadership. He also serves at Blanchard Alliance Church in Wheaton as a teaching pastor, a role he has occupied since 2002 after graduating from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He hold degrees in history and comparative religion, and has spoken and written widely about Christianity and consumerism. Skye first met Url at an ashram near Varanasi, India, where Url served as a short-term missionary/masseuse.
Posted by UrL Scaramanga at October 1, 2005 | Comments (5)
