March 31, 2009

The Dangers of Easter

by Bob Hyatt

As we journey through Lent toward Easter, I want to be mindful of the dangers that surround this season and threaten the soul of a community and the soul of a pastor.

What danger? The temptation to bait and switch.

Every year I need to remind myself that Easter is not a marketing opportunity. The resurrection of the Son of God is not an opportunity to market our programs or build "my" church, even under the guise of concern for lost.

And as I feel the pressure to create a winning, life-changing sermon for those who may only come this one time a year, I especially have to remember: It's not about me. (Please wait a minute while I repeat that to myself a few times.) Why? Because heaven forbid we should ever do community in such a way that communicates that our main avenue for people coming to Christ is hearing the Gospel preached from the mouth of one person, rather than hearing it preached from the mouths (and lives) of the whole community. If, in your community, more people are becoming Christians on Sunday than during the rest of the week, I think you may have a problem.

Times like Easter and Christmas are dangerous for us because we begin to see them as something different from what they really are for the life of a community. This is where a more robust engagement with the Christian calendar really helps. It focuses our communal life on the events of the life of Christ all year around, and keeps us from seeing "two big outreach event Sundays!" every year in Christmas and Easter.

Yes, a lot of people come to a Sunday service once or twice a year, and they are more likely to come on Easter than just about any other time. And yes, the Holy Spirit is amazing, drawing people to Himself even through our goofy Easter pageants and songs (or our smoke machines and laser shows, if that's your thing).

The danger in giving in to the impulse to do something radically different, humongously big and special at these times is what we communicate both to our community and those we are inviting to become a part of our community. What we subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) communicate to our people is that their job is to invite people who are not in our churches to come on Easter Sunday morning so that the pastor and the drama team and the worship guy and (possibly) the Holy Spirit can take a whack at them.

I know that's overstating, but believe me - I've been there. And that's what "event evangelism" and "big" Sundays communicate, I think. Regardless of what we teach about reaching out to others, what we say through our Sunday Show actions communicates that it's not the job of the average person to introduce people to Jesus. Leave it to the pros with the degrees and the training and the gifts.

In other words, "You get ?em to church, we'll get ?em to Jesus!" How empowering is that for people?

I would much prefer we both explicitly and implicitly communicate a model that includes befriending people; enfolding them into the rhythms of our lives; sharing the highs and lows (and how our faith informs those) with them; and integrating them into home groups, dinner times, and the big and small events of our lives. How natural would it be after all that love and enfolding that they become a part of our community, even before they believe? And when they believe, they believe because they've seen and tested the reality of a life of faith, as opposed to simply watching a special Sunday morning service where the band rocks extra hard and the pastor has a few more funny stories than normal.

Easter is dangerous because it's here that the attractional model reaches its zenith - or maybe its nadir - every year, as thousands of churches try to do "something special" in the hopes that their people will invite others to come and be bait-n-switched into a relationship with Jesus. And we all see what other communities do and are tempted to compete in the misguided effort to keep up.

Yes, I said "bait-n-switch," because that's what it is. If we're not careful, we could end up really disappointing some people. How? By "offering" them less on subsequent visits. Less pizzazz, less oomph. I'd be pretty disappointed if I got Cirque Du Soleil the first time I went to your church and the next week I got Phil and Ted's Bargain Circus.

I was super impressed to see another church planter dial it down a couple of years ago after hearing about the disappointment of some people who came to Easter services one year and came back the next week to a completely different (and less exciting) show.

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying we shouldn't take advantage of increased visitor attendance and preach the Gospel and hope that God does something amazing in people's lives. I'm just saying that if your strategy is to wait for someone to wander within range of your homiletical canon and then fire on them in hopes of scoring a hit, or worse yet, doing some cool things in the hopes that they might be lured within range, then I think there's a better way. Less defined, less able to be controlled by the pastors, less likely to be bragged about at pastor's conferences or to be written about in a book, but better - people loving people into your community and into relationship with Jesus.

It doesn't take mailers, banners, lightshows, and lasers every week; just a bunch of loving, welcoming Christ followers. People who genuinely care. People who are seeking relationships with other people and sharing life with them. A competent all-community gathering where things work well, so as not to be a distraction from what God wants to do that morning, sure. But less of a focus on Sunday mornings as the center of community and more of a focus on the spiritually-forming life of the community that revolves around Jesus Himself.

And all of this is vital for us to think through at Easter because I remain convinced that what we win people with, we win them to.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 31, 2009 | Comments (4) | TrackBack

March 27, 2009

The Wrong Boogeyman (Part 1)

by Skye Jethani

Two weeks ago the American Religious Identification Survey [ARIS] released its findings and announced that "secular" Americans now account for 15 percent of the population. That is up from 8 percent in 1990 and just 2 percent in 1962. Among the young the trend is even higher. Only 25 percent of people between 21 and 45 years old regularly attend church.

Who is responsible for this dramatic downturn in commitment to church attendance? According to some church leaders it's the government.

In a blog post from March 19, Al Mohler discusses an article in The Wall Street Journal by W. Bradford Wilcox who believes "the expansion of the government sector to offer cradle-to-grave social services contributes to the secularization of society." According to Wilcox as people become increasingly dependent on government programs for their daily bread, they become less dependent upon the church.

Mr. Wilcox, a professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, warns:

"A successful Obama revolution providing cradle-to-career education and cradle-to-grave health care would reduce the odds that Americans would turn to their local religious congregations and fellow believers for economic, social, emotional and spiritual aid."

Wilcox recognizes that many people engage religious institutions for reasons other than material aid, but then reminds his readers that "many of those who initially turn to religious organizations for mutual aid end up developing a faith that is as supernatural as it is material. But first they need to enter the door." Mohler shares this viewpoint saying that Wilcox's article "is not only an article that should be read, but an argument that must be heard."

Am I the only one who finds this line of reasoning dubious? Are we to believe that the number of secular Americans has nearly doubled in the last 18 years because of liberal government programs? The argument becomes even more incongruous when we remember that conservatives ran the Congress for 12 of those years and the White House for 10. And are we supposed to oppose health care reform and better schools because healthier, more educated Americans may be less likely to attend a worship service?

Government has always been a popular boogeyman for cultural crusaders, but this is downright bizarre. What if the exodus of young people from the church isn't the government's fault but ours? And what if the solution isn't opposing a certain political agenda, but working harder at building relational trust with the young adults in our churches, families, and neighborhoods?

It's time to stop blaming the big bad liberal wolf for the church's collapse, and start recognizing that we carry responsibility for building our houses out of hay and sticks.

In part two of the post, Jethani addresses the notion that the increase in the number of single adults is to blame for declining church attendance.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 27, 2009 | Comments (26) | TrackBack

March 25, 2009

Ur Video: Frank Viola on Community

This video comes from Lance Ford, one of our partners over at Shapevine.com. After Frank Viola's opening impression of Dirty Harry, he talks about the nature of Christian community. How important is proximity and frequency to fostering real community? And does a house/organic church structure foster healthier community than a more institutional model? Of course Viola struck a nerve last year with his book Pagan Christianity. A review of his follow up, From Eternity to Here, will be posted on Ur in the coming days.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 25, 2009 | Comments (2) | TrackBack

March 24, 2009

The Poetry of Pastoring

by Scot McKnight

"What the congregation needs is not a strategist to help them form another plan for achieving a desired image of life, but a poet who looks beneath even the desperation to recover the mystery of what it means to be made in God's image." So says pastor-professor, and poet, M. Craig Barnes, in his new book: The Pastor As Minor Poet: Texts and Subtexts in the Ministerial Life (Eerdmans, 2009).

Wisdom needs to be the name of the pastoral game. Wisdom finds its way into the poetic (not as in rhyming and verse), and not enough of us are committed to a life intent on wisdom. I wish more pastors (and Christians) were committed more to wisdom than to success.

How can the pastor get beyond the ordinary, the routine, the boring, the mundane, and the concrete realities that (sometimes, often) numb the joy out of life? What perspective can the pastor find that leads behind and beneath and beyond?

If this is what you are wondering, this is the book for you. The prose is graceful, the thoughts emerge from experience, and the perspective as fresh as it is old: the wisdom of the poet.

"When an exhausted pastor is entertaining serious thoughts about applying to law school, it's usually not because the theology failed. Often it's because somewhere along the way it became impossible to make sense of that theology in the midst of the ordinary and relentless messiness of congregational life" (18).

Barnes distinguishes truth (the deeper issues) and reality, and sees reality as a portal into the truth. President Lyndon Johnson was a realist; Martin Luther King Jr. was the poet.

When the pastor is poet, she (or he) looks for the portal of reality to peer deeper into life - into the soul of it all. Most pastors are "minor" poets and not "major" poets. They unveil particular truths to particular people in particular places. The major poets are the Biblical authors, and in a lesser degree, the greats of the Christian tradition.

In a not very elegant, and clearly not condescending, manner, Barnes describes the pastoral task as being the poet to the un-poetic. The task is to bid the parishioner to search for the mysteries beneath the surface of the ordinary.

But the poet must delve deeply into his own soul, and here he refers to pathos and gravitas. Gravitas "refers to a soul that has developed enough spiritual mass to be attractive, like gravity. It makes the soul appear old, but gravitas has nothing to do with age" (49). Scars make the pastor's soul attractive. He reveals that the "fishbowl" factor is small potatoes; the real issue is having "spiritual visibility" (53).

The first half of this book is the theoretical "what is a poet-pastor?" part; the second half is about the craft of being poetic, and here he focuses on preaching.

Poets don't make arguments, they reveal mysteries. I like that. I hope you do.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 24, 2009 | Comments (11) | TrackBack

March 23, 2009

Ur Cartoon: Servant Leadership

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 23, 2009 | Comments (3) | TrackBack

March 19, 2009

Ur Video: Is Drinking a Sin?

Earlier this week Brandon O'Brien wrote about the new debate among clergy over alcohol. Even if we believe the Bible permits consumption, what does wisdom tell us? Should pastors drink as an expression of Christian liberty, or should we refrain for the sake of the weaker brother/sister? This video from Frontline, the young adult ministry at McLean Bible Church, highlights the dilemma.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 19, 2009 | Comments (71) | TrackBack

March 17, 2009

Trouble Brewing

by Brandon O'Brien

In the upcoming issue of Leadership (in print mid April), we'll hear from a number of pastors - including Craig Gross, John Burke, and Matt Russell - who are committed to taking the gospel to people with addictions.

We're also featuring a couple of articles about how pastors can and should deal with their own addictions.

One article I suspect will get people talking is Eric Reed's report on clergy alcohol use. Here's a preview: Some younger pastors in traditionally teetotalling denominations are beginning to view bans on alcohol use as out of date. Is their so-called liberty in Christ simply an excuse for bad behavior? Or are the old timers adding laws to the gospel?

Mark Driscoll has thought the issue through (probably because the Pacific Northwest has more breweries than people) and argues that responsible alcohol use is thoroughly biblical.

John Piper disagrees. "I choose to oppose the carnage of alcohol abuse by boycotting the product. Is it really so prudish to renounce a highway killer, a home destroyer, and a business wrecker?"

No, I suppose not. But others see the issue as less cut-and-dried. More on that in April.

Our twin concerns of alcohol and addiction come together in a new online resource from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Rethinking Drinking is an interaction diagnostic tool that helps users determine whether they have a drinking problem. It presents lots of useful information in plain language and with pictures and graphs - information about the signs of alcohol abuse, resources for help, and even a "pros and cons" chart to help you decide whether to change your drinking habits. So if you're an imbiber, check it out here.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 17, 2009 | Comments (42) | TrackBack

March 16, 2009

Cartoon: Love, Theologically

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 16, 2009 | Comments (5) | TrackBack

March 12, 2009

Mark Galli Weighs in on Evangelical Demise

Senior managing editor of our sister publication, Christianity Today, posted a response to iMonk's prophecies about the end of evangelicalism on the CT website Wednesday afternoon. Here's the first bit. You can read the rest there.

The Internet is abuzz with the latest prognostications about "the coming evangelical collapse." This is the substance of three blog posts over at Internet Monk (a.k.a. Michael Spencer), who predicts said collapse in ten years. When his thoughts got picked up and condensed by the Christian Science Monitor and then the Drudge Report - well, you can just imagine the electronic excitement.

The title of Spencer's posts spoils the ending; still, many of the details are interesting. I've made many of the same observations in this column. For example, Spencer writes, "Expect evangelicalism as a whole to look more and more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth-oriented megachurches that have defined success. The determination to follow in the methodological steps of numerically successful churches will be greater than ever. The result will be, in the main, a departure from doctrine to more and more emphasis on relevance, motivation and personal success." My only caveat here is to wonder if this is a future or present reality.

Finish here.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 12, 2009 | Comments (6) | TrackBack

March 10, 2009

Goodbye, Evangelicalism

by Brandon O'Brien

In the last 24 hours, USA Today and The Christian Science Monitor have both released less than cheery articles on the future of faith in America.

"The percentage of people who call themselves in some way Christian has dropped more than 11% in a generation," reports Cathy Lynn Grossman of USA Today. "The faithful have scattered out of their traditional bases: The Bible Belt is less Baptist. The Rust Belt is less Catholic. And everywhere, more people are exploring spiritual frontiers - or falling off the faith map completely."

The American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) found that, "despite growth and immigration that has added nearly 50 million adults to the U.S. population, almost all religious denominations have lost ground since the first ARIS survey in 1990."

That means that religious people are not simply being redistributed from one religion or denomination to another, but that more and more people are abandoning all faith altogether.

According to ARIS findings, "So many Americans claim no religion at all (15%, up from 8% in 1990), that this category now outranks every other major U.S. religious group except Catholics and Baptists." (You can read the rest here.

Bleak news, perhaps. But not as bleak, or specific, as Michael Spencer's observations at The Christian Science Monitor. Spencer argues, "We are on the verge - within 10 years - of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity. This breakdown will follow the deterioration of the mainline Protestant world and it will fundamentally alter the religious and cultural environment in the West."

Spencer's predictions do not end with the fate of evangelicalism. He sees antagonistic political postures and declining public support of evangelical Christianity on the horizon. "This collapse will herald the arrival of an anti-Christian chapter of the post-Christian West," he writes. "Intolerance of Christianity will rise to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes, and public policy will become hostile toward evangelical Christianity, seeing it as the opponent of the common good."

According to Spencer, the result will be that "evangelicalism [will] look more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth oriented megachurches that have defined success."

Spencer may show his cards when he prophesies the hope for the church's future: "We can rejoice that in the ruins, new forms of Christian vitality and ministry will be born. I expect to see a vital and growing house church movement. This cannot help but be good for an evangelicalism that has made buildings, numbers, and paid staff its drugs for half a century." (Read the rest here.)

Together these articles raise interesting questions. Is the decline of religious adherence in the U.S. a sign of the death of evangelicalism? Or is it an opportunity for the gospel? From where you stand, do you see evangelical Christianity on course to certain demise, or is there hope for maintaining the movement in its current form? What needs to change? What must we preserve? Remember, keep it short and keep it civil.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 10, 2009 | Comments (45) | TrackBack

March 6, 2009

The Hansen Report: Suburban Church Slump?

by Collin Hansen

What if your city never recovers from the current economic crisis? What if your entire region enters an irreversible long-term decline? Richard Florida dares to declare the downturn's winners and losers in his March cover story for The Atlantic. In his essay "How the Crash Will Reshape America," Florida incorporates insight from his 2002 book, The Rise of the Creative Class.

Not surprising for anyone familiar with his earlier work, Florida believes that the big winners will be those burgeoning cities that have attracted a diverse class of sophisticated young professionals. So even though New York City has shed thousands of finance jobs, Florida believes the city's young talent will innovate and adapt. Detroit and other Rust Belt cities are unlikely to bounce back, even if the population loss is more like a slow bleed than a mass exodus.

But Florida doesn't just assess the economic effects on different regions of the country. He also observes how economic change will rearrange the relationship between cities, suburbs, and small towns. As I discussed last month, the brain drain in rural areas is making them a new mission field. Florida has little sympathy, because innovation depends on the best and brightest congregating together in dense, fast-paced cities. But Florida reserves his harshest analysis for the suburbs, the heartland of evangelical church growth in recent decades. He recommends that the federal government retract the tax incentives to homeownership that propelled suburban sprawl. In a post-industrial economy, Florida argues, the workforce cannot be tied down to mortgages. Mobility is the engine of competitive capitalism. In the megalopolis, Florida trusts.

"The world's 40 largest mega-regions, which are home to some 18 percent of the world's population, produce two-thirds of global economic output and nearly 9 in 10 new patented innovations," Florida notes.

There is cause for celebration and concern in Florida's analysis. On the one hand, evangelicals know how to accommodate new trends. When the suburbs started to sprawl, evangelicals built megachurches. When the American population shifted south and west, churches sprouted up in the desert. Yet cities are another matter. Since the massive immigration waves of the 1800s, cities have given evangelicals fits. High-profile exceptions only prove the rule that evangelicals prefer small towns and the suburbs. In Florida's estimation, the creative class thrives in cities with technology, talent, and tolerance. As commonly defined today, tolerance will frustrate anyone who subscribes to an authority higher than popular opinion. But if Florida is correct, evangelicals forsake the cities at the expense of gospel expansion. Besides, the changing mores even in suburbs and small towns testify to the growing influence of cities as culture shapers.

Thankfully, exceptions such as Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan provide evangelicals with models of faithful urban ministry. The challenge of bringing the gospel to the creative class will continue to attract some of the brightest young Christian leaders. They will be energized by Florida's vision of "a more concentrated geography, one that allows more people to mix more freely and interact more efficiently in a discrete number of dense, innovative mega-regions and creative cities." If Florida is correct about how innovation happens, then urban church planters and lay leaders rubbing shoulders will result in new ideas for reaching the city.

The same factors that stimulate innovation just might result in closer Christian community in cities than suburban residents have experienced. In the suburbs, large homes and the accompanying value of anonymity make meaningful relationships more difficult to come by. This challenge hinders both evangelism and fellowship. But the urban values of diversity and individuality don't give city churches the option of size over depth. Here, too, the new urban challenges invigorate a younger generation that recognizes the need for theological depth and close-knit community.

Yet for all of Florida's insight about economic development, he seems to misunderstand human nature. In his assessment, people are valuable merely for what they contribute. While they may enjoy the stimulating community of fellow culture creators, their motives and rewards are financial. He doesn't seem to account for the attraction to suburbs: low crime, good schools, and stable housing. He seems not to care why people will trade standard of living for quality of life in small towns. At their best, small town residents value every member of the community and come to one another's aid when needed. Indeed, this assurance survives any economic meltdown.

Nor does Florida understand the human cost of mobility. Economic vitality may rely on a fast-paced lifestyle of risk and reward. But the creative class of one generation gives way to the next when they burn out and seek refuge in the suburbs. Just ask city pastors. This is the problem they struggle to solve. Turnover gives urban churches wide national influence. Ironically, it also undermines local community. So the very bonds of fellowship that attract young people to urban churches in the first place eventually dissolve when members lose their resolve to stay in the city. As an economist, Florida doesn't propose to solve this problem. But before evangelicals get too excited about urban opportunities, they must.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 6, 2009 | Comments (7) | TrackBack

March 3, 2009

Urban Exile: Whose History?

by David Swanson

I've been to a lot of potlucks. Growing up in church and being a pastor has meant many, many casseroles and Jell-O salads. After a recent preaching gig at a suburban church, I was treated to an entirely different version of the potluck: fried chicken, ribs, spaghetti, and kimchi-stuffed dumplings. Not a casserole or gelatin-inspired food product to be seen. The menu perfectly reflected the ethnically diverse congregation of students, families, and retired folks.

Contrast these eclectic culinary delights with the weeklong theology class I took earlier this year. The professor provided an overview of church history that hit all the high points: canon, creeds, schism, reformation, awakening, evangelicalism, and so on. Curiously, there was no mention Christianity's early spread to Africa and India and not a word about the faith's new center in the global south. In the past, both church and neighborhood reinforced this mostly European perspective on history. Of course I knew about the Middle-Eastern roots of and some of the global influences on Christianity, but didn't most of the important stuff happen to guys with vaguely European-sounding names? History and tradition through a Western lens made sense when I lived and worshiped with people whose great-great-grandparents came from Germany, England, and Sweden.

This description of church history is no longer adequate. My neighbor's names are mostly Hispanic, and the people I worship with have roots all over the world. Calvin and Luther still matter, but the predominance of European and majority-American historical facts and figures seem odd in a diverse community of people with little contact to this history. Dave Gibbons wrote on Out of Ur about America's rapidly changing demographics, changes that are leading to minority-majority cultures. He asks whether these developments have "affected the leadership of our denominations, businesses, churches, and non-profits." To his questions I would add another: In light of this rapidly shifting culture, are we willing to acknowledge and celebrate the vast diversity of our history and heritage?

In Disciples of All Nations, Yale professor Lamin Sanneh documents the hospitality of ancient Christianity to the diverse cultures through which it was transmitted. "Paul was determined that for those new Christians who were brought up as Hellenistic pagans, even the notion of adopting the lifestyle of very good, devout, observant Jewish believers should be rejected." It was critical to Paul that faith in Jesus be rooted within the cultures and traditions of the newly converted. "The gospel was not just about religion as ?the Way,' or as ?ethnic dressing' so that followers and adherents could parade in borrowed garb?but religion as a personal, faith-filled fellowship with God." The early church had to reject culturally irrelevant traditions in order to transmit the faith across cultures.

Some of us are keenly aware of the tensions that arise while transmitting the faith. A Korean congregation must decide how to reach the second and third generation who mostly speak English. A denomination that baptizes infants is faced with Hispanic congregations who embrace believer's baptism. A mostly White suburban church wonders how to respond to new minority residents who've been displaced from the city by gentrification. Paul's rejection of cultural monopoly seems downright impractical in these situations. Wouldn't it be simpler for new converts, new immigrants, and new generations to adapt to our established traditions?

The Western church has often chosen such simplicity, which has prompted the newly converted to ask difficult questions. Sanneh, an immigrant from Gambia, writes, "Africans asked whether apostolic witness required civilization as an alibi, and whether it was credible for the West to claim to be exclusive host of the things of God? Should John Calvin and John Wesley be the litmus test of Christian conversion?" These types of questions were not only asked on the 19th century African continent; today they are voiced by missiologists, church planters and youth pastors. Christian's on the leading edge of the church's advance face the most dissonance with accepted Christian history and tradition. Calvin and Wesley will always have a place in the Church's story, but are there not thinkers and saints who more genuinely relate to our increasingly minority-majority culture?

Born in Liberia in 1860, William Wad? Harris is one such overlooked figure. Harris was converted after an encounter with the angel Gabriel in which he was charged to preach the gospel and baptize African converts. Traveling throughout the Ivory Coast, this indigenous prophet resembled an African John the Baptist, "with a long graying beard, a flowing white robe with broad sleeves, sandals, and a white turban." According to Sanneh, "The unadorned bamboo cross in his right and the Bible in his left hand were symbols of hope and renewal." Less than two years after his ministry began, Harris was arrested by the French and banished from the Ivory Coast. The French were understandably nervous: in that short time 200,000 Africans converted to a Christianity that was independent of colonialism. While European missionaries lamented the snail's pace of their progress, Harris could not find enough churches for those who heeded his Gospel call.

With grievous results, the Western church has often chosen cultural hegemony over indigenous expressions of Christianity, even when the fruit of these expressions was unmistakable. "Converts were torn from their roots in their own society to wilt in an alien missionary environment," writes Sanneh. "They once had a home. Now, thanks to Christianity, they had none." It is no longer only the foreign missionary who faces these realities; as Gibbons points out these are now questions for our suburban and city churches. How will congregations respond to new immigrants, shifting demographics, and a generation influenced by post modernity?

I hope we welcome the changes brought by those of different cultures and histories. The church is a growing body made up of Believers with diverse traditions, worldviews, and artistic expressions; not a static reserve for theology and worship. Those of us who are used to comforting traditions and controlled worship are reticent to release control. Difficult though it may be, this is the vision of God's coming Kingdom, when all peoples and histories are enfolded into the reign of the world's Savior. Put another way, once you've feasted on fried chicken and kimchi-dumplings it's impossible to be satisfied with casserole and Jell-O.

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 3, 2009 | Comments (18) | TrackBack

March 2, 2009

Ur Wisdom: Missional

Posted by UrL Scaramanga at March 2, 2009 | Comments (9) | TrackBack