November 30, 2006

Out of Context: John Beukema

"Ultimately, every text is about God. To focus constantly on the how can subtly influence our perspective of Scripture. For example, the awe-inspiring scene from Isaiah 6:1-4 should probably not become a sermon on 'How to Meet with God.'"

-John Beukema is pastor of King Street Church in Chambersburg, Pennsylvania
Taken from "When Sermons Are too How-to" in the Fall 2006 issue of Leadership journal. To see the quote IN context, you'll need to see the print version of Leadership. To subscribe, click on the cover of Leadership on this page.

Posted by UrL at November 30, 2006 | Comments (4) | TrackBack

November 28, 2006

Picking up the Pieces

In the old nursery rhyme “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men” tried to put Humpty Dumpty back together again. Likewise, when a pastor falls, a great amount of energy can be poured into the leader’s restoration. But what about the fallen leader’s church? In the wake of the Ted Haggard story we’ve invited Dave Terpstra, pastor at The Next Level Church in Denver, to share his reflections on leading a church after the fall of a gifted pastor.

What should a church do after the fallout of a disgraced leader’s resignation? That was the question our team faced almost 6 years ago when our senior pastor resigned after the revelation of a disqualifying pattern of sin in his life. After the shock began to fade and reality began to set in, we sat around and asked ourselves, “What next?”

After the fall of a primary senior leader, it is the junior leaders of the church who are left holding the bag. Sometimes, in churches with a smaller staff, it is lay people who are left to lead the church. The fall of a primary leader requires the best leadership that a church can muster, and for most churches that sort of leadership usually came from the person who fell.

Thankfully, when we found ourselves in this situation a group of mature and experienced church leaders offered their support and advice to those of us left. It was their words of encouragement that allowed me to discover the one thing I believe every church needs after its leader has fallen—a team of leaders who focus on themselves before they focus on the church.

At the time our senior pastor resigned, I was 25 years old and still a full-time student at Denver Seminary. I had just bought a house and was getting ready to settle into a comfortable junior position at the church. I had no experience in the senior levels of church leadership. But in spite of my youth and inexperience I was invited to replace our senior pastor as the primary teacher on our new leadership team.

I have no intention of trying to argue that under our team’s new leadership our church has been “successful”. But I believe that two things are true. Our church has survived the fall of our charismatic founding pastor and I believe we have been faithful along the way. And I attribute that to God’s faithfulness to us, and the primacy we as a leadership team placed on our own self leadership.

When thrust into this situation, a leader faces enormous challenges. The church’s phone rings off the hook, the mailbox is full, perhaps the media calls, and everyone’s email inbox is full of forwarded emails. People want to know what really happened. Rumors fly. And I can attest that all of these things are 100 times worse if the senior pastor does not publicly confess and own up to what they did.

So in the midst of this madness the leadership team must lead themselves first, before they can even try to lead others. Let me be specific with what areas they need to begin with:

1. As a team and as individuals leaders need to honestly wrestle with doubts and together slowly rebuild trust in God. At the same time leaders must grapple with belief in the church and in the role of pastor/elder in that church. This experience at the very least rocks our faith, but in some cases will shatter it all together.

2. As a team leaders must pledge to each other your total dependence on the plurality of your church’s leadership. Since this event will cause an overwhelming lack of trust among the church in any one leader, it is essential that you commit to each other as a team.

3. Each leader must personally commit themselves to a level of vulnerability and honesty that makes them uncomfortable. It doesn’t do the church any good to begin a leadership-wide witch hunt. However, in an environment where vulnerability and honesty was clearly not part of the ethos, each leader must themselves initiate a new level of candor in their conversations with those they trust.

4. As a team each member must commit to checking their ego at the door. The reality is that each of us who are left holding the bag will have the same temptations experienced by the person who handed it to us. “After all,” we tell ourselves, “if they were hiding this major sin and God used them to build a huge church, how much more could God use me, someone who isn’t hiding a major pattern of sin?” It seems silly now as I write it, but it didn’t seem as silly when I first thought it 6 years ago.

If the leadership gurus of the world tell us that it is the job of a leader to define reality, then after the fall of a senior leader, the most important reality that must be defined is our own. What do we believe about God, the church, each other, honesty and ourselves?

I do not envy anyone who has to walk this road. But if this is the place you find yourself, walk faithfully. Lead yourself before you try and lead others. And remember the words of the Lord to Paul: "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness."

Posted by UrL at November 28, 2006 | Comments (11) | TrackBack

November 22, 2006

Who Will Save Thanksgiving?

Wal-Mart announced this week they will return the word "Christmas" to their seasonal greetings. Good move, especially given their faithful hick-hop constituency. No more generic salutations that so many of us carped about last year, when many merchants dropped Christ from his own holy day so as not to offend non-believers.

We still have a way to go. The nearby nursery is advertising "Holiday Trees" and the local school is staging a "Winter Pageant" with small children singing, "We wish you a Merry Sparkle Season!" But before we restart the campaign to reChristianize Christmas, would someone please save Thanksgiving?

I thought we had made some progress a couple of years ago when retailer Macy's repented of renaming their annual streetside festival "The Macy's Day Parade," abandoning thanks altogether. But now, it seems to me the beachhead is slipping. This year the radio station in my city that plays wall-to-wall Christmas music plugged in Rudolph earlier than ever. The station manager saw two snowflakes outside his office window at 10 a.m. on November 2 and by noon had switched the format to 24-hour Christmas tunes. True story. Chalk one up for Santa. And the advertising department.

We're losing Thanksgiving.

I don't mean to sound like Chicken Little (or Turkey Lurkey?), but the one day set aside to contemplate our blessings and their divine origin has, in one generation, been reduced to a football orgy and now, for football widows, a jumpstart on the biggest shopping day of the year as more stores open on the sacred Thursday.

In years past, I have always looked forward to the annual recitation of things we're thankful for, both around my own table and in the public discourse. Chicago Tribune columnist Joan Beck captured it so well with her annual and often alliterative Thanksgiving prayer:

"Our Father's God to Thee, author of Liberty, we thank you for fathers and founding fathers and father figures, for the Internet if we can figure it out and interactive TV if we can manage it, for sundaes and Saturdays and TGIF, for DNA and AZT and CD-ROM, for a port in the storm and a bridge over trouble, for cocoa after caroling and dawn after dark, for healing after hurt and rest after work, and blessed promise of life after life forevermore" (from her 1994 column).

But dear Joan Beck is dead. Santa is seizing November. And Pilgrims, once champions of religious freedom, are being sacrificed as bigots on the altar of political correctness. So who's calling us all to give thanks now?

The pastor of an Atlanta church told us that Thanksgiving was becoming for them the new seeker's holiday. They found that people curious about faith would attend thanks-themed worship services with their believing friends. For seekers, Thanksgiving is a less demanding holiday than Christmas, which requires belief in the improbable (a Virgin birth?), or Easter, with its claims to exclusivity (must Christ be the only Way?). Everyone has something to be thankful for, and most people recognize that something beyond themselves must be credited with their blessings.

A Kansas City church we know holds a day-long prayer vigil at Thanksgiving, inviting people to bring family and friends to the sanctuary to give voice to their gratitude. And they do. In droves.

And there are the congregations in every city where families skip their own dinners to serve the hungry and homeless in packed-out fellowship halls.

But are these exceptions in a thankless society? In times of disaster or famine or war, people are more likely to turn their searching faces heavenward. As we mop up after disasters, however, and as war (God forbid) becomes routine, will people respond to the call to thanks? The Civil War was two years old when Abraham Lincoln issued his national call for a Thanksgiving day. His admonition still applies:

"The year that is drawing towards its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God.

"In the midst of a civil war of unequalled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign States to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere except in the theatre of military conflict; while that theatre has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union. …

"No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy. …

"I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the Almighty Hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility and Union."

If thanks could help save the Union, can we now save the holiday it inspired?

Posted by Eric Reed at November 22, 2006 | Comments (5) | TrackBack

November 20, 2006

Burned by Branding

Believe it or not, not everyone loves Starbucks. The Wall Street Journal’s Janet Adamy has written about the growing resistance the Seattle-based coffee cartel is facing in many communities. The issue—Starbucks ignores local culture in favor of maintaining its brand-identity.

The already omnipresent Starbucks has plans to triple its locations worldwide to 40,000, but Adamy says the plan has alarmed some communities. “The proliferation of [Starbucks] stores has prompted a small number of cities to block it from opening out of concern the chain will erode the local character.”

I’ve attended a number of conferences and read many reports in recent years about the popular multi-site church model. Invariably these sources will reference Starbucks as an example for churches who wish to establish themselves in multiple communities. But what should the church be learning from the rising anti-Starbucks sentiment?

During my first year of church ministry the two more experienced pastors on staff took me to “the Oracle.” The old man lived in a bungalow not far from our church. I entered the house rather nervously. The 60’s era furniture was covered in plastic, and every horizontal surface I could see was stacked with books. The Oracle looked to be in his 70’s, he was unshaven, his trousers held to his belly by suspenders. He wore only a tight-fitting undershirt (popularly called a “wife-beater” thanks to the TV show “COPS”).

The Oracle (aka, church consultant) sat in his recliner studying our numbers. He had requested detailed records of our church attendance, service schedule, and giving trends. He wanted nothing else. We sat in nervous silence waiting for the wise man to speak. After a few minutes of the old man saying “Hmmm,” “Ahhh,” and clearing his phlegm, he finally spoke. Without taking his eyes off the papers he started to tell a story.
“A few weeks ago I had a leaky pipe in the kitchen. Nasty things, leaky pipes. We used to have a very nice little hardware store up the street. It was small, but it was all we had. It’s gone now.” I looked at the two older pastors that had brought me here. Is this guy nuts? I asked with my eyes. Why have we come to an old man with dementia for advice about our church? The Oracle kept talking.

“So, I got in my car and went to the new place. They built a new Home Depot not far from here. You know the one. It’s orange. You can’t miss it. Sure enough, Home Depot had the part I needed. They have every part anyone could ever need.” He paused for a moment, then started up again. “I like to drive,” he said. Oh no, I thought, he’s lost it.

“I drive all over the place. And you know what? There are Home Depots everywhere. And they always look the same. Orange. I say to my wife, ‘Look another Home Depot’ and she laughs at me. And when you go inside they are the same too. The plumbing aisle is always the plumbing aisle.”

The Oracle finally put the papers down and looked at us. “You need to become Home Depot,” he said very seriously. I felt like Luke Skywalker in Yoda’s hut. I wanted to check behind the old man’s chair to see if Frank Oz was controlling him.

The consultant went on to say the era of small churches was ending. The future was in mega franchised churches. The most important element, the Oracle said, was “brand identity.” No matter where your church locations are, they must all be the same. Like Home Depot, or McDonalds, or Starbucks, people must know exactly what they are going to get from your church in any location.

That was my introduction to multi-site ministry.

But the Oracle didn’t have the clairvoyance to see what Starbucks is now facing. Its strategy of vigorous brand management is no longer working. In fact, the coffee giant is now learning from the little guys’ play book. New Starbucks stores are opening that do not reflect its well-established corporate identity. They are trying to personalize their stores to resemble local cafés that fit in with the community. One Starbucks in Denver has even abandoned the green mermaid logo of the brand.

The lesson—people don’t necessarily want to be connected to a massive corporate identity. An increasing number want to identify with local, accessible, and human-scaled institutions. My own experience affirms this. I am writing this post in a local coffee shop. At 8am there is not an empty table in the house. This is where community happens in my town. Directly across the street is a Starbucks. That store sees a steady stream of people pass through to get their morning fix. But the tables are empty. It isn’t a place people gather, converse, or write blog posts.

What is the church to learn? That's what the comment section is for, but I’ll start with this thought. If the church is to be merely a dispenser of spiritual goods and advice, a place people pass through to get their religion fix, then we should follow the example of brand-driven corporate giants. But, if we hope to form meaningful communities of Christ-followers we shouldn’t neglect the power of being local. Rather than reading the latest branding book, why not gather mature leaders and listen for the Holy Spirit? How is he advising us to be the community of Christ in this unique place at this unique time?

Posted by Skye Jethani at November 20, 2006 | Comments (45) | TrackBack

November 17, 2006

Out of Context: Ivy Beckwith

"Just look at church websites. How many of them have this picture of a perfect family with a blue sky background. They all look so nice in their polo shirts, and the kids all have straight teeth. It's all just so lovely."

-Ivy Beckwith is a minister to children and families at the Congregational Church of New Canaan, Connecticut.
Taken from "Family Portraits" in the Fall 2006 issue of Leadership journal. To see the quote IN context, you'll need to see the print version of Leadership. To subscribe, click on the cover of Leadership on this page.

Posted by UrL at November 17, 2006 | Comments (8) | TrackBack

November 16, 2006

Does Ministry Fuel Addictive Behavior?

In a recent issue of Leadership, Sally Morgenthaler shared the story of her husband’s sexual addiction that resulted in a felony conviction and years in prison. Through that painful experience, Morgenthaler came to see how pastoral ministry can actually contribute to the addictive behaviors that destroy many pastors and their families. Here is an excerpt from her article.

Religious culture has a hard time with pastors and pastor's families who have flaws. Thousands of pastors serve congregations that, despite rhetoric to the contrary, expect their leaders to maintain (at least for public viewing) near-perfect marriages, near-perfect families, and near-perfect lives.

Granted, certain kinds of church attendees are attracted to "bad-boy" clergy: those who tell and re-tell their stories of wild living, knowing that they will draw certain kinds of people simply because they have lived life on the edge. When a pastor is vulnerable for the right reasons, not just to entertain the masses, but to humbly demonstrate the power of the gospel, it is a positive step.

But let's not be fooled into thinking that "having a past" gives a pastor permission to be human in the present. More than a few congregations function with this unspoken proviso: "Pastor, we love the fact that you've walked on the wild side. It makes you fun to listen to. You're down-to-earth, we're not afraid to bring our neighbors. But your past is just that: the past." Even former bad boys get stuck living on pedestals at altitudes inhospitable for anyone less than angelic.

And it is not only congregations that build pedestals. Many pastors paint unrealistic pictures of themselves. This kind of leader carefully crafts a leadership icon, rather than presenting his God-given, multi-faceted self. This kind of leader sets himself up for failure. The heat of congregational stress, or simply the wear and tear of the mundane, will wear through the veneer to what is really there.

Image building is a dangerous game. And it's at the core of addictive behavior. Addictive family systems are built on image, from the practice of keeping secrets (the "no-talk" rule), looking good to the community at all costs, to living a double life. If a pastor comes into the ministry with an addictive family background or has otherwise developed addictive tendencies, a congregational system that requires him to uphold an impossible, squeaky-clean image is going to function like a match to gasoline.

Whenever pastors try to hide behind this patina, the chances of latent addictive behavior escalating is extremely high. The more impossibly perfect the pastoral image, the greater the need to engage in taboo behavior.

Getting what they owe me
A large percentage of pastors enter the ministry because they want to give people what God wants them to have. However, there is a dark side: when a pastor gauges this primarily by the admiration and esteem he receives in return. To the congregation, he intimates: "I will overwork to emotional and physical exhaustion; I will deplete myself and my family; I will be everything you expect me to be if you give me the requisite status, appreciation, and financial compensation in return."

This unwritten contract is often the people-pleasing pastor's demise. The reason is simple: no pastor can fulfill all of a congregation's expectations. Congregations by their very nature are filled with sinful, unrealistic, needy people who will take whatever the pastor gives and still keep coming back for more. When these people in positions of power begin doling out helpings of criticism instead of admiration, the unwritten contract is broken. The pastor begins to simmer in a potent marinade of entitlement.

At this juncture any addictive behavior begins to look really good. After everything he's done for his congregation, the people-pleasing pastor gives in to the feeling that he more-than-deserves the little piece of pleasure he's beginning to nurse on the side. Co-dependency has its price, and it isn't cheap. When a pastor gets tired of giving and not getting back, he'll find some way to make up the difference. It is only a matter of when.

Unrealized dreams of success
For over two decades, the entrepreneurial, multi-programmed church has been altering what people expect out of a church, and the concept of the church leader has also changed. Pastors must be visionaries, risk-takers, and innovators, as well as spiritual guides. They are expected to be top-of-the-heap speakers as well, their stage skills honed to the highest cultural standards.

Realistically, very few pastors are cut out for this kind of leadership. The average pastor may be at his best as teacher, coach, or theological guide. He might shine as a catalyst: a convener of collaborative vision and process; a facilitator of deep community. If he tends toward the empathetic and intuitive, he may excel as a nurturer, counselor, wound-dresser, or heart-holder. But he is not megachurch material.

Tragically, some of these so-called misfits will turn to an addiction, an escape out of what they see as a no-win proposition: become someone else, fit the mold, or fail. Instead of pushing back on leadership stereotypes that have long deserved questioning; instead of focusing on their strengths and becoming who God crafted them to be, they cave in.

Addiction, whatever the substance or behavior, then becomes a welcome oblivion, especially to those who have visited that oblivion before.

Posted by UrL at November 16, 2006 | Comments (22) | TrackBack

November 14, 2006

Protecting the Pastor's Soul

The phenomenon of celebrity pastors in the American church cuts two ways. When a mega-pastor succeeds everyone buys their book, attends their seminar, and emulates their strategy. And when a mega-pastor falls we all look into our own souls for evidence of similar frailty. Although the Ted Haggard story has been all but forgotten by the popular media since the election, there are many church leaders still reeling from the revelations. In this post we highlight insights from other blogs about how pastors can guard their souls from the self-destructive power of immorality.

Professor Scot McKnight address how the environment created by evangelicalism contributes to pastors hiding their sins, and the importance of developing the discipline of confession:

In evangelicalism, and the charismatic stream in which Ted Haggard swims, sin is bad and sin by leaders is real bad. This leads to a complex of features that creates a serious problem.

1. Christians, and not just pastors, do not feel free to disclose sins to anyone.

2. Christians, including pastors, sin and sin all the time.

3. Christians, including pastors, in evangelicalism do not have a mechanism of confession.

4. Christians and pastors, because of the environment of condemnation of sin and the absence of a mechanism of confession, bottle up their sins, hide their sins, and create around themselves an apparent purity and a reality of unconfessed/unadmitted sin.

5. When Christians do confess, and it is often only after getting caught, they are eaten alive by fellow evangelicals — thus leading some to deeper levels of secrecy and deceit.

Read more of Scot McKnight’s post.

Pastor of Mars Hill Church, Mark Driscoll, outlines the precautions he takes to avoid compromising situations with women in his church:

Pastors should have their office at the church and their study at home. There is no reason a pastor should be sitting alone at the church at odd hours (e.g., early morning and late evening) to study when anyone can drop in for any reason and have access to him. Instead, a pastor should come into the office for scheduled meetings and work from home on tasks such as emails, planning, studying, sermon preparation, etc. I spend the vast majority of my time working from home. Some years ago when I did not, I found that lonely people, some of them hurting single moms wanting a strong man to speak into their life, would show up to hang out and catch time with me. It was shortly thereafter that I brought my books home and purchased a laptop and cell phone so that I was not tied to the church office.

Read more of Mark Driscoll’s post.

Finally, Jenell Paris shares about the five sex scandals she’s witnessed in the seven evangelical churches she’s been a part of. This pattern, she says, is more than coincidence:

Their abuse was allowed to continue, in part, because of evangelical practice. We expect our leaders to be morally superior to the masses, and in order to preserve our expectation, we believe this to be so. We often allow pastors privacy in travel, expenses, and other arenas that we wouldn’t allow to others. We often believe men in positions of power more than we believe the women and children who cry out against them. We prevent women from becoming true peers and colleagues to men, and so inhibit the formation of checks and balances that draw on the strengths of all people.

Read more of Jenell Paris’ post.

Posted by UrL at November 14, 2006 | Comments (14) | TrackBack

November 10, 2006

The Poet of Ur: "The Liar’s Lament"

A reflection on the assassins within us all.

Daniel Haase, a professor at Wheaton College, is a frequent visitor to Ur. The last time he shared one of his poems with us it was after a heated conversation on the blog that turned ugly. Haase has composed another poem in the wake of the Ted Haggard scandal.

After reading Gordon MacDonald’s recent post about Ted Haggard, I have been reminded how knit together and effected we are by the actions of others. As John Donne puts it, “No man is an island.” This in turn has led to a reflection on my own actions and the “assassins” I allow within my heart and mind. What follows is a poem that has been written as a prayer of lamentation. I hope it might lead to a prayerful reflection of our own darkened corners and hidden places.

The Liar’s Lament

Sabbath.
Stillness.

I am sitting in a chair attempting prayer.

The assassins within make their way to the rooftops of my mind.

Anger is camouflaged in kindness.
They position themselves in the bushes of my conscious.
Impatience wears a smile and is dressed as a gardener.

Fear roams the street; he is carrying a newspaper –
Headline reads: EXECUTION IMMINENT

A shot rings out from the bushes.
A flash of light from the rooftop.

What was quiet has turned so loud.
I rise out of the chair.

Am I a dead man walking?

Posted by UrL at November 10, 2006 | Comments (19) | TrackBack

November 9, 2006

Out of Context: Ken Fong

"The nuclear family is not God's most important institution on earth. It is not the social agent that most significantly forms the character of Christians."

-Ken Fong is pastor of Evergreen Baptist Church of Los Angeles in Rosemead, California
Taken from "Our Faith Village Family" in the Fall 2006 issue of Leadership journal. To see the quote IN context, you'll need to see the print version of Leadership. To subscribe, click on the cover of Leadership on this page.

Posted by UrL at November 9, 2006 | Comments (14) | TrackBack

November 8, 2006

Signs of a Restorable Spirit

What are the tangible evidences of repentance?

In the wake of serious moral failure, church leaders are quickly asked about “restoration.” What does a person have to do to be deemed worthy of reinstatement as a church leader?

In many ways, the question is premature, like asking a toddler to decide on a college major. Too much has to happen, too many decisions along the way have to be made, a new direction of life has to be established before it’s even appropriate to weigh the possibilities of restoration.

And yet, the process is important. A direction does need to be pointed toward.

Author Chris Maxwell quotes one fallen minister:

“When a pastor commits a moral sin, the magnitude of that sin is so great that is has the capabilities of destroying the calling itself, the ministry, the man, his marriage, his family, his legacy and the community where that moral failure took place. In disgrace, humiliation, heartbreak and nearly being tarred and feathered, one man did that and was thrown out of town. I was that man.

“I needed to lay aside ministry and regroup. In reality I was a man without a ministry, a church and an income. Not a nice place to be. The transition from the religious/spiritual world to the secular/non-religious world was not difficult. It was the secular world that brought out innate skills that ultimately would make me a better man – if only I could survive the eight-year ordeal of getting my life back on track. It’s called Restoration.

“During this eight-year wilderness journey, there were six individuals who were used by God to be part of His restoration process. My life now of 69 years is a valid example of the concept that even though we humans ‘miss the mark’: God uses people, not the religious institution to restore us back into His favor. This process is called God’s grace” (from Changing My Mind by Chris Maxwell).

This man’s test, the apt root of the word testimony, prompts some key questions. During this hiatus from ministry, what are the issues that need to be dealt with by the group that oversees the fallen brother? What are the evidences that repentance is taking place and that grace is having its intended effect? Here are five evidences I’d look for before ever considering any restoration to ministry leadership:

1. Is he rebuilding the broken trust with his wife and children? His marriage vows and his relationships at home were clearly damaged. What progress has he made to restore the damage at home that his actions caused?

2. Has the sin been confessed in a way that shows he understands the deeper issues involved? Confession is not simply “I’ve done something wrong.” It’s an awareness of both the depth of the damage done AND the depth of the sin embedded in his soul. Any healing will involve a sharper clarity of the motivations, drives, and character issues at work.

3. Has he taken clear and specific steps to address the deficits in spiritual, relational, and emotional health? Without identifying, confessing, and correcting the root causes of his behavior, no change can be lasting.

4. Has he willingly relinquished his claim to position, privilege, and power? Any sense that “I’m doing what you’ve told me to do; now when can I get back into leadership?” is a red flag.

5. Has enough time passed that it’s clear that his life has taken a new direction, that repentance (the “turning”) is lasting, and that the soul and relationships have been cleansed?

What other evidences would you be looking for?

Posted by Marshall Shelley at November 8, 2006 | Comments (39) | TrackBack

November 5, 2006

The Haggard Truth

What are Christian leaders to make of the spectacularly painful experience of watching Ted Haggard this past week? The president of the National Association of Evangelicals and pastor of giga-church New Life Community in Colorado Springs, Colorado, gradually admitted to purchasing methamphetamines and the services of a male prostitute. We asked Leadership editor-at-large Gordon MacDonald to reflect on what we should learn from this episode.

It is difficult beyond description to watch Ted Haggard’s name and face dragged across the TV screen every hour on the news shows. But as my friend, Tony Campolo said in an interview last week, when we spend our lives seizing the microphone to speak to the world of our opinions and judgments, we should not surprised when the system redirects its spotlight to us, justly or unjustly, in our bad moments.

We are still in the process of learning what has actually transpired over the past many months on the secret side of Ted’s life. In just the last few hours the leadership of New Life Church has announced that he has been asked to resign. His ministry at New Life Church and as leader of the NAE is over.

I’ve spent more than a little time trying to understand how and why some men/women in all kinds of leadership get themselves into trouble whether the issues be moral, financial, or the abuse of power and ego. I am no stranger to failure and public humiliation. From those terrible moments of twenty years ago in my own life I have come to believe that there is a deeper person in many of us who is not unlike an assassin.

This deeper person (like a contentious board member) can be the source of attitudes and behaviors we normally stand against in our conscious being. But it seeks to destroy us and masses energies that—unrestrained—tempt us to do the very things we “believe against.” If you have been burned as deeply as I (and my loved ones) have, you never live a day without remembering that there is something within that, left unguarded, will go on the rampage. Wallace Hamilton once wrote, “Within each of us there is a herd of wild horses all wanting to run loose.”

It seems to me that when people become leaders of outsized organizations and movements, when they become famous and their opinions are constantly sought by the media, we ought to begin to become cautious. The very drive that propels some leaders toward extraordinary levels of achievement is a drive that often keeps expanding even after reasonable goals and objectives have been achieved. Like a river that breaks its levy, that drive often strays into areas of excitement and risk that can be dangerous and destructive. Sometimes the drive appears to be unstoppable. This seems to have been the experience of the Older Testament David and his wandering eyes, Uzziah in his boredom, and Solomon with his insatiable hunger for wealth, wives and horses. They seem to have been questing—addictively?—for more thrills or trying to meet deeper personal needs, and the normal ways that satisfy most people became inadequate for them.

When I see a leader who becomes stubborn and rigid, who becomes increasingly less compassionate toward his adversaries, increasingly tyrannical in his own organization, who rouses anger and arrogance in others, I wonder if he is not generating all of this heat because he is trying so hard to say “no” to something surging deep within his own soul. Are his words and deeds not so much directed against an enemy “out there” as they are against a much more cunning enemy within his own soul. More than once I have visited with pastors who have spent hours immersed in pornography and then gone on to preach their most “spirit-filled” sermons against immorality a day or two later. It’s a disconnect that boggles the rational mind.

No amount of accountability seems to be adequate to contain a person living with such inner conflict. Neither can it contain a person who needs continuous adrenalin highs to trump the highs of yesterday. Maybe this is one of the geniuses of Jesus: he knew when to stop, how to refuse the cocktail of privilege, fame and applause that distorts one’s ability to think wisely and to master self.

More than once we’ve seen the truth of a person’s life come out, not all at once, but in a series of disclosures, each an admission of further culpability which had been denied just a day or two before. Perhaps inability to tell the full truth is a sign that one is actually lying to himself and cannot face the full truth of the behavior in his own soul.

But then all sin begins with lies told to oneself. The cardinal lies of a failed leader? I give and give and give in this position; I deserve special privileges—perhaps even the privilege of living above the rules. Or, I have enough charm and enough smooth words that I can talk anything (even my innocence) into reality. Or, so much of my life is lived above the line of holiness that I can be excused this one little faux pas. Or, I have done so much for these people; now it’s their time to do something for me—like forgiving me and giving a second chance.

I am heart-broken for Ted Haggard and his wife and family. I cannot imagine the torture they are living through at this very moment. Toppled from national esteem and regard in a matter of hours, they must adjust to wondering who their real friends are now. They have to be asking how these events—known by the world—will affect their children. Mrs. Haggard will not be able to go the local WalMart without wondering who she may bump into when she turns into Aisle 3 (A reporter? A church member? A critic?). Both Haggards will face cameras every time they emerge from their home in the next few days until the media finds another person with whom to have its sport.

The travel, the connections, the interviews, the applause of the congregation, the organizational power, the perks and privileges, the honor: gone! The introit to people of position/power: gone! The opportunity to say an influential word each day into the lives of teachable younger people: gone! The certainty that God has anointed one for such a time as this: gone? And what will grow each day is the numbing realization of regret and loss. In time they will be approached by people who will say in one way or another, “I used to trust you, but what you’ve done has made me very angry….you’ve turned my son away from the gospel….I thought I knew you, but I guess I didn’t.” It will be a long time before either of the Haggards feel safe again. Suffering over this will last most of a lifetime even after some sort of restoration is rendered. How I wish this could all be lifted from them.

Perhaps there will come a day down the pathway when there will be some kind of return to influence. But right now it is—or should be—a long way in the distance.

Among my prayers is that the leadership of New Life Church will not assume that “restoration” means getting Ted back into the pulpit as soon as possible. The worst thing in the world would be to raise his hopes that just because he models a contrite spirit he can return to public life in the near future. He, for his own sake, must take a long time to work through the causative factors in this situation. He will not resolve whatever is wrong in his own soul by going back to work. He and his wife must set aside a long, long time to allow their personal relationship to heal. Forgiveness is a long healing, not a momentary one. And there are those five children. Thinking of them makes me want to weep. And then there are countless people in and beyond their church who must take a long time to figure out what all of this means. No, the worst things Ted’s friends and overseers can do is to try and bring him back from this prematurely. The best thing they can do is ask him to retreat into silence with those he loves the most and listen—to God, to trusted elders.

The statement issued by the NAE Executive Committee late Friday afternoon seems flat to me. It appears to have been written by savvy PR people who wanted to say all the nice and appropriate things which might mollify the media and cause no heartburn for the lawyers. The burden of the statement seems to be that the NAE is already on to the question of who the next leader will be. The fact is that, all too often, we have seen the President of NAE on the news and talk shows speaking as the leader of so-called 33 million evangelicals. I’m not sure that most of us were polled as to whether or not we wanted Ted Haggard (or anyone) speaking for us. I know that last time I felt safe about anyone speaking for evangelicals as a whole was when Billy Graham talked on our behalf. But, as of late, an illusion was permitted to grow: that the NAE was a well-organized, highly networked movement of American evangelicals headed by Ted Haggard who, when he spoke, spoke for all of us. Now, unfortunately, that voice has misspoken, and our movement has to live with the consequences.

I have a fairly poor batting average when it comes to predicting the future. But my own sense is that the NAE (as we know it) will probably not recover from this awful moment. Should it? Leaders of various NAE constituencies are likely to believe that their fortunes are better served by new and fresher alliances.

Ever since the beginning of the Bush administration, I have worried over the tendency of certain Evangelical personalities to go public every time they visited the White House or had a phone conference with an administration official. I know it has wonderful fund-raising capabilities. And I know the temptation to ego-expansion when one feels that he has the ear of the President. But the result is that we are now part of an evangelical movement that is greatly compromised….identified in the eyes of the public as deep in the hip pockets of the Republican party and administration. My own belief? Our movement has been used. There are hints that the movement—once cobbled together by Billy Graham and Harold Ockenga—is beginning to fragment because it is more identified by a political agenda that seems to be failing and less identified by a commitment to Jesus and his kingdom.

Like it or not, we are pictured as those who support war, torture, and a go-it-alone (bullying) posture in international relationships. Any of us who travel internationally have tasted the global hostility toward our government and the suspicion that our President’s policies reflect the real tenets of Evangelical faith. And I might add that there is considerable disillusionment on the part of many of our Christian brothers/sisters in other countries who are mystified as to where American evangelicals are in all of this. Our movement may have its Supreme Court appointments, but it may also have compromised its historic center of Biblical faith. Is it time to let the larger public know that some larger-than-life evangelical personalities with radio and TV shows do not speak for all of us?

And so I pray: Lord and Father, how sad you must be when you see the most powerful and the weakest of your children fall prey to the energy of sin and evil. There is nothing any one has ever done that we –each of us—is not capable of doing. So when we pray for our brother, Ted Haggard, we pray not out of pity or self-righteousness but with a humble spirit because we stand with him on level ground before the cross. Father, give this man and his wife the gift of your grace. Protect them from the constant accusations of the evil one who will seek to deny them sleep, tempt them to talk too much to the public, arouse conflict between them as a couple and with their children. Send the right people into their lives who can provide the correct mixture of hope and healing love. Deliver them from people who will curry their favor by telling them things they should not hear. Restrain them from making poor judgments in their most fearful moments.

Lord, be present to the leaders and people of the New Life Church. And to the NAE leadership which has to live with the side-effects of this tragedy. And to people in the evangelical tradition who are wondering today who they can trust. What more can we pray for? You know all things. We so very little. Amen.

Posted by UrL at November 5, 2006 | Comments (136) | TrackBack

November 3, 2006

Out of Context: J. I. Packer

"There's no sense that people need to be born again. There's no sense that Christians are different altogether at root level from non-Christians in society."

-J. I. Packer is the Professor of Theology at Regent College in Vancouver, B.C. and the author of Knowing God (IVP, 1973)
Taken from "God's Triple Team" in the Fall 2006 issue of Leadership Journal. To see the quote IN context, you'll need to see the print version of Leadership. To subscribe, click on the cover of Leadership on this page.

Posted by UrL at November 3, 2006 | Comments (10) | TrackBack

November 1, 2006

The Body Politic

Our of Ur�s best faith & politics posts from 2006

Last night I received an automated phone call warning that the Democrat running for Congress in my district wants to take my house and give it to illegal immigrants. I’ve received similarly ridiculous calls about the Republican candidate—apparently he wants to ban Dr. Seuss from the public schools. With mid-term elections just a week away, and the rhetoric speeding toward absurdity, we thought this would be a good time for a more intelligent political discussion. Here are some of the most popular posts from the last year about the intersection of faith, politics, and ministry.

From: Kingdom Confusion: Is the quest for political power destroying the church?
by Greg Boyd
I believe a significant segment of American evangelicalism is guilty of nationalistic and political idolatry. To a frightful degree, I think, evangelicals fuse the kingdom of God with a preferred version of the kingdom of the world (whether it’s our national interests, a particular form of government, a particular political program, or so on). Rather than focusing our understanding of God’s kingdom on the person of Jesus — who, incidentally, never allowed himself to get pulled into the political disputes of his day — I believe many of us American evangelicals have allowed our understanding of the kingdom of God to be polluted with political ideals, agendas, and issues. Read more.

From: Kingdom Confusion 2: The danger of believing in a Christian America
by Greg Boyd
The myth of America as a Christian nation, with the church as its guardian, has been, and continues to be, damaging both to the church and to the advancement of God’s kingdom.

Among other things, this nationalistic myth blinds us to the way in which our most basic and most cherished cultural assumptions are diametrically opposed to the kingdom way of life taught by Jesus and his disciples. Read more.

From: Reaching the Liberal Next Door: Are conservative politics a barrier to the gospel?
by Wes Haddaway
Two years ago our church was growing at the rate of about a hundred people per year and we were all very excited about what God was doing. As the pastor responsible for evangelism and assimilation, I had a unique perspective. One night after visiting a family that was new to our church, it occurred to me that no matter what walk of life a person came from to our church, there was one thing that I could be sure of; they had all watched the O’Reilly Factor on Fox News within the last week. They all voted for the same candidates and had conservative social views. Read more.

From: Is Emergent the New Christian Left? Tony Jones responds to the critics
by Tony Jones
If the mainstream media is a harbinger, then I'd say that recent columns by Gary Wills and Andrew Sullivan show that a tipping point is just around the corner. Jesus really wasn't a Democrat or a Republican, and he won't be domesticated by political agendas. I do, however, believe that he will inhabit the robust and respectful dialogue about ideas that matter. Read more.

From: Preventing the End of the World: A pastor's perspective on the Clinton Global Initiative Conference
by Gordon MacDonald
I know, all too well, that Bill Clinton is a polarizing name among many Christians. My association with him over these years has lost me any number of friends. Personally, I grew to love him and greatly care for him in the years that I served as a personal adviser. I recall many conversations we had about his post-presidency and the priorities for this period of his life. Since leaving office he has used his amazing ability to convince people of wealth to see their social responsibilities. Read more.

Posted by UrL at November 1, 2006 | Comments (7) | TrackBack