April 10, 2008

Live from Shift: Mark Yaconelli Podcast

Yesterday morning we recapped Mark Yaconelli's talk from the first day of Shift 2008. Thanks to those of you who have left comments on this post, along with the reviews of the sessions with Brian McLaren and Shane Claiborne. During his session Mark spoke passionately and with a good dose of humor about some of the unglamorous aspects of serving in student ministries. And one point he bemoaned watching the "good youth groups" at summer camp walking around with their Bibles while his students were "lighting marijuana cigarettes and sneaking off to the bushes."

Leading up to this conference the Shift organizers posted a number of podcast interviews with some of the folks who are speaking this week. Yesterday, immediately following his session, we got Mark Yaconelli in the studio to ask some follow-up questions. Take a listen.

Posted by UrL at April 10, 2008 | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 9, 2008

Live from Shift: Broken Ministry

The second session at Shift began with a plea from Bo Boshers, the Executive Director of Youth Ministries for the Willow Creek Association. He shared that a survey of this conference’s attendees showed that 67% of the youth leaders and students are not being mentored. “Folks, we’ve got to get this one right!” he said. It seems that the need for one-on-one relationships in youth ministry is one of the shifts the conference organizers are concerned with.

Mark Yaconelli, who just finished speaking, pointed out another major shift he believes must happen. Through a wide-ranging talk Mark kept coming back to his theme of emptiness and brokenness. Given the many resources, curriculum, and programs available at the conference, it was almost ironic to hear Mark tell youth pastors, "You don’t need anything. You need less. You can come to a conference and get so overwhelmed that you forget you already have everything you need. Your love of your kids and your desire to love God is enough."

UPDATE. Here are some video highlights from this session.

Mark began his session by reading Luke 5:1-11. He pointed out that Jesus’ first would-be disciple only had empty boats and their time to offer. Mark contrasted this passage with a fictional story of a youth pastor who decides to put on an event for his youth group on Cinco de Mayo called “Cinco de Jesus.” As he humorously described this frantic leader making preparations and inviting students to the event, it was evident from the audience’s laughter that they understood this scenario. The guy behind me muttered, “I’ve been there,” when Mark finished his story by saying that only two kids showed up to this spectacular event.

It is the tension between the desire to do big things and the reality of our brokenness that Mark kept returning to. Youth leaders first enter the ministry because they desire to serve as spiritual guides to students. According to Mark, the demands of church ministry quickly can distract from that initial simple calling.

The calling gets switched when you get into a church. The calling was to be a spiritual guide, a spiritual leader. Which feels different than what the church and families are asking us to do. To be a spiritual guide you have to spend time in the Spirit, and when we spend time in the Spirit we realize God is asking us to be broken- to be free of our own plans and agendas.

Has this been the case for you? Does your initial calling into ministry seem different than what you actually spend your time on? Do you agree with Mark that your calling is primarily to be a spiritual guide?

It was clear from this session that Mark does not think a large youth ministry is the same as a successful youth ministry. In fact, ministry that is small and challenging may actually be what God has in mind for a leader.

What if our youth ministry is our spiritual discipline? All our weaknesses are exposed in youth ministry. Thank God for those kids who are bringing out those things that are unhealed in us, the broken things. Without them you might think you didn’t need God, that you didn’t need to pray.

While I love what Mark is getting at, I wonder how it would “work” in a local church. Let’s hear from you. Is it possible to have a youth ministry that regularly allows room for brokenness and emptiness? How grateful are you for the types of weaknesses that are exposed in you because of your ministry? Finally, are you able to take a regular Sabbath break that might allow for an awareness of the brokenness Mark described as essential for ministry?

Posted by UrL at April 9, 2008 | Comments (10) | TrackBack

March 2, 2007

The False Gospel of Impact

How can a church leader keep their soul rooted in Christ and still keep pace with their ministry? The next issue of Leadership, due in mailboxes in April, will focus on that question. Phil Vischer may seem like an unlikely person to address the darker corners of a pastors’ souls, but his new book, Me, Myself, and Bob: A True Story about God, Dreams, and Talking Vegetables (Nelson, 2007), wrestles with questions every church leader should be asking.

In 2000, Phil Vischer was running the largest animation studio between the coasts, had revolutionized Christian family entertainment by selling thirty million Veggie Tales videos, and was named one of the top ten people to watch in worldwide religion. Vischer’s vegetable empire, better known as Big Idea Productions, seemed poised to become a Christian Disney.

But by 2003 the dream was over. After a heartbreaking court decision, later overturned on appeal, Big Idea declared bankruptcy and Vischer had to sell the company’s assets, including his computer animated characters Bob the Tomato and Larry the Cucumber. We spoke with him recently about his life after Big Idea, and how God has transformed his understanding of ministry.

In the book you talk about growing up in evangelicalism. How did that shape your sense of mission when you started Big Idea?
In college I heard a sermon in chapel about knowing God’s will. It was given by a former mathematician. He said that if God’s will is not clear we should use the test of spiritual expediency. Which of the two choices in front of me will impact more lives? That one is God’s will. My evangelical upbringing said more impact is better. It’s better to be Bill Bright than Mother Teresa. Better to impact millions at once than one at a time. God has given us limited time and resources and we have to help as many people as possible—not just two or three. Mother Teresa should have franchised a system for feeding the poor on a massive scale. She needed an MBA.

When did that perspective begin to change?
Near the end we were selling a gazillion [Veggie Tales] videos and I was getting four hundred fan letters a day, but one day I was reading my Bible and I came across the verse that lists the fruit of the Spirit. It occurred to me that none of those things were present in my life. It didn’t say the fruit of the Spirit is impact, large numbers, or selling lots of videos. I realized something was not right.

I began asking, how am I supposed to live? I thought I had that figured out, but evidently I was completely wrong. So over three months I went through all of Paul’s letters and wrote down every directive or instructive statement he made. And when I read all of those statements it became clear that the gospel I had was a sham. It was more the gospel of Benjamin Franklin than the gospel of Jesus Christ. It was more about self-improvement, and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, and going out and changing the world. It was American cultural values masquerading as the words of Christ.

What is your understanding of success now?
Now I understand God has a unique journey for each of us with unique measures of success. Now I ask myself, have I done what God has asked me to do? Am I walking with him daily? Success has very little to do with where I end up. I don’t know exactly why, but we seem wired to look for numerical results for affirmation. But success in ministry cannot be about measurable impact.

What advice do you have for church leaders? How can we keep our souls healthy?
I think we all have to start with a good self-assessment. That is what I did when I was sitting in the wreckage of my world-changing ministry reading the fruit of the Spirit and not finding it in my life. We should have peace. We should have joy. And that doesn’t mean we should force ourselves to have it, because we can’t. It will come from us when we’ve let go of our life, when we’ve let go of our ministry, when we’ve let go of any aspiration for having an impact. When it’s just us and God we’ll find the joy and the peace. Then, we can get back to work and help other people follow that path.

You can read more of the interview with Phil Vischer in the spring issue of Leadership.

Posted by UrL at March 2, 2007 | Comments (16)

January 23, 2007

Introducing 'Gifted for Leadership'

For all you women out there, I’m thrilled to announce the launch of Gifted for Leadership. It’s a new resource designed specifically for Christian women who are capable, called, and gifted leaders. Unfortunately, many Christian women in leadership feel alone in their calling. They need a place where they can converse about the issues they face, encourage one another, and challenge each other. They want something different from the women’s ministry resources and events that discuss issues unique to women. They want tools that visit topics that are not unique to women, but that approach them from a woman’s perspective.

That’s why we’re producing a blog, a free monthly e-mail newsletter (you can sign up at the blog), and—coming soon—a collection of downloadable booklets. These tools will equip, encourage, challenge, and unite women who exercise leadership gifts in church and parachurch ministry, in business, and at home. They’ll also build a community of women with leadership gifts who can challenge and support one another and grow together.

Like Out of Ur, "Gifted for Leadership" is a resource of Christianity Today International, produced in partnership with the editors of Leadership journal. I’m very excited to launch this blog and to tell you about our Gifted for Leadership philosophy:

We believe that people who have the spiritual gift of leadership are called to lead, not for their own benefit, but for the sake of nurturing the body of Christ. Women with leadership gifts, as with all gifts, are obligated to use those gifts in the ways and the places God has called them to. We are committed to speaking with these values:

Biblical truth—We always look at leadership issues through a biblical lens.

Reality—We are realistic about the issues, struggles, challenges, opportunities, and joys women leaders face.

Honesty—We are committed to addressing reality with honesty and without apology.

Redemption—We express ourselves without bitterness. When speaking from personal pain, we point to hope and

Healing—even if our healing process is incomplete. This is not a forum for mere arguments or expressions of personal anguish.

Love—We care about women in leadership and want to make personal connections with them.

Equipping—We help women get better, and more confident, in what they do.

Encouragement—We want women to feel good about the gifts God has given them, and we help them see how they can use those gifts. We love and root for the church and its people.

Challenge—We challenge women to use their leadership gifts, pursue spiritual growth, and think deeply.

Unity—We help women rise above the arguments and judgments about where they should lead. Instead, we agree that we are all obligated to use our gifts in the ways God has called us to do so.

If you’re committed to these values, please join this conversation. Let’s encourage each other to use the gifts God has given us.

Amy Simpson is Executive Editor of Resources at Christianity Today International.

Posted by UrL at January 23, 2007 | Comments (6)

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

October 5, 2006

Catalytic Conversations 2: Rednecks, sovereignty, natural selection, and injustice.

Leadership editor Marshall Shelley is in Atlanta this week for the Catalyst Conference, where almost 10,000 mostly younger leaders of churches are meeting to discuss ministry in today’s culture. Here’s his second report.

Today was the conference’s first full day, and in addition to a solid lineup of speakers (Andy Stanley, Marcus Buckingham, George Barna, John Maxwell, and Gary Haugen), the hit of the day, at least for me since my momma was raised in the hills of eastern Tennessee, was the surprise appearance of comedian Jeff Foxworthy (“If you put your TV that works on top of your TV that doesn’t work, you may be a redneck”).

Foxworthy had traveled to Kenya this past spring with Andy Stanley and some others to visit various ministries. He had fun with the audience pointing out that his definition of “redneck” is “a glorious absence of sophistication,” which applies to many of the key characters in the Bible:

Samson, who grew “the mother of all mullets” and who caught 300 foxes, tied them in pairs with tails tied to a burning torch, and set them loose to burn the fields of their despised neighbors, the Philistines? “Sounds like a redneck.”

How about David, who killed somebody with a slingshot, sneaked into a cave to play a trick on somebody who was going to the bathroom in there, and then spied over the fence on a naked neighbor. “That’s as redneck as it gets.”

Here are some other, less blue-collar, impressions from the day:

Andy Stanley retold the story of Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar’s madness, and Belshazzar's feast, and had everyone repeat the refrain that’s repeated in Daniel 4 and 5: “The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes.” The main takeaways:
1. Leadership is a stewardship.
2. Leadership is temporary.
3. Leaders are accountable.
4. Therefore, be diligent, fearless, and humble.

This was a refreshing opening message at a conference that some of the people sitting around me had criticized in past years for its undercurrent of “If you do ministry the way Andy and John tell you to, your church will grow like theirs.” This clearly acknowledged God's sovereign and unpredictable way of putting unlikely people in leadership.

George Barna preached his message of Revolution, celebrating his impression that “some of the most committed Christ followers aren’t finding a meaningful connection to the local church, so they’re doing church apart from local congregations.” As interviewer Gabe Lyons suggested, Barna came across not as a researcher (even though Barna claims his conclusions are based on research), but as a prophet.

My understanding of the difference between a researcher and a prophet is that a researcher discloses the methodology used for coming to his conclusions. By this definition, Barna must be a prophet.

John Maxwell talked about “natural selection” (my term, not his), that is, the unavoidable inequalities of leadership. People's gifting for leadership isn't all the same. He claimed that anyone can go from a low level to a high level of spirituality because it’s a choice people make. (I'll pass on the theology embedded in that.) But not all people have the potential to be strong leaders, because it’s a gift and a skill. And if a person is a level 2 as a leader, they can work hard and reach a level 4 or 5, but they’ll never become a level 9. Only people who are born as a level 6 or 7 can ever hope to become a level 9.

The implication: if you want to develop strong leaders, don’t waste your time with people of low potential. Focus on those who can reach the higher levels. He cited the example of Jesus, who didn’t spend equal amounts of time with all people, nor even with all the disciples. He focused on the three, then the twelve, then everyone else.

While this may be true, it’s also true that Jesus made sure to spend significant “face time” and “touch time” with the lame, blind, and powerless. IMHO, this is an element often lacking among those who choose to spend their quality time only with those of great leadership potential.

Finally, Gary Haugen of the International Justice Mission brought the most moving presentation of the day, describing his work freeing slaves from captivity and forced labor in south Asia and young girls sold into the sex trade in other parts of the world. He pointed out the Bible’s cry against injustice, which is not some trivial “getting caught in the 10-items-or-less express line at the store behind someone with 13 items.” But injustice is “people with power taking something from people who lack power.” His combination of Christian passion, a former prosecuting attorney’s eye for evidence, and his legal expertise showed us we don’t need to “sink into the paralysis of despair” over the enormity of the problems, but by putting what we can offer into God’s hands, injustice can be broken.

He concluded with the story of a young girl, taken from her home and forced to work in a Southeast Asia brothel. After collecting the evidence and working with the right authorities, agents of the International Justice Mission were able to free her and return her to her family. On the wall of the room where she had been so unjustly used, the girl had scratched these verses from Psalm 27:

The Lord is my light and my salvation—whom shall I fear?
The Lord is the stronghold of my life—of whom shall I be afraid?
When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall.
Though an army besiege me, my heart will not fear; though war break out against me, even then will I be confident.

I don't think I'll ever read those verses in the same way again.

Much to think about today, and much to live out.

Posted by Marshall Shelley at October 5, 2006 | Comments (9) | TrackBack

September 20, 2006

Eat, Drink, and Be Merry: Clergy holiness codes miss the point

Last week a study was released by economists called “No Booze? You May Lose.” Researches found that people who drink alcohol make more money and may have an advantage in social settings. But does the same hold true for pastors? Author, professor, pastor, and regular contribut-Ur, David Fitch is back to discuss the popular restriction on clergy to abstain from alcohol and tobacco. Are such rules helpful, and could they possibly be making us fat?

On August 25th, Chicago Sun Times religion columnist Cathleen Falsani wrote a piece entitled “Weighty Matter: Is religion making us fat?” In the piece, she recited Adam Ant’s lyrics in the 80’s “Don’t drink, don’t smoke, what do ya do?” She raised the question whether those Christian denominations that prohibit drinking and smoking are abusing food as a substitute for these other prohibited pleasures. For support, Falsani quotes a Purdue University study that concluded (after accounting for several other factors) that some kinds of churches seem to encourage the problem of obesity. In fact, the study states that churches where drinking alcohol, smoking, and even dancing are prohibited, “overeating has become the accepted vice.”

My denomination, along with others rooted in the old holiness movements, still hangs on to the holiness codes that prohibit alcohol and tobacco for its clergy. I consider this to be “an adventure in missing the point,” to quote Brian McLaren, and I believe Falsani helps us see why. Let me explain.

If we prohibit certain behaviors for pastoral ministry, are we not really revealing the fear that we lack the mature character for ministry in the first place? If drunkenness and chemical addiction is what we fear, why not name drunkenness and addiction as the symptoms that require discernment? By totally prohibiting alcohol and tobacco we are not really dealing with the issue of whether our clergy has mature character. We are just providing conditions to displace the lack of character (if it exists) to some other object that is safer, i.e. from tobacco or alcohol to food.

I want to be careful here about painting a broad-brush stroke across all of us who have struggled with weight. That’s not my point. I am someone who’s had food and weight problems. And I’ve had my own recent crisis with diabetes as a result. Rather, what I am trying to show here is how the holiness codes of my denomination and others do not address the issue, they merely reveal the symptom of the “Real” underlying problem.

Slavoj Zizek, post postmodernist (if there is such a thing) cultural critic, is famous for helping us see the ways cultures can manifest symptoms of the “Real” in ways that surprise us. I might just suggest a Zizekian view of our denominational holiness codes—over eating is the symptom of the Real. The zeal of evangelicals to be different than culture by forbidding alcohol and tobacco, has in essence revealed that nothing is really different. Instead the “hard kernel of the Real” has erupted in the obesity epidemic in our holiness coded churches. As a result, the holiness codes reveal the Truth. In Zizek’s words, “we overlook the way our act is already part of the state of things we are looking at, the way our error is part of the Truth itself.

In the end, character is about the ordering of one’s appetites towards God’s purposes in creation through a purified vision of Christ and His glory. If such desires are not ordered, if such desires are not integrated, holiness codes can only cover up the existing problem. The holiness codes then become a case of misrecognition. And as Zizek states, “the Truth arises from misrecognition.” Thus we have obesity as an epidemic in our churches.

More and more, the new generations cannot stomach these holiness codes. I have regularly met with outstanding candidates for ministry who raise their eyebrow at my denomination’s persistence on its holiness codes for clergy. This is because these codes are not holy. Instead, they trivialize holiness. The real question for us holiness denominations, if we are ever to be taken seriously by the postmodern generations (and our credibility slips everyday we hold onto to these “legalistic and unbiblical” codes of behavior—e.g. there is no Bible verse prohibiting drinking alcohol, quite the contrary), is whether we have the wherewithal to be sanctified in such a way as to be trusted with a drink or a stogie.

The real issue that our denominational leaders should focus on concerning the fitness of clergy is the commitment to a holy life and what that looks like in community. Obviously this refers to issues like drunkenness, addictions that reveal our lack of dependence upon God including tobacco, pornography, gambling, and yes, food! But this should also include how we handle money, how we engage the poor, how we speak to our neighbors, whether we engage in conflict in holy and Christ like ways. We should not resort to legalism! To the postmodern generations, “no alcohol, no tobacco” speaks only of rules, not holiness.

Posted by UrL at September 20, 2006 | Comments (50) | TrackBack

August 28, 2006

Church GPS: Where are we and where should we go?

David Fitch was recently invited by Trinity Evangelical Divinity School to speak on a panel during their new student orientation. Each of the five panel members was to present a response to the question: “Where is the church now and where should it go?” Fitch, who is a pastor, professor, and regular contributor to Out of Ur, shares his response with us in this post.

Where is the church now and where should it go? When I say church here, I speak about the evangelical church, the church where I have been born, become a pastor and an ordained servant of Christ. I believe we as a church in America are in trouble. I believe we’ve lost our way. I believe we have a.) accommodated ourselves to American culture in such a way that we have become another example of the mistake of protestant liberalism. And in the process, I believe we have b.) lost our calling that is given to all “the saved,” that is the calling to be the embodiment of Jesus Christ amidst society and the nations.

In regard to a.) I believe the evangelical church in its attempt to reach those without the gospel has accommodated itself to the languages of individualism, the habits of consumer capitalism, and the organizational forces of American business. We could do this because we have viewed salvation as largely an individualist transaction instead of the participation of God’s people in the cosmological salvation of God through the person and work of Jesus Christ. We could do this because we placed such faith in secular discourses like modern science and business technique (apologetics, business principles of leadership). In the process we have organized church life around the busy lives of Americans living the dreams of capitalism and democracy that leave little time for mission, community and worship. I fear the “church” for evangelicals has in George Hunsberger’s words, become “the distributor of religious goods and services.” As a result, I fear we evangelicals are becoming less and less noticeable and barely distinguishable as a people from the rest of our society who live as if God does not exist.

In regard to b.) I believe that evangelical church has lost the calling of God upon us to be the church of Jesus Christ in society. We evangelicals don't need the church to live salvation because we have personal salvation augmented by reason, science and immediate experience it seems. In some ways frankly, we can do without the Church. And so, the church in essence is left to be a sideshow to what God is doing for, in and through individuals. We no longer have a need for the church to be the social manifestation of His Lordship where He reigns over the powers of sin, evil and death, the very inbreaking of the kingdom of God, where His mighty works are made manifest and put on display before the world (1 Pet 2:9), where hospitality is such an overpowering ethos that the lost in this world are compelled by this invitation. As it is right now, we lack a way of life that people look at and see and say, “Look what manner of life has been made possible in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Our witness has been lost because we don't see “the church” as God’s strategy for the salvation of the world.

Where we must go? Let us reclaim the practices of being His Body. I count these as community, hospitality, embodied witness, truthful formative worship, preaching of the Word, justice both internal and then external to His body, spiritual formation as a Body, and the catechesis of our children as a community. The church becomes a culture in order to engage a culture. The church is the social strategy. We cannot know what parts of culture, justice or works of righteousness are faithful in the world, until we have discerned them as His Body from which we engage the world and perhaps make partnerships in the world, all under the Lordship of Christ. In short, let us embody the mission of Christ, in not just what we do or say, but also in who we are.

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

August 4, 2006

Married to the Ministry: has the pastor’s wife’s role changed for better or worse?

When my wife and I interviewed at my present church she asked what expectations the congregation had of staff spouses. She was told, “We just expect spouses to be church members like everyone else—serving, attending worship, and living uprightly. You know, no smoking pot in the back of the church.” That’s a pretty low bar, my wife thought, but one she could reach.

Of course, things have not always been so easy for clergy wives. Opinion Journal recently posted an article by Lauren Winner (author of "Girl Meets God" and "Real Sex: The Naked Truth About Chastity”) about the changing expectations placed on spouses of ministers. Below are a few excerpts. Read Winner’s entire article here.

Until fairly recently, hiring a minister or rabbi was a two-for-one deal: Into the bargain, churches and synagogues got A Wife, who would host teas, teach religious-education classes, sing in the choir. All this, of course, without a salary.

But she did get a job title--the diminutive rebbetzin in Jewish communities and the clunkier, and somehow more ominous, minister's wife in Protestant circles…

Second-wave feminism was, for clerical wives, a double-edged sword: No longer were women accorded honor and respect simply because they were married to a minister. And some clergy wives, reading "The Feminine Mystique" along with everyone else, began to rethink all those hours they had devoted to polishing the church silver. A role that had once seemed noble began to seem, well, exploitative…

Why is the wife's contribution to that work somehow defined by her husband? ("I sometimes muse that if I died, my husband would remarry, and someone else would assume my role in his ministry, but that if he died, I would not only lose my husband, I would also lose my position as a colleague in campus ministry," says one of my friends, the wife of a campus minister.)

…The problem with a facile feminist critique of the role of clergy wife is that it misses the real beauty of the collaboration sometimes found in clerical marriages. There is something wonderfully seamless about their lives--their work and their marriage is all of a piece. Husband and wife are profoundly knitted together, and their shared calling offers something of a rebuke to the hyper-individualism that characterizes so many American marriages. Indeed, they may set a nice example for the flock.

Posted by UrL at August 4, 2006 | Comments (8)

February 25, 2006

National Pastors Convention 3: David Anderson Reminds Us “Shift Happens”

Developing a multicultural congregation is something many people have talked about but few have done. David Anderson is one of the few. As founder and pastor of Bridgeway Community Church, a multicultural church in Columbia, Maryland, Anderson knows the challenges of ministry. But he encouraged pastors on Friday morning to never settle for less than what God has called us to.

An engaging and colorful storyteller, Anderson spoke about his recent purchase of a 1991 Ford F-150 pickup truck, and the thrill of shifting into all-wheel-drive when he got stuck in a snow filled ditch. After reveling in the masculinity of the moment (Anderson wants a bumper stick that simply declares “TESTOSTERONE”), he shared an important principle: in ministry we get stuck from time to time and we need to shift gears.

Anderson spoke from the story of Terah, the father of Abram, in Genesis 11. Terah set “out of Ur” (we didn’t pay Anderson to say that) with his family for the land of Canaan. But along the way he settled in Haran, and never left. He settled short of his goal and died without ever making it to Canaan.

Anderson spoke passionately about our tendency to “get stuck in Haran,” to settle short of what God has called us to. Offering many examples, he said one thing that will stay with me: “Some of us have set out for the land of ministry, but we’ve settled for the land of church activity.”

Ouch.

No one denies that ministry is hard. It’s understood that we’ll need to stop from time to time. But Anderson reminded us that “there’s a difference between being stopped and being stuck.” Stopping, resting, and rejuvenating are good things, but being stuck is not an option. Rather than settling in Haran, Anderson says, “No matter where you’re stuck, when life shifts, change gears and move on. Because shift happens.”

How do we shift gears and get unstuck? Well, one way is to escape the trap of victimization. We’ll never get moving by blaming everyone else for our condition. Second, Anderson says we need to embrace the “newness of God.” We serve a God who loves to do new things, and we’ll never experience them if we are stuck on yesterday, fixated on today, and ignoring tomorrow.

Finally, we can’t sit around and wait for a clear vision. Abram, picking up the story in Genesis 12, hears God’s voice to leave Haran and journey to Canaan, but he isn’t given a full vision or understanding of his calling. But Anderson said we shouldn’t wait until we’ve got a full picture. He said, “when the voice is clear even when the vision is not—get ready to go.”

Both David Anderson’s and Tony Campolo’s messages focused on obedience, endurance, and the necessity to take risks. They both inspired me to think once again about my calling. What has Christ called me to? What is my Canaan? And in what ways am I making myself comfortable in Haran?

That may be the greatest blessing of the National Pastors Convention for me. By getting out of my ministry context (a.k.a. “bubble”) for a few days, I was able to focus again on the big picture, to put things back into perspective, and return to my church with a renewed focus on what really matters. NPC has been a time to stop, rest, and rejuvenate so that in the months ahead I don’t get stuck. Stuck is not an option.

Posted by Skye Jethani at February 25, 2006 | Comments (3) | TrackBack

February 23, 2006

National Pastors Convention 2: Tony Campolo says “Risk More!”

I’ve heard Tony Campolo speak enough to know you’re in trouble when he takes off his glasses and squints his eyes so tight they disappear into his skull. At that moment his brain is loading a spiritual bombshell into his mouth and preparing it for delivery. Campolo’s bombs found their target on Wednesday night at the National Pastors Convention is San Diego.

He formed his talk around a sociological study (Campolo is a sociologist by training) conducted with people over the age of 95. The survey asked them, if you could do life over again what would you do differently? Most responses fell into three categories:
1. Reflect more
2. Risk more
3. Do more that will live on after I’m gone

While each of his points were powerful, I was especially impacted by Campolo’s exhortation that church leaders take up their prophetical calling to be the opinion shapers of the culture—a calling that always involves risk.

Campolo spoke about the Old Testament roles of priest and prophet. The priests cared for the people, comforted them, and blessed them. The prophets, on the other hand, lived in the hills, came down to make everyone angry, and then went back to the hills. They were the troublemakers.

But we pastors have a problem. We are called to be both priests and prophets. That means, says Campolo, that we are called to “comfort the troubled, and trouble the comfortable.” Although this appears to be a contradiction, Campolo was insistent that we can and must do both. He says “it’s the work of the pastor that legitimates the work of the prophet.” By caring and loving our people we win the right to speak the hard truth into their lives.

What is the hard truth we need to be prophetically declaring? Campolo (glasses removed and squinted eyes buried in his skull) rebuked evangelical church leaders for being silent on issues like poverty, education, war, government sponsored torture, and economic injustice.

Referring to John 6 where Jesus alienated thousands of his followers through his challenging teaching, Campolo called us to “risk more;” to not be afraid of alienating people by declaring unpopular truth; to be like Christ who only had twelve followers remain (and that was only because they had no where else to go).

For some time I’ve been wondering why there are so few prophetic voices in our churches. We have many prophets in evangelical America, many willing to say difficult things into a comfortable culture. But most of these voices are not pastors. We seem to push the prophets out of our pulpits and into academia, the conference circuit, or publishing. Where are the “in the pulpit” pastors who are confronting and shaping the church with their prophetic imaginations?

Campolo says that many passionate young people enter ministry with a prophetic calling, but loose the fire in their belly because they become scared. Fear is clearly a significant reason the pulpit has lost it’s influence. But are there other reasons as well? Are we training pastors to be prophets in our seminaries and schools? Or, are we training them to be managers of religious institutions? Do pastors still believe they have the capacity to actually change our world and culture? Or, has the once influential function of the clergy been neutered by secularization?

Yes, I know I am overstating things (this is a blog, ya know). I am aware that there are some prophetic pastors out there, but as Campolo reminded us they are a rare and endangered species.

Posted by Skye Jethani at February 23, 2006 | Comments (24) | TrackBack

February 22, 2006

National Pastors Convention: Will Willimon has Control Issues

Leadership’s editorial team is posting from sunny San Diego this week. We’ve gathered with 1700 other church leaders for the National Pastors Convention. At the opening session Methodist bishop Will Willimon spoke (with his charming and colorful Southern humor) about our pastoral tendency to control and squelch the Spirit of God.

Building his case from John 3 where Jesus speaks with Nicodemus about being born from above, Willimon found it interesting that the only person Jesus told, “You must be born again” was someone “like him”—a church leader. Nicodemus’ responds to Jesus with a question church leaders can relate to, “How?”

“How?” is a question pastors ask a lot.

How do I lead my church? How do I minister effectively? How do I deal with conflict? How do I grow my church? How do I (fill in the blank)? “How” is why we buy books, attend conferences, and go to seminars. Modern evangelical pastors are all about the “how.” And we base our credibility as leaders on our ability to tell other people “how.” We give them three-point sermons on how to do all sorts of things.

But Jesus irritates us by not sharing our passion for pragmatic answers. Jesus responds to Nicodemus’ question, “How can a man be born again,” with an unashamedly ambiguous answer. He says, “The wind blows where it wishes …you do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Willimon says that like Nicodemus many pastors have a desire to control, manage, stabilize, and harness God. But we serve a Living God, and this God does not yield to the desires of men. His Spirit goes where he chooses, blowing freely like the wind. This, said Willimon, “is why we nail down our pews.” We don’t want the Spirit to blow in and disrupt our perfectly managed ministries.

I’ve seen this controlling tendency in myself, and my church—maybe you have too. We assemble boards, committees, and task forces to manufacture policies by which our ministries function. These policies determine the what, when, and how of ministry. They constrain the Living God and his people to minister within a bureaucratic framework that keeps us comfortably in control. The wind of the Spirit may be blowing outside, but we’d never know it behind church walls sealed shut with policies and procedures.

That is the danger of always building ministry around “how.” History is full of Spirit-filled missional movements whose power waned as they become bureaucratic institutions. In the process of bottling the wind they lost it. But has this tendency come to mark a generation of church leaders enamored with the pragmatics of ministry—its procedures, policies, structures, and plans. Have we forgotten that the beauty and power of the Spirit cannot be bottled and stored on a shelf?

The mysterious movement of God’s Spirit is what separates spiritual leadership from all other kinds. Some want us to believe that “leadership is leadership” whether in business, government, or church. And we can take principles from one arena and employ them in the others. I don’t believe that. Sure, pragmatics are transferable, but the work of the Living God is something altogether mysterious and uncontrollable.

Posted by Skye Jethani at February 22, 2006 | Comments (7) | TrackBack

December 6, 2005

Marketing Narnia 2: Is That a Mouse in Your Pulpit?

Just when I thought commercialism in the church couldn't get any worse I read this from the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Attention, pastors: You have just four weeks remaining to work a lion, a witch or a wardrobe into your next sermon. Walt Disney Pictures is so eager for churches to turn out audiences for The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, which opens Friday, that it's offering a free trip to London - and $1,000 cash - to the winner of its big promotional sermon contest.

It seems Disney isn't content with having Narnia merchandise, posters, and books in the church--the Mouse wants a view from the pulpit too.

The article quoted above by David O'Reilly cites the financial success of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ as key to Disney's decision to market its film adaptation of C.S. Lewis' book directly to churches. One can hardly fault Disney for making a savvy business decision--Gibson's movie raked in over $600 million worldwide.

Far more disturbing is the lack of outcry from the faithful at a blatant attempt by a secular power to manipulate the preaching ministry of the church. The Southern Baptist Convention voiced public disapproval of Disney's policy concerning homosexual couples back in 1997, but where are the cries for a boycott when the Mouse attempts to shape pastors' sermons with promises of free vacations and cash? Which is a greater threat to the ministry of the Gospel and the integrity of the church?

Isn't this why the framers of the Bill of Rights created the First Amendment--to keep the government from preventing (or manipulating) the free practice of religion? I would hope church leaders would not tolerate the federal government manipulating the pulpit ministry as was the case in Nazi Germany, but is welcoming the intrusion of a multi-national entertainment company any different?

Perhaps the closest thing to Disney's sermo-mercials in recent years has been the sponsoring of a worship concert by Chevrolet in 2002 that involved displaying trucks and SUVs in church foyers. Steve Bets, a marketing manager for the auto maker, explained Chevy's motivation:

“Sponsoring the Come Together and Worship Tour provides Chevrolet and local Chevy dealers an opportunity to reach our target consumers, particularly families....This is a ground-breaking marketing effort for Chevrolet. With Contemporary Christian Music growing exponentially compared to every other genre of music for the past two years, Chevrolet recognizes the marketing potential with this tour.”

The obvious question is how far will it go? Where do we, as church leaders entrusted with the ministry of the Gospel, draw the line? When do we become guilty of serving both God and money (or the corporations seeking to make it)? Maybe your next baptism service could be sponsored by Evian? Perhaps Nintendo can take out advertising space in your children's ministry newsletter, or maybe you're content with just having a Mouse on your shoulder while you preach.

Posted by UrL at December 6, 2005 | Comments (25) | 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