April 11, 2008

Live from Shift: Bursting the Christian Bubble

The final session of Shift 2008 featured Dan Kimball, pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California, and regular contributor to Leadership and Out of Ur. Kimball shared some insights from this book, They Like Jesus But Not the Church.

He began with the good news—our culture is very interested in Jesus. He pulled a number of items from a bag: a Jesus bobble head figure, Jesus band-aids, a Jesus eraser, and then showed images from a Madonna concert where the queen of pop hung on a cross with scripture verses above to highlight the 12 million kids dying from Aids in Africa. Kimball says there is no doubt that people in our culture are curious about Jesus—and many find him very attractive.

Now the bad news—popular perceptions of the church and Christians are very different. Kimball showed a video of college students in his town describing Christians as judgmental, homophobic, and hypocritical. He humorously recounted the response of a girl at the health club when she discovered Dan was a pastor. She said, “Pastors are creepy” but admitted she didn’t know any personally.

This, says Kimball, is precisely the problem. In an increasingly post-Christian culture fewer people have contact with real Christians. We’ve hidden ourselves in a Christian sub-culture bubble. As a result only “the loudest voices are defining who we are,” he says. These loud and usually angry Christians are the only ones heard and seen by the culture. This is what people have based their opinions of Christians upon.

Kimball says the solution is getting outside the bubble again; obeying Jesus’ prayer for his people to not be taken out of the world (John 17:15). Only when we have real contact with people in the culture where love and friendship can be established will we change their perceptions of the church.

Dan recounted a great story from his time hanging out with the girl who cut his hair. While he was attending a ministry conference in Texas, she’d invited him to a bar to meet her friends in a band. The band turned out to be “Satan’s Cheerleaders.” Also in attendance was the Lizard Man—famous for having his whole body tattooed to resemble a lizard. Because of his friendship with the hairdresser, Dan was able to engage the group in a conversation about faith. Later he walked out of the bar with Satan’s Cheerleaders and the Lizard Man just as the ministry conference attendees were exiting across the way.

He ended with good news. “Most Christians and churches are not what the perceptions are,” said Kimball. We aren’t as judgmental, homophobic, or hypocritical as people think we are. We simply need to show them by getting outside our bubbles and reengage the culture.

Posted by UrL at April 11, 2008 | Comments (14) | TrackBack

April 10, 2008

Live from Shift: Deep Justice vs. Shallow Service

Kara Powell spoke during the final session at Shift this afternoon. Powell is the director of the Center for Youth and Family Ministry at Fuller Theological Seminary. She began by bursting a pretty big bubble. Many churches have gotten involved in short term missions trips (STMs) that often involve a service project in a developing country. But are these trips making any real difference?

The research isn’t encouraging. Powell shared about how those being served by North American church groups often feel demoralized by our service, and how many wished these churches would simply send the funds so they could do the work themselves. On the flip side, evidence suggests these trips are having a minimal impact on students as well. In an article she wrote called “If We Send Them, Will They Grow?” she concluded that students who go on STMs are not more likely to become long-term missionaries, and it doesn’t impact their materialistic lifestyles.

Powell said a lot of our local and international efforts toward the poor are really a placebo effect. They make us feel better about ourselves, but they’re not really impacting people the way we’d like to believe. What’s the answer? She believes we need to shift from shallow service to “deep justice.”

After tracing the importance of justice as a theme in the Old and New Testaments she laid out the difference between serving the poor and seeking justice. “Service is giving someone a glass of cold water who needs it. Justice is asking why the person needs a glass of cold water.” Service is good, she says, because it addresses real needs. But seeking justice means fixing the system that created the problem in the first place.

Our churches tend to approach service as an event—buying gifts for poor kids at Christmas, feeding the homeless, going to Mexico to build a house. Again, these are worthwhile things. But justice isn’t an event, it’s a lifestyle. She defined justice as simply “righting wrongs.” Toward this end students at her church are engaging issues like sex trafficking, HIV/Aids, and modern-day slavery.

Powell’s talk was very piercing. Is your church forming people to merely serve, or to be a people of justice? My sense is that if we pursue the goal of “deep justice” we may see an awakening in many evangelical churches. But if it remains simply events of service then social justice will be just the latest trend that will pass out of popularity like WWJD bracelets.

Posted by UrL at April 10, 2008 | Comments (7) | TrackBack

Live from Shift: Ministry 2.0 in World 2.0

Darren Whitehead leads the student ministry of Willow Creek. He compared the church in our changing culture to his own experience as an immigrant (he’s from Australia). Most immigrants suffer from “cultural freeze,” he says. This is the tendency to maintain their old culture in the midst of the new one they find themselves in.

He says the church is doing the same thing. We’re preserving church from the 1960s in a world that changing. He says this is really uncomfortable for newcomers. When someone comes into the church “it’s sort of like walking in on two people making out. It’s intimate and you feel kind of strange being there.”

This has led to what Whitehead called an “epidemic of ineffectiveness.” He cited numerous studies that all show huge numbers of students leaving the church after high school and never returning. He says, “The rate of change in the culture is far exceeding the rate of change in our youth ministries.”

Technology is changing the world and the culture. Whitehead referred to Time Magazine’s observation that we are seeing the emergence of version 2.0 of the internet through user-focused sites like Wikipedia, Youtube, and Facebook. This means students are growing up in World 2.0 where “consumers are now content providers.” This has led to five critical shifts in the way Willow is approaching youth ministry. These five ideas may well apply across the board.

1. Moving from passive to interactive
In the new World 2.0 people are creating content. As Whitehead says, in the past people were interested in how professional your ministry was. But today, “Any 14 year old with a Mac can produce really slick videos.” As a result students “don’t want professional, they want personal.” This should be good news for smaller churches without a big staff or budget. It means getting the people involved in creating the music, videos, and other content of the ministry. Whitehead says “students are no longer attending our ministry, they are our ministry.”

2. Moving from resolved to unresolved
The new generation isn’t looking for easy answers. They are even insulted by trite answers to difficult issues. This means they “are trying to be tour guides rather than travel agents.” Whitehead says they’re trying to walk along side of students rather than simply telling them what to think. He wants them wrestling with questions not just absorbing answers.

3. Moving from imitation to imagination
Whitehead says that for years we’ve been trying to clone students. We’ve shown them what we think it looks like to follow Jesus, and we’re not giving them space to imagine how it might look for them. Part of this has contributed to making “young people spiritually dependent on us.” This is why they fall way when the leave the high school ministry. Instead, says Whitehead, we need to be teaching people to be “self-feeders.”

4. Moving from informational to experiential
Darren admitted this isn’t exactly a new idea. Most of us are wrestling with how to be creative and engaging for those who have a variety of learning styles. Some things they’ve done: talking about vision with 3-D glasses, cooking food on stage to illustrate the aroma of Christ, and an experience of walking to the cross blindfolded.

5. Moving from confession to compassion
Finally, Whitehead says that young people aren’t interested in merely telling (confessing) what they believe. They’ve become activists. Toward that end they’ve made James 1:27 (you know, true religion is caring for orphans and widows) their ministry’s theme this year. They are partnering with local and international ministries to engage their students in compassion projects for single mothers and students in Africa. He wants students to realize that “following Jesus isn’t just a belief system—it’s something you do.”

One of the biggest challenges that student leaders face comes from the home. Whitehead says these kids go home and see that their “mom and dad don’t live differently than anyone else.” The students are hungry to be challenged, but the lukewarm faith of their families is a problem. “We got to be sure that we don’t under challenge them.”

How are you seeing these five shifts occurring in your churches? Which ones seem to be universally applicable? As Whitehead articulated—this isn’t just a youth issue, it’s the direction our whole culture is moving.

Posted by UrL at April 10, 2008 | Comments (2) | TrackBack

April 8, 2008

Coffee with a Cause

I’m sitting at Ebenezer’s—a coffee shop in Washington DC. That may not seem particularly remarkable, but this trendy meeting place represents the convergence of three social pillars—government, business, and church.

Ebenezer’s is owned and operated by National Community Church. Often referred to as “The Theater Church,” NCC meets at theaters located at three Metro stops around Washington. But the coffee shop serves as the church’s headquarters. The upper floors are occupied by NCC’s staff offices, and the basement of Ebenezer’s is a multi-media venue where worship services are conducted as well as concerts.

The connection between the coffee shop and the church represents a growing trend of churches advancing their mission through for-profit businesses. Ebenezer’s has been very successful for National Community Church. The business is thriving; it was even ranked among the city’s best coffee shops. (Right now the place is quite busy.)

Mark Batterson, pastor of NCC, said the experiment with Ebenezer’s has been so positive that they’re considering expanding to other locations and even franchising the operation to help other churches launch coffee shops to function as “3rd places” and missional outposts.

I can tell you first hand—Ebenezer’s is a nice place. I can’t vouch for the coffee (I don’t drink the poison), but the tea is very good quality. But here’s the question—should churches be getting into business? What are the advantages and disadvantages of mixing Christian community with commerce? How would you feel if your church moved in this direction?

Some believe that spending $2 million on a coffee shop that is utilized all week and naturally attracts non-Christians, is far more missional than spending the same amount on a worship building that’s primarily used on Sunday for believers. Are they right? Am I sitting in the future of the American church?

Here’s the other fascinating thing about Ebenezer’s—it’s located four blocks from the Capital building. National Community Church is populated primarily by young government staffers from both sides of the aisle. And the coffee shop draws many political appointees. You can’t find a more politically charged environment than this. If I had any hair I’m sure it would be standing on end.

I spent the last few hours talking with Mark Batterson about leading a church in this environment. (You can expect to read about that conversation in the summer issue of Leadership.) For now I’ll just leave you with this question: how would you feel if a highly visible and polarizing politician started attending your church?

My short time in Washington has been very interesting, and I’ve come away with more questions about ministry and politics than I anticipated. So far I’ve only concluded one thing: whether Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal, theocrat or secularist—everyone likes a good coffee shop. That may be NCC and Ebenezer’s winning strategy.

Posted by Skye Jethani at April 8, 2008 | Comments (5) | TrackBack

February 1, 2008

McChurch: I'm Lovin' It

"Church plants," "sister churches," and "satellite congregations" may be a thing of the past. In 2008, the language of missiology is changing, so look for "church franchises" in your town.

Eddie Johnson, the lead pastor of Cumberland Church, espouses the franchising concept when it comes to the relationship between his church in Nashville, Tennessee, and North Point Community Church in metro Atlanta. On his blog, he states, "Just like a Chick-fil-A, my church is a 'franchise,' and I proudly serve as the local owner/operator."

According to Johnson, his job is to "establish a local, autonomous church that has the same beliefs, values, mission, and strategy as North Point." He completed a three-month internship at North Point and continues to receive training and support. He claims to rarely deviate from the "training manual."

"Just like that Chick-fil-A owner/operator," he says, "I'm here in Nashville to open up our franchise and run it right. I believe in my company and what they are trying to 'sell.'"

The pastor says people who are already familiar with the North Point "brand" will find a local congregation with the same fit. For those who have relocated from Atlanta, they'll get a taste of home and know what to expect in their new church.

According to Johnson's website, the "Strategic Partnership Churches" exist in such diverse locations as Florida, Pennsylvania, and Colorado. And by 2010, North Point plans to plant 60 new churches.

Is this the future of the Western church- franchised congregations of megabrands in every city with pastors serving as the local owner/operator? Many of us have seen this coming, but it's rather shocking to see the model and language of the franchised church so enthusiastically embraced as it is by Eddie Johnson.

What do you think? Are Cumberland Church and other franchised congregations the wave of the future? Are Chick-fil-A and McDonalds the right model for the church to be emulating? Are franchised mega-churches going to be the denominations of the 21st century? Or, is this consumer Christianity taken to its logical and disturbing extreme?

Posted by UrL at February 1, 2008 | Comments (78) | TrackBack

October 26, 2007

Willow Creek Repents? (Part 2)

Last week's post about Willow Creek sparked a lot of conversation. It all flowed from comments made by the church's leaders following a three year self-evaluation of Willow Creek's ministry effectiveness. Your comments caught the attention of Greg Hawkins, Willow's executive pastor. Below Hawkins reponds to your thoughts, clarifies what Willow has learned, and discusses the church's future.

Friends,

I’m thrilled to see the high level of interest and energy behind the blogosphere comments about REVEAL. But I’ve read enough postings to think that it might be helpful to provide a few facts on three issues that keep coming up. Trust me. I’m not into “spin control” here. I just want to fill in some gaps.

1. It’s Not About Willow
• REVEAL’s findings are based on thirty churches besides Willow. In all thirty churches, we’ve found the six segments of REVEAL’s spiritual continuum, including the Stalled and Dissatisfied segments. And these churches aren’t all Willow clones. We’ve surveyed traditional Bible churches, mainline denominations, African-American churches and churches representing a wide range of geographies and sizes. Right now we’re fielding the survey to 500 additional churches, including 100 international churches. So, while REVEAL was born out of a Willow research project in 2004, the findings are not exclusive to Willow Creek.

2. Willow Repents?
• The first blog started with this question, and the answer is “yes”. But repenting is not a new experience for us. We’ve made a number of major course corrections over the years – like adding a big small group ministry for the thousands of new Christians coming to faith at Willow, and adding a mid-week service for our Christ-followers. We’ve always been a church in motion and REVEAL is just another example of Willow trying to be open to God’s design for this local church.

3. Is Willow Re-thinking its Seeker Focus?
• Simple answer – no. My boss would say that Willow is not just seeker-focused. We are seeker-obsessed. The power of REVEAL’s insights for our seeker strategy is the evangelistic strength uncovered in the more mature segments. If we can serve them better, the evangelistic potential is enormous, based on our findings.

I hope this was helpful. In any event, I’m enjoying following the dialogue. Keep it up! And let me know if you have any questions you’d like me to address.

Greg Hawkins

Posted by UrL at October 26, 2007 | Comments (55)

September 14, 2007

Don't Change Your Church!

In part one of our interview with Dan Kimball he talked about the intersection of the emerging church with missional theology. Simply changing the church’s worship style isn’t enough, he says. Becoming truly missional requires “an ecclesiological change.” In part two, Kimball address the role aging congregations can play in helping to reach the younger generation. And, once again, the answer is more about having a missional mindset rather than a cutting edge worship style.

You’ve been at this conference for a couple of days now. Are you sensing that leaders are asking the deeper philosophical questions? What kind of questions are you hearing? It’s been refreshing to see the interest in the future of the church by mostly middle aged and older pastors. They are really concerned about younger people. It’s refreshing and very sincere. I think this is happening because churches recognize younger people are disappearing. A woman talked to me just this morning about her daughter disconnecting from the church. She was very emotional. She wanted to know what her church could possibly do. So the refreshing part is seeing real passion from leaders saying we must do something. And the sad part is I suspect existing churches won’t be willing or able to make the necessary changes. I really, really hope they can. But it will take a sense of humility and passion.

And what do you say to people when they are looking to you for the answer?
This sounds cliché, but there isn’t a single answer. So much depends on the church.

So much depends on the history of the specific church. So much depends on who is in the leadership of the church. So much depends on the skill sets of the existing leaders. So much depends on the church’s culture, and who is part of the church and who lives in the community around the church. Sometimes a church shouldn’t do anything because they are doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing for the people God has given them to shepherd and lead and reach.

This is a true story. A guy read The Emerging Church, and a year later he saw me. He said, “Dan, It’s just not working.” And I said, “What are you doing?” He said, “I got some art stuff, and we are doing multi-sensory worship. And I’m having people come up and paint. But the younger people aren’t coming in.” I asked him, “What is your church is like.” He said it was about twenty-five elderly people. My heart broke listening to him share what happened. He convinced this group of elderly people they need to worship differently. They even changed the name of their church. He thought changing the worship gathering and having twenty-five elderly people do art in worship would bring in the younger people. His sincerity almost made me want to cry. We talked about his situation and I encouraged him to just shepherd the existing group of people in a way that makes sense to them and they can relate to.

So, not every leader needs to radically change their church.
No, because God may have their church a certain way intentionally. We need different kinds of churches in every city. Everyone doesn’t need to change their style to reflect what we are doing. What does need to change, however, is the development of an outward missional heart—no matter what kind or type of a church you are. But being missional will look different depending on your location, who the leaders are, what the people of the church are like, etc. You can have a very missional church of primarily elderly people or you can have a very non-missional church of twenty-somethings.

It’s hard for churches that are growing older to face the future. Maybe for some older congregations the answer is partnering with a younger church plant. We are doing that with our church. We’ve partnered with an aging church and we share their facilities. We are really joining together. It has its difficulties, but because it is missionally motivated it is extremely rewarding. But what makes it possible is that the older church has a missional mindset.

Dan Kimball is pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California, and author of They Like Jesus but Not the Church (Zondervan, 2007). A review of his book can be found in the summer issue of Leadership.

Posted by UrL at September 14, 2007 | Comments (11)

September 11, 2007

Alien Nation

We are putting the finishing touches on the next issue of Leadership built around the theme of ministering to people on the margins. Isaac Canales, pastor of Mission Ebenezer Family Church in Carson, California, has sent us this provocative article about ministry among immigrants. We’re posting it here first to hear your responses. Some of your comments may be republished with Canales’ article in the October issue of Leadership.

I am a Harvard graduate and the son of immigrants. My story is not unique. In California, where I live, immigration has been an issue for decades. We’ve lived with it every day of our lives, long before it became a divisive political issue. In California, even our governor is an immigrant. But most immigrants here are not from Austria. Most, like my parents, came from Mexico.

Today’s debate over “illegal aliens” is not new, but perhaps a bit of historical perspective will be helpful.

My mother was kidnapped by her father when she was four. He told his mother-in-law that he was taking his daughter to the market to buy her shoes. He never returned. Instead he brought my mother to Bakersfield, California, where he supported her by picking grapes, cotton, and fruit. Eventually, he became a naturalized American citizen and was proud of it. He bought a house with white columns and a wide porch. That is where mama grew up.

My father came across the Rio Grande and was an orphan by age eleven. He wandered from family to family, boarding house to boarding house. Freight train cars were his home for many years. At age 27 Papa experienced a powerful conversion and later attended the Latin American Bible Institute in Southern California. But before entering the school, he received a call from Uncle Sam.

Despite being an immigrant, completely undocumented and without naturalization papers, he was sent to fight in World War II. The Bible school sent Papa his first year’s books to study while overseas. I still have them. My father glued them all together with egg whites into one big volume as he carried it to England, France, Belgium, North Africa, and then back home. Toward the end of the war, my father became an American citizen with hundreds of other soldiers in a massive swearing-in ceremony. He was always proud of his service in the army.

My father and mother entered the gospel ministry together. When I was a child, they founded two churches including the one I pastor today in Carson, California—Mission Ebenezer Family Church. Many of our members are immigrants. In the beginning they were largely Mexican. Now we see 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th generation El Salvadorian, Guatemalan, Columbian, Peruvian, and other nationalities represented.

My heart is thrilled as they share their testimonies of how God brought them to the United States in a car trunk, under a truck chassis, walking, swimming, or through tunnels. Many risked death walking through the desert. But they all came with God’s help and with ours. I do not believe we are being politically defiant by helping them to the land of promise. This is our religious experience. The stories of faith they share make God real, and our mercy right.

In 1983, I was recently ordained, and our church was very small—just 23 people meeting in a tavern. One of our members, Sister Benny, would often disappear for a weekend to perform a secret ministry.

Benny was a Christian Coyote. A coyote usually charges immigrants a fee to bring them over the border and avoid immigration agents, but Benny did not charge. It was her way of serving the Lord. And she only transported babies that had been separated from their families in California.

Benny also had a practical reason for only transporting infants. She was a large woman, at least 380 pounds and only 5 feet tall. She always wore very large comfortable Hawaiian muumuus—red with white hibiscus, or pink with green palm trees and pineapples. Border agents never noticed the baby moving underneath. She brought many children across this way, under her dress or between her legs.

Benny, with the help of her husband Julio, reunited one family that was staying in my garage. The parents, Paz and Jorge, paid a coyote $2,000 to bring them and their older son across the border, but they had to leave their baby behind with his grandparents. So Benny retrieved their two-year-old from Mexico.

Of course, her ministry was not an officially recognized program of the church, but we were excited when she brought back Paz and Jorge’s little boy. They pulled up to our house around 1:00 a.m. We woke our three boys. Paz and Jorge were waiting with us curbside. It was a wonderful time of prayer and thanksgiving to the Lord for bringing this family back together.

Nico and Chayo came to America from Oaxaca, Mexico. The elderly couple invited us over for dinner. They lived in a small one-room apartment divided by a wire draped with sheets clipped together with clothespins. This provided some privacy, parents on one side of the sheets, kids on the other. Ten people lived in one room. They were so excited to have us in their home.

We sat on their only two chairs. They stood as they proudly served us. They had a hot plate with two small burners. One had a little pot of coffee. The other burner had some corn tortillas. Little black blisters showed that the tortillas were ready. The dinner was very simple and served humbly and with love.

Nico took his sweaty work hat off and asked me if I would like to say grace. I said no. I wanted to hear him try a prayer since he had just recently given his heart to Christ. He prayed thoughtfully, carefully, and sincerely. Then they served us a small plate of the most wonderful beans, fried in bacon fat, and crispy hot corn tortillas with a cup of steaming coffee. That was all.

I remember thinking to myself, “Is this why you trained at Harvard?” The answer was a resounding, “Yes.”

I remembered what Jesus said, “Wherever two or three are gathered in my name, there I am in their midst.” Jesus wasn’t on the tortilla. But he was there in that sheet-draped apartment.

Nico and Chayo were illiterate. They signed the membership rolls at the church, proudly, with an X. I bought Chayo a New Testament on cassette, in Spanish. She memorized many passages. It was thrilling to watch her stand up during our testimony time and see her wince with bashfulness, smile shyly, close her eyes, and say a Bible verse. Chayo and Nico were faithful to the end. They’re both in heaven now.

My years of ministry to immigrants has taught me many things, and has given me insight into many biblical lessons. The Old Testament teaches us a theology of welcome. From the very beginning, in the Torah, God says, “For the Lord your God is the God of gods . . . who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes. He defends . . . the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien, giving him food and clothing. And you are to love those who are aliens, for you yourselves were aliens in Egypt” (Deut.10:17-19).

Paul carries this lesson into the New Testament. He reminds us in Romans that Israel had forgotten to embrace foreign cultures with the love of God. The worship of the living God had lost much of its evangelistic fervor in their hands. The mandate the church receives is to accept others as Christ has accepted us.

In other words God loves the immigrants among us, and we are called to love them as well. However unsettling this may be, it is the American church’s mandate to embrace God’s theology of welcome in Christ Jesus. Our task as a church is not to judge immigrants but to love them, to become the arms of Christ, not the hands of tyranny. This is our prophetic and Christian duty.

As we look around our diverse country we need to remember that God’s intent is for all cultures and tongues worship in his house. We tell our friends that the kingdom of God is a big party with a piñata where all are welcome. But what kind of fiesta is it, really?

Is the kingdom for the documented only? At this fiesta are Asians in one room and blacks in another? Are the Pentecostals all crammed into the afterglow room, whites in the living room, and immigrants in the back?

Throughout our history there have been times when non-Christians see through our hypocrisy. They recognize that not everyone is truly welcome in our churches. These are times when we’ve worried about being politically right when we should be focused on being biblically correct.

The root of American evangelical hypocrisy is smugness; a historical inability to understand God’s unfailing mercies for the immigrant, his unfailing love for the poor among us. If our sense of worth is measured by privatized religion and political culture—from our color, to our work ethic, to the neighborhoods we live and worship in—we remain independent of God and self-sufficiently smug. Christ cannot help us. We are not being his church.

So the question I ask myself, and pose to every pastor, is: Shall I build a church that isolates us from immigrants, or should I embrace God’s story of welcome?

It is easy to raise a church with one culture, one language, one worldview. Anyone can raise up a large that is one culture. But building a church that includes the alien, the immigrant poor, can only be done with Christ. That is our biblical challenge and our biblical mandate.

Isaac Canales is pastor of Mission Ebenezer Family Church in Carson, California.

Posted by UrL at September 11, 2007 | Comments (40)

August 28, 2007

Missional Ice Cream

I’ve heard that the church is like a family. We’ve all been told the church is like a business. Now Leadership contributor, Chad Hall, explains that a missional church is like an ice cream truck. He may be on to something, but there will still be arguments about what kind of music to play.

My kids (6, 3, and 2 years old) LOVE the ice cream truck, and so do I. What's not to love? There we are, outside on a hot day playing in the yard or riding a bike or washing the car and out of nowhere we hear the faint melody of the ice cream truck. Like an unexpected friend dropping by, the ice cream truck rounds the corner and delivers delicious desserts in the middle of an otherwise humdrum day. It's a beautiful thing.

The ice cream truck reminds me of what it means to be a missional disciple. The ice cream truck driver has a wonderful gift he wants to bestow (okay, he's selling it – every metaphor has its flaws, so let's ignore the mismatches, okay?). The driver also seeks out the very kinds of people who are ready and in want of the gifts he has. The driver does not sit in the parking lot of the old folks' home and wait for my family to drop what we are doing and come to him and get our cool treats. No, he comes to us. And we delight in what he brings.
Missional disciples also have a wonderful gift (Jesus), best offered to those who are in want.

The more I think about it, what my kids love is not the ice cream truck – it’s the ice cream itself. If we bring Jesus to people, people will love what we bring. But too often we get perplexed and even disappointed because folks reject our opinions about Jesus, or our system for understanding Jesus, or our organization that is devoted to Jesus. In fact, we may even find it difficult to know Jesus apart from our opinions, systems, and organizations related to him. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of being a missional disciple is letting Jesus be unwrapped from all that packaging.

But do people really want Jesus? Do they want Way, Truth, and Life? At some level, the answer for every child born of woman is “Yes.” People want Jesus even more than my kids want ice cream because Jesus is the only Way we can Truly Live – and every person wants to truly live.

For a while, my 5-year-old neighbor didn’t think he liked ice cream. Go figure. At birthday parties, he’d take his cake plain. At summer cookouts, he’d settle for a cookie. When the ice cream truck came by, he just kept playing. But over time he kept noticing the other kids going bonkers over ice cream. Nobody forced him to try it. Though I considered holding him down and shoving some Neapolitan down his throat, I refrained.

Last week he finally came around. He likes bananas and he decided out of the blue to try some with ice cream. He liked it – a lot. I’ll let you draw out the deep and applicable analogies here, but the point is that everybody loves ice cream – some people just don’t know it yet. What’s a 5-year-old kid really know, anyway? And aren’t we all just kids who don’t yet know what we really want out of life? If the gospel is true, then a saving and sanctifying relationship with God through Jesus is at the core of each of us. It is our essence.

Force-feeding Jesus to people will only produce skeptics and suspicion. The missional disciple goes out in search of folks who hunger and thirst for Jesus. Such a disciple seeks them out and introduces Jesus so that people can taste and see that the Lord is good. Some will receive Jesus with enthusiasm and delight, while others will be affected by the impact Jesus makes for those who savor him.

While every person wants Jesus, whether they know it or note, the missional disciple does not concerns herself with convincing people they want Jesus. Savvy ice cream truck drivers go where ice cream is welcomed and lets the Nutty Buddies and Push Ups do their magic. They don't go to country clubs or carpet stores. They're not out on the interstate or at a Harley convention. Jesus had some things to say about the healthy not needing a doctor. Savvy disciples (wise as serpents) go after the hungry and thirsty. This is why most discipleship should be expressed outside the church. (Notice discipleship here is "living like Jesus," not "learning about Jesus.") Disciples are to be on a mission to bring the delight of Jesus to the least expecting and most ready.

I believe there are Jesus-ready people just about everywhere, if we only have eyes to see and hearts that are open. How might we seek out and bring Jesus to those who hunger and thirst? Here are some ideas...

• Paying close enough attention that you discern the unique way a co-worker hungers and thirsts

• Providing a listening ear to a friend (or foe) who thinks no one cares

• Seeking out a neighbor to encourage

• Praying for the people who wouldn't expect your prayers

• Walking through shame and disappointment with someone who has suffered loss

• Forgiving an enemy (you DO have enemies) even though there is embarrassment on both sides

• Going out of your way to allow someone to experience the Holy One who makes his temple-dwelling in you.

So what about you? Where do you need to drive your ice cream truck this week?

Chad Hall is a ministry coach living in Hickory, North Carolina, and the co-author of Coaching for Christian Leaders (Chalice Press, 2007).

Posted by UrL at August 28, 2007 | Comments (10)

August 16, 2007

Lessons from St. Arbucks

Once an article is published in Leadership one never knows the ripple effect it will have. Greg Asimakoupoulos, pastor of Mercer Island Covenant Church, wrote for Leadership about the community-forming power of Starbucks in his neighborhood. He confesses, “We like to say that our church is a genuine community of faith, the kind of place people can feel at home. Still, you may have to go down the block to get to see that become a reality for lots of people. We need to be honest and admit that people are lining up to get into Starbucks, but they aren't lining up to get into many of our churches.”

For this reason Asimakoupoulos refers to the coffee shop as St. Arbucks.

This week, Terry Mattingly drew heavily from Asimakoupoulos’ Leadership article for his column which appears in over 100 local newspapers and at GetReligion.com. Mattingly recognizes the draw of Starbucks as a “third place”—“a safe zone between home and office. For generations, bars, diners, barbershops and a host of other locations have played similar roles.“ And he notes, “This kind of hospitality has become rare in this rushed world.”

Diversity is another strength Starbucks exudes more than most local congregations. Mattingly continues:

Writing in Leadership Journal, Asimakoupoulos noted: "At St. Arbucks, I've seen a rabbi mentoring a Torah student. A youth pastor disciplining a new convert. High school girls working on a group assignment. A book club sipping mochas while discussing a fiction author's plot." Could churches try to be more open to outsiders?

However, before you throw out your ministry books and don a green apron Asimakoupoulos cautions us to be leery of some elements of Starbucks’ strategy.

When [Asimakoupoulos] was a college student in Seattle, this local institution was about excellent coffee beans -- period. These days, the place that many call "four bucks" offers CDs, gifts, pastries and super-sweet drinks of all kinds, hot and cold. Hardly anyone goes there for pure coffee.

"Maybe we can let that be a warning," said Asimakoupoulos. "It's important for our churches to think about what people want, but we can't lose sight of what people need. We have to keep offering basic faith, the faith of the ages. The extras are nice, but people also need the classics."

Read Terry Mattingly's entire column here, or at www.tmatt.net.

Terry Mattingly directs the Washington Journalism Center at the Council for Christian Colleges & Universities.

Posted by UrL at August 16, 2007 | Comments (22)

August 9, 2007

Evangelical Drop-Outs

A new study reported by USAToday finds that a high percentage of young adults who attended church while in high school stop attending by age 23. The poll was conducted by LifeWay Research, an affiliate of the publishing arm of the Southern Baptist Convention. 70% of young adults drop out of Protestant churches, and 34% do not attend even sporadically after age 30. That means at least one in four young people who leave the church never return.

"This is sobering news that the church needs to change the way it does ministry," says Ed Stetzer who directed the study. "It seems the teen years are like a free trial on a product. By 18, when it's their choice whether to buy in to church life, many don't feel engaged and welcome," says the associate director Scott McConnell.

Part of the problem, says Stetzer, is the way many churches organize their student ministries. "Too many youth groups are holding tanks with pizza. There's no life transformation taking place," he says. "People are looking for a faith that can change them and to be a part of changing the world." It seems spiritual formation, not just spiritual entertainment, may be what young people are seeking from a church.

Interestingly, the survey also found that those who stayed or returned to the church tended to grow up in a home where both parents are committed to the church. This may indicate that parents play a more crucial role in the spiritual development of their children than any church program.

Among the 7 in 10 who dropped out of the church a diversity of reasons were discovered:

• Wanted a break from church: 27%
• Found church members judgmental or hypocritical: 26%
• Moved to college: 25%
• Tied up with work: 23%
• Moved too far away from home church: 22%
• Too busy: 22%
• Felt disconnected to people at church: 20%
• Disagreed with church's stance on political/social issues: 18%
• Spent more time with friends outside church: 17%
• Only went before to please others: 17%

The full article may be read at the USAToday website.

Posted by UrL at August 9, 2007 | Comments (34)

July 6, 2007

The Measure of a Ministry

This week Americans are celebrating their independence by watching parades, enjoying backyard barbeques, and by not going to church. If your congregation is anything like mine you know that during the summer worship attendance slips noticeably, and the week of July 4th is typically the low point. Family vacations and parties draw people away for some valuable R and R. I’m not pointing a self-righteous finger at church slackers. Last Sunday my family and I were not seen in church either, we were away camping.

But the “summer slide” raises a question. Why is Sunday morning attendance the one measurement we cannot escape? Why is Sunday morning attendance the make-or-break number; the figure we proudly display or secretly despair? Like a corporation’s stock price, worship attendance seems to encapsulate a church’s entire mission and health in one simple, if volatile, number. A number we watch carefully week to week praying for its increase.

At my church I am aware of a number of families and individuals who won’t be attending Sunday worship very frequently this summer, and I’m thrilled about it. These people won’t be in worship because they’ll be overseas helping missionaries, or taking inner city kids to a camp in rural Michigan, or they’ll be making meaningful connections as families on vacations- something valuable in a culture where families are struggling. Don’t misread me, I think gathering regularly as a community for corporate worship, confession, and learning is both good and important. I just don’t think it’s so important that it should be the singular measure of missional impact, or even the primary one.

It has become very popular to talk about “life transformation” as the purpose of the church, and numerous studies have shown that worship attendance alone does not seem to impact people’s behavior or values. (Ron Sider’s book The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience comes to mind .) However, people who connect in meaningful and transparent relationships, the kind possible in small groups or with a mentor, do show more evidence of life change. Wouldn’t this be a much better and more helpful number for church leaders to measure? Do you know how many people in your church connected relationally with another brother or sister in Christ last week? Probably not, but I bet you know how many sang songs and passively listened to a sermon.

Granted, Sunday worship attendance is easier to measure than small group attendance or relational connections but I don’t think that’s why we do it. Dallas Willard has said that most churches are designed to grow their ABCs (attendance, buildings, and cash) not disciples. The ABCs form an unholy trinity; a cycle that cannot be escaped easily. Sunday attendance is vital and meticulously measured because that is what funds the church—people give money on Sunday. The money is necessary to pay for institutional needs such as buildings, staff, and programs. And, of course, these tangibles are needed to attract more religious consumers to pay for more buildings, staff, and programs.

If our primary measurements are the ministry ABCs one must ask if the mission of the church is really life transformation or institutional expansion? I believe the first step toward breaking this cycle is to change what we measure. Rather than making Sunday worship attendance the most important statistic we need to emphasize something else. Relational or small group connections is one option but there are many others.

I know one church that measures how many people spend at least 30 minutes reading scripture three times a week. Another congregation measures the number of troubled marriages rescued. And another records how many members have invited neighbors to their home for a meal. This summer, rather than determining how many people are skipping worship services I’m much more interested in how many from my congregation are participating in short-term missions projects, serving in local compassion ministries, and spending meaningful time together as families. I believe what we measure indicates what we value, and what we value is what we should celebrate.

Posted by Skye Jethani at July 6, 2007 | Comments (17)

May 29, 2007

Vintage Consumerism

We caught up with Dan Kimball, pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California, and author of They Like Jesus but Not the Church (Zondervan, 2007), at a conference where he was talking to other leaders about consumerism and the church. Kimball says the size of a church isn’t what makes it consumer driven, but how the leaders define success.

You’ve been talking to other pastors about consumerism in the church and the impact it’s had on our theology. How do you begin to recognize that impact?
You hear a lot of the complaints and valid criticism about the church being “a provider of religious goods and services,” as Darrell Guder says in the Missional Church. I started thinking about my own church and asking could the leadership be the ones who are really guilty of this? How did that happen?

I began to think about our meeting spaces. The early church met in homes where it is easier to participate, people can contribute, can be more vocal, make a meal, whatever. And then worship moved to the Roman basilicas and the format changed. People became more passive, but they still walked around and engaged. After the Reformation pews were brought in and people began to understand church different because they become passive. Expectations of a pastor and a leader become different. People expected us to do things for them.

So how has that translated into the church today?
We’ve been taught that this is how church goes. This is what you’re supposed to do. But now we’re making it better and bigger—better seating, better lighting, better sermons, better parking, better children’s ministry, better youth ministry. We’re simply fueling the whole thing.

But all of the consumer assumptions underneath are the same.
Yeah. And we haven’t yet challenged those assumptions. But my bigger question is what is this producing? Is it really producing people who are living and demonstrating the fruit of the Spirit in their lives? Are they loving one another and loving God more? What are we looking at for success?

So what is your sense? Are the ‘bigger and better’ churches producing the fruit of the Spirit?
I think it depends on the church leadership. As you talk to different leaders you pick up what they focus on. Ask them how they define success or what are they most excited about. That’s an interesting question. It reveals a lot. You can have a church of twenty thousand but what are you looking at as success? If I walked up to a person at your church would they say I’m here to get my religious goods and services. Or would they say I’m an active participant in the mission of this church, and this big worship meeting is just one part of it. Of course you can go to a small worship meeting and have the same exact thing. So it’s not about big church or little church necessarily.

So what are you guys doing at Vintage Faith to question those underlying assumptions of consumer faith?
We are asking God to transform us into a worshiping community of missional theologians.

Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Say that again.
We’re asking God to transform us (because it can’t be done through human effort); into a worshiping community (because we want to be worshipers first); of missional theologians (because if we’re on a mission in our culture we have to be thinkers).

We’re calling the church more of a missional training center as much as we can. We’re launching community groups. We’re calling them "community groups" even though we see them as house churches, but that name has weird connotations for some.

And what about your worship on Sunday, does that look different too?
Not really. Sunday meetings are just one part of the rhythm of the wekk when we all gather together, and we try to express worship to God and to teach in ways that creatively reflect who we are and the values we are striving to hold. Sundays are about community, care, worship and Scripture. But I’d hope that if you were to walk up to someone in our church and ask them “What is church?” they wouldn’t talk about the big meeting but about being on a mission.

Posted by UrL at May 29, 2007 | Comments (10)

February 5, 2007

We Aren't About Weekends

One Sunday Pastor Bob Roberts asked everyone in the congregation at NorthWood Church in Keller, Texas, to invert the collar of the person in front of them, find the label, and call out the nation where the shirt was made. China, India, Vietnam, Mexico, Chile, Kenya, Dominican Republic, and Spain were all mentioned before someone finally said "USA."

The shirts on their backs came from all over the world. It was Bob's way of reinforcing his recurring theme of glocalization, synonymous with Thomas Friedman's "the earth is flat." It describes today's seamless integration between the local and global, a comprehensive connectedness produced by travel, business, and communications.

"Glocal is as important a term to the 21st century as postmodern and seeker were to the 20th century," says Roberts, who has written two books, Transformation: How Glocal Churches Transform Lives and the World (Zondervan, 2006) and Glocalization: How Followers of Jesus Engage a Flat World (Zondervan, 2007).

He has applied the concept in quiet but effective ways at NorthWood, a church of 2,000 in suburban Fort Worth that has helped plant some 89 other churches in the last 15 years. The focus of NorthWood and all the daughter churches is not gathering people inside the sanctuary; it's clearly missional.

"We aren't about weekends," Bob says. "We aren't just trying to get people into church. It's 'kingdom in, kingdom out.'"

This means each church emphasizes weekday ministry in local neighborhoods as well as ongoing ministry with a particular nation overseas. NorthWood, for instance, has continuing ministries in Puebla, Mexico, and sends people several times a year to both Vietnam and Afghanistan to help with orphans, education, clinics, small businesses, water purification, and more.

Over three days, including both a weekend and a weekday, Leadership interviewed Bob about life in a glocal church.

What is the mission of NorthWood Church?

Glocal transformation.

You mean transformation of individuals or of communities or what?

All of it. It starts with individuals. But it can't stop there.

Societies are built on several domains:

• The family, from which we get our values.

• The tribe, from which we get our culture.

• The city, from which we get our livelihood.

• The nation, from which we get our security and our trade.

Finally, the world. And all of that is within the realm of the kingdom of God. We use the word glocal, meaning the kingdom encompasses all of this, local and global.

The number one result of God's kingdom is transformation of all the sectors.

Wow. That's some purpose …

No, that's our mission. Our purpose is to glorify God. I'm still Augustinian in my theology.

Okay. So what's your church's role in this transformation?

We're a connection center between believers and all of society's domains. Jesus told his disciples to be his witnesses, to live out and proclaim the gospel, in "Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth."

"Jerusalem" is where we live and work. We train our people to view their vocation as their "Jerusalem" ministry. From there, we teach them to use their vocation and skills to intersect a domain locally ("Judea") and to other nearby cultures—for us, Mexico is our "Samaria"—and globally to the "ends of the earth" (we define that as a hard place in the world, and for us, that's Vietnam and Afghanistan).

Continue reading the interview with Bob Roberts on our Christian Vision Project webpage.

Posted by UrL at February 5, 2007 | Comments (6)

February 2, 2007

Forecasting the Future

I have just finished reading James Martin’s The Meaning of the 21st Century. And—in my opinion anyway—every person who seeks to influence others to the Christian way ought to be conversant with this book. Don’t expect to find a Christian point of view about the future—just the opposite, in fact. But you will get a catalog of the issues that humanity faces in the next few decades. The issues are political, economic, technological, scientific, and, I believe, moral.

Martin, who comes out of the world of Oxford, spends most of his time ruminating on the social and economic impacts of computers and technology. So says the book jacket. His mind is deep and broad which is to say that he knows lots of things. And this book demonstrates it.

I found myself fascinated, not threatened, by James Martin for several reasons. First, because he is an intellectual who represents the totally secularized mind. It doesn’t hurt to acquaint ourselves with what people like him really sound like.

Second, because Martin has done his homework within the world he’s defined for himself. In other words, he’s thought through this stuff and isn’t going to be easily dismissed. Push back at him if you want, but you better have done your homework.

Thirdly, because he’s identified the issues of real consequence that every one of us will soon be living with, like it or not. Live twenty more years, and every one of Martin’s concerns will be on your mind…daily.

Finally, I appreciated Martin’s call to civilization to make some tough conversion-like decisions (some of which I think are plainly spiritual) if it cares to see the planet survive the 21st century. I wish I heard more voices in my faith tradition speaking as clearly as Martin does.

At this point in my life, I have felt a freshened call to do whatever I can each day to encourage and cheerlead a younger generation of Christian leaders. To challenge them to deepen their communion with God, to rediscover the Biblical building blocks that lead to a durable and resilient faith, to call people to a vibrant witness to Jesus which is less about words and more about meaningful initiatives that align with God’s purposes. And James Martin helps me identify another aspect of this call. To persuade younger men and women to become more involved and influential in the emerging planet-wide dialogues (everything from Starbucks to Davos) about the imperiled future of the human race. I think Jesus would like us to do this.

Read more of Gordon MacDonald's forcast of the future at Leadership's homepage.

Posted by UrL at February 2, 2007 | Comments (10)

January 12, 2007

Missional Buzz

The upcoming winter issue of Leadership will wrestle with the meaning of a very popular word—missional. Tim Conder, pastor of Emmaus Way in Durham, North Carolina, says, “So many fellowships that once boldly self-identified as cell churches, meta-churches, house churches, seeker-style, or purpose-driven now claim to be missional. It’s such a buzzword that it’s fair to ask, ‘Is there really any such thing as a missional church?’ Tim’s full article on the subject is featured in Leadership’s theme section, “Going Missional.” Here is a preview.

The game show To Tell the Truth pitted three guests (two imposters plus the day’s mystery guest who had some unusual occupation or accomplishment) against a panel of celebrities. The panelists asked questions of the guests, trying to identify which one actually had that occupation or accomplishment. The show ended dramatically when the truth was revealed: “Will the real ____________ stand up!”

Today, it would be almost impossible for “the real missional church” to stand up. Yes, there are plenty of imposters, but there’s no one true example to play the day’s mystery guest. And any panel of celebrities probably wouldn’t accept the outcome.
So many fellowships that once boldly self-identified as cell churches, meta-churches, house churches, seeker-style, or purpose-driven now claim to be missional. It’s such a buzzword that it’s fair to ask, “Is there really any such thing as a missional church?” Although some use the term glibly, I believe the answer is “yes.”

Missional at the core

In essence, missional churches seek to align their identity, activities, and hopes with God’s redemptive mission on earth. This is a tall order for churches that brim with cultural and programming expectations, resource abundance, iconic labels (like “evangelical” or “mainline” or “Pentecostal”), and visions of grand ambitions. The temptation is always to have a grand scheme to which we incessantly try to woo or invoke God’s presence rather see ourselves fitting into God’s agenda.

In contrast, the missional church is a corrective to or an outright rejection of commodified and cultural Christianity, steeped in institutionalism, individualism, and sentimentality.

Identifying missional churches can be difficult. Such churches are separated by identity and perspective as much as their visible forms. Nonetheless, there are some common commitments.

(1) Missional communities try to align themselves holistically with God’s theme of redemption. They resist the use of Christianity as an anesthetic to the pain of human needs and as an affirmation of the superiority of one culture’s way of life.
This is lived out in several common practices.

(2) Programming and finances are directed outward. It’s easy for much of the church’s program and fiscal reflexes to become directed internally. Emphases on church growth or “building the body” are often presented as the mission (“A larger church means more space and opportunity for our community to encounter Christ,” is the overt message, when the real message to staff is, in fact, “Keep the saints happy and coming back.”).

To counter this temptation, missional communities may cut back on programming to leave space for breathing and living. Some ministries are relocated from the safe confines of the church into the community. Financial assets are viewed as both opportunity and burden. Some missional churches have made a pattern of giving away resources without control or strings attached to reduce congregants’ sense of entitlement.

(3) Missional communities are discontent with spiritual formation as primarily cognitive assent (“I believe this to be true”). Instead, formation is presented as a way of life, a rhythm of being, and a rule of values. It emphasizes faithful living during the week rather than gathering for worship at a weekend event. The sharp boundary between the sacred and secular is evaporating as missional fellowships seek to hear God’s voice in culture and creation.

(4) Embracing the ethnic and social diversities of local communities is becoming a moral expectation. (This is one aspect of God’s voice that I believe we have heard strongly from outside the confines of the church.)

(5) Finally, missional communities are not only ardent listeners for the earmarks of God’s redemptive work in our world, these communities are passionate activists when they find the pathways and trajectories of God’s redemptive presence. The work of justice, reconciliation, peace, and spiritual direction are becoming the dominant reflexes of missional communities.

In this spirit of activism, theological debates and historical sunderings are becoming marginalized. Not only does the sacred/secular boundary blur in missional communities, but also the sharp divisions between mainline and evangelical, between Catholic and Protestant, and even between Western and Eastern Christianity.

When I think of broad-based and radical changes like this, no single community or individual leader can stand up, “tell the truth,” and perfectly embody the spirit of that revolution before a panel of inquirers. The missional church is diverse beyond single models and dominant voices. It comes in Reformed and post-reformation varieties, new monastic and post-church gatherings, and in transitional churches building missional ministry on their traditional foundations.

The missional church is far from complete; the exploration has just begun. But from the wide-angle, historical lens of God’s great redemptive narrative, the task remains the same—to find and join God’s gracious work.

Tim Conder is the founding pastor of Emmaus Way in Durham, North Carolina, and author of The Church in Transition: The Journey of Existing Churches into the Emerging Culture (Zondervan, 2006). This post is excerpted from an article in the Winter 2007 issue of Leadership.

Posted by UrL at January 12, 2007 | Comments (30)

January 2, 2007

Book Review: Reimagining Evangelism

Eight centuries ago St. Francis of Assisi famously told his followers to “Preach the gospel always. And use words if necessary.” Like Francis, Rick Richardson’s new book Reimagining Evangelism: Inviting Friends on a Spiritual Journey (Intervarsity, 2006) challenges our popular assumptions about outreach. To jumpstart our discussion of Richardson’s ideas we’ve invited David Robinson, pastor of Harvest Fellowship Church in Manhattan, Kansas, to review his book.

Rick Richardson opens his book, Reimagining Evangelism, with this statement…“Over the years, evangelism has gotten a bad name. It is sales, manipulation, TV preachers, big hair, pushing people to convert and going door to door. It elicits feelings similar to the intrusive practice of telemarketing.” People are repelled by cliché images of evangelism and the church’s tendency to reduce the dynamic work of God into an easy to read, streamlined, impersonal message. After our recent barrage of political ads, it’s frightening to consider their similarities with certain methods of evangelism.

Reimagining proposes a fundamental shift in our current image of evangelism. If we are to engage people in this consumer culture with the gospel message, Richardson believes we first need to rid ourselves of this unhealthy image of evangelism as “closing the deal” on some impersonal spiritual sales call. He proposes the image of a travel guide who encourages those around them to recognize what is already going on and invite them to take part in God’s much bigger story.

I appreciate how Richardson plainly states that those who follow Christ need to see themselves as collaborators with the Holy Spirit in guiding people on a spiritual journey. I think he does an excellent job of showing how evangelism is not exclusively reserved for a special group of Christians, but is something that we are all gifted to be a part of.

He takes this a step further by saying that evangelism is not to be seen as simply the role of one individual, but that entire communities have a role as well. In his challenging 3rd chapter he claims that there is a shift “to a central focus on community in the process of conversion” taking place. He states repeatedly that conversion is not to be seen as a “me and God thing”, but instead as a family affair where we shift allegiance from the world to Jesus. In our “commitment-phobic” culture, this shift puts a much greater emphasis on healthy, authentic communities that understand their identity and their role. This importance of our corporate witness is certainly something the Church today needs to consider.

Richardson understands that we live in a spiritually hungry and self-absorbed time. He reminds us that what many people need know about Christ is that those who follow him can be trusted. I appreciate not only Richardson’s clear writing and to-the-point style, but also his spirit of humility and vulnerability throughout. May we be the kind of communities who will guide others on the spiritual journey with the same spirit of humility and vulnerability.

Reimagining Evangelism
Inviting Friends on a Spiritual Journey
By Rick Richardson

Posted by UrL at January 2, 2007 | Comments (13)

December 5, 2006

Missional Bricks and Mortar

A few years ago churches that were serious about their work were “purpose-driven.” Today those same churches might call themselves “missional.” The upcoming winter issue of Leadership will ask what exactly it means to be missional. David Fitch is a regular contributor to Out of Ur, pastor of Life on the Vine, a missional community in Long Grove, Illinois, and the author of The Great Giveaway. In this post Fitch asks if owning a building is contrary to missional church values.

Is buying a building always contra being missional? Upon first instinct, the answer would be yes. Certainly missional gatherings would hesitate to invest in a traditional church building. But are there times when inhabiting a building might itself be incarnational according to missional logic?

One positive thing about the end of modernity is that truth cannot be held captive by the rational, the strictly representational, or the logocentric. It must be embodied. So we who live in these times naturally resist any attempts to strip truth of its embodiment. Missional living, we say, must be incarnational.

But if truth is to be embodied, if we are not going to be limited to only words, then we must embody ourselves as a physical presence in the community. This might include inhabiting a building.

I am sure many, perhaps the majority, of missional communities will gravitate towards meeting in homes. But if embodiment in a community requires this community to see us, watch our way of life, see they way we welcome and engage the hurting, recognize God in our architecture, our meals, our artwork and worship, then there might be times when we should take residence in a place that is visible to the community. I know this goes against all missional thinking, so I am just asking, at what point does a building become incarnational?

I understand the resistance of missional churches to own buildings. They are cumbersome, require resourses, and often push the church into an attractional mentality as opposed to a missional/incarnational one where the church is dispersed into the world. This is all good. But I argue that there are times and places (not all times and all places) where buildings, sanctuaries, and physical architecture might be the very expression of such an incarnational community. In other words, part of incarnation might be the very brick and mortar of the sacred space we gather in. A building could exemplify and point all who would see it toward the reality of God.

There might be therefore, a stage in the development of some missional communities when a building makes sense. Some of our best examples of missional communities have made investments in buildings (like Solomon’s Porch and Jacob’s Well). In order to be missional we might need buildings, particularly buildings that resist the impression that Christ is another thing for distribution at a Walmart. Not a big box church, but a building where artists render the theology of our life together upon its space. We might need a building to feed the poor, to give sanctuary to the victimized. We might need a physical space that wipes the blank stare off modern people's eyes to see a reoriented world under the Lordship of Christ.

To all those who meet in houses, I am sure all of this can be done in a home gathering. It is possible that art, meal, architecture, and furniture can embody the incarnational Christ in a living room. But sometimes it might be ok to devote a building for this purpose. Not a grandiose big box where the sign of the cross is not visible. Not a monstrous and expensive edifice that dwarfs and disfigures the surrounding community with corporate pretense. But a church inhabiting the community which visibly embodies the life of Christ in our midst. I think sometimes (not all the times, and it requires discernment) such a building is incarnational.

Consider all of the dying vestiges of a past church life in the cities where His Body once lived but somehow died or moved on. Many city neighborhoods desperately need a visible witness of the new life made possible in Christ. As long as the missional incarnational DNA remains, I believe these old buildings might be the very places for a re-incarnation of the gospel.

Our congregation started in an abandoned church building after the previous church closed. We filled it with art, camped out on its property, and now seek to engage the community from its launching pad. It provides the base for the Presense in the bland suburbs. In the midst of the urban landscape, and especially the suburbs, there may be times when such old buildings provide the basis for a uniqiue physical presense? What do you think?

Posted by UrL at December 5, 2006 | Comments (20) | TrackBack

October 10, 2006

Preventing the End of the World

The world is shrinking. One can hardly go a day without hearing about events in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea, or Israel. Recently leaders from around the world gathered in New York for President Clinton’s Global Initiative Conference to discuss the challenges we face. Pastor and Leadership’s editor-at-large Gordon MacDonald was there.

I was recently invited to the Clinton Global Initiative Conference in New York City by the former president. As far as I know only a handful of evangelicals were present among approximately 1,000 political, business, and cultural leaders.

The CGI Conference is a crossroads of ideas and networking to reduce cultural and political barriers that separate human beings and create the grounds for conflict and disaster. Panel topics included (1) Energy and Climate Challenge; (2) Global Health Issues; (3) Poverty Alleviation; and (4) Mitigating Religious and Ethnic Conflict. They were populated by people like Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Colin Powell, Rupert Murdoch, Paul Farmer, Kofi Annan, Hamid Karzai, Pervez Musharraf, Bill Gates, and Paul Kagame (president of Rwanda). And I have named only a few.

Amazingly, there was little energy spent on politics. Rather there was an incredibly serious tone, a clear awareness that the world is in greater trouble today than it has ever been.

Some (like the King of Jordan) spoke of the widening rift between the Muslim world and the West in almost prophetic tones. The two cultures are misunderstanding each others’ hurts and aspirations.

Climate change, fresh outbreaks of disease, the lack of basic community health (clean water, vaccines, etc.) are all contributing to a growing frustration that threatens the stability of the entire world. Despite the drastic situation there was a streak of optimism. Perhaps that was because the people at the conference are all entrepreneurs, can-do people who choose to see the opportunities that crisis creates. There was little hand-wringing and a lot of innovative thinking.

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.

Some $7.2 billion has been pledged this year by business leaders and philanthropists in response to the Clinton Foundation Global Initiative. Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines has committed $3 billion over the next ten years to alleviation of pollution. Millions will be invested in research regarding malaria, TB, and AIDS. Laura Bush announced a new water-well program that features a low-tech pump powered by merry-go-rounds that function as children spin them in their play.

I left the CGI conference with several feelings in my heart.

1. I had appreciation for the seriousness with which these people addressed the topics at hand. There was no glitz, no posturing. This conference made me increasingly less interested in who is Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative, Christian or Muslim, and far more interested in the question of who wants to save lives and offer hope and human dignity.

2. These people really believe that the end of the world (the end of humanity anyway) is a distinct possibility if these issues are not addressed globally, dramatically, cooperatively. I respect their seriousness. I will probably die before the full effects of our failure to act are felt. But my children will not, and their children will face a greatly diminished world of opportunity and security.

3. I felt that I was with people who have great compassion for the situation of the poor. Yes, to be candid, some of it is motivated monetary self-interest. More than once it was said that dealing with disease and poverty is simply good business. But there was also a great sense of moral responsibility.

4. I saw in my encounters with Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists that we have a lot of learning to do about who these people are. We have fallen into stereotypes which reinforce our positions rather than seek out the points of commonality that lead to partnership on global issues. When a man says to you, “I was raised by a mother who taught me that all things belong to God and that I must handle what is given to me with care and generosity,” and he is a Muslim, I have to stop and ask “what have I been missing all these years?”

5. Finally, I was personally moved by the drastic situation of the poor in our world. One message that kept coming through in the conference—before you get caught up in the big expensive ideas, spend time asking what you yourself can do as an individual. On the way home, I made a little list that began with becoming more disciplined about energy use, and cultivating relationships with people of other faiths.

When I got home, I took out my Bible and re-read Jesus’ words in the synagogue at Capernaum: “The Spirit of the Lord is on me because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He had sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” The words took on new meaning.

Posted by UrL at October 10, 2006 | Comments (32) | TrackBack

October 4, 2006

Catalytic Conversations: A beautiful and messy kingdom.

Leadership editor Marshall Shelley is in Atlanta this week for the Catalyst Conference, where 9,000 mostly younger leaders of churches are meeting to discuss ministry in today’s culture. Here’s his first report.

The conference officially begins tomorrow. Today was filled with “labs,” 15 seminars on topics ranging from “Passion” (led by pastors Eugene Peterson, Craig Groeschel, and Mark Buchanan) to “Culture” (writers Andy Crouch and Lauren Winner, and the National Endowment for the Arts’ Erik Lokkesmoe) to “Mission” (Shane Claiborne, Mike Foster, and Gary Haugen).

Right now I’m sitting in the balcony of the Performing Arts Center, where in a few minutes an informal “unplugged” session will feature a conversation between neo-church pastors Chris Seay of Ecclesia in Houston and Rick McKinley of Imago Dei Community Church in Portland, Oregon, and a Rwandan pastor whose name I don’t know.

I heard McKinley for the first time this afternoon when he presented a lab on “This Beautiful Mess: a conversation on the Kingdom.” Most people, especially the Catalyst crowd, know McKinley as “the pastor of the church where Donald Miller of ‘Blue Like Jazz’ goes.” So I was somewhat surprised that Miller’s name was never mentioned during the introduction or the hour-long session. But McKinley didn’t need any borrowed credibility.

To the crowd of 300 or so, he offered a concise and provocative discussion of the relationship of the church to the Kingdom of God. This was theology, imminently practical theology.

“As pastors, we are tempted to build the church,” he said. “So we send out postcards to targeted Zip codes and we promote church programs.” But that misses the point, he argued. “Our job isn’t to build the church. We’re supposed to BE the church, and build the kingdom.” He emphasized that the kingdom is to be experienced NOW, on earth, as Christians exemplify godly living, but he also pointed out, as the recent school shootings demonstrate, that the kingdom is also “not yet.” God’s kingdom won’t be realized in its fullness as long as such sin characterizes our world.

He identified why many U.S. churches don’t “get” the kingdom. The first reason is our individualistic culture. Ours is a “me and Jesus” spiritual life, disconnected from Creation, environment, relationships, and our surrounding community. Another reason is our tendency toward dualism: church vs. culture; sacred vs. secular; spiritual vs. physical. And ignoring the integration of those elements.

McKinley acknowledges the importance of Christ’s atonement for the forgiveness of individuals, but as he emphasized, “The best expression of the church is NOT what happens on Sunday morning. It’s what happens in the world during the week. And that’s not something you can market.”

His most provocative statements focused on the Christian’s calling to love their neighbors, even if those neighbors don’t respond to Christ or clean up their act. He told of his church’s messy efforts to love those with addictions, mental illnesses, and other conditions that aren’t easily cleaned up.

“We’re not called to change people’s behavior; we’re called to love them whether they change or not. It’s up to God to change them.”

After the lab, hallway conversations were discussing how you can “love the addicted” without “enabling” their dysfunction and thus perpetuating their addiction.

If this is indicative of the level of conversation, this year’s Catalyst is embracing both theology and practice, and getting to the heart of the Christian calling.

Posted by Marshall Shelley at October 4, 2006 | Comments (4) | TrackBack

September 25, 2006

Pop Justice: Is social action the latest church trend?

What do a pastor, a politician, and a pop star have in common? Until recently, not much. But Bono, lead singer of the band U2, has managed to unite these unlikely groups around the issue of social justice. As a self-appointed ambassador for the poor, Bono has helped the evangelical church in America become more sensitive to those in need around the world and awakened our marginalized, or in some places forgotten, call to seek justice. But, is the new focus on social justice just another pop-Christian trend? This week Dan Kimball, pastor of Vintage Faith Church in Santa Cruz, California, ponders that question.

I had a very, very haunting conversation with a good friend who is a pastor at a church in southern California. We hadn't seen each other for awhile and as we were catching up he was excited about a ministry he was starting with used clothing stores where all the profit goes to orphanages. My friend has had social justice and compassion ministries as major part of his church ethos since it began many years ago, definitely in the PB (pre-Bono) dispensation.

As he was showing me photos of his latest venture with the clothing stores he stopped and said, almost with embarrassment, "This sounds really trendy, doesn't it?” What was haunting to me and what I have thought about since the conversation I had with my friend, is what if it is true? What if social justice and compassion projects are simply the latest trend?

In recent years many churches have become involved in social justice issues, or at least talking about it. Saddleback and Willow Creek have both jumped onboard very strongly, including being a global voice for AIDS. I rarely ever go to a Christian concert, but during the last two I attended videos were shown of the band members in Africa talking about helping with Compassion International and the Invisible Children. And lately it seems at every leaders now bring attention to some international compassion or social justice project they are supporting. This is all so wonderful and must please Jesus so incredibly much.

Bono has certainly caused us all to really evaluate the "sleeping giant" (what he called the church several years ago) and how the church was ignoring the poverty, injustice, and AIDS crisis. He recently said the church has woken up and has now taken notice. But, will it last or will it fade like every other trend?

My friend’s comment got me thinking because over the years I have seen the church get excited about "small groups", or about being "seeker sensitive," or "Vineyard worship music" and other various bandwagons the church jumps on for a season. And there have been many other trends that I wasn’t a part of like cell churches, or using the baseball diamond for assimilation, or the breakouts of laughing in the Spirit by certain types of churches, or radio preaching, or whatever it may be. Whatever the trend the routine is the same. First there is excitement, then early innovators adopt them (maybe not the laughing in the Spirit), then in time most churches may do it. But eventually, it passes and we wait for the next “new” thing.

I keep wondering if all the attention the church at large is now rightfully and biblically giving to social justice could fade through time. Will we still see Christian bands showing videos of themselves in Africa five years from now? Will conferences spend time promoting compassion ministries and AIDS awareness five or ten years in the future? Will all the pastors and church leaders who today are such strong voices justice to the people in their churches still maintain that voice in the years ahead?

Of course, even if for some Christians and churches it is only a short-term trend even doing something short while still helps people and is greatly needed. So, I don't want to dismiss those who jump in while the conversation is prominent, as any help is very, very welcomed. But it seems horribly sad if this rising interest in justice is only-short term. I hope that is avoided, and the rising interest in compassion for the poor, AIDS, and caring for those with needs locally will not simply be a "trend.” Hopefully it won’t fade away, but instead we will come to see it as central to what it means to be a disciple of Jesus. I guess time will tell.

Posted by UrL at September 25, 2006 | Comments (17) | TrackBack

August 24, 2006

Scum of the Church 2: What churches should learn from ‘80s youth ministry

Many churches are struggling to reach young adults. The conversation on Out of Ur for the last two weeks has wrestled with this problem. Brian McLaren believes we need to be asking different questions of those who’ve grown up in the church and left. Mike Sares, pastor of Scum of the Earth Church in Denver, sees a clash between the values of the Boomers and today’s young adults.

In part two of his post, Sares describes how his church tries to accommodate the styles and values of young adults. He believes the same strategies used in the 1980s to reach teens need to be employed today—rather than putting up cultural barriers we need to be as winsome as possible and connect with the young adult crowd.

At times we at Scum of the Earth Church are criticized for having church on Sunday nights as opposed to Sunday mornings. The fear is that we are turning a blind eye to the things that happen in clubs and bars on Saturday nights, thus enabling lifestyles which may be contrary to the gospel. That is not our intent. We just want to make it as easy as possible for people to come to church. Boomer churches understood this concept when they chose to dress casually for church on Sundays compared to the formal attire of their parents' churches.

We've taken that a step further. Eric Bain, my co-pastor, got some flak from a Christian-college-educated young man when Eric wore an MTV t-shirt while he was preaching and used an illustration taken from "Punk'd," one of the network's popular shows. According to the young man, Eric was silently promoting a television network that would be injurious to people's spirituality.

While Eric acknowledged that everything on MTV may not be beneficial, he was attempting to connect with the crowd. He was being winsome.

The same is true in the style of our services. We are extremely laid-back. People ask me if we scream punk-rock hymns and have a mosh-pit during corporate worship. Others want to know if our style is more Industrial, Techno, Heavy Metal or Hip-Hop. In truth we are more "Emo" than anything else; but we wouldn't have a problem with any church adopting the styles mentioned because we realize that those can be used in legitimate expressions of faith.

I see it all as ‘80s youth ministry grown up. The emerging church movement is as varied as the youth groups of the 1980s. Youth pastors tailored their ministries to the kids God put in front of them. The Presbyterian Church in the suburbs had a totally different tack than the inner-city storefront church. Youth pastors adapted a missionary mindset depending on the "tribe" of kids they were reaching. Those various tribes each had their own music, slang language, dress codes and even moral codes so each youth ministry looked different.

The emergent church is a "flock of singularities," meaning that it's like a bunch of different birds that all fly together in some kind of loose formation. The great denominations seem to be on the decline with the next generation partly because there is a mindset that if something can be duplicated everywhere, then there is also something about it that is not genuine. It's the same thinking that leads the young people I know to distrust Wal-Mart and Starbucks; they prefer the homegrown, local varieties instead. Churches like Solomon's Porch, Jacob's Well, Frontline, The Portico, Urban Skye, etc., are as different as the people they reach and nurture.

Still, the great liturgies of the Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Presbyterian and Orthodox churches are not going to vanish. Who knows, they may even grow with the generations yet to come! The church of Jesus has always adapted in order to love people with the love of God. And that's the way it is.

This article was edited and modified from, "Young Adults and the Church: The Way Things Are," in SAMJournal issue 159

Posted by UrL at August 24, 2006 | Comments (23) | TrackBack

August 21, 2006

Scum of the Church: How the drive for “excellence” is driving young adults from the church

Recently, Brian McLaren challenged us to ask new questions about the absence of young adults in most churches. Mike Sares, pastor of Scum of the Earth Church in Denver, continues the topic by discussing the divergent values he has encountered between older and younger generations of Christians.

You may recall Sares told the story last year of the poet who dropped the f-bomb during their Christmas Eve service—with his permission. That triggered one of the most vigorous conversations Out of Ur has ever hosted. While likely less controversial, I trust Sares will challenge your thinking once again.

Every generation is quick to point out the hypocrisy of the one that preceded it. The generation born just after WWII began rejecting the values of their parents during the '60s. Now it's their kids’ turn.

Today’s young adults see a generation of baby-boomer Christians that has striven for "excellence" in every part of church life. Boomers proclaimed in the 1980s that image is everything, and their churches have reflected that cultural trend. The nurseries have got to be sparkling clean, the church buildings are marvelously functional as opposed to artistic, the music is as close to FM radio quality as possible (even if they must hire a band), the Sunday services are seamless with perfect transitions (just like television), the preaching is entertaining and informative (but not so deep as to offend visitors), and the plants on stage are beautiful (but artificial).

As a result, according to Dieter Zander, the next generation has concluded that "everything is image," and therefore nothing can be trusted. Church is too slick, too good, too polished to be real. And the twenty-something hunger for raw authenticity just doesn’t fit in.

Reece and Keith were twenty-one and still idealistic enough to think that church should be a place that accepts people just the way they are. But that idealism was challenged when the last church they attended asked them to “Please remove your lip rings and nose rings, and cover up your tattoos so you are not a distraction to the other worshippers.” Thankfully Reese and Keith’s commitment to Christ outweighed the misguided reverence of their older siblings in the Lord. They were able to find another place they could worship, learn, give, encourage, and be held accountable.

But what about the rest? What about the ones who never recover from the stares, whispers, or misapplied Bible verses that condemn the way so many young adults dress and live? What about the ones who never see Christianity as relevant past grade school? What about the thousands of young adults who have never stepped foot into a church, and judge Christianity solely by what they see in the movies, on television, or in other media? How do we welcome them back into our churches?

It’s been my experience that twenty-somethings simply want permission to struggle. Most fear that they are not good enough for God's family. Each week they are told about the standards they are expected to keep, and each week they are led to believe that the rest of the church is somehow keeping up. This "silence about the struggle" quietly drives young adults away from churches all over the country. One of the highest compliments the pastor of an emerging church can receive is to be told that his/her own difficulty in following Christ has given someone hope that they, too, can fail and still keep following Jesus.

Twenty-somethings also see a generation ahead of them in the church that cannot live well with moral ambiguity. Boomer Christians tend to divide the world into three categories: the holy, the secular, and the downright sinful. For example, there was a debate years ago about whether or not Amy Grant had "sold out" when she left the Christian recording industry and crossed over to the secular market. It wasn't evil, boomers would say, but neither was it holy.

The new generation of Christians, however, tends to see only two categories: the holy and the sinful. This means things that previously fell into the "secular" category are now open for consumption and experimentation without judgment. Take, for example, tattoos. I am often asked the proper spelling of Greek or Hebrew words for a young adult’s decidedly Christian tattoos; but then, a Chinese dragon or skull and crossbones is just as accept