the aimlessly ambling church

It appears that it is quite popular to be out-of-the-box thinkers in church leadership these days . . . so long as you are out-of-the-box in certain ways in certain directions with certain ideas.  We can't have complete rebellion here.  Until now.  In order to be a rebel without a cause in our Christian faith we are going to need to reconsider everything . . . going intentionally unintentional, purposefully purposeless, and being committed to non-commitment.

This may seem initially contradicting, but it is bound to work for it is the outworking of creating a self-defining system of church life that fixes everything else the church has been doing - right or wrong - for the days between us and the apostles.

Step One: Secure a Pastor.  One of the problems with pastors is that many of them actually want to be the spiritual leaders in a church.  There is obviously something wrong with such self-centered hubris, thus we cannot trust anyone who claims to be called into full-time ministry.  Probably, these are men and women who simply don't want to go to a "real job" and have become a pastor to fill their own desires of self-aggrandizement.  Solution: Wait for a suitable person to wander into the church building (perhaps looking to use the bathroom, needing a box of food, or who thought this was a Presbyterian church).  Secure an ankle bracelet around them and inform them that this is their new vocation.  They don't come with the baggage of biblical training, church leadership, lofty seminary ideals like praying, etc.  In fact, they will be submissive to the church leadership as a whole since they didn't even ask to be the pastor . . . and they don't have a key to the ankle monitor.

Step Two: Worship Services (or Not).  This becomes a bit tricky since we all feel as though Christians should have a weekly gathering.  (Well, those of us who have yet to discover that weekly church is simply something to do when your weekend is out of other options.)  To gather or not?  Hmm.  And, if there is the decision to have music during said service then we should ensure that no music that existed before our church was started is used - simply because there was no concept of proper Christianity until this congregation was established, so how could any of them be correct in their perspective?  Solution: Weekly gatherings happen whenever there are people who show up.  One would think that the pastor would always be at the service, but the anklet doesn't work that way: You see, this is an aimless and ambling church so the pastor is given the freedom to explore his/her own spirituality and not required to be at the church.  In fact, we would prefer he not passively demand our presence with his presence.  Unless we are there, then the pastor should be there.

Step Three: A Prayerful Place.  It is clear that everybody wants prayer.  Unfortunately, the act of praying can become long, tired and boring; nobody is really interested in praying.  Solution: The aimlessly ambling church will be a place of prayerful expression, though we will not infringe on anyone's personal praying habits.  Whatever prayers are satisfactory for the individual are acceptable, for it isn't as though there are particular rules for praying (i.e., no guidelines or specific teachings).  Also, corporate prayer gatherings will not be planned, for groups that pray together are probably cliques that are subverting the unity of the church anyway.

Step Four: Small Groups.  Small groups have been the conventional wisdom of those seeking to go against conventional wisdom in traditional church for some time.  However, the subdivision of the church into groups has often been linked to factions within the body, unless they are groups getting together to watch the Super Bowl.  Solution: We will neither encourage nor discourage small groups in the aimlessly ambling church.  Either way we are providing direction, and we are already committed (in an uncommitted way) not to do that.  Remember, we are true rebels . . . and nothing is more rebellious than  doing nothing to achieve everything.

Conclusion. The tradition of the church is bogus.  We all know that.  But replacing it with a different tradition under the guise of non-traditional is also bogus.  So, we're upping the ante and going non-traditional on the non-traditional.

Maybe this will work.

Or maybe we could go in the exact opposite direction, putting purpose and drive and intention to all that we say and do.



Or maybe we could just be the church instead.

simply Jesus 2

N. T. Wright, Simply Jesus (New York: HarperOne, 2011).

In Part Two of The Bishop's latest book about Jesus, we take a look at the public ministry of Jesus - what he was trying to accomplish - and how it leads to the central message of Christianity, namely, his death, resurrection, and ascension.  This is the longest of the three sections of the book, and (along with the rest of the investigation) provides an introduction that works out of a type of 'translation' of who Jesus is, what he said, and what he accomplished.  Case in point comes with Chapter Six: "God's in Charge Now" - this is Wright's way of translating the impact of Jesus' proclamation, in word and deed, that the kingdom of God has come.

Wright places the notion of God's kingdom come, as proclaimed in the public ministry of Jesus, within the context of a new exodus event, steeped in the heritage of Israel.  Second Temple Judaism held fast to the belief that God had created the world and was able to overcome its evils just as he brought Israel out of captivity and bondage in Egypt through the exodus event.  Thus, Wright includes seven themes of the exodus event that will significantly play out in the remainder of the book (64).

Chapter Seven then speaks about the beginning of this campaign of the kingdom of God.  It comes through celebration, healing, and forgiveness (68ff.).  Central to Jesus' mission, however, was that God was coming with his own agenda - going to the outsiders and lost.  "Their God isn't simply coming to endorse their national ambitions" (77).  Of course, this led many to question Jesus on many levels, not least of which was his very forerunner, John the Baptist (80f.).  In this context the radical nature of Jesus' message comes through as one who is subverting the present kingdom for the coming of another.

Chapter Eight then looks at the stories which Jesus told to explain this arriving kingdom.  Wright comes from the perspective that these stories contained echoes (87), that they connect to and build upon the stories which Israel held in their long corporate identity (89).  Jesus tells them as "kingdom explanations for Jesus's kingdom actions" (91).  Thus, Wright posits, "The very form of the parable thus embodies the content it is trying to communicate: heaven appearing on earth" (93, emphasis original).  Embedded in these stories, and thus the announcement of the kingdom, is a warning not to miss out and to embrace the transformation of hearts and the renewal of lives that is coming through Jesus' work.  "This is the point at which Jesus's whole agenda embraces the 'vocation' aspect of the ancient Exodus story" (101, emphasis original).

Chapter Nine then moves into a well-presented and succinct overview of the messianic-wannabe-activity which colored and shaped the world of Second Temple Judaism.  Far too many evangelicals are ignorant to the history of other messiahs who presented themselves as God's choice for bringing the final kingdom of God.  Included here are brief introductions to Judas Maccabeus (Judah the Hammer), Simon bar Kochba (Simon the Star), Herod the Great, and Simon Bar-Giora.  Jesus arrives into this context with his message and mission.

Chapter Ten then turns to what is probably the most significant factor in understanding Jesus as Messiah and Jesus as he is perceived as messianic within Second Temple Judaism.  In what has been a hallmark of my own understanding and teaching of Jesus for many years, Wright includes a chapter on "Battle and Temple" in which we may place the work of Jesus.  While common messianic expectations expected the battle to destroy God's enemies (presently Rome), and then cleansing the Temple as the true place and center of heaven-meets-earth worship, Jesus came with a different understanding altogether.  Wright presents that Jesus' greatest enemy was Satan (120-127), and that his enterprise of cleansing the Temple was accomplished through his followers (127-130).

Although I believe that the establishment of the church is the renewal of God's Temple through Jesus, placing me in full agreement with The Bishop, I might take a slight quibble with his notion that Jesus was fighting Satan as the archenemy.  This may initially seem small, but I think there is historical accuracy at stake, and am uncertain that Jesus would limit himself to battling Satan in personified terms when there is much to be said about the battle against sin and death in more abstract terms.  This heightens the battle and gives place to human responsibility for sin and failure - the blood of his life is on our hands - which further gives place to much of Jesus' kingdom message.  While there is nothing particularly wrong with the view that is presented here, I believe that it can be expanded to give a fuller sense of what Jesus is accomplishing.

give us rest

davidcrowder*band:

oh great God give us rest
we're all worn thin from all of this
at the end of our hope with nothing left
oh great God give us rest

oh great God do your best
have you seen this place it's all a mess
and i've done my part too well i 'fess
oh great God do your best

could you take a song and make it thine
from a crooked heart twisted up like mine
would you open up heaven's glory light
shine on in give these dead bones life
oh shine on in give these dead bones life

let it shine
let it shine
on and on
on and on
come alive

let it shine
let it shine
on and on
on and on
come alive

you shine
oh you shine

written by David Crowder and Matt Maher © 2012 sixsteps music worshiptogether.com songs

(still) tired of church, inc.

The over-systematization of church continues on, despite its continued failure as a means to effectively establish the kingdom of God in our congregational communities.  Over and again we continue to hear about how this approach or that methodology will yield the fruit of healthy congregations, yet never breaking the cycle of life that is necessary for such approaches to exist.  I previously wrote about this being the 'enterprise of church' that must provide its own fuel lest it exhaust its own effectiveness (translation: the methodology cannot provide a cure, because a cure would make the methodology unnecessary [further translation: it is good business for those who consult to keep a situation in which they can consult.].).

One of the more recent buzz-words for this behavior is intentional.  We must be 'intentional' about this and that (and the other . . .) or else it doesn't work.  Ironically, much of what is set out to be labelled 'intentional' kills the work that should have been happening in the first place.  This happens because we are overanalyzing (not over-thinking) situations where common sense would be good (and Christian thought even better).  The quest to be 'intentional' has simply become the latest label for what some self-appointed experts deem acceptable within leadership.  It is to imply that embarking on any direction without the consideration and implementation of whatever 38 steps are currently en vogue is random and pointless wandering.  (Someone should have told this to Israel, who wandered in the wilderness recklessly thinking it was God's will they needed, rather than intentional leadership . . . Moses was such a failure by today's church leadership, if judging on the intentional-will-get-you-where-you-need-to-go scale.)

Contrary to the objections which might be raised against my point, non-intentional leadership (when so narrowly defined) is not aimless.  For that matter, wandering in the wilderness is not aimless* (I shall come back to this one, I think), if it is following the pillar of cloud and fire that is God's presence.  And, as we should have discovered by now, his fiery presence refuses to be systematized.  But, the argument for being intentional (so narrowly defined) will continue to be made, so long as certain people need to make their living in the corporate constructs of church, church leadership, church consulting, denominationalism, etc.

Hence, I am (even more than before) tired of the Church, Inc. mentality that is getting in the way of meeting people where they are for the sake of the kingdom of God.  In fact, Church, Inc. mostly requires that ordinary people within our congregations accommodate to the leadership of the statist church.  (And I always thought good leaders related to others, not vice versa.)  In practice, the lingo and theories and philosophies that are handed over to the good men and women of a particular congregation are confusing and overwhelming.  These folks are typically average people who have not been trained in the practices of pastoring, and who simply want to have a straightforward discussion of how to make our church move forward.  Those who operate out of Church, Inc. fail to deliver this.

There is a broad gap between those who write, speak, and conduct church leadership events and those who are in the thick of it at a church.  What they do not need is a litany of evaluations, surveys, training seminars, 17 steps to making a better community, or some video curriculum that teaches everyone how to effectively use terms such as relational development.  My experience is that we can use all the fancy lingo and method that we want, we can have the Sam's Club of resource libraries, but without love we are a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

It seems that the most basic command is still ours to achieve: love.  The world, both in and out of the church, from suited leadership to church custodian, need to receive love and move in love.  That will be more powerful than everything else we try to convince ourselves is so important.  Then we will follow him on the path to which he has called us, rather than the path charted out in some introduction of a book that will be obsolete by the end of the year.

simply Jesus 1

N. T. Wright. Simply Jesus. (New York: HarperOne, 2011).

The latest work by noted scholar and theologian, known here as The Bishop, is an incredible book about Jesus.  Yes, Wright has written two significant books about Jesus, and yet has decided to offer another.  As he quipped during a recent speaking engagement, "Jesus hasn't changed, but I have" - thus he has once again entered the world of Jesus scholarship and takes the reader on a powerful journey to a better understanding of who Jesus was (and is), and the context in which he came with his message of kingdom.

There are times when you run across a book that so resonates with your own belief systems that you feel almost as though you could have written it.  For me, this is one of those books (not to sound as though I consider myself on par with The Bishop).  What I mean to say is that I so appreciate and enjoy the manner in which Wright has succinctly introduced Jesus and his first century context, that there was a resounding 'Yes!' on many pages of the book.

I want to take a series of posts to briefly review and summarize what Wright presents in Simply Jesus.

The book is divided into three parts.  In Part One Wright sets the table with his key questions and the context of Second Temple Judaism as the world into which Jesus came.  He briefly touches the question of the Gospels but is more interested in discussing Jesus than historical reliability - that he can point to other works which have made the case.  Telling in what the reader will find in this book, Wright says at the outset of Chapter Two, "Jesus is mysterious because of what we do know - what our evidence encourages us to see as the core of who he was and what he did - is so unlike what we know about anybody else that we are forced to ask, as people evidently did at the time: who, then is this?" (9, emphasis in original).

Wright strives to make the case that we must do much work in order to enter into Jesus' world, that time, space and thought are quite different now than they were then (and there).  But all of this brings about "the perfect storm" that characterizes Jesus, his identity, and his world.  Before getting at this, however, Wright takes a few pages to dispel the two major and opposing myths about Jesus - conservative and liberal.  All of this lends to Wright's overall premise that Jesus is very much unlike us today, even though most people seem to cast their own experience back into their understanding of Jesus.

What made the first-century storm?  Chapter Four outlines the factors that came together to make Second Temple Judaism and (by definition) the person and work of Jesus what the Gospels are trying to tell us.  There is the Roman storm (28-31) and the Jewish storm (31-35) which placed the confrontation of imperialism and God's covenant with his people at odds.  The hope of Israel was that God, not the Roman caesars would be king over the earth and would reign through his people Israel.  "The God who brought order out of chaos and who brought his enslaved people out of Egypt would do it again" (33).

This, according to Wright, all gave way for the great hurricane (Chapter Five) of Jesus coming into the world.  Mounting within the Second Temple period was the belief that it was time for God to become, once and finally, the one king (41).  The prophecies and prayers of Israel repeat this refrain, and the book includes a good number of such passages.  The people of God were waiting for God to be enthroned through his people, that justice and righteousness would be established on earth, and that the nations would be brought into obedience.

Of course, the biblical story is that those who were appointed to fulfill this task initially - the 'shepherds' of Israel (Ezekiel 34:2-16) - were a failure, thus leaving the story for God alone to fulfill the task of redemption and restoration on behalf of his people.  This leads to the question, ". . . would YHWH actually appear, visibly and in person, to take charge?" (50).  Further, when God does appear, it is noted that it will not look like the power struggles familiar in the imperialism of the Roman Empire (or Babylon, Persia, . . .), but with the establishment of the covenant kingdom upon the whole world (cf. 53).

Also included here is the promise of a Davidic king (2 Samuel 7), who was now expected to come and rise to the throne of Israel and establish the rule of YHWH.  When bringing this context to the life and ministry of Jesus Wright raises two questions: 1) "First, why would anyone say this of Jesus, who had not done the things people expected a victorious king to do?" and, 2) "Second, what on earth might it mean today to speak of Jesus being 'king' or being 'in charge,' in view of the fact that so many things in the world give no hint of such a thing?" (55).

These are the initial steps in Wright's approach to understanding Jesus.  Thus far he has done well to establish the preliminary context of the world into which Jesus came.  And, as I have seen time and again, getting a better grasp on Jesus' context already enlightens one to the things he said and did.  There is more contextual work in Part Two, but Wright begins to move toward a discussion about Jesus' own actions as well.  All in the work to answer the two questions of why he was considered to be Messiah, and what his present rule means for the world today.

churchgoing

"I remember, you know, you go to these parties on Saturday night and people would say, about 8:00 on Sunday morning "Whoa, I have to go - I gotta get to church!" People would say, "Why do you want to go to church, all those hypocrites." And I say, "Look, why do I want to stay here with all you hypocrites?"I never knew why going to church made you a hypocrite. They'd say because you go to church and you're all "Holy, Holy, Holy" for two or three hours, and then you go home and sin. I'd say "exactly!" For two or three hours you're doing pretty good! Maybe the problem isn't that you go to church, maybe the problem is that you go home! I never understood why going to church made you a hypocrite either, because nobody goes to church because they're perfect. If you've got it all together, you don't need to go. You can go jogging with all the other perfect people on Sunday morning Every time you go to church, you're confessing again to yourself, to your family, to the people you pass on the way there, to the people who will greet you there, that you don't have it all together. And that you need their support. You need their direction. You need some accountability, you need some help."


:rich (1995)

what were you expecting to see?

In reading through Tom Wright's latest book, Simply Jesus (HarperOne, 2011), I was struck by a few comments he makes in relation to John the Baptizer.  The Gospels demonstrate that Jesus was announcing the arrival of God's kingdom - God's rule of all nations through Israel - and that John played the role of forerunner for his arrival.  The story of John ends with his beheading while imprisoned for his outspoken criticism of Herod Antipas.

John sends his own disciples to ask Jesus the now famous question, "Are you the one who is to come, or should we expect someone else?" (Matt 11:3).  In response Jesus talks about the work he is doing to bring the kingdom of God into the world as a visible and recognizable manifestation of his announcement: blind see, lame walk, lepers cleansed, deaf hear, dead raised, good news coming to poor.  The answer which Jesus sends back to John is a powerful and resounding affirmation of his own role as the anointed one who is ushering in the kingdom of God.

And then, as the story goes, John dies alone in prison.

Wright's question to this scenario is raised well, "Why didn't it mean setting John free from prison?" (82). Indeed.  Jesus is telling John, and everyone who hears his words, that this is what the world looks like when God is in charge . . . yet, for John, it was enough to make him wonder about this new kingdom.  I think the same is true for those of us who struggle to grasp the coming of a new reality which we have not yet considered or experienced.  Perhaps this is why Jesus can be so unsettling even after we have wholeheartedly accepted his coming and his kingdom.  For, even when we believe we have grasped it, we so often discover that we are not quite ready for the demands it will make of us.

As someone who has walked many bloodied fields of church conflict and spiritual warfare, who often struggles with battle fatigue for continuing to labor for this kingdom, who must stop himself from coveting the 'successful' ministries that exist in the greener grass of the other sides, and whose broken humanity must again seek God's grace lest I despair of the life he has called me to, I need to know why the arriving kingdom of God didn't release John from prison.  Paul would eventually speak of all creation groaning for this new world to be birthed into the old (Romans 8), and John would have a vision that shows how dragons pursue those who give birth to the messiah (Revelation 12), and we should remember that the hope-filled Christmas story shook the darkness and evil so greatly that the baby boys of an entire village were murdered at the coming of God-made-flesh (Matthew 2).

This kingdom-come is messy.  This kingdom-come is hard.  This kingdom-come will put to death all that is in the kingdom-present, sometimes at the very cost of our lives.  Those who enter into the place of martyrdom have already relinquished their lives, following the demands of Christ and the proclamation of Paul that we take up our cross, die upon it, and live only by the presence of the risen Jesus within us.

For those who walk the challenging and lonely roads of ministry we need to be aware of John who, even with his monumental role in the gospel story, never made it out of prison.  This is not to be dismal and downcast, but (oddly enough) hopeful and steadfast.  As Wright says later in his comments, "This is the sharp edge of what God is doing" (84).  And, in Matthew 11, Jesus will further ask "What were you expecting to see?"  We must be conscious of the fact that the arrival of this kingdom of God comes with its own justice and righteousness to be established.  This will be done with equity, from the throne of God, but it will be a demanding and destructive (for all the powers of earth, even the human heart) experience leading to an everlasting peace.

Also, the arrival of this kingdom of God will not come in a vacuum - not in Jesus' world, nor in ours.  All hell will break loose when this kingdom comes, which is why babies are murdered, saints are martyred, churches are attacked, believers lose sight, and even church leaders become disheartened.  When we find ourselves asking if this Jesus is the one we were waiting for or if we should move on to another salvation, he will give us the calm assurance that his kingdom has come - with the raging fury of heaven and hell encircling it - and that it is in the effects of the kingdom that we find our answer.

In ministry there are struggles, hurts, pains, disappointments, and the like.  But there are also moments of love, grace, hope, and the unbridled kingdom of God restoring and renewing people, families, communities and, yes, even the world.  When we find that we are on the front lines of the battle we must recognize that he has called us to this place.  Here we can focus on the work of destruction or the work of the kingdom of God, which is more fully arrived today than ever before in the history of the world.

church football

From somewhere, I don't know its origins . . .

What Football and Church Have in Common


Draw Play: What to do with the bulletin during the service.

Halftime: The period between Sunday School and worship when many choose to leave.

Benchwarmers: Those who do not sing, pray, work, or do anything else but sit.

Staying in the Pocket: What happens to a lot of money that should be given to the Lord's work.

Two-Minute Warning: The point at which you realize the sermon is almost over and you begin gathering up your children and belongings.

End Run: Getting out of church quickly, without speaking to anyone else.

Flex Defense: The ability to allow absolutely nothing said during the sermon to affect your life.

Backfield-in-Motion: Making a trip to the back row during the service.

Blitz: The rush for the restaurants following the closing prayer.

Play like a champion today, folks.

it's the job

Listen to any surgeon complain about the odd hours of his job and you probably aren't going to have much sympathy for his plight.  The same could be said for a professional athlete who laments the long hours of traveling, or perhaps the CEO who whines over the headaches of flying coach.  There are certain jobs which the majority of folks believe to be better-than-most, and therefore (after the consideration that everybody has bad days) above the grumbling.

This is also the context in which most people consider the pastor.  In many ways this is not too far off, since there are many privileges of the pastoral vocation, even though there is a case to be made for regarding the weight of the task of leading within the church.  It is a bit of both/and here, and my thought here is that not enough is given to the heavier end because most people think that working in a church is a pretty sweet deal in which no one would have a bad day.  And yet most pastors are having more bad days than good . . . the stats should direct us to a different perception of reality.

As a pastor I know that the struggles that take place in the office will always follow me in my other areas of ministry, on vacation, through my 'distractions' and hobbies, and (worst of all) to my home.  There are many of us who fight the tendency to covet those with punch-in-punch-out jobs that stay in the workplace, in a quiet contempt of God's calling.  (These are not those who should never have been pastors in the first place, this happens among those who truly value God's church and their role in it.)

And so, it becomes lonely.  And sacrificial.  For many pastor's homes there is (of necessity) the working out of the weight of conflict and uncertainty that has trailed back from the very church that was supposed to make families stronger.  Herein lies the enemy's greatest foothold against those who would choose to lead within the church.

What I have discovered is that there are, basically, two types of people within the church that catalyze this difficult reality.  First, there are those who pour on the conflict and crises in an effort to make the pastoral ministry in a church become a nightmare.  This is an all-out-attack driven by personal issues - sometimes disagreement, sometimes spiritual oppression, sometimes bitterness, etc - toward the pastor.  And an attack on the pastor is an attack on his family and the church he leads.  Typically, there is no regard for this in the mind of the antagonist, for they effectively segment their own actions and motives to fit their own self-serving rational.  It is no use complaining here, because this is part of the job and if you can't find a way to work things out (even with unreasonable people) then you're probably not suited to be a pastor in the first place.

Second, there are those who have an opportunity to help minister to the pastor (there's an outrageous idea for you!), but choose not to do so.  Why not?  Because it's part of the job, and if you can't handle a little conflict then you're probably not suited to be a pastor in the first place.  I remember sometime about a year ago when someone in a church board meeting was making the case that I was being a lousy pastor - that I didn't care and wasn't trying because we as a staff had taken a couple of days off following the extra days of working around Easter (yes, I'm serious).  My response outlined all of the work we had done and how much we had sacrificed those few weeks from family, personal time, along with the 'overtime' that could be considered.  I gave up trying to convince the room when I was met with apathetic looks that conveyed one simple message: it's the job, and you should be used to it.

My point here is that it is wrong for Christians to enter church with a consumerist mindset that only uses and discards the gifts, ministries and lives of those within it.  And the way many churches treat their pastors as though they were as disposable and replaceable as a crappy Dell computer is morally reprehensible.  It is an utter failure to live out love for God and others.  There are so many places where such activity is commonplace enough not to be considered as abnormal or unChristian.  So, we have yet one more layer of why so many thousands of pastors jump ship and find entirely different vocations every month.  Once again, our ability to love will transform our lives and the lives around us.  Failure to love only conforms us to the pattern of this world.