Thursday, June 25, 2009

Let There Be Universal Coverage

Let There Be Universal Coverage
Pastors sell health reform to the faithful
by Lisa Miller (Newsweek.com)
Jun 24, 2009

What, I wondered, is a Christian minister doing on CNN pitching the president's health-care plan? Last week the Rev. Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, a Christian social-justice outfit, made a seven-minute appearance on Lou Dobbs's show. Facing off against Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council, Wallis made a disclaimer. Health care for everyone is a fundamental moral issue, he said, but "the community of faith should never be involved in the weeds." And then he dove, headlong, into the weeds. If you didn't know Wallis was a cleric, you would have thought two veteran partisans were debating a hotly contested culture-war issue. Perkins accused the Obama administration of presenting a "one-size-fits-all health-care program." Wallis responded on message: "This proposal is about people having choice." Though he sought the moral high ground, Wallis was not able—this time, at least—to claim it.

Since the beginning of the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama has been unusually skilled—for a Democrat—at rallying the faithful to his side. Thirty percent of white evangelicals ages 18 to 29 voted for Obama, compared with 16 percent for John Kerry in the previous election, a testament to the care his religious-outreach team took wooing and winning them and the pastors who preach to them. Less than a month after his inauguration, Obama announced the formation of his Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Two dozen prominent (progressive and conservative) clerics and laypeople who are, broadly speaking, engaged in questions of the nation's values—Wallis among them—serve as advisers.

In frequent conference calls, the administration informs faith-based leaders of its policy initiatives; participants make suggestions and offer advice. In separate calls, the religious leaders then convey the administration's priorities to their constituencies—though not always, Wallis reminds me in a phone conversation, their agreement. Wallis has his own regular conference call, which, he says proudly, has the potential to reach a hundred million people. The Rev. Adam Hamilton, a Methodist megapastor in Kansas who is on that call, preached earlier this month on health-care reform. "I think this issue matters to God and to us," he said, "and I don't know what the solution is ... The Scripture keeps telling us to stand up for people who can't stand up for themselves."

There is nothing illegal or unethical in this exchange of ideas. It's smart politics, and in Washington, progressive religious groups are euphoric that after 30 years in the wilderness, sitting mutely as the religious right dominated the faith conversation, they finally have a seat at the table. Clerics have always engaged in politics (think of Martin Luther King Jr.), and politicians have always looked to church communities for support—both in elections and on issues (such as the religious right's historic drum-beating on abortion rhetoric). "Administrations, Democratic and Republican, have tended over the years to say, 'Our policies are good and they're consistent with your religious viewpoint. We hope you'll agree and go do things.' That's part of the interplay of politics and religion that's been with us for a long time," explains Barry Lynn, the executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. All of America's great social movements, from abolition to suffrage to civil rights, have been driven largely by pastors as a matter of conscience.

But as religious leaders increasingly engage in the health-care conversation—and they will—two aspects of this new faith-and-politics marriage are worrisome. The first is that proximity to power can be corrupting. This is the theme of Blinded by Might, the 1999 book Cal Thomas and Ed Dobson wrote about their years with Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority. More recently the George W. Bush administration was frequently accused of shrouding political fights in religious rhetoric—and of manipulating its conservative Christian base to further its own political ends. There is no reason why the left should be immune to this same temptation. "The word for that is 'idolatry,' " says former Missouri senator Jack Danforth, whose 2006 book Faith and Politics: How the 'Moral Values' Debate Divides America and How to Move Forward Together is a polite excoriation of the culture wars. "It's when you make God in your image rather than the other way around. It's the thing we all have to guard against."

The second is whether health-care reform is the really the perfect vehicle for a full-scale social-justice campaign—since "right" answers are so obscure. "Particularly on the issue of health care, and legislation of health care, and how it's paid for, and what the consequences are, and future generations—it's just so complex," says Danforth. "Some issues are clearer than others. If you're speaking out against genocide, that's a much clearer case. As I see it, there's only one possible position for people of faith to take. When it comes to economic policy and health-care policy, where there are numerous people with numerous ideas, it's very hard to say, 'This is the religious position.' " In light of these complexities, Danforth urges clerics to speak out for what they believe in but to do so with an appropriate measure of humility and not to claim to be speaking for God.

Wallis would agree with this. He believes that health care for all is "a fundamental moral issue," and he is committed to doing whatever he can to see that the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans receive coverage. Christians, he reminds me, have been concerned about the health of the poor and the sick since the time of Jesus. And while he understands that his warm relations with the White House give him a certain influence, he also demonstrates the requisite humility. "I have said very directly to members of the Obama team, all of this will be tested not by access but by results. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who has the ear of the president or gets their calls returned. If 30,000 kids are still dying of preventable disease and stupid poverty in four years, our having a close relationship with this administration won't matter much." Fighting for justice as an insider, he says, is different than fighting as an outsider; but he's still determined to fight.

Look for more visible efforts by progressive religious groups on behalf of health-care reform in the coming weeks. Over the Memorial Day recess, a coalition of faith-based groups—including Wallis's Sojourners, the Washington-based Faith in Public Life, and others—ran radio ads in six states where "we feel there are members of Congress and senators that will be moved by a faith message," explains Katie Paris, spokeswoman for Faith in Public Life. "Or states that have a highly religious population. These are going to make the difference on health care reform." In each spot, a local pastor proclaims that "God desires abundant life for all people" and then pleads, "Please contact your members of Congress." New ads have been written to run over the Fourth of July recess, pending funding. This same coalition is also sponsoring forums at churches to talk about health care. Wallis and other prominent clergy are meeting in Washington after the Fourth to strategize about health-care reform. In those conversations, I'd guess agreement on the need to care for the sick and marginalized will be universal. More difficult is how to raise questions having to do with income taxes, insurance companies, and doctors' compensation to the high ground, where the moral perspective is perfectly clear.

© 2009

Monday, June 01, 2009

Attractional Vs, Missional Continued

Apparently my comment was too long as a comment, so I'm just continuing Dan's topic as a fresh post. I’ve thought a tremendous amount about this issue in recent years, as we followed a purely attractional model for a long time. Here a few thoughts…

Philosophically, the purely attractional model has been fueled by the underlying thinking that conversion is really the big goal: attract them and get them to make the decision. While I think the “decision” is important, the end goal is to help people become disciples, which I understand to mean finding a new way to see, be, and live. If we are going to attract people, more thought has to be given to what it means for them to be with us after we attract them.

I also think the purely attractional model has suffered from a bait and switch problem. In attracting people with hip worship and tips and tricks sermons, we have often inadvertently given the impression that Jesus exists to be your accomplice in the pursuit of happiness (as defined by the American dream). Then when we try to call these people to face their hearts and lives, or to live in sacrificial love for the good of the world, they’re thinking, “But I thought it was all about me.” Inherent in the Good News is the good news that it is not all about me, so something bigger than me has to be in the picture from the first day we attract people. One of the fringe benefits of our church’s radical commitment to our brothers and sisters in southern Haiti is that if you walk into our church you hear right away that people here are chasing something beyond themselves.

On the other hand, in all the craze about becoming missional, a lot of people have interpreted “missional” to mean “just get your church doing stuff for people outside the church”. This sometimes fails to address either the reality that the mission must come from hearts in the process of being transformed by love, or the idea that serving people still fits into the larger picture of God’s redemption of all things. If we are not fueled by honest love, nor pulled forward by redemptive hope, we may just serve for awhile and burn out.

I’m no expert, but where I’ve settled in is this:
1. I’m okay with attracting people to our church.
As Hirsch points out, these will mostly be M1/M2 people who have had some kind of church/Christendom exposure in their life. My Muslim neighbor is unlikely to just walk into our church. But I’m even okay with attracting these people with some relevant sermons, some great music, etc. But these have to be things done in a way that serves our worshipping community. So I might say that I’m okay with attracting people with the things that are naturally attractive about our church.

2. I’m looking to attract people who find two things attractive that the attractional model has tended to keep in the closet.
The attractional model has had relevant sermons, great music, dramas, video, and high-impact children’s ministry as its primary calling cards. What it has left in the background is what I’ll call “the felt sense of God’s presence”. I think there was a fear that the reality of the Holy Spirit in the midst of a church service might scare people (and it might with Americans, if you’re planning on having several people speak out in tongues, or planning on slaying people in the Spirit when you gather). But I will say that in the last four years in our church, the felt presence of God during worship has played a significant role for most of those who have come to Jesus. I think the seeker/purely attractional approach has neglected to address the rampant spiritual hunger of the human heart, the desire for transcendence, for spiritual reality. Many people will be responsive to the presence of God, so in our service we have a time where we slow down, worship, and tell people to find God. We say, “You can sit, you can stand, you can kneel, but find God this morning, because He’s here looking to find your heart.”

The second thing that has often been kept in the closet is precisely mission. This may have made sense with boomers (though from a Kingdom mindset was probably still wrong). But it is a fatal mistake with current generations. Starbucks draws people in by selling them Ethos bottled water, and their purchase helps pay for clean water wells and filters in poor countries. The world has gotten smaller, and people want their lives to make an impact by making the world better—and we happen to be in the change-the-world-business (at least theoretically). Of course, I’ve seen some seeker churches in my area try to go missional to play the attraction angle of caring about the world—ooh, bad call. But if we actually do care about the world, current generations will find this attractive, and the more radically we care about the world the better.

3. I’m inviting people less and less to “accept Jesus” and more and more to come know and follow him.
We’ve ditched the bait and switch. Yes, Jesus will help you with your marriage and your finances and raising your kids, but in a sustainable way if you let him change you, and if you let your life get caught up in the redemptive adventure he is unfolding in the world. He hasn’t invited us to get saved and pick up our free pass to heaven, he’s invited us to come become real and more whole human beings, like Jesus, and to join his effort to see the light supplant the darkness. If I invite people to something less than this in my efforts to attract them, then I am inviting them to something less than Jesus is… Hmmm.

That’s it… this is just our journey here at LifeSpring. I hope these thoughts are helpful for you guys. We are still a work in progress.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Attractional vs. missional

I have a question regarding the "attractional" model of church vs. a more "missional" model. I used to be pretty caught up in the whole "seeker sensitive" frenzy, where we did all kinds of things just to try to attract people to our Sunday service. I think others have done a good job of showing how that model does nothing but create consumers of our church hoppers, and doesn't really do a lot in the way of helping to make disciples. But sometimes I think our attempts to be more missionally minded leave us going almost too far the other way in our evangelistic pursuits, and we can make no effort at reaching out to people with the idea of hopefully seeing them connect with a church someday. Does anyone else struggle with this?

For example, I had a newspaper reporter ask to interview me (as a pastor), and I declined for various reasons, but mostly because I didn't want it to be one of those "see how great our church is, and why you should come to it" type of things. I finally agreed to have the reporter do an article on the picnic shelter and playground we built for the community. I thought this would be a good opportunity for people to see that it was available for them to use (and free of charge, btw), and at the same time it might be a good way to help change some people's minds about the church in general. To help them see that the church is actually here to serve and bless our communities, rather than just take from them or ask them to come to our places and give us their money. But now that I've done the interview, I'm not at all confident that is going to come through.

Anyway, I just wondered if anyone had any thoughts on this. Or any ideas on how we, as the church, can be evangelical but without doing things to simply attract a crowd to our services. Do you know of anyone that does a good job of this? Any examples of good or bad? Anything???

Monday, May 18, 2009

Church is a verb, not a noun

I ran across this article: The Church is A Verb, Not A Noun (http://www.christianpost.com/church/Denomination/2009/05/united-methodists-church-is-a-verb-not-a-noun-02/index.html) about how the United Methodists are "...urging the world to 'rethink Church' through a new campaign that seeks to offer the church not as a building but as a movement of people empowered to transform the world." It sounds very similar to a lot of the thoughts shared on this blog.

The article also states, "The denomination stresses that 'Rethink Church' is not a call to find new theology but rather a 'call to refocus our ecclesiology' and 'to see church in a way that is more aligned to Scripture..." Is this what some of you/us have been saying/thinking?

The blog has been slow, so I wondered if anyone had any thoughts on this.
  • Do you think the United Methodists are on to something?
  • Do you think this will "work better" with the denomination pushing it (making it a multi-million dollar campaign)?
  • Is this something the cggc could do, or should do?
  • Any other thoughts?

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Podcast Download: Episode 17 - The Forgotten Ways - Chapter 7 Revisited

Download: Podcast Episode 17 - The Forgotten Ways Chapter 7 Revisited

If you right click on the sermon, then click "Save Target As", you can save the MP3 to your computer.

We set out with the intention of talking about Chapter 8 of The Forgotten Ways but first wanted to respond to Dan Horwedel's comments on our chapter 7 podcast. Before we knew it, our time was up. So this is a revisit to chapter 7 - Organic Systems.

Labels:

Friday, April 24, 2009

2009 Exponential Conference

I spent the last three days in sunny Orlando Florida. Several CGGCers were there, including Ed Rosenberry (who I only saw at dinner... could he have been at Disney World the rest of the time? :) -- a joke). Thanks to Midwest CGGC for paying for me and one of my leaders to go.

Here are some quotes from the conference I wrote down. They may not be exact quotes. I wrote them down as I heard them.

Erwin McManus

"The church is scared to death of reality." -- Erwin McManus

"Jesus Christ died in the most heroic act anyone has ever done and then asks us to live our most heroic lives." -- Erwin McManus

"The gospel of the traditional American church is the most narcissistic story in our society." -- Erwin McManus (He was speaking of the "I'm a sinner. Jesus died for me. I get to go to heaven if I say I'm sorry.)

McManus said he almost cut his ties with Christianity (at least with organized Christianity) a couple of years ago when he was labeled a heretic for going into the "Marketplace" and discussing Jesus such as Paul did at Mars Hill. He would rather cut ties with organized Christianity than feel any limitation to sharing the gospel.

Alan Hirsch

Alan Hirsch defined what Missional is not.
-Not emerging church
-not simply being evangelistic
-not just social justice
-not church planting

"The church doesn't have a mission. The mission has a church." -- Alan Hirsch

Hirsch spoke of prevenient grace as the ability for our church to participate in mission.

Tri Robinson

"Vision is being who God made you to be and doing what he told you to do." -- Tri Robinson

Bob Roberts

Bob Robert's Ten Things to Learn from the Church Around the World

1. Gospel of the Kingdom of God -- not just the Gospel of Salvation

2. The Gospel encompasses the reconciliation of all things.

3. The focus is on the disciple not the preacher.

4. All religions are all places which makes for a naked public square and thoughtful communication.

He spoke of meeting with muslim and communist leaders all over the world and gaining access to share the gospel by invitation rather than by secrecy.

"Christianity started as a Jewish movement to Jesus. It will end as a Muslim movement to Jesus" -- Bob Roberts


5. Knowing other religions isn't just for experts but for everyone who would communicate who Jesus is.

6. Risk is seen in life and death not nickels and noses.

7. Never, never, never, never vilify another religion.

He didn't finish the ten but they can be found at glocal.net

Bob is always my favorite speaker. I could listen to him for hours. His books don't have the same effect at all unfortunately.

Neil Cole

Weeds in the Garden of Leadership

1. Institutionalism -- elevate institution as only institution doing God's work.
-Over 50% of Christian leaders will not finish well. Their calling became a career.

2. Corruption of Leadership -- the desire for power, fame (being liked by everyone), possessions, or pleasure

3. Legalism -- Protecting the powerful -- non-biblical traditions become equal to God's commands

4. Still in the Dark Ages - contributing to ignorance in an age of scholarship (keeping the Word out of the hands of the people. you do it more than you think.)

5. Bound by Chain of Command -- we're a mess from top to bottom

"Make everybody a disciple of Jesus so they will fall short of Jesus. If you make them your disciple, they will only fall short of you." -- Neil Cole

Efrem Smith

"What was it that disturbed you when you decided to plant a church? You can't live in disturbance. If you live angry, you will be dysfunctional, but that disturbance should continue to be at the core of your vision." -- Efrem Smith

"If you study the roots of most things (Hip Hop Culture for example), you will find "God Thoughts." -- Efrem Smith

Two Keys to turn white churches multi-cultural
1. Preach the Bible as a multi-culturally strong document.
2. United by Faith -- the measurements for multi-cultural church are not as high as you think. Dominate group is not more than 80%.

Francis Chan

"You wouldn't read the Bible and think, 'I need a building, a band, a sermon, and a room for the kids to have church.'" -- Francis Chan

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Podcast Download: Episode 16 - The Forgotten Ways - Chapter 7

Download: Podcast Episode 16 - The Forgotten Ways Chapter 7

If you right click on the sermon, then click "Save Target As", you can save the MP3 to your computer.

Chapter Seven Quotes – Organic Systems

The main stimulus for the renewal of Christianity will come from the bottom and from the edge, from sectors of the Christian world that are on the margins. – Harvey Cox, Religion in the Secular Society, p 179

The most probably assumption is that no currently working business theory will be valid 10 years hence… And yet few executives accept that turning a business around requires fundamental changes in the assumptions on which the business is run. it requires a different business. – Peter Drucker, “A Turnaround Primer”, p 179

…as we grew and began to operate in the classic church growth mode it became increasingly harder to find God in the midst of the progressively more machine-like apparatus required to “run a church.” With numerical growth, it seemed that we were increasingly being drawn away from the natural rhythms of life, from direct ministry, and that our roles seemed to become more managerial than every before. But the mechanization of ministry was not only felt by the leadership of the church; the people in the church were increasingly being programmed out of life and therefore less engaged in active relationships with those outside of the faith community. – p 182

Living systems whether organic in form (e.g., a virus, a human being) or systemic organizations (e.g., the stock market, a beehive, a city, or a commercial enterprise, even crystal formations), seem to have a life of their own and possess a built-in intelligence that involves an aptitude for survival, adaptation, and reproduction. – p 182

…we need to move the system toward the edge of chaos; that is, it needs to become highly responsive to its environment. The assumption here is that if it will not deal with real issues facing it, the system will not adapt and will thus perish in the context of any significant adaptive challenge. – p 184

…because systems exist in a mass of disordered information, the task of leadership here will be to help select the flow of information and focus the community around it. Not in order to dominate and try to predetermine the outcome, but rather to supply accurate and meaningful information to the system so that it can in-form itself in response to it. – p 184

So religious institutionalism happens when in the name of some convenience we set up a system to do what we must do ourselves so that over time the structures we create take on a life of their own. A classic example is churches outsourcing education to external organizations. Initially these training organizations exist to fully serve the grass roots. However, over time they increase in authority, eventually becoming ordaining bodies whose imprimatur is needed to minister. As the provider of degrees, they become increasingly more accountable to the government bodies than they do to the mission of the church. But the net result for the local community is that not only do they become dependent on an increasingly powerful and cloistered institution, they also lose the ancient art of discipling and educating for life in the local setting. The local church as a learning and theologizing community is degraded as a result. – p 187

As far as I am aware, no historical denomination has ever been able to fully recover its earlier, more fluid and dynamic movement ethos again. – p 188

It is perfectly true to say that most groups that have impact on either a local, national, or international level almost always begin with a form that sociologists call a movement. – p 191

Most transformational organizations, religious or otherwise, are launched with a certain ethos and energy that starts with a seminal vision/idea and swells like a wave to impact society around it. – p 191

We must constantly subject our institutions to prophetic critique, because it is the prophet, in his or her simple call to faithfulness to God alone, that is most aware of the dangers of the claims that institutions make on faith. – p 195

Since Constantine, it seems that we have simply got it all mixed up. – p 196

Labels: