Tuesday, June 28, 2011
My colleague, Bishop John Schol in the Baltimore-Washington Conference, made a video of his conversation with his daughter, Rebecca. Rebecca is a none; not necessarily disbelieving in God, raised in the church, and a wonderful human being (I've spent many hours with her and her twin sister). But she has some issues with the church! You can listen/watch the interview at: http://www.bwcumc.org/ministries/connecting/rebecca?tr=y&auid=8511504
But whether you listen/watch the interview, one of the insights I got from Becca was around the frustration that nones--young people in particular--have with the church. They believe that church people are too judgmental. This has been documented in many well-known books, such as UnChristian (Kinnaman) and They Like Jesus But Not the Church (Kimball). I thought I resonated with their concerns but Becca gave me a new insight, particularly a young adult insight that I hadn't thought about before.
Becca implicitly compares the church's judgmental attitude with high school. "High school follows you," she said, indicating that it has a continuing impact on young adults' lives. I don't know exactly what high school was like for her but my guess is that she and many in her generation have experienced more bullying, judging and negative experiences in high school than many of us who are baby boomers. There are so many ways to bully/judge each other in high school these days, including Facebook, email, and other social media. The pain of judgment, criticism, ostracism, name-calling, etc. is more recent and fresh, and easier to do than taking someone out and beating them up as was the usual means in my day (and not so frequent then at least where I went to school).
Yet almost diametrically opposed, Becca's seemed to have an expectation of a church as a group of "like-minded people." The church community as well as our general society is more and more diverse and not adverse to sharing one's own unique perspective. The church community needs to be a place where we can learn to live with each other in our un-like-mindedness in a way that is accepting of each other and in a way that teaches us to live, love and work with all those other people in our lives with whom we have un-like-mindedness.
WDYT? Is the church like high school, too quick to judge? If so, how do we live together in our un-like-mindedness in a way that helps us all grow more like Christ?
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
Ken said, "Is she related to Leslie Weatherhead?"
I said, "No." But my NO dragged out into about 3 syllables in my cynicism at such a ridiculous question. Weatherhead is a common name in Cleveland. In fact there is a Weatherhead School of Management at Case Western Reserve Univeristy so why would I think this was Leslie Weatherhead's relation?
Leslie Weatherhead was a British theologian from the World War 2 era and beyond. His famous book is The Will of God. In it he describes how basically everything is the will of God; whether it works out the way God originally intended or not, there will be the ultimate will of God. Leslie Weatherhead was a very controversial figure, shaking up the religious establishment of his day. I imagine him a bit like Rob Bell!
His grand-daughter, Ann, had never read him. So of course the first thing I did was hold a study on The Will of God. She was mortified by his dated language and illustrations but I tried to assure her that in fact he was contemporary for his time. Ann has never been quite sure where she stands with all of her grandfather's theology (her parents didn't subscribe to it at all and it was only because she came with a running friend that she even showed up at church that first Sunday) but even as I type, she is in England, checking out some of her ecclesiastical/theological roots.
The will of God is an elusive phenomenon. In Acts 21 Paul is sure that he knows what the will of God is. But then, so do his friends. Paul thinks the will of God is that he goes to Jerusalem; his friends think the will of God is that he doesn't go to Jerusalem. But Paul is a bit like Leslie Weatherhead. He believes that no matter what happens in Jerusalem, ultimately God's will is made known because what's important is that he will faithfully witness to God, no matter what happens. The will of God isn't that Paul is spared imprisonment and even death; the will of God is that God's grace is shared. Paul ultimately (an important word, I think, in describing the will of God) gives witness to God's grace--through his trials in Galilee with the political and religious leaders, through his hardships in getting to Rome (ship-wrecked and all), and through his imprisonment in Rome once he gets there. Ultimately it's all God's will.
In the end, Paul arrives in Rome where they haven't heard much--and what they've heard hasn't been good-about Christianity, but Paul takes it on as his personal mission to share the grace of Jesus with others. Specifically with those who haven't been in the inner circle. Sort of like Ann Weatherhead, to tell you the truth. She's the original none, seeking but unsure, embarrassed by less-than-spot-on Christianity, and yet a person with a heart of gold. Had she known him, she would have gone to Paul's open door. Having known her, run with her (a couple half marathons), hung out with her at the Barking Spider at Case Western Reserve University on their gospel night, I know that God's will is ultimate; far beyond my ability to express or know it, or Ann's.
What about you? How do you know what God's will is?
Saturday, March 26, 2011
I was sitting behind a worship leader during a service and I could see her notes about what the praise band would be singing next. On the paper, she had written, "Be Thou My Version." I chuckled but then wondered if this was some new contemporary song that I hadn't heard of yet and frankly couldn't quite imagine where it was going in its message. But then as the service continued, sure enough! The song they sang was an upbeat, modernized version of "Be Thou My Vision."
I've contemplated this Freudian slip of the hand and as I read Acts 16:6-10. Paul and Timothy had a plan to "turn west into Asia province, but the Holy Spirit blocked that route." So they proceeded to go another way, "but the Spirit of Jesus wouldn't let them go there either." They ventured yet on another route until finally Paul had a dream where a Macedonian was beckoning them to "come over to Macedonia and help us!" It says that "the dream gave Paul his map."
While it's important to plan--Paul did it regularly--it's also important to know when what we are doing is our version of God's vision.
I'm impressed by this story that Paul's version wasn't as big as God's vision. By going to Macedonia, Paul's world and therefore the church's witness and outreach was significantly enlarged.
Are our versions small and sometimes even self-centered, asking what we want to do instead of what God is calling us to do?
Are our versions limited to our own and people like us instead of reaching out to God's people everywhere?
Are our versions tight-fisted instead of generous in helping others?
Are our versions reflections of what we've done before and how we've done it instead of rethinking and imagining what God can do through us in new ways?
How has God given you a new song to sing? Changing it from "Be Thou My Version" to "Be Thou My Vision?"
Sunday, February 27, 2011
What does it mean to try to "out-god" God?
Out-godding God may be one of the biggest obstacles to our own ability to reach new people with the gospel. We're familiar with the consistent reports that young people think that the church people are hypocritical, judgmental and boring...maybe it was too political rather than boring. But too political, according to the reports, means that one side of things is proposed as the only way to believe if you want to be a Christian, on the right side, with the insiders. I think that's out-godding God.
How easy it is to fall into the trap of out-godding God! Recently a pastor in my home town told his congregation of farmers that unless they farm organically, they're not really Christian. (He's not long for that world...) Not to get engaged in how nearly impossible it is to make a living farming organically in eastern Washington state and how complicated the whole American agricultural system has become, given the US Farm Bill, etc., what was he thinking?
Abraham Joshua Heschel, my favorite prophetic voice of the Hebrew scriptures, warns his readers in The Prophets, that prophets can go beyond God's judgment, destroying instead of disciplining. Heschel calls it a hypertrophy of sympathy for God, or out-godding God in judgment. Jeremiah had a tendency to out-god God in his condemnation, reprimanding without reminding people of God's love; judgment instead of grace, forgetting God's love for the victims caught in the mire of complicated issues. A hypertrophy of sympathy for God is to outweigh love of God for love of neighbor; they're meant to be in balance (a trick if you can do it).
Obviously out-godding God isn't an exclusively early church phenom!
But equating any political, social, religious or economic agenda--or anything for that matter--as the only way to be Christian is to out-god God! It's simplistic and only adds burdens to those who are often the most vulnerable, even the victims, of the injustices that we decry.
Acts 15 demonstrates that the complicated issues of our religious, economic, political, and cultural lives aren't easily discerned, lived out, and finalized. In our present economic struggles, given the federal deficit, states' need to balance budgets, and the pinch on congregations to be in ministry (and federal and state leaders calling on the faith communities to pick up the slack), how do we find our way forward to make wise and faithful decisions based on our biblical and Wesleyan traditions of economic justice? And avoid out-godding God when we do? How do we find a gracious prophetic voice?
Monday, February 14, 2011
Over the years we've considered missionaries and evangelists to be people who travel to other places to people that we or they don't know in order to share the good news. But what does it mean in our world today where we don't have to go to another country or people in order to be sent to someone else with the gospel? Today to be sent means to go talk to a neighbor, co-worker or someone in our own family.
We're all the sent--telling others about Jesus or at least where they can find Jesus (hopefully in our churches!). We're all the supporters of the sent--doing our part in the life of the Christian community so that all experience opportunities for Christian formation--no matter how old or young, Christian community that is open to new people and changed by them, and opportunities to grow toward God and others.
But then, you have to consider the end of this chapter that finds Paul and Barnabas forced out of town because some were afraid that "their precious way of life was about to be destroyed" by this message of Jesus.
What is your "precious way of life" that might be destroyed if you truly shared your faith and your church with others? Might we lose control over what happens there--the style of music/worship, the decisions made about what it means to be church, who comes to church and who gets attention that might be lavished on ourselves?
Monday, January 31, 2011
Stephen's story of salvation is an example of how he who is in the midst of a very bad situation--about to be stoned--gives credit and praise to God who has helped his people face adversity. I admire that ability to see and tell his story from the perspective of God's care for them in the midst of difficulty.
The way we tell the story of our lives becomes a lens by which we see life and define ourselves. It becomes a script for us in how we see ourselves, others, the world, and even God. Some people's story is that of how everyone has hurt them and they are victims. Others who may have even more experiences of adversity tell their stories in terms of how they have overcome; if they are people of faith, they give credit and praise to God for helping them overcome. We should be very careful how we tell our stories since we can spiral down into despair or find hope and courage to face the future.
Even how we tell the story of our church can provide a script that can bring despair or hope to us as a people. I would guess that there are no churches in the Minnesota Annual Conference who have not faced adversity in the past and yet they have perserved. How do we tell our story? What did we learn in those times? Do we live so much in the moment that we fail to remember how God has been with us in the past?
How do you tell your story in such a way that empowers you instead of deflates you? Let me give you an example. I was told when I was in the 8th grade that it was "too bad you're a girl, you'd make a great preacher." People often gasp in our 21st century context (although not everyone!!!). Yet I understand that the person who said that and people who believed it (so as not to recommend me to the seminary I wanted to go to because I was a woman) had no imagination for women in ministry. Even I didn't initially have the imagination that it was possible. But now I do. I could be the victim in my own story or I could see it as what continues to happen in our lives, faith, and culture all the time: there's so much we don't have an imagination to understand. See how far our imaginations have gone! How much farther might they go in the future? What is God waiting for me to imagine today?
So how do you tell your story in light of God's salvation history in your life?
How do you tell your church's story in light of God's salvation history?
How might we someday tell the United Methodist Church's story in light of the context of God's salvation history?
Monday, January 17, 2011
Prior to the 5th and 6th chapters of Acts, the opposition against the Christian movement was largely from the outside. It's easy for us to idealize the early church, thinking that it was free of significant internal disagreement and conflict. But people are people in the first and the 21st century and not only is Christ present when two or three of us get together, but there's also disagreement! That's what happened when the church began to grow and included a diversity of people. People gathered in Christian community from different ethnic-racial groups, languages and from a lower socio-economic condition and conflict erupted!
While we are aware of the role of decline in a local church that causes conflict, having significantly grown church in my ministry, I'm aware that conflict results when a church grows, too!
"Who are these people and why are they here?"
"I don't know everyone anymore!"
"Things just aren't the same here anymore!"
As a church that was growing, we had problems; we called them "good problems," like not enough parking, seating, coat space, Sunday School rooms, etc. As the church grew, it also attracted a diversity of people with different theological perspectives, racial-ethnic backgrounds, religious traditions, socio-economic conditions. These differences created challenges for the church to include all who needed community and their spiritual needs met. A clear focus on the purpose of the Christian movement as well as the distinct leadership gifts was essential in order to deal with their good problems.
One way or the other, differences and conflict occur when two or three of us get together, even in Christ's name. We need to stop beating each other up for that reality. Keeping our focus, recognizing each other's gifts, and including all into our midst of Christian community transcend time, people and context.
Please don't give us the gory details about the conflict, but what do you see has important in moving a community of faith through the inevitable differences and disagreements that occur when two or three of us get together?
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
So what was that early church like? Following the coming of the Holy Spirit, it says that people were amazed and filled with awe at all that was happening in through the followers of Jesus. It says that the believers were in harmony with each other, holding everything in common, even selling what they had so that "each person's need was met." Followers followed a daily discipline of prayer and worship. They came together for common meals and joy was the mark of the church.
Is that a description of the 21st century church? Your church? The church at its best? Have you experienced in this regard?
We'd all like to be a part of a church like Acts 2, but it's a utopia unless we are also living and doing what what those first followers were doing. Did you know that the word utopia means 'no place'? Acts 2 is a utopia unless we are living like those early followers. We all want to go to an Acts 2 church but without us there's no there there! It doesn't exist as an ideal place; it's a place that we're called to create. We need to make Acts 2 incarnational, in and through us. It will be less than perfect and less than fully Acts 2 but it needs to be our simple model of what it means to be church.
Acts 2 is a mirror to hold up to what we are as the church today. At our best, where do we demonstrate this palpable sense of God's presence through awe and wonder in our daily living? Where and how do we seek to live in harmony? Where and how are we willing to give for the good of all, much less even sell what we have to make sure that there is an elimination of poverty in our communities? Where have we become intentional as individuals as well as a congregations to follow a daily discipline of prayer, worship and study?
When you break it down--this description of a seemingly utopian community--there are practices that make an Acts 2 church; a real, flesh-and-blood community of faith in any place and time. So the question is: what are we as individuals--clergy and laity--willing to do and be willing to change in our lives to be an Acts 2 church?
Yes, I want to be a part of an Acts 2 church, but it doesn't just happen; it happens because the Spirit changes me to be an Acts 2 church. Where do we see this Acts 2 church lived out that gives us all inspiration to allow the Spirit to change us?
I look forward to your insights! WDYT?
Sunday, January 2, 2011
At annual conference 2010, I invited all United Methodists in Minnesota to read the Acts of the Apostles for themselves and for each church to do some kind of study or sermon series during the conference year. Many individuals (lay and clergy) as well as churches have been studying Acts and others will be in the new year.
My intent is that we look at Acts as inspiration and a comparison between the 1st and 21st centuries. What can we learn from the 1st century that helps us to see ourselve differently in the 21st? I invite you to read the study guide that I posted during the Fall as some background to the scriptures. You can find that at http://minnesotaumc.org/Portals/1199/Bishop%20Corner/acts%20study%20guide%202010-2011.pdf
While I don't intend to go chapter by chapter, I do want to start with the first chapter this week.
When I read the first chapter of Acts, I'm mindful that it's a critical kairos moment, entrusted to ordinary and sometimes uncomprehending human beings like Peter but also empowered by God's Spirit. It's post-Jesus of Nazareth and pre-church. It's a hand-off in the marathon of salvation history that hinges on all that has been with all that will be. What a moment!
I don't want to be overly dramatic here, but sometimes I feel like we're in a critical moment, too. Our transition is from post-Christendom to pre-something else! This kairos moment is entrusted to us ordinary and sometimes uncomprehending human beings but also empowered by God's Spirit. Peter interpreted the moment from scripture and called for +1 in the number of disciples.
It's easy to romanticize or idealize this 1st century moment when in fact the reason that they scattered from Jerusalem to Judea to Samaria and the ends of the world was because there was persecution. It was a hard and disruptive time for Christians but in the midst of the disruption, Christianity spread to new places, new people, and in new ways.
Today people are scattering, too. The next generation has scattered from the church, often because our forms of worship and our failure to live out the faith has made Christianity irrelevant to their lives. As people move or become discouraged with a local church, they scatter and often don't become a part of a faith community as readily as before or if at all. There are lots of reasons--many of them very socially acceptable like the increase of travel by many Americans--that makes a connection with a faith community weaker and weaker. While it breaks my heart that there is such a scattering of the people, instead of just beating ourselves up for it, I wonder what we might learn from Acts about what to do when there is this kind of upheaval in church as we have known it.
Phyllis Tickle in her book, The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why, views Christendom from the perspective of major upheavals and how upsetting it was for many Christians and the church at each disruptive time. During these times of upheaval, people had to rethink what was essential in being a Christian but "because of the reconfiguration of those treasures (of tradition) into new shapes and vessels and accommodations, the faith they testify to was scattered across a far broader geographic and demographic area than it had previous occupied. And...(the church) was freed to develop a praxis, liturgy, and theological richness" (p. 27) than before. The church didn't cease to be but spread wider and deeper than before.
So do you think this is a "disruption" in Christianity that will allow the emergence of a new way of being Christian here in the US? And if so, what treasure do we bring out of our ancient tradition and what do we "bring out" that is new (Matthew 13:52)?
Is this just a discouraging, downward spiraling time as the church or is it actually a kairos moment entrusted to us like those hinge times in the past? Like runners in the marathon of salvation history, are we at the point of a hand-off to an emerging way of being church? If so, what is required of us?
Please share your thoughts with others!