Anyone who has spent anytime around me or reading this blog will know that I do not fall into the camp of those who despise everything postmodern. In fact, I believe that our culture’s shift of thinking (which we can call “postmodern,” “post-postmodern,” or whatever) has provided the Church with a great opportunity. The world is shaking its collective head clear of the Enlightenment’s refusal to acknowledge the spiritual component to reality – and we have an opportunity as a people indwelled by the Holy SPIRIT to provide reconstruction for their deconstructed paradigms.
And in one way or another it seems that many people are trying to do just that. Here in the blogosphere there is no shortage of forums, blogs and websites dedicated to postmodernism in one way or another. For many in the conservative camp, POMOPHOBIA rules the day. Anything deemed unorthodox is labeled “postmodern” or “emergent.” If a condemned postmodern does say something useful is often either ignored or heralded as remnants of “modern” virtues.
These pomophobics can themselves vary greatly on their response. Many are honestly seeking to engage in dialogue bent on discerning truth and expect the other side to respond in kind. Others have reacted so violently and responded in such an extreme way that they are now posting articles highlighting how God killed Kyle Lake at University Baptist in Waco as a message to the Emergent Church. (I don’t despise people who condemn postmodernism, but that little article was vile and completely devoid of anything useful or holy…well this is a whole other post) Still others, it seems, are simply distrustful of a group who appear to be filling the category where “New Agers” and “hippies” have previously dwelled.
However, critique is healthy during the formation of any philosophical viewpoint. In this case, there is indeed much need for a critical assessment rather than a wholesale endorsement of all things pomo.
POMOPHILIA seems to be another popular mindset these days. Some people, also in reactionary mode, are ready to accept anything labeled postmodern or emergent in a desperate attempt to escape the Church of the Enlightenment. A friend of mine is fond of warning us not to throw out the baby of reason with the bathwater of the Enlightenment. He is absolutely right. Pomophiliacs that quickly discard reason and logic are going to find themselves without a leg to stand on…if they aren’t already feeling it. For Christians, the use of narrative has long been an important approach to sharing the Gospel. That narrative, however, ceases to function as the Gospel when it is disconnected from Jehovah’s interaction with mankind through the Judeo-Christian metanarrative. This does not imply that there is nothing to be gained from conversation with other metanarratives; in truth, we have much to learn from the ways that God has been moving in the communities of all humanity. But when we place all metanarratives, explanations of the human condition, and understandings of the Divine on the same level; when we deny the distinctive character of Christ – even if our motive is to heal the damage done by previous generations of pain inflicted in Jesus’ name – then we have made a mistake equal to or in excess of those from whom we are trying to distance ourselves. Putting candles in a room and practicing Lectio Divina are themselves neither proof for or against the authenticity of a community’s worship or faith.
There is at least one way in which both extremes (phobia and philia) are making what I feel is the same mistake. POMEOSTASIS is defined by Bretster’s Dictionary as the fallacious assertion that the phenomenon currently hailed as postmodernism is a finished, static or stable product. In truth this term is fluid.
For some (usually adolescents and those who oppose pomo) it is defined almost exclusively as a rejection of absolute truth and defense of relativism. For others it has to do with the acceptance of the spiritual realm as one which is at least equal to the physical world in its relevance to the human condition. In addition to its varying use across communities, postmodernism is also being formed and reformed across time. Before we label it as something void of substance, let’s be honest and acknowledge that modern and pre-modern thought also had to go through formation…they did not fall from heaven, no matter how much some of us would like to think they did.
While I don’t claim to be able to see into the future, I predict that absolute relativism will phase itself out eventually. It will become a paragraph in the chapter of the history books referring to this age. First of all, relativism is a self-defeating ideology…it is itself an absolute statement. If you punch a relativist they will deny that you have the right to claim that as appropriate action. Life is directed by absolute truths. This is evidenced by the similarity of communal life across time and geography. Sure all cultures have differences, but there are also so many similarities to human interaction that we must admit that there are things going on below the surface. I believe that the rejection of Absolute Truth often stems more from a suspicion of human ability to comprehend Absolute Truth. If we are again willing to be honest with ourselves it becomes necessary to admit that most groups, Christians very much included, have used a convenient understanding of Truth to justify their abuse of other groups. Were the Crusades a display of Truth at work? The problem with absolute truth is that it can be used as a trump card by who have power and want to keep it or don’t have power and want to take it.
Is this a reason to reject the existence of absolute truth? No, absolutely not. Is it a good reason to be suspicious of claims regarding absolute truth? Maybe. One thing is surely true, if those who defend truth do so with anger and malice the wedge of suspicion will only be driven deeper. I realize that for many, speaking with compassion and humility has become equated with spinelessness…that too is a post for another time.
One of my friends – who doesn’t really seem to be for or against postmodern “stuff” – has told me on several occasions that he thinks this whole deal is simply the usual rejection and rebellion that one generation displays for the previous. In some ways I think he is right. The problem is that we look at everything that is going on and try to place it neatly in one category or another. Sure, there are normal rebellions going on…many people claiming postmodern thought are, after all, young adults. There also seem to be some legitimate paradigmatic shifts occurring simultaneously which make this whole debacle something that will be much more easily sorted out in a couple hundred years. Until then we should argue against relativism without resorting to hyperbole and bashing all things postmodern. In truth there are some great things happening. Great stories of life are being told, people are realizing that they should no longer compartmentalize their faith, and whole groups of previously disinterested persons are willing to hear the Gospel.
And yet we may have a typical American tragedy in the making. My final thought on this issue is our penchant for marketing and consumerism. I have told my friends that when I write a book I’m not going to put a catchy title on it. If I do, and people read it, they may use my title in conversation. This title may become a buzzword. This buzzword may become a fad. And then everyone will hate me.
I realize that this is my own little hyperbolic statement following my admonition against such things. But we are a culture of locusts (another hyperbole…well not really, I think this one’s pretty accurate!). We consume and consume and consume until we have gorged ourselves and begin vomiting out the very thing we couldn’t get enough of moments before. We are already experiencing this “death by marketing”.
I’m not sure how we stop this juggernaut; I don’t know that we can. I do know that both sides of this debate are guilty of blanket demonizations that are not only unhelpful and inaccurate, they often provide the very fuel that the other side needs for its next barrage. In this way we ensure perpetual fighting and insure ourselves against any hope for healthy dialogue.
To be continued…
Wednesday, February 8, 2006
Friday, February 3, 2006
Marrying our Gomer: further adventures in developing my theology of ministry
DISCLAIMER: Rachel is not my “Gomer.” If you try to tell her that I said she was a prostitute from Biblical times, I will retaliate with Old Testament force!
…I remember my frustration during the period of time when I was trying to convince Rachel that she needed to go out with me. We had become very good friends and she would come over to our house at night and complain about guys…she was clueless.
When I finally broke down and told her how I felt, she wasn’t convinced (surprise, surprise! Many of you are still wondering how I pulled that one off…I’ll never tell!). But interestingly Rachel’s hesitation had less to do with the fact that she was out of my league and more to do with her fear of getting in another relationship. Though it had been quite some time, she still had not recovered from a bad break-up which was making it hard to trust the idea of once again making herself vulnerable. Luckily for me, my persistence paid off and now she’s stuck with me…happily ever after.
I have recently experienced a similar feeling of fear myself. I felt this reticence as I thought about the next church where I would serve. Those who are not in ministry sometimes think that losing your job is losing your job, no matter what you do. While I would never take away from the difficulty of anyone being told that their “services are no longer required”, ministers have the added difficulty of loosing their church family…their support system which should be there to help people through these times.
A wise man in ministry advised me not to see the congregations where I serve as my support system or even my spiritual family but rather to cultivate that community outside with other ministers. This counsel is based on recognizing the very real possibility that any church can let you go at any time. As much as we would like to say that we are working for God, we are being paid by man.
6 months ago…actually as recently as 2 months ago, I was convinced that the only advisable course of action was to resist putting “roots down” anywhere. It made sense that I was going to have to be somewhat of an outsider because I couldn’t risk allowing myself to become vulnerable again. Over the last few years I have developed a network of good friends, which was a definite blessing during these months.
But then a couple things began running through my head. The first was the story at the beginning of this post. There came a point where Rachel had to decide that she would risk another relationship. If she hadn’t, the world would have been deprived of Conner Allan Wells and his famous vanishing finger trick!
And also I thought of Hosea.
We know the story of the prophet Hosea. He was called by God to marry an adulterous woman named Gomer. God knew that she would not be faithful to Hosea, just as he had known that Israel would not remain faithful to him. Hosea was called on to demonstrate God’s love – a love which makes itself vulnerable even in the face of certain betrayal. Hosea would have been so blessed to have witnessed the love of Christ which surpassed even his commitment to Gomer. Christ’s was a love which not only made itself vulnerable, but was willing to forfeit life for the love of an adulterous people.
As a minister, God has called me to demonstrate this kind of love as well. Thankfully in his mercy God allowed me to marry a faithful, loving wife. He has surrounded me with compassionate, loyal friends. And the small thing that I have been asked to do is to make myself vulnerable to a group of people who could possibly (as opposed to “will definitely”) end our relationship in a painful way.
I will take the advice and continue to appreciate God’s blessing of holy friends, but I will also be faithful and marry my Gomer. I must be willing to invest in a community because this is how God calls us to love his children – not with reservation but wholeheartedly, accepting risk as the Lord did by first loving us.
…I remember my frustration during the period of time when I was trying to convince Rachel that she needed to go out with me. We had become very good friends and she would come over to our house at night and complain about guys…she was clueless.
When I finally broke down and told her how I felt, she wasn’t convinced (surprise, surprise! Many of you are still wondering how I pulled that one off…I’ll never tell!). But interestingly Rachel’s hesitation had less to do with the fact that she was out of my league and more to do with her fear of getting in another relationship. Though it had been quite some time, she still had not recovered from a bad break-up which was making it hard to trust the idea of once again making herself vulnerable. Luckily for me, my persistence paid off and now she’s stuck with me…happily ever after.
I have recently experienced a similar feeling of fear myself. I felt this reticence as I thought about the next church where I would serve. Those who are not in ministry sometimes think that losing your job is losing your job, no matter what you do. While I would never take away from the difficulty of anyone being told that their “services are no longer required”, ministers have the added difficulty of loosing their church family…their support system which should be there to help people through these times.
A wise man in ministry advised me not to see the congregations where I serve as my support system or even my spiritual family but rather to cultivate that community outside with other ministers. This counsel is based on recognizing the very real possibility that any church can let you go at any time. As much as we would like to say that we are working for God, we are being paid by man.
6 months ago…actually as recently as 2 months ago, I was convinced that the only advisable course of action was to resist putting “roots down” anywhere. It made sense that I was going to have to be somewhat of an outsider because I couldn’t risk allowing myself to become vulnerable again. Over the last few years I have developed a network of good friends, which was a definite blessing during these months.
But then a couple things began running through my head. The first was the story at the beginning of this post. There came a point where Rachel had to decide that she would risk another relationship. If she hadn’t, the world would have been deprived of Conner Allan Wells and his famous vanishing finger trick!
And also I thought of Hosea.
We know the story of the prophet Hosea. He was called by God to marry an adulterous woman named Gomer. God knew that she would not be faithful to Hosea, just as he had known that Israel would not remain faithful to him. Hosea was called on to demonstrate God’s love – a love which makes itself vulnerable even in the face of certain betrayal. Hosea would have been so blessed to have witnessed the love of Christ which surpassed even his commitment to Gomer. Christ’s was a love which not only made itself vulnerable, but was willing to forfeit life for the love of an adulterous people.
As a minister, God has called me to demonstrate this kind of love as well. Thankfully in his mercy God allowed me to marry a faithful, loving wife. He has surrounded me with compassionate, loyal friends. And the small thing that I have been asked to do is to make myself vulnerable to a group of people who could possibly (as opposed to “will definitely”) end our relationship in a painful way.
I will take the advice and continue to appreciate God’s blessing of holy friends, but I will also be faithful and marry my Gomer. I must be willing to invest in a community because this is how God calls us to love his children – not with reservation but wholeheartedly, accepting risk as the Lord did by first loving us.
Monday, October 31, 2005
The Birthright of the Margins
There are lots of conversations going on in the political realm regarding morality issues. In many instances the charge for morality is led by Evangelical Christians and the “Religious Right”. There is much good to be said about Christians being willing to risk ridicule or estrangement to fight to protect that which we hold dear. I was recently talking to a friend about the present issue of whether or not the school system should teach Intelligent Design alongside the theory of Evolution. The question he asked me is whether or not the Church should be lobbying Congress for this or other issues. Until now I have been fairly silent on this, but I have finally been roused from my slumber…
Many scholars have debated the exegetical issues with Isaiah 40:3. Should the passage read, "A voice cries out in the wilderness: "Prepare the way of the Lord." or instead, "A voice cries out: "In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord"? Regardless of how this text is rendered, I think that it holds significance for our discussion here.
The command to prepare a way is given so that all people (presumably the nations as well as
I'm not sure that one couldn't make a case that our political systems today are in fact a wilderness and the prophetic voice of the Lord should be heard from within.
However if we are to prepare a "highway in the desert" we have to at some level leave the discourse of the nations for a time. I often comment that the church has been disengaged for too long now. But we have not gone to the desert to make a highway... we've made refugee camps. We've gone to the desert to die.
A friend of mine recently raised the call to engage our culture rather than ignore it in the supposed name of faithfulness. I agree that often we can use our allegiance to another Kingdom as a crutch and smokescreen to avoid our responsibility, so I applaud what Matt is calling for (check out the post on Little Holy Heroes). With this in mind, I would urge us all to consider the ways in which the Church can regain its birthright of the margins. How do we once again become the place from which Jesus calls to the poor, the oppressed, the weak?
It is only when we identify ourselves as the poor, the oppressed and the weak! We must rejoice in our sufferings and embrace our rightful place at the margins of a secular society. How can we continue to focus on issues like our kids praying in school when to keep from being offensive we don't cry out in prayer away from school? How can we fight for intelligent design to be taught alongside evolution when we our own handling of this vital part of our faith is just in passing…a story for elementary students? How can we expect the government to teach people about the creative aspect of Jehovah God? Do we just want a scientific theory of creation? Of a creator? Which creator then? Which theory? Why?
The important part of our belief in God as Creator is not the way in which the world came about. It is our belief, our faith, that Jehovah God along with the Word is the creative force behind all that is, all that was and all that will ever be.
And this is our story to tell, not the government's.
It was the Church; the disciples of Jesus Christ, who were commissioned go and preach the Good News...not any government. When God's dealings were with a government (
This makes perfect sense to me. God's call is not a top-down "come-to-me-because-its-law" approach - except within the ranks of his own people. God is not afraid of proselytizing, its just supposed to come from the mouths of the meek and lowly, not the powerful. Walter Brueggemann has been very helpful on this issue. He shows evidence that God often waits to act until there is no other explanation for victory but God’s deliverance. The Christians are not ever going to be the redemptive force in our society…its always been God and God alone. I pray that we will learn to depend more fully on the Lord. I pray that we will become convinced of our world’s brokenness and our inability to fix it.
When this happens we will cry out to the Lord and he will hear us. That’s always been his promise.
Matt you are right, we need to be challenging the way the world goes about its business. But we must acknowledge that there are separate kingdoms at work here. We seek to be active participants in this world, but never at the expense of our distinctive identity as citizens of a wholly different kingdom.
Perhaps we are called to be the voice of one calling…perhaps we are called to be the ones building the highway. Either way we end up in the wilderness away from the comforts of the city council. We can be a voice to our generation; to our culture; to our country without being just another special interest group on Capital Hill. Ours is the more difficult calling, one that requires more than rhetoric, money and knowledge of Constitutional law. Our calling is predicated on lives not legislation. The life of Jesus Christ and the lifestyle of his Disciples.
Matt points out that we need to highlight the positive things that are happening. He is very right; spiritually mature Church’s know how to celebrate. So let’s celebrate the things we see going on and encourage one another so that this becomes the norm of our identity. Let’s just give it a shot. If the Church in the
If this happens and it doesn’t have an effect, then by all means let’s retry legislating morality (I say this realizing and acknowledging Matt’s statement that all laws are a form of morality legislation). However, if we enter this experiment and it does not have any effect on our culture, I admit that I will be forced to reevaluate my faith entirely…
…but that’s a risk I’m willing to take.
Friday, October 14, 2005
The Spiritual Discipline of Love
The past couple weeks have been really hard. This job in New Orleans is all about long hours and stressful days. I enjoy the work, but the “higher ups” don’t make it very easy to do your job around here. Files come in and then are taken away, you get a hard copy of a claim but no electronic – which means you can’t write anything…which means that you can inspect the house but can’t turn in a report, and thus can’t get paid. And then there is the really frustrating “paying your dues” aspect. I’ve been humbled by going from positions of management (running this stuff down here is kinda like running a youth ministry or an extended work camp…its certainly not as hectic as Kids Corp!) to being treated like a worthless nothing. The “supervisors” don’t necessarily have any supervisor training…they’ve just been adjusters for a long time. So they ask for my help fixing their computers, learning new programs and even sending emails – but then refer to me as “little boy” or ceremoniously pretend I’m not in the room…or tell me to leave the room so that the grown-ups can talk. I don’t mind doing menial tasks as the low man on the pole, but I’m reaching the limit of ability to keep my very well-sharpened tongue in its cage.
In the midst of all this I have been reading some exchanges between early leaders in the Stone/Campbell Restoration movement for my Restoration History class at ACU (last class…comps next week…graduation in December!!!) This past week I stumbled across a series of essays over the concept of unity and how to treat others who profess Christ and yet have different understandings of what that means.
I also found a modern-day version of this debate between a friend of mine and a website of “Watch Dogs”…protectors of the Faith. "Watch Dogs"...what a conundrum of a name! I visited their site and it was sadly familiar. I greatly respect the desire of these folks to protect the Church they love. However, like we often experience with adolescents, love must mature beyond insecurity or it isn't actually love at all. When teenagers (and immature adults) are “in love” their relationship is often characterized by insecurity and jealousy. This is often viewed as protection of the beloved. However, in truth the motives here are more self-centered than other-focused. I don’t mean this in a defamatory way, but rather to point out the natural need for an intentional and continued maturation process. Love does not envy. When true love is present, fear is driven out and we can act and react from a standpoint of patience, compassion, peace and trust rather than suspicion or anger.
This love should drive us to protect, but only when an intruder is threatening our loved ones. The problem we run into with our situation is that “Watch Dogs” seem to begin from an assumption that “everyone” is an intruder and should be treated with suspicion…you have to earn the right (through agreement to a certain party-line, proper doctrinal stance, etc) to be called family. But family (supposedly loved ones) are still family even if don’t agree with them, so treating them like an intruder because you don’t like what they say is not love. It is, at best, an immature infatuation.
*************
Sidebar: You’ll notice that I’m not using any specific references to names or websites. This is not because I’m afraid or want to shout critiques from the corners. However, my goal is not to debate, confront or offend any specific person or group of people. My goal with this blog is to engage ISSUES that relate to Spiritual Formation and/or Youth Ministry. Like everyone, this is a learning process for me. One thing I have learned is that people expect critiques to be leveled at an individual and it is very hard to convince them that you are attempting otherwise. I don’t want to fight with anyone! This is not about individuals…it is about the larger ideas behind our individual actions.
Please note: words that are italicized, in bold or underlined do not suggest anger or aggression – these highlighting tools help important points to stand out from the rest of the text. Okay back to the Watch Dogs...
***********
These "Dogs" view it as their Christian duty to police the actions of others and report back to everyone else on just how wrong these bad/dumb/evil/etc people are…and why they should be reprimanded. While there may be a comment (which can often come across as offhand or insincere) about the imperfection of the Watch Dogs, a basic assumption is that they have a grasp on the height and width and depth of God’s nature, His Church and other humans’ actions. This to me seems wrong on so many levels. (Even the choice of "Watch Dogs" as a title...in Scripture, is it ever a good thing to be described as a dog?)
Interestingly, the Dogs seem to often espouse the rhetoric of unity. Unity seems often to be synonymous with ascribing to everything they believe. I stumbled across the blogs of some of these Watch Dogs just yesterday and, as always, I wish I’d just navigated away from the page as soon as I realized what it was. However, like a motorist on 635 craning my neck to see an overturned car in the other lane, I read on. A sour mood hung like a cloud over the rest of my evening.
The Unity movement - one of the fundamental tenets of the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement - seeks the unity of all believers under the banner of Christ. The Watch Dogs have shown me how dangerous it is to seek this unity on the basis of doctrine rather than behavior; of creeds (even the creed of anti-creedalism as in my own corner of the family tree) instead of conduct.
This doesn’t mean that doctrine or statements of belief are not important. Rather we should seek our unity based on the faith and following of Christ, and work out the other differences within the confines of a mutual love and respect shared between brothers/sisters.
Interestingly, these comments are probably enough to place me on the "bad list" with several of my brothers/sisters who are most ardent about unity.
I don’t intend to estrange or attack – though I admit my patience is tried by this subject. Neither would I ever suggest that everything is relative and that we should just chuck our convictions to the wind. However, I believe quite strongly that if I, or anyone else on this earth (Watch Dogs included) were judged on the basis of right doctrine and freedom from error, we would be undone. I hope that my understanding of God’s Law is maturing and developing along with my spiritual growth. With that said, I must then acknowledge the probability that there are things I am ignorant of or erroneous on at any given time which will require God’s grace.
It is much easier to find fault, raise defenses and circle the wagons than to truly seek "as much as it is up to us, to live at peace with everyone." As you pointed out Nate, we can easily come to believe that we are appointed by God to do the "guarding" and elevate our opinion to that of Sage and Prophet. The pride and seclusion that come along with believing we are our own ambassadors is difficult to combat. I’ve definitely seen that at work here in Louisiana. Without structure there will be strong ones who rise up and take a position like that of Watch Dog – without the necessary accountability or integrity. It is, to say the least, a stretch to think that if we all go our separate ways and study that we’ll all come to the same conclusions and consensus will be achieved. This is often described as trusting in the Holy Spirit or the Scriptures to clearly communicate the message of the Gospel with no “iffy” sections. However, this manner of discernment does not promote faith in God so much as faith in human ability and reason…we just don’t call it that. You can put religious or faith language on it, but we’re still talking about our ability to discern. The Unity movement, if based on human ability and reason, should be abandoned. If, rather, it is based on faith and hope in Christ’s interaction with humanity then it should be revisited, strengthened and supported with all that we are and all that we have. And then it should be proclaimed that there is indeed Good News for the oppressed, that it is Christ and not reason, doctrine or ability that will provide salvation.
In the midst of all this I have been reading some exchanges between early leaders in the Stone/Campbell Restoration movement for my Restoration History class at ACU (last class…comps next week…graduation in December!!!) This past week I stumbled across a series of essays over the concept of unity and how to treat others who profess Christ and yet have different understandings of what that means.
I also found a modern-day version of this debate between a friend of mine and a website of “Watch Dogs”…protectors of the Faith. "Watch Dogs"...what a conundrum of a name! I visited their site and it was sadly familiar. I greatly respect the desire of these folks to protect the Church they love. However, like we often experience with adolescents, love must mature beyond insecurity or it isn't actually love at all. When teenagers (and immature adults) are “in love” their relationship is often characterized by insecurity and jealousy. This is often viewed as protection of the beloved. However, in truth the motives here are more self-centered than other-focused. I don’t mean this in a defamatory way, but rather to point out the natural need for an intentional and continued maturation process. Love does not envy. When true love is present, fear is driven out and we can act and react from a standpoint of patience, compassion, peace and trust rather than suspicion or anger.
This love should drive us to protect, but only when an intruder is threatening our loved ones. The problem we run into with our situation is that “Watch Dogs” seem to begin from an assumption that “everyone” is an intruder and should be treated with suspicion…you have to earn the right (through agreement to a certain party-line, proper doctrinal stance, etc) to be called family. But family (supposedly loved ones) are still family even if don’t agree with them, so treating them like an intruder because you don’t like what they say is not love. It is, at best, an immature infatuation.
*************
Sidebar: You’ll notice that I’m not using any specific references to names or websites. This is not because I’m afraid or want to shout critiques from the corners. However, my goal is not to debate, confront or offend any specific person or group of people. My goal with this blog is to engage ISSUES that relate to Spiritual Formation and/or Youth Ministry. Like everyone, this is a learning process for me. One thing I have learned is that people expect critiques to be leveled at an individual and it is very hard to convince them that you are attempting otherwise. I don’t want to fight with anyone! This is not about individuals…it is about the larger ideas behind our individual actions.
Please note: words that are italicized, in bold or underlined do not suggest anger or aggression – these highlighting tools help important points to stand out from the rest of the text. Okay back to the Watch Dogs...
***********
These "Dogs" view it as their Christian duty to police the actions of others and report back to everyone else on just how wrong these bad/dumb/evil/etc people are…and why they should be reprimanded. While there may be a comment (which can often come across as offhand or insincere) about the imperfection of the Watch Dogs, a basic assumption is that they have a grasp on the height and width and depth of God’s nature, His Church and other humans’ actions. This to me seems wrong on so many levels. (Even the choice of "Watch Dogs" as a title...in Scripture, is it ever a good thing to be described as a dog?)
Interestingly, the Dogs seem to often espouse the rhetoric of unity. Unity seems often to be synonymous with ascribing to everything they believe. I stumbled across the blogs of some of these Watch Dogs just yesterday and, as always, I wish I’d just navigated away from the page as soon as I realized what it was. However, like a motorist on 635 craning my neck to see an overturned car in the other lane, I read on. A sour mood hung like a cloud over the rest of my evening.
The Unity movement - one of the fundamental tenets of the Stone-Campbell Restoration movement - seeks the unity of all believers under the banner of Christ. The Watch Dogs have shown me how dangerous it is to seek this unity on the basis of doctrine rather than behavior; of creeds (even the creed of anti-creedalism as in my own corner of the family tree) instead of conduct.
This doesn’t mean that doctrine or statements of belief are not important. Rather we should seek our unity based on the faith and following of Christ, and work out the other differences within the confines of a mutual love and respect shared between brothers/sisters.
Interestingly, these comments are probably enough to place me on the "bad list" with several of my brothers/sisters who are most ardent about unity.
I don’t intend to estrange or attack – though I admit my patience is tried by this subject. Neither would I ever suggest that everything is relative and that we should just chuck our convictions to the wind. However, I believe quite strongly that if I, or anyone else on this earth (Watch Dogs included) were judged on the basis of right doctrine and freedom from error, we would be undone. I hope that my understanding of God’s Law is maturing and developing along with my spiritual growth. With that said, I must then acknowledge the probability that there are things I am ignorant of or erroneous on at any given time which will require God’s grace.
It is much easier to find fault, raise defenses and circle the wagons than to truly seek "as much as it is up to us, to live at peace with everyone." As you pointed out Nate, we can easily come to believe that we are appointed by God to do the "guarding" and elevate our opinion to that of Sage and Prophet. The pride and seclusion that come along with believing we are our own ambassadors is difficult to combat. I’ve definitely seen that at work here in Louisiana. Without structure there will be strong ones who rise up and take a position like that of Watch Dog – without the necessary accountability or integrity. It is, to say the least, a stretch to think that if we all go our separate ways and study that we’ll all come to the same conclusions and consensus will be achieved. This is often described as trusting in the Holy Spirit or the Scriptures to clearly communicate the message of the Gospel with no “iffy” sections. However, this manner of discernment does not promote faith in God so much as faith in human ability and reason…we just don’t call it that. You can put religious or faith language on it, but we’re still talking about our ability to discern. The Unity movement, if based on human ability and reason, should be abandoned. If, rather, it is based on faith and hope in Christ’s interaction with humanity then it should be revisited, strengthened and supported with all that we are and all that we have. And then it should be proclaimed that there is indeed Good News for the oppressed, that it is Christ and not reason, doctrine or ability that will provide salvation.
Monday, August 22, 2005
Toward a Theology of Youth Trips
I have replaced the original text of this post with the rewritten version that was published on Matt Tapie's blog, Two Cities, in December 2005. I have changed this post because in addition to the critique against youth ministry that it was intended to raise, some felt it was an attack against a particular group of people. Thanks.
Some of my friends think I don’t like youth ministry. I’m not sure how they came to that conclusion. Sure I don’t like lock-ins (does anybody actually like lock-ins?). I don’t like babysitting. I don’t like ski trips. I’m not a big fan of shaving cream wars or even water balloon fights—I always have to clean up the water balloon shrapnel. I don’t really enjoy many contemporary Christian rock, pop, or Praise-N-Worship bands, and I like going to their concerts even less. I don’t like ski trips.
I’m not a fan of the 5 minute “devo talk” unless it is given by a teenager…those I’m usually proud of. I don’t like using acrostics unless they’re really good, and most are not! I don’t really like marshmallow object lessons. I don’t necessarily like putting together trips to Six Flags, though I do like riding the Titan. But I don’t like water parks at all. Did I mention that I don’t like ski trips?
I don’t like the “initials” language of instant messaging: rotflol…jk! I can’t stand people telling me that I have to have at least four mediums for communicating messages to teens because they don’t have the attention span for a serious conversation. And I don’t think I should look, think, talk and act like a teenager.
But what would make them think I don’t like youth ministry?
In truth, none of this stuff has anything to do with actual youth ministry. Unfortunately, many people (including some youth ministers) don’t realize that. I’ve talked a lot lately about the paradigm of youth ministry that comes from parachurch organizations and has presented itself, in many ways, as a social club or latch-key program for teens. So as someone that speaks out against this approach, I think it’s important that we discuss our theology.
Why do we need a theology of youth trips?
By necessity there are various hats that Youth Ministers must wear. Some of these hats look “religious” while others appear to be more social or administrative in nature. However, this is a false distinction. All aspects of our ministry can and do have a profound spiritual impact. Having a theology of youth trips, in part means that in our role as “program director” we must begin to dismantle the thought process that has led us to assume that attendance is the best indicator of the efficacy of trips, camps, and retreats.I know of one fairly large congregation in an urban setting which has struggled recently with the development of a healthy summer schedule. In an attempt to put together a summer calendar that is low stress and low maintenance (not necessarily a bad thing at all) they have decided to send the kids to a camp at a Christian college where they will be intentionally separated from their youth group and put in with kids from all over.
I know the folks who run this camp and think very highly of them. I understand their philosophy and appreciate the creative way they are introducing young people to new Christian friends. However, this camp is not for this group of kids. These kids are naturally fragmented because few of them even go to school in the same district. They are fragmented even more because their youth minister has left. They are isolated and this camp is going to allow them to withdraw spiritually and isolate even more.
Choosing a camp simply because it is easier on the adults is spiritually irresponsible.
While I doubt that there are many situations where the situation is that cut-and-dried (it certainly was not that simple in the situation referenced above), I believe it is true that our unspoken, unrealized, unexamined motives can endanger the health of a program in significant ways.
I’ve also known of some summer camps that exist more for the adults than the teens. These are often staffed by a group of volunteers who’ve been going out to this camp for years and years and it has become their vacation…much like a timeshare at the lake.
Tradition is great. I love the idea of taking teens to a camp that has a formative history with their congregation or family. However, often these can become a “good ole boys” club and when this happens the spiritual formation of the kids may well play second fiddle to the adults’ enjoyment.
As is true for any group or organization, a camp which forgets its purpose, regardless of how fun or popular it may be, is going to at best have a diminished formative impact.
And then there are ski trips...
Would someone please tell me how spending $600-$1500/person taking a group of over-privileged kids to a posh ski resort has anything to do with the kingdom of God? Maybe you’re from a small town with poor country kids who’ve never been farther away than grandma’s house. I know there are some groups like this. You raise the money and make sure that everyone who wants to go can, and it is a great experience. Cool. But now you’ve done it once and that makes it tradition, so you go back the next year…and the next.
Soon you’re raising $1000 per student every year. There’s no budget money to do service projects unless those projects are raising money for Colorado. Oops. Well, it’s still a bonding experience that they’ll never forget. Right?
Then there are the groups of kids in the big city that plan the trips as well. They decide not to spend their efforts on fundraisers (you know, we need to have time for things like service projects, right?). Instead they just decide that they’ll make monthly payments of $150 for 6 months leading up to the trip. It’s okay that only some kids can afford to go, because if the group gets too big it’ll make the trip more expensive and that wouldn’t be very responsible would it? So in the end it’s the kids whose parents take them to Europe in the summer and go to Aspen in the winter…on a church ski trip.
Yes, I know, that was a vicious little soap box. But the truth is that we can build community just as easily in a Habitat for Humanity project. If it’s a rare experience you’re after, serve the poor somewhere. There’s nothing wrong with doing exciting things and having a good time, but can we really look in the face of the homeless man we see while in vans on the way to the airport to go be ski bunnies for a week? Please understand that this is not intended as a guilt-trip for a trip that has a recreation purpose. It isn’t the planning of a “fun” trip that is bothersome. It is the elevation of the “fun” trip to the key position in the roster. We communicate a very specific and dangerous lesson by spending three times as much money on one self-centered adventure than on any two other experiences.
We need a theology of youth ministry because without an intentional plan we run the risk of leading unexamined lives through an unexamined ministry. Perhaps more accurately, we need an intentional theology to combat against the dangers of unintentional theologies.
Intentionality is Vital
What type of person and what type of community are we forming with our youth trips? A community that believes spirituality is an individual thing, perfectly healthy in isolation from the local church? Someone who sees church as a place for them to live out their fantasies of being in charge and getting their own way? How about a nice materialistic consumer who believes that the church exists for their entertainment?
It’s been said that “it’s a sin to bore a kid with the Gospel.” Maybe, but isn’t it an even more damaging sin to teach a child that the Gospel exists for their entertainment?I believe that our trips should be an extension of that in which we've engaged throughout the year. Each trip should be carefully chosen with an outcome in mind. Questions we must consider include things like:
What type of community are we forming with this activity?
What type of person do we want to form with this trip?
Is this trip contrary to our mission?
These questions must be asked early in the planning stage and we must have the courage to respond when we discover a beloved trip that is forming something other than a faithful disciple of Christ. This doesn't mean that there is one camp that we should all be attending - I don't have a sales pitch for the latest and greatest. The camps that may be most beneficial to the rural youth group of 20 kids - those who were in diapers together and have been in the same school together for 12 years - will not be the same events that benefit a suburban conglomeration of teens who barely know each other.Regardless of the specifics, in each situation intentionality of spiritual formation is needed. We cannot afford to be haphazard anymore. We don't have enough time with these young people and they are no longer growing up in a Christian dominated society where they'll be discipled by osmosis (if that world ever really existed).
Just the Beginning
Youth Ministry is at a crossroads. I am convicted that the Holy Spirit is calling me to a long term focus on church youth ministry. When I was dismissed from a congregation because the position of Youth Minister had been eliminated I received a wake-up call. That decision communicated something important. Those things I listed at the top of this post have been what so many churches have wanted from youth ministry - they don't even know there is an alternative. And yet many churches are realizing that these ministries aren’t producing the desired result. I pray that the Lord will raise up leaders to take responsibility for helping the church mature in its understanding of our responsibility to young people. It is way past time for us to develop an intentional theology of youth trips…and youth ministry for that matter. This is not intended to serve as the final word on the topic. Rather I hope we will begin, restart, or re-imagine this conversation in community rather than isolation and move intentionally toward spiritual maturity and Christlikeness.
Some of my friends think I don’t like youth ministry. I’m not sure how they came to that conclusion. Sure I don’t like lock-ins (does anybody actually like lock-ins?). I don’t like babysitting. I don’t like ski trips. I’m not a big fan of shaving cream wars or even water balloon fights—I always have to clean up the water balloon shrapnel. I don’t really enjoy many contemporary Christian rock, pop, or Praise-N-Worship bands, and I like going to their concerts even less. I don’t like ski trips.
I’m not a fan of the 5 minute “devo talk” unless it is given by a teenager…those I’m usually proud of. I don’t like using acrostics unless they’re really good, and most are not! I don’t really like marshmallow object lessons. I don’t necessarily like putting together trips to Six Flags, though I do like riding the Titan. But I don’t like water parks at all. Did I mention that I don’t like ski trips?
I don’t like the “initials” language of instant messaging: rotflol…jk! I can’t stand people telling me that I have to have at least four mediums for communicating messages to teens because they don’t have the attention span for a serious conversation. And I don’t think I should look, think, talk and act like a teenager.
But what would make them think I don’t like youth ministry?
In truth, none of this stuff has anything to do with actual youth ministry. Unfortunately, many people (including some youth ministers) don’t realize that. I’ve talked a lot lately about the paradigm of youth ministry that comes from parachurch organizations and has presented itself, in many ways, as a social club or latch-key program for teens. So as someone that speaks out against this approach, I think it’s important that we discuss our theology.
Why do we need a theology of youth trips?
By necessity there are various hats that Youth Ministers must wear. Some of these hats look “religious” while others appear to be more social or administrative in nature. However, this is a false distinction. All aspects of our ministry can and do have a profound spiritual impact. Having a theology of youth trips, in part means that in our role as “program director” we must begin to dismantle the thought process that has led us to assume that attendance is the best indicator of the efficacy of trips, camps, and retreats.I know of one fairly large congregation in an urban setting which has struggled recently with the development of a healthy summer schedule. In an attempt to put together a summer calendar that is low stress and low maintenance (not necessarily a bad thing at all) they have decided to send the kids to a camp at a Christian college where they will be intentionally separated from their youth group and put in with kids from all over.
I know the folks who run this camp and think very highly of them. I understand their philosophy and appreciate the creative way they are introducing young people to new Christian friends. However, this camp is not for this group of kids. These kids are naturally fragmented because few of them even go to school in the same district. They are fragmented even more because their youth minister has left. They are isolated and this camp is going to allow them to withdraw spiritually and isolate even more.
Choosing a camp simply because it is easier on the adults is spiritually irresponsible.
While I doubt that there are many situations where the situation is that cut-and-dried (it certainly was not that simple in the situation referenced above), I believe it is true that our unspoken, unrealized, unexamined motives can endanger the health of a program in significant ways.
I’ve also known of some summer camps that exist more for the adults than the teens. These are often staffed by a group of volunteers who’ve been going out to this camp for years and years and it has become their vacation…much like a timeshare at the lake.
Tradition is great. I love the idea of taking teens to a camp that has a formative history with their congregation or family. However, often these can become a “good ole boys” club and when this happens the spiritual formation of the kids may well play second fiddle to the adults’ enjoyment.
As is true for any group or organization, a camp which forgets its purpose, regardless of how fun or popular it may be, is going to at best have a diminished formative impact.
And then there are ski trips...
Would someone please tell me how spending $600-$1500/person taking a group of over-privileged kids to a posh ski resort has anything to do with the kingdom of God? Maybe you’re from a small town with poor country kids who’ve never been farther away than grandma’s house. I know there are some groups like this. You raise the money and make sure that everyone who wants to go can, and it is a great experience. Cool. But now you’ve done it once and that makes it tradition, so you go back the next year…and the next.
Soon you’re raising $1000 per student every year. There’s no budget money to do service projects unless those projects are raising money for Colorado. Oops. Well, it’s still a bonding experience that they’ll never forget. Right?
Then there are the groups of kids in the big city that plan the trips as well. They decide not to spend their efforts on fundraisers (you know, we need to have time for things like service projects, right?). Instead they just decide that they’ll make monthly payments of $150 for 6 months leading up to the trip. It’s okay that only some kids can afford to go, because if the group gets too big it’ll make the trip more expensive and that wouldn’t be very responsible would it? So in the end it’s the kids whose parents take them to Europe in the summer and go to Aspen in the winter…on a church ski trip.
Yes, I know, that was a vicious little soap box. But the truth is that we can build community just as easily in a Habitat for Humanity project. If it’s a rare experience you’re after, serve the poor somewhere. There’s nothing wrong with doing exciting things and having a good time, but can we really look in the face of the homeless man we see while in vans on the way to the airport to go be ski bunnies for a week? Please understand that this is not intended as a guilt-trip for a trip that has a recreation purpose. It isn’t the planning of a “fun” trip that is bothersome. It is the elevation of the “fun” trip to the key position in the roster. We communicate a very specific and dangerous lesson by spending three times as much money on one self-centered adventure than on any two other experiences.
We need a theology of youth ministry because without an intentional plan we run the risk of leading unexamined lives through an unexamined ministry. Perhaps more accurately, we need an intentional theology to combat against the dangers of unintentional theologies.
Intentionality is Vital
What type of person and what type of community are we forming with our youth trips? A community that believes spirituality is an individual thing, perfectly healthy in isolation from the local church? Someone who sees church as a place for them to live out their fantasies of being in charge and getting their own way? How about a nice materialistic consumer who believes that the church exists for their entertainment?
It’s been said that “it’s a sin to bore a kid with the Gospel.” Maybe, but isn’t it an even more damaging sin to teach a child that the Gospel exists for their entertainment?I believe that our trips should be an extension of that in which we've engaged throughout the year. Each trip should be carefully chosen with an outcome in mind. Questions we must consider include things like:
What type of community are we forming with this activity?
What type of person do we want to form with this trip?
Is this trip contrary to our mission?
These questions must be asked early in the planning stage and we must have the courage to respond when we discover a beloved trip that is forming something other than a faithful disciple of Christ. This doesn't mean that there is one camp that we should all be attending - I don't have a sales pitch for the latest and greatest. The camps that may be most beneficial to the rural youth group of 20 kids - those who were in diapers together and have been in the same school together for 12 years - will not be the same events that benefit a suburban conglomeration of teens who barely know each other.Regardless of the specifics, in each situation intentionality of spiritual formation is needed. We cannot afford to be haphazard anymore. We don't have enough time with these young people and they are no longer growing up in a Christian dominated society where they'll be discipled by osmosis (if that world ever really existed).
Just the Beginning
Youth Ministry is at a crossroads. I am convicted that the Holy Spirit is calling me to a long term focus on church youth ministry. When I was dismissed from a congregation because the position of Youth Minister had been eliminated I received a wake-up call. That decision communicated something important. Those things I listed at the top of this post have been what so many churches have wanted from youth ministry - they don't even know there is an alternative. And yet many churches are realizing that these ministries aren’t producing the desired result. I pray that the Lord will raise up leaders to take responsibility for helping the church mature in its understanding of our responsibility to young people. It is way past time for us to develop an intentional theology of youth trips…and youth ministry for that matter. This is not intended to serve as the final word on the topic. Rather I hope we will begin, restart, or re-imagine this conversation in community rather than isolation and move intentionally toward spiritual maturity and Christlikeness.
Monday, July 25, 2005
Pacing...Then Leading
Those of you who know me, know that I always have several books I am reading. The latest I've stumbled across is Shaping the Spiritual Life of Students by Richard Dunn. While I'm not completely sold on some of his conclusions, I love the concept he puts forth for ministry to adolescents: Pacing...then leading.
This way of thinking encourages adults to invest personally in the lives of individual teens, to walk alongside them and learn about their world. It is only after this has occured that the adult is in place to actually provide healthy, informed leadership.
In reading the materials produced by Mark Yaconelli and the Youth Ministry and Spirituality Project I stumbled across this quote,
Our curricular aim was to "re-frame" the problem of youth ministry by focusing not on "reaching" youth (who are usually only the "identified patient" in a dysfunctional system) but by challenging the adult leaders of churches to look at their own lives in Christ and ponder whether they have a way of life that is genuinely attractive to young persons searching for healing, hospitality, and inspiring role models who accept them as they are. Our foundational premise was advanced: that all Christian life and ministry needs to be attentive first to God's presence within us, between us, and around us. (taken from YMSP website, documents section - In Service Session-1)
In order for anyone to effectively engage in a ministry of pacing - one of empathy and investment - they must be dedicated to attending to God's presence in their own life. Without this, any attempt to reach out will seem hollow or perceived to have an agenda. I believe that what we are discussing here is fundamental to any endeavor of Spiritual Formation but especially those within the context of a youth ministry.
But as the folks with the YMSP pointed out, many youth ministries are marked more by anxiety than pacing. The focus on "reaching the lost for Jesus" has often damaged our ability to be companions by feeding our desire to be on the cutting edge of outreach programs - we create a stressful environment that looks just like the world around us. I believe that in large part this is what Nate Bostian was referring to when he asked about the danger of
building an alternate Christian sub-culture that is populated by bands that sound the same as the world and styles that look the same as the world, except they just have "Jesus" plastered all over them.(see my post on The Role of Intentional Spiritual Formation in Youth Ministry)
Adults often want to be given a precise job description with hours required, tools needed and direction on exactly what they have to do. In my experience they often loose interest in helping when I respond with, "love the teens...spend time with them." The truth of the matter is that this is our greatest need. We need adults who are willing to walk alongside these young people and discover what it means to be a teenager in Dallas, Texas in 2005; we need adults who will communicate with their actions that these kids are important. That is very hard to program and its hard to plan, but it is impossible to replace.
Pacing, then Leading may then become the most important tool for raising up volunteer leaders - it is both the way we find companion ministers and the primary tool we provide. And yet, with all of this said, I am left with a nagging question. How do we get this started in a community that seems to value leaving not-so-well-enough alone? How do we present this concept to a group that isn't sure that we're really in need of anything more than overly planned and communicated but sporadically attended events? The only answer I can even muster at this point is that I must continue to pace with potential volunteers and hope that a critical mass will eventually form. It goes back to creating an environment where we ministers (paid and volunteer) are "attentive first to God's presence within us, between us, and around us."
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Formed in the Image / Conformed to the Image
In a previous post I referred to Spiritual Formation as the process of being conformed to the image of Christ. I think that this language is appropriate and useful but probably needs a little more attention.
I have had people respond that they don’t see the scriptural validity of this view because Genesis claims that we are created in the image of God and thus any claim to be more fully formed takes away from the power of God. What I appreciate most about their concern is both the acknowledgement of God as the great Creator – the one about whom Paul says “He is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else.” (Acts 17:25) – and also the desire to avoid complicating our lives with pointless pursuits and human endeavors.
However, when I refer to being formed in or conformed to the image of Christ I am not speaking of our created being described in Genesis. Rather I call attention to the identity and character of our person which has been greatly affected by the presence of sin – both the sin in the world and the sin in our own lives.
In Colossians 3:12-17, Paul also says,
“Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience. Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. And over all these virtues put on love, which binds them all together in perfect unity. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”
No one who has attempted this type of life can say that it is a simple matter which comes naturally because we are created in the image of God. In fact Paul himself says that there is a battle taking place in regards to this life;
“So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God-through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:21-25)
My favorite part of that passage in Romans is found in the statement, “Who will rescue me…? Thanks be to God – through Jesus Christ our Lord!” Christ is not only the rescuer but the perfect model of what the rescued will look like eventually. My life then is found in the balance between recognizing my total dependence on the rescuer and a journey toward the perfection of Christ. Though I don’t think I’ll be able to fully trust in Jesus or fully become like him in this life, my task is to continue in both.
One of the questions we should be asking in our personal lives as well as in everything we do in the Church is “what kind of person are we forming/seeking to form with this?” It is then an incredibly oversimplified and impossibly complex answer to say “someone who looks like Jesus.”
To be conformed to the image of Christ is not a simple matter of listing attributes (the list itself grows with us as we get to know the person of Jesus) but rather like an apprenticeship, it entails learning those aspects of identity and action which escape words. We’re not talking about simple moral principles. The image of Christ refers to the minute idiosyncrasies that can only be recognized by intimate travel companions. This happens in community, it happens over time, and it happens by the grace of God.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)