So, Amazon sent me Coldplay’s new album, Viva la Vida on Tuesday, and I got to really listen to it yesterday.  Now I normally wouldn’t post about a “secular” band’s album here, but listening to the title track, I was struck by how fitting it was to the current predicament a lot of the institutional church finds itself in.  The song, Viva la Vida, is told from the perspective of a king who has lost his power.  His once great standing in the world is gone, and he’s left with only memories of the golden years.

I wonder sometimes if that isn’t why we see the sort of reaction we do from some people in the church.  It is not an easy thing to lose power and influence.  As humans, we naturally crave it.  Evangelicals have held a lot of sway in America for the last 50 years or so, and I think we are now arriving at a place where a lot that power has left or is the process of leaving.  The question becomes, how will the respond?  Will we grasp for power, or we embrace our lack of power and serve others?  Will we be content with “sweeping the streets”?

Here are the lyrics:

Viva la Vida

I used to rule the world
Seas would rise when I gave the word
Now in the morning I sleep alone
Sweep the streets I used to own

I used to roll the dice
Feel the fear in my enemies eyes
Listen as the crowd would sing:
“Now the old king is dead, long live the king!”

One minute I held the key
Next the walls were closed on me
And I discovered that my castles stand
Upon pillars of salt, and pillars of sand

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword, my shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can’t explain
Once you go there was never, never an honest word
That was when I ruled the world

It was the wicked and wild wind
Blew down the doors to let me in
Shattered windows and the sound of drums
People couldn’t believe what I’d become

Revolutionaries wait
For my head on a silver plate
Just a puppet on a lonely string (Ooooh)
Ah, who would ever want to be king?

I hear Jerusalem bells a ringing
Roman cavalry choirs are singing
Be my mirror, my sword, and shield
My missionaries in a foreign field
For some reason I can’t explain
I know Saint Peter will call my name
Never an honest word
But that was when I ruled the world

By the way, this is the song that is on the new Itunes commercial, and, yes I do realize there is some level of irony in Apple using a song about the loss of one’s power in an ad.

Like many conversations, there are certain subjects which rise to the surface from time-to-time, often (and hopefully) becoming clearer over time. One such subject that probably bears another go is that of the language we use – words and sentences.

Setting the Stage

As part of the baseline for this discussion, I would like to borrow and briefly touch on some concepts from this article last fall. Specifically, there are three ways of classifying behavioral beliefs:

Absolutes – those things which are cross-cultural truths, which are demanded or forbidden. To do (or not do) such things is sinful, regardless of the cultural context.

Convictions – those things which are personally convicting, actions which a person believes they should (or should not) do. To do (or not do) such things would be sinning against one’s conscience, and therefore would be sinful. However, convictions are limited to the person or faith community (as with binding and loosing) and cannot be demanded cross-culturally.

Preferences – those things which are personally preferred, based on traditions or likes and dislikes.

Legalism occurs when Preferences or Convictions are raised to the level of Absolutes. This is the sin of the Pharisees. Relativism occurs when Absolutes are lowered to Convictions or Preferences. This is the sin of the Pagans and Hedonists.

Both are to be avoided.

The Words We Use

The Bible has a number of things to say about the words we use. Just a few relevant examples:

Read the rest of this entry »

Since the release of his first book, The Irresistible Revolution, Shane Claiborne has both risen to prominence and taken a lot of flak in Evangelical circles.  He is one of those people who people either seem to love or hate.  He is one of the few people who seems to have the ability to remain within the mainstream of American church culture, yet offer some harsh critiques at the same time.  All the while he never comes off as mean-spirited or like he has an ax to grind.

His new book, Jesus for President, a collaboration with Chris Haw, is in some ways a sequel to the first book, but it goes in some unexpected directions along the way.  With a subtitle, Politics for Ordinary Radicals, some might expect that this book would be Claiborne’s take on the current political scene in the U.S. or some sort of alternative Christian voting guide.  While, the book is certainly political in the sense it talk about political issues, it never really delves into the American political system.  In fact a strong theme throughout the book is the futility of expecting any real change to come through the political process, much like the point that Greg Boyd made in his 2005 release, The Myth of a Christian Nation.  That certainly doesn’t mean Claiborne doesn’t have opinions about issues, though.

First, I think I need to say something about the actual book itself.  The book is full color paperback, and nearly every page has unique, hand-drawn (or at least made to look hand-drawn) artwork pertaining to the content on the page.  It is obvious that the was a labor of love for the authors.  The book is nearly 350 pages long, but in actual content it is probably comparable to other paperbacks half that length.  It’s a pretty quick read.

The book is broken up into four sections, and the first three are largely historical in nature.  In Section 1, the Old Testament narrative including Creation, the Fall, the Flood, the Tower of Babel, and the call of Abraham are reviewed.  The authors make special note that all throughout this time, God was working with humanity to bring redemption and restoration to the fallen world.  They talk of God’s plan for the Israelites, and His frustration with them for neglecting their calling.  They talk about God’s giving in to the Israelites demands for a king, and the prophets that were sent to keep these kings in check.  An interesting discussion in this section has to do with the Levitical laws and festivals the Jewish people were to observe.  A major point of these laws and observances, according to the authors, was to set Israel apart as an example for other nations to see.

At their core, these Hebrew laws were ways God was protecting the integrity of a new humanity.  It was not simply for their sake but for the sake of creation.  For the original plan of God was that Israel would be set apart to redeem the nations.  This was not a plan to reform the pagan nations around it – like making the neighboring Assyrian empire better at doing empire.  Rather, God would save the world through fascination, by setting up an alternative society on the margins of empire for the world to come and see what a society of love looks like.  It would be the city on a hill that God would use to light up the world, drawing the world back to God.

Read the rest of this entry »

As I sit here, finishing my lunch, I am struck by a recent comment from Nathan on another thread:

Every church is driven by some program, structure, or church plan.

Exactly.

I’m going to be a bit pragmatic here for a moment. Please don’t point this out – I already know it, and I only bring this up because it may demonstrate a truth apparent in many experiences that have been shared:

/PRAGMATISM [ON]

One of the key axioms of organizational theory teaches that organizations are typically built in such a way as to achieve the results for which they were designed. My initial response to this was “duh”, but having seen it applied as an organizational project manager, I see the truth in this demonstrated in likely and unlikely ways.

One manifestation of this axiom is that organizations built around a single individual lose operational effectiveness when they reach 100-125 people. When an organization is led by a small group (1-15 people) with tight control over the organization, its effectiveness reaches a maximum at 350-400 people. When control is turned over to a second tier of hierarchy, its organizational capability expands to an operational maximum of about 1,000-1250. The next tier goes to about 3,500-4,000; then 10,000 and so on… [please realize I'm simplifying the org structural changes between models for the sake of brevity].

When you examine ‘church growth’ literature, you will find that these same ‘plateaus’ are often recognized and cited. You will also find that many ’stagnating’ churches seem to be hovering around these marks, as well.

So – recognizing this, if you are in leadership in a ’stagnating’ church at one of these tiers, chances are you’ve hit the maximum operating efficiency for the way you have structured the workings of your church. Additionally, you are probably being pressured to ‘grow’ the church in numbers. [There may or may not be spiritual issues, as well, but for the sake of argument, we will assume that these issues are not extraordinary when compared to the norm experienced in most churches today.]

All too often, the ‘answer’ to the stagnation is to simply try to change the programming – either in a ‘home grown’ manner, or ‘off-the-shelf’ (PD, 9 Marks, G12, etc.). Unfortunately, this response only deals with one of the two (or more) underlying issues. Bringing more people into an organization that is already near its maximum operating capacity without addressing the operating capacity, itself, is a recipe for disaster. [Noting that if there are extraordinary spiritual issues going on, as well, leaving these readdressed is even more disasterous.]

To be blunt – if your church has organizational problems before you change its programs, changing the programs won’t fix anything.

Unfortunately, issues of large organizational structure aren’t directly addressed in Scripture. The primary model at the end of the Era of the Apostles was the house church which, while not without its own unique problems, requires little organizational thought beyond having 2-3 men in pastoral roles. Thus, most churches have never diagnosed the organizational problems as problems, and end up hurting a lot of people in the process of changing.

So, from a truly pragmatic standpoint, if the church needs to make changes in its programming, etc., to better meet the needs of the community and to grow, two options need to be considered:

1 – Plant a new church, allowing the new church to be a ‘change agent’, focusing primarily on reaching the unchurched or disconnected.

2 – Go ahead and make the programming adjustments, while making the necessary organizational changes that will support the shift from ‘tradition’.

Unfortunately, many pastors like being king of their domain and are quite loath to relinquish their current level of control (as codified in the org structure), as are many elder boards, as well. So, they forego #1 and attempt #2 without the other change that must occur. Since PD is one of the most popular means of ‘changing programming’, it (and Rick Warren) then become the whipping boys for why strife entered the local church, when the root cause is sitting on the doorstep of the local church:

1) What is the motivation for growth? Is it from God or from ego?

2) Is growth the answer to stagnation? Will simply ‘preaching the Word’ – or dealing with some specific sins and sinful attitudes – end it?

3) Are the leaders, who are looking for ‘change’ to ‘fix’ the problems, willing to radically change their ways of working, as well?

All too often, though, such spiritual and organizational questions are left unanswered – dooming the organization to fail, and ensuring that people will be hurt in the process.

/PRAGMATISM [OFF]

Check out this really good post from Team Pyro (yes, you read that right). They have been writing a series on faith and politics. Anyone who thinks that we are a “Christian Nation” because biblical moral are made into laws has something else coming. Anyhow, check it out.

I’ve been re-reading Philip Yancey’s book called What’s So Amazing About Grace? In the beginning he shares this story that a friend of his told him.

A prostitute came to me in wretched straits, homeless, sick, unable to buy food for her two-year-old daughter. Through sobs and tears she told me she had been renting out her daughter– two years old! —to men interested in kinky sex. She made more renting out her daughter for an hour than she could earn on her own in a night. She had to do it, she said, to support her own drug habit. I could hardly bear hearing her sordid story. For one thing it made me legally liable—I am required to report cases of child abuse. I had no idea what to say to this woman.

At last I asked if she had ever thought of going to a a church for help. I will never forget the look of pure, naïve shock that crossed her face. “Church!” She cried. “Why would I ever go there? I was already feeling terrible about myself. They’d just make me feel worse.”

Yancey continues,

“What struck me about my friend’s story is that prostitutes much like this woman fled toward Jesus, not away from him. The worse a person felt about herself, the more likely she saw Jesus as a refuge. Has the church lost that gift? Evidently the down-and-out, who flocked to Jesus when he lived on earth, no longer felt welcome among his followers. What has happened?

I’ve pondered this question for years. What has happened? How have we as the church lost our way? When did it become about being right instead of being refuge? When did it come about posting our credentials? When did it become about creating mocking names about offering children to Molech? When did it become Ok to mock and jeer those we disagree with or those we agree with who aren’t as mean as we want them to be? When did Jesus tell people to take their plank and shove it? How many people have walked away from the church because those who made it up forgot how dirty they truly were? Somehow, we’ve lost our way as a church. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in the blogosphere where people can hide behind any name they want and say whatever they want to say. Someone can call 15 year old girls painted whores of Sodom and write Tabloid titles because they don’t have to see the pain they are causing people. Somehow, the political party you belong to is more important than the family you belong to. If we believe we are criticizing children of God then we are family. If one is not criticizing God’s children then we’re violating all sorts of Scriptures not in the criticism but in the name calling. Lines are being drawn not about salvation but about what is worn on Sunday’s to church.

And the whole time people who’s lives are being blown apart just keep on dying. They just keep on living the wrong way because Darn It, I AM RIGHT!!! One camp picks apart a person in the other camp because he doesn’t go far enough down the Theological trail with them. They may agree that one goes to Heaven by believing on the work on Christ but down the path they disagree so it’s Ok to tear each other apart. I wonder, does this make you as sick as it does me?

Here’s what the Apostle Paul had to say about it,

The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

I wonder how many people have been devoured by someone who “was right” and “justified.”

Confession and testimonies may not look or sound the same in AD 2008 as they did in AD 208, but I imagine that they have always been moving in their demonstration of God’s work in His kingdom

HT: Rick Frueh

Seems that the bi-monthly topic of homosexuality has come up again. Interestingly, last week’s sermon topic at my own church was specifically on this topic, with an approach likely to tick off both extremes of the spectrum on the issue.

You can listen here (sorry for the streaming link – I don’t have a downloadable one, though you can get it through iTunes here).

That’s it folks! Look no further for the reason why we all in decline. According to this slice post, from this ABC news story, the problem is hygiene! Now why didn’t I think of that?! All these kids coming into our churches, wearing the latest fashions of tattered jeans and bed head – they just need a good shower! Maybe if we had Colgate come and do a 45 minute presentation in all of our churches, we would be rid of the slobbery. Better yet, we can have the ushers hand out disposable toothbrushes at the door. And maybe we can get people back into those polyester three-piece suits again! Remember… the Lord looks at the hygiene, the clothing style and how well you are able to color coordinate your clothing.

**this post contains many facetious statements. While I do believe that our society is becoming more brash, rude and crude, I have no clue how that corresponds to hygiene, clothing choice and how those two affect the current state of the church.

Good news for all our Dispensationalist friends out there. This service described in this article promises to make your post-rapture communication a little bit easier. In addition to sending your left behind family and friends emails letting them know that they have indeed missed out on their chance to avoid the Tribulation, this site will take care of all that pesky post-Rapture financial paperwork.

Now if we could only come up with a way to use all those beans in our basement we bought before Y2K…