God's Plan and the Decline of the Church

Does God have a plan for us today? And exactly how detailed does that plan get? Did God plan for me to eat cantaloupe this morning for breakfast? Or was it enough that I ate a healthy breakfast? Or that I simply had something to eat at all? Or maybe God’s plan is more of a “big picture” kind of plan that is not so much involved with day-to-day logistics?

Speaking of plans, a recent study released by the Pew Research Center paints a gloomy picture of the future of the church. Numerical decline is happening in every denomination across the board, and dire predictions are being heard from church leaders about the future viability of the church.

So, does God have a plan here? Is the decline of the church opposed to God’s plan and therefore we should strive against it and work to reverse it? Or is the decline of the church actually a part of God’s plan and something new is now happening all around us, something we should not oppose but rather support and encourage?

It reminds me of Ezekiel 37, where God shows the prophet the valley filled with dry bones and asks, “Mortal, can these bones live?” God actually interprets the vision for Ezekiel, telling him that “these bones are the whole house of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost; we are cut off completely.’” In other words, they just got their Pew Research Center Report.

The modern church has kind of felt like a valley of dry bones ever since we started obsessing over our declining numbers. All dried up. Hopeless. Isolated. Irrelevant. Dead.

What’s the plan here, God?

Prophesy to the bones! Tell them to listen up! God is going to open up our graves! Do you believe it? Prophesy to the breath! God is going to breathe life into the deadest and driest of us once again, and we will live! THAT’S the plan here!

Doesn’t make a bit of sense, does it? Well neither does resurrection. And that plan seems to be working out pretty well.

Jeremiah 29:11 is an intriguing Bible verse - “For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope.” So maybe that’s a good starting point. Whatever God’s plan looks like, it is not going to cause harm; God’s plan is for the “welfare” of God’s people.

And wouldn’t you know, the Hebrew word that is translated here as “welfare” is actually shalom, a word that connotes completeness, safety, health, and peace.

Yes, God has a plan for us, and we call that plan “shalom.” God’s plan is life. God’s plan is resurrection. God’s plan opens up graves, rattles dry bones, stretches sinew and skin over newly assembled skeletons, and breathes new life into dead, dry structures.

I am confident in the future that God has in store for the church. It is going to be amazing, unlike anything we’ve ever encountered before. It is going to be joyous and gracious and just. Love will abound and we will be at peace. It will be shalom.

And here’s the thing … there’s no reason we can’t go ahead and start doing all that stuff right now. You know, joy and grace and justice and love. And shalom. Lots and lots of shalom.

The bones are already rattling. I think I even feel a breeze…

Take a Breath, Church

You rarely think about breathing until you are finding it difficult. As when you have just run up three flights of stairs or been swimming underwater for several seconds. And if it gets really bad, then breathing is ALL you can think about. You gasp until your body has enough oxygen to function normally again, and little by little your breathing slows and deepens, at which point you promptly stop thinking about it again.

Yet we are always breathing. While we live, we breathe. We are never doing nothing. We breathe. The oxygen infuses our blood. Our heart carries it through our body. Life is motion. Life is breath.

For the church, the Holy Spirit is breath. There are times that we take the Spirit for granted, as we do with our breathing, rarely thinking about the Spirit ... until we struggle. Until a poor decision gets us in trouble. Until a loved one dies too soon. If it gets really bad, then we gasp for the Spirit with huge hiccups of prayer and grief and unanswerable questions of “why.” And little by little, as time goes by, our spiritual breathing eventually slows and deepens, normalizing into a new version of our inevitable new life.

We are always in the presence of the Holy Spirit. While we are the church, the Holy Spirit is with us. God is never absent from us. We pray. Love infuses our lives. Our service carries it through the body. God is Spirit.

My prayer for the church is that we would be continually mindful of the presence of the Spirit among us. Just as breathing deeply calms the mind and body, may our deep prayers serve to calm the church and focus us on God’s presence, power, and peace.

That will require us to practice intentional awareness, to develop our ability to perceive the Spirit. Of course, there are times it is the mighty wind of Pentecost Sunday, and it blows our hats off. But much of the time it is just the tiniest puff of breeze, which we may very well miss if we’re not careful.

We are always going. Always striving. Always arguing. Always making noise. Always ...

Always out of breath.

And so, stop. Sit still. And take a breath, church.

Just.

Breathe.

So, The Church Is a Mess...

There’s a new study out that reinforces a trend that has been on church leaders’ minds for years. It is a Pew Research Center report, and it verifies that the number of Americans who identify as “Christian” has dropped while the number of Americans who identify as “atheist,” “agnostic,” or “nothing in particular” has grown.

To be sure, over 70% of the population still says it is Christian, so we could still override a veto. But the trend is quite clearly a decline, and it has been for years.

Now, different church leaders will react to the trend in different ways, obviously. Lament, panic, resignation. But I’ll tell you what I think about it – I think it’s a good thing.

I have spoken to quite a few people who have left the church for one reason or another. As I’ve heard their stories, I have noticed a common theme: The church they left is not the church of my experience.

They are leaving a version of Christianity to which I have never ascribed. They are leaving a narrow and rigid form of church that bears little resemblance to the community of Jesus as I understand it. In other words, what they are leaving is an expression of the church that frankly I would leave, too, if I was a part of it.

And nine times out of ten, among the doctrines of the church they leave is included some variation of this idea: “There is only one way to be the church – our way.” And so when confronted with a church that they find void of meaning AND the idea that this is the only version of church there is, the only option is to leave.

The thing is, that’s NOT the only option.

There is a diverse spectrum of churches, of denominations, of congregations within denominations, of people within congregations. There is no “one-size-fits-all” when it comes to God, and so there is no “one-size-fits-all” when it comes to church, either.

Sure, it can be a confusing mess to sort through, trying to find a group of people to call your church. But the messiness is real. It’s the realest thing ever. It is truth. It’s people being people. It’s a beautiful mess. And sorting through the mess is most definitely worth the effort.

A significant problem is that we have spent too much time and energy insisting that church isn’t messy, that it shouldn’t be a struggle, that church is a neat and tidy proposition. The norms we project are actually false fronts, hiding turbulence and anger and doubt and fear. What a mess.

What a gorgeous, holy mess.

And so I do not lament that people are leaving. I’m not going to wring my hands and worry about the demise of the church. In fact, I celebrate the opportunity that arises. I am eager and excited to witness what the Holy Spirit is doing among the people who have left the church, what new expressions of faith are emerging, and what “church” is going to look like as we experience this messy, turbulent time together.

There are nicer things to call this mess, actually. Gil Rendle calls the present moment “our particular exodus,” a healthy journey through the wilderness to a new ecclesial identity. Phyllis Tickle says it is a “Great Emergence” similar to other historical “great” moments, like the protestant reformation, the east/west schism, and the monastic movement.

The only reason to lament people “leaving” the church is if your ecclesiology is so narrowly defined that it only contains your own personal understanding of what the “church” is. How dare we try to place such limits on what the Holy Spirit may be capable of accomplishing outside of the boundaries of what we think of as the church!

Instead, we who are the church should be celebrating the great work that God is doing in the world today, and asking how we might join in to help out! There's no need for us to be jealous of what God is accomplishing outside of the sphere of our understanding. The church is a mess, and I for one like it that way!

Christian Discipleship as Amoeba Tag

Do you remember playing “tag” as a kid? One person started out as the one who was “IT” and then ran around the playground trying to touch another kid, who then became “IT” and it was their turn (NO TAG-BACKS!).

A variation of the game is called “Amoeba Tag.” In this version, two people are “IT” and they join hands. Each person they tag joins on to the “Amoeba” by linking hands with the end person. When there is an even number of people linked together, the “Amoeba” can split in two if it wants. And you keep tagging people until everyone is tagged.

When Jesus said to his disciples, “You are witnesses of these things” (Luke 24), he was basically tagging them. He might as well have said to them, “Now, you’re ‘IT!’”

Christian discipleship is more like “Amoeba Tag” than traditional tag. We reach out to others not to relinquish evangelistic responsibility to them, but rather to join together with them in the task of sharing the good news. Linked together as the church, we work together in a coordinated effort to reach out to others.

There’s another aspect of the game that the church might think about embracing: It’s supposed to be fun! This isn’t a competition. This isn’t a military campaign. This isn’t a numbers-driven business venture. This is the church!

The church is a joyous community of grace and love, so filled with the power of the Holy Spirit that it overflows in everything we say and do. If we can’t have a bit of fun while we’re sharing this good news, then how good can the news really be?

So let’s play tag, church. We are “IT,” so let’s join hands and run around the field laughing our butts off and reaching out to the other kids running around all over the place. Let’s have some fun!

A Denomination-Wide Sabbatical

I have an idea for the future of the United Methodist Church. The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that my idea is exactly what our denomination needs right now.

I think we need a sabbatical. All of us. A denomination-wide sabbatical.

One year should be enough time. We need a one year sabbatical to do nothing but worship and pray, reconnect with God, refocus our energy and renew our souls.

In that year, we do nothing else. No Bible studies. No mission trips. No church plants. No leadership training. No marriage license signing. No board meetings. No capital campaigns. No new member classes. No political advocacy. No evangelism programs. No fellowship events. No appointment changes. Nothing.

Rather, every resource, every dollar, every pastor, every staff member, every denominational board and agency, every United Methodist in every congregation around the world focused for an entire year on two things: worship and prayer. And literally stop doing anything else.

Let’s see, General Conference is in May of 2016. So, maybe they could designate 2018 as a year of sabbatical for the United Methodist denomination, which would give everybody plenty of time to prepare. (As with any significant time off, you need to plan ahead to make sure the processes and procedures are in place to get you through the time in a healthy way.)

Imagine the power of all 12 million of us on sabbatical at once. Imagine how radically counter-cultural that would be.

We would say no to the frenetic pace of the world. We would say no to imposing market-driven value on people. We would say no to the debilitating metric of unimpeded growth. We would say no to our over-scheduled, hyper-active calendars. We would say no to the relentless demand for instant results. We would say no to slick programs and perfect curricula and trendy books and hip lingo.

We would say yes to the living presence of God.

Period.

There are a few “plans” floating around out there about the future of the United Methodist denomination. Many of these “plans” are variations on a theme titled, “What the United Methodist Church Should Do About Homosexuality.” The run up to every General Conference features a quadrennial flurry of latest, greatest ideas. And this time around is no different.

However, my plan is unique among them. See, all the other plans have something in common: they all advocate doing things. To my knowledge, mine is the only plan that advocates actually stopping doing things. On purpose.

Sigh. I know, I know. It’s not going to happen, is it? But wouldn’t it be nice? Just to take a break, catch our breath, and remember why we do what we do?

Maybe stop nitpicking each other for a year? Maybe stop bickering? Maybe stop trying to one-up each other? Just pray and worship. That’s it.

And then, when the year is done, we get back to it. But we come with a new perspective, refreshed and focused. A little less grumpy. A little more gracious. And a little more ready to be the church that God wants us to be.

Everyone's An Angel?

God is still sending messages. God has spoken to human beings through all of history, and God is still speaking today.

The law was a message from God, sent through Moses. God spoke through the prophets of old, calling the nation to live worthy lives. God sent messages through the heavenly beings called angels, whose very name means “messengers.”

And ultimately, God embodied the message in Jesus. Jesus is the incarnate Word of God, the most complete expression of God’s message to the world. And after his resurrection, God sent the Holy Spirit to dwell in our midst, the ongoing presence of God with us even now.

And so, considering God’s ultimate expression in Jesus, considering God’s ongoing, unmediated presence with us .... are there angels any more? If God can speak to us directly in the Holy Spirit, what use is there for angels? Do they even exist?

Now some will answer, “Yes, absolutely. I know because I have seen for myself.” Others will say, “No way. Angels are myths.”

Still others will reply, “Maybe so, maybe not. I’m not really sure. Angels haven’t been a part of my experience, so I can’t say one way or the other.”

Wherever we personally fall on that spectrum, scripture does make one thing clear to all of us: we are to treat people as if each one is an angel (Hebrews 13:1-2). How would it change the way you looked at others if you thought to yourself, “What if he has been sent by God?” or “What if she has a message for me that God need me to hear?”

God is still sending messages, and it could come from ANYONE! There are definitely “Angels All Around.”

3 Reasons Why Itinerancy is an Idea Perfectly Suited for the 21st Century Church

As an itinerant preacher, I am sent by the church to a community in order to do ministry in that community alongside a congregation for whom I provide spiritual, missional, and temporal leadership. Okay, so there are a lot of prepositional phrases in that sentence - so first take note of the basic subject and verb: I am sent. That is the heart of what it means to be itinerant in the United Methodist Church, to be sent.

Here are three reasons why the itinerancy is perfectly suited for the mission of 21st century church.

1) The itinerancy empowers prophetic ministry.

“I am sent ... by the church.” The mission of the church guides the bishop in his or her discernment process. The bishop then acts on behalf of the entire church, utilizing the authority granted her or him by the church, to deploy leaders for that mission. Once deployed, I am accountable to that very same mission, and the bishop holds me accountable to that mission through my district superintendent.

And for the church’s mission in the 21st century this accountability connection is vital. For example, sexism, racism, and any other “-ism” congregation members may harbor will not unduly influence the decision of who will lead them. For another, a preacher can say what needs to be said to proclaim the Gospel and empower world-changing discipleship, without fearing the consequences of making the congregation a bit uncomfortable when doing so. Yes, I am accountable to the congregation as well, but my “direct supervisor” is the superintendent.

2) The itinerancy allows the church to take context into account.

“I am sent … to a community in order to do ministry in that community.” The mission of the church happens outside of the building walls, and itinerant preachers are sent to share the good news in particular communities. That’s an important part of what it means to be Methodist, as our founder made abundantly clear when he said, “The world is my parish.”

In the 21st century, the “mission field” of the church is becoming more and more nebulous, and less and less reliant on the old “insider” models of ministry. We are much less concerned with bringing “them” into the church, and much more concerned with being the church “out there” in the world. As an itinerant preacher, I can be sent to where my particular skill set matches the leading edges of new mission fields most effectively, rather than hired by a congregation to be “their” pastor.

3) The itinerancy facilitates grassroots ministry.

“I am sent … alongside a congregation for whom I provide spiritual, missional, and temporal leadership.” Methodism has always been a movement led by the laity; frontier preachers were sent to new towns, and sometimes discovered that groups of Methodists had already begun meeting together long prior to the preacher’s arrival. The healthiest United Methodist congregations still follow that model for ministry today.

Which is exactly the right approach for the church in the 21st century. We live in an era in which “bottom-up” efforts are the norm, and “top-down” initiatives are regarded with suspicion. Institutions are distrusted and hierarchies are shunned. Grassroots efforts, shared on social media and spreading quickly within communities, are nimble and energized and have great power and effect. An itinerant preacher leads a congregation for a season, stepping into a flowing stream and encouraging, equipping, and cheerleading the lay-led ministry of the congregation, and then moves on to do the same elsewhere.

Of course, no church polity is perfect. I know colleagues who have not experienced the itinerancy in the way I have, and I do not want to belittle their experiences at all. This post was prompted by a post several of my friends shared online, so I’m sure there is disagreement among us as to the efficacy of the itinerant ministry in today’s UMC.

But I happen to think that the itinerancy, especially how it is lived out here in Missouri, is perfectly suited for the prophetic, contextual, lay-led ministry that comprises the identity of the United Methodist Church. I believe it is the ideal way to deploy pastoral leadership for the 21st century.

I Am Zechariah

I am fascinated by the old priest Zechariah, John’s father, who appears in the first chapter of Luke. He is one of the few in Scripture who encounters and speaks with an angel. In his case, it is the angel Gabriel.

Gabriel brought Zechariah a message, but ol’ Zack wasn’t ready to hear it. He just couldn’t believe that the message Gabriel brought him could possibly be true. And he said so!

Well, things didn’t go well for Zechariah then, which is … unfortunate. But his story raises some pretty important questions for us to consider today.

Are we ready to hear a message from God? Even if it seems kind of far-fetched? Even completely unbelievable?

And then, how do we know it really is a message from God? How do we respond typically when someone claims to have heard a message from God? Especially when the message they “heard” may be something we don’t agree with?

If someone claims that “God told them” a tornado was actually divine retribution for a sinful society, for example, why does that make us so skeptical?

To be honest, if I had been in Zechariah’s shoes that day, my reaction would have been identical to his. And then I would have been the object of Gabriel’s ire.

I suppose the answer is … faith. We know God by faith. We receive salvation by faith. We live our lives by faith. And by faith we keep our ears open, to hear any and all of the messages God may be sending to us each day.

Question 1 Edit: Change "I will be" to "I would be if I could"

It has just been pointed out to me that my family does not technically live in the city limits of Springfield. There's a little narrow strip of "not Springfield" that runs from Twin Oaks Country Club south, bordered on the east and on the west by "Springfield" proper. We live in that little narrow strip.

(I work in, shop in, and basically do everything else in the city limits. But we don't "live" there. How messed up is that?)

The good friend who alerted me to this fact wanted to give me a "heads up" before next Tuesday, so that I wouldn't blow a gasket when I went to the polls and didn't see Question 1 on my ballot.

So basically, in all the posts I've written about Question 1 ...

"Thou Shalt Fire the Lesbian"

"Three Questions for Christians"

"Red Herring"

"Resigned to Respond"

"I Wish I Didn't Have to Write This"

... you need to mentally edit every "I will be voting NO" to "I would be voting NO if I could" when you read it.

I thought I should say something online, because of how much I have already shared. In the spirit of full disclosure, I won't be voting on Question 1, because I live outside of the city limits.

However, everything else I have written stays. I would be voting NO on Question 1 for many reasons. One of them is because I am a follower of Jesus, and I try to live my life according to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

A cornerstone of that Gospel is that every single person matters; everyone is worth something. And I want the community in which I work and shop and (almost) live to reflect that idea, with explicit language that condemns discrimination against people based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.

I would be voting NO because I believe that religious freedom does not give you the right to oppress another person.

I would be voting NO because sexual assault in a public women's room is illegal now, will be illegal on April 7, and will stay illegal after the vote no matter what the outcome.

I would be voting NO because the ordinance includes an exception for churches and religious groups, anyway.

I would be voting NO because I love my friends who happen to be gay or transgender and I don't want them to be treated any differently than any one else.

I would be voting NO because this is the United States, and we have already had this conversation, haven't we? Like, dozens and dozens of times? And we didn't learn from all those times?

I would be voting NO ... but I can't. And I'm incredibly bummed about it.

Jesus Christ, Barrier Buster

Every time Jesus discovered a barrier, he removed it.

The money tables in the Temple were barriers making it more difficult for people to worship God. Jesus overturned them.

The law prevented the blind and the lame from being in the Temple at all. Jesus not only invited them in, he healed them.

A social stigma devalued children in the ancient near eastern culture. It is the children who, with palm branches in hand, proclaim him the “Son of David.”

In fact, breaking down barriers was a central part of Jesus’s entire ministry, and a core value of the Gospel message itself. It is expressed in many ways, perhaps none more eloquent than Paul’s affirmation: “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

Easter removes the ultimate barrier - death itself.  The power of the resurrection tears the curtain of the Temple in two, removes once and for all the barrier of death, and reveals the promise of life abundant and everlasting.

Death has a power that is based in fear, uncertainty, anxiety. Death confronts us with our limitations, our finitude, our sin. These are barriers to living life as fully as God desires us to. In his resurrection, Jesus removes that final barrier, and thereby empowers us to live fully, so that all creation might flourish as God intends.

Are there barriers that need removing in the world today? What “tables” are keeping people from worship? What “law” is keeping people away from the church? What “social stigmas” are preventing outcast groups from proclaiming Christ? Where is today’s “temple curtain?”

The power of the resurrection is a force to be reckoned with. Wielding it, Christ continues to break down the barriers that confront the world. May we as the church, empowered by the Holy Spirit, continue Christ’s resurrection mission in all we say, in all we do, and in everything that we are.

"Thou Shalt Fire the Lesbian"

Okay, so Question 1 is a freedom of religion thing. Let’s follow that trail for a while.

If this is a freedom of religion thing, you’re going to have to claim that your religion includes in it a doctrine that says bosses should fire and landlords should evict LGBT people. Only then would the City Council’s additions to our anti-discrimination ordinance infringe upon your religious freedom.

To be clear, since we are talking about an “anti-discrimination” ordinance, the opposite of that would be “discrimination.” So in order for this to be an actual freedom of religion issue, active discrimination toward other people has to be a part of your faith.

Now, the source of doctrine for Christian people is the Bible. So what we’re looking for in the Bible is something that promotes discrimination. Maybe there’s a verse that says, “Thou shalt fire the lesbians among you,” or something like that. Maybe it says, “Thou shalt not rent an apartment to a gay man.” Or you know, some such applicable teaching.

The thing is … it just isn’t in there.

And so if it isn’t in the Bible, the primary source of religious doctrine for Christians, it had to come from some other source of authority. Maybe the doctrine came from a preacher, or a teacher, a denominational position, or some other secondary source. But it wasn’t the Bible. Maybe the preacher, teacher, or denomination is basing the doctrine on Scripture, but it is at best an interpretation.

So if Question 1 is a freedom of religion thing for you, that means you have heard from a teacher/preacher/denominational position that a part of what you are NOT to do in the practice of your religion is employ or rent to LGBT people. This is central enough to your faith that you are willing to propose a ballot initiative, sign a petition, take up valuable city resources on an election, buy a yard sign, etc. It is THAT important to you.

The thing is, all of that is still fine. You can base your religious teachings on anybody’s interpretation of any sacred text. Freedom of religion means ANY religion, and ANY version of ANY religion. Just ask a Pastafarian.

But freedom of religion has limits, and society sets those limits. Freedom of religion does not give you freedom to do harm against another person. And things like taking away someone’s job or evicting them from their home most definitely do harm. So, you can’t do it.

It’s really just that simple. It doesn’t matter if your religion gives you permission to do harm against another person. You can’t. You just can’t.

Even if commandment 73.5 of your sacred text actually is, “Thou shalt fire the lesbian.”

You just can’t.

Society places limits on freedom of religion, and one of those limits is that you can’t do harm to another person. At least that's what I believe, and that's one reason I'll be voting NO on question one.

Three Questions for Christians: The Springfield SOGI Conversation

A Christian has to answer three questions.

1) Who do you say Jesus is? He asks us this question himself (Matthew 16:15).

2) How do you want Jesus to be known in the world? His followers will be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).

3) How will your actions, words, and attitudes make Jesus known? Following Jesus means that “it is no longer [you] who live, but Christ who lives in [you]” (Galatians 2:20).

There is a group of Christians in Springfield, Missouri who, by the witness of their actions, words, and attitudes, seems to have answered these three questions this way:

1) They say Jesus is an anti-gay rights advocate.

2) They want Jesus to be known as one who denies people a job and a place to live.

3) They will make Jesus known in many ways, including by voting yes on Question 1, and hoping others do so, as well.

All due respect, but I answer these questions a bit differently.

1) I say Jesus is Lord and Savior, Teacher and Friend, the Messiah, the Son of the Living God.

2) I want Jesus to be known as one who saves, one who loves, one who forgives, one who reconciles.

3) I will make Jesus known in many ways, including voting no on Question 1, and hoping others do so, as well.

Of course, another possibility is that this group 1) knows Jesus as a Savior, and 2) wants Jesus to be known as one who confronts sin, so 3) they also confront sin as they see it in their community, including by voting yes on Question 1.

Actually, I can go there too. I know Jesus as a Savior and I want Jesus to be known as one who confronts sin. However, I believe that Jesus confronts sin with compassion, not condemnation. Jesus confronts sin with grace, not exclusion. Jesus confronts sin with love, not with discrimination. And I do not understand how firing or evicting someone will do anything towards convicting them of their sin, anyway. So I would still be voting no on Question 1, even if this were my primary motivation.

If you are a Christian, I hope that you will give prayerful consideration to these three questions. Who do you say that Jesus is? How do you want Jesus to be known in the world? How will your actions, words, and attitude make Jesus known?

And then decide of your own free will how you will vote on Question 1 on Tuesday, April 7. As for me, as a follower of Jesus, I will be voting no.

Knowing Jesus

When Jesus asked Peter, “Who do say that I am?” Peter replied, “You are the Messiah.”

Peter “got it!” He knew Jesus well, and knew who he was. Peter identified Jesus as the Messiah before anyone else did, and what’s more he said it out loud. He claimed it boldly, and Jesus responded to him with words of blessing.

Immediately after this incident, Jesus told his disciples the plan. He would go to Jerusalem, undergo great suffering, and be killed. And Peter replied, “God forbid! Surely there’s another way we could do this, Lord?”

Peter “didn’t get it.” He knew Jesus, but he didn’t see the full picture, much less concur with the plan. Peter couldn’t abide the thought of Jesus suffering and being killed. He voiced his opposition, and Jesus responded again.

But these were not words of blessing; this was a curse. “Get behind me! You are Satan! You are a stumbling block to me!”

Whoa - harsh.

What happened there? How did Peter get is so right one moment and so very wrong the next? How could Peter have understood so much about Jesus and yet at the very same time understood so very little about him?

The truth is, there are times you and I get it right, too. There are times that God seems very close to us and following Jesus is energizing and joyful. And there are times we fail. We can’t find God anywhere and it feels as if we’ve forgotten all we’ve ever known about Jesus and what it means to follow him.

We are Peter. Knowing Jesus doesn’t mean we are perfect, it just means we know Jesus. And that’s a pretty good deal, because knowing Jesus means we don’t HAVE to be perfect to be forgiven, to be blessed. Knowing Jesus means we do not have to be perfect to be loved.

"Should" vs. "Want To" (And Blatant Pastoral Narcissism)

Focus less on convincing people that they should …
           … and more on equipping the people that already want to.

I’ve been contemplating this idea all week long. It seems like everything I do is geared toward convincing, cajoling, urging people to practice the pattern of discipleship – you know: weekly worship, small group study, proportional giving, selfless service, and radical hospitality – and it gets tedious. Worse, it feels empty.

It feels empty because I obsess over the people who don’t seem to get it, rather than celebrate the people who do. And I need to stop that. It puts me in a dark and scary place where I begin to doubt a whole lot of stuff about my vocation, and I’d rather not be there.

And the truth is, there are an abundance of people who “get it” when it comes to being a follower of Jesus, people who need no convincing. I feel so much more energized, focused, and happy when I get to hang out with people like that, hear them talk about God and church and discipleship and what following Jesus means to them. It is joyful and filled with grace and the power of the Holy Spirit.

And yet …

I have read several articles and books lately that describe how the church is being confronted with issues like:
- sporadic rather than weekly worship,
- small groups as cliques or clubs rather than true growth in grace and knowledge of God,
- giving when it’s convenient rather than proportionally to one’s income,
- being “nice” to others rather than engaging in selfless service, and
- staying home when you have house guests rather than actually inviting a stranger to church.

Now it sounds like I’m just griping. And I don’t want to be “that pastor.” But I need to be honest. It just takes so much energy to move people from being a good-person-who-goes-to-church-every-so-often to actually becoming an authentic disciple of Jesus Christ.

So I was thinking maybe I need to take a break from trying to convince people that they should, and focus more on equipping the people that already want to. Encouraging, cheering, thanking.

Like for example, last night there were eight people in Bible Study, and there are usually more than twice that number. My initial reaction was one of disappointment at the low attendance. But you know what? The discussion at that Bible Study was one of the most enjoyable experiences I’ve had all week. Why? Because of the "want to."

And what does it say about my own theology when I think it is up to me to convince people that they should follow Jesus? How narcissistic is that? What would happen if I actually allowed the Holy Spirit to convince, cajole, and convict?

And what if I then saw my role simply as the one who would meet them in the midst of their life and help them follow that conviction?

I suppose what I’m getting at is that I’m tired of trying to generate the conviction in people and being met with a resounding “meh.” And there are so, so many people who have already felt that conviction and are actively following it – and so yeah, that’s the people I want to be with.

In the Gospels, three different groups are described. In short, these groups are the “Scribes and Pharisees,” the “crowd,” and the “disciples.” The “S & P” group is openly antagonistic toward Jesus. The “disciples” have transformed their lives to follow Jesus.

But the “crowd” is that large and mostly anonymous group that’s hanging out and listening to what he has to say, watching what he’s doing, enjoying some bread and fish with 5,000 of their closest friends, but haven’t made the commitment that the disciples have to actually follow him wherever he goes.

It has been my pattern to focus mostly on people in the “crowd” and move them into the “disciples” group. But just lately I’m feeling God nudge me to spend less energy there and more time and energy with the disciples. And in particular, with disciples who have found the church to be … well … let’s just say “lacking” when it comes to discipleship opportunities.

I believe that I am called in particular to serve people who have felt the Holy Spirit’s conviction to follow Jesus but cannot find a way to pursue that conviction in the life of the church.

In other words, focus less on convincing people that they should and more on equipping the people that already want to.

St. Patrick's Priority One

Other than wearing the color green on March 17, having a parade, and eating corned beef and cabbage, what does “St. Patrick’s Day” mean to you?  How much do you actually know about Patrick himself?

Well, much of his life and ministry is legendary at this point. He served in the 5th century, so a lot of what he actually did has been either forgotten or embellished over time.

He was likely born in Scotland, and captured by an Irish raiding party as a teenager. He apparently spent several years as a slave in Ireland before escaping and returning to his native land. However, it seems God called him to return to the land in which he had been a slave, for the purpose of spreading the gospel of Christ there. And so he became a priest, and eventually a bishop, at which time he was sent across the Irish Sea once more.

March 17th, the date we celebrate as St. Patrick’s Day, is the date that it is believe he died, sometime around the year 460.

This Sunday at Campbell UMC, we’ll consider a prayer that is traditionally attributed to St. Patrick. It is known as “St. Patrick’s Breastplate” or “St. Patrick’s Lorica.” There are several translations, as a quick internet search will show you, and the variations arise from the passage of time. Here's an excerpt from one version:

Christ be with me, Christ within me,

Christ behind me, Christ before me,

Christ beside me, Christ to win me,

Christ to comfort and restore me.

Christ beneath me, Christ above me,

Christ in quiet, Christ in danger,

Christ in hearts of all that love me,

Christ in mouth of friend and stranger.

I bind unto myself the Name,

The strong Name of the Trinity;

By invocation of the same.

The Three in One, and One in Three,

Of Whom all nature hath creation,

Eternal Father, Spirit, Word:

Praise to the Lord of my salvation,

Salvation is of Christ the Lord.

The theme of the prayer is constant across the variants: the priority of Christ. Over and above all else, this prayer is a commitment to keep Christ at the very center of one’s life. Life will throw challenges at us, constantly. And yet Christ is the point of salvation, the source of hope, and the promise of life.

So as I’m enjoying my “Shamrock Shake” this year, listening to the Chieftans, and kissing everyone who’s Irish, I’ll also be asking myself if Christ is the priority of my life. Have I allowed Christ to be the very center of all that I am? Is God my “Priority One?”

Red Herring: Even More SOGI Stuff

Those who would repeal part of Springfield’s anti-discrimination policy have made a move to which I have the following response - “Brilliant.”

I am sincere. I think the latest part of this effort is actually brilliant.

The “Yes on Question 1” group has included “bathroom privacy” in the title of their kickoff rally, according to this article in the localpaper. This is a genius move.

My first thought was, Surely they don’t actually believe Springfield’s anti-discrimination policies have anything to do with bathroom privacy. (I’m almost positive they don’t.)

My second thought was, There’s no way this idea will convince people to vote for repeal. (A few may be swayed by this tactic, but not many.)

Then came my third thought, and the light bulb clicked – This idea seems to be completely disconnected from reality, and as such it will be dismissed. And if this idea is dismissed, the yes campaign will be dismissed altogether. And if the campaign is dismissed, people won't come out to vote, and the repeal will pass. And so, brilliant!

I’m afraid that including “bathroom privacy” in the campaign is so irrational that it will convince rational people that there’s nothing to worry about, so they won’t come out and vote. The thinking will be that the effort to repeal the SOGI protections is so disconnected from reality that there is no chance in the world that this proposed repeal will actually pass. I think this move is strategically designed to keep people home from the polls on April 7, and I’m afraid that it might work.

Anyone who has actually read the city policies at question here knows that there is absolutely zero implication for bathroom privacy. That’s not the point. I’m not going to engage that argument. It is the reddest of red herrings.

And so if that’s not the point, what is? The point must be to keep people from voting. The point must be to increase voter apathy.

For so many people in Springfield, the need for equal opportunity in employment and housing is assumed. Many cannot even believe that this would be an issue any more. “Of course our city should have anti-discrimination policies,” we think. And so for many, this question is seen as really no big deal.

And now added into the mix is an idea that is as far-fetched as they come, intentionally included to make the rational voter stay home on April 7, thinking all is well and there’s nothing to worry about.

Well, I’m not going to stay home on April 7. I’ve written before  about the reasons why I’ve decided to vote this way, and those motivations are a lot stronger than any red herrings the pro-repeal group might toss out there. I’m going to vote NO on the proposed repeal. I’m going to vote NO on Question 1.

Resigned to Respond: More SOGI Stuff

Recently I made the paper. I was described as promoting a “fringe” version of Christianity that consisted mainly of “Jesus sugar” rather than a substantive, scriptural faith. The saccharine idea that had elicited the description was, apparently, that Christian people have differing opinions about issues of human sexuality.

I was named personally by a man I have never met, and only communicated with via email. I’ve written about that interaction here, in a previous post. (A quick follow-up to that post: there was a response to my email to let me know that the language of the communications would not be changing because, in the author’s words, “I do not regard varied and diverse responses as valuable, because God does care [sic] about every ones [sic] perspective of the truth.  His view is the only one that matters.” He was very respectful, and asked that I align myself with God’s view, which also happens to be his.)

In short, a man who does not know me at all chose to call me by name to a reporter from our local paper, presumably understanding that said reporter would subsequently print my name in the article. In fact, he was probably counting on it.

I have gone through a range of emotional responses since then. I’ve felt angry, offended, amused, flattered, and finally … resigned. I am resigned to respond.

My brother in Christ believes that the Bible is “crystal clear and God is not confused on the issue.” For clarity’s sake, let’s recall that “the issue” is if people should be denied employment and housing based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. And further, I never claimed that God was confused. So there’s that.

I looked for Bible passages that addressed housing and employment for gay and transgender people. I did not find any. Now of course, there may be some in there. But if so, I didn’t see them.

So, it follows that without clear scriptural guidance on the questions, what’s left is interpretation, right? So Christians take ideas from scripture and apply them to current questions. Each person can choose which parts to apply, as well.

Some will choose the “anti-gay” verses. Some will choose the justice, unity, and love verses. I have chosen the latter, because these ideas are quite clearly predominant themes throughout all of scripture. And as John Wesley said, “…the obscure text is to be interpreted by those which speak more plainly.”

I am applying the numerous, plain spoken scriptures that speak of God’s justice, that affirm all are one in Christ Jesus, and that love is unconditional and unearned, to the questions at hand. (Remember, the questions at hand are about employment and housing for people who happen to be gay or transgendered.)

And applying those scriptural principles to the decision, I have decided to vote no on “Question One” here in Springfield this April 7. I do not want the anti-discrimination language repealed, so I will be voting no.

And I have come to this decision because, "fringe" or not, I am a Christian. Quite frankly, my personal religious beliefs should provide motivation for only one person – me. Honestly, I can make a case for voting no on Question One based on business, civic, and constitutional foundations, as well. But I am a follower of Jesus, and I do all I can to pattern every part of my identity after him.

At the same time, I do not begrudge my brother in Christ his views on the matter. I just disagree with him.

I want the city of Springfield, Missouri to have language in our city ordinances that forbids employment and housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, just like it does based on “race, creed, sex, handicap, age, national origin, or ancestry.”

I want that to be so for a variety of reasons, one of which is that I am a Christian. And so, that’s why I’ll be voting “NO” on Question 1 on April 7. I hope this clears things up!

Hope - "Here Comes the Sun"

This coming Sunday, I'll be preaching about hope. And that always makes me think of a trip to Guatemala I took during seminary as a part of a "Ministry Immersion" class.

There’s a workshop in the middle of one of the poorest neighborhood in Guatemala City. This workshop employs the women of the neighborhood, who sew traditional Guatemalan items that are sold mostly to tourists. Employment at this workshop is the last line of defense keeping most of the women (and their families) from hunger and homelessness.

The workshop is called “UPAVIM,” an acronym for “Unidas para vivir mejor” - “United to Live Better.” You can see more about their work here - http://www.upavim.org/

The reason I’m mentioning UPAVIM today, though is to point out the name of the neighborhood in which they work.

The neighborhood is called “La Esperanza” - “Hope.”

It seems an ironic choice for a name; on the surface there really doesn’t seem to be much hope in the community. Poverty is the rule. Children pick through the garbage dump for food or maybe the odd trinket they might be able to sell for a bit of change. Gang violence is common. Alcoholism and drug addiction are everywhere.

And yet, it is “La Esperanza.” It is “Hope.”

In chapter 8 of Romans it says that “hope that is seen is not hope.” I wonder what that means exactly? I wonder if it means that true hope lies under the surface? I wonder if that means that there’s a difference between “hope” and “optimism,” like optimism is that “on the surface” feeling that things are going well whereas hope is that “under the surface” assurance that things are going to be all right in spite of what’s happening “on the surface?"

Hope - when everything is not okay, God gives us hope. God says, “Here comes the sun, and I say - It’s all right!”

Life is Too Short ...

Complete this sentence: “Life is too short to … “

How did you finish it? “ … hold a grudge?” “... be boring?” “... worry?” Or maybe something practical, like “...drink bad coffee?”

The Beatles think that “life is very short, and there’s no time for fussing and fighting, my friends.” That’s a line from their 1965 #1 hit, “We Can Work It Out.”

What if we could all adopt that attitude? How would the world change if more people believed that life is just too short to fuss and fight with one another?

Or, as the apostle Paul might put it, what if more people would “lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”

Actually it isn’t that Paul “might” put it that way. It’s that he DID. That’s in the book of Ephesians, right at the beginning of chapter 4.

A life “worthy of the calling” of Christ is much too short “for fussing and fighting, my friends!”

Why does it seem to be so difficult for people to avoid animosity? Maybe it is because we think “unity” means the same thing as “uniformity,” and that means if we’re not in lock-step agreement with one another, we must be bitter enemies?

I don’t know about you, but it seems to me that life is far too short to think that way. I’d rather work it out. Life is very short; surely we can work it out!

Money For Nothin?

Dave Ramsey’s website points out that there are over 800 passages in scripture that deal with money. That clearly makes it one of the Bible’s most important topics. Money thoughts appear in the Torah, the prophets, wisdom literature, the Gospels, the letters of Paul … throughout the entire Bible.

Money is a subject of Jesus’s own teaching. It is Jesus who says that we cannot “serve two masters,” and if we try to serve both God and wealth, we will fail (Matthew 6:24). He throws down a challenge for his followers, saying that none of us can become his disciples without giving up our possessions (Luke 14:33).

Jesus’s thoughts on wealth might be summed up in one big idea: “One’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:15).

How quickly we forget this profound truth!

I look at our house, our cars, our various screen devices, our closets filled with clothes. I think about our bank accounts, our insurance policies, our college funds, our retirement plans. So. Much. Stuff.

I wonder, does my life consist in an abundance of possessions? What would my life be if all of these things were gone?

It’s easy enough to answer those questions about wealth and possessions while I’m enjoying their benefits. “Of course I’m not ‘serving two masters!’” I might say … from the soft couch in my warm and dry living room, with my full belly, dressed in clothes appropriate for the weather.

Will there ever be a time I can honestly say that “I don’t care too much for money, ‘cause money can’t buy me love?”

Or am I stuck with “Money can’t get everything it’s true – but what it don’t get I can’t use!”

There’s a great documentary called “Happy.” (Available on Netflix.) In it I heard an idea that changed my thinking about money.

“Anybody who says ‘money doesn’t buy happiness’ should go talk to somebody living under a bridge.” And immediately following that, “But anybody who says ‘money buys happiness’ should go talk to Bill Gates.”

“Neither of those things is actually true.” This was according to Daniel Gilbert, PhD.

It turns out that there is a noticeable increase in a person’s happiness when they have sufficient resources to meet their basic needs. After that, there isn’t much of an increase at all.

In other words, “The difference in happiness between a person who earns 5,000 and 50,000 is dramatic. The difference in happiness between a person who earns 50,000 and 50,000,000 is not.”

So having a whole boat load of money doesn’t actually make you happier. But being able to eat does.

One’s life does not consist of possessions. But having a safe and warm place to live sure helps.

Or maybe we say it this way: after our need for food, clothing, and shelter is met, even the richest person in the world cannot buy what they truly need.