Interactive Sermon

Back At The Ponderosa

Hoss has been thinking.

Three weeks.  That's how long matters of a family leaving one congregation and surfacing in another have dominated the conversation at the local pastor's meeting.  Be assured, it's not just a family deciding to change scenery, but rather showing up in a new location spewing venom towards their previous church home.  It's emotional.  It's personal.  It's a danger within the church community.

If airtime at the meeting wasn't enough, a couple of these matters have spilled into (seemingly) endless strings of "copy all" email.  Has anyone else considered that email is not the best manner of communication over things that have emotional and personal charges attached?  Oy vey!

One pastor has suggested a formal covenant be struck between the local pastors and leaders.  Another has begun drawing up such a document.  Still another invited the leader of a pastor's fellowship in Massachusetts to come visit us to share what they've written up there.  Still another pastor sent an email saying he's picking up his jacks and he's going home.  Email, again! 

A pastor, newer to our group, had a very interesting take.  He pointed out that we've spent the better part of three weeks (I think he's only been with us three weeks) arguing over a small handful of families that are "in" the church.  He pointed out that folks in some 95% of the households in our community don't attend any church anywhere.  He wondered aloud what might happen if we focused some of our energy on those folks.  Let me just say, Hoss likes the new guy.

I'm not opposed to signing a covenant. I'll sign it. I prefer, however, that relationships within our local church community ran deeper than a formal agreement--they were there once. 

For my reading of the scriptures, unity and love are those things, when evidenced in the church, that cause a watching world to take notice.  I'm just sayin'...

Bet This Gets Ugly Fast

Did you see this?  A company in Michigan supplying the U.S. Military with rifle sights has been putting "secret Jesus messages" in the serial numbers of their product.  Some folks are crying foul.  Uh oh.

Check the article here.

What do you think?  Would folks in Iraq and Afghanistan be offended?  Does this constitute proselytizing as specifically forbidden?  I'm no military strategist, mind you, but I'm guessing the idea with these rifle sights is to keep folks far enough away from you that they can't read the "JN8:12" at the end of your rifle's serial number.  I'm just saying...

Women and Happiness

Bluebird: Women and the New Psychology of Happiness ~ I'm reading Chick-Lit?  No.  Chick-Psych.  You do know that I live with five women, right?

Besides, one of my favorite authors, Ariel Gore, has written this book on women and happiness. It hits bookstores TOMORROW.  I've read an advance copy and found it very informative and thought provoking.  Ariel weaves together material from a wide variety of sources, the findings of noted authorities (most of them men), the experiences of a panel of 100 real women (imagine that?), and her own life's experience, so as to paint a picture of what women are up against.  I've found Ariel's book thought provoking because it's real world. 

Now, a note to my Jesus Freak and/or church-going crowd: Ariel's book isn't a Jesus Freak and/or church-going handling of happiness.  And that's a good thing for my thinking.  I was talking about this book with a pastor last week who actually said, "A book on women and happiness?  That must be a short book.  'Trust Jesus!  The end.'"  What's worse is he wasn't joking.  You won't find "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life!" in this book.  This is studies.  This is experiences.  This is emotions.  This is real life.  And this is the playing field women find themselves on in our society. 

Pick up a copy.  Give it a read.  Then look me up and we'll chat about it. 

Where Did You Come From?

Local Pastor's Meeting today~

Church hopping and church shopping.  We've conceded: the majority of church growth we're seeing is folks shuffling back and forth between our local congregations.  We get it.  We know that Pastor A is "too liberal" and the music at Church B is "lame."  We understand that Pastor C's church "doesn't relate well to families with children" and that Church D "is nothing more than a clique."  We've heard about your "run in" with Pastor E, and how Church F is, well... (insert your own obscenity).

Here's a sad reality: this week marks my tenth anniversary at Christ's Church and I am second in seniority in the local pastoral fellowship.  Average shelf life for a local pastor in our neck of the woods seems about four years.  That's actually better than the national average.  Pastoral ministry in this culture can be so discouraging.

A few of us old timers (the few of us who have been here together the longest) were lamenting the old days when all of the local pastors knew each other well enough that we'd ask a family showing up on a Sunday "Where did you come from?" and we could answer someone who came from the congregation down the road, "Oh, the pastor there is a very good friend of mine.  I know him well."  We nipped any bad-feelings (or people peddling disharmony) in the bud.

Picture L to R: Pastor Darin Shaw, Pastor Ron Tannariello, Pastor Mike Sacco and Pastor Nick Manha.

Guess what?  We've won the newbies over! 

We're ready to become intentional again about our pastoral relationships and the relationships between church leaders across our community.  Don't show up at Church A with complaints about Church B any longer.  Don't expect Pastor D to entertain your complaints about Pastor E in our community. We're not going to tolerate it.  We're on to you.  We're done playing.  We're shoulder to shoulder again.

We're collectively called to bear the gospel to our community.  It's time we put the distractions out to pasture and get back to what matters most.

You see, we're not many churches.  We're many local expressions of ONE CHURCH.  And we're getting back to acting like it.  You with us? 

The Emergent Label

If you've been a part of the emerging church conversation at any length, recent posts across the blogosphere might serve as fresh thought provocation.  I wrote last week about the blog-and-forth between Andrew Jones and Tony Jones.  Others have chimed in.  The most entertaining of them has to be Rick Bennett's Obituary for the Emerging Church.  All of it has led me to consider, all the more, the emerging label.  I'll plan to spill out some thoughts in a few posts.  For starters:

It was somewhere in the early '00s when I was asked by one of our music team leaders, "Is Christ's Church an emerging church?"  I answered that question with a question (seemed like something Brian McLaren gets in trouble for, so why not?): "Why do you ask that?"  The answer was that she had heard our congregation mentioned in the local church community as being "caught up in the emergent heresy."  

To that point, I had read a couple of Brian McLaren books.  Did this make me/us emergent?  I had begun reading Tall Skinny Kiwi's blog regularly and even linked to it from my own blog.  Did this make me/us emergent?  I was becoming more aware of our particular setting as a local expression of the body of Christ, and a growing discomfort with apologetic evangelism while also sensing more openness to genuine conversation and relationship.  Did this make me/us emergent?  As I read McLaren's More Ready Than You Realize, I realized that I was engaged in a couple of generative conversations myself. Did that make me/us emergent?  I became intentional about trying to augment my preaching and teaching ministry with more dialogue and conversation.  Did this make me/us emergent?  I instigated a reading and discussion group over the McLaren book Generous Orthodoxy.  Did this make me/us emergent?  What labelled us?

And heresy?

There has not been any change in our doctrinal statement.  There have been no changes in my personal theology, that I am aware of.  To my standard Reformed sense of humor--I'm still among the elite of the elect.

But there have been changes.  As a congregation, we've moved decidedly in the direction of embracing an incarnational evangelism.  Is that heretical?  We've welcomed people to "belong before they believe."  Is that it?  We've encouraged questions, dialogue and searching in matters of life and faith, rather than enforcing a standard of religious certitude.  Did that cross the line?  We've looked at ourselves and admitted that, at times, we've practiced more like Pharisees than followers of Jesus Christ--and we've determined to change that.  Was that it?  Heresy?

We've wanted to see sharing the gospel become more "who we are" than an "outreach program"; to see discipleship happen along life's way rather than in a classroom; to partner effectively with other followers of Christ--and those of difference and distance, too, not just those who look and think exactly like we do.

Funny thing is, these are all things we've been learning from the Bible, and seen in Jesus--not in a McLaren book or a Tall Skinny Kiwi blog post (although I've seen some of those themes repeated in those places for sure).

I don't guess I've ever thought of it as emergent.  I've thought of it as being a follower of Jesus Christ. And these are the things that I believe will outlast the label.   

More to come...

Hot Topix - No Pun Intended

Global Warming: You should be steamed!

When I was a kid growing up in South Florida I knew one thing--if Dr. Neil Frank was on our television, there was a hurricane coming.  As the director of the National Hurricane Center he would guide us through our every brush with tropical fury.  So when his name showed up attached to this topic--an article he wrote this week on Climategate and Global Warming--I took notice.  Read the article here.

If you're not familiar with Climategate, his second paragraph does a great job explaining it.  Note particularly the sentence, "Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases."  Uh oh.  Busted.

Dr. Frank's article gives a great scientific overview of the debate in layman's terms.  I'm not the most scientific of thinkers.  I'm one of those skeptics, however.  A pretty ardent one.  Here are my top three (very simple and almost completely non-scientific) reasons for doubting:

Hot Topix

Should the Lord's Table be restricted?

Noted theologian J.I. Packer spoke to this a year ago in an interview with Christianity Today.  You can read the article here.  In summary, Packer believes that Communion should be restricted in two instances--first, that those who are not believers in Jesus Christ should not participate, and second, those who are known to be living in sin should be restricted.

If you look at the article that I've linked, take a run down through the comments below it.  You will see that this is an emotional issue.  Is this a red-rope, VIP sort of a ordinance in the church?  Can we be judging who is worthy to come when Jesus, himself, was so inviting? 

In eighteen years of Pastoral Ministry and twenty-six years of church leadership involvement, I've seen this done well--and I've seen this done very poorly.

With regard to communicants being a genuine believer in Jesus Christ, I think this is a no-brainer.  The Apostle Paul warned (in 1 Corinthians 11) that those approaching the table should consider themselves, and especially in light of the body and blood of the Lord.  It would be contradictory for someone who wasn't relying on Jesus Christ's body and blood for their soul's salvation to participate in Communion--recognizing that sacrifice.  The thing is, I cannot look at someone and clearly see their heart's embrace (or lack of embrace) of the gospel.  The best I can do is share that warning from Scripture and leave people to discern for themselves if they should participate or abstain.  At that point it's between them and the Lord.

Some congregations (churches and denominations) have decided to fence the table around their particular membership. I know a Protestant believer who went forward for Communion at a Catholic church and literally had the Priest take the 'host' back out of her hands upon learning she wasn't a Catholic.  "Give me back that Jesus!"  {An aside: Shari and I enjoyed a midnight Mass this Christmas Eve, and were welcomed by Father Don as "fellow believers in Christ" to participate.}

Where the matter of sin is concerned, I tend to agree with Packer.  And again, I've seen it done well and not so well over the years.  Packer uses the phrase "serious offense" in his argument.  In my experience, the best scenario has involved the leadership of the church identifying for an individual areas of "willful, known, unrepentant sin" in their lives.  I think that phrase is crucial.  If it's simply a matter of pointing out sin in someone's life--well, get in line.  I'll point at your sin.  You point at mine.  The budget for bread and juice will get pretty small as none of us will be able to partake!  It's not a matter of sin.  Hear me: It's NOT A MATTER OF SIN.  It's a matter of "willful, known and unrepentant sin" in someone's life. 

When it's been pointed out that these are the issues; these are the places where your choices and behavior are at direct odds with God's will; these are the issues that have put your testimony as a believer in Christ in doubt--and the individual refuses to acknowledge there is a problem and take steps to remedy it--we've got a problem.  That's the place where I believe the leadership of the local church is charged to determine this is a case of "willful, known and unrepentant sin." 

Packer points out one more item in his thoughts--that of differing interpretations of what constitutes a serious offense.  Thankfully, in all the cases I've seen go right, the leadership has been very much in agreement.  But I'd take it a step further.  What happens when leadership in different congregations, see it differently?  That's an issue that was unknown to first century churches--a member determined to be in "willful, known, unrepentant sin" in one congregation, slides across town and is welcomed to the Lord's Table in another without question.  Why just twenty years ago or so, when someone left one congregation and surfaced in another they were expected to produce a "letter of transfer" from one congregation's leaders to the next.  "This family is of sound testimony and left in good standing", and so on.  No more.  I'd suggest that is a breakdown beyond the scope of Packer's thoughts.  Perhaps a matter for another post.

Back to the matter at hand, fencing the table: Yes?  No?  Done well?  Done poorly?  Ever had a Priest rip the Jesus from your fingers?

Technorati Tags: Interactive Sermon,Communion,The Lord's Supper,Mass,Church Discipline

A Slice of American Pie

Though he's never said that the song is based on the tragic crash in Clear Lake, Iowa that claimed the lives of Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and J.P. Richardson, Don McLean has said that he learned of their deaths as he folded newspapers early on the morning of February 3rd, 1959, preparing for his paper route.  You know, with every paper I deliver.

Today marks the 50th Anniversary of the plane crash.  I suppose you could say that it was the day the music died.  But, you could also say that the music of those three men lives on, as their songs have been covered numerous times over the years, and their influence is farther reaching then they'd ever have imagined.  Buddy Holly is said to have told a close friend at the beginning of the Winter Dance Party Tour that his hope was that one day everyone would know his name.  Guess what?

If you're driving through Clear Lake, Iowa today, stop by the corn-field where this makeshift memorial resides.  If you're not in Iowa, put on some good old rock-n-roll, or YouTube American Pie.  Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and the Big Bopper - gone 50 years today.

Any thoughts on this day?  On the lyrics of American Pie?  On how to remember these guys?

Technorati Tags: Interactive Sermon,Buddy Holly,Ritchie Valens,American Pie,February 3,1959

With Malice Toward None, With Charity For All

A pretty amazing day, the inauguration of our 44th President.  For all of the partisanship and all the rhetoric, it is a wonderful sight to see 44 peaceful transfers of power--something no other nation in the world can claim.  It did my heart good to see ex-Presidents support one another.  It has been a very good thing to see the cordial relations between President Bush and President Obama these last several weeks.  It is a marvelous thing to be part of such a great country and to live in liberty.

Sure, the Inaugural Speech took a couple of slightly veiled shots at the outgoing administration.  It certainly wasn't Abraham Lincoln's second Inaugural Speech (from which the title of this post was borrowed).  It wasn't Reagan-esque.  But it was honorable.  And I think it was sincere.

I didn't vote for Barack Obama.  But, I'm thankful to be a citizen of this great country and proud today that he's my President.  And I intend to keep my promise to pray for him and this administration.  I hope to be part of the solution to partisanship rather than part of the problem.  I'm sure I'll disagree with a number of his decisions, but I pledge not to be disagreeable. 

"With malice toward none, with charity for all," Abraham Lincoln concluded his second Inaugural Address, "with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."

I'm all for it.  How about you?

Technorati Tags: Interactive Sermon,Barack Obama,Abraham Lincoln

Under The Weather - Literally

 

Sorry for the slothfulness of posts these last couple of days.  Our wonderful ice storm has left us without power - 48 hours and counting.  The power company estimates it will only be another 3 or 4 days!  So, we're keeping fires and kerosene heaters running, hoping to keep our pipes from bursting.  Down into the single digits tonight.  Oh joy!  Lord willing, I'll be back to the routine here in a day or so.

Tomorrow morning at Christ's Church???  I'll be there.  There is no power at the building and the last we checked the temperature in the sanctuary was about 40 degrees - so bundle up if you're planning to come worship with us!  

Blessings!  And... be warm.