At the church where I was a minister they actually had a bible classed named, “The Bible Class”. As if all other bible classes were not actually bible classes or didn’t actually study the Bible. Just so you know, the people in that class are great people and love God, I just always thought it was a bit ironic. I’ve always felt that the bible class experience always depended on the teacher. That may sound like a funny statement, but it’s true. If someone is a bad teacher, you are probably not going to learn anything. Discussion, if any, usually stays surface level and nothing new is learned. But even if something new is learned, there-in lies the problem. Bible classes were and are largely designed to learn something new. Some new piece of knowledge. If the bible class you currently attend is bigger than 12-20 people, it’s only feasible for the teacher to impart information and pose questions. The nature of this setting only allows for surface level information transfer. Plus, if anyone actually answers a question really honestly, they’re just weird.
Humor me for a minute. It is a bit like learning about a new feature on the iPhone when a new release of the software comes out. People that don’t own an iPhone don’t care. It is something you only want to tell other iPhone users about, and make sure they know, that you knew about it first. It’s kind of this weird one-up game. People that don’t own an iPhone could care less that now you are able to put all of your apps into one folder. In some cases this might actually convince someone to buy an iPhone, but rarely. Most of the information you learn in a bible class is just not fit tell to non-believers or use in your daily conversations with co-workers. “What is the new, popular little nuanced part of the bible we can learn so we can tell other Christians about?” I know that most people don’t go into a bible class asking this question consciously. But subconsciously, it’s implied. I’m not saying that bible class is evil or you should stop going. I’ve not gone off the deep end thinking that studying the bible is a bad idea. What I want to argue is that, if we are not careful, knowledge about the information in the bible can quickly be replaced by what the information in the bible actually does for us.
What do think? Has a particular bible class changed the way you act out your faith?
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Church as an Experience
In one of my favorite books, “The Divine Commodity”, Skye Jethani and his team flesh out this idea of externalities and experiences through an interview with economist Jim Gilmore. As Gilmore guides them through the American Girl Place he explains how it is our “experience culture” at it’s best. It has the appearance of a museum but everything you see is for sale. It has all the dolls portrayed in a different historic era, each with it’s own history and story. You can even take your doll to the beauty salon to get it’s hair done, get a picture taken with her and put on the cover of a magazine, or go have lunch in the store with your doll. All an experience. I’ll start the interview here.
MS: So how does all this “experience providing” apply to the church?
Gilmore: It doesn’t. When the church gets into the business of staging experiences, that quickly becomes idolatry.
MS: I’m stunned. So you don’t encourage churches to use your elements of marketable experiences to create attractive experiences for their attenders?
Gilmore: No. The organized church should never try to stage a God experience.
KM: When people come to church, don’t they expect an experience of some kind? Consumers approach the worship service with the same mindset as they do a purchase.
Gilmore: Increasingly you find people talking about the worship experience rather than the worship service. That reflects what’s happening in the outside world. I’m dismayed to see churches abandon the means of grace that God ordains simply to conform to the patters of the world.
KM: So what happens in church? Are people getting a service, because they’re helped to do something they couldn’t do on their own, that is, get closer to God? Or are they getting an experience, the encounter with God through worship?
Gilmore: The word “getting” is, I think the problem with contemporary Christianity. God is the audience of worship. What you get is, quite frankly, irrelevant as a starting point.
ER:But people, especially unchurched people, don’t perceive it that way. They’re expecting some return.
Gilmore: That is the argument. But the only thing of value the church has to offer is the gospel. I believe that one result of the emerging Experience Economy will be a longing for authenticity. To the extent that the church stages worldly experiences, it will lose its effectiveness.
So powerful. “The only thing of value the church has to offer is the gospel.” That’s it! It is the only thing that matters. Somehow or another, the modern church has taken integral parts of the gospel and carved out their own law. Not only that, when I got into ministry, I quickly found out that I had somehow missed the ministry class in event planning and church politics.
MS: So how does all this “experience providing” apply to the church?
Gilmore: It doesn’t. When the church gets into the business of staging experiences, that quickly becomes idolatry.
MS: I’m stunned. So you don’t encourage churches to use your elements of marketable experiences to create attractive experiences for their attenders?
Gilmore: No. The organized church should never try to stage a God experience.
KM: When people come to church, don’t they expect an experience of some kind? Consumers approach the worship service with the same mindset as they do a purchase.
Gilmore: Increasingly you find people talking about the worship experience rather than the worship service. That reflects what’s happening in the outside world. I’m dismayed to see churches abandon the means of grace that God ordains simply to conform to the patters of the world.
KM: So what happens in church? Are people getting a service, because they’re helped to do something they couldn’t do on their own, that is, get closer to God? Or are they getting an experience, the encounter with God through worship?
Gilmore: The word “getting” is, I think the problem with contemporary Christianity. God is the audience of worship. What you get is, quite frankly, irrelevant as a starting point.
ER:But people, especially unchurched people, don’t perceive it that way. They’re expecting some return.
Gilmore: That is the argument. But the only thing of value the church has to offer is the gospel. I believe that one result of the emerging Experience Economy will be a longing for authenticity. To the extent that the church stages worldly experiences, it will lose its effectiveness.
So powerful. “The only thing of value the church has to offer is the gospel.” That’s it! It is the only thing that matters. Somehow or another, the modern church has taken integral parts of the gospel and carved out their own law. Not only that, when I got into ministry, I quickly found out that I had somehow missed the ministry class in event planning and church politics.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
I love God...but church is not my God
We are a culture of externalities. Church 3 times a week, maximum involvement in “church ministries”, making sure you tithe every week, and taking the Lord’s supper. All of these are good things and great pillars of the modern church. However, they only provide for us an outward experience or expression of our faith, and if not careful turn very quickly into a weekly checklist. This stifles our need to rely on inward transformation and only provides an excuse for external symbolism we in the church have become so familiar with. It all quickly becomes just another experience. More noise.
Moreover, the excuse/externality of choice for me and many others in the
church has ironically been...the church. Where I came face to face with this recently was while my wife and I were visiting her hometown congregation in Seminole, OK. Like most small town churches, the church meets 3 times a week. It was Sunday night around 5:30 (church is at 6) and my father-in-law asks us the question. “You guys goin’ to church tonight?” Grateful that he gave us a choice, Courtney smiled at him politely and declined. To which he quipped, “Well, you must not love God.” We all had a good laugh at a moderately to extremely corny joke. However, while the laughter was dying down, Courtney responded with a comment that we have been mindful of ever since. “No Dad, I love God...but church is not my god.” Don’t make an experience your god. Don’t make doctrine your god. Don’t make the church building, which has no significant meaning, your god. All external, all pointless. Especially when in pursuit of a personal God who doesn’t look at appearances, but only at the heart. Tuesday, July 19, 2011
I can follow Jesus and not go to Church
I once heard from Tim Keller that 80% of American Christians believe that statement. 80%!! He goes on to point out that this idea is some fairy tale that was crafted to make us feel better about not having to be in community with other believers. Keller continues to explain the idea like this. You know that one friend of yours that reacts a certain way when you tell a joke? You know how you feel a little more comfortable around some of your friends than others? Maybe you have a few friends that you feel comfortable around but they are completely different and bring out different sides of you. This is how God created us. If you tried loving God on your own, you would fail. It is not possible. You must love God in community. Deep community. One that loves, encourages, confesses, suffers, gives, and lives together. Trying to love God on your own does not reveal the many sides of God that so many others posses. Here's the other deal. Going to church once a week does not constitute deep community. It constitutes going to church once a week. Church should be a result of what happens in community; outside the walls of the building (that's for another post). So, to say you can follow Jesus and not go to church, well maybe you can follow Jesus and not go to Church. But you're definitely not being the Church.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Church is Business
As I minister, I tried sticking by the "Doing one thing, and doing it well" philosophy. I realize their are exceptions to this rule, but this idea is often overlooked in the church. It is often justified by stating "We are still doing a lot of good". However, this neglects the question, "How much more good could we be doing?" by only doing one thing and doing it well.
It has only been until recently that there has been quite a bit of push-back to the idea of pastors being and doing everything. I still know quite a few ministers of whom the leadership wants way more than they are capable of. Instead of playing to people’s strengths and their ability to do one thing really well, we often play to their ability to accomplish a bunch of things on a mediocre level. This is not only true for ministers, but for the rest of the church.
If the church is to run like a well oiled non-profit, should not the church have the most important message to serve out at maximum efficiency? If it is to be run like a business, should not the church have the best motivation for doing so? If you are going to do it, do it right! Stop dilly dallying in crappy business practices and then try to hide the fact that the modern church isn’t a business. If you hire and fire people based on performance, give them job requirements, a job description, monthly goals, a budget, benefits, a 401k, and they get a paycheck every two weeks...it’s a business!
The church has become a really odd entity. It’s not a non-profit, it’s not a secular business, it doesn’t sell a service or product (although some make it look like that). However, it has a staff, a CEO, a board of directors and shareholders (Respectively ministers, senior minister, elders and members). They hire and fire people like businesses do, negotiate salaries like businesses, they often market like businesses, they have mission statements, vision statements, budgets, annual budget reports (aka-the most boring Sunday of the year), and weekly meetings. Many of the most revered, numerically successful church leaders often look to the world of business for “best practices” and “strategies” and encourage others to do the same. For success in the modern church, are all of these things necessary?
What do you think? Is the church just a business in shroud?
It has only been until recently that there has been quite a bit of push-back to the idea of pastors being and doing everything. I still know quite a few ministers of whom the leadership wants way more than they are capable of. Instead of playing to people’s strengths and their ability to do one thing really well, we often play to their ability to accomplish a bunch of things on a mediocre level. This is not only true for ministers, but for the rest of the church.
If the church is to run like a well oiled non-profit, should not the church have the most important message to serve out at maximum efficiency? If it is to be run like a business, should not the church have the best motivation for doing so? If you are going to do it, do it right! Stop dilly dallying in crappy business practices and then try to hide the fact that the modern church isn’t a business. If you hire and fire people based on performance, give them job requirements, a job description, monthly goals, a budget, benefits, a 401k, and they get a paycheck every two weeks...it’s a business!
The church has become a really odd entity. It’s not a non-profit, it’s not a secular business, it doesn’t sell a service or product (although some make it look like that). However, it has a staff, a CEO, a board of directors and shareholders (Respectively ministers, senior minister, elders and members). They hire and fire people like businesses do, negotiate salaries like businesses, they often market like businesses, they have mission statements, vision statements, budgets, annual budget reports (aka-the most boring Sunday of the year), and weekly meetings. Many of the most revered, numerically successful church leaders often look to the world of business for “best practices” and “strategies” and encourage others to do the same. For success in the modern church, are all of these things necessary?
What do you think? Is the church just a business in shroud?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Church as a movement? Nahhh....
For me, Church was always a building. It was a place where I straightened up or got grounded (which might have happened more than a few times). Of course, I grew up hearing and being taught that the church, was indeed, actually the people. However, I never questioned this juxtaposition as a kid. “Stop running! This is the Lord’s House! No yelling! This is the Lord’s House! No shorts. We are going to church.” And why again could I not kiss my 8th grade girlfriend in the church building during a lock-in? The mystery of what was so sacred about the “church building” continued to unravel into my college years. Although, I knew intellectually that the church was the people, and not a building, I still wasn’t sure what to do about it. I continued to feel this strange compulsion to dress up for church on Sunday morning and act differently while I was there. Even though, in college (when I actually could wear shorts), I think dressing up was much more about a chance to look nice for the girl I liked instead of “giving my best to God”. Much more than the church just being the people, I actually just found out that it began as a movement! Did you know, when the church began, they didn’t have to send out a catchy mailer with a cool graphic on it, an e-mail to all their friends, and make sure they mentioned it on Facebook? The genesis of the church actually happened through word of mouth...so 80’s.
Really, “The Church” no longer functions like a movement. If it did, there would be way to many variables if we still called “The Church” a movement. “Who’s in charge? Who makes the rules? Who decides who’s in and who’s out? What version of the bible are we going to use? Can we use instruments? Is Sunday evening service at 5...or 6 (We all know Sunday evening service in Heaven will be at 6)? Imagine the 1st century church asking these questions. Ridiculous! All they knew was that they were cut to the heart and wanted to do something about it, they had possibly negated some great promise for themselves and future generations and they had crucified the one man whom they read about in scripture...the Messiah.
When did church become so complicated?
Really, “The Church” no longer functions like a movement. If it did, there would be way to many variables if we still called “The Church” a movement. “Who’s in charge? Who makes the rules? Who decides who’s in and who’s out? What version of the bible are we going to use? Can we use instruments? Is Sunday evening service at 5...or 6 (We all know Sunday evening service in Heaven will be at 6)? Imagine the 1st century church asking these questions. Ridiculous! All they knew was that they were cut to the heart and wanted to do something about it, they had possibly negated some great promise for themselves and future generations and they had crucified the one man whom they read about in scripture...the Messiah.
When did church become so complicated?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)