Tuesday, May 09, 2006
Nothing new under the sun?
I always enjoy Lectureships because I get to hear about what is going on in our fellowship. However, after this past week at Pepperdine (yes I know...it was tough but someone had to go) I am once again struck by how hard it is to line up practice with theory. Let me share a few examples...
There was lots of theory about missional theology. I heard about how we need to be out in the world, not just expect them to show up at our building. Then when talking about great things happening in congregations, it was amazing how many talked about building projects (all designed to draw in the unchurched). So I'm confused. Do we go out or draw them in?
There was lots of talk about how we need to not be exclusive and/or judgemental about people who disagree with us about certain doctrines (women's role, instrumental music, etc.). Of course, if you don't agree with the "right" position then you are intolerant, ignorant, or not spiritually mature. So does inclusive mean only if you agree with me (and of course my position is correct)?
I heard lots of discussion on how we must figure out new approaches to reach this post-modern generation. There was talk of interactive ministry, new technology, and bold approaches. Then most of the actions I heard were build youth outreach facilities, hire more staff, and be more aware of their needs. I heard those same proposals when I was a youth minister 30 years ago. So did we do a good job, or did we not?
However, my favorite was a new model of empowering ministry by radically reorganizing our ministry structure. I even saw a chart that showed how this new structure would energize our congregations. It looked just like the old deacon organization charts from 40 years ago. Except the titles are not deacon, but ministering servant leader.
Finally it dawned of me. All of our talk for fifty years has been about radical change so we won't be trapped in our past mistakes. And the solutions are always more or different buildings, different preaching styles, or better staffing. Every revolutionary proposal I have heard for fifty years has involved a building or staffing or a new preacher. So I'm confused. Have we done well, or have we not? It really seems the more things change, the more they stay the same. Past ways are bad, I have the new answers, build buildings the right way, preach the modern way, and increase staff.
So what am I missing? More thoughts later. Let me hear yours.
There was lots of theory about missional theology. I heard about how we need to be out in the world, not just expect them to show up at our building. Then when talking about great things happening in congregations, it was amazing how many talked about building projects (all designed to draw in the unchurched). So I'm confused. Do we go out or draw them in?
There was lots of talk about how we need to not be exclusive and/or judgemental about people who disagree with us about certain doctrines (women's role, instrumental music, etc.). Of course, if you don't agree with the "right" position then you are intolerant, ignorant, or not spiritually mature. So does inclusive mean only if you agree with me (and of course my position is correct)?
I heard lots of discussion on how we must figure out new approaches to reach this post-modern generation. There was talk of interactive ministry, new technology, and bold approaches. Then most of the actions I heard were build youth outreach facilities, hire more staff, and be more aware of their needs. I heard those same proposals when I was a youth minister 30 years ago. So did we do a good job, or did we not?
However, my favorite was a new model of empowering ministry by radically reorganizing our ministry structure. I even saw a chart that showed how this new structure would energize our congregations. It looked just like the old deacon organization charts from 40 years ago. Except the titles are not deacon, but ministering servant leader.
Finally it dawned of me. All of our talk for fifty years has been about radical change so we won't be trapped in our past mistakes. And the solutions are always more or different buildings, different preaching styles, or better staffing. Every revolutionary proposal I have heard for fifty years has involved a building or staffing or a new preacher. So I'm confused. Have we done well, or have we not? It really seems the more things change, the more they stay the same. Past ways are bad, I have the new answers, build buildings the right way, preach the modern way, and increase staff.
So what am I missing? More thoughts later. Let me hear yours.
Comments:
<< Home
Precisely why lectureships pretty much only succeed in giving me a headache. I think if I ever make it out to the Pepperdine lectures, I will spend my days on the patio of the cafeteria overlooking the Pacific and the mountains and just praise God for His creation instead of trying to listen to all of that hoo-hah. If I had to sum up YOUR summary, it sounds like there is too much talking going on, and not enough doing. Just a theory. . .
Too many chiefs, too few indians...
That's what came to my mind after reading this. I agree with Sarah- I'd much rather enjoy the ocean and praise the father than listen to what we are or are not doing wrong in the CofC's across America.
Imagine if all of those ministers and people in attendance had just gotten together and went door knocking...
then again they would probably disagree on how many times to knock on the door, right?
Or better yet, went out and served the community around Pepperdine? That probably would have made a broader statement to the world.
You have given me some food for thought today. Thanks!
That's what came to my mind after reading this. I agree with Sarah- I'd much rather enjoy the ocean and praise the father than listen to what we are or are not doing wrong in the CofC's across America.
Imagine if all of those ministers and people in attendance had just gotten together and went door knocking...
then again they would probably disagree on how many times to knock on the door, right?
Or better yet, went out and served the community around Pepperdine? That probably would have made a broader statement to the world.
You have given me some food for thought today. Thanks!
I think you have not summed up the past 50 years but the past 2000. How do you practice what you preach? You speak of frustrations with trying to be a mission oriented church but the problem is, a "church" is not meant to be mission oriented, disciples are.
A church is designed to bring people in and keep them there. A better building, better worship experience, more ministers...those are all meant to draw people in and then help those people nurture and grow.
Rick preached a great sermon on Sunday and he asked the question..."When did we go from a 'Send out' to a 'Come to' church?" That is a great question. It does seem ironic that we want to send people out of our church but at the same time we want to make our church more appealing to stay in.
I don't know the answer but I do believe that we have got to put more of an emphasis on being vocational missionaries and that is done by teaching and preaching on the subject. What good does it do to hear a sermon on any subject when you know the person giving the sermon doesn't do it. It is meaningless. That is why Jesus is the ultimate teacher. His life was an expression of his teaching every single day.
The point - we become a missional church by expressing our faith every day at work and with the people we come in contact with. It is not ok to cruise through the week and then get your spirituality on the weekend. We have stopped being disciples and have become casual observers. Instead of being starters and playing 48 minutes, we are the people who are happy just to be on the team and only get in the game when nothing is on the line (sorry for the basketball analogy but I am still stoked about the MAVS!) We need a serious call to discipleship rather than a different orginizational chart.
Post a Comment
A church is designed to bring people in and keep them there. A better building, better worship experience, more ministers...those are all meant to draw people in and then help those people nurture and grow.
Rick preached a great sermon on Sunday and he asked the question..."When did we go from a 'Send out' to a 'Come to' church?" That is a great question. It does seem ironic that we want to send people out of our church but at the same time we want to make our church more appealing to stay in.
I don't know the answer but I do believe that we have got to put more of an emphasis on being vocational missionaries and that is done by teaching and preaching on the subject. What good does it do to hear a sermon on any subject when you know the person giving the sermon doesn't do it. It is meaningless. That is why Jesus is the ultimate teacher. His life was an expression of his teaching every single day.
The point - we become a missional church by expressing our faith every day at work and with the people we come in contact with. It is not ok to cruise through the week and then get your spirituality on the weekend. We have stopped being disciples and have become casual observers. Instead of being starters and playing 48 minutes, we are the people who are happy just to be on the team and only get in the game when nothing is on the line (sorry for the basketball analogy but I am still stoked about the MAVS!) We need a serious call to discipleship rather than a different orginizational chart.
# posted by 
: 7:41 AM PDT
: 7:41 AM PDT << Home
