The Institute of Evangelism

Every Church an Evangelizing Community!

Church - General

What Makes a Vital Church?

by .

Harold Percy spoke at an annual Institute of Evangelism dinner at Wycliffe College. This is the text of the talk he gave that evening.

It is no secret that our churches across this country are generally having a difficult time connecting with people and attracting them into the lives of their worshipping communities. It seems to be mystifying and bewildering to many that forms of worship, church life, and governance that worked effectively for generations no longer do so.

George Hunter, in one of his books on church life and North American culture, offers the picture of a corn farmer whose family has been successfully raising and marketing corn for generations. He ask us to imagine that one morning, as this farmer and his crew wake up to go into the fields to harvest the corn, they discover to their amazement that overnight the cornfields have turned to vineyards. Instead of acres and acres of rich, ripe corn waiting to be harvested, instead there are vines dropping with juicy grapes waiting to be picked. A preposterous picture to be sure, but go with it for a minute. Hunter says that in this situation there are a number of options open to the farmer. Of all these options, surely the most disastrous would be to think, “There can’t be that much of a difference between corn and grapes, so let’s just start up these corn pickers and drive into the fields and harvest the grapes.” This could not possibly end well! In fact, the harder they worked at this, the more damage they would be likely to cause.

Hunter says this is the situation facing churches (for our purposes, particularly mainline churches and especially the Anglican Church) in North America. For generations we had a way of “doing and being” church that fit perfectly into the surrounding culture and so was very effective. But in recent years the changes in the culture have been rapid and significant. The result is that the churches are much like the corn farmer, surrounded no longer by corn but by grapes. The harvest has changed, and changed dramatically. And, if we as the church are going to be effective in what we are called to do, we must change as well. To insist that we can continue to do just exactly what we have always done, and hope that our results will eventually change, is folly. Corn pickers can’t harvest grapes. We need to rethink what we are doing and how we are doing it.

Dallas Willard wrote, concerning church life in America, that “your church is perfectly designed to get the results you are presently getting.” If we want to get different results we need to do some serious thinking about what needs to be changed, and what we need to be paying attention to. The following acrostic on the word VITAL provides a convenient framework for me to make a few observations about some of the things I think we need to be paying attention to if we are going to revitalize our congregations and carry on effective ministries.

Visionary Leadership

The “V” stands for visionary leadership. We need visionary leadership at every level because the nature and scope of the changes required go far beyond simply tinkering a little bit with what we already have. It is clear that the traditional parish model which is organized around liturgy and pastoral care simply doesn’t work anymore. No matter how good we get at these, it won’t help. What we need is new DNA, and leaders who get this, and can model and communicate it.

The number one job of leadership is to explain why the organization exists and to communicate this clearly and effectively. We have congregations all across this country who don’t know why they exist, with leaders who are unable to tell them.

I read somewhere that the two most radical questions any organization can ever ask itself are these: Why are we doing what we are doing? And why are we doing it the way we are doing it? These are questions that have to be asked on a regular basis in every congregation, parish, and diocese across the country. It is hard to know just what to do if you aren’t clear on precisely what it is that you are trying to do. What should be the result of all this work and effort we are putting into church life?

For my money the answer to the first of these questions would be something like, “The church exists (or this parish exists) to let the whole world (or this particular community) know that Jesus is Lord; to explain what this means, to live what it looks like, and to invite everyone within our sphere of influence to become an intentional follower of Jesus and learn to live the new life of his Kingdom.

Again, for my money, the worst possible answer to the second question (why are we doing it this way?) is “Because we have always done it this way.” A better answer is “because we have tried and experimented in all kinds of ways and currently this is what seems to be most effective, but we are always looking for ways to get better at this.”

The leadership in a vital congregation needs to be able to inspire the people of that congregation with a vision of who they can become as they work this out, to dream of what such a community of people might look like in their particular context, and to nurture such a community into being. That is always an exciting journey for everyone involved.

The challenge is that our systems of formation and oversight do not produce and nurture such leaders. In fact, they probably weed them out more often than not in the early stages. We send clergy out into the field, full of passion and dreams and hope, but without the necessary training and ongoing coaching in the transformational leadership skills required to take hold of a parish and lead it through a process of transformation to vitality. So, as they try or suggest various things, they get beaten up, discouraged, tamed, even skittish, and often end up simply trying to hang on and survive. This is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Inspirational Worship

The key here is simply to remember that people mostly prefer parties to funerals. Over the years I have come to the conclusion that we put far too much emphasis on the set texts and forms of our liturgical worship and expect far too much of the liturgy in return. We need to get over our obsession with “doing liturgy properly”—not that we should strive to do it badly, but because there are more important things to be thinking about. We simply overplay this in terms of its importance and what it can do.

One of the problems with the way we think about liturgy is that it is rationally driven. It is explained by means of logic and reason: “this piece goes here, because we have just done so and so, and this is what should follow.”

I don’t have a problem with this, except to say that of much greater importance is the tone and pace and feeling of what is happening, no matter how the pieces are linked together. It simply is a fact that the majority of our churches bore the pants off people with the tone and pace of the service. It is just quiet, somber, and weary. I have often marveled at how Anglicans can be such jolly, life loving, vibrant people on the parking lot or in the coffee hour, but so totally dull and dreary at worship. There is nothing in scripture to suggest that worship needs to be a funeral march. So much of what we do and how we do it is just lacking in imagination and energy.

When the people we are hoping to connect with do eventually come to church to check things out, most of them aren’t asking whether the pieces of the service fit together theologically, nor even, “What did I learn?” The first and most important question for them is usually, “How did I feel?” Did I feel that I was in a community that is life-filled and loving? Did I feel welcome? Did I sense that in some way I was actually in God’s presence, and that God and I were connecting? Did God speak a word into my life in that service? Was I touched? Was I challenged? Did I get excited? Did I leave with a new or renewed sense of purpose or hope; a new or renewed perspective on my life and its possibilities? Was I convicted of things in my life that need changing? Do I feel that I have been forgiven?

They aren’t asking if the priest adopted the proper postures or stood in the right places or if the hymns were proper hymns, or if their grandmother would have been pleased with the way the service was conducted.

Training In Discipleship

This has to do with the teaching and coaching that enables people to make an intentional commitment to be followers of Jesus and to learn to live the new life of his kingdom. I believe that this is at the very heart of the life of a vital congregation, but for various reasons we have let this slip badly. In fact, in many of the churches I have visited across this country most of the members have never even heard that this shot is on the board.

This work has been badly neglected. We have life long parishioners who don’t know how to pray with their families or in their churches, and life long parishioners who are functionally biblically illiterate. And these are just the basics.

I think this might be the result of thinking that this work is done by the liturgy, or that it is done as we breathe in the air of a Christian culture, or that people have just learned these things somewhere else.

But most parishes make the mistake of starting in the middle: simply assuming the people in the pews are already mature, well formed, holistic followers of Jesus, and know how to make the connections between faith and life on a daily basis. This is not a good assumption. We need to get back to the absolute basics of the faith, and take it from there, helping people to grow through a deliberate process of personal transformation.

Again, for my money, my hunch is that we put far too much effort into what we call pastoral care and not nearly enough into discipleship training. I believe that our clergy need to be delegating most of the pastoral care to gifted and trained care givers in the congregation who are longing for ways to make a difference, and to spend their own time working at developing the processes by which disciples are formed and nurtured in their congregation. “Pastoral care” should be changed to “congregational care”, and in the seminaries I believe that the departments of Pastoral Care should be changed to Departments of Congregational Leadership.

Authentic Community

 

I am not talking here about churches that seem more like comfortable Christian clubs, but about communities of growing disciples who are meeting together to encourage each other in their journeys of discipleship, caring for each other deeply and tenderly, and learning what it means to “love one another, to weep with those who weep, and to rejoice with those who rejoice.”

Loving Outreach and Evangelism.

 

All of this brings us to point where we are prepared to begin seriously thinking about how we will reach out in the name of Jesus to serve our communities and to invite others to join us in the adventure of learning to follow Jesus. The means and ways to this are limited only by our imaginations. I believe that Jesus would still say today, in our parish neighbourhoods, “the harvest is plentiful”.

But in order to be effective in this, we require visionary leadership, inspirational worship, training in discipleship, and authentic community. When we have these, we will be able to do this, as an authentic expression of who we are; ministering out of vibrant, life filled, dynamic congregations in which the message of Jesus is modeled and shared: “Come and see, join us in Christ’s mission, learn to follow Jesus with us.” Such congregations, and only such congregations, are ready for sustainable evangelism, whether “attractional” or “fresh expressions” or whatever. Without these, all our efforts will be hit and miss—like playing pin the tail on the donkey, with the tail ending up all over the place.

I love the thought of communities of Christ followers meeting together for prayer, bible reading, holy communion, and then going out to walk through their neighbourhoods asking “how can we help”—and thinking seriously about what it would mean to share Jesus in that place.

My friend Tom Bandy said it well, I think: “Love your church, of course: but love Jesus more.”

What’s Happening to our Young People? – Highlights from John Bowen’s Book

by .

Some highlights from John Bowen’s book, Growing up Christian: Why Young People Stay in Church, Leave Church and (Sometimes) Come Back to Church

 

You have seen them and so have I: bright, enthusiastic young people leading worship, heading out on short term mission trips, collecting food for the food bank. And we think, “Ah, the future of the church is in good hands.”

But what happens to those young people in the years that follow? Do they fulfill their potential for church leadership. If so, why? And if not, why not?

For many years, my wife and I worked in a Leadership Training Program at Ontario Pioneer Camp, an interdenominational camp in Ontario, Canada. Over that time, we worked with around a total of over 1,200 young people.

In 2003, I had the opportunity of a sabbatical from my teaching, and decided to try and find out what had happened to this particular group of lively, committed Christian teenagers. Where were they now, in terms of faith and church involvement? And what might we learn from them about what keeps them in the faith—or drives them away?

I prepared an online survey, and invited them to fill it out. They were asked to identify where they were at spiritually, and answer appropriate questions. Their main options were:

  1. “You still call yourself a Christian and are involved in church.” There were 251 who chose this survey, 75% of the respondents. I refer to these as Loyal Believers.Roughly one third of these (eighty-three), although they are active Christians today, had a time of six months or more when they were away from church and/or faith. This is a distinctive group, so I call them Returned Believers.
  2. “You would no longer call yourself a Christian and have dropped out of church life.” There were fourteen who chose this survey, 4% of respondents. I refer to these as Former Believers.
  3. “You still consider yourself a Christian but have more or less dropped out of church.” There were fifty-seven who chose this survey, or 17% of respondents. I call these Absent Believers.

All told, I received responses from a total of 333 people, about 28% of the potential pool. As I read through the answers, there were a number of things that jumped out at me. Each one is discussed more fully in the book, but here are some of the highlights:

  1. The first surprise was why those who were continuing in faith and church involvement did so. I had assumed that friends would be the primary influence. Well, friends came high on the list, at 80.9%, but two factors were rated higher. Mentors rated fractionally higher, at 82.3%. But topping the list was (can you guess?) “my relationship God” at 89%. It’s obvious, I suppose, as soon as you say it: people continue in their Christian faith because of the reality of God.Not only that, but I was quite startled to find that, in response after response, people spontaneously stated their faith in strong, personal and passionate ways. They testified to their love for God, their dependence on God, their gratitude to God, and so on. These are clearly people who are not involved in church and faith out of a sense of obligation. They are involved because they feel strongly about their faith.
  2. I thought that the main factor causing Former Believers to leave faith would be suffering (what I called a “catastrophe,” such as the loss of a child, parent, or partner). Since only fourteen Former Believers responded, I cannot draw sweeping conclusions, but certainly among those fourteen the problem of suffering received hardly a mention.What was surprising however, was the string of stories told by Loyal Believers about their suffering, including the untimely death of children and parents, and chronic debilitating illnesses. For these people, although the suffering was sometimes unbearable, it did not drive them away from faith and church, but instead their faith gave them the resources to cope with it and to survive.
  3. It is remarkable how many people have changed denomination since the time they were teenagers. Three-quarters of respondents have left the denomination in which they began life. The book looks in some detail at what these changes are and why they take place, but as a general rule many would sympathize with the Absent Believer who wrote: I don’t subscribe to denominations, but rather, prefer to find a specific church with a pastor and congregation that I relate to.This research confirms what others have found, that changing denominations is a very common thing these days, although, as sociologist Reg Bibby has pointed out, the switching is often within church “families”—that is, from one conservative church to another, or from one mainline church to another. Many, but by no means all, of the changes among my respondents confirm this.
  4. Many of the respondents, whichever category they put themselves in, have experienced difficulties with church and with faith: many speak of finding “hypocrisy” in the church, having values that differ from those of their church, encountering intellectual difficulties, and so on. Not only has this driven many (Absent Believers and Returned Believers in particular) away from church: it is also the thing that most often challenges the faith even of Loyal Believers! This theme of what we might call “the disappointing church” crops us frequently in the responses.
  5. Largely because of this, fully one third of those presently involved in church were absent from church (less often from faith) for a period of six months or more, the longest “absence” being one of seven years. However, the range of reasons they leave, and the reasons they later return, are varied and (particularly in the reasons they return) often startling. This reinforces the fact that a number of people who are presently Absent Believers will likely return to church at some point. But, equally certain, some of those who are presently Loyal Believers will move away from church at some point. Of those, some, though not all, will return later. And (according to other people’s research), some will leave and return more than once.
  6. A lot of people say how difficult moving from one town to another has been for their church involvement. It’s not easy uprooting from a faith community where you feel at home, comfortable, and needed to another where “none of the above” applies—at least, till you’ve been there some time. As Reginald Bibby says, “every time people move, about half of them will stop attending regularly.”

So what might we learn from all this?

There is much to learn from these respondents. Three preliminary questions come to my mind:

a) Do our youth groups teach their members what it means to have a meaningful relationship with God which will last and grow over the years? Do we dare to teach them spiritual disciplines, or do we assume these would be beyond the average teenager?

b) Can we help young people, when they move to another town or city, to find a suitable church? Obviously it is not enough to suggest that Presbyterians (for example) simply look for another Presbyterian church. If they are leaving a family-oriented evangelical church, they are highly unlikely to settle in an ageing, theologically liberal congregation (or vice versa), even if both are Presbyterian. Are we prepared to think “kingdom” more than “denomination”?

c) What can we learn from their criticisms of church? What these people are looking for in a church is not rocket science, neither is it inappropriate. They specifically ask:

  • that followers of Jesus should cultivate a warm and open community
  • that they should consider issues of truth, and be open to questions and discussion
  • that they should be active in service to their community and the world, and
  • that worship (whatever form it takes) should be done with excellence and should include thoughtful preaching.

In some ways, all they are asking is that churches should act like churches. After all, these criteria are pretty basic for any church. It seems as though, if we want young people to find churches credible, the best thing we can do is actually very simple (though deeply challenging): to take seriously our commitment to be a community of followers of Jesus. Is that too much for them to ask?

xxx

Growing up Christian: Why Young People Stay in Church, Leave Church and (Sometimes) Come Back to Church is published by Regent College Publishing (2010), and is available online from Amazon here or at other bookstores.

.

Hallowed be Thy Game

by .

On Sunday afternoon, February 28th, 2010 – God willing – the Canadian Men’s Olympic Hockey Team will be going for gold. There’s no question that this event will be the highlight of Vancouver’s games, and that the vast majority of us – the faithful – will be there, on the edges of our couches, glued to our sets, with our hearts in our throats. For a couple of hours we’ll be caught up in the ecstasy of it all, nothing else will matter. Filled with religious fervour, we’ll fully engage this sacred event; our very identities on the line. And all we’ll need to do is believe.

Why? Why will this event transcend so many others? How can one hockey game ever mean so much to so many Canadians?

It’s a question I hope to engage in the pre-game sermon I’ll be preaching that Sunday morning. My thinking is that the God who made all things (in the Christian worldview anyway) has something to do with this game. Surely he’ll be watching. And surely there’s some greater divine purpose at play.

But what?

In order to get at an answer I decided to solicit some professional help. So I emailed Globe and Mail sports writer Roy MacGregor and asked if he’d be willing to help me research my sermon. His response? “I’d be happy to,” he wrote, “if time permits.” Following is the email dialogue that ensued.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 8:56 am

Roy,

Here’s my first/main sermon research question(s).

Why are Canadians so passionate about their men’s Olympic team? What is it about this series that matters so much? Can you identify the specific yearnings and desires in us that are being piqued by this event?

I’m especially interested in your thoughts on our “specific yearnings and desires” Roy. How do they differ in this series, from say a playoff run, or a regular Saturday night game? J

Thanks again for taking the time,

John

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 9:10 am

John,

I’ll try and answer in the body [of your email], John.

[“Why are Canadians so passionate?] Canadians aren’t known for much — even the things we should be known for. Americans say basketball was invented in Springfield (it was, but BY A CANADIAN). They say the telephone was invented there (it wasn’t — but HERE, BY A CANADIAN). We invented hockey and no one disputes this. We embraced it as our national game and we are one of a few countries where only one game matters above all others, hockey. The Olympics gives us the chance to have the world notice that Canadians truly own this game they invented.

[How are the Olympics different from other hockey series.?] It is sooooooo different. A playoff run is only important to the city, Saturday night hockey only important to the country. The Olympics are the world’s showcase. Our specific yearnings and desires are simple. We know, in our insecure hearts, that the rest of the world, if it thinks of us at all, it is as what that British headline writer once called “That Great White Nothing.” Or if they do think of us, it is of very quiet, polite not-quite Americans.

But hockey, I believe, allows Canadians to show the world the face Canadians wish the world to see in Canada: resilient, tenacious, teamwork, hardworking, determined, filled with heart, ultimately triumphant — and yet humble in victory. (After the wild piling on and cheering, of course.)

Roy

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Tuesday, February 02, 2010, 10:18 am

Wow… great insights Roy.

When you write, “The Olympics gives us the chance to have the world notice that Canadians truly own this game they invented…” I think about how, in the Christian story, God created humanity with the mandate to be fruitful, and multiply and fill this world (Genesis 1:28). A big part of that filling involves the creation of culture. And a big part of our culture today is sport. So when we are the ones who invent a game like hockey, we’re doing a good thing that God commanded. And when we come up with something that’s innately us – with all of the ice we have to play on, available trees for sticks, and weather resilient spirits – we’re giving back to the broader global culture something very unique, very indigenous, very us. You’re right. We came up with this game. There’s something about being the first to create something that leaves us feeling very much who we are, very human, very alive, while at the same time bringing us closer to our Creator. In Christian circles the thinking is that all human beings are made in the image of God. So when we create one of the greatest cultural products ever conceived of, we’re mimicking our Maker. J

Your insights connecting our insecurities as Canadians with the pursuit of Olympic gold, was a new one for me. And I think you’re right. We do want to be seen for who we are, as the “resilient, tenacious, teamwork[ing], hardworking, determined, filled with heart, ultimately triumphant — and yet humble in victory” people that we really are. J As I consider these words, all I can think about is how God made us to be seen, recognized, and fully known and appreciated by him. I think God loves every single person and culture on our planet, in every detail, in all of their unique ways of playing and being, even if we mess things up some times (like finishing out of the medals in Turin – what was that about eh?). So this makes me wonder if our deep desire to be seen by the world for who we really are, is a pointer to an even greater yearning to be seen by God (knowingly or not).

What do you think about these spiritual connections?

John

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Tuesday, February 02, 2010, 10:41 am

I like it. I’m not a religious person at all (not anymore, anyway) but I appreciate the connections and think they work very well. Good luck with the sermon.

R

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Tuesday, February 02, 2010, 11:00 am

Thanks. And thanks for the inspiration Roy. I’m not sure I would have got there on my own.

Have a blast at the Olympics,

John

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Tuesday, February 02, 2010, 11:03 am.

Many thanks, John.

R

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

So think about it as you watch the game. Where is God present in all of this? What is he saying about who you are, and how he made you… how he made us as Canadians? What is God revealing about himself through this good old hockey game?

Our Sabbath Year: A Good Idea? Time Will Tell

by .

sabbathyearLast spring, I was doing what I believe many of my fellow clergy might do, and that is to begin to wonder what exactly we (my congregation and I) should be planning in the way of activities and programs for the congregation for the upcoming fall/winter season. Like many of us, I prayed about it. I had lots of ideas, but nothing seemed quite right. Then, one beautiful spring morning, as I was driving to my church and pondering what to do, I felt as if God was saying to me, “Your people are tired, they have worked hard, they are a little disappointed in the fruits of their labours, and they are slightly discouraged. They don’t need a lot of busy-ness, they need time to rest to simply be—time to come back to basics.”

“But,” I said, “the church isn’t growing much and we’re operating very close to the line financially: how can we rest? And besides, I like the busy-ness.” Again I felt God say to me, “Precisely, that is why all of you need Sabbath Rest—a whole year’s worth.”

I spoke to my wardens and my advisory board, and—surprisingly—they all concurred: it would be good to take a Sabbath Year. I then began to study what the Seventh Year Sabbath means exactly, and how it could work in our congregation in the coming year. I discovered that there are three aspects of the Seventh Year Sabbath:

Release of the Land

God proclaimed that, in the Seventh Year, there were to be no crops planted: the land was to rest. At the same time, the land by its very nature would bring forth some produce. This produce was to be shared amongst households, masters and slaves, the needy and the vulnerable, and the stranger. During this Seventh Year, the people were to trust in the Lord’s provision. It is this trusting in the power and provision of God that brings us back to basics, that God will “give us this day our daily bread.”

He did all this so you would never say to yourself, ‘I have achieved all this wealth with my own strength and energy.’ Remember the Lord your God, He is the one who gives you power to be successful. (Deut. 8:17-18)

This year, we have applied the concept of the resting of the land to our congregational life. For one year, we will stop the busy work, the big events, the major projects. We will step away from all of this busy-ness, and simply rest in the presence of the Lord. We want to take time to see where God is, and ask what is truly important for the kingdom in this place. Sometimes we get ourselves so overcommitted, that we just don’t have a sense of what we are really doing and why. This year we will stand back from the noise, be still, and ask what is God’s will, not ours.

Release from Debt

In the Seventh Year Sabbath, sometimes referred to as the Year of Release, there is a release from debt. The texts I read were not certain if this meant release from the entire debt (as in Jubilee) or if it meant release from debt obligations for the Sabbath Year, a year in which there would be no harvest income generated. Whichever way it was intended, one would be debt free for at least a year.

Taking this concept into our church life, we cannot (unfortunately) be free from certain debt obligations that we have. That being said, it is understood that this year we will not push our people about financial issues: this year we will have no financial campaigns, no carrying on week after week about the budget. And we have agreed to trust that our people will share what they can.

Curiously, we were tested right at the beginning of our Sabbath Year. There was an electrical fire which, although not huge, caused enough damage that insurance was involved and of course there is a deductible which understandably was not in our budget. Without asking, people have responded with donations toward this deductible.

There is another form of debt to consider. In some translations of the Lord ’s Prayer, it is written, “forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.” As a congregation, are there people whom we believe to be in our debt, if so, can we let this sense of debt go, release our debtors, set them free? We can ask this same question on a personal level as well.

Release from Slavery

God said that in the Seventh Year Sabbath, all slaves were to be released if they wished to be. Furthermore, the slaves were not to be simply set free, but were to be given enough provision that they could begin new work as a free person, and become financially independent. In essence, these slaves were to be given an opportunity to begin a whole new life if they chose to accept their right to freedom.

We have taken this release from slavery and applied it to all of our volunteers (except the wardens). Everyone has been released from any form of responsibility or commitment to work in the church. Those who are happy to be involved and delighted to share their gifts and skills are welcomed and encouraged to carry on. On the other hand, those for whom their work in the church has become a drag and a “have to do” are released. So far, we have lost only one person—and gained six willing hearts. An unexpected outcome is the inspiring sense, when going into the sanctuary on Sunday, or attending a meeting, of knowing that everyone who is there is there because they want to be present and to participate.

Slavery, like debt, has another side to it. It includes those amongst us who are vulnerable, whose lives seem boxed in, as if they are chained to a past that has no future. How can we, with God’s help, break their chains, set them free and provide them with hope for tomorrow. This is a requisite of the Sabbath Year.

How is it going for us so far?

At this point in time we not far into our Sabbath Year. I have not as yet heard one complaint. I have, however, heard lots of reminders around: “Remember this is our Sabbath Year, let’s keep it simple and easy.”

We are making every effort too to reclaim the Seventh Day, the Sabbath Day, and, this is reflected in our worship, our communication, and our focus. Again, people are talking about it and claiming their Sabbath Day.

I have only recently become aware of the sense of mutuality that is emerging. There is a developing Sabbath Spirit: we are all in this together, supporting and encouraging each other to keep the Sabbath.

Our newcomers are intrigued by our Sabbath keeping and feel quite relaxed, coming into this atmosphere of rest and simplicity.

In my study on Sabbath Rest, I read that the word rest in its original context does not mean so much sleeping or napping as it does abiding with God. So the Sabbath Year of Rest is our time to truly be with God. It is our time to stand back and try to see ourselves, through God’s eyes.

My hope is that, when we come the end of our Sabbath Year, we will be refreshed and renewed, encouraged and energized in the power and presence of God. We will be able to define what we missed, what we didn’t miss, what is important to us—and what God is preparing for us.

My prayer for those in my charge during this our Sabbath Year is this:

May Christ make his home in your hearts. May your roots grow down into God’s love and keep you strong. May you have the power to understand, how wide, how long, how high, and how deep his love is. May you experience the love of Christ. Then you will be made complete with all the fullness and power that comes from God. (adapted from Ephesians 4:17-19)

A Sabbath Year. A good idea? So far, so good. Thanks be to God.

FX Pilgrimage Liveblog: St. Thomas Crookes Sheffield (Cell – Cluster – Celebration)

by .

In September 2009, Tim Haughton (Minister of Discipleship at St. Paul’s Bloor Street, Toronto) travelled to the UK to explore Fresh Expressions of Church. He is blogging about his experiences here.

fe 004My plane reading (Clusters – by Mike Breen and Bob Hopkins) had been preparing me for my first site visit. St. Thomas’ Sheffield is hailed as the largest Church in the North of England. I plugged the address into the ‘Sat Nav’ (GPS for us Canadians) from my home base in Liverpool and was taken on an early morning drive through snake pass to the British Version of a “Mega –Church”. Imagine my surprise when I pulled up to an older building of Norman Architecture – with a remodeled interior to seat 200 and a balcony to seat an additional 50 – “This is a MegaChurch”??? (I guess I was thinking Willow Creek)

A modern sign to the right of the door communicated both the vision and mission in the form of a triangle – Meet Friends (IN – Cell) – Meet God (UP – Sunday Gatherings) – live life better (OUT – Cluster).

I was one of the first to arrive – and at an early service of 40 regulars – a very similar crowd to the 8:15 service at St. Paul’s. Being the only newcomer I was the object of some interest. I was warmly greeted, offered a cup of tea (which they freshly made just for me) – and ushered to a seat. One of the student interns came and sat with me to introduce me to the church – nonchalantly mentioning that this morning they were planting a church for students in a pub near the university – “This Lot???” – I thought cynically as I scanned the crowd.

The 9am service, apart from the Lord’s prayer, and the words of institution had no C of E residue. Two moments in the service however bowled me over – as the minister held up the bread and wine he said “This is evidence of God’s love not just for us but for this world – this is not just for you – we are empowered here to bless and to serve the world God loves.” After the announcements of what was happening in the church (including the introduction of a dozen students who were giving up their “gap year” to minister in the church and city!!) – we split into groups of three or four to pray for the ministry of the church – as we did so – the minister again said “This is the purpose of this service to pray for the ministry of our church” – 15 minutes of Spirit – filled prayer concluded in a song and we were dismissed.

“Alice” came up to me during coffee – note paper in hand – asking if I was new. During the course of the conversation I ascertained that her cell group’s ministry was to connect with newcomers in a ministry of hospitality – inviting people around for tea to welcome them to the church.

After a few conversations – the church was getting ready for the 11am service – so I ducked out and walked around the block to re-enter the church again to get the “newcomer” experience – in the 5 minutes I was gone the church was flooded with 250 young families and students. I had to go right to the front to get a seat!!

The service – though with higher energy (drums, guitar and bass, added to the worship leader’s piano – as the songs were projected on the screen) – was very similar to the 9am – however without communion. One noteable difference was when, during announcements, the pastor pulled out his cell phone – asking people to take out their cell phones.

I know what you are thinking – I was thinking the same thing – he is going to ask us to turn them off.

On the contrary!!!

We were asked to turn them on – and text someone saying – I am in Church and God loves you – have a great day. He asked us to keep them on through the sermon – so we could together hear the ‘dinging’ of replies. Indeed – through the sermon we heard the dings of people responding to what they called “Instant Evangelism”.

After the service – I was again approached by members of the community asking if I was new – if I had not replied that I was a visiting minister learning from what they were doing – I would have been invited to a cluster to get connected. As I spoke with the people – the reality of the sign on the front door began to take shape.

The Sunday morning text is discussed and prayed through, as Christians support one another in their weekly cell. Three times a month all the members meet together on Sunday for the “Gathering”. Sounds like a church with coordinated small groups right?

Not at all!! On one Sunday a month the place closes for ‘Cluster Sunday’ – 2 to 5 cells meeting together in a cluster (Mid sized communities of 25 – 75) under a common vision to impact their neighbourhoods and city. Many of these clusters have branched out to form their own “church plants” – like the pub church starting that very Sunday – and the 2nd Church plant that was starting in October – a gathering for young families between the services – with about 100 people, many who weren’t Christians I was told.

Now I get it – I thought – This is how St. Thomas Crookes is the largest church in Northern England – it is a network of a number of different church plants that are the fruit of the ministry of cluster.

At the end of their cluster activity on that ‘cluster Sunday’ – each cluster gathers back at the Church to share what God has done in and through them that week – many said this was their favorite Sunday.

As I drove through Snake Pass on my way to Sheffield I wondered how the church would be doing after their charismatic leader Mike Breen had left years ago – would it decline like many other churches do after loosing such a leader? On the contrary – it has continued to grow in leaps and bounds. Why? In my observation it is because everyone knows, believes in, and can articulate not only the vision and mission of the church – BUT – the process by which the church will get there – AND – their specific role in that process. The greeters sought out newcomers to connect them to cluster – the cluster has vision for outreach into the city – the 9am service to pray for the ministry – and ‘Alice’ and her cell meeting people on the front steps on ‘cluster Sunday’ to meet, feed, and pray with those who forgot there wasn’t church that Sunday.

A Fresh Expression of Amnesia

by .

If we are to become a church shaped by and for God’s mission in this world, the last thing we need is a fresh expression of amnesia. 233 variations of the word “remember” appear in Old and New Testaments. As poet and philosopher George Santayana has it, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” So as we immerse ourselves in talk of being sensitive to the multiplicity of different contexts and cultures around us in Canada, and of the need to connect appropriately with those contexts and cultures, it is salutary to be reminded that we haven’t always thought, much less acted, in this way.

The tradition goes back at least as far as Peter the apostle and the interior struggle that ensued when God presented him first with a triple vision on a rooftop in Joppa, followed closely by the very human invitation to enter the home of a Roman. The Council of Jerusalem described in Acts 15 similarly struggled with questions of what some would call contextualisation. Should we impose our way of worshipping and following Jesus on another culture, or should we help that culture develop its own response to the God who Jesus Christ reveals?

In the clash between the Celtic church and Rome in seventh century Britain over such world-shatteringly important matters as the “right” haircut for Christians and the ”right” time to celebrate the Resurrection, we see the very human tendency to try to impose “our” way (which to us is obviously the right way) on those with whom we come into contact. Of course, the tendency is made worse when we find ourselves part of a dominant and powerful group which has the ability to enforce “our way” of doing things on others.

At the same time, there has also been a recognition that God has a different view of diverse cultural expression. The miracle on the day of Pentecost was not so much that visitors to Jerusalem from throughout the Mediterranean world suddenly became able to understand Aramaic, spoken with a decidedly Galilean accent, but that these visitors had the “mighty works of God” proclaimed to them in their own native languages by people who were previously unable to speak (or presumably understand) those languages. For some strange reason, God appears to accommodate himself to different tribes, tongues and nations.

Thomas Cranmer picked up on this theme in the sixteenth century with the move in public worship from Latin into a tongue “understanded of the people.”[1] Unfortunately, many Anglicans since Cranmer seem to have forgotten this principle, and instead we have often imposed a foreign language and culture on people to whom we went bearing the gospel of Jesus Christ. (A particularly Canadian example of this would be the Residential Schools, many of which were church-run). At the same time this attitude has sometimes led to the trivialising, belittling and dismissing of forms of worship developed by the “receiving” group in their own language and culture.

A notable exception to this attitude is Robert McDonald, the nineteenth century missionary, and translator, of the Yukon:

McDonald travelled extensively, visiting native camps throughout the area. He had a natural empathy and respect for their culture and concerned himself with teaching them to read in their own language so they would have access to the teachings of the Bible during his absences. Two years after his arrival at Fort Yukon, he baptized the first Gwitch’in converts. Over the course of his 42 years in the North, he baptized 2,000 adults and children.[2]

The confluence of First Nations people with the Christian faith has produced some distinctively First Nations expressions of the faith. One example is the continuing American Indian hymn sing tradition, in which people gather towards dusk for a communal meal, followed by story telling and hymn singing which could continue far into the night. Bishop Mark McDonald tells us these have often been looked at by some white Christian leaders as being inferior or inappropriate expressions. This propensity to judge one cultural expression of Christianity by the standards and through the lens of another is a danger that will need to be avoided if fresh expressions of church in all cultures and contexts are to flourish and to receive the respect which they deserve.

The apostle Paul offers us this model for a different way of proceeding.

Think of yourselves the way Christ Jesus thought of himself. He had equal status with God but didn’t think so much of himself that he had to cling to the advantages of that status no matter what. Not at all. When the time came, he set aside the privileges of deity and took on the status of a slave, became human! Having become human, he stayed human. It was an incredibly humbling process.[3]

We are being offered the exciting opportunity of engaging with God’s mission in a post Christendom context, but this will only be realized fully if we have the courage to face the mistakes of the past, taking appropriate responsibility for them, and taking great care not to repeat them.

[1] Article 24 of the Church of England

[2] http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/Exhibitions/BishopStringer/english/mission-mcdonald.html

[3] Philippians 2:5-7 (The Message)

“On Pigs and Jesus”, or why the Eucharist is the end of the culture of fear

by .

We all know what Jesus did to the herd of swine in the gospel story when he allowed the demons who were harassing the demoniac to enter into the herd grazing nearby. Not a PETA poster moment, for sure.

swine-flu

Three weeks ago in Egypt, the government there began a pig slaughter on a slightly bigger scale: some 350,000 pigs were led to the slaughter for fear of the dreaded “swine” flu. Countries all over the world began to ban pork imports from North America and we saw news clips of well-intentioned people (usually in the grocery store, mid-shopping) telling the reporters that they were eliminating pork from their diet, “just in case.”

What these stories intimately share is the fact of possession, of being possessed. In the gospel story, the demonic possession of the pigs leads to their plunging death off the cliff. In our more recent dealings with swine (which extends far beyond Egypt’s rash reaction), it is us, as a culture that is possessed. We are a society that is possessed by fear and being possessed by fear always ends in death.

The days following the swine flu outbreak from Mexico were a newsmaker’s dream and an opportunity for our culture of fear to kick it into high gear. A new, hybrid flu that was unheard of with a catchy name, and an increasing death count—what more could the networks ask for? We were then all witnesses and participants in a quickly escalating panic.

Why did alarm spread so fast even though this flu turned out to be nowhere near as fatal as a regular seasonal flu? Why were we so quick to panic? I think Frank Furedi, in his book Culture of Fear, hints at why when he reminds us that “the risks that kill you are not necessarily the ones that provoke and frighten you.” What does he mean by that? He simply means that while we are afraid of what statistically usually kills us (cancer, heart disease, and stroke) we are, as a culture, more pointedly afraid of terrorism, school shootings, pedophiles, serial killers and these new killer viruses (which, statistically, come nowhere near to the risk of the big three above).

So, again, why did panic spread so quickly over a flu that we now know was overblown? I think the answer is that, as a culture, we’ve transformed fear, like everything else, into a commodity that is bought and sold and we’ve become proficient peddlers and consumers of fear. In other words, just like sex, fear sells. And just like selling sex, marketers, advertisers and producers hold a vested interest in shaping our collective imagination and influencing our desires to line up with what they’re selling—and we’re buying.

In his book, Following Jesus in a Culture of Fear, Scott-Bader Saye makes the observation that in Scripture when we meet an angel from God, they begin their message with “fear not”. Why is that? He says he always thought that it was because angels must be such imposing and frightening figures. But there’s more to it than that. He thinks the reason they tell us to not be afraid is that the quieting of fear is required in order to hear and do what God asks of us. And I think he’s right.

Thomas Aquinas taught, eons ago, that disordered fear is a result of disordered desire. Simply put, we fear in deformed and distorted ways because our imaginations, and consequently, our desires are screwed up—which is another way of saying that we are a sinful people who can’t imagine a world of quieted fear and so we act, think, and speak accordingly.

You see, this culture of fear is all about shaping our imaginations through the various rituals that make up this culture from the ways and forms our news is disseminated to the methods with which producers market their products as the ‘safe’ alternative to their competitor’s. This is an embodied cultural reality that is practiced over and over again in order to intentionally form us to be a certain kind of people—in this case, scared.

As followers of Jesus in this culture, we are called to be a living alternative to it. Jesus, like God’s angels, told his disciples over and over again, “fear not”. As the church, our liturgy is all about shaping our imaginations through the rituals that make up this alternative culture of the church. Nowhere is this more clearly, visibly and physically true than in our practice of the Eucharist.

eucharistic-wafers1

The Eucharist is an embodied reality that is practiced over and over again in order to intentionally form us to be a certain kind of people. It is the act of the church whereby it remembers who she is as follower of a crucified and risen Lord. So, it is in the ritual practice of the Eucharist that we learn that death is not the worst thing that can happen to us—which puts us deeply at odds with this predominant culture of fear which feeds off this fear of death.

As Bader-Saye notes, this isn’t about telling ourselves not to fear. Our fears are primal, overwhelming and overpowering. We can’t just tell ourselves to feel less fear—that would be disingenuous. What we need is for our desires and our fears to be re-ordered, or rather, rightly ordered. In other words, our overwhelming fears need themselves to be overwhelmed by something bigger and better. That is what we recognize and practice in the Eucharist. In consuming Jesus we are consumed into the body of Christ; we are consumed into a wonderful adventure where our fears are rightly ordered because we know this story to be ultimately hopeful and not tragic.

So what, in the end, of the pigs? It is our task, as those people whose imaginations are shaped and formed in the Eucharist to embody that imagination in our world through practices that upend the culture of fear. Being a people that don’t buy into the consumerism of fear is a good first step and is part and parcel of our commission as followers of Jesus in our world. We ought to be God’s disciplined people in a scared world—a people who practice hospitality to strangers, who love enemies, who bring gentleness to violence, a people who, in our day to day lives, are dispossessed of the demons of fear and filled with God’s Spirit of peace.

Can Stingy Churches Be Missional Congregations?

by .

countingcashI’m watching as the pastor in a megachurch prepares to receive the Sunday offering. This is a “prosperity” church where you have only to claim your pile of riches on Sunday to receive it on Monday-where being a consumer is not a systemic evil but a divine right.

Food for judgment. But a lifelong missionary, now a member, says to me, “This is the most generous church I have ever been in!” I’m watching for it. The pastor speaks. He says three things. First, “prosperity” is not luxury but having more than you need. Second, for believers our true wealth lies in our relationship with God, even when material blessings slip through our fingers.

Third, he reminds that the economy has brought hard times to many. Then he asks us to take a second envelope from the pew rack, insert money or a cheque, then give it to someone who is in need. I wonder how many people follow through.

Upon reflection, I see in this moment of offering first, the total comfort of the pastor to talk about money; and second, the total acceptance of the people to hear it, and to respond. I am transported back to my own childhood in the Pentecostal church where money is seamlessly interwoven with praise, preaching and piety. At the age of 15, I give my eighty cents tithe on a monthly government Family Allowance cheque of $8. What is happening in this middle class megachurch is in a way not so different from my rural Maritime church-whether poor or wealthy, we honour God with the first fruits of our labour, and God will supply our needs.

My eventual leap into the Anglican family was thick with cultural difference, including attitudes to money. I soon realized that money was a deeply private matter, mentioned perfunctorily once a year at “pledge time,” and giving was measured carefully to just meet the budget presented by the finance committee. The “biblical tithe” was seldom mentioned, and “tithes and offerings” was as unfamiliar as hillbilly music in a cathedral, and just about as unwelcome. Of course there were stellar exceptions, but that is the point-they were exceptions.

It took me years to realize the impact of church culture. Culture is the beliefs, attitudes and behaviours that say in effect, “this is who we are” and “this is how we do things.” Desired change in either one cannot be achieved by mounting interesting programs alone. Programs are an important delivery system, but cannot by themselves change the culture of a congregation.

Back to money and church. What I encountered in my new church family was a cultural phenomenon of middle class North America. As long ago as 1929, H. Richard Niebuhr named it-I was now part of “a bourgeoisie whose conflicts are over and which has passed into the quiet waters of assured income” [cited in Durall, 45]. The effect of these “quiet waters” is predictable and discernible. Our money is ours, not yours or even God’s. We give as we choose, not out of duty, compulsion or imposed scale. We are offended by money talk outside the liturgical rhythm of the fall pledge drive, like the woman in my former congregation who was upset when I preached a sermon on money in June instead of October.

Of course there is more money talk these days because we are a shrinking and aging church in the midst of mounting maintenance costs for equally aging buildings. There is an increasing urgency on the part of leaders who are aware of our mainline culture, and some are finally ready to give up some of our entrenched practices which seem like debilitating cultural baggage.

Now to our question-does this stingy and measured attitude to money hinder a congregation from being missional? To put it differently, can a congregation be truly missional without being generous? My preliminary conclusion is that it may be possible, but it is likely as difficult as getting a camel through the eye of a needle.

Two fundamental reasons for the difficulty come to mind. As already mentioned, mainline Christians are mostly rather secure middle-class folk. The older generation is particularly committed to our cultural institutions, while the younger generation is more personally and consumer motivated. This is not a critique of middle class Canada (I am part of it, after all) but is intended to point out how this cultural status affects our attitude to money. The second reason is that the older generation, which warms most of our pews and gives the most money, responds best to the needs of the institution. For them it is hard to give beyond the needs displayed on the annual income-expense pie chart. Patterns of giving that stretch far beyond church upkeep are understandably difficult.

A missional church will call forth much more from its members than is currently expected or received in most of our mainline congregations, and at every level. But in order to achieve these changes, the culture of the congregation must be changed. We need generous congregations that will embody the character and spirit necessary to respond to the larger challenge of the gospel.

I have no magic wand, and consider myself to have been only partly successful in accomplishing this goal in my own parish ministry. But the following guidelines may serve as preliminary pointers, if not a detailed map, for moving forward.

1. Make every effort to break through the cultural glass ceiling of silence regarding money. This will take more courage than most of our pastors have the stomach for. It will require finding creative and effective ways to incorporate the subject of money in sermons, teaching, and decision-making processes. It will call for involving more laity who share your views.

2. Address the spiritual benefits of giving, not just the moral “ought.” This is a challenge because many of our pastors (1) do not believe in tithing as a New Testament principle, (2) are unconvinced that there is a “spiritual law” of giving, and (3) do not think that there is any connection between generous giving and an enriching personal faith.

3. Shun the dichotomy (spiritual apartheid?) between those with more of the world’s goods and the materially poor. Jesus made a stunning observation for the religious leaders in the synagogue when the widow gave her last penny. Rather than rushing to protect her from her recklessness, he praised her example of sacrificial generosity-not to mention the stinging blow he dealt to the hypocritical onlookers. To deprive the poor of the blessing of giving is to score a moral and spiritual indignity upon them.

4. Preach and teach both the macro and the micro dimensions of giving. That is, preaching macro would include the belief that (1) all that we are and have belongs ultimately to God, who provides the good things of life on loan, and (2) giving is one of God’s ways of employing his followers in the world. We give generously for evangelism because we believe that every person deserves to know God’s gracious offer of salvation and fullness of life in Jesus. And we give for the alleviation of pain and poverty in this world because we know that our resources and ministry are God’s way of giving witness to a new world. In other words, biblical generosity means sharing the Good News as well as our resources.

Preaching micro is making the message relevant and real in your own congregation. The best of preaching motivationally will address both head and heart. What would it take to create such a climate of generosity in our churches that people would find it hard to keep their hands off their wallets when a Kingdom vision is cast? What would it take to bring our message home with the kind of excitement described by one visitor to a 10,000 member megachurch: “a cup of designer coffee with lightning bolts coming out of it” [Durall, 26]? Our calling is to help people see that giving generously for God’s work is not only right but desirable.

5. Work with the symbiotic relationship between giving to God and giving missionally. Research shows that just giving to worthwhile outreach projects does not create a culture of generous giving. We first seek to form disciples who live out the truth that everything we have belongs to God. But opportunities to give are important means by which we grasp the reality and blessing that comes from giving.

6. Do not be afraid to appeal for sacrificial giving. Our consumer culture is not accustomed to depriving itself of its wants. But for Kingdom purposes, the decision to delay trading in the family car or postponing a kitchen renovation becomes a moment for weighing the sacrifice factor. As Bill Hybels says, be bold in asking for money, since most will likely end up spending it on frivolous things anyway.

7. Enlist laity in the culture change. Observe those lay persons who already show signs of a generous spirit. Do not limit yourself to those who have more money to give. Find ways to raise their visibility in the congregation. Give them opportunities to share their testimony, especially the ways God has blessed them. Ask elected leaders (wardens and church board) to lead by example-commit to tithing or have a plan to work toward it through increased proportional giving.

Churches are never just about bricks and mortar. They are either weekly comfort stations for passive believers, or they are hospitals for the sick, redemptive centres for the sinner, and launching platforms for sharing God’s good news from the neighbourhood to the farthest continent. The former takes only a little money to keep the doors open. The latter is secured by a divine purpose, a global vision and lots of money. Whether or not we feel the pain of the sacrifice depends entirely upon the angle of vision and disposition of the heart. Miracles are not always instantaneous. This one will take a minimum of five years.

REFERENCE

Michael Durall, Creating Congregations of Generous People (Washington, DC: Alban Institute, 1999.

  • Get a Good Idea once a month

    Get the Good Ideas e-newsletter monthly on how to share your faith and build up the people around you. It’s completely free and our gift to you.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.