Thoughts on Integrating Faith, Politics, and Public Policy

There are two things one does not talk about in polite company, religion and politics.  I happen to have a passion for both, and to various degrees, my professional life has moved in both circles.  Integrating these passions well then, is something I care about, and that leads to the question of how that should be done.

My goal here is not to set out a treatise for all people at all times.  Rather, I just want to share some thoughts based on my journey.

On the one hand, I do not think there should be a separation of church and state that extends to one’s own soul.  Nor do I see the state as the primary vehicle for extending Christ’s reign on earth. How then should a Christian live an integrated life when it comes to religion and politics?  And if I don’t see the state as the primary vehicle for extending Christ’s reign on earth, why care about it all?  I think the prophet Jeremiah gave a beautiful answer to this question, when he addressed the Jews who had been carried away into exile. He said, “seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.”

Scripture on Judging Others

There is a tension in scripture on the use of the word "judge."

For example, John 7:24, and many other similar passages say things like, "Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.”
 
While in contrast, Romans 14:4 says, "Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand... You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat."

And yet, 1 Corinthians 6:2 says: "Do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?"

This all seems like it could be a problem.  Taking a look at the full context of each of those passages helps, and I think the Apostle James offers further assistance. Judging rightly is closely related to teaching, admonishing, and loving others well, and James has this to say about teachers: "Not many of you should become teachers (which inevitably involves making judgements), because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. [Remember] we all stumble in many ways." James 3.

And Paul says this: "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others." Philippians 2:1-4

In my judgement, many Christians are like this blogger, who writes at length on why it is ok to judge others, without looking at the tension in scripture, or talking about how to do so well.  (He lists nearly every passage that says judge, but never looks at Romans 14.)

Exercising discernment, care, concern, teaching, or judgement without humility is an effort doomed to fail, and too often, that is exactly what happens. (For me in particular.)  That is one of the reasons non-Christians, and former Christians, and Christians who often don't identify as Christians, and our culture in general disdains judgement so much; they rarely experience it combined with humility and graciousness.

The Kingdom of God is the Gospel

I recently read an interesting article, Is the Mega Church the New Liberalism.  It focused on culture, gospel, megachurches and compromise with a focus on the issue of homosexuality.

As I'll summarize here, I don't think compromise on the issues of homosexuality or liberalism is the issue for the contemporary megachurch, rather the over-arching issue is American consumerism and individualism.  That in turn affects sexual identity, politics, and many other personal habits which may or may not be healthy.

My argument is that one reaches that conclusion by taking a close look at the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and frankly, how one defines the word gospel.

In Mark 1:15 Jesus says, “The time has come, The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!”

In this passage, the "good news" or gospel is directly tied to the Kingdom of God.  In turn, a critical reading of Christ's teachings on the Kingdom of God tends to create revolutionary changes that go beyond personal salvation.  On numerous occasions Jesus avoids giving a singular narrow definition of the Kingdom of God, but instead says, "The Kingdom of God is like..." and then goes on to share a parable which often included radical transformation and sacrifice.  Consequently, the Gospel or "good news" should not be defined narrowly by some selected writings of Paul (for example, what some have called the Roman Road, or Four Spiritual Laws), but in combination with the whole teaching of Christ, which is generally not in contradiction with Paul, but rather gives depth and width to those short summaries.

Reflecting on Trayvon's tragedy and our ongoing need for racial reconciliation

In our national racial dialog, I think we need to distinguish between the systemics of injustice and the facts in any given case.  Yesterday, CNN published some new allegations on the Trayvon tragedy which raised some questions for me. (Note I did not say new facts.  We just don't know what all the facts are.)

In the systemics of prejudice and injustice we have so far to go.  Those that know me, know I am deeply concerned about injustice and prejudice...  individually and collectively.  The reaction to the Trayvon tragedy is completely understandable.  Everyday, children of color go missing, and too often the media doesn't give a damn, something in contrast to when a cheerleaderesq white girl disappears. This time the media did give it some attention, and that is a good thing.

But the fact is, we just don't know exactly what actually happened on the evening of February 26.  And until we do, a rush to judgement doesn't advance our national dialog on race.  Too many black men have been falsely accused for us to forget the consequences of a rush to judgement.

However, what we do know is that typically, the death of a white child is given a significant amount of resources, whereas in this case it appears the police did not give the case the investigative resources it deserved, begging the question, why?

If they did indeed fail to give Trayvon's death the attention it deserved, that is a grave injustice.  And one that ought to be protested vehemently.  Trayvon was not killed because he was wearing a hoodie.

However, acknowledging our collective failure to achieve an equal common good for all.  Acknowledging that we are not doing enough to solve this problem.  Acknowledging that police do not investigate every homicide equally and that racial stereotypes play a role.  None-the-less we have to stop and ask, is that what happened here?  I'm not sure we can know that; yet.

When we do, as the prophet Micah said, may there be justice, mercy, and humility.  And if the facts support the outrage, may there be protests.  May the perpetrators both of the actions and the inactions be brought to justice.  But more importantly, may there be solutions and dialog, honesty and truth telling, forgiveness and efforts toward our ongoing need for racial reconciliation; for reconciliation is not just an event, but an ongoing life-long process.

On Rob Bell's Love Wins and Other Thoughts

Recently there has been quite the brew-ha-ha over Rob Bell’s new book, Love Wins.  Here, I want to share some of the Biblical passages that cause me to be cautiously open to Bell’s take on these things.  Open in the sense of being willing to converse.

What we preach is clear, Christ crucified. (1 Corinthians 1:23)  But when we do theology, we are venturing into a speculative human enterprise. 

Why Christians Should Support a Mosque near Ground Zero

More than once I have heard stories of churches who were denied the opportunity to build a worship center where they deemed fit. Sometimes there was a hidden agendas, sometimes there were legitimate zoning issues. Regardless, they felt that their freedoms, their religious freedom no less, was being restricted.

Christians of Every Stripe Calling for Immigration Reform

You may be surprised to find out that churches of nearly every denomination and tradition are speaking out with one voice on immigration.

Together they are calling on the Federal Government to reform our present immigration laws.

Consistently, they are calling for three things.

• That immigrants be treated fairly, humanly, with dignity and respect.

• That the rule of law be respected, and shaped to meet the above standards.

• That we recognize that we ourselves are immigrants; that as Christians we come from a tradition of immigration, and that we therefor head the words of scripture, welcoming, loving and caring for those in need, including the immigrant, regardless of legal status.
  

Following are the statements on immigration of no less than eleven diverse christian organizations. Catholics, Evangelicals(2), Lutherans(2), Methodists, Presbyterians, Southern Baptists, and Episcopalians.

My take on potential global warming.

I'm not a scientist. Neither are most of you. So what to do about all the scientific claims on global warming.

Here is what not to do. Don't think that this issue is in any way actually related to any other issue that has become partisan.

I truly don't understand why virtually everyone that thinks abortion is wrong, also thinks global warming is false. Or why so many who think global warming is true, think the war in Iraq was a mistake from the beginning. One should be able to study an issue and come to a conclusion on that particular issue, irrespective of other issues. To me, the fact that this has become so partisan speaks to what I guess is obvious, the deep divide and mistrust that exists in this country. It is this latter point, as much as anything, that I find so troubling. We should be able to listen to people who are experts in their field, without judging them on every other issue, which they may or may not be qualified as an expert on.

So back to global warming. I chimed in on a facebook discussion page hosted by my denomination, the CRC, here.

A Bible Thumping Agnostic

There is a pretty interesting book coming out, and the title says it all.

Good Book: The Bizarre, Hilarious, Disturbing, Marvelous, and Inspiring Things I Learned When I Read Every Single Word of the Bible

Written by David Plotz, a writer for Slate, an online news magazine, it is a compilation of his multi-year blog journey through the Bible.

In his blog entry on the book he says this: Maybe it doesn't make sense for most of us to read the whole Bible. After all, there are so many difficult, repellent, confusing, and boring passages. Why not skip them and cherry-pick the best bits? After spending a year with the good book, I've become a full-on Bible thumper. Everyone should read it—all of it! In fact, the less you believe, the more you should read. Let me explain why, in part by telling how reading the whole Bible has changed me. Read more here.



David's journey through the Bible didn't change his agnostic outlook, but he did learn to love the book many of us cherish. For a review from a Christian perspective check out Church Central's Book Review.

Why do I bring all of this up. If Christians want to be engaged in God's world, we have to understand how that world thinks. This is as good a tool as any. Furthermore, what David says in that video about understanding the complicated characters of the Bible on their own terms, without the window dressing if you will, of sermons and commentaries, is spot on.

Using Bible study tools is good, but I think the place to start is with a naked reading, the whole Bible as it really is, the good, the bad and the absolutely disgusting.

And you took your sons and daughters whom you bore to me and sacrificed them as food to the idols. Was your prostitution not enough? You slaughtered my children and sacrificed them to the idols. In all your detestable practices and your prostitution you did not remember the days of your youth, when you were naked and bare, kicking about in your blood. - Ezekiel 16:20-22

Beleving : A Short History

One of my friends, Mike, sent me this link: Biggest Intellectual Fights of All Time with the following question.

David,

I had a conversation with the guy who sent me it. I asked if he agreed with me that the Socrates part was slightly mistaken. I explained that the Sophists believed truth was not absolute but established by persuasion or argument (or truth is constructed by language as Post Modernists would say, basically the same thing as there is nothing new under the sun.) The headline reads something like "Socrates vs. the Gods, logic wins". It seems that logic lost if people can just make up whatever truth they want.

He went on to say that our senses can deceive us and truth can't really be known.

Thoughts? How would you take that conversation? It went out ok, I learned from him and hopefully he heard some of what I said. Hit me back when you can.

Peace

This is how I responded.

Mike,

There used to be powers that controlled what people thought. In centuries gone past, the perception was that to run afoul of the church seriously put one in danger of hell. Something similar happens today in terms of being "politically correct". To run afoul of these norms has dire political or professional consequences; though many feel free to ignore these norms and live outside of their power, some for the better, others for not. (Commitments to a particular religion on the good side, but sexest or racist jokes, the KKK, and things like that on the bad side...) Cultures in every age have always had their norms and ways of controlling people, and conversely those that chose not to be controlled; sometimes for better, "the earth really is round", sometimes for worse, "sex whenever, wherever is a great idea"

I think logic and science still play a huge role, but their scope has shrunk. In answering questions like "what should we do about terrorism, or the global financial meltdown?" you will probably use logic, and quite possibly some kind of economic, or political science.

Unfortunatly, the church at the time of the enlightenment had WAY overstepped it's bounds, beveling itself to be the sole owner of ALL truth. Imagine if the church had embraced science and logic as complimentary to theology and philosophy. It didn't and we reap the consequences to this day. Eventually it did, but by then it was too late. Today the church continues to use science and logic when most people have quit using these tools to determine spiritual truth. (more on that in a second)

Science and logic eventually replaced the church as lords of authority. Unfortunately, many in that community make the same mistake the church did, and imagine that those gods can control all knowledge. However, most people in today's culture recognize that not everything falls under the authority of science and logic. Consequently, when it comes to religion and spirituality, people feel free to believe whatever they want. Convincing people to accept a particular authority in these areas requires spiritual authority, not usually the authority of science and logic.

Sincerely, David

Don't Imitate - Lead

Recently, some "Christian" reality shows have hit the airways on various cable TV channels. While the message is positive, and at first glance relevant and integrated to the culture around them, ("punk" Christian skaters sharing Christ by all means necessary, or an inside look at a Christian rock festival) a closer look revels nothing more than a cheep knock-off of a lousy medium, not so reality TV.



One of the skaters said it best, "We don't not use all of these platforms and avenues that make up society (to share the gospel)" Key word: use. It's not creative, it's not original, it's predictable, old and tired.

As Christians we should be leading in the creative arts. Our God is a creative God, and he calls us to create, not copy old worn out story lines. In contrast the Christian community spends much of its time trying to catch up with the culture, and ends up arriving late and looking stupid. We are that guy at the party trying way too hard to look cool.

I love audio book downloads from my library

So I recently discovered that I can download audio books from my local library's web site, and guess what, I like it a lot!

For quite a while now, whenever I go on a trip I try and bring an audio book or two. This last time, I decided to look into whether there were downloads available and if they could be transferred to my mp3 player. They were, and I did.

I like to learn, I don't like to physically read. With audio books you can do simple multitasking while enjoying the latest non-fiction or an ancient classic. Plus it's fast, they don't stop the way you or I tend to do when we are actually reading.

Look at this list I have listened to in just the past few weeks. There is no way I could read all these books, but via audio downloads...

• War and Peace - by Tolstoy (just started)
  
• Hearing God's Voice - by Blackaby
• Beyond Band of Brothers – The War Memoirs of Major Winters. – by Winters
• The Problem of Pain – by C.S. Lewis
• God's Politics - Why the right gets it wrong and the left doesn't get it. - by Wallis
• Conspiracy of Fools - The rise and fall of Enron - by Eichenwald
• Three Cups of Tea – One mans mission to start schools in Afghanistan. – by Mortenson
• Legacy of Ashes - The history of the CIA - by Weiner
• Dispatches from the Edge - A Memoir - by Anderson Cooper

(Someone should really pay me for this post, a blatant advertisement.)

Decesions Decesions

Who to vote for tomorrow is the decision in front of many of us. And for the Christ follower, I don't think it's an easy one. Two candidates and two parties each seek my vote, each representing Christ in some ways, and assailing him and his creation in others. So, who to vote for?

To help me make my decision, I'm looking at what some Christian organizations have to say, specifically the Sojourners - Voting Guide (Left), Focus on the Family - Citizen Link - (Right) and Christianity Today - How to Pick a President Article (centrist) as well as the candidates themselves.

Having looked over the material of these organizations, as well as the candidates, I think what I'm going to do is simply list the candidates and make a list of the top pros and cons for each one, from my perspective.

John McCain pro

• Pro-Life on the rights of the unborn child.

• Conservative judiciary philosophy. I believe in writing laws written by the people's representatives, and/or amending the constitution, not legislating from the bench. (Though both the "Right" and the "Left" are guilty of this from time to time.)
  

• Will divide power between Democrats in Congress and a Republican in the White House, which among other things should limit spending.
  

• Centrist (Examples: emigration, torture)

• Will limit spending. (Hopefully. W certainly hasn't, but that is primarily because with a Republican congress for much of the time, there were no checks and balances.)
  

Barack Obama pro

• Pro-Life on capital punishment, war and genocide.

• Comprehensive health care plan addresses Biblical issues of justice and may put the nation on a better economic footing. People absolutely should not die simply because they can not afford their medicine or a procedure. Additionally this will set the nation on a better footing economically, because it will allow American multinational cooperations as well as small businesses to compete on an even playing field with their international competitors.

• Has an appropriate view of Americas place in the world, and understands that God loves the whole world.
  

• Will limit defense spending.
• This may put us on a better footing economically, depending on if the savings get spent or not.
• The chief threats to our "way of life" as well as our ability to help the less fortunate is economic, as we have seen in the last few months. Yes we need to defend ourseleves and fight terrorism. However we do not need the ginormous profit driven military industrial complex that the Bush administration has enriched at the expense of economic security and the poor and needy.
  

• Understands the Biblical mandate to care for creation.
  
  

John McCain con

• Many economic policies cater to the wealthy at the expense of the poor. This is a "values" issue.

• Choice of campaign style does more to tear down, and caters to an "us vs them" mentality, which is inappropriate.

• Choice of Sarah Palin was a poor choice because there are others who are much more qualified. Even from a conservative perspective, there are much smarter people out there, who are just as conservative. This choice placed his campaign to become president ahead of the good of the country, and that is a moral problem.

Barack Obama con

• Association with some aspects of the far Left.
• Homosexual agenda
• Secular Anti-Faith agenda
• Overly socialistic agenda, that while well intentioned will not work economically. (We must pay for whatever "good" things we want to do, and stop putting it on the backs of future generations.)
  

• In conjunction with a Democratic congress will provide no checks to spending in general or a far left agenda.

For both candidates I could list things already addressed as pro's for one candidate, as con's for the other since they don't address them, but that would just be redundant.

So who to pick? - Fortunately I still have over 24 hours to decide.

: )

Let me just say this in closing. The country will be just fine on November 5th, and Lord willing will be a better place to live four years latter, no matter who gets elected.

I hear a number of people say they don't like either candidate. I like them both. Barack's choice to work with people in the inner city, and John's 5 years in a prison camp, gives me confidence that both of these men "get it", an while you are I may not agree with every policy position they hold, I think they are both fundamentally seeking the good of the nation.

Red Sex, Blue Sex

Different parts of the country have different attitudes about sex... and many other things for that matter. (no kidding) How those attitudes translate into actions is the rather interesting story. One highlighted by the The New Yorker in their recent story Red Sex, Blue Sex. Below are excerpts, but here is my take.

As is the case with so many other things, Evangelicals generally need to shut up until they can put up. But that's in general.

What about the reality of growing up in a hyper sexual world? If like me, you find the mantra of "though shall not" incredibly ineffective, what should replace it? How do we as Christians learn to speak comfortably and effectively about one of God's greatest gifts? I don't have any answers off the top of my head as I write this. But I think it's a matter worth discussing if we are going to save marriage, not from homosexuals, but from ourseleves. (guess which states have the highest divorce rates?)

One thing in the story stood out above all else for me: Religious belief apparently does make a potent difference in behavior for one group of evangelical teen-agers: those who score highest on measures of religiosity—such as how often they go to church, or how often they pray at home. But many Americans who identify themselves as evangelicals, and who hold socially conservative beliefs, aren’t deeply observant.

Who knew - prayer works. ; ) (That one is for you parents.)

Excerpts
During the campaign, the media has largely respected calls to treat Bristol Palin’s pregnancy as a private matter. But the reactions to it have exposed a cultural rift that mirrors America’s dominant political divide. Social liberals in the country’s “blue states” tend to support sex education and are not particularly troubled by the idea that many teen-agers have sex before marriage, but would regard a teen-age daughter’s pregnancy as devastating news. And the social conservatives in “red states” generally advocate abstinence-only education and denounce sex before marriage, but are relatively unruffled if a teen-ager becomes pregnant, as long as she doesn’t choose to have an abortion.

Religion is a good indicator of attitudes toward sex, but a poor one of sexual behavior, and that this gap is especially wide among teen-agers who identify themselves as evangelical.

Religious belief apparently does make a potent difference in behavior for one group of evangelical teen-agers: those who score highest on measures of religiosity—such as how often they go to church, or how often they pray at home. But many Americans who identify themselves as evangelicals, and who hold socially conservative beliefs, aren’t deeply observant.

Like other American teens, young evangelicals live in a world of Internet porn, celebrity sex scandals, and raunchy reality TV, and they have the same hormonal urges that their peers have. Yet they come from families and communities in which sexual life is supposed to be forestalled until the first night of a transcendent honeymoon. Regnerus writes, “In such an atmosphere, attitudes about sex may formally remain unchanged (and restrictive) while sexual activity becomes increasingly common. This clash of cultures and norms is felt most poignantly in the so-called Bible Belt.” Symbolic commitment to the institution of marriage remains strong there, and politically motivating—hence the drive to outlaw gay marriage—but the actual practice of it is scattershot.

In 2004, the states with the highest divorce rates were Nevada, Arkansas, Wyoming, Idaho, and West Virginia (all red states in the 2004 election); those with the lowest were Illinois, Massachusetts, Iowa, Minnesota, and New Jersey. The highest teen-pregnancy rates were in Nevada, Arizona, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Texas (all red); the lowest were in North Dakota, Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, and Maine (blue except for North Dakota).

Evangelicals could start, perhaps, by trying to untangle the contradictory portrayals of sex that they offer to teen-agers. In the Shelby Knox documentary, a youth pastor, addressing an assembly of teens, defines intercourse as “what two dogs do out on the street corner—they just bump and grind awhile, boom boom boom.” Yet a typical evangelical text aimed at young people, “Every Young Woman’s Battle,” by Shannon Ethridge and Stephen Arterburn, portrays sex between two virgins as an ethereal communion of innocent souls: “physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual pleasure beyond description.” Neither is the most realistic or helpful view for a young person to take into marriage, as a few advocates of abstinence acknowledge.

As the Reverend Rick Marks, a Southern Baptist minister, recently pointed out in a Florida newspaper, “Evangelicals are fighting gay marriage, saying it will break down traditional marriage, when divorce has already broken it down.” Conservatives may need to start talking as much about saving marriages as they do about, say, saving oneself for marriage.

Missional Defination in Art and Scripture

Philippians 2:6-7
Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being.

Matthew 28:18
Jesus came and told his disciples, “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Therefore, go...

John 20:21
As the Father has sent me, so I am sending you.

Mark 2:16
But when the teachers of religious law who were Pharisees saw him eating with tax collectors and other sinners, they asked his disciples, “Why does he eat with such scum?

1 Corinthians 9:22
I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

A word of explanation
Rich over at Blindbegger, as well as many others I am finding, feel that the word missional is loosing it's meaning. Consequently he has called for a synchroblog event, happening today, to discuss the defination of the word missional.

Since I'm sure other people will do a better job than I at putting pen to paper, what you see above is my contribution to a working defination. Those pictures were not chosen randomly, rather, I believe they each carry great meaning. The word missional means the life of we who are the church centered on three things: Jesus, The Mission of God, and a sense of community; meaning an awareness of the interrelatedness of humanity, and the need to be in relationship.

The first picture obviously depicts Jesus, the center of all things, but just as important is the fact that in this picture Christ is incarnate in and for a particular ethnic community. There is nothing wrong with a blond hair/blue eyed Jesus'... in Scandinavia, or any community that is truly that homogeneous. (though I would question how truly homogeneous communities that think they are, are.) Jesus was God made flesh, for a particular community, the Jews in his historical case. We too must seek to reflect Christ in our particular communities, authentically engaging people where they are at.

People should not have to cross cultural boundaries to come to Christ. Unfortunately on it's worst days, the size and weight of the evangelical community has created its own sub-culture, one allian to those not initiated. It is a subculture wholly un-Christ like in that it serves as a barrier to those on the outside. We don't GO as Christ taught us, we say COME; and when your just like me you can belong... if you take this class and pass the test. (Of course there are good days too. Take a look at who is actually rebuilding New Orleans.)

The second picture is meant to convey a sense of "going", or being on the move. It's an added bonus, that in the picture the world seems to be passing the church by. How true. To avoid this we have to evaluate how we spend out time. How many relationships do we have with people outside the church? And how much of our time goes to those people? Jesus left the comfort of church err... heaven, and went to where people were at, usually the "sick" not those who are "well"... (in church?) (This is an area I certainly struggle in.)

The final picture is meant to convey a sense of community and relationship. To love our neighbor as ourselves demands an awareness of our communities both local and global, and an understanding of how what I do impacts others. The teachings of Jesus demand lived beliefs that impact the communities we are a part of.

In contrast, much of the church lives with a dualism that acts as if A) doesn't impact B). Ironically the church often talks about breaking down this dualism, and in some ways does. But several Biblical concepts, justice and equality in particular, have been given very little attention. Instead, we who are the church have reflected a greater commitment to a kind of capitalism which is unencumbered with the ethics of Christ or a concern for those most in need. Sure we give of our time and money. But then our spending and investing habits, and the actions of our elected representatives (on both sides of the aisle) undo all the good we were tying to do, illustrating the dualism we are talking about.

Having said all of this, I am concerned that we who are authentically using the word missional (i.e. not just tagging it on to a very attractional thing.) none the less struggle to live it out. I certainly do, especially in the area of economic justice. There is a real danger that all we are talking about is degrees of separation on the wrong side of the equation. Do we really want to trumpet Jesus as our guide and example if we struggle as much as we do to live up to his over-the-top example?

Take these pictures for what their worth, and by all means, feel free to critique. For a fuller defination see the links below.

Synchroblog Participants

Alan Hirsch . Alan Knox . Andrew Jones . Barb Peters . Bill Kinnon . Brad Brisco . Brad Grinnen . BradSargent . BrotherMaynard . Bryan Riley . Chad Brooks . Chris Wignall . Cobus Van Wyngaard . Dave DeVries . David Best . DavidFitch . David Wierzbicki . DoSi . Doug Jones . Duncan McFadzean . Erika Haub . Grace . Jamie Arpin-Ricci . Jeff McQuilkin . John Smulo . Jonathan Brink . JR Rozko . Kathy Escobar . Len Hjalmarson . Makeesha Fisher . Malcolm Lanham . Mark Berry . Mark Petersen . Mark Priddy . Michael Crane . Michael Stewart . Nick Loyd . Patrick Oden . Peggy Brown . Phil Wyman . Richard Pool . Rick Meigs . Rob Robinson . Ron Cole . Scott Marshall . Sonja Andrews . Stephen Shields . Steve Hayes . Tim Thompson . Thom Turner

Oasis (3) - Missional?

So this Sunday will be our first preview service for Oasis, our new church plant. Things are kind of crazy right now, but I need a break, so I thought I would share some of the mental gymnastics I am going through with being missional in a semi-rural/semi-suburban context, in Nebraska.

It’s my impression that a certain number of people in this area want the attractional thing. Want church to be a place to go to meet Jesus. Now if missional is absolutely the only way to do things, well then you don’t compromise. The problem I have is that I don’t think everyone woke up January 1st, 2000 and suddenly became postmodern. On the contrary, I get the impression that many un-churched people still think that when life is falling apart, the institutional church is where you go to get God.

I don’t agree with that at all. But because I agree with a missional perspective, I’m willing to work with people and their misconceived ideas about church, in the same way I am willing to be in relationship regardless of any number of other things we might disagree about. Some aspects of attractional can be missional for those in a modern 20th century context. We are going to gather to worship together. What am I going to say when someone's life is falling apart, and they "come to church." "Sorry I can't help you, let me set up a non-appointment with you at the bar so we can do this more incarnationally." Having said tha, what leans me to the missional side is when I see churches going uber attractional, assisting in the sin of a self centered world view, simply giving people what they want, be that the "uncompromised gospel" or anything else.

What were doing in Waverly is a missional thing, wrapped in an attractional shell. Yah were advertising, inviting people to church and what not. But that is where attractional stops. If I had my way, our buzz line would be “It’s not about you.” (Or me.) On Sunday we are simply going to gather together to worship our Lord and Savior, and btw your invited. If some people are attracted to that, fine. But when it comes to lived values. It will be about missional. Keeping it simple, the values of Jesus, going to where people are at, serving our community, in community, doing life together.

Needless to say, this will make none of the true believers on either side happy, but I believe that it corresponds to a key tenant of missional, which is to be true to your zip code, not your friends zip code.

Talking about this on paper, kind of easy compared to the challenge of living it out. That is the part that really scares me, and where I feel the least prepared.

Missional - Overused and Missunderstood?

Rick over at Blind Beggar believes that the word missional is getting overused. So he is calling for a SynchroBlog about the defination of missional on June 23. You can see who else is talking about this here. I'll definitely be participating.

In the mean time, here is my defination in three words: Jesus - Community - Go.

Juno

Just watched Juno. It's really good if your ok with a certain amount of profanity and coarse joking. (it fits the character) It is so stinking real. I don't mean the pregnancy, I won't presume to be an expert on that, although the baby was shown as rather bloody right after being delivered. I mean the circumstances, the feelings, and all the rest. Specifically the challenge of dealing with a teenage pregnancy in a normal kind of way, one that isn't over dramatized, (you won't see this one on the Hallmark channel anytime soon) and in fact is very funny.

As for the spiritual angel. I simply like identifying with real people in real life. Jesus lived a real life with real laughter and real problems. The film Juno animates life... warts, laughter and all. Additionally, it represents a pro-life view, without being an infomercial.

White Like Me

In the last 10 or 20 years there has been a shift in the minority community from focusing on ways in which we are all similar, to the ways that we are uniquely and beautifully distinct.

When I was first made aware of this, I had to ask the question, does this apply to me, a white male as well? Do I get to celebrate my whiteness or maleness? And does even asking this cause people to question my commitment to social justice and breaking down stereotypes?

Some people may have a problem with those questions, but they shouldn't, and good news, there is a blog that celebrates that fact called Stuff White People Like. Apparently it has skyrocketed in popularity, only being created in the last year or so.

The Gospel According to Huckabee

Huckabee wins the award for showing Evangelicals what not to do in public discourse, loading up his speeches with references to Biblical stories. I can understand public policy that is Biblicaly based, but it's just bad communication to be constantly referencing Biblical stories that people are not familiar with. Want to know just how not familiar people are with Biblical language? Check out this story on npr.

If you disagree, keep in mind, Huckabee is running for President, not head of the Southern Baptist convention. If he actually wants to be president, he needs to speak clearly to all Americans.

The Gospel According to Huckabee (excerpts)

In November, as Huckabee surged in the polls, a student at Liberty University asked him what was driving his startling success. Huckabee responded, "It's the same power that helped a little boy with two fish and five loaves feed a crowd of 5,000 people."

We played the tape for Leitha Anthony, who was waiting to go into the Washington Monument. Did she know what he was talking about?

"That's when Moses ... had to feed all the people, the multitude of people that left Egypt," Anthony hazarded. "That's what it was?"

For the next quiz question, we played a clip from Huckabee's Super Tuesday victory speech:

"Sometimes," the former Arkansas governor told his supporters, "one small smooth stone is even more effective than a whole lot of armor."

"Maybe something to do with the war," guessed Dan Booth, who was visiting from Alabama.

"He's talking about peace, the resolution of peace?" ventured his friend Mike Allen.

Actually, Huckabee was comparing himself to the shepherd boy David, who slayed the giant Goliath with one smooth stone right in the forehead.

Only one person knew that one — a disconcerting record as we moved into advanced "Huckabese." The next clip also came from Tuesday night's speech:

"We've also seen that the widow's mite has more effectiveness than all the gold in the world."

We asked Daria Teutonico and Richard Pettit about the widow's mite as they walked to lunch on Pennsylvania Avenue.

"I have no clue," was Teutonico's answer. "I thought a mite was a bug."

"Is it a spider?" Pettit added. They both laughed.

The widow's mite actually refers to a poor woman Jesus observed giving a small coin to God. It was all she had.