I am sitting downstairs in the Nazarene Mission Network office. I have had several papers to grade but decided to take a little time to update all of you on what God is doing here in the Philippines.
I arrived late, the rest of the team preceded me by two days. I was speaking at a Singles Retreat and didn't feel I could cancel. Since our arrival we have been working hard, playing hard, and basking in the grace of God.
We have visited a swatter camp that makes you feel inadequate. Fifteen, fourteen, and eighteen year old young people are sharing the gospel and training seminary students how to do it. They are growing the church in the midst of squalor and the joy of the Lord is evident on every face. Last night Ann and I went to their Sunday night service. it was something. They sang, gave testimonies, and asked us to speak. Wow, what an experience.
Sunday Morning Pastor Daryl and two thirds of the team went to New Hope, a 3 year old church plant. And Ann and I and Fern and Ron Hutter went to Living Water church. I preached on Esther. the pastor was a man of God that looked a lot like Moses coming off of the mountain. His face literally glowed with the grace and love of the Lord.
I have been working on installing baseboard in the main office area. APNTS (Asia Pacific Nazarene Theological Seminary) is celebrating 25 years next week and we are sprucing the place up.
Two days ago we had the privilege of being taken by canoe through an amazing canyon to a gigantic waterfall. Several of us rode a raft under the falls, the pressure was intense, but oh what an experience.
We have eaten at several wonderful restaurants in Manila, visited three malls and spent Christmas money.
But the highlight has been the people we have met. Always when I return from such a trip I am always humbled by how the third world lives and maintains a gracious, loving, and graceful spirit. I will write more later.
Blessings,
Gary
Monday, November 10, 2008
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Community Formation
Three days ago I had a great conversation which made me reflect on the value and type of communities in which I participate.
We speak of our "Sidewinder Family" and our "Gold Rush" family. But we never really looked into the dynamics of those "families." These families are composed of at least one boy about the age of 11 years and one or more parents. The Sidewinders is a traveling baseball team that's been together for over two years. The Gold Rush is a football team that's been together for three years. There are several families that overlap both of these groups.
So three days ago, one of the father's of a Gold Rush football team member was completing an assignment for a college composition class. The assignment was to interviews members of a community to find out what forms that community and what value it adds to life. Together with one other father, we discussed our values and how this experience for our boys affected us and made us want to be a part of each other's lives.
What I have realized is that we are a part of this community that is pulled together by youth sports. While youth sports can at times challenge family time, commitment to church activities, and challenge the budget, there is an opportunity to form meaningful shared bonds. We together express a desire to help our kids, and each other's kids to be good people, that is the main focus. But beyond that, we really enjoy one another's company.
Now that football is done, we have a bit of a lull. It will be interesting to see how this community will re-gather itself without or children's activities to pull us together. Will we keep up with each other, or will the tug and fragmentation of modern life keep us apart until next August when the pads and helmets start crunching and crashing again? I hope we keep in touch.
We speak of our "Sidewinder Family" and our "Gold Rush" family. But we never really looked into the dynamics of those "families." These families are composed of at least one boy about the age of 11 years and one or more parents. The Sidewinders is a traveling baseball team that's been together for over two years. The Gold Rush is a football team that's been together for three years. There are several families that overlap both of these groups.
So three days ago, one of the father's of a Gold Rush football team member was completing an assignment for a college composition class. The assignment was to interviews members of a community to find out what forms that community and what value it adds to life. Together with one other father, we discussed our values and how this experience for our boys affected us and made us want to be a part of each other's lives.
What I have realized is that we are a part of this community that is pulled together by youth sports. While youth sports can at times challenge family time, commitment to church activities, and challenge the budget, there is an opportunity to form meaningful shared bonds. We together express a desire to help our kids, and each other's kids to be good people, that is the main focus. But beyond that, we really enjoy one another's company.
Now that football is done, we have a bit of a lull. It will be interesting to see how this community will re-gather itself without or children's activities to pull us together. Will we keep up with each other, or will the tug and fragmentation of modern life keep us apart until next August when the pads and helmets start crunching and crashing again? I hope we keep in touch.
Friday, October 17, 2008
NT Wright
In this Fall's Seminary Without Walls class we are reading "What Saint Paul Really Said." Wright is able to condense and pack so much into this small, very readable book. His gift of clear, simple, and concise language means that readers don't have to wade through piles of words to get to the kernel of what he is saying. His main contention is to refute the often discussed idea that Paul was the creator of Christianity. Wright posits that Jesus was the creator of Christianity, Paul was simply a humble messenger, okay at times not so humble.
Secondly, Wright emphases that Paul's basic mission was to the pagans of his world, not to the Jews, and therefore he might have something to say to contemporary paganism. (22) Paul's message of Jesus as the true God in the midst of a polytheistic, syncretistic world is his main theme. In this vein Wright offers a different understanding and interpretation of "gospel." In the Christian religious world of today, particularly in Evangelical circles, there is a major emphasis upon personal salvation as the true meaning of gospel. Wright says that he doesn't deny the value of the "order of salvation" (41) but he says he doesn't believe that is what Paul means by the term. For Paul the idea of "gospel" or "good news" is kingdom language. It relates to the message that the long-awaited release from captivity is at hand, because the King is here. The emphasis upon Jesus as the author and King of this kingdom is powerful. Therefore, gospel is the announcement of the present and coming king. For Paul this was amazing because to "announce that YHWH was king was to announce that Caesar is not. This was the 'good news' that Isaiah's heral was called upon to proclaim." (44)
Therefore the gospel is a true story about a human life, death, and resurrecton through which the living God becomes king of the world. It is not a system of how peole get saved. The announcemtn of the gospel results in people being saved, but "the gospel" itself, strictly speaking, is the narrative proclamation of King Jesus. (45)
Chew on that for a while. More to come later.
Gary
Secondly, Wright emphases that Paul's basic mission was to the pagans of his world, not to the Jews, and therefore he might have something to say to contemporary paganism. (22) Paul's message of Jesus as the true God in the midst of a polytheistic, syncretistic world is his main theme. In this vein Wright offers a different understanding and interpretation of "gospel." In the Christian religious world of today, particularly in Evangelical circles, there is a major emphasis upon personal salvation as the true meaning of gospel. Wright says that he doesn't deny the value of the "order of salvation" (41) but he says he doesn't believe that is what Paul means by the term. For Paul the idea of "gospel" or "good news" is kingdom language. It relates to the message that the long-awaited release from captivity is at hand, because the King is here. The emphasis upon Jesus as the author and King of this kingdom is powerful. Therefore, gospel is the announcement of the present and coming king. For Paul this was amazing because to "announce that YHWH was king was to announce that Caesar is not. This was the 'good news' that Isaiah's heral was called upon to proclaim." (44)
Therefore the gospel is a true story about a human life, death, and resurrecton through which the living God becomes king of the world. It is not a system of how peole get saved. The announcemtn of the gospel results in people being saved, but "the gospel" itself, strictly speaking, is the narrative proclamation of King Jesus. (45)
Chew on that for a while. More to come later.
Gary
Monday, August 11, 2008
Musings
I am sitting on the back porch of a friend in Lynnwood, WA. Ann and I are here preparing to fly to So. California for a week-long training for Celebrate Recovery. We are beginning that ministry at College Church.
One of the challenges that the church of today faces more than anything is the loss of the 20 and 30 somethings in the church. Their reaction to "same old church" is quite startling. They desire to have an authentic encounter with God and feel that this is missing in much of what goes on in the church today. Couple that with the church's unwillingness to change to meet their need and we have a tragedy. This is one of the reasons that I have so passionately involved myself in the missional church movement coupled with the best of the emergent village material
Often people ask me "what is missional church?" The following article will provide some light. Below is a very interesting read that my friend Robin Dugall posted on his blog. He says very clearly what I would have said.
“…the missional church…is a renewal movement. I see it as a moving of God’s Spirit within the Western church at a very critical time in its history. We find ourselves (most Christians probably agree on this) in a time of decline. Churches in the West are in trouble: internal dissensions, the failure and discouragement of leadership, loss of our youth, widespread negative perceptions of Christians by outsiders, and the death of many congregations. Just the kind of dry-bones situation where the breath of the Spirit often begins to blow!
(but)…I am impatient for the transformation, and that’s where the trouble begins . . .I imagine those of us in the missional church movement sometimes sound a bit
(critical) to believers perplexed by massive changes in the church and culture, and are not sure “missional” is the way to go. They may hear the message as, “move out of the way,” “get with the program,” “admit you are wasting your time,” or something equally uncharitable. To them the missional discussion seems like just another way to “diss” the past. When missional leaders point out current problems in the church, they often appear to have an arrogant disregard for what God has already done—as if the Holy Spirit has been totally absent for the last century and nothing of eternal significance has really been accomplished! Good people thus feel attacked and undervalued, their contributions unwelcome and unneeded. I suspect most renewal movements, whether by intention or misunderstanding, have conveyed such messages.
To those who have felt attacked, I apologize. The point is not to discredit the sincere and often productive endeavors of the past, but to ask, "How can we be faithful to the gospel in the new cultural situation of the 21st century?" Of course any attempt to answer this question involves evaluation of our current situation and some level of critique of the current state of the church. (But we)…need to remind (ourselves) that if this is indeed a movement of the Spirit of God, it will make its way among the people of God with power and certainty.
Another problem many people detect in renewal movements is a prideful spirit. In the case of the missional movement some folks have sensed a triumphalist spirit among its proponents, as if we are saying, "This is THE ANSWER, we have found THE WAY, wisdom now resides with US!" Certainly triumphalism in all its forms is divisive and offensive. To the degree that missional church leaders are guilty of this, we need to repent. Triumphalism is not helpful and does not honor the Lord or his people. However, I would like to offer a note of caution to those who think the missional church is triumphalistic and who are tempted to dismiss the movement on that basis. Part of what initially attracted me was the willingness of missional leaders to admit that they did not have all--or even many--of the answers to the problems facing the church today. The point is that this discussion is not about having all the right answers, but rather trying to identify the most important questions before the church--and working toward biblically and theologically sound answers.”
It is our purpose at the Institute for Missional Directions that we maintain a humble and yet challenge spirit. We know that we don't have all of the answers, we are on a journey of discovery. The challenge, however, is great. What will happen to the church in the next 10 to 20 years? I know, Christian history has taught us that God had a way of preserving his church. Interesting enough a thorough read of Church History announces the reality that most of this "saving" of the church takes place in reformative ways. The question before us today is whether we move into and embrace the changes needed.
One of the challenges that the church of today faces more than anything is the loss of the 20 and 30 somethings in the church. Their reaction to "same old church" is quite startling. They desire to have an authentic encounter with God and feel that this is missing in much of what goes on in the church today. Couple that with the church's unwillingness to change to meet their need and we have a tragedy. This is one of the reasons that I have so passionately involved myself in the missional church movement coupled with the best of the emergent village material
Often people ask me "what is missional church?" The following article will provide some light. Below is a very interesting read that my friend Robin Dugall posted on his blog. He says very clearly what I would have said.
“…the missional church…is a renewal movement. I see it as a moving of God’s Spirit within the Western church at a very critical time in its history. We find ourselves (most Christians probably agree on this) in a time of decline. Churches in the West are in trouble: internal dissensions, the failure and discouragement of leadership, loss of our youth, widespread negative perceptions of Christians by outsiders, and the death of many congregations. Just the kind of dry-bones situation where the breath of the Spirit often begins to blow!
(but)…I am impatient for the transformation, and that’s where the trouble begins . . .I imagine those of us in the missional church movement sometimes sound a bit
(critical) to believers perplexed by massive changes in the church and culture, and are not sure “missional” is the way to go. They may hear the message as, “move out of the way,” “get with the program,” “admit you are wasting your time,” or something equally uncharitable. To them the missional discussion seems like just another way to “diss” the past. When missional leaders point out current problems in the church, they often appear to have an arrogant disregard for what God has already done—as if the Holy Spirit has been totally absent for the last century and nothing of eternal significance has really been accomplished! Good people thus feel attacked and undervalued, their contributions unwelcome and unneeded. I suspect most renewal movements, whether by intention or misunderstanding, have conveyed such messages.
To those who have felt attacked, I apologize. The point is not to discredit the sincere and often productive endeavors of the past, but to ask, "How can we be faithful to the gospel in the new cultural situation of the 21st century?" Of course any attempt to answer this question involves evaluation of our current situation and some level of critique of the current state of the church. (But we)…need to remind (ourselves) that if this is indeed a movement of the Spirit of God, it will make its way among the people of God with power and certainty.
Another problem many people detect in renewal movements is a prideful spirit. In the case of the missional movement some folks have sensed a triumphalist spirit among its proponents, as if we are saying, "This is THE ANSWER, we have found THE WAY, wisdom now resides with US!" Certainly triumphalism in all its forms is divisive and offensive. To the degree that missional church leaders are guilty of this, we need to repent. Triumphalism is not helpful and does not honor the Lord or his people. However, I would like to offer a note of caution to those who think the missional church is triumphalistic and who are tempted to dismiss the movement on that basis. Part of what initially attracted me was the willingness of missional leaders to admit that they did not have all--or even many--of the answers to the problems facing the church today. The point is that this discussion is not about having all the right answers, but rather trying to identify the most important questions before the church--and working toward biblically and theologically sound answers.”
It is our purpose at the Institute for Missional Directions that we maintain a humble and yet challenge spirit. We know that we don't have all of the answers, we are on a journey of discovery. The challenge, however, is great. What will happen to the church in the next 10 to 20 years? I know, Christian history has taught us that God had a way of preserving his church. Interesting enough a thorough read of Church History announces the reality that most of this "saving" of the church takes place in reformative ways. The question before us today is whether we move into and embrace the changes needed.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
I am going to try to blog more often
I was told this past week from a former student that I don't blog enough. I realized that it is because of my need to have something significant to say. I will do my best to blog at least once a week if not more. I hope to still have something important to say, but perhaps they can be shorter. So hang in there with us at IMD as we continue to figure out how to be the most effective we can be.
Blessings,
Gary
Blessings,
Gary
What your learn when you are sick
For the past month I have had a series of related illnesses that have forced me to rearrange my schedule. It is interesting that until something like this happens we are trapped by a schedule that seems brutal and controlling. But for much of the past 30 days, I was forced to remain close to home, most of the time in bed. It was interesting to me that people understood without question when I rescheduled appointments, canceled some, rearranged some responsibilities, etc. The idea was, "oh, you are sick so you have a valid excuse."
It forced me to think about who ultimately controls my life? Recently I had the privilege of attending a StrengthsFinders workshop. One of the requirements was that I needed to purchase the book, take the test online, and then bring the results to the workshop. I have taken many tests over the course of the past 25 years: TJTA, Meyers-Briggs, LIFO, Firo-B, DISC, The Flag, Spiritual Gifts inventories, Miller, Minnesota Multi-Phasic, Sanguin/Choleric/Meloncholy/Phlegmatic, Gary Smalley's test on personality, and others I can't even remember. They all seek to describe me within the context they are measuring, whether it be what kind of a leader I am? what is my personality? how do I relate to people? what are my strengths in leadership, management, interpersonal, etc.?
Interestingly enough almost all of them describe me as I believe myself to be. Whether it is that belief that skews the test so that it comes out that way, who really knows. They try to put in safe guards that create a sense of honesty even if you are trying to make yourself "look" good. I have had others take the above tests on me and they seem to come out pretty much the way I view myself. So my conclusion is that I pretty well know myself and these have given me tools in how to explain myself to others in a variety of working or leisure settings.
In the StrengthsFinders test my top one is: WOO (Winning People Over) - this was not a surprise to anyone who has known me for longer than an hour. My goal in life is to make friends with everyone I meet, and get to know them at a deeper level than superficial. This was not a surprise to me because other tests, Meyers-Briggs for one has me as an ENFP (Extrovert, Intuitive, Feeling, Perceiving). In Smalley's tests I am an Otter, which is really a Sanguin. In the Flag test my country is "Fun Country" with "Peace Country" my support. So the fact that I came out WOO was not a surprise. But I began thinking.
Perhaps it is this WOO/Sanguin/otter/ENFP/Fun Country characteristic that is my strength and my major weakness. As I said in an earlier paragraph I am not good at controlling my calendar because primarily I don't want to let others down. And as you know people have a way of throwing guilt around pretty readily when you don't have time for them, or they feel they are not a high enough priority in your life.
This illness has me thinking that perhaps the greatest thing I can do as a WOO is take care of me. If I have a genuine illness people understand, but what about when I simply need to stop and take care of myself and my soul.
A recent discovery (which is really not new) is that when interviewed, most pastors confess that the "care of their own soul" is a high need and desire, but a low priority in their lives. I have been asked to do some work related to the "Soul Care" of clergy and when asked where would I start, my response was simply with their schedule. This caused the individual, who is BTW the one organizing the program, to look at me funny. I suppose he wanted me to talk about prayer, devotions, silence, solitude, and any number of other spiritual disciplines. But when I said to him that without this initial discipline of control of time and schedule, we can dream all we want about soul care and priorities, but until we make those priorities fit into our schedule they are highly unlikely to happen. I believe he agreed with me, we will see if he gives me any work :-).
Well that is my rambling for today.
Comments?
Gary
It forced me to think about who ultimately controls my life? Recently I had the privilege of attending a StrengthsFinders workshop. One of the requirements was that I needed to purchase the book, take the test online, and then bring the results to the workshop. I have taken many tests over the course of the past 25 years: TJTA, Meyers-Briggs, LIFO, Firo-B, DISC, The Flag, Spiritual Gifts inventories, Miller, Minnesota Multi-Phasic, Sanguin/Choleric/Meloncholy/Phlegmatic, Gary Smalley's test on personality, and others I can't even remember. They all seek to describe me within the context they are measuring, whether it be what kind of a leader I am? what is my personality? how do I relate to people? what are my strengths in leadership, management, interpersonal, etc.?
Interestingly enough almost all of them describe me as I believe myself to be. Whether it is that belief that skews the test so that it comes out that way, who really knows. They try to put in safe guards that create a sense of honesty even if you are trying to make yourself "look" good. I have had others take the above tests on me and they seem to come out pretty much the way I view myself. So my conclusion is that I pretty well know myself and these have given me tools in how to explain myself to others in a variety of working or leisure settings.
In the StrengthsFinders test my top one is: WOO (Winning People Over) - this was not a surprise to anyone who has known me for longer than an hour. My goal in life is to make friends with everyone I meet, and get to know them at a deeper level than superficial. This was not a surprise to me because other tests, Meyers-Briggs for one has me as an ENFP (Extrovert, Intuitive, Feeling, Perceiving). In Smalley's tests I am an Otter, which is really a Sanguin. In the Flag test my country is "Fun Country" with "Peace Country" my support. So the fact that I came out WOO was not a surprise. But I began thinking.
Perhaps it is this WOO/Sanguin/otter/ENFP/Fun Country characteristic that is my strength and my major weakness. As I said in an earlier paragraph I am not good at controlling my calendar because primarily I don't want to let others down. And as you know people have a way of throwing guilt around pretty readily when you don't have time for them, or they feel they are not a high enough priority in your life.
This illness has me thinking that perhaps the greatest thing I can do as a WOO is take care of me. If I have a genuine illness people understand, but what about when I simply need to stop and take care of myself and my soul.
A recent discovery (which is really not new) is that when interviewed, most pastors confess that the "care of their own soul" is a high need and desire, but a low priority in their lives. I have been asked to do some work related to the "Soul Care" of clergy and when asked where would I start, my response was simply with their schedule. This caused the individual, who is BTW the one organizing the program, to look at me funny. I suppose he wanted me to talk about prayer, devotions, silence, solitude, and any number of other spiritual disciplines. But when I said to him that without this initial discipline of control of time and schedule, we can dream all we want about soul care and priorities, but until we make those priorities fit into our schedule they are highly unlikely to happen. I believe he agreed with me, we will see if he gives me any work :-).
Well that is my rambling for today.
Comments?
Gary
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
I've been thinking...
Hans Rookmaaker, a Dutch scholar, said "Jesus didn’t come to make us Christian, he came to make us fully human." For some time this idea has been rolling around in my head. If in fact we are created in the image of God, then to be fully human would mean that we have some God characteristics. A fully human being is a human being that is intellectually, spiritually, creatively, morally, and relationally alive. In one respect this would seem like a tall order, and that not a single solitary person, except for Jesus, could ever be fully human. But the gospel seems to indicate that the role of "Jesus in me" is to to do just that--make me fully human, or make us fully human. This seems to be the challenge of Paul for us as he calls us to a life in Christ, to be like Christ. To be Christlike requires a daily surrender to his will and way. It is this relationship with him that enables us to be fully human. However, there is one aspect of being fully human that is not mentioned above, and that is free choice. What makes us alive is the ability that we have to chose to be human, to follow the call and claims of the gospel, and to seek to be like Christ.
A recent PEW study indicated that approximately 95% of American's believe in God, but only a few, less than 40%, attend worship on a regular basis. Other studies have indicated that the lifestyle of Christians is not different from the lifestyle of the majority of Americans. So what is the problem? The problem is that America is superficial both in its religion and its popular culture because we are intellectually, spiritually, creatively, morally, and relationally superficial.
Perhaps the challenge of this time is the discovery of what it means to be fully human. That discovery begins with a study of Jesus and his teachings. Now, I know this is not new, this is an old thought, but it is still true for today. It seems that we spend far too much time trying to be Christian, as understood by a majority of Americans, and less time contemplating what it means to be a follower of Jesus with all of its demands and implications.
This election campaign year has been an interesting study in what it means to be Christian. Christians seem to be playing an important role, but not because of who we follow, but as another voting bloc or another purchasing power. It is time for Christians to be more than the "political religious right." It is time that we discovered what it means to be fully human. The challenge is to step away from how the world defines Christianity and begin to discover who we are in Christ. We must dig deep to discover the claims of the gospel, and thereby discover what it means to be fully human as God intended. We cannot do this on our own, but together as we interact encourage, and support one another we will become the Church that truly is the Bride of Christ. Jesus came to make us fully human, it is time to discover what that means--enjoy the journey with its pitfalls and challenges, and its hopes and successes.
A recent PEW study indicated that approximately 95% of American's believe in God, but only a few, less than 40%, attend worship on a regular basis. Other studies have indicated that the lifestyle of Christians is not different from the lifestyle of the majority of Americans. So what is the problem? The problem is that America is superficial both in its religion and its popular culture because we are intellectually, spiritually, creatively, morally, and relationally superficial.
Perhaps the challenge of this time is the discovery of what it means to be fully human. That discovery begins with a study of Jesus and his teachings. Now, I know this is not new, this is an old thought, but it is still true for today. It seems that we spend far too much time trying to be Christian, as understood by a majority of Americans, and less time contemplating what it means to be a follower of Jesus with all of its demands and implications.
This election campaign year has been an interesting study in what it means to be Christian. Christians seem to be playing an important role, but not because of who we follow, but as another voting bloc or another purchasing power. It is time for Christians to be more than the "political religious right." It is time that we discovered what it means to be fully human. The challenge is to step away from how the world defines Christianity and begin to discover who we are in Christ. We must dig deep to discover the claims of the gospel, and thereby discover what it means to be fully human as God intended. We cannot do this on our own, but together as we interact encourage, and support one another we will become the Church that truly is the Bride of Christ. Jesus came to make us fully human, it is time to discover what that means--enjoy the journey with its pitfalls and challenges, and its hopes and successes.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
The Vision Thing Part 2
So what is it we are trying to accomplish at The Mission Place with our work in the Institute for Missional Directions and Seminary Without Walls?
I was just re-reading some statistics about how many people go to church. (See, http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_rate.htm). As is stated in that article, the research tends to indicate a pretty consistent answer: about 40% of Americans say they went to religious services in the past seven days. But there appear to be discrepancies in the research analysis. The author of this article probes the effect of the "social desirability bias". This bias would tempt people to give an answer based on what would be the "right" thing to say. Generally, this affect comes in at a 2 to 1 ratio.
One example is given in which church attendance rates are examined. If there were a static percentage (40%), then as the population increases, so should attendance rates in churches. But this is not the case. In fact, church attendance seems to have peaked in the 1960s.
The author then goes on to present research supporting the idea that church participation in the United States is actually around 20%-26%. So just for fun, let's say 25% of Americans go to church. Roughly, how might that break down? With about 300 million Americans, 25% would come to about 75 million attending religious services. Loosely, about that means 60 million Christians. Of that number, most likely the 80/20 rule is in affect, meaning that the leaders and influencers of the church might estimated at 12 million people.
Archimedes said, “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” It is these 12 million people we want to reach. These 12 million can touch the lives of about 48 million other church attenders. These people can heal broken communities; they can befriend children whose parents are out of the picture; they can speak peace to anxious living and conflicted relationships; they can give themselves to civic responsibilities; they can raise and nurture their children to carry it onward. 12 million people would make a difference.
So what is our vision? We'd like to wake the sleeping giant of 12 million people to engage in real missional transformation. So many of these church leaders may still be functioning on the old modern paradigm and wondering why the old ways don't work any longer. Some may be caught in the trap of trying to recreate the success stories of the "growing church in town". Still others may be experimenting with new ways, but not able to network and form a shared learning community to accelerate learning and discernment.
If we can move 12 million leaders into missional transformation, another 48 million might follow. But more, there will be a world that will witness Christians acting like Christ in the world. Not that this is a "strategy" for growing the church, or a new attractional program to pursue. It's just a desire to awaken a sleeping giant to bring grace, justice, peace, and love to a world needing to know that the reign of God is at hand. To move 12 million or more from just going to church, to actually being church.
So how do I put this vision into seven words?
I was just re-reading some statistics about how many people go to church. (See, http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_rate.htm). As is stated in that article, the research tends to indicate a pretty consistent answer: about 40% of Americans say they went to religious services in the past seven days. But there appear to be discrepancies in the research analysis. The author of this article probes the effect of the "social desirability bias". This bias would tempt people to give an answer based on what would be the "right" thing to say. Generally, this affect comes in at a 2 to 1 ratio.
One example is given in which church attendance rates are examined. If there were a static percentage (40%), then as the population increases, so should attendance rates in churches. But this is not the case. In fact, church attendance seems to have peaked in the 1960s.The author then goes on to present research supporting the idea that church participation in the United States is actually around 20%-26%. So just for fun, let's say 25% of Americans go to church. Roughly, how might that break down? With about 300 million Americans, 25% would come to about 75 million attending religious services. Loosely, about that means 60 million Christians. Of that number, most likely the 80/20 rule is in affect, meaning that the leaders and influencers of the church might estimated at 12 million people.
Archimedes said, “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” It is these 12 million people we want to reach. These 12 million can touch the lives of about 48 million other church attenders. These people can heal broken communities; they can befriend children whose parents are out of the picture; they can speak peace to anxious living and conflicted relationships; they can give themselves to civic responsibilities; they can raise and nurture their children to carry it onward. 12 million people would make a difference.
So what is our vision? We'd like to wake the sleeping giant of 12 million people to engage in real missional transformation. So many of these church leaders may still be functioning on the old modern paradigm and wondering why the old ways don't work any longer. Some may be caught in the trap of trying to recreate the success stories of the "growing church in town". Still others may be experimenting with new ways, but not able to network and form a shared learning community to accelerate learning and discernment.
If we can move 12 million leaders into missional transformation, another 48 million might follow. But more, there will be a world that will witness Christians acting like Christ in the world. Not that this is a "strategy" for growing the church, or a new attractional program to pursue. It's just a desire to awaken a sleeping giant to bring grace, justice, peace, and love to a world needing to know that the reign of God is at hand. To move 12 million or more from just going to church, to actually being church.
So how do I put this vision into seven words?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
