Coming Up Sunday, May 30

On this Memorial Day weekend we will take the opportunity to give thanks for our forebears, both as Americans and as Christians.

At Arlington National Cemetery (and countless others this weekend), each veteran's grave will be decorated with a small American flag. The view is breathtaking, rows and rows of marble headstones with flags beside each of them:

Each stone represents one life. Each flag represents an appreciation of each life.

If we are honest, we know that there are similar fields of markers in our spiritual lives. Looking back on our spiritual journey, we can see several important people and events along the way. Do we ever take the time to think back on those times and remember? What would our faith be like if we did?

More News from the General Board Meeting

Earlier this week, the congregation received the annual Communique, which offers news from the General Board, which met in April. If you are interested, the publication is posted on the church bulletin board, or is available as a .pdf download here.

Three impressions from the items:

• Rev. Sharon Watkins will serve another term as the General Minister and President of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). She has announced her willingness to serve another six-year term if re-elected. I cannot imagine that she will not receive the support of the committee charged with recommending a candidate for the position, and I imagine she will be enthusiastically re-elected by the delegates to next year's General Assembly.
• The troubled economic times are affecting the church in significant ways. Despite a couple of articles that insist there are signs of hope among the darkness -- Disciples' ministries are doing much better than many other similar groups in nurturing their resources through this difficult time. But giving is still down almost across the board, which creates significant problems for ministry.
• Mission realignment of the general ministries is (quietly) on hold. Despite taking an additional year to work on its proposals, the committee created to suggest ways for reorganizing the general ministries has only had limited success instead of the dramatic changes imagined.

The Study of Theology

Recently, The Christian Century has been running a series of articles from theologians about how their minds have changed over the years. In the February 23rd issue, Kathryn Tanner, who teaches theology at the University of Chicago Divinity School (and was one of my teachers), wrote a lengthy essay about the scope of her career so far. In the middle of the (admittedly technical) article, she offers an interesting thought about what makes theology unique:

Relevant to this interest in history is the fact that part of what originally drew me to theology was its oddity within the secular university and even on the contemporary scene... Theology had the ability to propose the unexpected, to shock and startle. It offered an escape form the taken-for-granted certainties of life by referring them to something that remained ever beyond them, resisting capture and encapsulation. The theologian respects the capacity of theology, it seems to me, not by dressing up contemporary commonplaces in religious terms, but in seeking what lies beyond a contemporary outlook and beyond the immediate context of one's work.

Tanner continues by suggesting how the entire historical breadth of Christian theology encourages such epiphanies and "outside the box" thinking:

A theology that starts from, and uses as its toolbox for creative ends, materials gathered from the widest possible purview is, in my opinion, a theology with that imaginative expansiveness. Such a theology looks to the Christian past not for models for simple imitation but for a way to complicate one's sense of the possibilities for present Christian expression and action. It looks to the past not to restrict and cramp what might be said in the present but to break out of the narrowness of a contemporary sense of the realistic. It complements an understanding of the complex variety of premodern theologies in the West with an understanding of the complex forms of Christianity's global reach now and in the past. It moves beyond narrow denominational confines to the broadest possible ecumenical vision and sees beyond elite forms of theological expression, in written texts primarily, to the popular theologies of everyday life.

This is an intriguing, and I think helpful, understanding of the possibility of theology, especially academic theology, during our lifetime. Many disciplines of knowledge, from the sciences to the social sciences and throughout the humanities, have pretty well-defined fields of inquiry and methods of inquiry. The definitions that help to isolate things for study in a precise way also unavoidably limit what conclusions might be reached from that study. To give a crude example: a scientific experiment either "works" (proves the hypothesis) or "doesn't work" (disproves the hypothesis). A scientific experiment doesn't generate a poem or produce a new political philosophy; scientific experiments are not designed or equipped to lead to such things. Likewise, a poet does not write a geometric proof: poetic language is different from mathematical language.

Tanner argues that theology is different. It allows someone to ask a question, and in the course of studying that question come up with drastically unexpected results: sometimes answers, sometimes different questions, sometimes an observation that renders the initial question irrelevant. It's the equivalent of putting 1000 monkeys in a room with 1000 typewriters, but with a catch -- they produce not the works of Shakespeare but some novel literate description. A biologist would wrestle with how a monkey's brain functioned to produce the writing; a theologian would wonder about that and apply the writing itself.

In her brilliance, though, Tanner isn't requiring monkeys to produce these new, unexpected insights into God. Instead, she realizes that many of these insights have already been produced and were preserved in the Christian tradition -- they've just been overlooked or applied in other ways. So the theologian can study the works of the ages and constantly gain new insights into God, making connections between writers of different generations and different cultures, of different educational levels, different genders, different outlooks.

Happily, Tanner doesn't simply argue that this ability to shock and startle comes from the Bible alone, though it is present there too. Instead, she sees this ability -- which many Christians attribute to the Bible -- to the great Christian writings of history that have interpreted the Bible through the centuries.

Maybe the leaders of other disciplines would argue with Tanner. Maybe the chemist or theoretical mathematician would say she overlooks the same possibilities in their areas of study. Maybe the anthropologist would suggest that she's never done field work with a culture almost entirely different from her own, or the astrophysicist would counter that she's never tried to decipher the galactic implications of a spectrograph. Surely there are stunning surprises in these fields too.

And yet, I think Tanner is right about theology's unique ability to flesh out such shocking revelations (if I might used a rather loaded theological term). In a way unlike anything except perhaps philosophy, theology exerts a continuous questioning about the validity of its own methods; and like philosophy, it benefits from the almost unimaginable amount of saved artifacts to study.

Reflecting on "Lost"

Like many people (about 13 million judging by the Nielsen overnight numbers), I spent Sunday evening watching the series finale of "Lost." I have enjoyed the series for its unique storytelling since its premiere; over time, I have become fascinated by its consistent curiosity about questions of faith and spirituality.

I am still processing the final episode. It was refreshingly unexpected -- it refused to cater to fans' desires for answers, instead providing emotional resolution and closure for many of the main characters.

My friend John (also a pastor) has published his reflection on the finale, which he loved. I highly recommend his thoughtful essay, particularly his comments on the creators' decision to leave so many questions unanswered.

As you know, I enjoy looking for the presence of theology in popular culture, especially television and movies. "Lost" was rich in this regard, a motley assortment of people earnestly seeking meaning (or, as they usually said, "purpose") for their lives, which is a key component of faith development. It also was very perceptive towards religion, recognizing its propensity to be misused by some and the cultural ambivalence with which it is viewed by many today. (The way that the characters tolerated, but mostly ignored, one character's attempt to build a church on their island, even as they lovingly supported the character, is but one example of the shows sophisticated and insightful approach to issues of faith.) I am sad there will be no new episodes to ponder, but I'm grateful for DVDs, which will allow this series to be considered and discussed in the years ahead.

DisciplesWorld Archive

Although DisciplesWorld Magazine has closed down, the Disciples of Christ Historical Society has recently unveiled a new web archive of all the articles, at http://www.disciplesworldmagazine.com. While it is a shame that the magazine no longer continues its publication, it is a good thing that its years of excellent publications will be easily accessible online.

Coming Up Sunday, May 23

Sunday, we will celebrate Pentecost, which is the celebration of the entry of the Holy Spirit into this world and, through it, the birth of the Christian Church. Pentecost, the 50th day after Easter, has long been the date of this celebration, coming sometime shortly after Jesus' post-resurrection ascension into heaven -- this is the timeline found in the first two chapters of Acts.

Red is the color of the Holy Spirit, so everyone is encouraged to wear red as part of our celebration this Sunday. There will be some fun touches during the service, including a modern-day version of the long-ago Day of Pentecost which you'll have to see and hear to believe.

During the sermon, we'll focus on Peter's great sermon delivered on the Day of Pentecost, particularly the final section of it where he compares Jesus to David. Titled "Eyewitness Testimony," the message will reflect on the odd, and yet spiritually brilliant, newness that Christianity represented for the faithful -- then and now.

After the service, we'll have a brief reception to celebrate the birthday of the church. It should be a joyful, SPIRIT-filled, day.

The Multicampus Church

Can you imagine attending a congregation that met simultaneously in different locations? For generations, multiple congregations have shared one pastor -- for example, in the United Methodist Church, there are many examples of two- or three-point charges, in which a minister splits time between two or three congregations. Recently, though, a new variation of this has emerged -- one church, with one unified staff, meeting in multiple places.

I was reminded of this while reading a recent issue of The Christian Century a few weeks ago. In "Synchronized Worship" (Jan. 26, 2010), Jason Byassee writes about LifeChurch.tv, which is a thirteen-year-old ministry begun in Oklahoma that has expanded to include thirteen "campuses" in five states, plus an extensive online ministry that includes multiple online services. This is perhaps the most progressive example of a trend over the past generation in which large churches are not simply adding more service times to accommodate more people, but building entire sanctuaries in other locations.

In general, there are some basic benefits, especially in leadership. Instead of multiple congregations having to figure plan and organize for outreach, a central committee does so. A unified team handles church finances. A unified team leads audio-visual technology preparation, meaning that all aspects of that are handled better. I could go on, but you can imagine the list. It is based on the model of increased efficiency that has flourished throughout American society over all of the 20th Century, from the Sears and Montgomery Ward mail-order catalogs to the rise of Wal-Mart, from the growth of industrial farming to the merging of countless smaller business ventures in countless fields.

LifeChurch.tv takes this even further by developing a franchise model of church, in which each worship service is carefully coordinated, ensuring a similar experience in all of the various locations. It's the church's version of McDonald's; wherever you worship, you know what to expect -- including the promise that the service will last exactly one hour. The precision of the service is necessary because it combines live video elements with local in-house elements. At certain times, everyone sees the same things on the video screens, including the sermon; at other times, there is music or prayer led by one of the onsite pastors or worship leaders. But there's also a distinct technical precision to these services that goes beyond the issue of live video feeds -- the leadership of this church clearly intends for the church to be production savvy. All of the video (which I believe is prepared by their own teams), including the slick announcements video (shot and edited to feel like a hip, cable newscast), is of a very high quality -- better than a lot of local news programming. And the various local elements are evidently evaluated to make sure that they meet the goals of the worship service, which in MBA terms is about protecting your brand.

Byassee has a very simple question in his profile: Is this the church of the future? On the one hand, the gut answer is "No." There are simply too many people who like congregations of a certain size that meet in certain places. Certainly there will be other churches who follow the multiple-location model, there are even Disciples churches that are pursuing this, like Geist Christian Church in Indianapolis, and not also just outside of Indianapolis. There may even be several more who aggressively add an "Internet-campus," just like LifeChurch.tv's Internet church. But what many people love about their churches are their sizes and their personal relationships with each other and with their own pastor. Once a church grows to a certain size, your relationship with the senior pastor will be limited, and some people don't want that.

On the other hand, I worry that the answer to Byassee's question will be "Yes" far more often than I'd like to think. Not because of the growing economic challenges of churches, which may force many of them to either merge or share the services of one pastor, if they are to avoid simply disbanding. There are several cultural movements that a multiple location church like LifeChurch.tv taps into. A desire for a known product of a certain quality, regardless of where you are (the McDonald's or Applebee's or Cracker Barrel approach to church -- you pretty much know what you'll be getting before you walk through the doors). A desire for a certain amount of anonymity -- it would be wrong to suggest that all of the people who attend don't want to meet other people, but you can bet that they're happy they won't immediately be approached become a church officer after they join. The rise of "church as event" worship -- where the pastor is such a superstar, you watch him on a giant TV screen, with hundreds of other people; and if you've been to a concert in a large venue, you know that you're usually watching the performance on one of the jumbo TV screens because the performers are so small from your vantage point -- this attitude makes a video-fed sermon seem normal or even better, because you can see the preacher's face so much more clearly on the screen.

I'm sure there are others, but these are the basic ones. Mind you, I'm not criticizing LifeChurch.tv for their individual ministry, which taps into these trends -- clearly they're reaching out to lots of people in a way that seems to make sense. I'm all for more people taking their faith lives more seriously. But I am criticizing LifeChurch.tv as a model for the future of the church as a whole. I think it's an awful trap, just as many enormous churches are, to go overboard on efficiency in ministry and leadership.

I'm convinced that the church was never meant to be efficient, ultimately because worship is not an efficient act. God does not want us to worship from a prescribed checklist on a schedule. If God wanted that, he would have hard-wired such worship into us and we would do it naturally. Kind of like the opening of The Lion King, all of creation would gather together (lion next to lamb, naturally) singing or praying to God at a certain time before we go about our other business; unlike The Lion King we wouldn't need an occasion, and we'd just worship. But God created us with a freedom so that we have to want to worship, we have to want to reach out to God. And human desire does not work on a schedule.

More than this, though, there's another aspect of the overly efficient church that bothers me. It can seem ideal for leadership to be drawn from vast numbers of people, so that the cream rises into positions of leadership. But the history of the church demonstrates a different model of leadership, in which people rise to the challenges of the gospel despite their official educational and work experiences. We know that God has given us many gifts, including some that we don't always tap into unless we're given the opportunity. A church that only looks to certain types of people for certain types of ministry and leadership misses out on those times when someone unexpectedly discovers a gift for doing something. There are so few places in our society that encourage people to try things outside of their comfort zone or outside of their obvious field(s) of expertise; it would be a shame if congregations stopped being such places. And efficiency is a significant impediment to this type of spiritual gift discovery and development.

Regardless of my misgivings, this trend of larger, multiple location congregations will only become more pronounced in the upcoming years. I'm sure that such churches will offer new opportunities and ministries that will benefit the church. I just hope it doesn't come at too high of a price.

General Assembly 2011

It's never too early to plan. The next biennial General Assembly of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) is scheduled for July 9-13, 2011 in Nashville, Tennessee. Today the planning committee has announced the theme -- "Tell It!" -- and unveiled the official logo. You can see it, and read more about the theme, here.

Coming Up Sunday, May 9

This Sunday, we'll finish up our "Faith Smart" sermon series, loosely based on the series of Holiday Inn Express "Stay Smart" commercials. Remember the central question: If staying at a Holiday Inn Express can make you smarter, what can being a Christian make you?

This week, we begin with a commercial that takes place at a book-signing by legendary baseball player Cal Ripken:

Here we have a commercial that is based on a knowledge of the rest of the campaign. The doctor's help is unnecessary because the security guard is so intent on finding someone who stayed at a Holiday Inn Express to help the man who has fainted.

In some ways, this is the natural counterpart of last week's sermon about the "Foolish Answers" of Christianity. This week, we remember that some people believe we have the answers or skills simply because we are Christians. We are assumed to be able to do all manner of things because of our faith identity, rather than our professional titles or our education and experience.

How many times have you assumed that a pastor could do something simply because he or she was a pastor? Comfort the dying, say a prayer, lead a meeting, read a budget, understand tax law, counsel the troubled, teach Sunday School, preach brilliant sermons, send inspirational personal notes, edit the newsletter? Many people can do each of these things well; few people can do all of them well. But many people expect their minister to do all of these things well, and walk on water on the side.

And it's not just ministers. We come to expect these things of each other. Don't believe me? Talk with someone who's active in another church. They may gush about the latest book that has changed their view of life and God. Then they find you're a Christian, and they expect you have read the book too. Or seen the movie, recorded the episode of Oprah, heard the sermon, whatever -- simply because you're a Christian too.

It's not unreasonable to expect professing Christians to have a working understanding of worship and the Bible (though the number of professing Christians who lack such knowledge has increased to depressing numbers). But we can't expect each other to know everything either. How do we balance these expectations? How do we restrain ourselves from expecting too much of others? How do we deal with others expectations of us?

We shouldn't avoid it. Part of being "Faith Smart," after we've learned about some of the gifts God has given us through our faith, is to learn how others see us. Sometimes, like last week, they see us as fools; sometimes, they see us almost as Christ reborn -- far more sainted and talented than anyone ever could be. Like most things, the truth is in the middle, but we need to learn to handle these differing expectations of faith in order to better live out our faith honestly and well.