Today I want to delve into a bit more of Smith’s deconstruction of our beliefs about the Bible before moving on to his ideas of how to better view scripture. One of the things Smith challenges us to consider is this.

Most biblicists carry on with unperturbed confidence in biblicist assumptions and beliefs, paying little attention to the ramifications of multiple counterclaims about rival biblical teachings. Why and how can this be?

Smith offers a couple of possibilities for why this may be.

1. Our Social Networks – In essence, birds of a feather flock together. We naturally gravitate towards other like minded people and as a result we don’t actually deal with the differing theologies of our Christian brothers and sisters that much. We stay clustered and don’t pay much mind to what others believe or teach. (Here he uses the word homophily to describe this phenomenon)
2. A tendency to minimize the real differences of interpretation and the significance of these differences – Our natural response to the question about differing interpretations of scripture by other evangelicals is often a belief that the differences are minor and that we mostly believe the same things. In fact these differences may be much larger than we are ready to admit.
3. We benefit by emphasizing our differences from each other – Somewhat going against the earlier idea, we gain a strong sense of identity within our particular theological spheres by emphasizing our uniqueness from other groups. These differences reinforce our connection to denominations and theological clusters. This has obvious benefits for us personally and corporately.Our identity is shaped as much by who we are as by who we aren’t. (Think of Duke and Carolina for a powerful example of this. They are both greater because of the other)
4.  Overcoming biblical and theological differences toward Christian unity sounds like “ecumenism”. Ecumenism sounds like liberal Protestantism. And liberal Protestantism is bad. Better to be divided in absolute commitment to truth than to be unified in flaccid, liberal compromise. In this way being divided is almost a badge of honor.

Smith is quick to say that these are just possible explanations for why we aren’t more uneasy about the wide array of interpretations that those within evangelicalism hold to. As a sociologist Smith does hit on some interesting ideas here. I for one will quickly jump on point 3 as a characteristic of the Church of the Nazarene. There is such a strong identity within the church of having a unique or peculiar understanding of holiness. This holiness badge insulates us from the interpretations of others and keeps us from having to seriously interact with the theological work of others. We can hold to our own interpretations like a great security blanket because to let go of them enough to interact meaningfully with others is to dance on the slippery slope of compromise.

Do you see merit in these ideas? What can you identify with in Smith’s observations? Have the groups that you have been a part of been marked by significant openness to conversations outside of their normal theological parameters? What are the benefits or drawbacks from these stances?

Tourism is being hurt around the globe by recession and violence. Countries such as Syria are suffering mightily because of the effects of unrest on their tourism industry. This is leading to even more unrest that is spurring once conservative and satisfied business owners to pressure the government for changes.

This change is not unlike the changing financial realities effecting the church. We have the pinnacle of megachurch prosperity, the Crystal Cathedral filing for bankruptcy. That was unthinkable even a few short years ago. For many churches, the death of church tourism has really hurt. It hasn’t just been that attendance is down, but the excess money many people were using to support the mission of the church has dried up. It is very similar to the way many people have stopped traveling as much because of the economy. The death of tourism is felt in many ways.

In the Church of the Nazarene the global downturn has forced significant changes. In the last several years the COTN has downsized almost half of their staff from their global headquarters. The COTN also unveiled a new Funding the Mission budget systems for all churches that is intended to continue the support of the global mission of the church while at the same time easing the financial burdens being felt by local churches. I have been really proud of our denomination’s work to change in the midst of these struggles.

That is why I was equally excited by the news that the church has sold off it’s church loan arm for $26 million and has used that money to pay off completely the Global Ministry Center the church built a few years ago. The church also recently agreed to sell the old headquarters building.

Every time I have heard our leadership talk about our financial future there has been a ready and willing spirit to change the way we do church in order to not only accommodate the financial changes of the world but to prepare the church to thrive.

I am wondering if your churches have been forced to make changes because of the economy and if any of those changes have been for the better? How is the death of church tourism spurring necessary changes in your church?

For the past several weeks we have been discussing David Fitch’s new book The End of Evangelicalism? You can see the earlier parts of this conversation here and here.  Today we continue by examining the “Decision for Christ”, how our theology of conversion developed and how it effects the way we live out our faith.

The decision for Christ is one of three master signifiers that Fitch identifies as part of the developed ideology of evangelicalism. (The previous post talks more extensively about the significance of a master signifier) The decision for Christ emerged in the 20th century as a defining characteristic of the evangelical church. As many mainline churches moved away from the atonement language of salvation and focused more on inviting people into their efforts at creating a better society evangelicals began to focus on the moment of personal salvation.

No one illustrates this more than the wonderful Rev. Billy Graham. Dr. Graham has spent his life bringing people to a moment of decision. His radio programs was called The Hour of Decision. Tens of millions have been blessed by Dr. Graham’s ministry and who knows how many people came forward in a moment of decision at one of his crusades. These crusades show the theology of conversion at work in evangelicalism. Dr. Graham did not pastor a church. He came into town, held a large event, brought forth an articulate presentation of the gospel and then called those in attendance to a moment of individual decision. After the decision there was an attempt to attach this individual to a local church or at least get them some materials to begin to study and grow with as they now learned to follow Jesus.

The results of this theology on evangelicalism and our practices is significant. Here is what Fitch says.

Yet we are still under the spell of “the decision”. The practices of the evangelical megachurch movement, for instance, testify to the reality that these most visible of evangelicals still operate under assumptions of “the decision”. “The decision” assumes salvation is individual, begun through a voluntary act, and then nurtured through individually acquired learning and worship.

How then has our theology of conversion adversely effected our mission as the church? For one it seems to have distracted us from our calling to make disciples. We have developed a fascination with the number of people we can mark down as having prayed a prayer of salvation. We then only secondarily consider how many of them actually grow in their faith or show true transformation. In addition we have increasingly separated out salvation and sanctification into two distinctly different events with a multitude of adverse effects. We have a generation of Christians who are immature in their faith and view holiness and sanctification as some sort of higher calling that only super Christians seek after.

We also have placed far too much emphasis on a cognitive choice brought about by effective preaching. We have lost a sense of the vitality of the church as community in the process of salvation and in developing disciples. We have lost the power of experiencing God’s love as a primary part of our witness to the gospel and replaced it with well articulated gospel presentations, tracts, and altar calls. I think Fitch is right in identifying “the decision” as often being an empty ideology. We use it to convince ourselves we are doing the work of the church but it is leading us too often away from the work of the church.

This is a complex issue for us evangelicals. What do you think about “the decision” and its effects on mission? How do we balance out our theology and practice of conversion?

Such an observation is at the core of what Zizek offers to our look at evangelicalism. Here is Fitch’s description of why he chose to use Zizek’s work in his book.

Reading Zizek is like doing therapy upon an entire culture. Like few political theorists, he can get to the heart of a politic by asking what drives a people to believe certain things and then coalesce around these same beliefs. He understands that “ideology” takes place in the root practices we keep doing together even when they don’t make sense. He is able to keenly observe the contradictions that irrupt within a culture and/or political ideology and then help us see what drives people to ignore these contradictions in order to believe their ideologies all the more firmly.

Zizek’s benefit is in helping us understand gaps within our ideologies and practices and why we behave the way we do. That is a benefit indeed. So where does such analysis begin for us as evangelicals? It begins with looking for what Zizek calls Master Signifiers. “A master signifier is a conceptual object around which people give their allegiance thereby enabling a political group to form. It represents something to believe in, a badge which identifies us as part of this political cause.”

In our country we have numerous master signifiers. Take for instance our belief in freedom. We celebrate being the land of the free. It unites as as Americans. But do our ideas of freedom match up? Have we celebrated ourselves as being the land of the free while being segregationists? Do we even now give up our freedoms increasingly in the fight to hold onto them? That is the reality of master signifiers. They become banners we unite under even as we distance ourselves from the reality of them and suffer from a lack of unity in what they mean.

This is what Fitch is proposing for Inerrancy, the Decision for Christ, and a Christian Nation. These have become within evangelicalism master signifiers that unite us but don’t necessarily effect how we live nor promote helpful unity. They have become empty in many ways. If we become students of our culture we can see where the emptiness behind some of these banners exposes itself and leads us to question what we believe.

Stepping back from evangelicalism and looking at my own tribe, the Church of the Nazarene, I can see many ways in which this has shown itself. The banner we most like to unite under as Nazarenes is holiness. We consider ourselves to be unique as a Christian tribe because of our belief in personal holiness and entire sanctification. At the beginning of our denomination this did indeed set us apart in many ways. While many churches were de-emphasizing a transformed life as a Christians, Nazarenes were emphasizing a total transformation. This then demonstrated itself in different moral standards than the culture around us and many other Christians. But along the way the past 100 years, a call to holiness really became an empty signifier. So long as we said we were sanctified and we didn’t drink, cuss, smoke, or have sex, the rest of our lives didn’t matter so much. Social justice as part of holiness was lost. Communal practices that lead to holiness were lost. And over time those pieces of legislated morality such as drinking were lost. They haven’t been lost in our Manual, but they have been abandoned by many of our people. We still consider ourselves uniquely holy, but what evidence is there to back that up? Has this banner indeed become an empty master signifier?

What about in your own traditions? Can you identify master signifiers within your tradition or within evangelicalism that you would add to this list?

Say what you want to about Nazarenes (and I will in a moment) but being gathered with them is a reminder that we are a people of worship and prayer. I love gathering with a group of Nazarene clergy to worship because nowhere else do I hear people sing with such joy. Blending together very different generations and worship styles did nothing to hamper a marvelous time of worship at each of our gatherings. One of my dreams is to pastor a church where such fervent worship is the rule not the exception.

God is really doing some great things across the USA/Canada region in the COTN. Like other denominations you can see a shift taking place where some of the churches are fading and new ones are taking their place. But there is an undeniable spirit of change in the church. The Nazarene church of today is very different than 15 years ago. This seems to demonstrate itself in the openness of the leadership in the church, especially. Maybe it is because we are only 100 years old as a denomination or because we are a people of revival and change is part of our DNA, but I have great hope for the changes the Spirit is making in the COTN.

The most fun group of people I met were the Liturgical Nazarenes. (That actually isn’t oxymoronic as I once thought) There is a wonderful group of Nazbos that love liturgy and sacraments and are working to highlight this part of our Wesleyan heritage. We are working on the Nazarene Liturgy Project as a resources for sharing liturgy resources and creations. Visit the site and add your thoughts. I laugh that my time with the Methodists gives me great stature in such a gathering. Hooray for the Method to the Madness.

This is not a harsh comment, just an honest one. Nazarenes are not healthy people. For a group of people who don’t smoke or drink, we have totally missed the boat on healthy living. You don’t realize it until we all get together but wow are we a large group of people. A little wine with dinner is a no no, but a third trip to the buffet line seems to be ok. There is a piece of holiness living that isn’t being talked about and that is the stewardship of our bodies.The only answer? I will have to gather my buddy Blair and our other friends and start at Nazarene P90X group.

Finally, one thing that also stuck out to me during our gathers is how we as Nazarenes have exchanged a theology of worship that uses Word and Table for Word and Altar. The only response we seem to know as a church is to bring people forward for an altar experience. Each of our worship gatherings was crying out for the Eucharist. Not once in a rare gathering of the church body did we come to the Lord’s Table together. This is a tragedy. We don’t seem to know what we are missing.

Give Some Love this Christmas

If you are look for some great gifts this Christmas and aren’t sure what to get might I suggest some for you.

Go to doma’s website and give the gift of home to an at risk mother and her children in Uganda, the Ukraine, Russia or Ethiopia. Your gifts and partnership with doma can literally be the gift of life for a family.

Another great place to shop is at Free the Girls. Buy a beautiful piece of clothing for a woman you love and help rescue women out of the sex trade.

Do you like giving gift cards? How about a Nazarene Compassionate Ministry gift card that the individual can choose to spend supporting a wide variety of compassionate ministries around the globe. That is a gift that keeps on giving.

Kindle Theology

After a week of reading books on my new Kindle I am reflecting today on the theology of such a device. It is always important to think about the theology of technology and how it effects our life. The Kindle and its effects are particularly intriguing. On the good side there is the ability to carry around a huge library with you wherever you go. This is especially helpful if you are in a place that has the internet, but little access to the books you wish to enjoy. For my buddy Dave in the Moz, a Kindle is a lifeline. The Kindle also has benefits of getting fast access to materials, and for the most part is more cost effective. It is certainly friendlier on the environment to have books that are widely distributed without having to be printed. That is a plus.

What are the downsides? Sharing is the first downside that jumps out at me. As my friend Maggie pointed out, as she invested in her call to ministry I shoved a constant stream of books her way to help guide her. As of right now with the Kindle that can’t happen. I think it will eventually, but for now that is a consideration. I am also wondering about retention and intimacy with the books we read. There is something different about holding the pages, feeling the book, physically writing your notes in the margins, and carrying a book around with you. You own it in a different way.

Consider the use of a Kindle for the Bible in particular. If you only ever read a Bible on a Kindle it would be a very different experience. Think about a beloved Bible that you have invested years of study into. The pages have a familiar feel. There are notes from sermons years past. There are memories attached to places and times when the scripture came alive for you. A physical Bible seems to many things an electronic one never can.

What do you think? What are the good/bad theological considerations of the technology of ebooks and Kindles? I would love to hear your thoughts.

Instead, for the 19th and 20th centuries that role went to the church in the United States. The US became the leader of the spread of Christianity around the world. The explosion of churches, denominations, Christian schools and scholars changed the face of Christianity. But, statistics are showing us that now the church in the US is in a lengthy decline. The youngest generation in our culture is moving away from organize religion in their quest for spiritual awakening. So will our mega-churches one day stand as museums rather than places of worship? Will the church in the US become as much as an afterthought at the church in Western Europe has become?

We are already seeing some evidence of a European like decline, but in the end that the US church will not follow the same path as the church in Europe for a number of reasons. The US Church is seeing similar patterns of socialization, declining cultural impact, and growing liberalism in many of the mainline denominations. That pattern has maintained itself, thus far. But mainline denominations ceded their place at the forefront of growth for the US Church long ago. Instead Evangelicalism has lead the way for most of the last century. (Which is certainly not to say that evangelicalism is entirely removed from main line church, but I am using a wide paint brush for this conversation)

The culture within Evangelicalism has within it certain distinct advantages over the more institutionalized church that beckons towards a different future. Evangelicalism has within it radical diversity, a bent towards cultural adaptation, and often a lack of limiting hierarchical structures that inhibit change. The diverse nature of evangelical churches, the wide range of leadership, and a powerful desire to reach the culture of the day open up the possibility for great spiritual awakening within our country even amidst powerful cultural change.

In our increasingly postmodern culture the evangelical church is already showing its adaptability. Ten years ago as the Emerging Church began there was a whole generation of evangelicals that looked at the church and saw how it had lost its first love. The evangelical church seemed out of date with a limited view of the gospel. But in ten years, which is such a short period of time, there has been tremendous adaptation taking place already within the evangelical church. There has been  a return to a fuller gospel, the birth of radically different churches that are missionally focused, and a new generation of leaders asking the questions that need to be asked.

The structures of the European churches and the culture they inhabited did not allow for such rapid change. They were the stalwarts of tradition in a world of change. Now, however, there seems such hopeful potential for the US Church to move beyond its limitations of the past 100 years and to reshape itself. As a Nazarene I can see these forces at work within our denomination. A decade ago I joked that we Nazarenes were the new Amish. We just decided to hold onto the culture of 1950s in the midwest rather than the 1600s in Germany. But that spirit has changed so quickly. The are so many signs of new growth and openess within our denomination.

Is the US Church in decline? Yes, it is. Is our culture becoming increasingly disinterested in organized religion. Yes it is. Does that mean the US Church is going the way of Europe. No I don’t believe it does. It does mean that the church 50 years from now will look and behave in radically different ways than today, but that is just fine. So long as we are willing to hold onto our mission as the people of God we will experience a new awakening for the church in our country.

I must begin this week by celebrating cringing over the Redskins victory yesterday over the Bears. Living in Chicagoland I am very thankful for the Skins covering me for all the trash talking I did yesterday (including yes, those comments I made from the pulpit). But that game was one of the worst played awesome games I think I have ever seen. Big kudos to the refs for helping us prevent two Chicago touchdowns within a minute and a bigger shoutout to Jay Cutler for his love affair with throwing to #23 DeAngelo Hall. Never let the fact that a player is on the other team prevent you from throwing to him over and over and over and over again.

We want to see God

Yesterday was a powerful day of worship at DCC. It was a day where we were all forced to answer the call to go all in. Are we going to keep trying to kinda be Christians or are we going all in? Are we going to settle for our dreams or are we going to go all in? Are we going to feel satisfied to accomplish reasonable things for the kingdom or are we ready to see God sized successes that require us to go all in?

I am so thankful for all of those in our church who took a public stand to say that they are all in. We spent the day yesterday in Hebrews 12 comparing and contrasting the Mountain of Fear with the Mountain of the Living God. Here in Hebrews 12 we get the the ‘how’ of becoming pure in heart. We are made holy by living in the presence of God.

What good news indeed is the coming of the Kingdom of God that we are given access to God! We are offered a seat at his table, as his children. We are granted an opportunity to have a life we could never experience on our own. And the reward for this life is that we get to see God.

Well that is our prayer at DCC. That is our commitment. We are going to live in the presence of God so that we can see God at work in and through our lives and our church.

Interesting Randomness

Did you know that Google is driving around unmanned droid cars? One day when a Google supercomputer is holding us hostage with our own nuclear missiles we will remember what John Connor told us.

Have you heard of Crowdspring? It is a website where you can submit your design needs along with an award attached and allow designers from around the globe to compete for your award. In a week we have had people from 4-5 different countries submit ideas for a new church logo. Check it out the designs here and tell me your ideas or favorites.

My interesting book recommendation for the week is Open Leadership: How Social Technology Can Transform The Way You Lead by Charlene Li. This isn’t a book about how to use social technology, although it has some good information on that. This is a book that examines the changes in community, organizations and leadership, that social technology illustrates for us. Very interesting and practical.

Of all the Beatitudes this is the one that makes me stop in my tracks and really think. My Wesleyan Holiness upbringing is both a blessing and a curse when reading this Beatitude. A part of me jumps straight on it and moves directly to holiness as the root of this Beatitude. Another part, however, really is working to balance out initial thoughts of personal holiness with the good news of the kingdom. How does a rich view of the kingdom shape our ideas of holiness?

This week I am exploring the pure in heart through a couple of lenses. First I am looking at Psalm 24 which tells us, “Who may ascend the hill of the LORD. Who may stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to an idol
or swear by what is false. He will receive blessing from the LORD and vindication from God his Savior.”

The second lens is the second half of Hebrews 12 which has rich ideas of both holiness and the kingdom of God. Hebrews 12 seems to tie together these ideas of holiness and the kingdom of God. Hebrews says, “14Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord. See to it that no one misses the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many……28Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, ²⁹for our ‘God is a consuming fire’.”

The first question to consider then with this Beatitude is why? Why is this Beatitude good news? What good news do the pure in heart need? This Beatitude seems closely tied to the blessing for those who hunger and thirst for righteousness. The need is the same. The coming of the kingdom of God is good news for the pure in heart because now they can experience a purity that they never could before and now they can see God in ways they never imagined. The longing to see God will be fulfilled for those hear and respond to the good news of Jesus.

With the coming of the kingdom then, how does is our understanding of holiness reshaped? The Pharisees had a very personal view of holiness that was external and regulated. Jesus preached a holiness that was internal and freeing. The holiness Jesus invites us to participate in is relational. This Beatitude ties purity into relationship. The pure in heart will see God. They will experience God in ways we can’t even imagine. They will discover God at work in the world in places hidden from the rest. They will experience a relational bounty of blessing from their connection to God.

So what thoughts do you have on holiness? How are we made holy? What are the biggest obstacles to seeing God? How has seeing God at work in your life and the world led to holiness?

The future of the traditional evangelical church as I see it is:

a.) mega churches continuing to grow, consolidating what is left of the Christendom populations, providing a traditional church services to the shrinking masses of already existing Christians and lapsed Christians coming back into the fold,

b.) smaller churches of under 200 slowly dying and eventually closing, and

c.) the birthing of new missional communities through  either seeding new missionary communities or transitioning (the aforementioned) dying small churches into vibrant places of mission.

Now David’s categories are very generalized, but they are helpful in thinking about what we are witnessing within our culture with the slow death of Christendom and the changing of the evangelical church.

My question today is what do you think about these categories and what type of church are you a part of? Further, if we continue to walk down these paths how will this changing landscape change the roles of pastors?

For our part, Duneland Community Church is decidedly a type B church moving towards being a type C. We have been through a major transition of mission in the past year. Not even ten years old the church already had experienced major decline and a bit of an identity crisis. But a rebirthing of our vision with a distinctly missional emphasis has brought a new life to our congregation.

What about your church?