Leadership

Worthy Risks: The Faith of Leap by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost

Posted by revd4 on Friday, October 19th, 2012 in Books, Leadership, Ministry, Reviews | Comments (0)

Some ten years ago (woah… pause to contemplate that I’m in my forties) I came across the book “The Shaping of the Things to Come.” This was my introduction to the world of Hirsch and Frost. This was one of the first books that I had encountered from the missional point of view, and while intriguing in many ways I have to say that my first impression was that I was somewhat underwhelmed.

After spending a large portion of my ministry dedicated to including folks who aren’t usually included in church life, Hirsch and Frost make a lot more sense. In fact I’m amazed at how much they’ve changed. In all honesty though, this book gives a really good exploration of the kind of ministry and leadership that is required for the 21st century.

While it covers a wide variety of themes, I want to lift up one that I believe to be of critical importance, and what I therefor find to be the strength of this book. This theme would be the nexus between leadership and liminality.

Liminality is a concept originated by the anthropologist Victor Turner. Turner was describing the dynamics of initiation and coming of age rituals. In this context he was describing the transitional moments between being a “child” and being an “adult” where one is neither. Here is a description from Frost and Hirsch:

‘Liminality‘ is defined as a ‘threshold experience‘ that comprises of any kinds of ‘danger, marginality, disorientation, or ordeal and tends to create a space that is neither here nor there, a transitional stage between what was and what is to come.’

The biggest issue regarding the future of our churches is not informational. Within an hour anyone can look at the statistics and dynamics regarding the cultural disconnect between the established church and the culture at large. Knowing more of these statistics is not an answer.

5 years ago I was preaching in a bar trying to pull together some folks to start a church. I went there because that’s where the people who I felt called to reach, the people who my heart breaks for were located and felt comfortable. I was not trained to do that. I didn’t want to do that. It was uncomfortable and disorienting to say the least. It was liminal.

I believe the biggest need is not acquiring more information, but rather the capacity to lead risk-averse institutions to reorient themselves for our contemporary situation. This reorientation requires leading people through the requisite disorientation. Most of all, it requires leaders willing to go through the uncomfortable disorientation themselves. This is the core experience of liminal leadership, and it is the strength of this book. I recommend reading Faith of Leap not as a “how to” book, but rather as a “how to be” book on leadership.

-D

My Best Shot at Defining “Missional”

Posted by revd4 on Friday, May 25th, 2012 in Church, Ecclesiology, Identity, Leadership, Mission, UU | Comments (4)

In the conversation on church growth the idea of being “missional” has become a trendy topic as of late. It has its enthusiasts, which I count myself as one, who see incredible possibilities for the future of the progressive church. It also has an incredible amount of confusion surrounding what exactly all these “missional” types are talking about, and questions regarding whether it is even relevant. So this post is my best shot at defining what missional means.

I recently had a DOC executive take time to connect with me and we had a great conversation about ministry, church planting, and the changing culture’s effect on faith and the church. It was an exciting talk, not only because he seemed to “get me”, but he also articulated some exciting denominational responses to the current challenges the church faces.

The DOC (Disciples of Christ) is a denomination closely associated with the UCC’s. Like the UCC’s and the UU’s they are on the whole very liberal, aging, more compassion oriented than soul-winning in their outreach, and place a high value on being inclusive. They are a denomination with 3600 churches and 650,000 members and have been struggling under the weight of cultural trends antagonistic to our traditional churches.

DOC church plant stands up against religious bigotry

However, the amazing part of their statistics is over 700 of those 3600 churches have been started in the last 10 years reaching 50,000 new people. This is all part of their 2020 vision which is an initiative to start 1000 congregations in 1000 ways. These new congregations reach an incredibly diverse array of people in diverse ways from Hispanic, to Welcoming Congregations, to the Alternative.

I share this because it gives a tangible example of what it might look like for a non-evangelical mainline liberal denomination to engage in missional work. Now this is not to say that the DOC’s are surging in growth and have turned everything around, but it does show that even an older denominational bureaucracy can open up to new ways of thinking and practice.

I think the simplest way to understand what missional means is to think of it as one end of a spectrum of how the church orients itself in the world. On one end of the spectrum would be the church as a sanctuary where the church is a refuge from the world. In a sanctuary style church the purpose of the church is focused on the members who are already there. This can take on different forms, but you can imagine a church where decisions place the comfort of current members as the highest priority.

When the word mission or missional is used you can imagine the other end of the spectrum, where the church is oriented around its connection with the world. In this perspective decisions place the relationship between the church and its neighborhood (or more precisely the ‘focus’ of its mission), as the highest priority. This can also take on very different forms, but the main thing is that the focus is shifted from who is inside the walls to who is outside.

Most of our churches fall somewhere in between. To speak of being missional is simply about naming where on this spectrum we are practicing our faith.

I believe the reason why this is resonating to a growing group of leaders has to do with the fact the cultural landscape has changed so dramatically that the sanctuary style of church is experienced as irrelevant to a growing segment of the population. The struggles of the traditional denominations and churches over this cultural disconnect have been elaborated pretty extensively at this point. For this reason, out of necessity, leaders are looking for ways to overcome this disconnection and mission provides the church a possibility.

I imagine the missional perspective is annoying to some, or even threatening, because the focus is not on who’s here but on who is missing. In that sense it’s not about the democratic process of church members that is quite common in a sanctuary style of church. Rather a missional perspective is about the vocation of the church. It is about the calling of our faith to engage the culture around us.

What I find very helpful about missional thinking is that it provides a comprehensive framework to work through the challenges that congregations are facing at this time. It moves the reference point of where we “do” church from inside the congregation, to doing church from within the community we are seeking to reach. This shifts the cultural reality away from the self-reinforced bubble that marks so many churches. Since cultural context impacts faith, this shift alters the way we answer a whole host of questions from worship, to theology, to leadership, and other practices of the church.

Perhaps the most challenging aspect of this shift for us all is that it raises the question once lifted up by Theodore Parker in his sermon “The Transient and the Permanent in Christianity.” That question challenges us all to discern what are the core spiritual commitments of the church which lead to transformation, and what are the cultural commitments that determine who is included? That question also serves as a warning for how easily the two become confused.

Finally I think its important to point out that missional thinking is not about getting rid of existing churches. It isn’t about taking anyone’s church away from them. It isn’t about privileging one particular cultural group over another. In fact it’s the opposite. What it is about, and what true mission is always about, is expanding the scope and diversity of who is included beyond what it is now.

-Dave

3 Clues to the Mission and Myths of Contemporary Worship

Posted by revd4 on Wednesday, February 29th, 2012 in Church, Leadership, Media, Universalism, Worship | Comments (0)

I remember a few years back attending a workshop on contemporary worship put on by my denomination’s General Assembly. I attended hoping for some guidance for Micah’s Porch and especially to see what other church’s were doing. Unfortunately the answer was not much. Turned out the workshop featured speakers who did not actually lead congregations using contemporary worship. Sometimes you just gotta laugh or you might end up crying.

But over the last 5 years I am impressed and surprised at how much things have changed.

As less and less people connect with the traditional worship popular in the old-line liberal denominations the subject of contemporary worship is drawing a much greater focus. What is clear to everyone is that the Boomers may be the last generation to reliably connect to traditional worship. What that means is that there is an urgent need for the progressive church to change worship to reach a changing world. The big fear is that if we wait until the millennials are having kids to begin working on worship that speaks to gen-x’ers, well, lets just say it would be a very great example of very poor stewardship.

For those of you whose weekly worship experience is not contemporary, but you find yourself struggling with the challenge of updating your church for the 21st century my heart goes out to you. Although every situation is different, it is likely that the subject of contemporary worship has come up, and with it a lot of questions, and perhaps even more opinions. At times it may feel hard to get a handle on exactly what it even is. It is to those of you wrestling with transforming worship, and your church, that I write this post.

While I cannot offer any easy answers or a sure fire model, I can offer up some clues and hopefully dispel some myths regarding contemporary worship.

Myth #1: Contemporary worship is about using contemporary rock music.

This is one of the most easily made misconceptions about contemporary worship. While it is true that having a worship band that sounds like Nickleback isn’t going to happen in a traditional service, it is best not to define contemporary worship by any particular form of music or media. A better understanding would be that the word “contemporary” does not describe any particular worship element, music or otherwise, but rather “contemporary” defines the people who you are trying to reach and include in the life of the church.

Myth becomes Mission with worship that is relevant to people living in a contemporary culture.

Myth #2: Contemporary worship will bring back our youth and young adults who have left the church.

While this is a very noble goal and certainly a passion for many adults. The problem is that using contemporary worship as a youth retention strategy may not be realistic. There are many reasons for youth and young adults to leave the church that have been well explained elsewhere. Among these I would add the observation that the youth church experience is heavily shaped by its own unique cultural – religious blend that is difficult to replicate and it is often almost as alien to contemporary seekers as traditional worship. The point being that if this is your primary reasoning for transitioning to contemporary worship you may find yourself unnecessarily disappointed.

Myth becomes Mission when the worship vision grows in its creative use of culture to build a bridge between our faith and the people you’d love to reach and include.

Myth #3: Contemporary worship is dumbed-down worship.

This idea often gets expressed by claiming one’s cultural preference is superior to others. I remember a respected minster, and someone who I deeply respect, explaining to me the critical nature of learning traditional hymns and how contemporary worship would destroy the faith because people wouldn’t be able to sing ‘spirit of life’ and ‘Rank by Rank’. It was kind of like experiencing the mirror image of the old “rock music is from the Devil” argument. The reality is that contemporary worship forces theological clarity and depth in order to have a real message that can be really heard by the emerging contemporary culture.

Myth becomes Mission through worship leadership that loves people enough to contextualize worship for their culture while authentically deep enough to still contend for the saving message of faith.

I think the phrase “meet people where they are at” best summarizes the vision.

So there you have it, a few clues that hopefully gives you some working definitions in order to get deeper into this and ultimately help you discover what contemporary worship might look like in your congregational situation. I hope to hear about and experience your worship discoveries some day for myself.

In the mean-time enjoy some contemporary non-rock worship (from the Quakers).

peace and grace,

Dave

Leadership in the Declining Church

Posted by revd4 on Monday, February 20th, 2012 in Church, Culture, Ecclesiology, Leadership, Mission | Comments (6)

Diana Butler Bass’ following words are critical for any clergy, lay leader, denominational staff who cares about the church’s future:

In a typical week, less than a quarter of Americans attend a religious service, down from the half of the population who were regular churchgoers a generation ago.

In her essay The End of Church Bass lays out in stark relief the conditions that the established religious institutions are struggling to navigate. The reality is that for us who are in some way tied to the institutions of religious leadership and who care about their future are in a hard spot. The fact that things aren’t working the way they once did has sunk in and is too obvious to ignore.

For decades, mainline Protestants have watched helplessly as their membership rolls dwindled, employing program after program to try to stop the decline. In the last 15 years, conservative Protestant denominations have witnessed significant erosions in membership, money and participation — with some of the greatest drops in groups like the Southern Baptist Convention that once seemed impervious to decline.

There certainly are some that may be ignoring the degree of the issue, and thinking that this is just a matter of some key tweeks to musical repertoires or technology. In fact the idea of a new model or silver bullet program is a seductive lure almost too good not to latch on to in hopes of righting the church’s decline. Over the years I’ve tried a few of these myself only to be disappointed in their lack of overall effectiveness. But the problem of the church’s irrelevance to the spiritual seeking public is deeper than any particular program’s capacity to overcome.

In 10 years, those willing to identify themselves primarily as “religious” plummeted by 45 percentage points.

The truth is that we are dealing with two truths that may seem frustratingly contradictory on the surface. The first truth is that in the eyes of the general public the church is the bottom option for engaging the sacred. This truth is easily summarized by the numerical declines of religious denominations and associations. It is a truth that is painfully felt in many local congregations.

The other truth is that the level of spiritual yearning and concern seems to be exploding. Whether the pathways are self-help, book clubs, groups of friends staying up late “to figure it all out,” drugs, yoga studios, or social reform protests the spirit is bubbling up everywhere. Everywhere that is, except inside the church.

While “religion” means institutional religion, “spirituality” means an experience of faith. Large numbers of Americans are hankering for experiential faith whereby they can connect with God, the divine, or wonder as well as with their neighbors and that lead to a more profound sense of meaning in the world. Maybe Americans once called this “religion,” but no more. Americans call it “spirituality.”

These two truths might be spelled out this way. The church used to be where all of the above took place. Now this is taking place outside the church. And the real rub is this. It is almost impossible for the current faithful stewards of the institutional church to personally relate to what’s going on outside. The result is that when such reports come out about what people are seeking there is always a chorus of church folks saying “they’re talking about our church, we have exactly what they’re looking for!”

I would be wary of any leadership argument that suggests we can change things by demanding that we stay right where we are on our collective comfortable asses. This is like the tried and true argument about church growth happening when the younger generation returns because they have kids. The brilliance of the argument is in its action plan – just sit and wait, no change necessary. Of course religious education numbers are declining as the boomer generation’s kids age up (and then usually leave the church. )

Other arguments tend to focus on why what’s happening won’t effect us because of certain theological particularities, and still others revolve around the more self-centered “our purpose should be to serve the people already here,” and “if they want to come they’re more than welcome.”

Meanwhile the world moves into something entirely new and surprising:

The end of conventional church isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Christianity after religion, a faith renewed by the experience of God’s spirit, is closer to what Jesus hoped for his followers than the scandalous division, politics, and enmity we have now. Will there still be Christianity after the end of institutional religion? Yes, there will be. But it is going to be different than what Americans have known, a faith responsive to the longings of those who are expecting more spiritual depth and greater ethical integrity rather than more conventional church. Indeed, I suspect that the end of church is only the beginning of a new Great Awakening.

There is an incredible opportunity for bold leadership in this time. I see the fundamental question for the church’s leadership as this:

Will the church continue to put forth its resources and work to slow the decline of its current institutional incarnation.

Or will we reorient our mission to connect with the vast majority of Americans and be a part of this era’s “new Great Awakening.”

Which path seems more faithful to you?

peace and grace,

Dave

Wanted: Faith Seeking a Home

Posted by revd4 on Monday, February 6th, 2012 in Conversations, Grace, Humanity, Incarnation, Leadership, Love Wins, Mission | Comments (2)

These days finding the way forward with your faith, inside or outside of the church is a frustrating process. Its not that there are no answers out there, in fact the problem may be just the opposite. There are few things more annoying than getting an answer to a question that your pretty sure you weren’t asking.

I admit, I love talking about faith, and where to go next with it, how to express my faith more fully and abundantly. In church leadership this question of where to go next, or what we “should” be doing, and how to get there is well worn territory. So in the midst of thinking about the how what and where of moving forward and reaching toward the finish line of some vision (whatever the goal may be), I’d like to offer a brief respite from all of that.

Lets do that, by dwelling not on the finish line, but rather by dwelling on the starting line. In my experience it is very easy to get drawn into envisioning wonderful and creative answers for our lives, that can become disconnected from our lives. And unfortunately this ‘possibility thinking’, by whatever name it goes by, inside or outside the church bleeds over into our spiritual lives.

Let me be clear, this is not a call to stop dreaming and questioning and envisioning. Rather it is an invitation to stop looking for these answers long enough to make sure you are asking the questions from a good and faithful place. Or another way to say it, we need to remember that without a starting line, the finish line makes no sense. The starting line is the environment that deeply determines your trajectory, it determines which race you are running, including the way you view future possibilities.

So where do you build your house of faith? Where do you put down the foundations to create a spiritual home? Maybe the starting line is here in the streets of need like Julie Clawson? (hat tip to Steve Knight)

Think about her story and who do you find your heart going out to? Who can you connect with?

Maybe its here, finding a home in a humbling walk with God. In what Kathy Escobar calls downward mobility, her starting line begins as she connects with insecure and shattered spirits, including her own.

I’ll highlight that last line:

“One thing we all have in common is a deep need to be loved and to love, so really that’s the starting point”

What is your starting point? Honestly, where is your starting point?

Because maybe how you think about where you are going and envisioning how you’ll finish is not the right question. Maybe the really important question to answer in your life is where are you starting?

Where you begin is where your faith will build its home, so discern your starting place faithfully and gracefully.

It will make a deep difference in how you’re running the race, the people your running it with, and who you’re running it for…

peace and grace,

-D

Leadership

Worthy Risks: The Faith of Leap by Alan Hirsch and Michael Frost

My Best Shot at Defining “Missional”

3 Clues to the Mission and Myths of Contemporary Worship

Leadership in the Declining Church

Wanted: Faith Seeking a Home

Join In

Popular Posts

Good Voices

Meta