iJesus

Cool Jesus
Originally uploaded by isc_luis_herrera

I have the key to reaching the world for Jesus: We ride the popularity wave of the iPod, iPhone and iTouch and market a reinvented iJesus.

The traditional Jesus is as dated as 8-track tapes. In today's world, even CDs are being replaced by mp3s. We need a Savior who is technologically savvy.

We've been doing cross-marketing for years, what with the John 3:16 guy in the end zone and athletes thanking Jesus for helping them to be successful. We just need to be more diligent. Maybe we could buy the naming rights to Wrigley Field. How does Jesus Saves Stadium sound?

Of course, we'll have to update our logo. The cross is iconic, but overdone. We need a fresh, new twist. Even Pepsi has updated their logo.

We need a cool Jesus, one that will boost consumer confidence and turn around our economy.

If this sounds like a good idea, head over to ChristianityToday.com and read Jesus Is Not a Brand by Tyler Wigg-Stevenson. Here are a few quotes:

When it's just you and Jesus, you (the consumer) "invite him" (the product) "into your heart" (brand adoption) and "get saved" (consumer gratification).

If you feel like a used-car salesman talking about Jesus, the solution to the perceived lack of authenticity isn't a smoother pitch—it's a renewal of the church.

In a consumerist society, my identity comes from what I consume.

Spiritual consumers, therefore, will approach the church with the same narcissism they bring to other brands. What am I expressing about myself if I buy Brand Jesus? How will Christianity fulfill my vision for me?

Preaching and evangelism that focus on the benefits of becoming a Christian present a message not fundamentally different from commercial advertising about the existential benefits of this car or that soap.

We live in neighborhoods of single-family homes populated by people like us, go to church with people like us, consume media targeted at people like us, and shop with people like us. All of this makes us more reluctant to inhabit a world with people who are not like us.

If we treat the gospel like a commodity, can we fault nonbelievers for thinking that the cross is just another logo?

Spiritual consumers will come to Christianity as do window shoppers at a mall, wanting a spirituality tailor-made to their preferences.

Tyler focuses on evangelism, but consumerism is deeply embedded in North-American Christianity. It won't be long until we have Consumer Reports reviewing churches and rating the programs that they offer.

Pastor Rod

This Is Not Your Father’s World

The hymn "This Is My Father's World" uses an antiquated view of the universe as a poetic device:

This is my Father's world,

And to my listening ears,

All nature sings and round me rings

The music of the spheres.

"The music of the spheres" comes from the idea that the earth was surrounded by rotating, transparent spheres upon which were fixed the sun, moon, stars and planets. And these spheres operated according to ratios similar to those found in reflected in the harmonic scale. No one still believes that the earth is the center of the universe or that the sun rises and sets every day, but we still use that language metaphorically.

The key is that we know this is figurative language. It doesn't shape our actual perception of the world.

Every fifth-grader knows that the geocentric view of the universe was replaced by a heliocentric view. Johannes Kepler then refined the sun-centered model by discovering that the orbits of the planets were ellipses rather than pure circles.

A similar transition has happened in the world of communication.

Marshall McLuhan popularized the phrase, "The medium is the message." The point is that the method we use to communicate is at least as important as the message we think we are transmitting. As new communication media appear, they also shape the culture.

M. Rex Miller has written an analysis of these changes from the perspective of the church. The Millennium Matrix suggests that the way we store and distribute information changes our worldviews.

At the time of Jesus, the culture was oral. This prevailed until the advent of the printing press which gave birth to a print culture. Television ushered in the broadcast culture. Finally, computers and the Internet produced a digital culture.

The book contains a detailed matrix of the various cultures and their characteristics. (A brief PDF version can be found here.) For example, in the oral culture truth is relational. The credibility of a message is based on the credibility of the messenger. In the print culture truth is based on principle. Logic and other tools of deduction are used to verify the message. In the broadcast culture truth becomes existential. The message is validated through experience. In the digital culture truth is contextual. Community tests and validates reality.

We'll return to some other aspects of The Millennium Matrix, but first I want to make clear that this is not a generational analysis.

In 1990, I attended a seminar sponsored by The Church Growth Institute called "How to Reach the Baby Boomer." It was based upon research described in the book Great Expectations: America and the Baby Boom Generation, by Landon Y. Jones. This seminar had a profound impact on the North American church.

The idea was that Baby Boomers had similar experiences and expectations. Formulas could be devised to reach them with the gospel and to get them involved in attending church. Demographics became an essential tool in church growth. The seeker-driven model was canonized. Consumerism became the focus of church programs and ministries.

This approach was so "successful" that church leaders tried to adapt it to the following generations. Various names were suggested (gen-x, busters, MTV generation, millennials) but none of these really caught on. Furthermore, those who followed the boomers were not as monolithic in their attitudes and experiences. Many of their characteristics were seen as reactions to the values of the boomers.

The church growth industry produced strategies, methods and programs to reach these generations. But something just didn't click. These approaches were not as effective.

Into this milieu came the emerging and missional movements. The resulting confusion has left pastors and denominational officials baffled to this day.

First, they tend to see these movements as identical. Even though there is considerable overlap between the emerging and missional movements, they are significantly different.

Second, they tend to view them as a generational phenomenon. While many of the people who make up these movements are younger, they are not simply expressions of age and shared experiences. In fact, many of the key figures in these movements are boomers.

We now live in a world where generational analyses are less and less useful.

It is important that The Millennium Matrix not be understood as a description of younger generations. It is rather a description of the world in which we all live. Yes, some older people still try to live in the print and broadcast cultures. But we all live in a digital age.

Let's look at the way the oral, print, broadcast and digital ages view leadership.

In the oral culture the leader is a steward. The steward acts as a caretaker for the entire household as a representative of the owner, fulfilling his intentions.

In the print culture the leader is a manager. The manager uses command and control, division of labor, and vertical integration to maximize efficiency and production. The assumption is that people need to be structured and tightly supervised to be productive.

In the broadcast culture the leader becomes the inspirational leader. The focus becomes releasing the potential of individuals.

In the digital culture the leader becomes a facilitator. Management takes on a less definable structure and acts more like a web of collaboration.

The church still seems to be enamored by the larger-than-life leader. (See Joel Osteen.) Yet the digital culture requires something very different:

Congregants in the emerging digital culture are hungry for leaders who are approachable, touchable, accessible, transparent, and real. They want to connect with someone who is unscripted, unrehearsed, and not "on." They want a real person who walks among them, not someone who periodically comes down from the mountain to deliver a prescription for life or platitudes of hype.

M. Rex Miller, The Millennium Matrix: Reclaiming the Past, Reframing the Future of the Church, pp. 154–155

The values of these cultures are also different. The oral culture valued reliability. The print culture valued productivity. The dominant value of the broadcast culture is quality. The highest value of the digital culture is creativity.

In the print and broadcast cultures, community is a technique.

Community becomes a strategy, a means to retain the numbers, instead of the end or the purpose from the very outset. That inversion seems to be an inherent trap that many churches focused on numerical growth succumb to.

M. Rex Miller, The Millennium Matrix: Reclaiming the Past, Reframing the Future of the Church, p. 260

But in the digital culture, community is the goal.

If what we offer is a weekly experience or presentation that does not raise the urge or provide the opportunity for connection resulting in community, then we might as well take down our label as church and proclaim our facility a house of religious entertainment.

M. Rex Miller, The Millennium Matrix: Reclaiming the Past, Reframing the Future of the Church, p. 182

Miller suggests that the church needs to embody eight values in the digital age:

• Agility
  
• Authenticity
  
• Cohesion and balance
  
• Resiliency and forgiveness
  
• Sustainability
  
• Open-endedness
  
• Accessibility
  
• Collaboration
  

This book does not provide the final word on the factors that shape our world and the context in which the North American church finds itself. But it does provide important insights and raises significant questions.

But remember, this is not our Church or our mission. It is God's. We are not charged with saving the world. It is not our job to devise the ideal strategy.

Our responsibility is to be aware of the world in which we live, to be open to the various ways in which God is working in that world, and to be willing to assume the role that God calls us to.

While this is not your father's world, it is your Father's world:

O let me ne'er forget

That though the wrong seems oft so strong,

God is the ruler yet.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

The Prince goes to church

A Machiavellian Primer on Church Growth

• The greatest moral good is the preservation of the church (denomination).
  
• Any actions to preserve the church (denomination), no matter how cruel, are always justified.
  
• The only real concern of the pastor (denominational leader) is the acquisition and maintenance of power.
  
• The pastor (denominational leader) must do whatever is necessary to keep his power.
  
• The pastor (denominational leader) should seek to be feared and loved, but it is more important to be feared than to be loved.
  
• During a siege a pastor (denominational leader) will "keep the morale of his subjects high while removing all dissenters."
  
• The authority of the organization must be supported by a show of power that makes obedience inevitable.
  
• While the pastor (denominational leader) comes to power by his own initiative, skill and talent, it is useful to convince others that he is under divine appointment.
  
• Most followers do not want freedom. They want security. The few who want freedom can be bought off with honors or eliminated.
  
• A pastor (denominational leader) must contrive to earn for himself the reputation of a great leader.
  

It may seem to some that these principles are extreme. But let me reassure you that they are practiced in many places within the western church. While they are never stated so explicitly, these principles are currently being taught in leadership books and seminars.

Just as sports fans are ultimately responsible for the absurdly high salaries of star athletes, consumer Christians are complicit in maintaining this situation. They flock to the church or denomination that has the most visible trappings of success. They ignore the machinations of the leaders because "they are doing so much good."

God have mercy on us.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Walk This Way

In the movie Young Frankenstein there is a classic comedy scene where "Igor" (Marty Feldman) tells Dr. Frankenstein (Gene Wilder) to "walk this way." This scene inspired the hit song by Aerosmith.

There is a similar misunderstanding in the church, which would be hilarious if it were not so tragic. Congregations try to mimic "successful" churches and end up without either success or anything resembling a church. Reverend Russell Rathbun writes (HT: Maggi Dawn):

Nothing is sadder than to see a beautiful congregation of fifty member that has been around for a hundred years in a small town in rural Iowa turn them selves inside out chop up their organ, spend what little money they have on technology (cordless mic.s and keyboards are favorite starters, then on to the projector and the power point) all because one of the board members attended a Willow Creek training and bought the "How To" book at the sales table on the way out.

The church ends up having to watch kindly Mr. Sundquist fumble with the sound system, able to get from it only ear piercing feed back, while the forty nine year old volunteer youth director tries to rap.

He likens this to trying to wear someone else's clothes. The book of Acts, he argues, is not a "how to" book. We shouldn't try to mine it for the "biblical principles" for growing a successful church.

The only thing worse than wearing someone else's hip new clothes, is wearing someone else's old clothes.

But this is not only true for the early Church in the book of Acts. It is also true for the "seeker-driven" model of Willow Creek and Saddleback Church. Not only are the strategies and methods a poor fit for most congregations, but the days of the church service as a late-night talk show or as a rock concert are over.

So what do you think?

Why are church leaders so eager to copy the methods of others? Why are new churches trying to become megachurches "right out of the box"? Why do small churches have such an inferiority complex?

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Put the Credit Card Away

I've noticed with some concern how parents feel enormous pressure to spend money they don't have on their children at Christmas.

Brant Hansen provides a gentle word of advice for those parents.

It's time that the Church made a stand against this materialistic, consumeristic tradition. Let's quit spending so much money on our children (and ourselves.) Let's quit buying expensive toys for the kids in our Adopt a Family programs. Let's refuse to buy anyone a gift card.

I'm not against gifts.

Gifts are great. But the boxes we wrap at Christmas aren't real gifts.

Among other things,

• Real gifts are especially suited for the recipient.
  
• Real gifts are not made in expectation of a return gift.
  
• Real gifts are unexpected, surprising in some way.
  

Give your family, your friends and yourself permission to get off the Christmas gift escalator.

Good grief, how did we get to the place where a Lexus is a reasonable Christmas gift?

Whether you are "that guy" or not, you don't need to buy your wife a diamond.

American retailers are not going to come by your house in February and help you make your credit card payment.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Shiny Happy People

In 1991, REM released the song, "Shiny Happy People":

Everyone around / Love them, love them
Put it in your hands / Take it, take it
There's no time to cry / Happy, happy
Put it in your heart / Where tomorrow shines
Gold and silver shine.
Shiny happy people holding hands
Shiny happy people laughing.

While the song was a parody of a Chinese propaganda poster, it could well have been a satire of North-American Christianity.

It seems that we are obsessed with celebrity, wealth, power, attractiveness and success.

Even our counter-culture movements within the faith have their own celebrities.

Michael Spencer tells the story of a co-worker who certainly would not fit most people's image of the beautiful people.

One arm barely works. One eye is non-functional. One leg is almost immobile. He's deaf in one ear. One side of his head is terribly scarred. He's a soft-spoken, gentle man, but obviously life has not been gentle with him.

Yet this man is a spiritual giant.

Standing in front of our students, saying again and again that God is good. His suffering and loss can't be measured, but his faith has grown every step of the way. In his gentle, Minnesota accent, he says over and over, "God is good. I'm so thankful."

Jesus did not hang out with the popular folks. He spent his time with the outcasts, the untouchables. And those are the very ones that he built his church on.

So today, we spend our time trying to convince others that we are Somebody.

We spend money on our vanity, while others are starving.

We pour billions of dollars into entertainment to stave off boredom, while God is calling for people to participate in the greatest drama in the universe.

And we pastors are the worst offenders.

We've neglected the call to discipleship and self-denial and replaced it with the promise of a "happy life"—mostly because that is the dream that we are chasing.

God forgive us.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Market-Driven Church

Life in North America is dominated by market forces. And church life is no exception.

When believers are looking for a church, they do an informal (or formal) cost-benefit analysis.

It might look something like this:

Benefits	Costs
Quality of worship	Driving time
Skill of preacher	Giving expectations
Children's ministry	Volunteer expectations
Facility features	Facility limitations
Youth pastor?
Prestige of church in community
Business networking opportunities
Variety of service times
Variety of service styles
Number of paid staff

Of course, one size does not fit all.

We all have personal preferences, and we take them with us to church. So we shop around until we find just the right fit.

Then we enter into an informal contract with the church and its pastor: We pledge a certain level of attendance, giving and volunteering in return for religious goods and services.

If the quantity or quality of those services drop below our expectations, then we are released from our agreement and become free agents.

But this mindset is not limited to the "consumer."

Churches market themselves with yellow-page ads, direct-mail pieces and clever sayings on the church sign.

The market-driven church becomes the data-driven church. Demographic reports dictate the long-term ministry strategy. Programs are designed around the felt needs of the community. The pastor is expected to be a technician rather than a theologian.

This video is only a slight exaggeration:

This one is dead serious:

Ian Littler warns

Beware the measurable. Neither growth nor effectiveness is a reliable indicator of faithfulness. Consumers are trained to believe (wrongly) that they alone are the final arbiters of what they need. For marketeers the real issue is church survival, which they perceive to be entirely in our hands rather than the concern of the God who calls the church into being.

The church has been called into existence by God and entrusted with his mission. This mission is not fashioned in response to marketing studies and surveys. It is a mission that is not always welcomed by the powers that be.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You To Be"

Addicted to “Success”

Western culture is obsessed with its image of success. Professional sports teams fire their coaches because they don't win championships. Businesses "need to show earnings growth to satisfy both equity analysts and investors." Even scientists succumb to the pressure to succeed and fudge the results of their research.

One doesn't need to engage in extensive investigation to discover that the same disease has infected the Church.

We must break with the big is better mentality of the Western world and learn the foolishness of the cross of Jesus, which says, "Small is beautiful." We must courageously open ourselves to the full outpouring of the Holy Spirit in order to increase the gifts of God in our life. If we are not willing to get radical for Christ, he will never be a radical force in our lives, and we will remain in our darkness and pain.

How to Build Spiritual Muscles, John Michael Talbot

The danger is not only spectacular failure when high-profile leaders crash and burn. But this addiction to "success" also prevents us from experiencing the true power of God which can only be known in weakness.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Missional “in quotes”

The missional church rejects the association of Christianity with American values and the association of the church with entertainment, marketing, and corporate business models. The missional church is reading both Scripture and culture with new eyes. It sees that what is determined by the Christian faith is more than being a good, upright citizen. It sees the church as something different from the smooth corporate model of business. This emerging church calls for honest, authentic faith that seeks to be church in the way of a more radical discipleship.
Robert Webber, Ancient-Future Evangelism, p. 129

Contrary to the perception of many critics of the "missional/emerging" Church, the motivation is not to make following Christ more comfortable. The motivation is to take discipleship seriously, to take Jesus seriously.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Missional Freedom

The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing, becomes nothing. He may avoid suffering and sorrow, but he simply cannot learn and feel and change and grow and love and live. He has forfeited his freedom. Only the person who risks is truly free.

Anonymous

I've been thinking over a few ministry encounters that took place over the past week and how I responded to them differently than I would have before I started cultivating a missional mindset.

Freedom from the pressure to put on a good show: Few people understand the pressure a pastor feels to make sure that the Sunday service is worthwhile for those who attend. While it has been quite some time since I feel the need to be entertaining on Sundays, I only recently realized that the "quality" of the sermon was not the primary factor in the "success" of the Sunday service. I no longer believe that I am responsible for the effectiveness of the Sunday service. I leave that in God's hands.

Freedom from the desperate need to "sell" the church: Another burden pastors commonly feel is the pressure to sell the services of the church to prospective "customers." When someone would call asking questions about our congregation, I would try to sell them. When people would visit on Sundays, I would try to convince them to come back the next Sunday. Now I no longer apologize for our deficiencies. I simply invite people to join us in the journey without putting pressure on them or on me.

Freedom from the fear of wasting my time: Because I am not pouring all my time and energy into the Sunday service, I now am free to "waste" my time when ministry opportunities come up. Being with people trumps just about everything else. I no longer do a cost analysis on my time. I can afford just to hang out with people without constantly telling myself that I have to get back to the office and "get some work done."

Freedom from the fear of wasting my charity: I also have found that I am now able to give to others without calculating whether my gift is a good investment. I can take the chance that my contribution will not produce the results I intended for them to produce. This is not to say that I am frivolous with financial contributions. But I can give away money in situations where there is still a chance that the person is taking advantage of me.

Freedom from the tyranny of busyness: I no longer feel the need to prove my value by staying busy. I have learned how to relax and enjoy life. I don't have to be always hurrying to a meeting or rushing to an appointment.

Freedom from the compulsion to produce results: I no longer believe that it is my job to produce results. My job is to be faithful to my calling and to be open to the ministry opportunities that God puts in my way. The results are his responsibility.

Freedom from the need to change people: Because I believe that the results are God's responsibility, I no longer feel the need to change people. Only God's grace can chance people anyway. I am willing to be a channel of his grace, but I leave the results up to him.

Freedom from the fear of inadequacy: Because the results are God's problem, I no longer feel overwhelmed by the magnitude of the needs I encounter. Of course, I am inadequate to meet those needs. But that is not my responsibility. My responsibility is to "be there" for others, to point them to the One who can meet there needs.

So what is your experience? Have you experienced a similar freedom in your ministry (whether you are a pastor or not)? Have you found other aspects of this freedom that I have overlooked?

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Missional “in quotes”

A congregation must become a place where members learn to function like cross-cultural missionaries rather than a gathering place where people come to receive religious goods and services.
Alan Roxburgh & Fred Romanuk, The Missional Leader, p. 13

Missional does not mean being hip and trendy. It means that we are on God's mission. It means that we are here to serve, not to be served.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Becoming Missional

Brian Russell has almost single-handedly given me hope that the Wesleyan Church has a chance to give up its addiction to church growth and business models for the church and that it might somehow figure out how to become a missional organization.

In this post, he lists 4 transitions that an existing congregation will need to make in order to become missional:

1. Reintroduce the apostolic narrative of Acts. "In many struggling churches, the people of God have lost the capacity to dream of what God might do in and through the community. One of the first steps in transitioning to a missional model is to help followers of Jesus Christ to begin to dream again dreams shaped by the Scriptures."

2. Move from surviving to living. "The goal of the Church of Jesus Christ is life in relationship to God." Surviving keeps us from living. Sacrificing for the future can also be an obstacle. A church must learn to live in the power of the kingdom in its current circumstances.

3. Move from consumerism to participation in the kingdom. "The people of God shift from consuming to becoming Kingdom-rooted entrepreneurs who seek to extend the influence and reign of God to the ends of the earth. Congregations shift from inviting people to have their needs met to unleashing people to change the world."

4. Shift from attractional methods to incarnational ministry. "The World no longer serves as a threat from which followers of Christ flee. Instead, the World becomes the venue for life and service in God's mission."

Sounds like he's pretty much got it right.

Pastor Rod

"Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be"

Gift Mode

Last week, I was watching and reading Miroslav Volf to find material about reconciliation that I could use for Sunday's sermon. In one of the articles, He mentioned Natalie Zemon Davis and her book, The Gift in 16th Century France. She says that people can operate in one of three modes: coercion mode, sales mode, or gift mode.

This intrigued me. So I did some research into gift theory.

This field was established in 1925 by Marcel Mauss. "Gifts are thought to be voluntary and altruistic, Mauss argues that they are obligatory and selfish" (Irven DeVore, Harvard Anthropologist). Gifts can even be used to manipulate and control others. Some economies appear to operate on the basis of obligatory gifts.

This raises the question of whether there can be such a thing as a true gift, a "free gift."

Jacques Derrida argues that four criteria must be met for there to be a "free gift":

• There is no reciprocity. The receiver of the gift does not return a gift to the giver.
  
• The recipient does not realize that he has received a gift. This way there can be no sense of debt caused by the gift.
  
• The giver must forget that he gave the gift. Otherwise, he would be able to benefit from the gift by thinking well of himself.
  
• The thing itself cannot appear as a "gift." As soon as the thing given is seen as a boon, it imposes a sense of obligation.

Clearly, Derrida believes that a real gift is impossible. Others (Russell Belk) have suggested more realistic criteria for true gifts:

• The gift must involve sacrifice by the giver. The giver gives of himself. A gift that cost nothing is not a true gift. King David said, "I will not sacrifice burnt offerings to the Lord my God that cost me nothing" (2 Samuel 24:24). This is behind the moral discomfort of "re-gifting."
  
• The gift must be given for the pleasure of the receiver. If the "gift" is given for some selfish purpose, it is not a gift. Husbands should take note, giving your wife something that you want is worse than no gift at all.
  
• The gift must not be a basic necessity. While a box of chocolates would make a suitable gift for most people, a bag of potatoes would be inappropriate. Another mistake husbands often make.
  
• The gift must be uniquely appropriate to the person. This is why giving money seems so "cold."
  
• The perfect gift surprises and delights the recipient. If the gift is expected, it ceases to be a gift.

Marshall Sahlins said rather cynically, "If friends make gifts, gifts make friends" (page 10)

Sometimes when people appear to be giving a gift, they are really operating in manipulation mode or transaction mode. A true gift is free of any obligation. But it is not just the giving end where there can be a problem.

The recipient of a gift can turn a true gift into a "transaction."

For most people, religion is a combination of transaction mode and manipulation mode.

In some forms of religion the worshipper uses the rites and ceremonies to manipulate the diety. Christians sometimes fall into this error. They think that if they are good that God owes them a good life. They try to put God into their debt.

Others have a higher view of the process. They don't stoop to manipulating God. They simply expect "what is fair." For them religion operates according to quid pro quo.

Now most Christians "know" that grace is the "unmerited favor of God." They "know" that salvation is a gift. They "know" that nothing can be done to earn God's love.

Problem is, they don't live that way.

Pastor Rod

"Helping you become the person God created you to be"

Fish out of Water

For fish, water seems a rather natural place to live. In fact, they are unaware of many of the qualities of their environment (if, that is, they are aware of anything at all). If you take a fish out of water, it becomes aware very quickly that it is in a new environment.

For humans, our culture is like water is to fish.

It seems normal, even essential to life. And we are often unaware of many of its qualities until we are placed in a different culture.

Dallas Willard describes culture as "what one thinks of as 'natural' and as requiring no explanation or even thought" (Renovation of the Heart, p. 97).

At the beginning of this year, I spent five weeks in Sicily teaching English. This was my second extended stay in our Sister City and my 11th visit to Italy. Altogether, I've lived in Italy almost six months (three months with the same family).

I've always been interested in cultural differences. That's one reason that I like to travel. And being in a different culture for an extended time, gives me a better understanding of the distinctives of my own culture.

During this last trip, I started to develop a deeper understanding of Sicilian culture and Italian culture. Some of the things I discovered may surprise you.

Italian culture is more materialistic than American culture. This is the land of the Renaissance, and the emphasis on beauty and appearance is deeply ingrained. Italians must have the latest designer fashions. They are always evaluating each other by their clothes. This translates into a preoccupation with "stuff."

Italian culture is more concerned with appearance than American culture is. Everything is about la bella figura. Women would never think about going out, even to the market, without full makeup and proper attire. Men never wear shorts, except at the beach, no matter how hot it gets. Drivers don't like to wear seatbelts because they ruin the laid-back impression they want to make.

Italian kids are more spoiled than American kids. There is a constant contest among Italian parents to see who can shower his child with more expensive toys and clothes. Mothers wait on their children like servants.

Italian culture is more celebrity driven than American culture. It's no accident that paparazzi is an Italian word.

Italians are more concerned with social status than Americans are. A college degree provides entrée into circles that others cannot enter no matter how successful they might become. There is a reason that the Italian language still has a formal "you." (The English version disappeared some time ago.)

Italians are more obsessed with sex than Americans. Many Americans think that Europeans are blasé about sex and nudity. They have topless beaches after all. Don't confuse more relaxed rules about nudity with a more relaxed attitude about sexuality. As hard as it may be to believe, advertisers use sex more blatantly in Italy than in America to sell all sorts of products. Paris Hilton has a seductive TV commercial for a mobile phone service. The satellite channel FX is racier than its American counterpart; at night it shows programs that are only available in American on adult pay-per-view. One of the popular Italian fashion brands uses a logo than depicts sexual intercourse. (And this logo is worn to school by young children.)

It might seem that the obvious conclusion is that American culture is not as bad as the doomsayers think.

But I have a little different reaction.

I found these extremes jarring. They made me even more aware of tendencies in American culture that trouble me.

However, I find the culture-war mindset unhelpful. It does little to change basic assumptions. This approach only makes decadent values look more appealing.

Nor do I think that things are worse now than they've ever been. There have been many depraved cultures in the history of mankind. And there are places in the world today that are more rotten than American culture in just about any component one might choose.

However, Christianity is not just a private matter. It has much to say about social evil. The proclamation "Jesus is Lord" has implications for how life is lived in the public square. The question is not whether Christians should speak out against sin that has become institutionalized in culture. The question is how can we do this effectively. (Another issue is that we must make sure that we address all social evil, not just the ones that we don't participate in.)

Let's take the twisted view of sex as an example.

Much of what Christians say about sex makes it sound as if we think the whole things is a bad idea. When the church warns people about the dangers of promiscuous sex, it only makes it sound more attractive. The words decadent, sinful and tempting are used in advertisements to make products more appealing.

We need to hear more of the message that sex is good. The Christian message is that God made human beings as sexual creatures. He designed those parts to fit together. In fact, he intended for it to be enjoyable.

But the more powerful a tool is, the more care must be exercised in its use.

We also need more warnings like this. Gene McConnell lists nine lies of pornography.

• Women are less than human
  
• Women are a "sport"
  
• Women are property
  
• A woman's value depends on the attractiveness of her body
  
• Women like rape
  
• Women should be degraded
  
• Little kids should have sex
  
• Illegal sex is fun
  
• Prostitution is glamorous
  

The bottom line of pornography is that

Pornography makes a profit from the ruined lives of young women and entraps men who will spend lots of time AND money succumbing to their product.

The first part of that statement is rather widely accepted. But the second part is rarely acknowledged. Women are not the only ones being exploited by pornography and other sexually explicit material.

Sex is used to manipulate people.

And it works. This is the main reason that sex is used in advertising. Sex sells. But it never delivers what it promises. Wearing that aftershave will not cause women to tackle you in the supermarket.

Sex is used to hijack our attention.

A hint of nudity and the promise of more will keep most men's attention for several minutes. We're afraid to look away for fear that we'll miss something. But this is no more than a tease. Many print ads are designed to look like a shocking display of nudity. But on closer inspection it's a boy rather than a girl. Or the "cleavage" turns out to an elbow or some other innocuous body part.

Television shows flirt with showing more and more nudity. But they can't deliver, because broadcast TV can only show so much.

Cable ups the stakes. Nudity is allowed, but there are still some limits. The limits are pushed, but men are left wanting more.

And so there is pay-per-view. Men pay big bucks for the ultimate in sexual titillation. But it is still just a tease. Surgically and digitally altered women are presented as "the woman next door." They tap in to men's deep fantasies and desires. But the "high" lasts only a short time after the show ends, leaving the viewer more cutoff from the real world, more desperate for true intimacy and more in debt.

Men may not see the harm being done to women by the "sexualization" of our culture (or may not care). But they should take a look at the way that sex is used to manipulate them, to steal their time and money, and to decrease their chances of finding true intimacy.

Pastor Rod

"Helping you become the person God created you to be"

Oprah’s Secret

Oprah recently devoted a couple of shows to The Secret, a book and a DVD movie about “the law of attraction.”

From Oprah’s site:

The Secret is defined as the law of attraction, which states that like attracts like. The concept says that the energy you put into the world—both good and bad—is exactly what comes back to you. This means you create the circumstances of your life with the choices you make every day.

This is a combination of Buddhism and self-help psychology.

But a few viewers were uncomfortable with the religious implications of The Secret. They asked if it didn’t contradict the teachings of Christianity. The panelists all smiled as if a child has just asked where the sun goes at night:

Michael says The Secret isn’t about contradicting religion—it supports it. “It actually goes underneath the culture and explains to you the sacred laws that these wonderful teachers have brought to us,” he says. According to James, The Secret is about supporting the great spiritual traditions in a more modern form. “It really is just putting Christianity, Judaism, all the great teachings into a current vernacular,” he says.

Of course, this view is nothing new. There are many who say that all religions are the same. But this assertion is naïve and self-contradictory.

Yet in an attempt to ride the wave of The Da Vinci Code, the producers of The Secret have announced that a great conspiracy has prevented the widespread implementation of The Secret. They even say that it was discovered by “the church” in the 20th century and then banned.

They claim that The Secret is old but that it has been known by only a few fortunate individuals. They claim that it holds the key to having one’s desires fulfilled. They claim that the world will experience a dramatic change now that The Secret is being revealed.

If you would like a detailed response to these claims, you should read the article by John Stackhouse.

But here is my quick analysis:

Positive thinking works. Our thoughts tend to be self-fulfilling prophecies.

We are responsible for our choices. Many people live as if they are victims. They spend so much energy complaining about the choices they do not have that they fail to take advantage of the choices they do have.

Self-reliance and self-esteem are not the answer to humanity’s problems. We do not need to “believe in ourselves.” We need help from “outside.” Our only hope is for Someone to rescue us from the disaster we’ve created for ourselves.

The Secret is both good and bad. Many people could benefit from some of the techniques presented in The Secret. But the underlying philosophy is dangerous. The answer to “all our problems” is not getting what we want. It is rather submitting to the true King who seeks to fulfill the deepest desires of our hearts (Psalm 37:4). And this submission often feels like moving away from the very things we think we really want. Jesus called it denying ourselves and taking up our cross (Luke 9:23).

And without that “giving up,” you cannot be his disciple, because you will still think you are in charge and just in need of a little help from Jesus for your project of a successful life. But our idea of a “successful life” is precisely our problem.
Dallas Willard, Renovation of the Heart, p. 243

The real secret is the “open secret” about Jesus Christ. All of human history was a preparation for the arrival of the Creator of the universe in a small Judean village 2000 years ago. The good news is that this King has defeated all the rival claimants to his throne and has freed his people from bondage to sin, Satan and death. And now we can live in the power of that victory as we are transformed from the inside to reflect the character of our Master.

Pastor Rod

“Helping you become the person God created you to be”

Why I Hate Mardi Gras (repost)

(This is a repost of something I wrote last year.)

You would expect a pastor to say that he doesn’t like Mardi Gras.

But you might be surprised why I don’t like it.

Is it because of the excessive drinking? Not really. There are many other situations when people drink too much and hurt themselves and others because they are intoxicated. I’m not in favor of excessive drinking. But that’s not the reason I hate Mardi Gras.

Is it because of the nudity? Nope. There’s just as much nudity at Spring Break. (And I have to admit that it does appeal to my hormones.) Sure, women flashing their breasts in public is not a healthy expression of sexuality. God has a much better, and more fulfilling, way to express and satisfy sexual desires. But the nudity is not the reason I hate Mardi Gras.

Is it because of the debauchery? This is nothing unique to Mardi Gras. People engage in all sorts of self-destructive behavior every weekend. They have been duped into abusing God’s gift of sex for a few moments of titillation, when God wants us to enjoy a lifetime of intimacy and fulfillment (with a fair amount of pleasure in the bargain). No, sexual decadence is not why I hate Mardi Gras.

I hate Mardi Gras because it reinforces several lies of the Evil One.

• The lie that “holiness” is about deprivation.
• The lie that “holiness” is dull and boring.
• The lie that we have to give in to temptation so that we can resist temptation in the future.
• The lie that forgiveness is cheap.

That’s why I hate Mardi Gras. It’s not just “a little harmless fun.” It’s propaganda by the Enemy to keep people from finding the life that God wants them to enjoy.

It is one more way that the Enemy distracts people from being serious followers of Jesus Christ.

Pastor Rod

“Helping you become the person God created you to be”

Missional Marketing

What is the difference between a missional orientation and a seeker-sensitive orientation?

One significant difference is the motivation for adapting the message of the gospel to the culture.

First, let me make clear that we do not have the option of a culturally free expression of the gospel. The gospel is not “timeless principles.” It is an account of good news. It is a report about a specific event that happened in a specific place at a specific time. The story of the gospel is inextricably intertwined with culture.

But the gospel transcends culture. The Christian Scriptures can withstand translation into other languages and cultures. (It is radically different from the Quran in this regard.) In fact, the four accounts of the gospel in the Bible had already broken cultural barriers before they were even recorded.

We do not even have the actual words of Jesus. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but his words are recorded in “street” Greek. Each writer sought to capture the sense of what Jesus said; he had no intention of being a human tape recorder.

Matthew tells his gospel in the framework of Hebrew culture. Mark recounts the same story in terms more at home in the wider Roman Empire. Luke seems to be working from a Greek foundation. John takes a different view entirely, focusing on the meaning of events in Jesus’ ministry.

Right from the start, there was never such a thing as a “Christian culture.”

In the past century or so, the Church has operated out of a culture that was distinct from the culture of its environment, but also different than the culture of the first Christians. This “Christian” culture was generally little different than the general culture, that is the general culture of a few decades before the current time.

Many western missionaries in that same period seemed to be as focused on instilling western culture as they were in proclaiming the gospel. It could be argued that they were unable to conceive of the gospel in any other terms than the prevailing (or dated) western culture.

Along came some mission-minded people who were culturally literate enough to see the foolishness of this strategy. People were rejecting the Church, and Jesus Christ, for reasons that had little to do with the essence of the gospel. They were rebelling against elements that had little or nothing to do with Christianity—even though these elements came from the culture of many Christians.

And so these pioneers removed the artificial, cultural barriers. This development is generally known as the seeker-sensitive movement.

But, as happens with any “adjustment,” there was an “over correction.”

In the effort to remove cultural barriers there was generated a momentum that tended to remove (or weaken) all barriers, even barriers inherent in the gospel itself.

Partly in reaction to this over correction, a significant part of the Church has taken a new direction. These people seek to proclaim the gospel in terms that challenge the “powers.” They make no effort to soften the offense of the gospel, but they are scrupulous to distance themselves from the offense of Christendom.

This movement often dismisses the previous movement as “mere marketing.”

And this charge has substance. The gospel has far too often been packaged and sold as another product in the marketplace. Success has often been defined in marketing terms. Not only were the methods taken from the world of business, but the measure of success was defined in “bottom-line” terms, even when the bottom line was “souls.”

But we need to be honest here. Marketing is inevitable. We are always marketing, either intentionally or unintentionally. “Non-marketing” is simply another form of marketing.

So the question is not whether we should market the gospel. But the question is what the message should be and how it should be communicated.

The missional movement seems to be at once counter-cultural and culturally sensitive.

The seeker-sensitive movement appeared to be motivated by a desire to remove barriers to make the gospel more accessible. The missional movement seems to be motivated by a desire to make the scandal of the cross more prominent by removing all cultural “noise” that might be confused with that offense.

But this is not as straightforward as it sounds. Even the prevailing explanations of the offense of the cross are usually loaded with ideas that have more to do with the Enlightenment than with the gospel.

This “offense” is usually explained in terms of personal sin and divine power.

But I would suggest that it runs much deeper than this. The real scandal of the cross is that Jesus won his victory in weakness and defeat.

As it is usually depicted, the cross is little more than bowing to a superior power. Even a tough guy like "Dirty Harry" Harry Callahan admits that “a man’s gotta know his limitations.” When we recognize that God is the sovereign, we give up our pretensions of being in control. But this is simply a wise “business” decision.

Too many people “come to Jesus” to enhance their lives: to win more football games, to make more money, to sell more widgets. Taking up our cross is no longer a radical submission; it is now a calculated investment.

What the gospel calls us to is something much more difficult. It calls us to trust in a Savior who could not “save himself.” It calls us to a life of power that is manifested only in weakness. It calls us to abandon ourselves to God’s story without any alternative “plot lines.”

Jesus is not the ultimate warrior. He is the outcast, the reject, the “fool.”

We are not called to “take prisoners” for Jesus. We are called to become prisoners for the gospel. The gospel is not just a different insider game. It is a complete rejection of all struggling for position and power.

This is the scandal of the cross.

It is not giving up bad habits. It is not changing the way we dress. It is not engaging in a program of moral improvement. The way of the cross may involve these things, but they are not the essence of that way.

At least that is what I think. What do you think?

Pastor Rod

“Helping You Become the Person God Created You to Be”

No More Frozen Pizza

I generally don’t make New Year’s resolutions. But this year I’m making an exception.

My resolution for 2007 is not to eat any frozen pizza.

Pizza is a strong candidate for my favorite food. I like deep dish pizza, stuffed pizza, thin crust pizza and authentic Italian pizza cooked in a wood-fired oven. I like pizza with mushrooms, onions, sausage, olives, pepperoni, green peppers, sun-dried tomatoes and just about anything else you can put on a pizza.

Pizza is also the food I am most likely to eat too much of.

I don’t eat sweets, so I am not tempted by pie, cake or ice cream. You can leave a bowl of M&M’s in front of me, and I won’t eat a single one. But pizza is a different matter. I’ve even forced down a slice of pizza when I was already stuffed.

So what’s the problem with frozen pizza?

The problem is that frozen pizza is not real pizza. Most of it is little more than cardboard with tomato sauce and “cheese” on it. Even the best frozen pizza is a weak imitation of the real thing.

If I’m going to have pizza, I want the real thing.

I don’t want to waste empty calories on something that fills my stomach and yet leaves me hungry—longing for the real thing.

Of course, this is bigger than pizza.

I’m also done with reduced-fat peanut butter, fat-free mayonnaise and turkey franks. But food is just the tip of the iceberg.

The prophet Isaiah records these words of the Lord:

Why spend money on what is not bread,
and your labor on what does not satisfy?
Listen, listen to me, and eat what is good,
and your soul will delight in the richest of fare (55:2).

Our lives are filled with fake junk.

We sit in our imitation leather chairs while we watch “reality” shows on TV that are interrupted by ads that tell a fictional love story that centers around instant decaffeinated coffee and by mechanically animated commercials selling us financial investments with a “personal touch.” We then go to our computers where we enter the virtual community of My Space while smoking low-tar cigarettes and eating “butter-flavored” popcorn.

Sundays are no different. We get up and eat Egg Beaters for breakfast. Then we drive 30 minutes to a church where we have a manufactured “worship experience” and listen to an entertaining monologue from a preacher who wishes he were Jay Leno.

Enough.

Jesus said, “I came so they can have real and eternal life, more and better life than they ever dreamed of” (John 10:10, The Message).

So why do we settle for imitation life?

We spend our time, energy and resources accumulating wealth, trying to make ourselves look attractive, buying the latest electronic gadget, going to trendy vacation spots, developing our abs, indulging in addictive pleasures, applying products to our bodies to make us look younger and scaling the never-ending ladder of “success.”

And the whole time our souls are starving.

I’m not talking about pagans, atheists or hedonists. I’m talking about people who claim to be among Jesus’ “sheep.” I’m talking about myself.

Do I really believe that God causes all things to work together for my good? Do I really believe that if I focus on the Kingdom of God that God will supply all my needs? Do I really believe that nothing can separate me from the love of God in Jesus Christ? Do I really believe that God intends to fulfill the desires of my heart? Do I really believe that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us? Do I really believe that my life can be suffused with love, joy and peace?

Then why am I gorging myself on frozen pizza?

Pastor Rod

“Helping you become the person God created you to be”

Controlling Grace

I’ve noticed a rather disturbing behavior in parishioners while participating in the means of grace known as Communion, the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper.

It is most obvious when they are partaking of the “wine.”

(Disclaimer: We use grape juice in little cups. I know that it has little continuity with Jesus passing around a cup of wine after the Passover meal, but there are other factors involved.)

Communion is supposed to be a means of grace. It is one of the “channels” through which God administers his “unmerited favor” to his people. It is well established that humility and surrender are necessary conditions for receiving grace.

But this is what I see: worshippers asserting control when they are receiving Communion.

It is a general attitude. But I have isolated two different behaviors that expose this attitude. One is refusing to take the little cup that is closest. It seems to be a deliberate assertion of self will.

In this situation, the tray has some cups already removed. And one cup is isolated making it easy to grasp. (I often rotate the tray to make these even more accessible.) I watch the person consciously reject the close cup and reach for one farther away.

The other situation could be described as “which one should I take.” In this case, the worshipper looks at the cups in the tray as if they were chocolates in a Whitman sampler. After a short deliberation, the communicant reaches for the prize with the compressed lips of satisfaction.

What made me aware of this was a jarring moment that occurred while I was distributing the bread. (We use a small loaf of regular bread which I break in two. I often carry a half loaf in each hand.) I extended one of the half loaves to a congregant who quite purposefully reached past it to tear off a piece from the other half.

It was after this that I started to notice the more subtle behaviors I described above.

So what do you think? Have you seen this at your church? What is your attitude when taking Communion? Do you think I have made too much of this behavior?

Pastor Rod

“Helping you become the person God created you to be”

Two Restaurants

Imagine that you are a patron of a restaurant where you get poor service and inferior food. Frequently, the waitress ignores you and procrastinates in taking your order. She is rarely friendly. And you often get food that you didn’t order.

While the food is always edible, it often looks as if it’s just been thrown on the plate. The chef has a tendency to overcook everything. He couldn’t prepare al dente pasta to save his life.

And the prices are higher than anywhere else in town.

How long do you think you would continue to eat at this restaurant?

Before long you’d start asking your friends where they eat. You’d ask them how the food is there. You’d enquire about the quality of the service. You’d compare prices with “your” restaurant.

You might even shop around and try different places. But you would be foolish to stay at a restaurant that wasn’t satisfying when there were several good alternatives.

Imagine a different scenario.
You’ve been eating at a particular establishment for several years. This place doesn’t even have a menu. You rarely get any input into what is served. What’s more, you are expected to eat whatever is served, whether you like it or not.

And the service is poor. When you need something that doesn’t happen to be on the table, you have to go into the kitchen and get it yourself. You are required to bus your own table.

So one day you tell the waitress, “It’s nothing personal, but I’m looking for a different place to eat. I know you’ve tried your best. But, Mom, I just don’t feel that I’m getting the nourishment that I need. Tommy says that his mother makes an outstanding meatloaf. I owe it to myself to try it out.”

So why don’t we shop around for different families? Because a family is more than a dispenser of domestic goods and services. We belong to families. We don’t enter into service contracts with our parents.

Of course in extreme cases, some do have to leave their families. When there is neglect or abuse, this becomes necessary. But this is the exception.

Churches are more like families than they are like restaurants.

Imagine having this conversation with your father:

“Dad, I know you are a good parent. But I’ve found a better deal down at the Johnson family. They don’t require any chores. And their curfew is not until 1:00 a.m. I really appreciate all the things you’ve done for me, especially the time you stayed in the hospital with me when I had that terrible fever. But it’s time for me to move on. I have to think about what’s best for me. I hope that I’ll be able to stop in from time to time. I really wish the best for you and Mom. I’ll be back later to pick up my stuff.”

Yet parishioners have this conversation with their pastors all the time.

We’ve turned the church into a dispenser of religious goods and services. We evaluate churches by what they can do for us and for our families. We look at the programs and services they offer, and we weigh that against what they require of us. Then we enter a loose contract with the winner, binding only until we find a better deal.

We think that the purpose of a church “worship service” is to meet the private, individual spiritual needs of the members of the “club.” We pay performers to entertain us and make us feel better. We hire a leader to listen to God for us and to tell us what God’s wonderful plan is for our “club.” We make our own special rules for membership so that our “club” can maintain its “distinctives.”

If the church is going to be the church, then the leaders and the “members” need to stop thinking about it as a dispenser of religious goods and services. We need to start thinking of it as the Body of Christ, the family of God, the Kingdom of God.

Pastor Rod

“Helping you become the person God created you to be”