The heading for this post is the quote that Tony Campolo uses to conclude an interview he did on the Ted Haggard situation. I found it very interesting and here's the link...
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=09824747-14f2-474a-9223-4aa52ed5280c&f=00&fg=copy
I guess the first thing to say about Haggard is that the lesson for pastors everywhere is don't put yourself in a position where you admit, to a reporter, in front of your wife and three of our kids, that you bought crystal meth from a gay prostitute you hired to give you a massage in a hotel room in Denver. That's just, bad, on any number of levels. I mean, what's the worst aspect of that particular moment? Admitting on TV, and thus to your 14,000 member church that you purchased illegal drugs (even if you never did inhale)? That after you denied ever knowing the man, a self-proclaimed gay escort, that now you remember that you hired him to give you massage? Or that you, the leading crusader against gay marriage on the basis that morally it will destroy the country, were in the presence of gay prostitute, and as a disciple of Jesus your witness was to hide your identity and buy drugs from the man? Or was it the conversation, the questions, and that confused look in the eyes of your wife and kids after you pulled away from that TV reporter?
Or was it the pain and lonliness you felt months, even years ago, that was so deep that maybe you were deceived into believing that not even God would accept you as you are?
Here's the weird thing about all of this.... I understand where Ted Haggard's head was at when he lost his way. I haven't hired any prostitutes or bought drugs, but I've found other means of escape that were legal, and while not nearly as overtly distructive, tore my inner life apart. I mean the pressure of being a pastor stems from you having to stand up in front of people and speak with conviction week after week, when maybe, in your own heart, there is doubt and some uncertainty. Speak honestly about this, "from the heart", and you cause an uproar (let's just say I know, unequivically, that this is true, and leave it at that). Hide the confusion, and you begin to withdraw, or get sick, or act out in strange ways you can't understand. And it doesn't matter if the sin is sexual in nature, or you find yourself watching TV until 3am every morning in a stupor.... the need to escape while simultaneously you are proclaiming that we should enter the Kingdom of Heaven is a horrible, horrible place to be. That's why, to me, the incidents in question, the "did he or didn't he", don't make a difference. You end up where Ted Haggard did today, trapped in that SUV, and faced with the choice of admitting on TV and in front of your family that you bought drugs, or issuing a simple "no comment", you choose to make the confession, you are hurting and that hurt runs long and deep.
That's why, unlike the Bryan of maybe four or five years ago, who would have lit into this pastor, now, I just feel bad for the man. I pray he finds some healing and peace on the other side of this. I hope he finds some true friends that will stand by him as he deals with all this stuff. That the pain of this moment will someday seem like a small price to have been paid to find himself, and in the process, a grace-filled God who whispers,
"You should have seen what would have happened to you if that whole gay drug thing hadn't broken when it did. I don't know what you were so afraid of... didn't you know I loved you, no matter what? Heck Ted, you really are better than the worst thing you've ever done."
Thank God, that is true for all of us. Let this be our message to one another, as we proclaim the mystery of faith.... that even death can't separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus.
Amen.
P.S. Watched "Akeela and the Bee" with Aimee tonight (we didn't think it was appropriate for the boys, but it will be when they get older), and it was fantastic. I'll talk more about this movie Monday for the weekly "Ten Things...", but if you are looking for a good flick to rent this weekend, go ahead and bring it home. You won't be sorry.
Friday, November 03, 2006
Asbury for Dummies (part 1)
These are some notes for the first chapter of my dissertation
Francis Asbury was born just outside of Birmingham, England on either August 21 or 22, 1845 (according to his journal, he was sure of the exact date). At a young age, Asbury's sister, Sarah, died unexpectedly, his mother, Susan found comfort by becoming increasingly more religiously active. During that day, a number of religious "reformers" were paring their spiritual wares across the English countryside, and the Asburys were known to host them in their home for services. Francis grew up around preachers, prayers, and was schooled in the ways of holiness. As a result he grew up a very pious young man.
After six years taking formal educational training, Asbury, at the age fourteen, dropped out and apprenticed with a local man in a trade that's never been fully identified (button making is a possibility). It was during this apprenticeship that Asbury first heard a Wesleyan Methodist preacher, and his heart found its destiny. Asbury joined a local Methodist Class Meeting (a small group of people who came together for fellowship, to examine their own and on another's spiritual lives, study the scriptures, pray, and collect money to support the Methodist's work with the poor). In Class Meetings, members were encouraged to speak, or exhort, and before long Asbury gained a reputation for being a passionate, if uneducated, speaker. In time, he was invited to speak at other class meetings, and after serving as an assistant to one of the traveling lay preachers, John Wesley himself took Asbury to be one of his own assistants. There, to compensate for his lack of education, Asbury was instructed to read the many tomes published by Wesley (hundred and hundreds) on all subjects relating to the Bible, theology, church polity, Greek and Hebrew, and skads of church and world history.
Asbury over time, gained a reputation for being an ardent Methodist and a fine lay preacher. The only complaint his superiors could make of him was that he often had a lot of suggestions as to how the movement could be better organized, and often began making changes without any OK fromt he hierarchy. Wesley ruled with an iron hand, and expected the same of his cheif deputies, so this ended up buying Asbury a great deal of trouble.
Of course.... it also caught Wesley's eye.
By 1772, the Methodist movement in the American colonies was growing, but lacked any true form or structure. Only two Methodist missionaries had traveled from England to the new land, and they were firmly ensconced in circuits working out of Baltimore and Philadelphia. Captain Thomas Webb, a retired member of the British army now living in New York, a man who had converted to Christianity through the Methodist movement, was the big mover and shaker in the new world. He raised money. He helped organize class meetings. He supported Methodist lay preachers in every way imaginable. And finally, out of frustration, traveled to England to tell Wesley that more Methodist lay preachers were needed in the new world.
Wesley called a conference of all his ordained an lay preachers, and asked for volunteers to go. Only two stepped forward.... another guy who shortly would return back to England, and Francis Asbury. Immediately, Asbury went to Bristol where Wesley's main headquarters was, raised the necessary money, said good-bye to his family, and traveled to America. He would never return.
Asbury, because of his lack of education and a formal ordination as a minister in the Church of England, probably would have faded somewhat into obscurity had it not been for the American Revolution. Because all things tied to Britain were viewed with a fair amount of suspician by the colonists, and because John Wesley came out formally opposed to the revolution (much to Asbury's dismay... he wished that Wesley had just remained mute on the subject), Methodist preachers were often treated rudely and violently. This caused Wesley in 1778 to call all of his missionaries back home (there numbers had grown to eight), of which seven complied.
Asbury couldn't bear leaving the American Methodist church. He had working as a lay preaching in the area of Baltimore, and had been instrumental in orgainizing conferences among preachers up and down the coast. Inspired by the rapid growth of the movement, despite the opposition caused by the political climate, he felt "compelled by God" to stay. Thus, by 1783, Asbury was the only formal voice representing Wesley in America.
At the conclusion of the war, America, now an independent nation, wanted nothing to do with the "Mother Country", and Asbury knew it. Because so few ordained Church of England ministers lived in the country, and Methodist lay preachers were not allowed to perform the sacriments, lay preachers ached to give communion and baptize their followers and not no means to accomplish the tasks. Wesley, out of his own personal study of what "apostolic succession" meant, decided that presbyters (ordained ministers in the Church of England) could not only ordain new presbyters, but could also raise up "superintendents" to organize the presbyters. This caused a great stir, because in the Anglican church, only Bishops could ordain ministers and choose their superintendent superiors. Even John's brother, Charles, couldn't stomach John's idea, because he was making himself, de facto, a Bishop who could ordained and organize the church which violated Anglican polity.
But, undetered, John Wesley determined that Thomas Coke, an ordained Anglican minister should be the superintendent of the American wing of the Methodist Church, and sent him there to ordain ministers in what would become a free-standing American Methodist Episopal Church. Upon arriving, at the Christmas Conference of 1784, Coke not only started ordaining Methodist ministers, he also made Asbury a superintendent in the church, subordinate only to Coke. Six months later, Coke went home, leaving Asbury as the man in charge.
Because he had been traveling extensively thoughout the country to give the church some order, Asbury knew practically every preacher and class leader. He wasn't in American long before he realized that if new converts were to be made, a system where churches were planted and served by a pastor had to be avoided at all cost. In the 1780's, fewer than 3% of America's population lived in cities of 8,000 or more. Mostly, they lived in rural areas, and were moving further and further west out on the frontier. Asbury, understanding this perfectly, passionately fought the idea of "urban, settled pastors", and given his immense power, there would be none of these in the Methodist Episcopal Church.
Instead, class meetings and local churches scattered across the country were organized into "circuits". Lay preachers were assigned to the circuits, generally anywhere from 9 to 14 class meetings and or churches. These lay preachers, or Circuit Riders, created a schedule where by every single stop on the circuit would be visited once a month for the purpose of checking the class meetings roles, settling up finanical matters, resolving disputes, administering the sacraments, and (most important) firing up the faithful and reaching new converts through spirited preaching and worship.
Asbury, in a given year's time, resolved to visit every single one of these every single year, a feat made possible only by his remaining on horseback 6,000 miles per year through every conceivable mountain pass, swamp, and form of weather imaginable. After years of this, Asbury would remain in poor health (although it rarely deterred him from his schedule) but his knowledge of the geography and demography of the land became unparelled. Thus, Asbury always seemed to know how new circuits would work, where to find a new preacher to serve it, and where that preacher (based on their gifts, skills, and health) would need to serve next.
Thus, Asbury set about formally organizing the church so that it could continue to grow with the country. He organized the circuits into "districts", appointing a "superintendent" who not only served a church of his own but also was expected to preach in new places to new people, to help train new circuit riders, class leaders, and administrate the churches. This was important because all circuit riders, superintendents, and Asbury himself were paid from a central fund. The superintendents were essential in collecting money (mostly raised through the selling of books published by the fledgling denomination's publishing house in Baltimore) raised to send to the central administration, who then paid everyone quarterly. The rest of the money was used to fund the creation of new circuits and support infirm Methodist preachers and subsequently their widows.
The districts were then organized into "conferences" so given the name because once a year a "conference" of all clergy would be scheduled for worship (the foundation of what would become the "camp meeting movement"), to vote on matters of adminsitrative importance (Asbury, unlike Wesley, understood that decisions could not handed down unilaterally in a nation possessed by the idea of democracy, so every Methodist preacher was given voice and vote in all these matters), and ultimately serve as the place where Asbury, who traveled to each of these meetings, would announce what circuits pastors would be assigned for the next two years. Asbury believed that given the differing nature of each circuit, that the preachers serving them needed to be changed every two years. Sometimes a preacher was assigned because the circuit was just starting and needed a firery leader to get it going, and that preacher was the "firery type". Other times, the sheer physical demands of the circuit had worn out a circuit riding preacher, so Asbury would assign them to a less-physicallly demanding circuit where they could recover.
And I mentioned that preachers had voice and vote in every administrative matter effecting them, and this is true, even in the case of appointments. Asbury even announced at the beginning of each "annual conference" that preacher who wanted special considerations to be taken into account before Asbury made the assignements, could put what they wanted in writing, and hand it to Asbury a couple of days before those appointments were made. But Asbury was no democrat... not really. A man who changed his title from "General Superintendent of the American Methodist Episcopal Church" to it's one and only "Bishop" (a title John Wesley refused to give himself... in his last letter to Asbury he dressed him down for doing so) really wanted as much control as possible. So, as a means of effecting that control, Asbury would wait until the last possible minute to announce his appointments, take a vote, and immediately leave town... and those asking for special considerations in appointments often found themselves geographically hundreds of miles away from the place they had asked to be. Since there was no time for a grievence process (remember, it was the last thing they did at each conference), pastors learned to keep their mouths shut and hope for the best.
All of this information nobody in their right mind has read (if you've gotten this far, you either have nothing else to do or like reading absurdly reduced history... may God have mercy on your sould) and for what....... just to say this.
1) The system of Bishops, District Superintendents, and appointed local church pastors in charge of Annual Conferences, Districts, and local churches was largely Asbury's creation.
2) Methodists, particularly United Methodists who are largely direct descendents of Asbury's Methodist Episcopal Church, got the reputation for moving preachers around a lot largely because Asbury, out of necessity had to move what leaders he had to keep the movement growing as the country grew and keep his preachers alive.
3) Vestiges of "don't tell the Bishop where you want to go cause they'll move you in the opposite direction" still exist until this day in various quarters of the UMC. Stories of pastors showing up at Annual Conference as late as the 1970's not knowing if they'd be going home to work or pack until the final day of the meeting are legion among retirees. Because they unilaterally determined appointments made ME, and later UM Bishops were far more powerful as episcopal leaders than Bishops in Anglican or Episcopalian denominations.
I remember a story (I don't know if it's true) that a now retired UM pastor from the West Ohio Conference told me about Bishop Werner who ruled the roost in the late 1950's and 60's. Apparently when the denomination purchased land for the purpose of establishing a church camp facility near Bellefontaine (now, Camp Wesley), it was determined that a man-made pond was needed to make the complex complete. Thus, for a number of summers, Werner made it mandatory that all Methodist preachers had to take a week in the summer, travel to Camp Wesley, and help, among other building projects, dig out the pond.
Power like this led to schisms creating numerous denominations (Wesleyan and Free Methodist to name a couple) where the power of the Bishop was muted, or the position was eliminated all-together.
4) Despite the best efforts of his opponents who opposed his Episcopal, centralized model (critics accused Asbury of secretly wanting to be a "Methodist Pope") Asbury, largley out of his knowledge of every facet of the church, and of the nation as a whole, became too well-known and popular to be defeated on these matters. But Asbury was pragmatic enough to realize that the "my-way-or-the-highway" model John Wesley employed in Britian wasn't going to fly in a fledgling nation built on democracy. The Annual Conference and General Conference models where originally all ordained preachers would gather to vote on all matters of importance was Asbury's concession to this reality. It was largley though the appointment process and his own reputation that Asbury was able to largely control the system. That Bishops emulated Asbury in terms of how they saw their power largely, over time became as much traditional as it was disciplinary.
5) Lay-people from the inception of the American wing of the movement, have not much say in the appointment of pastors in the UMC. Much of this derives from Asbury's belief that the Congregational "call" model led to lazy preachers serving self-centered churches who hired them to do their beck and call. Asbury also realized that once a pastor married and had kids, their tendancy was to want to settle down and become "locational", thus the system of appointment began to tend toward methodist preachers owning few things in the world, and the church providing housing so that moves could be made quickly and cheaply. This conditioned the laity to not look for a particular circuit rider, but a particular time that a circuit rider would show up. As a result, the class meeting and local churches were instructed to be somewhat self-supporting and self-leading with the guidelines set by the ME Discipline. Laity focused energy on raising up new class or church leaders (the most promising would often be encouraged to become circuit riders) who's main function was biblical instruction, spiritual guidance, and exhorting (which is, basically, preaching). Thus, the laity were "freed up" to do ministry, not be served by someone as a professional pastor.
6) Asbury's system of appointment was designed for a world where 97% of the population lived in the most remote locations. Because Asbury himself realized what the toll all the traveling took on the traveller (he paid a horrible price personally for all his time on the road, as he was often in poor health which often took its toll on his state of mind.... Asbury was often a pretty depressed dude because he felt like his infirmaties limited his ability and passion for Christ and his church) this had great bearing on how his Circuit Riders were appointed. What's more, the movement was growing so quickly and geographically huge, many moves were made necessary just because the demand for new superintendents was always pressing. Preachers who developed reputations for giving new sermons, raising up good new preachers, or administrating things well rose quickly through the ranks. Couple that with legions of Methodist preachers who left the pulpit because they married and wanted to be home, turned to alcholism due to the stress/physical pain/lonliness, or simply wore out or died, and lots of moves had to be made.
What was a necessity in the late 18th century due to circumstance however, as often is the case in religion, largely became tradition later. Churches understood that they needed to equip themselves to house pastors and their families while Methodist preachers were largely underpaid (which is still the case for the vast majority of ordained ministers today). A model evolved where inexperienced preachers were appointed to small churches that largely self-functioned. It they desired to move to larger churches where the parsonages were larger and the pay better, they needed to learn how to do Methodist polity and preach well... which often resulted in the small church beginning to grow just about the time the pastor would get moved to something a little bit bigger.
Sadly, young preachers, short on experience but long on spunk, had once taken the message of Jesus across the frontier into new territories as entrepreneurial leaders who fueled Methodisms' rapid growth. Peter Cartwright, who pretty much single-handedly established Methodism as a force in this part of the world, was commissioned by Asbury at the age of 19 to a circuit. By the 1960's, this entrepreneurial spirit was largely replaced a bueracratic one, which might help account for a four-million member decline over the last thirty years.
7) Asbury's fear of pastor and laity desiring a "locational" model, where pastors served only a few, or even one local church, largely ended up becoming true. Laity are no longer encouraged to preach or teach. Pastors have now been largely given the job of raising up a new generation of leaders, while in Asbury's day the laity were the ones who discovered those among them that could preach in such a way as to give the Circuit Rider a run for his money. As result, while we have become better educated as clergy, and as a nation, rudimentary knowledge of the scripture, theology, and church history are ever decreasing among the general populace. In turn, as daily preaching and teaching responsibilities have been professionalized into the clergy, to fill their time and justify their salary, clergy have become the primary administrators, visitors of the sick, and evangelists in a congregation. At one time, someone just checked once a month to make sure the laity were taking care of business..... now, the pastor is the one held accountable by the laity to get these things accomplished, which was Asbury's greatest fear.
Francis Asbury was born just outside of Birmingham, England on either August 21 or 22, 1845 (according to his journal, he was sure of the exact date). At a young age, Asbury's sister, Sarah, died unexpectedly, his mother, Susan found comfort by becoming increasingly more religiously active. During that day, a number of religious "reformers" were paring their spiritual wares across the English countryside, and the Asburys were known to host them in their home for services. Francis grew up around preachers, prayers, and was schooled in the ways of holiness. As a result he grew up a very pious young man.
After six years taking formal educational training, Asbury, at the age fourteen, dropped out and apprenticed with a local man in a trade that's never been fully identified (button making is a possibility). It was during this apprenticeship that Asbury first heard a Wesleyan Methodist preacher, and his heart found its destiny. Asbury joined a local Methodist Class Meeting (a small group of people who came together for fellowship, to examine their own and on another's spiritual lives, study the scriptures, pray, and collect money to support the Methodist's work with the poor). In Class Meetings, members were encouraged to speak, or exhort, and before long Asbury gained a reputation for being a passionate, if uneducated, speaker. In time, he was invited to speak at other class meetings, and after serving as an assistant to one of the traveling lay preachers, John Wesley himself took Asbury to be one of his own assistants. There, to compensate for his lack of education, Asbury was instructed to read the many tomes published by Wesley (hundred and hundreds) on all subjects relating to the Bible, theology, church polity, Greek and Hebrew, and skads of church and world history.
Asbury over time, gained a reputation for being an ardent Methodist and a fine lay preacher. The only complaint his superiors could make of him was that he often had a lot of suggestions as to how the movement could be better organized, and often began making changes without any OK fromt he hierarchy. Wesley ruled with an iron hand, and expected the same of his cheif deputies, so this ended up buying Asbury a great deal of trouble.
Of course.... it also caught Wesley's eye.
By 1772, the Methodist movement in the American colonies was growing, but lacked any true form or structure. Only two Methodist missionaries had traveled from England to the new land, and they were firmly ensconced in circuits working out of Baltimore and Philadelphia. Captain Thomas Webb, a retired member of the British army now living in New York, a man who had converted to Christianity through the Methodist movement, was the big mover and shaker in the new world. He raised money. He helped organize class meetings. He supported Methodist lay preachers in every way imaginable. And finally, out of frustration, traveled to England to tell Wesley that more Methodist lay preachers were needed in the new world.
Wesley called a conference of all his ordained an lay preachers, and asked for volunteers to go. Only two stepped forward.... another guy who shortly would return back to England, and Francis Asbury. Immediately, Asbury went to Bristol where Wesley's main headquarters was, raised the necessary money, said good-bye to his family, and traveled to America. He would never return.
Asbury, because of his lack of education and a formal ordination as a minister in the Church of England, probably would have faded somewhat into obscurity had it not been for the American Revolution. Because all things tied to Britain were viewed with a fair amount of suspician by the colonists, and because John Wesley came out formally opposed to the revolution (much to Asbury's dismay... he wished that Wesley had just remained mute on the subject), Methodist preachers were often treated rudely and violently. This caused Wesley in 1778 to call all of his missionaries back home (there numbers had grown to eight), of which seven complied.
Asbury couldn't bear leaving the American Methodist church. He had working as a lay preaching in the area of Baltimore, and had been instrumental in orgainizing conferences among preachers up and down the coast. Inspired by the rapid growth of the movement, despite the opposition caused by the political climate, he felt "compelled by God" to stay. Thus, by 1783, Asbury was the only formal voice representing Wesley in America.
At the conclusion of the war, America, now an independent nation, wanted nothing to do with the "Mother Country", and Asbury knew it. Because so few ordained Church of England ministers lived in the country, and Methodist lay preachers were not allowed to perform the sacriments, lay preachers ached to give communion and baptize their followers and not no means to accomplish the tasks. Wesley, out of his own personal study of what "apostolic succession" meant, decided that presbyters (ordained ministers in the Church of England) could not only ordain new presbyters, but could also raise up "superintendents" to organize the presbyters. This caused a great stir, because in the Anglican church, only Bishops could ordain ministers and choose their superintendent superiors. Even John's brother, Charles, couldn't stomach John's idea, because he was making himself, de facto, a Bishop who could ordained and organize the church which violated Anglican polity.
But, undetered, John Wesley determined that Thomas Coke, an ordained Anglican minister should be the superintendent of the American wing of the Methodist Church, and sent him there to ordain ministers in what would become a free-standing American Methodist Episopal Church. Upon arriving, at the Christmas Conference of 1784, Coke not only started ordaining Methodist ministers, he also made Asbury a superintendent in the church, subordinate only to Coke. Six months later, Coke went home, leaving Asbury as the man in charge.
Because he had been traveling extensively thoughout the country to give the church some order, Asbury knew practically every preacher and class leader. He wasn't in American long before he realized that if new converts were to be made, a system where churches were planted and served by a pastor had to be avoided at all cost. In the 1780's, fewer than 3% of America's population lived in cities of 8,000 or more. Mostly, they lived in rural areas, and were moving further and further west out on the frontier. Asbury, understanding this perfectly, passionately fought the idea of "urban, settled pastors", and given his immense power, there would be none of these in the Methodist Episcopal Church.
Instead, class meetings and local churches scattered across the country were organized into "circuits". Lay preachers were assigned to the circuits, generally anywhere from 9 to 14 class meetings and or churches. These lay preachers, or Circuit Riders, created a schedule where by every single stop on the circuit would be visited once a month for the purpose of checking the class meetings roles, settling up finanical matters, resolving disputes, administering the sacraments, and (most important) firing up the faithful and reaching new converts through spirited preaching and worship.
Asbury, in a given year's time, resolved to visit every single one of these every single year, a feat made possible only by his remaining on horseback 6,000 miles per year through every conceivable mountain pass, swamp, and form of weather imaginable. After years of this, Asbury would remain in poor health (although it rarely deterred him from his schedule) but his knowledge of the geography and demography of the land became unparelled. Thus, Asbury always seemed to know how new circuits would work, where to find a new preacher to serve it, and where that preacher (based on their gifts, skills, and health) would need to serve next.
Thus, Asbury set about formally organizing the church so that it could continue to grow with the country. He organized the circuits into "districts", appointing a "superintendent" who not only served a church of his own but also was expected to preach in new places to new people, to help train new circuit riders, class leaders, and administrate the churches. This was important because all circuit riders, superintendents, and Asbury himself were paid from a central fund. The superintendents were essential in collecting money (mostly raised through the selling of books published by the fledgling denomination's publishing house in Baltimore) raised to send to the central administration, who then paid everyone quarterly. The rest of the money was used to fund the creation of new circuits and support infirm Methodist preachers and subsequently their widows.
The districts were then organized into "conferences" so given the name because once a year a "conference" of all clergy would be scheduled for worship (the foundation of what would become the "camp meeting movement"), to vote on matters of adminsitrative importance (Asbury, unlike Wesley, understood that decisions could not handed down unilaterally in a nation possessed by the idea of democracy, so every Methodist preacher was given voice and vote in all these matters), and ultimately serve as the place where Asbury, who traveled to each of these meetings, would announce what circuits pastors would be assigned for the next two years. Asbury believed that given the differing nature of each circuit, that the preachers serving them needed to be changed every two years. Sometimes a preacher was assigned because the circuit was just starting and needed a firery leader to get it going, and that preacher was the "firery type". Other times, the sheer physical demands of the circuit had worn out a circuit riding preacher, so Asbury would assign them to a less-physicallly demanding circuit where they could recover.
And I mentioned that preachers had voice and vote in every administrative matter effecting them, and this is true, even in the case of appointments. Asbury even announced at the beginning of each "annual conference" that preacher who wanted special considerations to be taken into account before Asbury made the assignements, could put what they wanted in writing, and hand it to Asbury a couple of days before those appointments were made. But Asbury was no democrat... not really. A man who changed his title from "General Superintendent of the American Methodist Episcopal Church" to it's one and only "Bishop" (a title John Wesley refused to give himself... in his last letter to Asbury he dressed him down for doing so) really wanted as much control as possible. So, as a means of effecting that control, Asbury would wait until the last possible minute to announce his appointments, take a vote, and immediately leave town... and those asking for special considerations in appointments often found themselves geographically hundreds of miles away from the place they had asked to be. Since there was no time for a grievence process (remember, it was the last thing they did at each conference), pastors learned to keep their mouths shut and hope for the best.
All of this information nobody in their right mind has read (if you've gotten this far, you either have nothing else to do or like reading absurdly reduced history... may God have mercy on your sould) and for what....... just to say this.
1) The system of Bishops, District Superintendents, and appointed local church pastors in charge of Annual Conferences, Districts, and local churches was largely Asbury's creation.
2) Methodists, particularly United Methodists who are largely direct descendents of Asbury's Methodist Episcopal Church, got the reputation for moving preachers around a lot largely because Asbury, out of necessity had to move what leaders he had to keep the movement growing as the country grew and keep his preachers alive.
3) Vestiges of "don't tell the Bishop where you want to go cause they'll move you in the opposite direction" still exist until this day in various quarters of the UMC. Stories of pastors showing up at Annual Conference as late as the 1970's not knowing if they'd be going home to work or pack until the final day of the meeting are legion among retirees. Because they unilaterally determined appointments made ME, and later UM Bishops were far more powerful as episcopal leaders than Bishops in Anglican or Episcopalian denominations.
I remember a story (I don't know if it's true) that a now retired UM pastor from the West Ohio Conference told me about Bishop Werner who ruled the roost in the late 1950's and 60's. Apparently when the denomination purchased land for the purpose of establishing a church camp facility near Bellefontaine (now, Camp Wesley), it was determined that a man-made pond was needed to make the complex complete. Thus, for a number of summers, Werner made it mandatory that all Methodist preachers had to take a week in the summer, travel to Camp Wesley, and help, among other building projects, dig out the pond.
Power like this led to schisms creating numerous denominations (Wesleyan and Free Methodist to name a couple) where the power of the Bishop was muted, or the position was eliminated all-together.
4) Despite the best efforts of his opponents who opposed his Episcopal, centralized model (critics accused Asbury of secretly wanting to be a "Methodist Pope") Asbury, largley out of his knowledge of every facet of the church, and of the nation as a whole, became too well-known and popular to be defeated on these matters. But Asbury was pragmatic enough to realize that the "my-way-or-the-highway" model John Wesley employed in Britian wasn't going to fly in a fledgling nation built on democracy. The Annual Conference and General Conference models where originally all ordained preachers would gather to vote on all matters of importance was Asbury's concession to this reality. It was largley though the appointment process and his own reputation that Asbury was able to largely control the system. That Bishops emulated Asbury in terms of how they saw their power largely, over time became as much traditional as it was disciplinary.
5) Lay-people from the inception of the American wing of the movement, have not much say in the appointment of pastors in the UMC. Much of this derives from Asbury's belief that the Congregational "call" model led to lazy preachers serving self-centered churches who hired them to do their beck and call. Asbury also realized that once a pastor married and had kids, their tendancy was to want to settle down and become "locational", thus the system of appointment began to tend toward methodist preachers owning few things in the world, and the church providing housing so that moves could be made quickly and cheaply. This conditioned the laity to not look for a particular circuit rider, but a particular time that a circuit rider would show up. As a result, the class meeting and local churches were instructed to be somewhat self-supporting and self-leading with the guidelines set by the ME Discipline. Laity focused energy on raising up new class or church leaders (the most promising would often be encouraged to become circuit riders) who's main function was biblical instruction, spiritual guidance, and exhorting (which is, basically, preaching). Thus, the laity were "freed up" to do ministry, not be served by someone as a professional pastor.
6) Asbury's system of appointment was designed for a world where 97% of the population lived in the most remote locations. Because Asbury himself realized what the toll all the traveling took on the traveller (he paid a horrible price personally for all his time on the road, as he was often in poor health which often took its toll on his state of mind.... Asbury was often a pretty depressed dude because he felt like his infirmaties limited his ability and passion for Christ and his church) this had great bearing on how his Circuit Riders were appointed. What's more, the movement was growing so quickly and geographically huge, many moves were made necessary just because the demand for new superintendents was always pressing. Preachers who developed reputations for giving new sermons, raising up good new preachers, or administrating things well rose quickly through the ranks. Couple that with legions of Methodist preachers who left the pulpit because they married and wanted to be home, turned to alcholism due to the stress/physical pain/lonliness, or simply wore out or died, and lots of moves had to be made.
What was a necessity in the late 18th century due to circumstance however, as often is the case in religion, largely became tradition later. Churches understood that they needed to equip themselves to house pastors and their families while Methodist preachers were largely underpaid (which is still the case for the vast majority of ordained ministers today). A model evolved where inexperienced preachers were appointed to small churches that largely self-functioned. It they desired to move to larger churches where the parsonages were larger and the pay better, they needed to learn how to do Methodist polity and preach well... which often resulted in the small church beginning to grow just about the time the pastor would get moved to something a little bit bigger.
Sadly, young preachers, short on experience but long on spunk, had once taken the message of Jesus across the frontier into new territories as entrepreneurial leaders who fueled Methodisms' rapid growth. Peter Cartwright, who pretty much single-handedly established Methodism as a force in this part of the world, was commissioned by Asbury at the age of 19 to a circuit. By the 1960's, this entrepreneurial spirit was largely replaced a bueracratic one, which might help account for a four-million member decline over the last thirty years.
7) Asbury's fear of pastor and laity desiring a "locational" model, where pastors served only a few, or even one local church, largely ended up becoming true. Laity are no longer encouraged to preach or teach. Pastors have now been largely given the job of raising up a new generation of leaders, while in Asbury's day the laity were the ones who discovered those among them that could preach in such a way as to give the Circuit Rider a run for his money. As result, while we have become better educated as clergy, and as a nation, rudimentary knowledge of the scripture, theology, and church history are ever decreasing among the general populace. In turn, as daily preaching and teaching responsibilities have been professionalized into the clergy, to fill their time and justify their salary, clergy have become the primary administrators, visitors of the sick, and evangelists in a congregation. At one time, someone just checked once a month to make sure the laity were taking care of business..... now, the pastor is the one held accountable by the laity to get these things accomplished, which was Asbury's greatest fear.
Thursday, November 02, 2006
Video Basketball, Heroes, Fathers, and Sons
Tonight, Max (my seven-year old.... excuse me, seven-and-a-half year old) at the suggestion of his mother, and I went one-on-one "NBA 2K5" style, via the X-Box. This was the first time we'd played since he beat me about three weeks ago. Aimee knew this, and I suspect that she figured this would be good payback because I hadn't jumped to it fast enough when she had asked for help earlier in the evening. Watching me be humiliated by my boy was her idea of a good way to end the day.
Well, let me tell you something... I not only whooped him on the video basketball floor like a rented mule, I did it twice. How, you ask?
Practice. Lots of practice.
You see, it's like this... when I was Max's age the cutting edge of home video game technology was Pong. We thought it was cool that you could control a line on the television for the purpose of hitting a blob back at the other line. It was the Halo of its day. An epiphany of epic proportions.
And when Atari came out with the 2600, well, I can't tell you what a leap that was. A joystick, and a button! Ring the bells! We could play Pac Man at home, as much as we wanted, no quarters necessary (except that the graphics were kind of unintelligble and the joystick only worked about 60% of the time). Thus, if you grew up when I grew up, you are famillar with a joystick and a button. You've got that down.
But, apparently, one joystick and one button are no longer sufficient in this post-modern age.
Have you seen the latest video game controls? The X-Box game pads involve seven buttons on the face, two mini-joysticks, another 360 degree button, and two triggers on the underside of the control. I have no idea what's on the controls of the X-Box 360... you could probably fly a plane with it. I'm not worried about the future of the country because for those kids that have figured out how to use these things, all forms of engineering will seem tame by comparison. It's thoroughly ridiculous... especially if you are dinosaur who can remember cutting edge being two lines and a blob.
Max, at seven-and-a-half, has mastered the modern game control. We severely limit his video game time, and it makes no difference. His little fingers just know what to do which in a way I admire, and in a way kind of ticks me off. That's how he beat me in video basketball. His little fingers went to all the places they should have, while my fingers kept putting up three-quarter court shots, calling unwanted time outs, and wanting to make obscene gestures in frustration (which they did not, I might add).
So, late at night, after everyone was asleep, starting the first night I lost, every night for a couple of weeks I played the X-Box until I got blisters, and over time my fingers started figuring out where they needed to be. I didn't get more than four hours of sleep any single night, and I'm pretty sure it set back my academic progress, but by golly, I finally got to the place where I could beat the computer on the most difficult level.
And all for the purpose of re-asserting my supremacy over my offspring, which I did in convincing fashion this evening.
You might think this is kind of sick, but there's a real mystique about not being able to beat your father in something, and finding out over time that there's a point where he can't dial it up another notch. That day you stick it to the man is a powerful thing. I still remember the first time I ever beat Dad at one-on-one basketball (the real thing... not video). The closer I got to beating him, the more he cheated and the more determined he became to not lose. He was genuniely upset when I finally "won by six shooting only left-handed" or whatever crazy rule he'd made up to give himself one last hope of defeating me just one more time.
Of course, another year later and I was toying with him at will... which is the nature of all things. But for now, I'm just not ready to be Max's video whipping boy. I've still got a physical edge on the real basketball court cause I'm two feet taller than he is, but I don't want to give up the video basketball frontier just yet. I don't want him to find out how human I am. I want to be immortal and all-knowing in his eyes just a little bit longer. Heaven knows he'll find out human I really am, and that too soon. No sense rushing things. Let's just enjoy them the way they are... me as his hero.
He'll find out the world is short on heroes only too soon.
For as long as I can, I want him to dream of beating me just like I dreamed about beating my father. And someday, it will be no contest.... and I'll step aside gracefully and wait for the grandkids, who, I might add, will crush me on a regular basis.
Until then, Daddy will reign supreme....
although Max said something about finding a "cheat code" for the game. What's a cheat code? Should I be worried?
Well, let me tell you something... I not only whooped him on the video basketball floor like a rented mule, I did it twice. How, you ask?
Practice. Lots of practice.
You see, it's like this... when I was Max's age the cutting edge of home video game technology was Pong. We thought it was cool that you could control a line on the television for the purpose of hitting a blob back at the other line. It was the Halo of its day. An epiphany of epic proportions.
And when Atari came out with the 2600, well, I can't tell you what a leap that was. A joystick, and a button! Ring the bells! We could play Pac Man at home, as much as we wanted, no quarters necessary (except that the graphics were kind of unintelligble and the joystick only worked about 60% of the time). Thus, if you grew up when I grew up, you are famillar with a joystick and a button. You've got that down.
But, apparently, one joystick and one button are no longer sufficient in this post-modern age.
Have you seen the latest video game controls? The X-Box game pads involve seven buttons on the face, two mini-joysticks, another 360 degree button, and two triggers on the underside of the control. I have no idea what's on the controls of the X-Box 360... you could probably fly a plane with it. I'm not worried about the future of the country because for those kids that have figured out how to use these things, all forms of engineering will seem tame by comparison. It's thoroughly ridiculous... especially if you are dinosaur who can remember cutting edge being two lines and a blob.
Max, at seven-and-a-half, has mastered the modern game control. We severely limit his video game time, and it makes no difference. His little fingers just know what to do which in a way I admire, and in a way kind of ticks me off. That's how he beat me in video basketball. His little fingers went to all the places they should have, while my fingers kept putting up three-quarter court shots, calling unwanted time outs, and wanting to make obscene gestures in frustration (which they did not, I might add).
So, late at night, after everyone was asleep, starting the first night I lost, every night for a couple of weeks I played the X-Box until I got blisters, and over time my fingers started figuring out where they needed to be. I didn't get more than four hours of sleep any single night, and I'm pretty sure it set back my academic progress, but by golly, I finally got to the place where I could beat the computer on the most difficult level.
And all for the purpose of re-asserting my supremacy over my offspring, which I did in convincing fashion this evening.
You might think this is kind of sick, but there's a real mystique about not being able to beat your father in something, and finding out over time that there's a point where he can't dial it up another notch. That day you stick it to the man is a powerful thing. I still remember the first time I ever beat Dad at one-on-one basketball (the real thing... not video). The closer I got to beating him, the more he cheated and the more determined he became to not lose. He was genuniely upset when I finally "won by six shooting only left-handed" or whatever crazy rule he'd made up to give himself one last hope of defeating me just one more time.
Of course, another year later and I was toying with him at will... which is the nature of all things. But for now, I'm just not ready to be Max's video whipping boy. I've still got a physical edge on the real basketball court cause I'm two feet taller than he is, but I don't want to give up the video basketball frontier just yet. I don't want him to find out how human I am. I want to be immortal and all-knowing in his eyes just a little bit longer. Heaven knows he'll find out human I really am, and that too soon. No sense rushing things. Let's just enjoy them the way they are... me as his hero.
He'll find out the world is short on heroes only too soon.
For as long as I can, I want him to dream of beating me just like I dreamed about beating my father. And someday, it will be no contest.... and I'll step aside gracefully and wait for the grandkids, who, I might add, will crush me on a regular basis.
Until then, Daddy will reign supreme....
although Max said something about finding a "cheat code" for the game. What's a cheat code? Should I be worried?
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Either All Things Are In Decay, Or God Is Making All Things New...
Just thought I'd share with you the lyrics to the song, Ghost Rider. The lyricist, Neil Peart lost his wife (breast cancer) and daughter (auto accident) within a year. Peart, a motorcyclist, hopped on his R1100GS BMW, and proceeded to ride over 56,000 miles over the next nine months on a quest to make sense of things, and find out if life really was worth living. The song is a good summation of what it's like for anyone who has lost someone, or is having a hard time discerning what God might have in store before any healing comes.
Pack up all those phantoms
Shoulder that invisable load
Keep on riding North and West
Haunting that wilderness route
Like a Ghost Rider
Carry all those phantoms
through bitter wind and stormy skies
from the desert to the mountain
from the lowest low to the highest high
like a Ghost Rider
Keep on riding North and West
Then circle South and East
Show me beauty but there is no peace
for the Ghost Rider
Shadows on the road behind
Shadows on the road ahead
There's nothing to stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Sunrise in a mirror
Lightens an invisable load
Riding on an aimless quest
Haunting that wilderness route
like a Ghost Rider
Just an escape artist racing against the night
a wandering hermit racing toward the light
from the white sands to the canyon lands
to the redwood stands to the barren lands... to the barren lands
Sunrise on the road behind
Sunset on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
(There's nothing left if there's nothing left
Ghost Rider)
Am currently working on my 2nd Chapter of my dissertation, which is the theological underpining of my study. Unfortunately, I'm not quite sure exactly where this thing is going, so as a way of getting some clarity, I decided to take a look at every single pastoral transition in the West Ohio Annual Conference in the United Methodist Church involving pastors who pastored, or would end up pastoring a church with an average annual worship attendance of 250 or more. There are more than 260 appointments that have been made fitting that criteria from 1990 to 2005, and I've looked at every single one of them.
What have I learned?
Well, just preliminarily, everytime the Cabinet makes a new appointment, if history is any indicator, there is about a 66% chance that the new pastor will either lead the church to no new growth, or into decline. What's more, the fabulous growth of a few churches (Reynoldsburg, Sidney First, Greenville Evangelical, Toledo Upton, and our own Shawnee.... to name a few) hide the fact that there are dozens declining at an alarming rate.
But here's the catch...
Of those churches that have grown big, and are getting bigger, a good many of them will be looking at a pastoral change in the next three or four years. The lead churches on the edge of this trend of having to make a pastoral transition, particularly the ones that have had Senior Pastors that have been there a very long time, are struggling to do so. Considering that our second largest church, Reynoldsburg is in the midst of an unexpected transition (due to pastoral misconduct), and our other standard bearers (Ginghamsburg, Kettering Christ, Hyde Park) all have Senior Pastors who are all nearing retirement, the numbers tell me that there should be reason for concern in the Bishop's office if we keep doing business as usual.
Pretty troubling if you believe that all things are in decay... but what if God is making all things new? What do you think that looks like, on the other side of what will be?
As one of the pastors, waiting for that inevitable call, let's just say I'm staring down Jericho with nothing but a trumpet, a will to march in circles, and some crazy words from God in my ear.
There's a shadow on the road behind
There's a shadow on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
There's nothing left, if there's nothing left.... Ghost Rider
Pack up all those phantoms
Shoulder that invisable load
Keep on riding North and West
Haunting that wilderness route
Like a Ghost Rider
Carry all those phantoms
through bitter wind and stormy skies
from the desert to the mountain
from the lowest low to the highest high
like a Ghost Rider
Keep on riding North and West
Then circle South and East
Show me beauty but there is no peace
for the Ghost Rider
Shadows on the road behind
Shadows on the road ahead
There's nothing to stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Sunrise in a mirror
Lightens an invisable load
Riding on an aimless quest
Haunting that wilderness route
like a Ghost Rider
Just an escape artist racing against the night
a wandering hermit racing toward the light
from the white sands to the canyon lands
to the redwood stands to the barren lands... to the barren lands
Sunrise on the road behind
Sunset on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
(There's nothing left if there's nothing left
Ghost Rider)
Am currently working on my 2nd Chapter of my dissertation, which is the theological underpining of my study. Unfortunately, I'm not quite sure exactly where this thing is going, so as a way of getting some clarity, I decided to take a look at every single pastoral transition in the West Ohio Annual Conference in the United Methodist Church involving pastors who pastored, or would end up pastoring a church with an average annual worship attendance of 250 or more. There are more than 260 appointments that have been made fitting that criteria from 1990 to 2005, and I've looked at every single one of them.
What have I learned?
Well, just preliminarily, everytime the Cabinet makes a new appointment, if history is any indicator, there is about a 66% chance that the new pastor will either lead the church to no new growth, or into decline. What's more, the fabulous growth of a few churches (Reynoldsburg, Sidney First, Greenville Evangelical, Toledo Upton, and our own Shawnee.... to name a few) hide the fact that there are dozens declining at an alarming rate.
But here's the catch...
Of those churches that have grown big, and are getting bigger, a good many of them will be looking at a pastoral change in the next three or four years. The lead churches on the edge of this trend of having to make a pastoral transition, particularly the ones that have had Senior Pastors that have been there a very long time, are struggling to do so. Considering that our second largest church, Reynoldsburg is in the midst of an unexpected transition (due to pastoral misconduct), and our other standard bearers (Ginghamsburg, Kettering Christ, Hyde Park) all have Senior Pastors who are all nearing retirement, the numbers tell me that there should be reason for concern in the Bishop's office if we keep doing business as usual.
Pretty troubling if you believe that all things are in decay... but what if God is making all things new? What do you think that looks like, on the other side of what will be?
As one of the pastors, waiting for that inevitable call, let's just say I'm staring down Jericho with nothing but a trumpet, a will to march in circles, and some crazy words from God in my ear.
There's a shadow on the road behind
There's a shadow on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now
Nothing can stop you now
There's nothing left, if there's nothing left.... Ghost Rider
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Another Good Reason to Sprinkle, Not Dunk
All three of my boys would do this.
Thanks to classmate Nolan Donald, who put this up on his blog first. Both Aaron Wymer and I lifted it, but it was too good not to lift.
Thanks to classmate Nolan Donald, who put this up on his blog first. Both Aaron Wymer and I lifted it, but it was too good not to lift.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Nobody Wants To Follow A Winner
Last Friday, the Dean of the Beeson Program, Randy Jessen, gathered us together to do a little brainstorming, thinking, projecting, and discussing the whole church thing. We do this periodically cause he things it will help us, and generally, it does. To get us in the mood, he gave us two scenarios of potential churches we could end up in when this year is over and done.
Church 1 averaged over 1700 in worship, had $4,500 in debt, interest income from a million dollar annuity bequeathed to the church, a five hundred seat sanctuary that was packed three times a morning, and a legacy of 20 years of non-stop growth.
Church 2 averaged 78 people in worship in a five hundred seat sanctuary over two services. It had $200k in debt, $700 in the bank, and had just come off of a scandal where the last pastor went out defrocked and disgraced.
Which of the two churches do you think most of my classmates jumped after? If you said Church 1, you were absolutely positively......... wrong. Almost to the person, the general consensus was that every person in the room would rather have the beaten down church facing bankruptcy. Is it because Beeson Pastors like renewal? a challenge? Preaching to 450 empty seats?
Or, would pastors rather not follow winners?
Years ago a good friend of mine who helped get me into this ministry gig, told me that he would rather follow a pastor who had been a complete disaster than somebody who had done a good job. The rational he used was that it's ten times harder to do better than someone who has been doing a good job than to do better than a doofus. No doubt, when we were talking about Church 1 you could see in my classmates eyes, if not a fear, a definite concern with how much pressure you'd be in a church that had grown from 200 to 1700 in worship over 20 years. Personal performance would need to be high from the start, as expectations on the part of church leadership and the UM-hierarchy (my apologizes to our two non-UM's in the class) would be sky high, particularly if the person you are following is made a saint by the laity within four months of the moving van pulling out of the driveway.
What must it have been like for the disciples to know that they had to follow the Son of God with the message of the Gospel? It's no wonder Jesus had to promise the Holy Spirit because I gather, given the way Jesus' died and the tough life here on earth he promised them, the disciples had to feel more than a little overwhelmed. Talk about expectations.... most of the world hates them, and the rest don't know they exist. Not mention, the guy you follow could raise the dead.
"Yeah you can give a decent sermon, but can you raise the dead?"
And so we pray for our own Pentecost, my classmates and I. A blowing of the Spirit into our souls, hearts and minds, so that we might see clearly, and hear with clarity the promises of faithfulness, no matter if we are accepted or rejected by others. For some of us are headed to serve churches on the margins, others will be starting a new church, others will end up places where people haven't been excited about much in a long time..... and, I suspect, one or two of us will be following a winner.
"And lo, I will be with you, even until the end of time."
We're counting on that Jesus. We're counting on you.
Church 1 averaged over 1700 in worship, had $4,500 in debt, interest income from a million dollar annuity bequeathed to the church, a five hundred seat sanctuary that was packed three times a morning, and a legacy of 20 years of non-stop growth.
Church 2 averaged 78 people in worship in a five hundred seat sanctuary over two services. It had $200k in debt, $700 in the bank, and had just come off of a scandal where the last pastor went out defrocked and disgraced.
Which of the two churches do you think most of my classmates jumped after? If you said Church 1, you were absolutely positively......... wrong. Almost to the person, the general consensus was that every person in the room would rather have the beaten down church facing bankruptcy. Is it because Beeson Pastors like renewal? a challenge? Preaching to 450 empty seats?
Or, would pastors rather not follow winners?
Years ago a good friend of mine who helped get me into this ministry gig, told me that he would rather follow a pastor who had been a complete disaster than somebody who had done a good job. The rational he used was that it's ten times harder to do better than someone who has been doing a good job than to do better than a doofus. No doubt, when we were talking about Church 1 you could see in my classmates eyes, if not a fear, a definite concern with how much pressure you'd be in a church that had grown from 200 to 1700 in worship over 20 years. Personal performance would need to be high from the start, as expectations on the part of church leadership and the UM-hierarchy (my apologizes to our two non-UM's in the class) would be sky high, particularly if the person you are following is made a saint by the laity within four months of the moving van pulling out of the driveway.
What must it have been like for the disciples to know that they had to follow the Son of God with the message of the Gospel? It's no wonder Jesus had to promise the Holy Spirit because I gather, given the way Jesus' died and the tough life here on earth he promised them, the disciples had to feel more than a little overwhelmed. Talk about expectations.... most of the world hates them, and the rest don't know they exist. Not mention, the guy you follow could raise the dead.
"Yeah you can give a decent sermon, but can you raise the dead?"
And so we pray for our own Pentecost, my classmates and I. A blowing of the Spirit into our souls, hearts and minds, so that we might see clearly, and hear with clarity the promises of faithfulness, no matter if we are accepted or rejected by others. For some of us are headed to serve churches on the margins, others will be starting a new church, others will end up places where people haven't been excited about much in a long time..... and, I suspect, one or two of us will be following a winner.
"And lo, I will be with you, even until the end of time."
We're counting on that Jesus. We're counting on you.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Ten Things I Think I Think
1) Well, during a study-break, I decided to click on my blog-tracker, just to see how many people had surfed by today, when I received a surprise. You see, Sunday hits are usually few and far between. People who normally follow the musing of this blog know that virtually every Monday, you can expect a new "Ten Things I Think I Think", and the other six days of the week... well, there are no guarantees of anything new. So Sunday is generally pretty slow.
But not today.
It seems that a blogger who attends Holy Trinity - Brompton, the congregation we visited during our visit in London, googled my blog, and posted my "part one" segment on my experience at the church. Imagine then, seventy hits, all from England and India within minutes of that particular blogger's post. I'm kind of curious how they'll receive what I had to say, for even though I'm pretty kind to HTB, I viewed (and view) their take on the Holy Spirit and how he (the Holy Spirit is a person... just ask Dr. Steve Seamonds, one of my professors) manifests himself with a degree of... well, if it isn't skepticism, it's some sort of relative.
Who knows where this might end up.
2) I said it in August, and I'll say it again: the national championship for college football is going to be played in Columbus on November 18th. USC's loss only confirms what I thought then, and believe now that the best two teams in the country are in the Big Ten. The downside to this, of course, is that I've a sense that the actual BCS Championship Game, itself, will prove to be anti-climatic, as it looks like a Big East school is going to represent the challenger to the mighty Bucks. OSU/West Virginia might prove interesting, but as for Louisville or (I can't believe I'm even going to type this name out) Rutgers..... yeesh! How good could your conference be if Rutgers is undefeated? It'd be like if Indiana won the Big Ten Championship... that'd be the year that a new strain of the bubonic plague struck every state in the midwest except Indiana, and all of Purdue's starters were ineligible. How tainted will West Virginia's bid be if they had to "get by" Rutgers first? Expect many renewed calls from fans from the SEC, Pac-Ten, Big Twelve, and even a dog-awful ACC for a football championship tourney.
3) In a post a couple of days ago about books, and particularly books I'd read if they were ever written, I listed a book called "Why Jesus Hates Religion" by a pastor named Bruxy Cavey as something I'd read if it was ever written.... and I was being serious (as I was when I called for my boss to write a book on David for Adults). Well, guess what, Bruxy Cavey just released his first book, and guess what it's called.... The End of Religion . Needless to say, I've already ordered my copy, and suspect that it will find a way into my dissertation. Check it out.
4) Had to read "East of Eden" for my preaching class. The assignment was to do (among other things) detail what having read this book would do for me as a preacher. Well, in short, it confirmed for me that a) Steinbeck was one of the greatest authors of his generation b) that the imagery he uses is so vivid that you can practically smell California as he describes it (which is instructional for a preacher), and c) that nobody talks or writes like Steinbeck anymore. Nobody. No one. Not a soul. Most authors would have written that book in a third-less pages, and doubted that the evil character (Kate) was realistic because she was born evil. It just seems to come out of a more naive, and better educated (don't' think the two are mutually exclusive... they aren't) time. They don't make 'em like this one anymore.
5) Percentage of their budget that a church should be spending on staffing costs, as per the suggestion of Aubrey Malphurs, author of Advanced Strategic Planning and a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary: 40-60%, with larger churches spending less percentage wise than smaller churches.... in case you were wondering. I'm sure it kept you up and night. You can thank me later.
6) Heard an excellent sermon this morning at Quest Community Church in Lexington on how the mirror, and a false-perception perpetuated in the culture of how we should look, robs us of our connection with God. Helen Music, the preacher of the morning, nailed it. If you are interested, here it is: http://www.questcommunity.com/subindex.php?id=currentseriespodcast
I guess we're going to spend a little time at Quest, as opposed to Southland Christian Church with is the big behemoth we'd been attending during our year of (mostly) self-imposed exile from home for awhile. And that's no knock on Southland... we're just using this year to experience new things.
7) Another excerpt from Malphurs' book:
We have discovered that people fear the future. It frightens them to the extent they prefer to live in the present or, worse, the past. So to succeed, leaders must address that fear. By far the most effective way is vision clarity - to picture the future with such vivid terms that a congregation can see where it is headed.
8) Drafted my NBA fantasy league basketball team for 2006-07. With the top pick, I took LeBron. Also got Vince Carter, Chris Kaman (center for the Clippers), Antwan Jamison (forward for the Wizards), Kurt Thomas (forward/center for the Suns), Andre Miller (guard for the Nuggets), Dwight Howard (a force of nature for the Magic), Mehmet Okur (from my beloved Utah Jazz - really ticked off my brother I got him too, which is a bonus), Richard Hamilton (Pistons), Ben Gordon (Bulls), Bonzi Wells (my one headcase - last year I had Artest), and Mike Miller (Grizzlies). Since only fourteen people follow the NBA in America any more, I need let you know that this a great team. I think after a three-year drought, the title will once again be mine.
9) I took Elijah to the nursery at Quest this morning, which was a landmark. Usually I spend most of the sermon (since normally this Aimee's job, me being a preacher and all) out walking around, trying to catch snippets of the sermon on closed-captioned TV. Today, I thought I'd roll the dice... and he did OK. He cried as I left, and then kinda glommed onto a teenage volunteer who played with him until we picked him up. He gave her a hug and wave as we left, and all to say this....
You don't know how important it is to volunteer in your church's nursery or children's ministry. You just don't know how much parents and kids appreciate it. I don't care if you are a stockbroker, butcher, a cabinet-maker or a candlestick maker.... everyone should do this a few times a year. It is one of the ultimate acts of servanthood, with the greatest potential for impact you can give. No joking. It's that important.
10) Am doing my dissertation on churches that made planned pastoral leadership transitions where a succeeding pastor was selected before the senior pastor left, and they actually serve on staff together before the transition takes place. It's an interesting study, but the problem is that, as per the suggestion of my Bishop (and you gotta take a Bishop's suggestion pretty seriously), I'm looking for churches in Episcopal systems that have made this transition. For those who don't know what "Episcopal system" means, it's systems where pastors are appointed by Bishops to serve churches. "Call systems", where the congregations ask a pastor come and be their pastor are far more prevalent in this country, have been experimenting with this kind of transition now heavily for about 10 to 15 years. Now, some of the biggest "call" churches in the country (Willow Creek Community Church, Saddleback Church, and Southeast Christian Church of Louisville to name a few) are in the middle of massive leadership transitions where the well-known pastor (Bill Hybles, Rick Warren, and Bob Russell, respectively), are retiring to some other aspect of ministry, and another Senior Pastor takes over using the "succession model". Finding 12 to 15 examples of these kinds of transitions in the "call church" world would be easy.
But Bishops are a little wary of giving up their right to make appointments. Wary to the point where I've scoured the country, and at this point I've only found six examples of "Episcopal system churches" that have tried this (all successfully, I might add). They include St. Lukes Community UMC (and African-American congregation in Dallas), Indian River City UMC (Florida), Mt. Pisgah UMC (North Georgia), Prospect Street UMC (North Georgia), St. Luke UMC (Indianapolis), and All Saints Episcopalian Church (Pasadena - and yes, this is the same church that made headlines when it's former Senior Pastor made an anti-Iraq/Republican sermon, advocated that its members should get politically active, and was subsequently investigated by the IRS for having violated it's tax exempt status).
Holy Trinity- Brompton, actually qualifies, as they made the transition from Sandy Millar to Nicky Gumble two years ago... but I don't think a British example will be allowed.
However, the track record of appointments made in churches (particularly larger ones) where a Senior Pastor left, and the new pastor comes in cold the next day to take over, has been abysmal (I'm working on the data for the West Ohio Conference, and the stats are depressing), which is why there are at least a dozen UMC churches nationwide that are "in-process" for a planned succession, which is unprecedented in our denomination's history. I guess Bishops are more afraid of churches falling to pieces in the midst of a conventional appointment (the current norm), than trying something new in an effort to protect a church's future.
But I can't use "in process"... I need "process completed at least two years ago", so it's turning into a challenge.
Anyhow, be in prayer as I seek more examples of "planned succession Episcopal churches" who successfully made this transition (it'd be easier looking for bald, left-handed, world-class violinists, with three sisters, and a wife named Elvina). If you know of a United Methodist, Anglican, Wesleyan, Episcopalian, or Free Methodist church that did this, please let me know.
But not today.
It seems that a blogger who attends Holy Trinity - Brompton, the congregation we visited during our visit in London, googled my blog, and posted my "part one" segment on my experience at the church. Imagine then, seventy hits, all from England and India within minutes of that particular blogger's post. I'm kind of curious how they'll receive what I had to say, for even though I'm pretty kind to HTB, I viewed (and view) their take on the Holy Spirit and how he (the Holy Spirit is a person... just ask Dr. Steve Seamonds, one of my professors) manifests himself with a degree of... well, if it isn't skepticism, it's some sort of relative.
Who knows where this might end up.
2) I said it in August, and I'll say it again: the national championship for college football is going to be played in Columbus on November 18th. USC's loss only confirms what I thought then, and believe now that the best two teams in the country are in the Big Ten. The downside to this, of course, is that I've a sense that the actual BCS Championship Game, itself, will prove to be anti-climatic, as it looks like a Big East school is going to represent the challenger to the mighty Bucks. OSU/West Virginia might prove interesting, but as for Louisville or (I can't believe I'm even going to type this name out) Rutgers..... yeesh! How good could your conference be if Rutgers is undefeated? It'd be like if Indiana won the Big Ten Championship... that'd be the year that a new strain of the bubonic plague struck every state in the midwest except Indiana, and all of Purdue's starters were ineligible. How tainted will West Virginia's bid be if they had to "get by" Rutgers first? Expect many renewed calls from fans from the SEC, Pac-Ten, Big Twelve, and even a dog-awful ACC for a football championship tourney.
3) In a post a couple of days ago about books, and particularly books I'd read if they were ever written, I listed a book called "Why Jesus Hates Religion" by a pastor named Bruxy Cavey as something I'd read if it was ever written.... and I was being serious (as I was when I called for my boss to write a book on David for Adults). Well, guess what, Bruxy Cavey just released his first book, and guess what it's called.... The End of Religion . Needless to say, I've already ordered my copy, and suspect that it will find a way into my dissertation. Check it out.
4) Had to read "East of Eden" for my preaching class. The assignment was to do (among other things) detail what having read this book would do for me as a preacher. Well, in short, it confirmed for me that a) Steinbeck was one of the greatest authors of his generation b) that the imagery he uses is so vivid that you can practically smell California as he describes it (which is instructional for a preacher), and c) that nobody talks or writes like Steinbeck anymore. Nobody. No one. Not a soul. Most authors would have written that book in a third-less pages, and doubted that the evil character (Kate) was realistic because she was born evil. It just seems to come out of a more naive, and better educated (don't' think the two are mutually exclusive... they aren't) time. They don't make 'em like this one anymore.
5) Percentage of their budget that a church should be spending on staffing costs, as per the suggestion of Aubrey Malphurs, author of Advanced Strategic Planning and a professor at Dallas Theological Seminary: 40-60%, with larger churches spending less percentage wise than smaller churches.... in case you were wondering. I'm sure it kept you up and night. You can thank me later.
6) Heard an excellent sermon this morning at Quest Community Church in Lexington on how the mirror, and a false-perception perpetuated in the culture of how we should look, robs us of our connection with God. Helen Music, the preacher of the morning, nailed it. If you are interested, here it is: http://www.questcommunity.com/subindex.php?id=currentseriespodcast
I guess we're going to spend a little time at Quest, as opposed to Southland Christian Church with is the big behemoth we'd been attending during our year of (mostly) self-imposed exile from home for awhile. And that's no knock on Southland... we're just using this year to experience new things.
7) Another excerpt from Malphurs' book:
We have discovered that people fear the future. It frightens them to the extent they prefer to live in the present or, worse, the past. So to succeed, leaders must address that fear. By far the most effective way is vision clarity - to picture the future with such vivid terms that a congregation can see where it is headed.
8) Drafted my NBA fantasy league basketball team for 2006-07. With the top pick, I took LeBron. Also got Vince Carter, Chris Kaman (center for the Clippers), Antwan Jamison (forward for the Wizards), Kurt Thomas (forward/center for the Suns), Andre Miller (guard for the Nuggets), Dwight Howard (a force of nature for the Magic), Mehmet Okur (from my beloved Utah Jazz - really ticked off my brother I got him too, which is a bonus), Richard Hamilton (Pistons), Ben Gordon (Bulls), Bonzi Wells (my one headcase - last year I had Artest), and Mike Miller (Grizzlies). Since only fourteen people follow the NBA in America any more, I need let you know that this a great team. I think after a three-year drought, the title will once again be mine.
9) I took Elijah to the nursery at Quest this morning, which was a landmark. Usually I spend most of the sermon (since normally this Aimee's job, me being a preacher and all) out walking around, trying to catch snippets of the sermon on closed-captioned TV. Today, I thought I'd roll the dice... and he did OK. He cried as I left, and then kinda glommed onto a teenage volunteer who played with him until we picked him up. He gave her a hug and wave as we left, and all to say this....
You don't know how important it is to volunteer in your church's nursery or children's ministry. You just don't know how much parents and kids appreciate it. I don't care if you are a stockbroker, butcher, a cabinet-maker or a candlestick maker.... everyone should do this a few times a year. It is one of the ultimate acts of servanthood, with the greatest potential for impact you can give. No joking. It's that important.
10) Am doing my dissertation on churches that made planned pastoral leadership transitions where a succeeding pastor was selected before the senior pastor left, and they actually serve on staff together before the transition takes place. It's an interesting study, but the problem is that, as per the suggestion of my Bishop (and you gotta take a Bishop's suggestion pretty seriously), I'm looking for churches in Episcopal systems that have made this transition. For those who don't know what "Episcopal system" means, it's systems where pastors are appointed by Bishops to serve churches. "Call systems", where the congregations ask a pastor come and be their pastor are far more prevalent in this country, have been experimenting with this kind of transition now heavily for about 10 to 15 years. Now, some of the biggest "call" churches in the country (Willow Creek Community Church, Saddleback Church, and Southeast Christian Church of Louisville to name a few) are in the middle of massive leadership transitions where the well-known pastor (Bill Hybles, Rick Warren, and Bob Russell, respectively), are retiring to some other aspect of ministry, and another Senior Pastor takes over using the "succession model". Finding 12 to 15 examples of these kinds of transitions in the "call church" world would be easy.
But Bishops are a little wary of giving up their right to make appointments. Wary to the point where I've scoured the country, and at this point I've only found six examples of "Episcopal system churches" that have tried this (all successfully, I might add). They include St. Lukes Community UMC (and African-American congregation in Dallas), Indian River City UMC (Florida), Mt. Pisgah UMC (North Georgia), Prospect Street UMC (North Georgia), St. Luke UMC (Indianapolis), and All Saints Episcopalian Church (Pasadena - and yes, this is the same church that made headlines when it's former Senior Pastor made an anti-Iraq/Republican sermon, advocated that its members should get politically active, and was subsequently investigated by the IRS for having violated it's tax exempt status).
Holy Trinity- Brompton, actually qualifies, as they made the transition from Sandy Millar to Nicky Gumble two years ago... but I don't think a British example will be allowed.
However, the track record of appointments made in churches (particularly larger ones) where a Senior Pastor left, and the new pastor comes in cold the next day to take over, has been abysmal (I'm working on the data for the West Ohio Conference, and the stats are depressing), which is why there are at least a dozen UMC churches nationwide that are "in-process" for a planned succession, which is unprecedented in our denomination's history. I guess Bishops are more afraid of churches falling to pieces in the midst of a conventional appointment (the current norm), than trying something new in an effort to protect a church's future.
But I can't use "in process"... I need "process completed at least two years ago", so it's turning into a challenge.
Anyhow, be in prayer as I seek more examples of "planned succession Episcopal churches" who successfully made this transition (it'd be easier looking for bald, left-handed, world-class violinists, with three sisters, and a wife named Elvina). If you know of a United Methodist, Anglican, Wesleyan, Episcopalian, or Free Methodist church that did this, please let me know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)