They Laughed

"They laughed at him. They knew she was dead." (Luke 8:53-The Message)

We were in the middle of a conversation about the difficulties of being the Church in today's society. I asked those who were gathered for this annual review of church life to discuss the barriers that stand in the way of effectively leading members to a deeper and richer relationship with Christ. As usual, their answers included lack of commitment, too many other priorities, too many things to do and too little time to do them, people whose lives are going so well that they don't feel they need God, and other similar ideas. I then invited them to think about what one spiritual practice (prayer and worship, fasting, study, participating in Holy Communion, generous giving, Christian service, etc.) would have the greatest power to transform their members if their congregation practiced it with great consistency and intentionality.

After some small group conversations, I asked who had chosen prayer. A few hands went up.

I asked who had chosen fasting. No hands…then laughter…then a few side comments about how ridiculous it would be for Methodists, lovers of the fellowship meal, to consider fasting.

Laughter? Have we truly become so undisciplined that the pursuit of a spiritual practice is laughable to us? It was as if I had asked a 300-pound person to run a marathon. I might as well have asked a 4 year-old to sit down at the piano and play one of the classics.

Now shift to the following story. In the last part of the eighth chapter of the Gospel of Luke, Jesus is called to the home of Jarius to tend to Jarius's dying daughter. The daughter reportedly dies before Jesus can get to the house, but he insists on seeing her anyway. Jesus allows only his three closest disciples and the daughter's parents to enter the home with him. That makes sense. They were the ones most likely to believe in his power. Once inside the house, he tells them not to worry because the girl is just sleeping. They laughed at him. It was obvious that she was dead.

We know how the story turns out. Jesus takes the girl by the hand and suddenly she is breathing, eating, and full of life.

This all leaves me to wonder whether many of us have concluded that the Church is like the little girl. She has already died, so how could we expect her to have the discipline required to be in relationship with Christ? After all, few of us are comfortable being called on to pray in a public setting. Most church members give at a rate that approximates 2% of their income rather than 10%. Only perhaps 1/3 of those who are Christian in our area say they think that attending worship is important in their life, and more than half are absent from worship on any given Sunday. Few are willing to teach others the faith because they willingly admit that they do not have a sufficient knowledge of the Scriptures. If not dead, it sure appears that the breathing is very shallow.

Imagine for a second that we have Jesus to our house because our little girl, the Church, is dying. Once in the house, he breathes new life into her, raises her up, and tells us to give her something to eat so that her new life might be sustained. What would be it take for us to give the Church the nourishment she needs to be restored to health? I suspect it goes back to the basic essentials. Learn to pray again. Study the Scriptures together. Worship as if our life depends on it. Celebrate the Eucharist as if we really believe we are receiving Christ into our daily lives. Rediscover how fulfilling it can be to be self-emptying through habits of generous giving. Fast in order to learn the discipline of obedience and the art of knowing the difference between our wants and needs. Feed the Church with our daily spiritual practices.

"Then, Jesus, gripping her hand, called, "My dear child, get up." She was up in an instant, up and breathing again! He told them to give her something to eat." (Luke 8: 54-55—The Message)

 

P.S. During the Charge Conference season, I used a series of questions for leaders to ask about their church. Several have asked for a copy of the questions. I am pasting them here for you to use as you wish.

If every congregation…

• Invited people to faith the way your congregation invites people to faith, would there be more Christians 20 years from now or fewer?
  
• Taught those who have accepted Christ to pray in the same way that your congregation teaches its members to pray, would prayer be a stronger component of church life 20 years from now, or less?
  
• Taught those who have accepted Christ to know the Bible and history of the Church in the same way that your congregation teaches the Bible, would Christians be more knowledgeable in 20 years, or less knowledgeable?
  
• Taught those who have accepted Christ to give generously in the same manner that your congregation teaches generous giving, would the giving habits of Christians come closer to the Tithe in 20 years, or further from it?
  
• Encouraged service in the community (beyond the walls of the Church) in the same manner that your congregation encourages service, would Christians have a better reputation for serving others in 20 years, or would the reputation be of a closed community?
  
• Worshipped with the same passion, earnest desire, and sense of expectation as your congregation, would more people be seeking to worship 20 years from now, or fewer?
  

 

Based on the answers you gave above, and on a scale of 1 through 10, how would you rate your congregation on its capacity for leading its members to a deeper and richer relationship with Jesus Christ?

The Make-Believe World of Reality TV

When I first received a call inviting me to perform a wedding on NBC’s Today Show, I wasn’t quite sure whether I was dreaming. As it turns out, that vague feeling of living in two worlds at the same time continued until the wedding was over.
During my first conversation with an NBC producer, I was assured that they intended to air the entire wedding live. I commented that I had expected they would need to have a commercial break within the normal time frame of a wedding. That was when the producer told me the rest of the story. The wedding did have to fit within their parameters. “How long is that,” I asked. “Five minutes,” she said.
“Five minutes? It takes three minutes to walk down the aisle. How in the world can we do a wedding in five minutes?” Having said that, I was already thinking I had been optimistic about the time it takes to get down the aisle.
“Well, it is five minutes from the time you start talking to the end,” the producer told me. “I will send you a link of a wedding from two years ago, so you can see.”
We continued to negotiate the length for the next couple of weeks. Finally, I was able to get the length all the way back up to five minutes, after a brief reduction to four and a half minutes. In the meantime, I learned that the event was the major story of the Today Show for about 2.5 hours of airtime. The day would include a toast by the stars, conversation about the honeymoon between the stars and the couple, descriptions by the stars of the food, drinks, reception site, cake and almost everything else related to the event. I finally began to understand that even though this was being advertised as a wedding, the world’s view was that the wedding is more about the stars and the party than the ceremony. I suppose I have spent a little too much time living comfortably in my little theological world.
NBC was interested in creating a day of fantasy while I thought we were trying to enter into a life-changing moment for two people. NBC wanted to explore the idea that expensive rings, clothing, and parties can bring happiness, while I wanted to caution against such ideas. NBC understood this as a simple commitment between two people that required little more than an “I do.” I understood that it was a commitment between two people and God, along with the support of the faith community. That takes a bit more time. The couple, fortunately, was in agreement with me, but over a month of percolating on the idea made me wonder if maybe we were truly the minority in our society.
NBC was producing a TV reality show in which its primary characters (Matt Lauer, Meredith Viera, Al Roker, and Natalie Morales) got to go to a wedding together. While there they would toast the couple that just happened to be living out a Cinderella fantasy. The storyline was helped by the fact that the groom had been off to war and was returning home to safety. It was a wonderful fairytale story, aside from the fact that Jeremy and Melissa really have lived with the separation and anxiety of war.
The fantasy experience was there for me as well. A limousine driver picked me up from the hotel and whisked me to the studio. I was escorted to the room where my make-up was done and my hair gelled so I wouldn’t be bothered by the real wind and rain. My robe and stole were sent to wardrobe for pressing. A keeper watched over me throughout the morning. One of the stars greeted me and asked me if I knew my “lines.” A person stood just beyond range of the cameras and pointed at me when it was time for me to start. He also stood ready to tell me whether to slow down or speed up, depending on whether we were behind or ahead of schedule.
I had to frequently ask myself whether I was “talent” in a show, or I was a minister performing a wedding ceremony and service of worship. I am sure that was also true for the bride and groom, and for the guests at the wedding. It didn’t get any easier for me after the show, I mean wedding. Almost immediately, I began to receive notes on my Facebook wall (This is a good thing because my Facebook wall has been mostly empty until now). Video links to the wedding showed up in many places, some of the text from the wedding was quoted in a news release posted on MSNBC, and my family began to claim that they know me. That hasn’t happened with any other weddings I have done.
As I think about all this, I am beginning to understand that I really was participating in two worlds at the same time. Yes, it was a show, and it was make-believe, and it placed the focus in the wrong places and the wrong values. At the same time, it was a real couple that was just as committed to their future life together as other couples I have married, and it was a service of worship, and this couple will live a life as complicated and as real as any of us. They will have future moments when their fantasies come true, and they will have days that feel like nightmares. God has still pledged to be beside them in all of those days, and they have pledged to seek God’s guidance along the way.
I can understand those who would condemn the whole thing as making a mockery of a solemn event, but that wasn’t my experience. What seems most important for me at this point is to be able to clearly understand the difference between the two.
During the wedding, I reminded the couple of their dreams and imaginings as they looked toward their marriage and then suggested that they had cast aside those dreams because the real thing was so much better. I pray that my statement will speak truth for the rest of their lives. The make-believe wedding seemed pretty good, but I pray it will feel empty when compared to life lived as one. The make-believe will fade, but the real will endure.
Now, back to real life.

Doing it Differently

    The neighborhood in which I live has what is for me a new fangled way of mail delivery. Instead of each family having a personal mailbox at the end of the driveway, the postal service has provided a group mailbox for a cluster of households.

    All of us in the cluster walk to our common box, place our outgoing mail in the same receptacle, and then get our personal mail out of a private container that has been designated for our household. No house is more than four lots from the box. It is a few extra steps, but it means we don't have to worry about maintaining our own box, and we don't have to worry about those late Saturday night visitors who enjoy smashing them. We have traded one convenience for another.

    I was wondering why the postal service had decided to provide such boxes for us until one day I saw the mail carrier stop at our group box. He opened the front of the container to expose our private boxes, and in a matter of seconds he was able to gather our combined outgoing mail and deliver our incoming mail without getting out of or even moving his vehicle.

    Wow! What had once taken the mail carrier 15-20 minutes now took only 1 or 2 minutes to complete. No wonder the postal service was willing to provide the boxes for us! Imagine, though, what it was like for the mail carriers when they first heard their number of daily deliveries was being multiplied 10-fold. It couldn't have made sense until they could visualize the plan.

    I hope that story is a metaphor for what is happening in the Pony Express and Heartland North Districts, beginning July 1. Most have probably heard by now that I will be serving as superintendent of both districts. The normal responses to me have been that it is too many churches, or too many pastors, or it means that some churches or pastors will be ignored, or that I will be over-worked. All those responses are predicated on an understanding that we are continuing with the same model for superintending.

    However, like the postal service, we are seeking to accomplish our mission by doing things in a different way. We have some ideas about improving the way we do charge conferences, pastoral supervision, and pastor-parish consultations. We will use a few of the resources that we used to spend on the second superintendent to contract with folks who have specialized skills and will perform specialized tasks. I also suspect that we will discover even better methodologies in the year to come. During the summer, we will hold a series of meetings to explain what this all looks like and invite your suggestions.

    In the meantime, let's answer a few basic questions/concerns. First, we will continue to have two distinct districts, with both offices continuing as before. I will work out of both offices, though my real office tends to be in churches and restaurants and wherever else you are gathered. If you need assistance, you will continue to call the same numbers and use the same email addresses.

    Some have worried that the superintendent will ignore the small churches. Actually, large churches tend to be the ones who ask very little from the superintendent. So, who can you expect to get my attention? I plan to continue devoting my attention to congregations that are actively attempting to interact with the community that surrounds them and are looking for assistance in taking the next step. Congregations that are just keeping the doors open until the last person dies do not need my help. Congregations that are already functioning with a high level of clarity do not need my help. It is the ones that are transitioning who can best utilize what I have to offer.

    However, answering the above question probably leads us astray. Our ability to accomplish the mission of making disciples of Jesus Christ will not be measured by whether churches get the attention of the superintendent. Having the superintendent simply show up at a worship service or fall sale will not make the Kingdom come into fruition. From the district's perspective, we must ask whether the district is effectively helping congregations develop the financial, spiritual, and leadership resources they need to do what God is calling them to do. It won't matter whether the church is small or large, rural or suburban, or served by a part-time or full-time pastor.

    This will be a great adventure for us, and we will do our best to follow in the direction of God. As always, stay focused on the mission of making disciples of Jesus Christ. Seek ways to serve the community that surrounds you. Follow the Wesleyan rules: Do no harm, do good, and stay in love with God.

13. Giving a Little Extra

I almost brought this up a year ago, but I chose the cowardly act of silence. Now I am gathering up my courage, and I will dare to ask the question: "Is it possible for a district in the Missouri Conference to pay 100% of its conference apportionments?" Perhaps I should be bolder. Is it possible that Pony Express District churches could pay their conference apportionments in full in 2010?

Before answering, here are some facts. Our district completed 2009 with contributions equaling 95.1% of what we were apportioned as a group. Seventy-nine of our 92 churches paid 100%. Thanks to the commitment of our churches, we came very close to hitting that 100% mark last year!

Of the 13 that did not contribute all that was asked of them, only two gave nothing. (Both of those either have or will soon have given something in 2010). Nine of those who did not make 100% have allowed it to become habitual. Those nine have missed on anywhere from 4 to 18 consecutive years. Quite honestly, though, almost all of them have extenuating circumstances that tend to impoverish them as congregations.

So, the first thought would be that we will never pay 100% because we will always have one or more congregations that don't quite make it. The very fact that I am writing this, though, should tell you that I have a second thought.

Our problem may not be that we will always have some churches that cannot pay 100%. Rather, our problem is that we don't have churches who consider paying more than 100%. For some reason, we have tended to believe that 100% is a cap on giving rather than a minimum standard. That is like saying no person should give more than a tithe of their income to God. It misses the Bible's invitation to be extravagantly generous.

The Apostle Paul suggested a similar idea to the people of Corinth. He wrote, "It is a question of a fair balance between your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that there may be a fair balance." (2 Corinthians 8: 13-14) In other words, if you are having an extra good year, if you have received an unexpected bequest, or if you just somehow end up with money in the bank because your need was less, then share some on behalf of those who didn't have the same kind of year. Someday, their time will come to help you.

As it turns out, that already happens in a neighboring annual conference. It traditionally pays 100%, I am told, not because every church can do so, but because churches than can pay 105%. There are a few churches here in Missouri that are doing the same—none so far from our district.

Is it worth it for us to go to that effort? I believe so. Our connectional giving lays the groundwork for everything else we do. If there were no apportionments, there would be no church camp, no new churches, no Africa University, no training for pastors, no safe sanctuaries, no communications system for helping us work together, no United Methodist Committee on Relief, no disaster response team, no Volunteer in Mission organization. Each church would simply be on an island picking a pastor from among the flock and teaching whatever theology was most popular at the moment. When we give connectionally, we make each other stronger.

I have mentioned this idea of giving 105% in a couple of places now. So far, I have been met with laughter. Well, Sarah laughed, and she ended up pregnant with hope. Is it possible for our district to be the first to give 100%? Sure. Will it happen? That will require a few pregnant churches!