21 Signs your church needs to change

21 Signs your church needs to change

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

How Does Size Matter: CRC Edition Follow Up Pt. 2

Make sure you catch part 1 and Larry’s response in the comments.

Structuring the Local Church

When I read Larry’s tweets I was imagining he was primarily commenting on the CRC structure and culture above the local church. He first focused, I think correctly on the local church structure. I’ll try to bullet some of his points, which I think are dead-on.

  • A local congregation’s structure must fit its size.
  • Mission requires freedom
  • Mission requires trust
  • the CRC’s tradition of local church structure majors on control rather than freedom and trust
  • The CRC’s tradition of local church structure slows down decision and movement
  • Churches should structure themselves for the next size up
  • Does our tradition in structure reflect the immigrant roots?
  • The CRC assumes (implicitly in church order and culture as default practice) one size fits all.

As I said think all of Larry’s thoughts here hit the mark. I’ll add a few comments, observations and questions of my own.

Most CRC Church Plants (in my experience) aren’t hobbled by CRC rules but perhaps sometimes by tradition. Continue reading →

Posted in CRC, Institutional Church | 4 Comments

How Can the CRC have a Voice with its People Today

I wrote this comment for the discussion of the purpose of the Banner on the Network

My fear for Synod is my expectation of a comment discussion, that we will spend time wandering around debating sex, science and the worthiness of our present editor. Discussions of sex, science and the worthiness of whatever editor we presently have will always be with us, it seems to me foundational question is the question of this article, “What do we want from The Banner?”

I think most of us will agree the denomination needs to be able to manage a number of missions at once:

1. Prescriptive Faith formation and doctrinal instruction. The assumption of the Banner for this mission and the felt betrayal by the two articles in question and the editorial decision to put them through is what is drawing all the heat. OK. but if this is the mission of the Banner then we should say so.

2. Creating space for exploration. Tolerating divergent even heterodox ideas. When I work with people, in and out of the church I encourage them to speak their minds and their hearts and I value honesty over correctness in this mode. Most of us get this as a necessary part of a process for individuals and communities to work out their faith and figure out how what they believe fits, or does not fit with the catholic church. Should The Banner be a space for this? Our current “mission statement” for the Banner seems to suggest it, and given the limited media modes of communal conversation in most of the 20th century it fits. The question is whether it fits the present realities of The Banner as print medium combined with its promotional mission (which is a separate mission from points 1 and 2 here).

When the matter of adopting the Belhar arose the most interesting question for me was “how would our denomination manage a communal conversation and decision of this magnitude?” My conclusion based not necessarily on observing the outcome as much as the process was “not very well”.

Questions of sex and science along side the matters of power and privilege which the Belhar sought to address are large and broad conversations that the church must engage because society is engaging them. If the church wants to have both influence and a voice we will need to figure out how to do so.

James Schaap has been the CRC historian for the late 20th century. The piece he wrote for the 150th anniversary of the CRC  noted that the reality of our place in our time is that we’ve lost the ability to control the question. CRC minds and hearts, of laity and pastor alike are shaped far more by voices outside the CRC than inside. No decision on the Banner will change this. We will not have the kind of voice in the Banner that we had in the days before TV and then the Internet took possession of the agenda. The question we must ask is how will we steward the conversations we

Posted in CRC, Saved Blog Comments | Tagged | 6 Comments

Evangelical Celebrity

Posted in Link Compilations | Leave a comment

Death Sentence for Christian Conversion in Sudan

Posted in Link Compilations | Leave a comment

Lessons from a Black Mass Cancellation at Harvard

Slate

For the HECSC, religions are content neutral. That is, all religions are of identical value and validity simply because they are religions and people practice them; there can be no inquiry into the ways in which they genuinely differ and/or offer more or less enriching experiences to interested parties or adherents. So when the Catholics and other assorted Christians of the Boston area responded sharply to the announcement of the mass, it was impossible for the HECSC to mount much of a spirited response: all they could say was that the traditions were distinct, and that anyone who couldn’t see the supposedly inherent value in distinct traditions was guilty of rank ignorance.

Yet it remains a vexing fact that religions really do differ. It is advantageous for some institutions, such as the state, to retain a neutral attitude toward religions for particular purposes, such as constitutional treatment and so forth. But that attitude of neutrality hardly necessitates an overall social attitude of neutrality, and the fact remains that whether or not groups like the HECSC want to contend with it or not, religions are and will continue to be in conflict, and it is impossible to deal with those conflicts with nothing but procedural norms.

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

The world won’t let Monica Lewinsky Move On

Slate

We’re still living in a world where women are defined by the sex they have, while men are defined by, you know, other things they say and do.

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

The speed of change of LGBTQ opinions among American Christians

Barna

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment

Why Pray and Believe in a World of Genocide and Extinction?

Sennacherib, the mighty king, king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the throne of judgment, or at the entrance of the Jewish city of Lachish. I give permission for its slaughter”

Faith in a Brutal World

If you’re reading through the Hebrew Scriptures and you get to the book of Kings you’ll get accustomed to the “good kings” and “bad kings”. The descriptions are stark, black and white, good and evil.

2 Kings 16:1–4 (NET)

1 In the seventeenth year of the reign of Pekah son of Remaliah, Jotham’s son Ahaz became king over Judah. 2 Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned for sixteen years in Jerusalem. He did not do what pleased the Lord his God, in contrast to his ancestor David.3 He followed in the footsteps of the kings of Israel. He passed his son through the fire, a horrible sin practiced by the nations whom the Lord drove out from before the Israelites. 4 He offered sacrifices and burned incense on the high places, on the hills, and under every green tree.

2 Kings 18:1–8 (NET)

1 In the third year of the reign of Israel’s King Hoshea son of Elah, Ahaz’s son Hezekiah became king over Judah. 2 He was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned twenty-nine years in Jerusalem. His mother was Abi, the daughter of Zechariah. 3 He did what the Lord approved, just as his ancestor David had done.4 He eliminated the high places, smashed the sacred pillars to bits, and cut down the Asherah pole. He also demolished the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for up to that time the Israelites had been offering incense to it; it was called Nehushtan.5 He trusted in the Lord God of Israel; in this regard there was none like him among the kings of Judah either before or after.6 He was loyal to the Lord and did not abandon him. He obeyed the commandments which the Lord had given to Moses. 7 The Lord was with him; he succeeded in all his endeavors. He rebelled against the king of Assyria and refused to submit to him.8 He defeated the Philistines as far as Gaza and its territory, from the watchtower to the city fortress.

If you stop reading here you can preserve the stark relief. The story, however, doesn’t end here. It is the way of the text to offer these flat summaries. Ahaz bad, Hezekiah good. If you keep reading, however, you begin to see how painful “good” was, and how wobbly and flawed the “good” were.

Judging Hezekiah

Hezekiah lead a nationalist, reform movement that sought to clean up a lot of what his father had done. Was he moved to do this because he loved Yhwh more than the gods of Assyria? Did he see in the decisions of his father the path to destruction that northern brother-kingdom Israel had descended? Was his mother a Yhwh-fundamentalist? Was he ambitious, seeing and hoping for an opportunity to be released from the yoke of Assyria? We can’t judge him peering through the thin straw of the texts available to us. Isaiah and the authors of Kings and Chronicles sure seemed to like him and they were clearly highly devoted Yhwhists.

Hezekiah had real decisions to make in his life. Would he join a coalition to rebel against Assyria? Would he look to Egypt for aid which in the eyes of Isaiah was swapping one pagan overlord for another rather than trusting in Yhwh alone as the great King of Israel and Jerusalem?

Realpolitik Continue reading →

Posted in On the way to Sunday's sermon | 2 Comments

First People’s Voices: Morality

Native History

Lakota Elder continues: “White people are taught to keep away from things because of ownership, not because of RESPECT. This is why traditional indigenous people had no need for locks, no need for written laws, no jails. There was no stealing, if someone was hungry, they could go in your house and get food. That was all. Why didn’t people take things? Because of respect. 

Posted in Daily Links and Notes | Leave a comment