Remember that episode of Friends when Rachel takes up smoking? She had just gotten a promotion with Ralph Lauren, but her boss and a co-worker would make all the decisions when they would go out on a smoke break. To ensure she wouldn't be left behind, Rachel picked up a cigarette and pretended to puff like a pro. Smoking was portrayed poorly on that show, and Rachel's character admitted to her friends that she hated the very smell of cigarettes. She simply didn't want to be left out. Smoking was the only way to ensure this would not happen, so she adapted herself.
I'm part of a church that puts major emphasis on community. I don't mean we all live in the same part of town (not sure if that would be more cool or more cult), but that we try to instill the idea that church should go beyond the corporate and small group gatherings. The Church at Rock Creek has a great saying: It's More Than Just Church...It's Life. That's a powerful statement, and one that can be a double-edged sword.
When you try to do church this way, there is the risk of hurting feelings. If a group of people who are all part of the same church get together, it's probably going to be seen as a church-related function. In one way, this is unfair to do, as a church should not be judged by the actions of a small portion of its population. On the other hand, a church is the people, and if we are really trying to view our life as community-based, even the smallest of get-togethers are technically a function of the church.
But how about the hurt feelings? Within any organization or community, there will always be those more sensitive than others. For those of us who are typically the "organizers" of a get-together, I think it's pretty selfish when we fail to include others whom we know would like to share an evening with us (and by the way, EVERYONE has left someone out or been left out before - therefore we're all guilty and should all be sympathetic to this situation). From this point of view, though difficult, the ideal approach to hanging out is to include everyone with whom you worship.
One problem of including everyone is that your group will eventually get so big that you can't go anywhere together as one. Waiting on grub for 2 hours because you need a table for 30 gets old. Additionally, it's unreasonable to expect someone will remember to call all 700 people they see in church every time there is a social gathering. Also, I don't know many people who's homes can comfortably seat their entire church. And finally, most of us are involved in more than one circle of friends, both within and without our church bodies. To invite everybody to a single gathering means we'll be putting people in a room who don't know each other and won't have anything to say to each other. That can be awkward. So from this perspective, it may be better if we don't always seek to include everyone we worship with to our gatherings.
The paradox continues.
I think back to Jesus, and how he had his group of disciples whom he constantly surrounded himself with. Sometimes he even retreated from large crowds to be with them. We have evidence of him spending more time with 3 disciples than the others, and 1 whom he might have spent the most time with out of them all. It's clear when we look at the life of Jesus that he did not play favorites, but he did have a core group he was close to.
Yet, a part of Jesus' ministry that we often miss is that he constantly spent time apart from his group of regulars. His disciples tried to take him away from a group of children - he stayed with the kiddos and illustrated a lesson his followers needed to learn about immeasurable faith. When crowds swarmed around him, he found a Rudy-sized tax collector named Zacchaeus and then grabbed dinner with him. He welcomed a prostitute to the table who came to kneel at his feet seeking to leave behind a life with no king. An outcast woman in John 4 needed water; Jesus had a long conversation with her beside a well, then sent for her to bring by everyone she knew so he could visit with them, too. He met up with a Pharisee one night who wanted to know more about this new birth Jesus spoke of.
Despite the fact that Jesus had a core group, Jesus purposefully made time for people he did not regularly hang out with.
What does this tell us about Jesus? What message about him does this remind us of? That he had love for humanity? Sure, a love that brought about compassion for the weak, healing for the sick, and purpose for the disengaged. That he sought to connect people? I think so. First, within his own original disciples he pulled together people from all walks of life. Some lowly fisherman, an educated accountant, a traitorous tax collector, a politically vocal Jewish patriot, and others. Then, he brought those disciples to people outside of their comfort zones - the sick and injured, foreigners, government officials, poor people, rich people, and everyone in-between. And what's more: Christ's disciples continued to interact with different groups after his death and resurrection.
So how is the church supposed to react and respond? Certainly community-driven churches must do a good job with spending time together outside of a building. In forming a community that is tightly knit, we must walk that fine line to where it does not become an exclusive club. And it must be made up of individuals who are willing to get outside of their core group to connect with others - perhaps even bringing these "outsiders" in to the existing core group.
What could happen if your community was made up of people like that? Not people who just want to hang out amongst themselves all the time, but people who are continually reaching out to others? People who are willing to miss out on an occasional night with their regulars to make a connection with someone else who needs their influence? I think we'd be surprised what would happen within our churches, and also within our personal lives. If we became people who sought to live within a community while also seeking those outside our community because we realize we are a part of a greater community - the Kingdom of God - where we all share in a reward none can surpass.
Let's re-visit that Rachel Green instance from earlier. In pretending to be a smoker, she faked who she was for acceptance into a group. Without such a forgery, she would have been excluded from certain activities. You and I have probably done this too. We pretend to like a video game, band, restaurant, or author just so we'll not be excluded the next time the group takes part in a related activity. Erving Goffman, considered to be the most well-known sociologist of the 20th century, believed in a presentational self, wherein people take on a certain image of themselves and portray that image over other aspects of their personality. While deemed normal to a sociologist, I believe such a presentational self dangerously threatens our ability to be genuine. The church, I believe, can facilitate the deconstruction of the presentational self. And if we are to live in a vibrant, authentic community, it's necessary for people to know that they do not have to present themselves, but rather to be themselves.
As a church leader, you can make an impact on the way people interact. Communication does not just play a key role, it is the key role. Below are a few brief tips in how to implement this deconstruction of the presentational self into your community-driven church:
1. Make a commitment to speak to someone you do not know at your church's next corporate gathering. Privately tell others within any sort of leadership position in the church to do the same. Organizations follow the example of their leaders.
2. Avoid hanging out with the same people every weekend night, and instead...
3. ...intentionally spend quality time on a weekend night with someone you are just an acquaintance with.
4. Repeat #3 in the near future.
5. Eliminate the phrase "our group." When we label ourselves as a "group", anyone on the outside becomes an "other". This clearly contradicts the New Testament model of a church body.
6. When organizing a get-together, tell those you invite that everyone is welcome. It's impossible for you to invite everyone, but bringing more people in on the invitation process will eliminate the exclusive group mindset.
The presentational self dilemma directly correlates to this close-knit community crisis. If someone feels excluded from a group (and receiving no invitation is a form of exclusion), the first thing he or she will do is stress over why they weren't invited. This leads them to the conclusion that there is something about themselves they must change, or that they must highlight something different in conversations. Such constraints keep people guarded, insecure, and fake - traits that cannot exist for authentic community to take place.
This is a convoluted issue, to be sure. And pastors, along with others in leadership positions, can do a great job of practicing an inclusive lifestyle, yet still have the problem of exclusive hang-outs and presentational conversations take place within their communities. What is required for disposing of this problem is a concentrated group effort, with a focused desire to eliminate exclusivity. It will start from the top down. The community must be continually reminded to break free from their comfortable "inner-circles" and include new people into their lives.
When our churches learn -- not just occasionally practice -- how to become a truly unified community, we will gain a better understanding of what our world needs. We will be a part of positive change because we were first changed, and we understand what it means to be a biblically-based community.
"They devoted themselves to the apostles teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer...They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those were being saved."
Acts 2:42,46-47
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Systems, Machines, & Other Likeable Things
What do you think of when you hear the term "The System"?
How about the phrase "a cog in the machine"?
We don't view either of these phrases in positive ways. In fact, we usually talk about ways of "beating the system" and refer to company men as "just another cog in the machine."
Often times, we take this approach to organizations because we think of them as easily corruptible. And true, this can (and has) happened many times over. However, despite the many times corporate corruption has infiltrated groups that began with a good purpose, I believe the organization still has the best chance to bring about positive change. An individual can be a great champion and cheerleader, but he or she must have a supporting cast to carry out the mission. A cast where everyone has a specific task that is different, yet brings to life the over-arching goal. For this reason, it is a powerful thing to be a cog in the machine and a small part in a big system.
Take the human body, for example. The gallbladder is just one of many organs. It's one of the smaller organs, only 6-9 centimeters in length. We can actually live without this tiny organ, even though it helps us process and breakdown the food we eat. Yet, missing a gallbladder carries serious setbacks. People living without a gallbladder cannot eat large meals. Because the gall bladder secretes bile into the small intestines, which helps digest fat, people without one must instead eat snack-sized portions throughout the day. Eating smaller portions prevents the "dumping syndrome" in which food is too quickly transported from the stomach to the small intestines. So while the human body can continue living without this organ, the digestive system is at a large disadvantage in its absence.
The gallbladder is a part of a greater system - the digestive system, to be exact. The digestive system is part of an even bigger operating machine, which we call the human body. Within this body are even more systems, namely the circulatory, musculo-skeletal, endocrine, nervous, excretory, integumentary, reproductive, and respiratory systems. Within each system are many more parts, some of which are large, and some even smaller than the gallbladder. Because each system in the body is made up of parts working together to meet the same goal, it works. When even one part in this overall system goes down, the whole body suffers.
The same can said of organizations. Many systems exist within any given organization. These systems are made up of people and functions, and no matter which function people find themselves in, the work they do matters for the health of the organization.
Like any other organization, churches certainly have their systems. Teaching teams, worship leaders, small groups, outreach groups, mission teams, and finance teams are typical for most churches. They each meet specific needs within a church, and each are very important. And while any of these parts are capable of being corrupted, they are more likely to produce something beneficial for the overall system. More than just another cog in the machine, each part is THE cog for THAT specific function of the machine.
So what part do you play in your church? I write this assuming you play a specific role, as this site is for leaders. And if, in fact, you do play a role, how are you viewing your place in the system? How do you view the system?
General systems theory is a great framework for church leaders to consider. Through this framework, we see our churches as a group of parts working together for the same reason.
I mentioned many parts of this in my first post, but this theory is essential for anyone involved in organizational work. Therefore, it's worth repeating many times over. The system or machine can be a good thing, and it's an inescapable part of accomplishing positive change. What we must remember as leaders is to play our role in the systems we lead. We must put in our strengths and allow others to put their strengths into the same system. When we view our churches in such a way, we empower individuals with different abilities to be a part of the same goal.
This is how our churches will collectively change the world.
How about the phrase "a cog in the machine"?
We don't view either of these phrases in positive ways. In fact, we usually talk about ways of "beating the system" and refer to company men as "just another cog in the machine."
Often times, we take this approach to organizations because we think of them as easily corruptible. And true, this can (and has) happened many times over. However, despite the many times corporate corruption has infiltrated groups that began with a good purpose, I believe the organization still has the best chance to bring about positive change. An individual can be a great champion and cheerleader, but he or she must have a supporting cast to carry out the mission. A cast where everyone has a specific task that is different, yet brings to life the over-arching goal. For this reason, it is a powerful thing to be a cog in the machine and a small part in a big system.
Take the human body, for example. The gallbladder is just one of many organs. It's one of the smaller organs, only 6-9 centimeters in length. We can actually live without this tiny organ, even though it helps us process and breakdown the food we eat. Yet, missing a gallbladder carries serious setbacks. People living without a gallbladder cannot eat large meals. Because the gall bladder secretes bile into the small intestines, which helps digest fat, people without one must instead eat snack-sized portions throughout the day. Eating smaller portions prevents the "dumping syndrome" in which food is too quickly transported from the stomach to the small intestines. So while the human body can continue living without this organ, the digestive system is at a large disadvantage in its absence.
The gallbladder is a part of a greater system - the digestive system, to be exact. The digestive system is part of an even bigger operating machine, which we call the human body. Within this body are even more systems, namely the circulatory, musculo-skeletal, endocrine, nervous, excretory, integumentary, reproductive, and respiratory systems. Within each system are many more parts, some of which are large, and some even smaller than the gallbladder. Because each system in the body is made up of parts working together to meet the same goal, it works. When even one part in this overall system goes down, the whole body suffers.
The same can said of organizations. Many systems exist within any given organization. These systems are made up of people and functions, and no matter which function people find themselves in, the work they do matters for the health of the organization.
Like any other organization, churches certainly have their systems. Teaching teams, worship leaders, small groups, outreach groups, mission teams, and finance teams are typical for most churches. They each meet specific needs within a church, and each are very important. And while any of these parts are capable of being corrupted, they are more likely to produce something beneficial for the overall system. More than just another cog in the machine, each part is THE cog for THAT specific function of the machine.
So what part do you play in your church? I write this assuming you play a specific role, as this site is for leaders. And if, in fact, you do play a role, how are you viewing your place in the system? How do you view the system?
General systems theory is a great framework for church leaders to consider. Through this framework, we see our churches as a group of parts working together for the same reason.
I mentioned many parts of this in my first post, but this theory is essential for anyone involved in organizational work. Therefore, it's worth repeating many times over. The system or machine can be a good thing, and it's an inescapable part of accomplishing positive change. What we must remember as leaders is to play our role in the systems we lead. We must put in our strengths and allow others to put their strengths into the same system. When we view our churches in such a way, we empower individuals with different abilities to be a part of the same goal.
This is how our churches will collectively change the world.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
What to Say?
This Sunday marks a special day: Easter. More than Cadbury Cream Eggs or Chocolate Bunnies, Easter is the day the Church celebrates Christ's resurrection from the grave. And while Christmas is the day most of us get more excited about, what Easter commemorates is truly what separates Christianity from any other religion.
Easter Sunday also happens to be the day that church buildings are most packed. Attending an Easter service is as expected as watching the Super Bowl - while few people watch every football game during the season, just about everyone will sit down for the end-of-year extravaganza.
This leaves pastors with the tough decision of what to preach. Now largely, the decision is made by the Christian calendar. The message will likely focus on the death, burial, and ascension. But there is a decision as to what kind of take-away to leave the audience with. After all, some of those in attendance will not hear another sermon for 365 days.
By the grace and omniscience of God, I do not pastor a church. And since I do not have the responsibility or pressure of making such a decision this week, I will forgo using this little platform to suggest which direction to go. I will, however, list several ideas for pastors to consider as they prepare for this Sunday's message. Although churches across the world have many different structures and will use different formats, they will all (in some way) present a gospel message. By now, most pastors have probably finished the major points of their sermons; but I hope these points will be considered as the finishing touches are added.
1. What does the resurrection of Christ communicate to the world?
2. What does the resurrection of Christ communicate to the Church?
3. How does the answer to question 1 differ from question 2, and how do they compliment each other?
4. What does the message from the resurrection of Christ do?
Here is what I believe on all 4 questions. The fact that God would send his Son to suffer and die for the world communicates that He values every person in the world. The resurrection displays the power that accompanies this value, proving that God is a loving God. To those of us who buy into this idea, I've said nothing ground-breaking. However, those who have seen the extreme poverty and government-imposed injustice of 3rd world countries, experienced harsh judgment from a church, or witnessed hypocrisy from those claiming to follow Christ, often have a hard time believing in a loving God. The resurrection serves as an explicit reminder of the existence of such a being.
For question number 2, I believe Christ's resurrection reminds the Church, his followers, that we will be raised from the dead with Him one day. This life, with all its pain, misery, discomfort, and even its joy, will not overcome our need for Him, nor will our imminent last breaths overshadow what He will do with and for us in the end.
For question 3, of course both answers revolve around Christ's doing. The power connected to God's value on the created human race is the same for those who are in Christ and those who observe from a distance. But I believe an important difference is that those who are not Christ-followers will not experience the love this power comes from without turning to it. Therefore, while an individual's response can neither create nor destroy God's power, the openness of the human heart and the willingness of the human mind to embrace this phenomenon is required to one day experience the resurrection of Christ.
As for question 4, a lot. If we focus on the semantic meaning of "resurrection", we find polar opposites represented. Christ was dead (and beginning to decay), and then He was alive. What does this mean for a heart as far away from God as possible? For the Satanic ritualist? The murderer? The rapist? The pornographer? The gossip? The liar? The adulterer? All of these are far from God, yet none of them are dead. What about the Muslim, Hindi, Sikh, Buddhist, Taoist, or Jew? What about the agnostic or athiest? All of these hold a view of a non-divine Jesus, yet none of these are in physical decay. Christ has already overcome much more, but we often look at these situations and people of such different beliefs as lost causes. The resurrection changed everything, and it continues to change how we view reality. Linguistically, we can understand what is meant by "resurrection." Spiritually we can experience it for ourselves. And physically, we believe that Christ truly overcame death and decay to make hope possible for the world.
For those who will teach the masses this weekend, consider these 4 questions. However you choose to do it, clearly communicate the message God gave the world.
Easter Sunday also happens to be the day that church buildings are most packed. Attending an Easter service is as expected as watching the Super Bowl - while few people watch every football game during the season, just about everyone will sit down for the end-of-year extravaganza.
This leaves pastors with the tough decision of what to preach. Now largely, the decision is made by the Christian calendar. The message will likely focus on the death, burial, and ascension. But there is a decision as to what kind of take-away to leave the audience with. After all, some of those in attendance will not hear another sermon for 365 days.
By the grace and omniscience of God, I do not pastor a church. And since I do not have the responsibility or pressure of making such a decision this week, I will forgo using this little platform to suggest which direction to go. I will, however, list several ideas for pastors to consider as they prepare for this Sunday's message. Although churches across the world have many different structures and will use different formats, they will all (in some way) present a gospel message. By now, most pastors have probably finished the major points of their sermons; but I hope these points will be considered as the finishing touches are added.
1. What does the resurrection of Christ communicate to the world?
2. What does the resurrection of Christ communicate to the Church?
3. How does the answer to question 1 differ from question 2, and how do they compliment each other?
4. What does the message from the resurrection of Christ do?
Here is what I believe on all 4 questions. The fact that God would send his Son to suffer and die for the world communicates that He values every person in the world. The resurrection displays the power that accompanies this value, proving that God is a loving God. To those of us who buy into this idea, I've said nothing ground-breaking. However, those who have seen the extreme poverty and government-imposed injustice of 3rd world countries, experienced harsh judgment from a church, or witnessed hypocrisy from those claiming to follow Christ, often have a hard time believing in a loving God. The resurrection serves as an explicit reminder of the existence of such a being.
For question number 2, I believe Christ's resurrection reminds the Church, his followers, that we will be raised from the dead with Him one day. This life, with all its pain, misery, discomfort, and even its joy, will not overcome our need for Him, nor will our imminent last breaths overshadow what He will do with and for us in the end.
For question 3, of course both answers revolve around Christ's doing. The power connected to God's value on the created human race is the same for those who are in Christ and those who observe from a distance. But I believe an important difference is that those who are not Christ-followers will not experience the love this power comes from without turning to it. Therefore, while an individual's response can neither create nor destroy God's power, the openness of the human heart and the willingness of the human mind to embrace this phenomenon is required to one day experience the resurrection of Christ.
As for question 4, a lot. If we focus on the semantic meaning of "resurrection", we find polar opposites represented. Christ was dead (and beginning to decay), and then He was alive. What does this mean for a heart as far away from God as possible? For the Satanic ritualist? The murderer? The rapist? The pornographer? The gossip? The liar? The adulterer? All of these are far from God, yet none of them are dead. What about the Muslim, Hindi, Sikh, Buddhist, Taoist, or Jew? What about the agnostic or athiest? All of these hold a view of a non-divine Jesus, yet none of these are in physical decay. Christ has already overcome much more, but we often look at these situations and people of such different beliefs as lost causes. The resurrection changed everything, and it continues to change how we view reality. Linguistically, we can understand what is meant by "resurrection." Spiritually we can experience it for ourselves. And physically, we believe that Christ truly overcame death and decay to make hope possible for the world.
For those who will teach the masses this weekend, consider these 4 questions. However you choose to do it, clearly communicate the message God gave the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)