A Campus Group is "Too Christian"

A Christian group on a campus in England has been suspended for acting in accord with its principles. The Birmingham Christian Union has this strange idea that membership should be limited to Christians.

The North Alabama Conference Decreases Districts

The North Alabama Conference has now voted to decrease the number of districts from 12 to 8, following the same pattern as the Texas Conference, though taking it just a step further. Their Bishop, William Willimon, comments on their changes here.

New Church Director - Job Opening

Here's an announcement from the Texas Annual Conference. Note: I am NOT inside the loop on this hiring process, just a concerned by-stander.

January 27, 2006

The Texas Annual Conference is seeking a Director of New Church Development to
work in the new Office of Congregational Excellence.

A complete job description follows.
Resumes and salary expectations should be sent by February 21, 2006, to Dr.
Karen S. Dorris, 3900 Lexington Blvd., Missouri City, Texas, 77459, or
kdorris@hswdistrict.org.

Director of New Church Development
Texas Annual Conference


Primary focus of the position: Director of New Church Development will work with
the Director of the Center for Congregational Excellence to resource local
churches and districts for the purpose of implementing the conference priority
of starting new churches.

Primary task: Resource districts and local churches in the task of starting new
congregations which are vibrant, growing. And reflect the population of the
Texas Annual Confrence

Results of Director's work:

+ Create a culture of new church development across the annual conference

+ In partnership with the Director of Congregational Excellence and district
superintendents develop, implement, resource and coordinate a process/system for
New Church Development.

Identify and prioritize sites for 10-15 new church/satellites each year.
Develop criteria for churches that should be encouraged to do a new church start
or satellite.
Align and coordinate resources for new church starts and satellites.
In consultation with the bishop, cabinet, director of congregational excellence,
and director of clergy excellence, identify, recruit and equip clergy to do a
new church start or satellite.
Establish the criteria and policies used in assessment to determine continuing
support and termination of a new church start or satellite.

System Results: To work with Bishop, Director Congregational Excellence, staff,
Coference Council (by whatever name it shall be called) and district
superintendents to align the system to achieve the following Conference
outcomes.
+ Increased number of trained clergy prepared to provide spiritual leadership
for a new church start or satellite.
+ Increased number of churches starting a new church or satellite.
+ Increased number of healthy, growing new churches and satellites.
+ Lowering of average age of congregation.
+ Congregational demographics better aligned with neighborhoods.


Supervision and Accountability
The Director of New Church Development will be directly responsible to
the Director of the Center for Congregational Excellence.

Leadership Qualities and Characteristics
+ A healthy relationship with God: understands, knows and celebrates the power
of the gospel of Jesus Christ to bring healing and wholeness, forgiveness and
reconciliation plus justice and peace to the lives of individuals,
congregations,and their respective communities.
+ A maturing spirituality: maintains a disciplined spiritual life, desires to
be a lifelong learner, maintains healthy boundaries and is accountable for one's
work and actions.
+ Integrity: external behavior is aligned with internal Christian beliefs and
healthy relationship with God.
+ A caring heart: a servant leader who cultivates the gifts of the spirit and
empowers others to claim their call.
+ Flexible: implements changes in personal job description and work patterns,
the work of staff or in staff personnel as the needs of the local
churches, districts and/or conference change.
+ Developed evidences and/or history of relating positively to diverse persons,
cultures, languages and economic groups.


Skills and Competencies
+ Visioning and implementation skills: the ability to identify and articulate
the vision plus the assessment and administrative skills to make the vision
become reality.
+ Procamation skills: possesses and articulates a working knowledge of
biblical faith; demonstrates the ability to communicate and apply the gospel of
Jesus Christ in culturally relevant ways to the diverse population groups of the
Texas Annual Conference
+ Relational Skills: ability to listen, develop working teams, equip persons
for ministry and manage conflict in ways that lead to healthy resolution.
+ Self Care Skills: possesses the time management skills that lead to a healthy
balance between work, relationship, and self-care responsibilities.
+ Demonstrated administrative, management, and supervisory skills.
+ Demonstrated knowledge of new church start models and necessary demographic
information, and demonstrated skills in the training and supervision of new
church start pastors and congregations.


Salary Negotiable

New Church Director - Job Opening

Here's an announcement from the Texas Annual Conference. Note: I am NOT inside the loop on this hiring process, just a concerned by-stander.

January 27, 2006

The Texas Annual Conference is seeking a Director of New Church Development to
work in the new Office of Congregational Excellence.

A complete job description follows.
Resumes and salary expectations should be sent by February 21, 2006, to Dr.
Karen S. Dorris, 3900 Lexington Blvd., Missouri City, Texas, 77459, or
kdorris@hswdistrict.org.

Director of New Church Development
Texas Annual Conference


Primary focus of the position: Director of New Church Development will work with
the Director of the Center for Congregational Excellence to resource local
churches and districts for the purpose of implementing the conference priority
of starting new churches.

Primary task: Resource districts and local churches in the task of starting new
congregations which are vibrant, growing. And reflect the population of the
Texas Annual Confrence

Results of Director's work:

+ Create a culture of new church development across the annual conference

+ In partnership with the Director of Congregational Excellence and district
superintendents develop, implement, resource and coordinate a process/system for
New Church Development.

Identify and prioritize sites for 10-15 new church/satellites each year.
Develop criteria for churches that should be encouraged to do a new church start
or satellite.
Align and coordinate resources for new church starts and satellites.
In consultation with the bishop, cabinet, director of congregational excellence,
and director of clergy excellence, identify, recruit and equip clergy to do a
new church start or satellite.
Establish the criteria and policies used in assessment to determine continuing
support and termination of a new church start or satellite.

System Results: To work with Bishop, Director Congregational Excellence, staff,
Coference Council (by whatever name it shall be called) and district
superintendents to align the system to achieve the following Conference
outcomes.
+ Increased number of trained clergy prepared to provide spiritual leadership
for a new church start or satellite.
+ Increased number of churches starting a new church or satellite.
+ Increased number of healthy, growing new churches and satellites.
+ Lowering of average age of congregation.
+ Congregational demographics better aligned with neighborhoods.


Supervision and Accountability
The Director of New Church Development will be directly responsible to
the Director of the Center for Congregational Excellence.

Leadership Qualities and Characteristics
+ A healthy relationship with God: understands, knows and celebrates the power
of the gospel of Jesus Christ to bring healing and wholeness, forgiveness and
reconciliation plus justice and peace to the lives of individuals,
congregations,and their respective communities.
+ A maturing spirituality: maintains a disciplined spiritual life, desires to
be a lifelong learner, maintains healthy boundaries and is accountable for one's
work and actions.
+ Integrity: external behavior is aligned with internal Christian beliefs and
healthy relationship with God.
+ A caring heart: a servant leader who cultivates the gifts of the spirit and
empowers others to claim their call.
+ Flexible: implements changes in personal job description and work patterns,
the work of staff or in staff personnel as the needs of the local
churches, districts and/or conference change.
+ Developed evidences and/or history of relating positively to diverse persons,
cultures, languages and economic groups.


Skills and Competencies
+ Visioning and implementation skills: the ability to identify and articulate
the vision plus the assessment and administrative skills to make the vision
become reality.
+ Procamation skills: possesses and articulates a working knowledge of
biblical faith; demonstrates the ability to communicate and apply the gospel of
Jesus Christ in culturally relevant ways to the diverse population groups of the
Texas Annual Conference
+ Relational Skills: ability to listen, develop working teams, equip persons
for ministry and manage conflict in ways that lead to healthy resolution.
+ Self Care Skills: possesses the time management skills that lead to a healthy
balance between work, relationship, and self-care responsibilities.
+ Demonstrated administrative, management, and supervisory skills.
+ Demonstrated knowledge of new church start models and necessary demographic
information, and demonstrated skills in the training and supervision of new
church start pastors and congregations.


Salary Negotiable

Learning from North Point, part 6

I’ve had a bit of a hiatus from this series, but here we go again.

The second of the “Seven Practices for Effective Ministry” is Think Steps, Not Programs. More than any of the other practices they mention, this one highlights the teleological focus of their ministry model. Not only are they as a church going somewhere, but they also believe their ministry exists to help people “go” somewhere, or better, a related set of “somewheres.” As they aim to help people enter into and grow in an intimate relationship with God, grow into their fellowship with the body, or enter into ministry, they always want to make it easy for people to identify and take whatever might be the “next step” to get them where they’re going.

We could understand this using a cartographic metaphor. Let’s suppose you’re in Mt. Pleasant and you want to get to Dallas. If you’re Bo Pilgrim you can take the simple step of hopping on your corporate jet and flying to Dallas. For most of us, it’s a little more complicated. We have a journey to take. To get to Dallas, we’ll first have to pass through Winfield, Mount Vernon, Sulphur Springs, Greenville, and Rockwall (and quite a few other points in between). Saying we want to go to Dallas is an illustration of the first practice: Clarify the Win. We’re saying Dallas is the place we want to end up. If we can get there – or help our people get there – we will have “won” – or accomplished that which we were trying to accomplish. If we want to get people to Dallas, we first have to get them to Winfield, then to Mount Vernon, etc.

Let’s try an example of a destination: Our youth pastor today said that he’d like to get more parental involvement in youth ministry. In this case, picking up the cartographic imagery, he’s “gotten a parent to Dallas” when that parent has become active in youth ministry. If he is “thinking steps, not programs,” what he’ll do is first identify where the parents are now, and figure out what a logical next step is, if he wants them to end up in “Dallas” – to gain a vision for involvement in youth ministry. There are some cases where simply telling people that “Dallas” is a good place to go is sufficient. My guess, however, based on years of trying to get church people involved in ministry, is that that method doesn’t work with most people. Instead, we have to get them to Winfield first. Our “thinking steps” then, will lead us to identify what counts as “Winfield” in relation to where they now stand and the objective of involvement in ministry.

But how are we traveling? Are we walking? Driving? Catching the bus? Or will Scotty just beam us up?

It’s possible that some might contest the whole teleological view of ministry. We’ve done away with teleology in so many areas of our lives; another won’t be a big deal. I’m convinced, however, that we are attempting to accomplish something in the lives of people through our ministry. Paul spoke about “presenting everyone perfect in Christ.” Obviously Paul didn’t think this was a solo project on his part, or a result of the merely human effort he and his colleagues exerted. But he did sense a responsibility to obey God to make a difference in the lives of people. He also sensed that his goal was not some telos (end) in the people themselves, but an end of conformity to Christ.

The advantage of the teleological approach, is you have somewhere to go and (perhaps) can know when you get there.

The disadvantage of the teleological approach is that you have somewhere to go, can fail to get there, and know that you’ve failed to get there. That can be mighty depressing. If we’re operating on the basis of program – mere activity – we can feel pretty good about ourselves even if we never get anywhere.

For myself, I prefer going somewhere.

Can the UMC learn a lesson from a Women's Basketball program?

Days after registering her mind-boggling 900th win as a college coach, Pat Summitt faced not just defeat, but a crushing defeat. The #1 ranked Lady Vols fell to the #2 Duke Blue Devils 75-53. To hear Summitt talk, it wasn't that close.

But I think the United Methodist Church could stand to learn something from this woman and the program she has built. Reacting to the loss, Summitt said, "Losing's one thing, losing the way we lost is something quite different. It's unacceptable in this program. So we will learn from it."

The Conference of which I am a clergy member, the Central Texas Conference, boasts some thirty-plus years of consecutive numerical membership growth. However, we have, for at least that long, been decreasing as a percentage of the population within our bounds.

Put the latter way, we should find this unacceptable and learn from it. Generally, however, we have patted ourselves on the back that we "aren't like all those Conferences that have been losing membership." (notice the siimlarity to that story in Luke where someone thanks God that he isn't like someone else?)

Or is numerical gain and societal loss acceptable.

Pat Summitt for Bishop in the SouthCentral Jurisdiction in '08!

Reformability of Islam?

Earlier in the month Hugh Hewitt interviewed Father Joseph Fessio on the topic of what Pope Benedict XVI has said about Islam. Here's what Fessio said:

Well, the thesis that was proposed by this scholar was that Islam can enter into the modern world if the Koran is reinterpreted by taking the specific legislation, and going back to the principles, and then adapting it to our times, especially with the dignity that we ascribe to women, which has come through Christianity, of course. And immediately, the Holy Father, in his beautiful calm but clear way, said well, there's a fundamental problem with that, because he said in the Islamic tradition, God has given His word to Mohammed, but it's an eternal word. It's not Mohammed's word. It's there for eternity the way it is. There's no possibility of adapting it or interpreting it, whereas in Christianity, and Judaism, the dynamism's completely different, that God has worked through His creatures. And so, it is not just the word of God, it's the word of Isaiah, not just the word of God, but the word of Mark. He's used His human creatures, and inspired them to speak His word to the world, and therefore by establishing a Church in which he gives authority to His followers to carry on the tradition and interpret it, there's an inner logic to the Christian Bible, which permits it and requires it to be adapted and applied to new situations. I was...I mean, Hugh, I wish I could say it as clearly and as beautifully as he did, but that's why he's Pope and I'm not, okay? That's one of the reasons. One of others, but his seeing that distinction when the Koran, which is seen as something dropped out of Heaven, which cannot be adapted or applied, even, and the Bible, which is a word of God that comes through a human community, it was stunning.

Spengler, at Asia Times notes that the Pope's position "refute[s] the fundamental premise of US policy" [i.e., that Islam is capable of reform and need not be violent toward outsiders]. Today at Townhall, Diana West comments on how little anyone has taken up what the pope said.

My take on the reformability of Islam vis-a-vis Fessio's report of the pope's comments, is that while Islam may not have reforming logic built into its tradition - and may have non-reforming logic at its core, change in tradition is driven by more than internal logic. As a tradition interacts with other traditions (something Islam has been doing from Day 1 - Mohammed was not well-received in Mecca when he began), opportunities for change come about.

Alasdair MacIntyre's three works After Virtue, Whose Justice? Which Rationality and Three Rival Verions of Moral Enquiry have developed the notion of a tradition as

[A]n argument extended through time in which certain fundamental agreements are defined and redefined in terms of two kinds of conflict: those with critics and enemies external to the tradition who reject all or at least key parts of those fundamental agreements, and those internal, interpretative debates through which the meaning and rationale of the fundamental agreements come to be expressed and by whose progress a tradition is constituted.

A wide variety of scholars (including myself) have used this concept of a "tradition" in our effort to defend Christianity against the acids of modernity. Interestingly, Muslim scholars interested in reform are also turning to MacIntyre. One example is an extended review of Whose Justice? Which Rationality? at the al-Islam website. A different kind of use is found in Samira Haj's essay on Muhammad ibn 'Abdul Wahhab [sign-in codes required] (we Westerners know him as the founder of the strict sect of Islam defended by Osama bin Laden and the traditionalists in Saudi Arabia). Clearly there are - and have been at least since the death of Mohammed - "interpretive debates" going on within Islam. There have also always been external conflicts - and not merely the warlike version of jihad we hear so much about. Therefore the conditions certainly exist for change to happen within Islam - even, I would suggest, change that can be seen by outsiders as "reform."

Do we now see any signs of reform? As a non-Muslim, the best I can go on is my reading and my interaction with individual Muslims. A few years ago when I was living in Houston, I had a time of dialogue with some Muslims. They came to my Sunday School class and spoke about Islam and I visited their Mosque and talked about Christianity. They are participants in the Islamic sub-tradition led by Fethullah Gulen. If we in the West are looking for a "reformed" version of Islam, Gulen's certainly fits the bill.

Is Gulen faithful to the internal logic of Islam? He and his followers certainly think he is. I'd guess that folks like Presdident Ahmadinejad, OBL, & Moqtada Al Sadr might not think so, but as the pope notes - Islam has no central authority. With no central authority - and a widely divergent history of interpretation - a deductive approach to the "internal logic of Islam" seems to be a capitulation to the loudest speakers. Instead, the variety we see - the interpretive debates internal to the Muslim community - suggests that an inductive approach - attentive to what we actually see in variants of Islam - is the best approach for identifying the "internal logic of Islam." If we use the inductive approach, the opportunity for reform is as large as Muslims want it to be.

QB gets it right

Big Ben gets it. In an article for espn.com, Michael Smith writes about the relationship that has developed between Jerome Bettis and Ben Roethlisberger.

Bettis, 10 years Ben's senior, has become a mentor for the young quarterback. Of Bettis Roethlisberger says, There's many times, and I know this sounds crazy, people wear those bracelets that say, 'What Would Jesus Do?' There's times when I think, 'How would Jerome handle this?'"

It doesn't sound crazy at all, Ben; that's how the world works. We all need to have people after whom we can model our lives. While I don't know Jerome Bettis well, it seems you've chosen well.

This week I will be preaching on Thomas. Yes, for some of you, that is "doubting" Thomas. Jesus word's to Thomas were "Jesus said, "So, you believe because you've seen with your own eyes. Even better blessings are in store for those who believe without seeing."(John 20:29, The Message)

I contend one of the main things John intends to convey in that passage is that most of us don't get to see Jesus himself, but will have to rely on what we can gain from other people.

"You may be the only picture of Jesus some ever see," they say. We all need someone whose example we can follow; someone at least two steps ahead of us who can ehlp us keep going. Ben Roethlisberger gets it.

Texas Conference Appointments

For the past several years (as far back as I can remember, that is), if you wanted to know which preachers were moving where you either had to get in the gossip line or wait until close to Annual Conference when they were announced.

That's why I was surprised when I went to the Conference website today. The front page story: "Bishop Announces Key Appointments." I suppose these appointments are being announced to help build momentum for the big changes coming our way. With the appointments of Karen Dorris and Rich Goodrich to Conference staff positions, it looks like at least 4 of the current 12 District Superintendents are accounted for (if you haven't been following Texas Conference events, we're realigning from 12 districts to 9 - and won't need 12 DSs), since Howdy Dawson (my DS in Texarkana) is retiring, and I believe Keith Whitaker (Lufkin District) has served for the period allowed by the Discipline.

I'm also hoping that this early announcement is a sign of greater transparency in the Annual Conference. While it is good to keep some things secret, we seem to have gone overboard. Keep praying for our progress in becoming the Annual Conference God wants us to be.

UPDATE: Bishop Will Willimon blogs about realigning districts in his North Alabama Conference. Clearly the Texas Conference isn't the only one making changes to reach more people and build stronger churches.

Future Job Opportunities

U.S. News and World Report, quoted at Yahoo, has this to say about entering the clergy as a great job opportunity:

Want the satisfaction of doing good? You'll routinely play a significant role in major life events such as birth, marriage, crisis, and death. Plus this career offers status, normally modest work hours, and often good salaries. You needn't necessarily have unquestioned faith in God. I've spoken with a number of clergy who have deep questions about the nature and even existence of a Supreme Being.

The best thing about it is you don't have to believe much of anything and get paid to be nice! I can't believe they forget to mention pastors only work one day a week!

C.H. Spurgeon said, "If there's anything else you can do, don't preach."

Pastoring is not just another "helping professions." Though we deal with the intellectual elements of the faith, the thing we need most is a deep trust in God. When churches undermine what you do and work their best to run you off (no - this is not a description of my current church, but I have been there before and seen many other pastors in similar places), or, when you live in a culture that at best privatizes and at worst persecutes your living out your faith, you stop thinking about it as a "good job."

Though it is a job (I don't sit around and do nothing), it's about a call from God, not about looking for good job opportunities.

Learning from North Point, part 5

North Point’s first “Practice for Effective Ministry” is to Clarify the Win. As sports fans, they think of sports metaphors, in this case their primary imagery comes from baseball. In baseball it’s easy to tell if you’re winning: Do you have more runs than the other team? While recognizing that the church is a more complex enterprise than a sport, they remain convinced that being able to discern a win is essential to making progress (to winning, we might say).

If we don’t like the idea of “winning” at church, how can restate the principle? How about this: When we set out to do something, how do we know that we have accomplished the thing we set out to do? Put this way, two questions will constantly come to mind: What are we trying to do? How are we going to do it?

Perhaps we are disinclined to want to apply this much analysis to what we do in church. After all, church is all about faith and love. On the other hand, when Scripture talks about loving God, it includes loving God with “all our mind.” Could it be that part of loving God with our minds includes thinking about what we’re doing & how we do it?

In the typical traditional church, one decides what to do by looking at what one has always done. If we follow that scheme, then a “win” is simply doing what we’ve done in the past. From what I see, especially in the area of Christian education, that method doesn’t work and its not working is having disastrous consequences for the church.

I am intentional in speaking of Christian education, not worship. In worship our aim is to honor God. I suppose that one could have a “win” in worship, but God is the only one in a position to identify the “win.” Of course if instead of worship we mean a “worship service,” in which our object is not the honoring of God but the education of the people, that’s a different matter. Since my preaching is communication directed at people, it is conceivable that one could define a “win” in preaching, though in my experience some of my “non-wins” have been used by God to bless people.

In Christian education, however, our goal is to influence people. We can often identify whether any given attempt at influence has worked. Again, this is difficult since people are complex and the notion of influence itself is complex. [I’m sure the NPCC people would hate me. They like to make everything simple and everywhere I look I see complexity.] People don’t always let on that they’re being influenced, sometimes because they’re hiding it, sometimes because they don’t yet have the self-understanding or vocabulary to discern it.

Do you get the idea why so many preachers and churches settle for measuring numbers? It’s so much simpler that way!

In spite of the complexity, we need to “clarify the win” for two reasons. The first reason is morale. Ministry is hard work. The biggest reward for ministry is seeing lives changed. If what we’re doing is not, as far as we can tell, leading to changed lives, then we might think we need to change course. For example, if my youth ministry is centered on teaching kids to juggle in hopes they might learn more about Jesus, I might be able to figure out whether I’m “winning” or not. If no kids are involved in juggling for Christ, I’m not winning. If the Jugglers for Christ are not coming to faith and growing in it, I’m not winning. If “coming to Christ” and “growing in Him” are too complex and mysterious to discern, and in the majority of cases cannot be humanly discerned at all, then I’ll likely be depressed all the time.

A second reason to “clarify the win” is that the “wins” we’re clarifying are truly good for the people involved and for the church as a whole. If I continually pour my heart into an after-school ministry with an objective of helping children come to Jesus, and all they do is run wild and try to kill each other, I am missing out on the fulfillment of an important objective. Surely I will need to find some other activity to use my resources (time, money, personnel) on to achieve my purposes. Perhaps we can see this as the rough equivalent of what Jesus described as “shaking the dust off our feet.” We each have a finite amount of resources. We cannot do everything. As good stewards it seems wise to identify (1) what we ought to do, and, (2) how we ought to do it, to (3) achieve our mission.

Jesus said, “Make disciples of all nations.” If all around us churches are shrinking – in both membership and attendance – while the surrounding population is growing, then surely our making of disciples is less than optimal. “We’re going for quality, not quantity,” some might say. Demeaning quantity sounds pretty spiritual – and we all want quality. But is a faith that fails to reproduce itself best described as “quality” or “sterility?” The discipleship Jesus instigated was more than an internal change; it impelled people outward in to a dangerous world. Those early disciples seemed rather interested in quantity also. Check out the numbers in Book of Acts sometime. “3000 were added to the church…” “People were added daily….” These weren’t numbers for numbers’ sake – they were counting actual people becoming followers of Jesus. As far as I can tell, the growth of the church in those days wasn’t just something the disciples thought up on their own. It was Spirit-inspired from beginning to end

I see here the practice “clarifying the win” – whether we call it that or the more verbose and less picturesque (though perhaps less offensive to our sensibilities), “figuring out whether we have actually done the thing we set out to do” – is a rational process, though not entirely rational. We’ll begin in prayer, end in prayer, and bathe the whole enterprise in prayer. We’ll recognize that in our actions to influence people toward Christ we’ll be partnering with God. His agency is primary, ours secondary. In some places being secondary might not count for much, but because God loves us enough to invite us to join in what He’s doing, our action can make an eternal difference in someone’s life.

Maybe it is just me....

If I am in my car in the evening, I often listen to Tony Snow on the radio. Last night was just such a night. Like many other "conservative" talk radio shows, the topic was the "spying on us" scandal that has pervaded the news lately. Mr. Snow said something to the effect that he had no problem with the President doing whatever he had to do to protect us from Terror.

Really?

I find it ironic that alleged "conservatives" are perfectly willing to cede President Bush free reign on domestic eavesdropping in the name of national security. It is ironic because whenever a "liberal" brings up the slightest infringement on, say, gun control, there is a cacophonous cry from talk radio throwing up Ben Franklin's "Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither"

Or is it okay to sacrifice freedom when "your guy" is in the White House?

Learning from North Point, part 4

North Point and many other prominent Christians (John Maxwell, Bill Hybels, etc.) look to the secular world to learn about leadership. They find examples in business, politics and the military. The North Point book, 7 Practices of Effective Ministry, is rooted in a baseball metaphor. The thought is that the church is organization, and that although it may be different from other organizations in numerous ways, the likeness is sufficient for us to find models of organization and organizational leadership in effective organizations around us. If this thought it wrong, we might as well toss the book and move on to other things. I do recognize some challenges, however.

The biggest is whether we can do this and remain Christian? Or is it a defeat for the church, evidence that we’ve succumbed to the secular world? [If you want the short answer, skip to the final paragraph] Perhaps, some might suggest, we ought to just leave the particulars up to God. After all, the Christian faith is about mysteries – and mysteries cannot be understood, only experienced.

In the late 18th century William Carey, an English Baptist, observed that many people around the world had no way of hearing the good news of Jesus. At the same time he observed that Jesus had commanded the disciples to “make disciples of all nations.” Nothing controversial there – or so we think. In Carey’s day, however, there was a strong conviction that if God wanted the “heathen” to come to faith He’d do it Himself. It was presumptuous to think humans could have a role in such a work. Perhaps the first Apostles had such a command, but we today – especially not a lowly shoemaker like Carey – are not apostles. Responding to such non-missional attitudes, Carey wrote a short booklet, An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens.

The idiom of “using means” isn’t commonly used today. In the history of missions that follow, “using means” amounted to (a) identifying the need, (b) thinking about how to meet it, and (c) doing something about it. In Carey’s case, he observed people in India who did not know about Jesus. Consulting the New Testament model of Paul’s missionary journeys, Carey decided that the way to meet this need would be for someone to go to India and share the gospel with the people. Acting on this theory, Carey moved his family to India and spent his life translating the bible and presenting the gospel to the people of India.

Most churches today at least tacitly accept Carey’s argument. They send missionaries to the ends of the earth as a reasoned act of obedience to Jesus’ command to make disciples. Of course it might be argued that this is just an expression of what Max Weber called the “routinization of charisma,” the rationalizing of an enterprise after the founder leaves the scene. Jesus has left the scene, his (charismatic) apostles are also long gone. We don’t have the Spirit the same we they did, so we need to depend on “using means” to accomplish what they did through “charisma” alone.

In what follows, I’m going to try to make a case for learning from non-church organizations and leaders. My case (much abbreviated) will have two prongs, one defensive the other offensive.

Is it a defeat for the church to look to the secular world to learn leadership? I think it can be, but it need not be. First, I confess that in my preaching and teaching I maintain a conviction that the Fall and the sin that comes from it are very real. Sin has infected every dimension of our lives. Because of sin we experience four broken relationships that encompass all of life. Sin alienates us from God, from each other, from ourselves and from Creation. All humans experience this brokenness in variety of ways. Because sin and its effects pervade all of life, this brokenness infiltrates not only our lives, but also our institutions, ranging from the family to the business to the State. As I read church history I even notice that the church – God’s own people – has, as an organization, incorporated this brokenness into its very life.

Second, learning from the world around us is nothing new for Christians. Very early on the church looked to Caesar and his empire as they organized the church. After the church was legalized they looked to Caesar’s methods of hierarchy and command and control and often brought them wholesale into the church. Many of our churches are still based on that top-down management style of so-called benevolent paternalism that Caesar claimed.  So in the first case, the choice appears not to be whether we learn from the world but whether we continue learning from the world or simply baptize what our forebears in the faith learned centuries ago as the true organizational principles. We look at the Amish and wonder why they choose 17th century technology as the proper model. We rarely look at ourselves and wonder why 4th or 12th or 18th century organizational styles and leadership practices are the way to go. [After all, many still think the best musical styles for Christians originated centuries ago, and that anything devised since is a perversion. Others think that if Latin was good enough for a millennium of church life, it’s still good enough for today. I’ve even heard ignorant folk suggest that since the KJV was good enough for Jesus, surely it’s good enough for us.] Perhaps in each case of learning fro the world the church is simply applying the Augustinian principle of “plundering the Egyptians.”

Surely we can make mistakes. We don’t have to look far in church history to find occasions when the church copied a destructive model or learned a leadership style that deviated from the teachings of Jesus. When we spend more effort looking at the world than looking at Jesus, we will likely err.

Might it be that we get our ends (the “What”) from Jesus and the means (the “Hows”) from the world? Picking up the example from Carey and his recovery of the Great Commission, we might say that the “What” – “Make Disciples of all nations” – is provided by Jesus. In fact, the world would really rather we simply mind our own business and not both making disciples. Be tolerant, live and let live, they tell us. We could then adapt some means (methods) – some “Hows” – from the world. These might include Sunday school classes, bible translations, Evangelistic meetings, books and tracts, TV and radio broadcasts, material inducement (bribes), bait and switch (“Having problems in life? Want to take care of all your problems and become prosperous along the way? Come join our church!”), or force (“If you become a follower of Jesus we won’t kill you/raise your taxes, etc.”).

Well maybe that strategy doesn’t work so well after all. While the first few methods seem fairly harmless, the latter strike us as antithetical to the character of Jesus. So while we may legitimately (so it appears) take some methods from the world, we cannot do so indiscriminately. At the same time, I believe that not only will the ends we pursue be drawn from Jesus, but also the foundational methods we rely on to achieve them. The first of these methods is fairly easily understood but strongly resists the routinizing we prefer in our search for principles. Jesus’ first method of pursuing his ends was to seek the Father and then obey him. Sounds pretty good, doesn’t it? A second method, however, one that seems to have resulted from the first is suffering. Through obedience to the Father his pursuit of our salvation led to his death on the cross. Over and over again throughout scripture – from Jesus’ own “Take up your cross and follow me” – the message is that the suffering of the righteous is, strangely enough, God’s way of winning the world.

How does this help us in our quest to discern first, if we can learn from the world, and, secondly, how we can learn from it? Here’s a suggestion. Whatever we adopt from the world must fit within the story of Jesus, a story of the Son of God motivated by love, who came to live as one of us, listened to and obeyed the Father at every turn, and suffered and died for the sins of the world. If what we learn fits with that story, then were doing ok. It maybe that the church will, on occasion, adopt a practice that seems to fit the story of Jesus. Later, however, as the church does what it has learned from the world, it comes to be seen that the method doesn’t fit with the way of Jesus. At that point the church – if healthy (listening and obeying, that is) – will repent and drop the method. I realize this is vastly oversimplified. Not only do we have methods, but we have methods of doing methods ad infinitum. At no time will the church be able to sit back and relax, thinking its work of discernment is done.

Consideration of the story of Jesus leads to the final defensive point I’ll make and also to my offensive case. Remember my claim that sin causes brokenness in four kinds of relationships? Likewise, the salvation Jesus brings offers healing and deliverance in each of these areas. Jesus died and rose not merely so I could have a renewed and restored relationship with God, but also such relationships with others, myself and all of creation. Because salvation – like sin – goes beyond the individual, the sacred-secular dichotomy is not as absolute as we sometimes think. Partly because some Christians work in the world (in my church the vast majority of members are employed outside the church), Christians have infiltrated the secular. While on occasion this might work to the detriment of the Christian, surely sometimes it works to the benefit of the secular – of the organizations in which they find themselves. It is also possible that on occasion a non-Christian may – knowingly or unknowingly – be attracted to Jesus and learn from Him. His ways do, after all, depict how life is best to be lived. So when we learn from the world, we are not learning from institutions that are completely free of grace or the work of God.

At the least, I hope my defensive case has inclined you to believe that learning from the world (or, more accurately, from non-church institutions) need not be an evil. What about the positive case? Just because it need not be bad, ought we to do it? My offensive case will be much briefer.

Let’s pick up the story of Jesus again, this time looking backwards to the beginning – the very beginning. In the beginning God created some humans. He put them in a perfect environment and appointed them stewards over creation. This work – this ruling over creation – is a significant aspect, I believe, of their being created in God’s image. As beings created in the image of God, humans were made with creativity. God delighted not only in creating things, but in creating mini-creators. Though our powers are immensely less than God’s – no creation ex nihilo for us – our creativity is still a significant part of us. The advent of sin did not remove our creativity but warped it, leading us to habitually use it in harmful and destructive ways. We don’t have to look far – either in history or in the world around us – to see the death and destruction wrought by human creativity. This creativity is creativity not submitted to God and his purposes. But need it be that way?

John Wesley claimed that because of the Atonement – the work of Jesus – we do not live in a state of nature, a state devoid of grace. Because of God’s Prevenient G race not all human creativity echoes death. Some, in fact, hauntingly points us to God. Even more, as people turn to Jesus and begin to experience his salvation, their creative powers are employed in new ways, ways directly subservient to God. I propose that our learning of leadership fits within these parameters. As we “use means” in the leadership of our churches – that is (a) identify problems; (b) think of solutions; (c) pursue those solutions – we are using our God-given and Jesus-redeemed creativity. While God can create from nothing, we can’t we can only use the materials we find at hand, in this case, non-church organizational practices. As a sculptor fashions a statue from a piece of marble, we fashion a practice from the materials we find in the world around us. Instead of chisels and hammers we use prayer, study, fasting, and other spiritual disciplines, but it is creativity nonetheless.

So – may we learn from the world? Yes – but it’s hard work to do it well. But most things in life that are worth while are that way.

Paul's First Online Movie

For those who don't know, my son Paul is taking video tech at high school this year. He doesn't limit his creativity to what he does at school. His first online movie is The Curse of the Living Dead. It's pretty large (5 mb) so you'll either need a broadband connection or lots of patience. If you like the movie send him some comments at heyduckbandit08 "at" yahoo "dot" com. (Replace the "at" & the "dot" with the appropriate symbols.)

Sunday Sermon - Attitude

I'm starting a series on Virtues & Vices. Today I spoke about Attitude from Colossians 3:17. You can listen here.

A Brief comment for Future Development

Those who speak of "The State" as univocal are mistaken. Not only is "The State" - or even "The Modern State" an entity that changes through time, it is also an entity that changes from place to place.

One of the things that determines the nature of "The State" is the existence, nature and health of the intermediate social institutions that stand between them and the individuals of the society. Though modernity is, in theory, atomistic and individualistic, this is only in theory. We see the outworkings of that theory in American life, but in spite of the theory intermediate institutions (the family, churches, clubs, etc.) continue to exist.

Learning from North Point, part 3

The next thing I want to bring up can best be approach by considering again NPCC’s mission statement: “The mission of North Point is to lead people into a growing relationship with Jesus Christ. We accomplish this by creating irresistible environments led by skilled staff and volunteers”

The unique part of this mission statement, and a feature that permeates everything they do is the focus on “environments.” I’ll have more to say about them later. The goal to “lead people into a growing relationship with Jesus Christ” is quite ordinary. It is the function equivalent of the United Methodist mission statement – “To make disciples of Jesus Christ, “ – and other mega-churches (I think of Willow Creek’s mission: “To turn irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Christ.”). In the past when I’ve concocted mission statements for churches I’ve always used some variant of the Great Commission, just like these other folks. Sure seems like the biblical approach, doesn’t it? But is it enough? Over the past couple of years I’ve started to think that it’s not.

The first problem, is that it’s highly individualistic. We’re about reaching individuals and helping them grow in Christ. Surely we are individuals, and surely we individuals need to enter a growing relationship with Jesus, but what about our other relationships?

The second thing I wonder about is the tendency to instrumentalize everything. That is, for every X that we do, we expect some Y to happen. We’re told that we need to have goals. Furthermore, we’re told that these goals need to be measurable. We can measure the number of people in our “environments.” But can we measure everything else? Can we measure “relationship?” I’m just not convinced that we can quantify and measure everything God wants us to do.

In spite of these reservations I’m still attracted to what NPCC and others are doing and to the making of mission statements. Too often in our traditional churches our de facto mission statements (regardless of what we put on the letterhead) is some variant of, “Our mission is to do what we’ve always done and to keep all the members happy.” I am very much attracted to the notion of asking WHY we do what we do. Now if we start asking WHY, we’ll soon find out that some of the things we’re doing aren’t done for any discernible reason and that others that we think we’re doing to accomplish X, really either accomplish Y or do absolutely nothing but expend money and get people tired.

We need to learn from NPCC that a mission needs to be clearly articulated, broadly communicated, commonly shared and consistently followed. Having a real mission statement is serious business because not only does the statement tell us what we do, it also tells us what we don’t do. When that kind of thinking comes into the traditional church where each of the “things we’ve always done” has its own constituency, change will be required. And we all know that change brings pain. The normal function of pain is to tell us to stop doing what we’re doing. You put your hand on the stovetop. You feel heat. You pull your hand off so you won’t get burned.

But there’s also a saying, “No pain, no gain.” What’s the difference? In the latter situation we have to go beyond the instinctual level and be able to identify some Good Thing that will not happen unless we work through the pain. We will never be educated unless we go through the pain of homework and long hours (and years) of study and work. We will never get a paycheck unless we go through the pain of getting up in the morning and going to work. We will never reach people who are not now followers of Christ unless we go through the pain of spending time with them, learning their “language” and how to express the Gospel in ways they understand, and sacrificing our comfort for their sake.

My guess is that our mission is something like, “Together we will exhibit the reality of the Kingdom of God so that people will be attracted to Jesus.” There is a measure of the quantifiable there. We do count people. Have you ever seen the Home Alone movies? Those are stories about a family that doesn’t count well and ends up leaving a person (their young son) out. We count because we don’t want to leave people out.

There’s also an element of the impossible in this conception of our mission. How do we exhibit the Kingdom of God? Well, it’s mostly by letting the Holy Spirit live in us and through us. As we together live a life that is unintelligible apart from the reality of God, the world will have reason to ask questions. The world understands excellence. The world understands growth. The world understands growing market share. The world understands proselytizing. The world doesn’t understand unconditional love and radical trust in and obedience to God. There’s just too much self-denial involved.

Though the idea of “exhibiting the Kingdom of God” isn’t quantifiable, we do need some way of identifying whether we’re actually doing it or not. More on that in future posts.

Learning from North Point, part 2

Learning from North Point part 2

North Point Community Church was one of the churches that generated publicity last month by not “having church” on Christmas day. They have at least three reasons for this position, two explicit, the other implicit.

First, they want to “create margin” in the lives of their people. Here’s what they say in The 7 Practices of Effective Ministry:

“Another example of calendaring margin is the unheard-of decision by our elders to cancel services on the Sunday following Christmas [so 2005 when Christmas fell n a Sunday is not the issue]. On that Sunday we simply shut down. We do this for two reasons: first, as a thank-you to the thousands of volunteers it takes to run a Sunday morning here; and second, to protect the quality of our product. So many of our volunteers travel on that weekend that we find it difficult to maintain the level of excellence to which we are accustomed. But by scheduling this closure and announcing it to everyone, we are able to take a potentially negative situation and turn it into a positive one.” (p. 177)

Ok, they provide their first two reasons there – a relief to their workers (their normal Sunday morning ministry requires over 1500 people), and a desire to maintain “the quality of our [their] product.” What is that product? It’s their Sunday morning Foyer environment. They want the people to come to be drawn to Christ, and they’re convinced quality will bring more people (or drive away fewer) than a slip-shod product. Here’s where the third and implicit reason for closing Christmas day comes in. Sunday morning is not about what the traditional church thinks of as church. It’s about evangelism – reaching people for Christ. How many of our traditional, liturgically correct churches schedule our evangelistic events, our seeker services on days our culture identifies as “family time holidays?”

But how many of our traditional, liturgically correct churches schedule any evangelistic or seeker events? How many of us exert huge effort to create and offer environments where non-church people can come and hear the message of Jesus focused on their hearing and learning style – instead of the hearing and learning styles of the insiders? As Mike Slaughter of Ginghamsburg UMC in Ohio has said, [I paraphrase] “I want to overcome all the barriers in communicating the gospel so that the people know they are offended – by the gospel itself and not by my style.” That seems to be what NPCC is about.

Therefore we need to nuance our claim that NPCC did not “have church” on Christmas day. If by “have church” we mean a event whose primary purpose is to unite all the members of the church worshiping God, then no, they didn’t “have church.” But they don’t “have church” any other Sunday either. NPCC is not organized to “have church” like our traditional churches. They’re a mission outpost, a missionary station in the middle of secular culture. They seem to be thinking along the lines of English missionary C.T. Studd, “Some want to live within the sound of a church or chapel bell, but I want to run a rescue shop within a yard of hell.”

So we traditional churches are “doing church” while NPCC (and some other groups) are “doing evangelism.” Which is more biblical? I have to think that having a desire to reach people for Christ as part of your lifeblood is sure biblical. The Book of Acts tells us of the early churches who were “adding to their number daily.” What? Not only at the invitation time on Sunday? It sure looks like NPCC has something we need. .” In their focus on evangelism the NPCC folks seem a lot more like the early Methodists than our current batch. Of course the early Methodists didn’t constitute a church, but more of what we today would call a “Parachurch” organization. John Wesley remained a member of the Church of England all his days. So maybe, although the name of the organization is North Point Community Church it’s not really a church after all.

Or then again, we might need to rethink our definition of church.

More Methodist Change

It looks like the Texas Conference isn't the only one doing some major change. Bishop Will Willimon tells a little of the change they're instigating in North Alabama, including, like Texas, a reduction in the number of districts. I wonder, though, how this kind of "big change" from above will influence local congregations.

Learning from North Point, part 1

Back in 2001 I flew to Atlanta for John Maxwell’s Catalyst Conference, held at North Point Community Church in Alpharetta. I didn’t know much about NPCC before I arrived, but found my experience there quite impressive. Here’s a short list of what impressed me:

• Clean Restrooms. It sounds like a minor detail but when a church can maintain clean restrooms while hosting a conference with several thousand people that tells me something about the commitment level of their people. The whole facility was staffed continuously while we were there, not only maintaining cleanliness, but to be available to help out in any way needed. Clearly this was a high commitment church.


• The children’s ministry. NPCC is one of those churches that segregates by age. (I’ll comment on that practice elsewhere.) Their Sunday morning children’s ministry is a high energy ministry to children and parents. Parents are not allowed to drop off their children: they must attend with them. This is a great idea – and another sign of a high commitment church. (It also looks like it’d be tough to transfer what they do to a small church in a small town.)


• The simplicity of their model of ministry. Their mission statement – “The mission of North Point is to lead people into a growing relationship with Jesus Christ. We accomplish this by creating irresistible environments led by skilled staff and volunteers” – doesn’t look like anything special. It’s the way they envision it that drew me in. Using the metaphor of a home (our primary “environment” – a key concept in NPCC thinking), they talk about moving from the “Foyer” to the “Living Room” to the “Kitchen.”


• Of the Foyer they say: “It’s the place in your home that serves as the welcome area for guests and new friends. It’s the first step, and it’s often your only chance to make your guests feel comfortable enough to return.” They have Foyer-type environments for each level of their ministry: adults (the Sunday morning service), children (Kidstuf), youth (Rush Hour) and singles (7:22). Anonymity is possible in the Foyer environment – it’s designed for checking things out.


• Beyond the Foyer is the Living Room. “When guests arrive and are welcomed into your home, you invite them into the living room. Everyone finds a comfortable place to sit, and the interaction begins. At North Point Community Church, this is where you connect with people like yourself. Smaller and more interactive than the foyer environment, these gatherings offer genuine opportunity to begin friendships...just like the living room in your home.” People start interacting face to face in the Living Room and begin to build trust as they grow with God. Again, there are Living Room environments for each age group.


• Finally, at the greatest level of intimacy is the Kitchen. “This is where lasting friendships are made. And that’s the kind of environment we are striving for in our small groups. Small groups are where people meet regularly for Bible study and prayer, and commit to accountability, friendship and support. They are the safe place to open your heart, share your life, and ask the tough questions.” In these small group environments, again there are separate groups for different age levels, each person is able to grow in their intimacy with God and find the support they need to live as faithful followers of Jesus.


• Their success in reaching people. Their objective is to reach unchurched people, not just to shuffle sheep. In their short time of existence (about 10 years) they’ve clearly done that.

NPCC puts on several conferences a year (check their site for details). They also put out a variety of resources from those who want to learn about how they do what they do. They’ve put out 7 Practices of Effective Ministry, a book that explores the practices that shape what they do. If you’d like to find out what they have to say, the simplest way is to go to their site and download the mp3 version of the discussion. I find the material quite useful – and challenging at the same time. In several future posts I will discuss my take on what they have to say and how we might apply it in our old small town church.

SCANDAL!

Sit down and try to imagine this: network television is about to misrepresent the Christian faith!

I know it is hard to believe, but let it sink in for a moment. As if many of our denominations are not scandal and corruption riden enough, now NBC is piling on with the new series "The Book of Daniel."

The American Family Association is so concerned they want us to email NBC and contact our local affiliates. The AFA would like us all to join them in telling NBC that this show is not what we consider a favorable presentation of Jesus or the Christian faith.

While I see their (the AFA's) point, and am deeply saddened by such a portrayal, I am even more saddened by the truth that we as an allegedly Christian Church have given the world so much fodder for shows like this!

When Do We Measure?

Some Christmas travelers have to contend with snow and ice. Not us. Our weather this past week has nearly perfect. Lows ranged from the upper 30s to low 50s, while the highs went from the 60s to upper 70s. According to the meteorologists it’ll be that way for the next week. Great weather. That’s what they say when they do the forecast: “A beautiful weekend!”

But that’s only if you judge by the single day in isolation. If you look at the long string of nice days taken together you no longer see “beautiful weather.” You see a drought. If measured the quality of the weather in relation to our desperate need for rain, a rain-soaked Friday through Sunday would be “A beautiful weekend.”

I wonder if this principle works in other areas also.

A month or so ago we learned of the huge profits the oil companies were making. Now, apart from other questions (like who actually profited from these profits), is it worth asking how we measure the equitability of a company’s profits? Do we measure them in the space of an hour? A day? A quarter? A year? A decade? Over the past several years I’ve read some literature on investing. I don’t count myself very knowledgeable, but I remember seeing one principle mentioned over and over. Invest for the long term. If you invest for the long term, it’s said, you cover for the short term volatility of the market. So maybe the oil companies go through fat periods and lean periods. Over what time span do you measure to decide fairness? Or whether you want to invest in them yourself?

Surely the long term view doesn’t always work. Think of food. If I’m starving now and will be for the next 60 days – but have the prospect for endless steak dinners after that – it won’t do me much good. As a living being, my sustenance must be measured more regularly.

What about the Christian life? What about a church? We look for progress in both. In both Scripture (think Jesus’ great successes before his arrest and crucifixion) and Christian history we see instances of apparent failure followed by ultimate victory. When do we measure?

“Leave it all to God. Don’t judge.” Judging is mighty close to measuring, isn’t it? Why do we measure? In most cases it’s so we know what to do. I measure my son’s feet before I buy him new shoes. I measure my hunger and how much money I have before I place my order at the restaurant. I judge – there’s that word – my student’s ability in the subject I’m teaching so I know what to teach next (and whether a subject has been adequately covered or needs more attention).

So – when do we measure – when do we judge? In general, I think we need to consider more broadly then we tend to do. Is the forecast for sunny weather this weekend good news or bad news? It depends on the needs for rain. Is the Endless Pasta at Olive Garden a good idea? It depends on my overall health. if I’m trying to lose or maintain my weight and have no prospects for exercise in the near future I’d guess not. One of my youth comes up and says, “I want to beat those kids into the asphalt.” Do I count this success or failure? Well, since the kid I’m thinking of what have beaten the kids without a qualm a month ago and know he’s only talking about it, I’ll call that progress.

A Case for Temporary Beauty

Our church sanctuary is a fine example of what I’d call permanent art. Constructed in 1904-1905, ours is the most beautiful sanctuary in town, and, I’m told, one of the most beautiful in NE Texas. I know it looks mighty nice. I also know that it costs heaps of money to maintain and will continue to do so from here on out. That’s the way old buildings are. Just before I arrived the church spent about $700k renovating the building. This past year we spend $49k on the stained glass windows and $34k on the roof. We’re just about done spending $185 rebuilding the pipe organ. The good news – it’s almost over. The bad? We still owe about $250k on the renovation loan and someday we’ll have to figure out how to stabilize the foundation. In the meantime, the expenses of our beauty most likely crimp our ability to expand ministry and meet other obligations.

But beauty is better than ugliness, right? Beauty honors God the Creator, right? I’ve heard this kind of protest against some of the newer churches that worship in plain looking buildings – or even in giant boxes. No beauty – just functionality. And after 25-50 years they just look dingy and are ready for replacement.

But are permanent (relatively) beauty and ugliness the only alternatives? I’d like to propose what I’ll call “temporary beauty.” We already do this to a certain extent. On the exterior, temporary beauty is called landscaping. It will include planting trees and flowers, arranging rocks and other inanimate objects in a way that is attractive. On the interior we occasionally make use of banners and wall hangings (not too many at our place – they’re not needed).

I see two big advantages to temporary beauty. First, being temporary, maintenance costs are lower. Second, and more importantly, more people can be involved. If we rely on the architecture alone for our beauty, it was done 100 years ago. We don’t need any more. But if – in addition to the architecture – we also have banners, wall coverings, paintings, sculptures and the like, these can be continually replenished by a vats number of people offering their gifts to the Lord.

I’m curious what others think. Leave me a comment and let me know.