It’s Time for Believers to Talk Graciously About Abortion Again #QDC

There have been a number of Q Talks that stood out to me and this is among them. Part of it is because we need to talk more about the abortion issue but we need to do it with more grace and compassion. Given the sensitivity of the conversation, I’ve been waiting to re-listen to the talk and it has recently become available on Q Premiere. (You can subscribe here and please know that I promoting this completely out of my own volition. I am receiving no compensation or courtesy membership. My gain is participating and the sharing of the conversation).

This panel was moderated by Rebekah Lyons. The panelists include Jenell Paris, professor of anthropology at Messiah College in Grantham, PA; Sarah Brown, CEO of The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy; Angie Weszely, President of Caris, a faith-based nonprofit providing support to all women facing unplanned pregnancies; and Johnny Carr, National Director of Church Partnerships for Bethany Christian Services, America’s largest adoption agency (panel description taken from the Q site)

So the first thing that seems obvious to ask is why are some of us still not ready to talk about abortion? It needs to be said that there is a sizable evangelical demographic that is still not ready to talk about it. Of course the abortion issue has never gone away but many cannot bear the thought of discussing it again which begs the question why.

For some of us, we were brought up in “culture war” settings where abortion was the classic example of evil and those that performed them or had one were cast as the worst type of human. Some of us are still drained and disillusioned from this part of the culture war and cannot bare to bring it back up again. I understand that some people will not find that acceptable but among the lessons that I take is the “culture war” does too much damage to too many people (including our “own”).

Further, even if we/they have never actually stood in protest at an abortion clinic, having a pro-life conviction cast a great deal of tension with those that were pro-choice. And many of those that have pro-choice stances hate abortion as much as we do, but they are convinced that the choice must be honored. For me, these include some dear people whom I regard as good friends. We may disagree but it makes less sense to me/us to break fellowship.

So here’s the interesting part. It turns out that despite a sizable demographic not talking about it, teen pregnancy has gone down, the number of teen abortions has gone down and there is always a story of an abortion clinic that has had to close its doors so why bring it up now? This has also resulted in the number of adoptions having gone up. In light of that, it’s tempting to think that if we wait a few more years in complete silence, the whole issue might all go away.

That’s the interesting part. The crazy part is the beginning of the bestseller Freakonomics where there is a connection between the reduction in crime in major cities like New York and the increase in abortions among particular demographics that are believed to would have contributed to the crime rate. It’s horrifying and offensive while being statistically staggering.

Sitting in silence is not going to do any long term good and statistics implying the social benefits of infanticide is not going to help either. It’s time for Christians to talk graciously about reducing abortion.

The first thing that some of my conservative brothers and sisters will notice about that last sentence is why I chose to use “reducing abortion” language than say, overturning Roe v. Wade. My answer is threefold: First using overturning Roe v. Wade rhetoric is a hyper-politically charged conversation, therefore polarizing, therefore not helpful for legitimate conversation.
Two, the reducing language not only avoids villiianzing others but it suggests that people sincerely want to help others.
Three, just about everyone publicly agrees that we need to reduce the number of abortions – therefore we have common ground.

During the panel discussion, Sarah Brown pointed out that of the 1.2 million abortions per year, 85% are by unmarried women and fewer than 20% are by teens. Majority of women who have unplanned/unintended pregnancies and having abortions are unmarried twenty-somethings. Among them are women with stable careers.

Three-fourths of evangelicals have admitted they have had pre-marital sex so as others have pointed out, the message of abstinence has not exactly been well-received. Whether certain people care to admit or not, among the key reasons the teen pregnancy rate has gone down is because of the increased use of contraceptions. Which brought up the need for discussing the use of contraception in churches.

I’ll admit, I don’t really hear myself saying from the pulpit, “Those women who do not wish to get pregnant, you are to be abstinent and if you can’t, use contraception …” For one, when I preach, I don’t preach like that (not intended to sound condescending to those that do). Further, I am not a weekly preacher so most of my ministry happens away from the pulpit. But I am not uncomfortable talking about the use of contraceptives. Truth is, I have in specific instances for years because frankly, you don’t have to wait for the Pew Forum to release the research saying that 3/4s of evangelicals are having pre-marital sex to figure out what’s going on.

And while I do I try to avoid sending conflicting messages, these messages are contextual. If you really listen to what some people are saying whether in your office or your small group or wherever people are choosing to be vulnerable, you might understand what I’m saying here. My point for saying all this here is – let’s be faithful with these opportunities to help reduce the number of abortions.

Which brought up a major theme in the panel discussion. Those in the church need to better express “grace theology” when it comes to women and unplanned pregnancies (and to the men who don’t cut and run). I will say this doesn’t feel as big of an issue in the churches that I’ve been a part of but sadly, I have heard too many horror stories of women feeling shamed in some way. The flip side though is I don’t know how many people never came to the churches I was a part of because of what attitudes and judgements they thought may have been lurking inside. We need to make sure that the church is a place of many things including belonging, grace, and unconditional love.

This is where the graciousness conversation comes in. In my scope I do see a number of churches (and Christians in general) getting better at encouraging each other to adopt, foster and support children. Some are also getting better at reaching out to single moms and families whose financial circumstances make it almost impossible to survive. Some pulpits have eliminated culture war language and a spirit of hospitality is emerging but not only is there so much work to be done, very few actually regard the Church as a place of welcome.

For serious Christians, that needs to change. Much of the work to be done begins in conversation as it is one of the elements that changes culture. We need to invite those that have stopped talking about this issue back into the conversation and foster a gracious discussion on such a crucial issue. Thoughts, concerns, push-backs, feel free to comment. Also, if you share some similar feelings here, please share – the more people that talk about worthy things, the better.

Here are a couple other posts on QDC  – thanks for reading.

Reflecting on Aliens & Strangers – Blogging Through Our Sermon Series

A couple weeks ago, Pastor Tom who leads our Wilmington campus preached an excellent message called “Strangers and Aliens.” You can listen to it here.

He opened with asking the question, “What’s it like to be a Christian in New England?” and soon revealed this was a topic of discussion we had during one of our staff devotions led by our Pastor of Outreach, Richard, who was born and raised in the South. It was an interesting conversation as I find myself thinking about the Christian faith in the Northeast quite a bit. I not only think of this geographically but if you know me, you know that I talk a lot about our intergenerational understandings of the faith as well. In fact, if you really know me, you might know that I borderline obsess about how the Xers and Millennials perceive religion, organized and otherwise, spirituality, God, etc. but I digress.

So needless to say, the opening question was like good fair trade coffee in my mug. Tom was preaching out of I Peter and unpacking how at times, Christ followers felt like “strangers and aliens” of this world. This sentiment is likely true for all people at some point in their lives. I have heard my non-believing friends share similar thoughts on how they feel like they don’t really belong here either – something that the Church should always remember. As we all know, the “world” can be a lonely place.

In Peter’s day as he was writing to a group of churches in modern day Turkey, they were experiencing this reality. With the constant threat of Roman persecution and the growing pains of a young church, it was an intense time. Even more importantly, Peter was encouraging them to live counter-cultural to the pagan society which included various forms of debauchery, violence and idol worship.

Today we would ask what qualifies as “debauchery.” Today we ask about violence regularly, what justifies it, how can stop/limit it. And today we would also try to parse out “idol worship.” One person’s idol is another person’s (G)god, right? I would like to point out too that in the early church, many Romans accused the Christian church of “idol worship.” We always see “the other” as a pagan when they don’t believe and worship as we do. Thus, the many that experience the sentiment of feeling like “aliens and strangers.” This should always motivate us to converse with another.

Tom made two observations that I’ve been thinking about. There is a tendency for some in the church to live in two different extremes. One is “Uncritical Acceptance” and the other is “Uncaring Abandonment.” If it wouldn’t have been perceived as divisive and arrogant, I would have yelled, “Amen!”

Tom explained that the in “uncritical acceptance, there was a danger of embracing without discerning the vision and values of the society we live in. He went on to unpack “uncaring abandonment” as the washing of hands of the problems around us, to disengage from the world and retreat into a sub-culture.

I’m thankful that both these extremes (and many nuances in between) have been critiqued by passionate people in the Church today. I think of The Next Christians by Gabe Lyons and Culture Making by Andy Crouch to be great examples of that. (And if you have read those and want to explore counter-culture on a deeper level, I encourage Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat . Also check out Resident Aliens by Stanley Hauerwas and William Willimon.

It should dawn on us at some point that we as Christians can navigate both extremes quite easily if we imitate Jesus’ unconditional love to those that were inside and outside of his circle. True followers of Jesus cannot be mindless slaves to the world nor can they pretentious snobs to it either. The love of God is what compels us to not disengage from the challenges of the world and it’s the love of God that lead us to be wise and discerning toe that we can live in ways that are honoring, virtuous and worshipful to God.

It was a very solid and very applicable message, may I and those in our GC community keep it on the forefront.

Reflecting on “Controversy” Post 2 – Seeing It As an Opportunity for Conversation

In my first post, I made the point that there will always be controversy and that we should probably get better at dealing with it.

Controversy is a tricky thing of course. For those caught in the middle of the controversy, it can be a very painful experience. If you are among the grieved, offended, angered party, controversy is an opportunity to be heard. In its best scenario, it’s a chance for progress or even change! Depending on how inside/outside you are of it will generally determine how annoyed you get with the fueling of it and its attention.

For example, most of us would agree that the Tim Tebow thing was much to do about not too much. Ok, the guy likes to kneel and pray a lot. Whether you are a huge admirer or a detractor, let’s move on. Of course whatever chance we had of that disappears now that he is playing for a New York sports team. Had he played for Jacksonville, it would be much different, they simply don’t have that type of media attention there. Still, I wish the Cougars, err, the Jaguars the best of luck this season).

While over-discussed certain people and topics, we certainly under discussed others. As a society, we probably could have discussed the Genocide in Sudan a bit more. We shouldn’t forget about the elections and ongoing unrest in the Middle East and regardless of what we feel about the Occupy Movement, it should remind us of the pain and frustration that it represents in our neighborhoods. None of these conversations are actually over of course.

As a Church, we should be discussing these as well. I would also suggest specifically as a church, we could have discussed Rick Perry’s thoughts on government a bit more (Santorum’s Catholicism limited some of the Evangelical input). Many of us Christian Gen X’ers and Millennials are very concerned with some of this Buster’s idea of Christian nationalism. I for one, am grateful that the Perry campaign ended. That isn’t meant to sound as a personal attack but as soon as a politician attaches “Christianity” to his platform, I get very sensitive because now, the candidate is attempting to represent me in a number of ways. And to put it politely, people like Rick Perry do not best represent me.

I’m sure he’s a great guy, maybe a good guy to have in a church but not a President type. I appeal to a fundamentalist who was no stranger to controversy who said, “I would rather have an atheist who is a neurosurgeon of excellent talents operating on me if I ever need a brain surgery than to have the best Sunday school teacher in the world who doesn’t know a thing about it. I’d much rather have the atheist if that is his specialty. … We’ve got to elect a president who, whether he or she goes to church or which church or whatever, understands the issues. And the top issue today in our culture is survival.” Even Jerry Falwell got it.

So here’s what I’m saying – looking back on it, Perry’s short run for the Presidency allowed for conversation. Without Perry, I would have fewer conversations on nationalism, patriotism and the Kingdom of God, the verbiage of Christian America, Church and State, Mormonism and the popular motto that “everything is weirder in Texas.”

And that’s what’s good about controversy. Controversy gives us an opportunity for conversation. For me, there are only so many times I can talk about the weather, or the traffic, only so many times I can talk about entertainment culture of even sports. Some times, we need to have a serious conversation and controversies allow for that. The media hype gives us a headstart in thinking about the issue. Further, the culture’s emotional response (whether it be in the forms of anger or sympathy) creates urgency. And when we finally stop talking about the weather and the traffic, we might be able to cut through the superficialities, deepen friendships, offer hope to those around us and maybe even contribute to the collective good.

That said, there certainly is a danger in becoming a controversy hunter. Having to make up your mind on every issue does not make you informed, only opinionated. This opens the door for pride and anger to enter the heart. There is also a danger in turning into an information junkie because everything tends to get objectified and even this becomes no more than a hobby. This invites apathy and possible disillusionment.

On better days, my motives for conversation include the following:
An opportunity to reduce the tension.
Our culture is so quick to respond and it’s usually in anger. We can speculate on the cultural psychological makeup of why but on the other side of it, we ought to ask, are we contributing to the pain or helping to lessen it in at least some small way? Reducing the cultural tension can help us think more rationally, and hopefully, respond more compassionately. Usually when this happens, the media shuts down reporting on the controversy and looks for another.

Second, such discussion creates an opportunity to listen. There have been numerous times when the conversation began in talking about a particular scandal and then a more personal experience like the pursuit of success and pride became the new center piece of the conversation. Listening in these moments can do wonders.

Third, such discussions, even heated ones, create an opportunity to see the other side. In conversing with those with different presuppositions, we not only gain understanding of “the other”, we not only offer our side to “the other” but we each get to see the complexity of the issue and the complexity of our respective personhood. We realize we have motives and experiences that have shaped us, and sometimes they need to be altered, destroyed or celebrated. It’s best if we can do this together.

Lastly, controversies can allow us to get to the heart of the matter. For example, going back to the Rick Perry example is that I was suspicious that he was using the Christian narrative as a tool for his political agenda. Certainly I would like to see more Christian values in the culture, including in the government, but not at the cost of the message of Jesus. And even more so, I do not want to see the powerful arm-twisting and crafting sound-bytes for hollow agendas. God does not manipulate, nor should we dare to either. And so, when I talk about moments like this, I get to talk about the calling and the potential of the Church as God’s vehicle to bring His kingdom of goodness, love and redemption to this world. I get to talk about how a strong church can reach out to the a increasingly secularized culture and how we are all invited to be part of God’s redemption.

It’s in these ways, controversies create opportunities for conversation, even for goodness, and we ought to be faithful with them.

Reflecting on Mark Batterson’s 5 Points on Church & Place at Q #qdc

Been looking at my notes and thinking about Mark Batterson’s Q Talk on Church & Place.
Here were his five main points:

1 – We need to find ways of doing church that no one is doing yet
2 – We need lots of different churches bc there are lots of different people.
3 – Church ought to be most creative place on planet
4 – Be known for what we are for, not what we are against
“Criticize by creating” – Michelangelo
5 – Church belongs in middle of market place.
“Coffee houses are postmodern drinking wells, screens are postmodern stained glass.”

Mark is the pastor at National Community Church, has authored a number of books and is a regular speaker at national events. From the few times I’ve heard/read him, I appreciate his balance of ideas and numbers. Here’s an example from a Q piece he wrote a while back “Postmodern Wells: Creating a Third Place.” Though I’m not really following his work but what he’s saying is what I’ve been thinking about and trying to apply to my ministry. Hmmm, maybe I should start following his work.

Anyway, in general I agree and respect Mark’s points. He said quite a lot in the nine minutes he was given. Certainly resonate with the first one. In some sense, it’s a bit over-stated but I think it’s a great question to begin asking in any ministry context. It’s this mindset that had my friends and I are wondering about concerning alternative worship services, pub church gatherings, small group dynamics, etc.

Completely agree with the second point and I find myself saying something like this all the time. We need churches like Solmon’s Porch and McLean Bible churches. We need churches that meet in pubs and coffee house, I believe there is still a place for the traditional church and I of course believe in the large church structure as well. We need different churches that are always reforming and seeking the Spirit for the sake of the Kingdom.

Point three sounds nice. If by that, we mean the Christian community (as opposed to only the institution) needs to be the most creative place, yeah, I guess so. But I’m not sure I would say it like that. I certainly think we need to aspire to be creative and pioneering. We honor the great Creator when we create. When I think of creativity today, I of course, think of Apple, the Arcade Fire and The Tree of Life (are you reading Bo?). In any case, Mark is right to encourage us here.

I would outright disagree with point four if so many people I respected didn’t keep saying it. I understand that for too many people outside the Church, we are only known for what we are against (gay marriage, abortion, Democrats). Of course these generalizations are not helpful. I do want the Church to be known as a community of love, compassion, open-mindedness. However, I think we should be known also as a people that are against unfair discrimination, injustice and closed-mindedness. When there’s a hate crime, society should say, “People in the Church are going to be angered, there is no room for racism here. We need grace and love.” People are not saying that and I know that sounds idealistic but it’s certainly consistent with the teachings of Jesus.

And regarding point five, I wish he could have had more time to unpack this. I need to take a closer look at what they are doing with the Ebeenzers Coffee House. I have visited, it is cool, great space, and they serve One Village!   It felt that very few communities could use this as a model but again, I would need to learn the story.

As a staff, we’ve talked about things like this a couple of times and I think this is a needed conversation in our churches. Not only because of the economical climate, not only because American culture is steeped in the marketplace, but I see it as stewardship. Even further, should local churches enter the market place, I hope we can do so with a countercultural attitude that confronts the negative aspects of consumerism and celebrates the better things like fair-trade, fair-wage, ethical marketing and a Kingdom-minded mentality.

For more check out:
www.markbatterson.com
the church he serves at, National Community
His new book The Circe Maker

and you can follow him on Twitter.

For related posts on my time at Q, you can read:

Reflecting on Andy Crouch’s Discussion on Power (And How it Relates In the Church Sector) at Q
Reflecting on the Q Conference, Washington DC Post 1 – Back Home & Grateful

Reflecting on Andy Crouch’s Discussion on Power (And How it Relates In the Church Sector) at Q

As I mentioned at the end of my last post and in one last week, I want to blog a little on the Q Conference in Washington DC that I was able to attend. I do find myself thinking about a number of the presentations and a few that I force myself to think again about. I’m not sure I’ll admit to which is which, nor am I sure how many of these I am going to actually blog about but I am intentionally trying to take the time to do so for a number of reasons and they include:
1. I found many of them to be really important for me.
2. Grateful for the sacrifices and blessings to be able to get there.
3. I really believe in the work.
4. By taking time and reflecting on the content and what it means to me in context and application, it allows me to move beyond “conference junkie” and consumer of content (at least I hope to move from this).

Although it makes more sense to begin at the beginning, let’s start at the second presentation with Andy Crouch. His discussion on power continues to evolve so well. Having been privileged (can I use that word in this context?) to hear Andy speak on this a few times, it’s really great and helpful material. And it continues to get even better – looking forward to the book. I am also grateful that Biblical Seminary kept trying to find ways to bring him in to speak to us because I am truly hungry for this conversation.

I would love to give you all the sound-bytes but I wouldn’t be able to do them justice but here are a few:

Andy’s big question was, “Who is flourishing through your power? That is the test of power.”

“God has entrusted power to His Image bearers.
Vulnerable image-makers (even realize their own nakedness)
To deal with our vulnerability, we misuse our creativity.
Deepest use of power is not force but creation.
Deepest corruption of power is misplaced creativity – this is idolatry.”
Idols promise everything, demand nothing … but they extract everything
Idols work cheap and fast and they work … at first. (don’t keep working)”*

For one, I’m a sucker for the whole Imago Dei-idol conversation. So what he says at the end, I find myself yelling Amen at.

Andy is one of those speakers that make it sound so clear, yet when you find yourself explaining it to someone later, you say things like, “Well you know, he was talking about power … and stuff. Oh and I really liked what he said about idols – it was good.”

But here’s where I am two weeks later since listening to the presentation.
I have been contextualizing this in my sector (The Church) and asking the obvious questions like, “Who in the Church has the power?”
To some, it may seem obvious to say that the Sr. Pastor has the power but that’s not completely true, at least not in the evangelical tradition (can’t and won’t speak of any others). I’ve seen churches where the Sr. Pastor seems to run the show and others where they clearly didn’t.

Well, if not the Pastor (and the staff) then the elder board! Yes and no. Then, perhaps it’s the members, the community (power to the people!) and the answer again is yes and no.

What I’m learning in the Evangelical Church is that the “power” is scattered, limited, temporary and contingent on so many factors.

That church where the senior pastor micromanages every decision will never grow past 400 because he can only manage/control 400 people. It’s scattered and limited for a number of reasons. Among them is the pastor will only have their limited attention, generally Sunday mornings, funerals, weddings, etc. Half of them will change churches within a few years, a new crowd will take their place; this makes it temporary and it’s contingent on an endless number of factors like the preaching, the music, family ministries, the elder board, the budget, the parking, who and what was said in the last congregational meeting, factors contributing to the building and losing of momentum and various other wildcards. Or at least that’s what it feels and looks like from the inside and from the outside. It turns out the micromanaging senior pastor is not really that powerful.

The small congregational church with the revolving door right next to the pulpit seems to have given the power to the people but it hasn’t. Some of the congregants may have been there for fifty years, but the power is limited and certainly scattered. It seems to me that some of the “flatter” churches have similar struggles and being new in a large church environment, indeed there are hinderances at work here. To test it, we could ask “Who is really in charge?” to different groups and representatives. Pastors all tell you that the leadership has been granted authority but the attendees affirm this. But they’ll also say if/when people stop coming/serving/giving/connecting, their power is revealed and “The elder board has no legs!”

In all of these instances, idols are created. Idols are created out of man-made dreams, attendance, the budget, the ministry model, the customer satisfaction huh, I mean … well, whatever you want to call it.

I love the idea in theory that the power needs to be shared and given. I really do. Though I am a pastor, though I see myself as a leader, my prayers won’t be genuine if I know that people are responding to my control rather than their response to the leading of the Holy Spirit. We won’t share the power unless we trust each other.

I also love the idea that power needs to be unifying. It’s an amazing and scary thought of what could be if we truly trusted each other.

Further, I am thinking about what it means for the exercising of power to be a true act of worship. In some sense, this is what Andy is already saying about using power to create and in the Church sector, I see that happening in moments like, during our praise of God (whether it be Sunday morning, small groups or personally and privately throughout our week) and especially outside the institution of the Evangelical Church.

But lastly, I am returning to Andy’s original question in the church context “Who is flourishing through your power? That is the test of power.”

I’ve been thinking about this for almost two weeks and here’s where I am today. There are a number of people who are actually “flourishing” because of the influence and ministry of the church. The frustration is that it’s not nearly enough in terms of the number of people that are hurting around us and the depth of the “flourishing.” It was great to think of people, to know names and stories but again, it’s sobering to see how many more are in need of redemption from the hurt, pain and evil.

Plenty to think about, plenty to act upon and so may we be faithful with the creativity and the power/influence/calling we’ve been given in the Church sector as congregants, pastors, elders, as followers of God’s Kingdom.

Andy said so much more, maybe I’ll post again on it but if you are interested, check out his incredible book Culture Making and this presentation at Q Austin called “Power, Privilege and Risk.”

Reflecting on the Q Conference, Washington DC Post 1 – Back Home & Grateful

Last week I had the privilege of attending the Q Conference. It’s a gathering of Christian leaders from different sectors of culture focusing on four themes Culture, Future, Faith and Gospel. The 7 that Q identified are: Media, Business, Arts & Entertainment, Education, Government, Social Sector and the Church. You can read more about Q here.

Given their interest in culture, each year the gathering moves to a different city which has included Atlanta, New York, Austin, Chicago, Portland and this year Washington DC. It’s always in a downtown venue, intentionally not in a church but generally a third place chosen for historical/cultural significance, aesthetics, and functionality. This year’s site was the beautiful Andrew Melon Auditorium on Constitution Ave. (which is just across from the National Museum of American History).

It’s a pretty intense schedule with two days of over 40 presenters each given either 18 minutes, 9 minutes or 3 minutes to share their central message. As an audience member, it’s great, you know when the person is going to finish.  As a presenter, it must be difficult but we do get quite a number of excellent presentations. There are also talkbacks with the presentations and table discussions with fellow attendees. But even still, it’s a lot to take in. On Day 3, each attendee participated in a briefing. Mine was on human trafficking at the Old Exec. Bldg of the White House. Obviously it was cool to be there but the data is heart-breaking. You quickly forget the aesthetics when you hear the plight of those being trafficked. However, it is great to see our government involved in this global crisis.

I’ve been looking over my notes and as of now, I really can’t sit here and list my favorite presentations and offer an adequate summary of what was said for each. Frankly, I’m not sure I can even tell you my favorite moments yet but as I’ve been unpacking from the trip and talking about it, I’m sure I’ll have a bit to say soon.

What I was thinking about on my drive and have been thinking since returning is how important these conferences and conversations are. I know there is a lot of joking and negativity surrounding conferencing and I’m sure some of it is warranted bit there’s a good bit that is extremely helpful. This being my fourth Q, I have found that many of these presentations fuel my ideation, inform my weak spots, and some of them frankly, are similar to “breaking news” for me.

Q is probably so personally helpful because it makes so many conversations accessible to me. I simply don’t know of any other gathering for ministry types that bring in such an array of theologians, practitioners, scientists, corporate employees, artists, government workers and various thinkers and personalities from the different sectors of society. Now I want to be careful that I do not overstate its effectiveness, after all, the longest presentation is only 18 minutes and some similar presentations have been made in years past. Which is a good thing, because it reintroduces the conversation to newer attendees and reinforces the conversation to returners. I cannot help but feel that some of what was said are things that I have either have wanted to hear more of or words I needed to finally hear.

I’ll be thinking about that, especially as I meditate on how the Church can serve the common good of the culture.

Lastly, I’ve also been thinking about how fortunate and grateful I am for those that have made it possible for me to attend Q. Over the years I have been the recipient of scholarships either from Q or kind and generous people around me. Also grateful for my friend Ryan for letting me crash in his DC apartment – enjoyed our late night conversations. I’ve been fortunate that the Churches I’ve served in have been supportive (thanks GC). And certainly, I’m grateful for my wife’s support – three little kids for three days, I owe you another one honey. I’m not kidding, when I think of the sacrifices that allow me to attend these events, I think I better not only pay attention to the material but use this material. And so may the Lord bless these words and efforts and all who/what is involved.

“What Does the Easter Bunny Have to Do With Jesus?”

Last week I got to speak at the ESOL Easter Banquet that meets in one of the buildings at our Lexington campus. Those taking the class have their own unique story of how they got there. Some came to the States for a job transfer, some for love, some for the classic “hoping for better opportunities here.” As a son of immigrant parents, I get that.

When I was first asked to do this, it was an easy decision for me. English was the second language for my parents so I’ll think I’ll always have a soft spot for broken-English. I was told that some coming were not believers of Christianity and the purpose of the banquet was to celebrate semester milestones and observe American holidays. The banquets are optional and the speaker’s message is to communicate the meaning of the holiday without proselytizing. As one who loathes the “bait and switch” mentality, I settled on entitling the message “What Does the Easter Bunny Have to Do With Jesus?”

My goal was to offer why Christians celebrate this holiday.  I did my best to avoid preaching at it but I make no promises in this reflection.

There’s so much I love about the Easter story. Among my favorite aspects is how this story serves all of our other stories. If the story of the Resurrection of Jesus is true, it changes all the other stories, including the tragic ones.

Jesus’ promise for redemption, forgiveness and the invitation to the life he offers only works if the resurrection account is true. If it’s true, then indeed everything changes.

Including the symbols – symbols like the cross. As many have pointed out, the cross being the central symbol of the Christian faith is an odd one to some extent because at the time of Jesus, the cross was a violent instrument of capital punishment. It was the Roman version of the electric chair or the lethal injection but much more inhumane. Its purpose was to create the most torturous death possible. Its symbol was to instill fear and serve as a grave warning for all who dared to rebel against the state.

The resurrection changed that. Instead of being a symbol to be dreaded, it because a symbol of hope, of love, of victory!

So how did the Easter bunny get dragged into all of this? First, a confession, I like the Easter Bunny. Just like I’m a fan of Santa.

I get that some of us are tired of church bulletin covers of Easter Lillie’s (and Christmas poinsettias), tired of angels, baffled women and disciples standing outside of glowing empty tombs, tired of cartoon characters and colored eggs. Not me though. I’ve seemed to have rebounded quite strongly from begin jaded by all the Christian cliches.

This is perhaps because we have children now. And while my near four year old may actually come close to understanding the idea of Jesus enduring a horrible death by affixation by crucifixion, the poor kid has trouble sleeping as it s.

I’ve been telling our children that Easter is about the life that Jesus offers us. I tell them that Jesus died but became alive again and it’s never happened before (or since). And that’s what makes Easter special. I ask our near 4 and 2 year old, “What’s Easter about?” The short answer is “Life.”

For centuries, parents were telling their children of the greatest story ever and using their cultural symbols to illustrate. They used rabbits and eggs because they were signs of life. They created “entry points” for their children so they could being grasping the Easter narrative at a young age. And it’s important that we do this without traumatizing our young children with screenings of  “The Passion of Christ” or worse, poorly acted Easter dramas ;)

This year, I’ve enjoyed sharing with my children the Easter story. I love that Easter story redeems all things, I love that it redefines the symbols and I love that our children are slowly grasping it … with the help of eggs, baskets, chocolate and the bunny.

Wishing Andrew Sullivan a Beautiful Easter – 3 Things I Liked About His Newsweek Feature

A few times a year, Time Magazine or Newsweek will feature Jesus on their cover  and we’ll debate a sucky article full of  twisted examples and typical rhetoric.

So when I heard of this week’s new issue of Newsweek, I figured it would be more of the same. I clicked the Twitter link, saw it was Andrew Sullivan and was even more disappointed because I generally like him.  I read his blog every so often and frankly, I respect his mind and his soul.

Scanned the article once, except for the title, I liked the piece and knew I must have missed something. Why would Newsweek put this out? Read it again and appreciated it even more on a number of levels. Here are three things I liked.

1. I think he got the crisis right. If you are undecided in reading the article or your time is limited, here’s how Sullivan describes what he calls, “The Crisis of Our Time”:

“All of which is to say something so obvious it is almost taboo: Christianity itself is in crisis. It seems no accident to me that so many Christians now embrace materialist self-help rather than ascetic self-denial—or that most Catholics, even regular churchgoers, have tuned out the hierarchy in embarrassment or disgust. Given this crisis, it is no surprise that the fastest-growing segment of belief among the young is atheism, which has leapt in popularity in the new millennium. Nor is it a shock that so many have turned away from organized Christianity and toward “spirituality,” co-opting or adapting the practices of meditation or yoga, or wandering as lapsed Catholics in an inquisitive spiritual desert. The thirst for God is still there. How could it not be, when the profoundest human questions—Why does the universe exist rather than nothing? How did humanity come to be on this remote blue speck of a planet? What happens to us after death?—remain as pressing and mysterious as they’ve always been?

That’s why polls show a huge majority of Americans still believing in a Higher Power. But the need for new questioning—of Christian institutions as well as ideas and priorities—is as real as the crisis is deep.”

I couldn’t agree more, people area always asking the big questions and looking for purpose and meaning. Obviously as a Christ-follower, I feel that Christianity has the best answers to these questions and searches. But as a Christ-follower, I fear that we as a Church are squandering its power and opportunity for lesser things. I’ll fight for Christ and the Church but I completely understand why some are pursuing the former without the latter. I’m left thinking Andrew gets these broad strokes right.

2. He may have redeemed Jefferson for me or at least motivate me to take a deeper look. I like Jefferson. A particular set of former youth group kids would lead you to believe that I’m obsessed with him because I “forced” our group to visit his memorial in the heat of July. Whatever. I do appreciate Jefferson on a number of levels – founding father, architect of the Declaration, and key promoter of separation of church and state. If that last line surprises you, I believe in the importance of a secular society because I believe a strong Church is not threatened in such a context. One friend emailed me encouraging me to express that sentiment more. Perhaps I’ll also write a post on that some time.

But back to Jefferson, I’ve never been able to share any more of an affinity for him because of his denial of the supernatural aspect of Jesus. It’s not enough for me that he believes we need to serve the other if Christ has not been raised. As a humanist, it would be enough for me, but not as a Christian. From what Sullivan was saying, it’s clear I need to look further into what Jefferson was not only doing with the famous edited Bible but with his practice of Christianity.

3. Sullivan doesn’t write as an outsider, but as a Christian acknowledging its weak points and proclaiming its essential ones. I may push back on some parts (I think everything is political, but do agree that too many in the evangelical church are overly-concerned with power in our political system). Regardless of my push backs, I appreciate what he’s clear on.

“Whether or not you believe, as I do, in Jesus’ divinity and resurrection—and in the importance of celebrating both on Easter Sunday—Jefferson’s point is crucially important. Because it was Jesus’ point. What does it matter how strictly you proclaim your belief in various doctrines if you do not live as these doctrines demand? What is politics if not a dangerous temptation toward controlling others rather than reforming oneself? If we return to what Jesus actually asked us to do and to be—rather than the unknowable intricacies of what we believe he was—he actually emerges more powerfully and more purely.”

I read the article a couple times. I’m not sure the cover of “Forget the Church, Follow Jesus” is what the article is actually saying. Again, I ‘m biased because I do believe in the Church. You would expect a pastor to say that of course but I’d like to think that I’d believe in the Church even if I wasn’t. Jesus went through hell to establish it, we Christ-followers need to be the Church Christ has called us to be, I’m grateful to be serving in it and am praying I and many will be faithful to Jesus’ way.

In any case, for a Newsweek cover, this is perhaps the most Christian article on Jesus that I recall seeing.

Nice job Andrew Sullivan and may you have a beautiful Easter.

Reflecting on a Few Takeaways from the Preaching Rocket Conference

The other week a handful of staff members attended the Preaching Rocket Conference. It was to promote their online membership program to help pastors preach better sermons. From what I saw, it was pretty good. I came late, multi-tasked while it was streaming and drank coffee, which was basically my seminary experience as well.

Honestly, I think it was helpful and it was cool to watch it with fellow staff. Being on a larger staff, I am receiving some really helpful encouragement and critiques. I mean that, they’ve been helpful and I hope I can be for them as well. So this came at a great time for us.  There were a couple moments when we paused the stream and debriefed with each other. Hope we have more of these opportunities.

I know some around the Twitterverse were bothered by the commercials in it (Come on pastors, you act like you never took an offering before – it’s a FREE online conference promoting a service). That said, I am not a member and at $99/month, I don’t preach enough for this to be good stewardship. If you are a weekly preacher and even if you’re really good, you should still consider it. There looked to be some great communicators there.

My biggest complaint is that it looked to me that all the presenters were from the South and I suspect that was to keep production costs as low as possible. That’s cool, I respect that but that would probably be another reason or me not to subscribe (As a Northeasterner, it would be helpful to hear from some pastors up here.  Btw, without the last name Keller.  We truly love him, now let’s find some more).  (Oh and I get that we all like Chick-Fil-A but the moment with Dan Cathy came across as odd to me. Either we are obsessed with chicken or the Cathy’s own all the churches in the south but I think it’s safe to say that we’ve jumped the shark, the cow here).

Anyway, great conference, here were a couple takeaways for me:

Andy Stanley. Can I make a confession when it comes to Andy? I never get excited when I see his name on something but I cannot count the number of times I’ve heard him say something and thought to myself, “Yeah that’s really good.” He’s like that band Train, they’ve been around a while, I never get excited about them but I like their songs when I hear them on the radio. I don’t hate on Andy or Northpoint, I know they’re doing good things but I realized I don’t give him any credit either.

I liked what Andy Stanley said about being careful about not just being interesting but having a point (a theme consistent with my blogging and sermonizing). I still like the idea of having one central point and having strong supporting themes running in and out (my last sermon may have allowed a supporting theme to overpower the central point) so when he said that I thought, “That’s helpful Andy – thanks.”

Still not sure about his comment on any time you’re nervous, you’re making it about you. I’ve thought about that for a good bit afterwards. That feels like a comment that you make when you’ve been preaching in front of thousands of people for the last 20 years and you’re considered an expert in your field. Yeah, maybe for that guy, nerves feel a little different than for others. I’m not suggesting that it’s better to live in fear, panic or anxiety, but I have found nervousness to be an excellent reminder for the need of prayer and to respect what it is that we do. But I’ll keep thinking about it.

I also appreciated what Judd Wilhite and Andy said about preaching to the broken and you’ll always have an audience. We would expect the preacher’s words to always offer people hope and encouragement (even conviction, should the Spirit allow). So long as this does not become formulaic and manipulative, we should not lose sight of this. Broken people are entering our sanctuaries each week, broken people are entering the pulpit as well – praise God.

It’s possible that I’ll forget much of this but I think I’ll remember the moment with Charles Stanley when he was moved to tears in talking about the impact that we as preachers have on the church. It was very powerful and sobering. He would go on and talk about the need for prayer which had been mentioned by an earlier speaker but I think many of us viewers didn’t hear it as a redundant and I imagine we all felt the Spirit’s reminder of that. Appreciated how he described the burden a preacher ought to have for the message. I think the most noticeable aspect of preaching for me these last few years is that I really believe in what I’m saying.

I think I’m always going to be homiletically improper (I did well in homiletics but I always got an asterisk with my grades too – I know many can relate ;). In an honest moment, I may admit that I want it that way but in an even more honest moment I may attempt to politely suggest that maybe the experts don’t have it completely right either – and them being people of humility would likely say the same. I was grateful that they shared their words and experience with us and grateful for the calling that we’ve received to serve in the Kingdom. To God be the glory.

Check out their site www.preachingrocket.com, check out their 1 month trial for $1 and subscribe if it works for you. Also you can follow the founder of PR Casey Graham on Twitter @CaseyGraham. I have not been contacted by Preaching Rocket, I’m just linking out of appreciation for providing the event.

My Take on #Kony2012 Post 4 – Why Are People So Against This?

This weekend, I was away speaking at at a retreat in the Poconos and on my long drive back, I was reflecting over a few things. I had the thought that if I was in Uganda trying to rebuild my life and my community and I had become aware that many in America had been talking about me, my country, my region, my future and the problems I face for the last two weeks, I’d be even angrier if the consensus was, “That video was misguided so I guess I’m not going to help …”

Now I know there may be sound concerns to not help, however, the unfair criticism, the constructive critiques, the missteps of the “Kony 2012″ campaign don’t seem like legitimate reasons. Though I was still very much enjoying the afterglow of the weekend, I found myself in that angry/frustration/passion/wrestlingwithGod moment. I was a bit stuck on this because I think it’s an important conversation. My bigger concern is that we would go through all of this and not take advantage of the opportunity to help those in need.

As you likely know and as I mentioned in the previous post, Jason Russell, one of the founders and the narrator of “Kony 2012″ suffered an emotional breakdown over the weekend. Initially it was reported that he was intoxicated but that has been clarified. You can watch this video that was made in follow up and read part of Invisible Children’s Statement below:

To the Invisible Children Family from INVISIBLE CHILDREN on Vimeo:

“Thank you to everyone concerned with Jason and his health. Jason has dedicated his adult life to this cause, leading up to KONY 2012. We thought a few thousand people would see the film, but in less than a week, millions of people around the world saw it. While that attention was great for raising awareness about Joseph Kony, it also brought a lot of attention to Jason—and, because of how personal the film is, many of the attacks against it were also very personal, and Jason took them very hard.

Let us say up front- that Jason has never had a substance abuse or drinking problem, and this episode wasn’t caused by either of those things. But yes, he did some irrational things brought on by extreme exhaustion. On our end- the focus remains only on his health, and protecting our family. We’ll take care of Jason, you take care of the work.

The message of the film remains the same: stop at nothing.”

-Jason’s wife on behalf of the Russell Family”

Don Miller had a brief and appropriate response. And I appreciated this post entitled “Jason Russell is My Friend.”by Jaime Tworkowski. I hope I am that type of friend and it reminds me that we need to have more conversations between enabling and loyalty. Though a terrible situation, we are indeed reminded of our humanity and the toll this issue takes on so many.

One of the most powerful and convicting scenes for me was in the movie Hotel Rwanda when Paul Rusesabagina (played by Don Cheadle) tells Jack (Joaquin Phoenix) that the was glad that he shot this footage so the world could see and intervene against such atrocities. Jack says, “I think if people see this footage they’ll say, “oh my God that’s horrible,” and then go on eating their dinners.”

More than 100 Million views. Almost a third of our country, about the number that voted in the 2008 Presidential election. I am concerned that a moment is being squandered here. Everyone agrees that Kony and the LRA are evil, everyone agrees that Uganda and Central Africa are in need of support for rebuilding and everyone agrees that this has been an atrocity. What we do between eating our dinners, watching our movies, preaching our sermons and living our lives will be telling.

On the drive, I keep asking myself what am I missing here? Why are people so against this?

Some answers I keep hearing are like, “Well, because IC implied that Kony was still in Uganda.” i can’t argue with anyone’s first impressions and it could be that I’m very familiar with their films and keep up with their blog and read their emails and try to keep up with a host of other anti-trafficking blogs, but “Kony 2012″ seemed clear to me that not only was he no longer in Uganda, but that Jason was telling the story to his son in the past tense. Still, between that and other aspects of the film, perhaps there is concern that it came across that way and I’ll consider these types of comments a contributing factor.

The other critique I hear is regarding their spending, I read one article complaining about how much IC spent on their filmmaking and stated that had it gone to malaria instead, Central Africa would have been malaria-free. I find that hard to believe. But her case would have been devastating had Invisible Children’s mission was to rid Central of Africa of malaria. I don’t find that to be a fair criticism. Fighting malaria is a very noble, essential cause and threatens thousands a year and there are great organizations that are dedicated to solving it. If the writer hasn’t already, I think it would be wise to examine the spending of the organizations committed to fighting malaria under the same scrutiny. Further, it seems her criticism would be better served to compare what we the public spend on alcohol, soft drinks, fast food, cable television, etc. and the costs to eliminate a killer like malaria. But I don’t find this to be a helpful critique in this context.

Another critique is the call for military intervention. I find this to be a very legitimate concern and a lengthy discourse because we need to unpack what type of intervention is sought after, what to do about the rest of the LRA and so forth. While I am never of the “kill ’em all” mindset, I am not for the doing nothing mindset either. I’ll get flack for this, but with all the peace treaties that Kony has been invited to, “participated in” and avoided in order to continue his violence and pain, the answer will not be found in a true pacifist approach – unless it’s the pacifist approach like Dietrich Bonhoeffer. If I may, I encourage pacifists to truly find other ways/organizations to support those in the region. (I included a list of other organizations at the bottom of my previous post.)

There are countless articles and posts critiquing – some very helpful to the conversation, some not. I believe some of the “not helpful” types are creating intelligent sounding excuses rooted in feeling jaded from the complexities surrounding Africa. I believe others to be rooted in apathy. That said, I do believe many in the “helpful critique” category to be rooted in wisdom, proper stewardship and solid experience. May God be our judge.

Here’s where I am landing.

For me, Invisible Children was and still is a great starting point for many. I personally went from being interested about human trafficking to finding ways to get involved against this atrocity. Also, at the time, I was a youth pastor, and our students connecting with these films was a great encouragement to me. I now support several organizations and am committed to bringing awareness to this important issue.

Awareness is the first step, and now that we are aware, we have the opportunity to do something. There are only so many causes, organizations and missionaries one can support so know that I am not implying that now that you are aware you need to do something. Not at all, I am among those that are saying, if you can, please support.

 Second, if you are getting involved, let’s commit to being involved responsibly. I highly   recommend reading books like, When Helping Hurts and these two from David Livermore:  Cultural Intelligence: Improving Your CQ to Engage Our Multicultural World and Serving With Eyes Wide Open. There are countless sites and blogs dedicated to eradicating trafficking like IJM, Polaris Project, Not For Sale. Check out the blog of friends I know, Jesse and Andrea serving in Uganda.  I trust and appreciate their take.  Further, papers like the NY Times, the Washington Post and the Boston Globe are always featuring articles on this important issue.    There are many takes on the issue, but not a scarcity of info, let’s read, think and discuss.  And let’s act at the same time.

And to keep it simple, the third step is prayerful action.  I’m way over my intended word count but in short, pray, give, create awareness, let’s keep our hearts broken and be diligent.

For those who have decided to not get involved in this issue for one reason or another,  know that your convictions are respected, but please, serve in a area where you see a need, can create awareness for, offer different types of support.  May we all serve God’s world in various and effective ways.

I believe the one thing we can all agree on is that we cannot witness terrible atrocities and go back to eating our dinner, drinking our frappucinos and watching our reality tv shows.

Thanks for reading friends.