“Inreach” is fairly well defined in my mind as ministry that seeks to bring believers to spiritual maturity.
“Outreach” is also fixed in my thinking as ministry that extends the gospel to the surrounding community and nations.
What I’m trying to figure out, however, is “midreach.”
Thus far, I’ve come up with this: Midreach is both. It’s communicating Biblical ideas in a way that is compelling to both Christians and nonChristians (and those on the fence).
As I struggle to define and master the art of midreach (in the context of college campus ministry), I’d love to hear your thoughts and suggestions.
p.s., descriptive words would be more helpful to me than sending me links—thanks.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Jesus outside the box
These days I am writing my own commentary on the gospel of Mark.
Am I finding fresh meanings in Mark? Writing something never before written?
Not really.
Scholars have been conducting a weighty conversation about the NT for the past 2000 years, and I’m simply joining in the fun. It would be quite dangerous to swerve outside the lines of this tradition.
Despite drawing on professional resources for my study, Jesus cannot be circumscribed. He continues to amaze me, baffle me, and exceed (or contradict) my expectations.
He often doesn’t do what he’s "supposed" to do, which makes me think I'm missing something.
Am I finding fresh meanings in Mark? Writing something never before written?
Not really.
Scholars have been conducting a weighty conversation about the NT for the past 2000 years, and I’m simply joining in the fun. It would be quite dangerous to swerve outside the lines of this tradition.
Despite drawing on professional resources for my study, Jesus cannot be circumscribed. He continues to amaze me, baffle me, and exceed (or contradict) my expectations.
He often doesn’t do what he’s "supposed" to do, which makes me think I'm missing something.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Sponsoring Downward, Outward
I have a radical idea. It’s not going to apply in every situation—I realize that.
But here it is: Church is not really for me.
Don’t get me wrong. I am HIGHLY committed to Grace Church Roseville.
What I’m saying, however, is that my job as a 50-something is not so much to receive as it is to give. Sharon and I give a lot of time and money to GCR, but we don’t expect the church to cater to our tastes, style, preferences, needs.
GCR must—absolutely must—reach out to the community. That means sermons aren’t going to “feed” me every week. Christian education is not going to be aimed precisely at me. Women’s ministries are not going to be a bullseye for Sharon. Music styles may not cater to our preferences.
Two implications of what I’m suggesting:
1) At middle age, Sharon and I should be capable of nourishing ourselves spiritually from the word of God. Yes, I listen closely to the fine sermons at GCR and I try to obey what I hear. But I don’t expect Pastor Jason (pictured above) to have me primarily in mind when he preaches.
2) I’m no longer a guest at GCR. On the contrary, I’m a host, a sponsor. My job is to help our church connect with young generations and new people. When stuff is aimed at me, I figure we’re missing the mark.
Folks, I’m not trying to be a martyr here. I’m just saying the church must constantly renew itself or risk losing its Great Commission.
Your thoughts?
But here it is: Church is not really for me.
Don’t get me wrong. I am HIGHLY committed to Grace Church Roseville.
What I’m saying, however, is that my job as a 50-something is not so much to receive as it is to give. Sharon and I give a lot of time and money to GCR, but we don’t expect the church to cater to our tastes, style, preferences, needs.
GCR must—absolutely must—reach out to the community. That means sermons aren’t going to “feed” me every week. Christian education is not going to be aimed precisely at me. Women’s ministries are not going to be a bullseye for Sharon. Music styles may not cater to our preferences.
Two implications of what I’m suggesting:
1) At middle age, Sharon and I should be capable of nourishing ourselves spiritually from the word of God. Yes, I listen closely to the fine sermons at GCR and I try to obey what I hear. But I don’t expect Pastor Jason (pictured above) to have me primarily in mind when he preaches.
2) I’m no longer a guest at GCR. On the contrary, I’m a host, a sponsor. My job is to help our church connect with young generations and new people. When stuff is aimed at me, I figure we’re missing the mark.
Folks, I’m not trying to be a martyr here. I’m just saying the church must constantly renew itself or risk losing its Great Commission.
Your thoughts?
Monday, May 10, 2010
Adaptability
In his excellent book, The Rise of Evangelicalism, historian Mark Knoll (Wheaton College) portrays the early evangelical movement of 18th century Europe and colonial America as entrepreneurial, adaptable, revivalist, experiential. . . radical.
This in contrast to the “creaking mechanisms” of established state religion.
Knoll observes: “By setting aside earlier religious forms, the evangelicals did not think they were setting aside the faith once delivered, but rather adjusting it to the new social realities of the age” (p149).
I have a feeling I'd have liked these guys: Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, John Wesley, Charles Wesley.
Knoll's account of their ministries is quite enlightening, and I'd recommend the book to you.
This in contrast to the “creaking mechanisms” of established state religion.
Knoll observes: “By setting aside earlier religious forms, the evangelicals did not think they were setting aside the faith once delivered, but rather adjusting it to the new social realities of the age” (p149).
I have a feeling I'd have liked these guys: Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, John Wesley, Charles Wesley.
Knoll's account of their ministries is quite enlightening, and I'd recommend the book to you.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
Tradition or Change?
My friend R is more conservative than me. My good buddy P is more Catholic than me (right, since I’m Protestant).
In lengthy discussions with both this past year, a critical issue has arisen—though from different angles: the place of tradition.
Each friend in his own way is telling me that church tradition keeps us from wandering outside the boundaries of the church historic—that is, outside the boundaries of orthodoxy.
I get that part (they may dispute that☺).
My reply is that one of the best things evangelicals bring to the table is flexibility in method. We can do things differently than we did yesterday in order to meet today’s ministry needs. We’re highly adaptable.
Example: I am a supporter of changing worship styles (music, order of service, electric/acoustic, graphics, architecture, lighting, décor, readings, liturgy, etc) to put worship into the “heart” language of various segments of a congregation: old, young, ethnic, etc.
Which way do you lean:
p.s. My friend L lives in country music territory. He thinks his church should consider a country music styled service. OK, I happen to like that idea. . .
In lengthy discussions with both this past year, a critical issue has arisen—though from different angles: the place of tradition.
Each friend in his own way is telling me that church tradition keeps us from wandering outside the boundaries of the church historic—that is, outside the boundaries of orthodoxy.
I get that part (they may dispute that☺).
My reply is that one of the best things evangelicals bring to the table is flexibility in method. We can do things differently than we did yesterday in order to meet today’s ministry needs. We’re highly adaptable.
Example: I am a supporter of changing worship styles (music, order of service, electric/acoustic, graphics, architecture, lighting, décor, readings, liturgy, etc) to put worship into the “heart” language of various segments of a congregation: old, young, ethnic, etc.
Which way do you lean:
- Preserve tradition? Or:
- Make changes for local contexts? Or:
- A little of both?
p.s. My friend L lives in country music territory. He thinks his church should consider a country music styled service. OK, I happen to like that idea. . .
Monday, April 26, 2010
The New Apologetic
Last week at Sonoma State University (CA) three “apologetics” converged like streams to a river:
1. The Free Thinkers group pressed me with questions such as “Are miracles rational?” and “Why does God never heal an amputee?”
They wanted evidence, even proof, of God—“classic” apologetics.
2. The InterVarsity group provided me with a different kind of proof of God’s presence: the embodied apologetic of love and hospitality.
Rationalists, don’t sneer. These days the best argument for the truth of Christianity on college campuses is the Holy Spirit supernaturalizing the community of faith.
3. My GLBT seminar. The current generation’s first impulse is to include, not exclude. What does this mean regarding gays and lesbians? Hopefully, I helped 25 young leaders think it through.
Stream #1 above represents modernism. It’s what I grew up on.
Streams 2 and 3 are more postmodern approaches to apologetics. They’re about relationships, power and political agendas.
Think of your church. Which kind of apologetic does it offer? Which is needed?
I invite your comments.
1. The Free Thinkers group pressed me with questions such as “Are miracles rational?” and “Why does God never heal an amputee?”
They wanted evidence, even proof, of God—“classic” apologetics.
2. The InterVarsity group provided me with a different kind of proof of God’s presence: the embodied apologetic of love and hospitality.
Rationalists, don’t sneer. These days the best argument for the truth of Christianity on college campuses is the Holy Spirit supernaturalizing the community of faith.
3. My GLBT seminar. The current generation’s first impulse is to include, not exclude. What does this mean regarding gays and lesbians? Hopefully, I helped 25 young leaders think it through.
Stream #1 above represents modernism. It’s what I grew up on.
Streams 2 and 3 are more postmodern approaches to apologetics. They’re about relationships, power and political agendas.
Think of your church. Which kind of apologetic does it offer? Which is needed?
I invite your comments.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Toast in the chapel
Get this: One day I show up for chapel in the gorgeous theater at North Central University* to hang with my son, Ryan, who studies music at the school.
“Who’s leading worship today, buddy boy?” I ask.
“One Accord.”
“They any good?”
He just grins at his senile father.
Five minutes later OA begins playing in front of 600 peers and professors, appearing demure and casual and unimpressed with their own celebrity. The songs have no dramatic modulations or big endings. There are no “inspirational” solos, no heavenly smiles.
Sandi Patty and Steve Green this isn’t.
By the second tune, I’m toast. I’m taken down, captured, disarmed, humbled. OA is too good, too attuned, too understated, too mature musically and spiritually for me to resist, nor do I want to.
Curiously, all the musicians seem to be watching something as they play—something they assume is happening in the theater which is beyond their control.
I finally see it too: The Lord walking among his people.
*****
After chapel I bump into music professor Dave Pedde who coaches OA. Late 20s, gelled hair, piercings?
Nope. Dave’s about my age, silver mane, pianist.
Two things stand out to me about OA:
1. How astonishingly well coached they are.
2. How little their music/look/feel (the whole package) resembles their coach’s generation.
Think about how tough this is to pull off. Boomer-run institution sponsors boomer coach who trains—but then releases young people to do their thing in their own way, for their peers.
I find this very gutsy.
Does your church have the courage to do the same?
I invite your comments.
* North Central University is located in Minneapolis, associated with the Assemblies of God denomination.
“Who’s leading worship today, buddy boy?” I ask.
“One Accord.”
“They any good?”
He just grins at his senile father.
Five minutes later OA begins playing in front of 600 peers and professors, appearing demure and casual and unimpressed with their own celebrity. The songs have no dramatic modulations or big endings. There are no “inspirational” solos, no heavenly smiles.
Sandi Patty and Steve Green this isn’t.
By the second tune, I’m toast. I’m taken down, captured, disarmed, humbled. OA is too good, too attuned, too understated, too mature musically and spiritually for me to resist, nor do I want to.
Curiously, all the musicians seem to be watching something as they play—something they assume is happening in the theater which is beyond their control.
I finally see it too: The Lord walking among his people.
*****
After chapel I bump into music professor Dave Pedde who coaches OA. Late 20s, gelled hair, piercings?
Nope. Dave’s about my age, silver mane, pianist.
Two things stand out to me about OA:
1. How astonishingly well coached they are.
2. How little their music/look/feel (the whole package) resembles their coach’s generation.
Think about how tough this is to pull off. Boomer-run institution sponsors boomer coach who trains—but then releases young people to do their thing in their own way, for their peers.
I find this very gutsy.
Does your church have the courage to do the same?
I invite your comments.
* North Central University is located in Minneapolis, associated with the Assemblies of God denomination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
