The Ministry Report

Are We Doing This?

2008-05-07T09:13:00.007-05:00

I caught this story on the wire a week ago and was waiting for someone to cover it more extensively. (Leave it to ESPN to produce a tear-jerker.) On the surface, it's an amazing example of true integrity and character. But beyond the Hallmark moment, I think every pastor will see a picture of what the church can be when we work in unity for kingdom purposes rather than for our own agendas or glory. Although that usually involves sacrificing personal victories and dreams, when we opt for this higher ground—as this story shows—the end result is always more powerful and life-changing.

The Great Debate

2008-05-01T09:11:00.002-05:00

While running down my list of blogs I read daily, I followed a slight rabbit trail and stumbled upon this slice of modern American church. Ignore the main post and just read the comments not for entertainment's sake, but for a pure example of the pointless battles we wage so passionately in Christendom today—against our own brothers and sisters! In this case, it's Tim Stevens, a pastor at a well-known yet typical community megachurch in Indiana, who gets the brunt of the acerbic responses. He recently wrote a book, Pop Goes the Church, that says we should—how dare he!—engage the culture by using relevant language. But as you'll see in the postings, he quickly becomes the emblem for an entire church movement.

Call it "seeker-sensitive," "community," nondenominational," "interdenominational" ... the decripts for this movement all seem to mesh into a similar form. Essentially, it's the "new" church of the past 20-plus years continuing to redefine itself today, trying to reach people via a cultural relevancy that has been declared absent in the church at large. On the other end, of course, lies those who remain dedicated not so much to tradition (although some would argue that) but to the purity of a gospel that should stand alone. In the words of one commenter, it believes you don't need to "prop Jesus up" with thematic messages, slick packaging and rock 'n' roll introductions. Both movements are multifaceted and represent a myriad of styles, methodologies and fundamental principles. Yet we continue to argue which is, for lack of a more precise measurement, better.

For some, the argument is over whether the church is actually broken. For others, it's a dispute over methodology. For those honest enough to admit their personal bias, it's a preference issue. But I encourage you to take a step back from whatever you feel is right and simply assess the heated reactions we often bring to the discussion table. Rather than truly discuss matters and search for truth, we're quick to fire our preloaded guns—once again, at our own brothers and sisters. The comments at the above link show we are at the point—and have been for years—of absurdity. Does this really matter in the grand scheme of things?

I'll admit, I still struggle with the debate between "seeker-sensitive" (I realize I'm over-generalizing here) and the more traditional (note: not necessarily antiquated). I've experienced the positives and negatives of both firsthand, and I've heard years' worth of impassioned arguments for and against each. I am part of an extended family that often derides the seeker-sensitive church's stigma of a watered-down gospel, lack of discipleship and entertainment-based services. This family believes whole-heartedly that a full dose of God's glory and His Spirit's powerful movement is what essentially transforms individuals—not styles or methods, although both play a role in church life. At the same time, my natural family is deeply steeped in a thriving movement that continues to expand. Lives are being changed. Those who have tossed church aside are being reignited with a newfound relevancy of what it means to be a Christian. While this family admits it struggles at times with the maturation of true disciples, it cannot deny that its methods are changing individuals, families and communities.

So where do I land? Most leaders have an opinion. I'll be honest enough to admit I'm still not there yet. At times I wonder if we've missed the boat—on both sides of the lake. I question this new church in America and its lasting effectiveness, just as I question the "old" church and its supposedly waning effectiveness. Both seem to pale when I look at some of the rising, revolutionary churches I see abroad. Yet all of them, at least in intent, aim for the ultimate goal of establishing God's kingdom on earth through the hearts of people. And to me, that makes the bigger issue not how we're "doing" church but whether we're actually being the church—which starts with our fervent love for God and one another.

What's Happening in Lakeland?

2008-04-23T09:48:00.003-05:00

re·viv·al (rĭ-vī'vəl) n.
1. The act or an instance of reviving.
2. The condition of being revived.
3. A time of reawakened interest in religion.
4. A meeting or series of meetings for the purpose of reawakening religious faith, often characterized by impassioned preaching and public testimony.

The word revival is used a little too flippantly among Christians, yet the intent is usually pure. We want to see the Holy Spirit changing lives. We want to see Him healing bodies, hearts and lives to the point that people are never the same. Obviously, our desire is to have this happen as part of our daily lives—to walk as Jesus did, following the Father's lead and leaving a trail of signs, wonders and miracles. Yet when this happens in a remarkable fashion, for a remarkable length of time, we label it as a revival.

That same element of time will tell whether what's going on in Lakeland, Fla., is a revival. One thing is clear, though: God is moving. Check out the on-the-scene reports from my coworkers at Charisma and from the local media. GOD TV has been broadcasting the evening services live, and you can watch archived streaming videos here. I'm sure I'll blog more about what's been dubbed as the "Florida Healing Revival" or the "Lakeland Healing Outpouring" as or if it continues. But for now I'll simply echo the phrase used countless times during my days with the Vineyard movement (which also knew a thing or two about revival): "More, Lord!"

Building Better?

2008-04-07T08:44:00.003-05:00

LifeWay Research released a fascinating survey today on church buildings that may come as bad news to many pastors. Turns out the "unchurched" don't necessarily go for churches turning contemporary—at least not when it comes to architectural style.

Researchers showed 1,684 adults—all of whom essentially hadn't been to church in the previous six months—four pictures of church buildings with various architectural styles. By more than a two-to-one ratio, participants opted for the Gothic cathedral building over more contemporary options. Just as surprising was that the unchurched repeated this preference for the traditional in choosing among various foyers and worship centers. In fact, the run-of-the-mill contemporary sanctuary with multiple projection screens and stadium seating actually came in dead-last, as did the wide-open, family friendly foyer.

Obviously, this is both startling and a little upsetting for thousands of pastors who have ridden the wave of church design and construction that says a less "churchy" building is a bigger draw. But before all you old-timers start saying "I told you so," let's dig a little deeper on both the research and the results:

Consider the exterior options. Aside from the cathedral, the other three church buildings presented were not (in my opinion) necessarily cutting edge or wildly contemporary. None were refurbished warehouses, I.M. Pei lookalikes or emblems of innovation. Given the selection, I'm not sure I would've voted for any of these three either. To a degree, they reek of mass production rather than the artistry so often shown in a cathedral.
At the same time, this speaks volumes about our cultural and spiritual climate. Through all the mile-long shopping malls, Super-Duper Wal-Marts, and megachurches, people are still hungry for intimacy and community, even as it's reflected in architecture. One respondent even mentioned wanting an "intimacy that's transcendent." Isn't it interested how the tables have seemingly turned? What was previously considered a cold, detached worship environment may now be seen as a warm, inviting locale for tight-knit communion.
Remember, these are unchurched adults. Just because they prefer the look of a church building doesn't mean they're more likely to actually show up in that building. I'm not trying to be a complete cynic here, but the reality is church buildings rarely draw people. Sure, they can facilitate a connection, and they can certainly make for a smoother transition (i.e., not be a detraction). But even LifeWay's survey found that 36 percent—the largest segment—of respondents said the design of a church building makes no difference in how much they enjoy their time there. It's an eternal truth: The church is people.

One of the keys to this study was the underlying question asked by Cornerstone Knowledge Network (CKN), the company that solicited LifeWay Research. Here's what one CKN representative had to say: "Despite billions being spent on church buildings, there was an overall decline in church attendance in the 1990s. This led CKN to ask, 'As church builders what can we do to help church leaders be more intentional about reaching people who don't go to church?'"

We would do well to continue asking similar questions, even when the results aren't what we'd hoped for. Especially when they're not what we hoped for.

Church MythBusters

2008-04-01T08:54:00.005-05:00

My brother-in-law is fascinated with urban legends. His DVR is loaded with every episode of MythBusters ever made. He's always finding new sites on the Internet that reveal the absolute truth behind some far-fetched tale. So I'm guessing he would get a kick out of two statistics released this week, and how they shed light on a couple of church myths.

Myth #1: 50 percent of all marriages end in divorce, whether you're a Christian or not.
False, and false again. How many of us have heard a pastor use this in a sermon/rant about how bad things have become? Maybe you've even used it too. I've heard this all of my adult life, and not until the past few years (after a little digging) did I discovered how badly skewed this morbid statistic is. I won't go into all the details, but somewhere along the line—probably in the late 1970s, when the overall number of divorces really started booming—this urban legend got started. Some explanations account for the fact that when you look at the sheer number of marriages and divorces in a single year, there's a virtual two-to-one ratio. The problem is, however, this doesn't factor in all the millions of marriages still existing. Bad stat.

The Barna Group's latest study echoes this with a relatively small sampling of 5,000-plus Americans. Thirty-three percent of those polled had been divorced at least once. Among born-again Christians, that rate essentially remained the same (32 percent), while for evangelicals it dipped slightly (26 percent). Is this difference enough to prove that a walk with God automatically makes you divorce-proof? Of course not. But it also echoes the fact that significantly less—about half, in fact—people are getting divorced than what you hear.

Myth #2: Muslims are taking over the world.
OK, maybe I'm exaggerating this myth a bit, but it's the sense you get once again from many misinformed pulpits. There is some definite truth to the feeling that the Muslim world is expanding. It is, and at a rate that should prompt every Christian to a renewed level of awareness and action. You know something's going on when even the Vatican is announcing that it is "no longer at the top" and that "Muslims have overtaken us." It should be clarified that by "us," Monsignor Vittorio Formenti means Catholics, who comprise 17.4 percent of the world's population. His big announcement was that Muslims have now surpassed that mark, making up 19.2 percent of the world.

Once again, let's keep some perspective on things. Although there are an estimated 1.3 billion Islamic believers worldwide, this still ranks second to Christianity at large, which, factoring in the multitude of various denominations and groupings, tops the 2 billion mark. That's about 33 percent of the earth's population. Again, I don't mean to downplay the impressive growth of Muslims in the past several years, but I also don't want to see another "wow" statistic misinterpreted.

Bottom line: Put on an investigator's hat before spouting a startling and oh-so-sexy pass-along statistic. That's hard as a pastor, given the limited time you usually have to do such research. It's much easier to just echo everyone else's latest shock tool, and it's certainly more effective in hammering home a point about the need for Jesus, revival, social revolution, etc. But given our statistic-frenzied culture, the real revolution may start with telling the truth rather than skewing it.

From the 'Miscellaneous' Folder

2008-03-11T11:43:00.007-05:00

It's time to unleash a few links still sitting in my "Miscellaneous" folder ...

Who knew we were the ones defining what can and can't send us to hell?
I just gotta know ... how in the world do you misplace a $1 million donation?! Not lose a million, mind you, but actually give it to the wrong organization. Do you know how much paperwork has to be filed to see a grant through? Wow. I feel bad for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who's getting all the blame.
I know there are other issues besides what's presented in this article about an Asheville, N.C., house church getting the boot. Regardless, it's still a sad, tough situation. I love the beautiful simplicity of "pastor" Amy Cantrell's reponse: "We're expecting God will provide." Right on.
Looks like Fort Worth's Broadway Baptist Church finally has some closure after months of a public battle that put the pastor's job on the line. Only problem is, what happens when your church lets you stay—by a mere a two-thirds vote?
Finally ... normally I wouldn't bother posting something like this since it usually just fuels friendly fire, name-calling and disunity. But I found the clip below of Faithful Word Baptist Church pastor Steven Anderson intriguing, funny, disturbing enlightening, pitiful and challenging—all at the same time. I have a hard time believing this guy isn't just acting. (After digging around a little, it appears he's not.)

Pastors for Presidents

2008-03-04T15:10:00.006-05:00

Don’t think it’s by chance that pastors are playing a huge role in this year’s upcoming presidential elections. People seem to forget that they’ve long been at the heart of our nation’s political process—and will continue to be.

It was impossible for the mainstream media to ignore the pastors-and-politics connection when Mike Huckabee, a former Southern Baptist pastor and denominational leader, stepped into the ring—then befuddled everyone by sticking around. Then came the hubbub over Barack Obama’s relationship with his pastor, Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, who just happened to be a longtime supporter of Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan. And as the apparent next contestant in the “Who’s Your Pastor?” political game show, John McCain recently found an endorsement from San Antonio pastor John Hagee to cause more of a stir than he’d hoped.

By now it’s obvious that the evangelical vote, no matter how fragmented, is still a hot ticket. What else explains the smiles among candidates as the roll call of Christianity’s biggest names—and their valued endorsements—continues? There’s an interesting shift that has taken place, however, in this wild electoral season. Call it the “new evangelical vote,” the “rising vote of social justice-based believers”—however you dub this development, it boils down to an age-old scenario that’s been a cornerstone of American politics since the Founding Fathers: a local pastor preaching his heart out on biblical values—values that, yes, connect directly with how we vote and just might line up with a particular candidate.

This used to be called “normal”; now it’s called into question. Such is the vacuum created when generations of pastors resigned from the political arena and allowed their sheep to fall prey to a “separation of church and state” agenda. (After all, when pastors don’t speak, someone else always will.)

I invite you, dear pastor, to find a place in history when pastors have ever been excluded from the American political process. You are, and always have been, the key to declaring God’s truth among the people—in every arena of life. That doesn’t mean you’re endorsing Obama, McCain, Huckabee, Hillary Clinton, Ron Paul or anyone else for that matter; it means you’re urging people to vote as followers of Christ, just as you’ve always done.

On that note … I’ll probably be plugging these again in the future, but I can’t think of a better time to promote two articles we’ll be running in upcoming issues of Ministry Today. If you’re a pastor and unsure what you can and can’t say from the pulpit in regards to politics, you won’t want to miss Mat Staver’s article “Pastors, Pulpits & Politics” in our May/June issue. If, on the other hand, you subscribe to the belief that pastors shouldn’t be part of the political process, I strongly urge you to check out David Barton’s piece in the following issue.

Sex Sells ... Especially in Church

2008-02-20T16:49:00.007-05:00

Sex sells. Yes, even in church. Especially in church.

That's what the folks at Relevant Church in Ybor City, Fla., are finding. After brainstorming with church leaders about how to help couples struggling with issues of sex and money, pastor Paul Wirth launched a challenge to those in his Tampa-area congregation this past Sunday: For the next 30 days, have lots of sex. In fact, have sex every day.

Ultimately, the point of his "30-Day Sex Challenge" is to help couples purposefully create time for increased intimacy, which will then make way for better communication and improve their relationships. As for singles in the church, they're urged to refrain from sex for the month (hopefully something they're already doing on a continual basis) and concentrate on going deeper in their own relationships without getting tripped up by physical issues.

"When you talk about sex, everybody expects the church to say God hates sex," Wirth says. "That's just not true. I really believe that God wants us to have great sex. ... Relationships are at an all-time low, and no one seems to have a handle on how to make them work right." He's arguing that his church—and this challenge—can help.

I had planned on blogging about this Monday morning, as it had sat on my radar for a few days prior. Then it became a story within a story, something not only incredibly indicative of our times, but also worthy of discussion that goes beyond the catchy sex tags. Here's why ...

As you can imagine, the media has eaten up this story. I've watched as it's quickly gone from a three-paragraph blurb on a small Tampa news site to Fox News, to the AP, to a two-page spread in the St. Petersburg Times, to every type of media outlet around the world. Definitely viral ... and the wordplay potential has certainly made attention-grabbing headlines. Meanwhile, church marketing blogs I regularly read have applauded the efforts of this small, hip downtown church full of 20- and 30-somethings. Doesn't every young, hip leader love it when you can stop a crowd mid-bustle and hold their attention for the required 0.2 nanoseconds with something that remotely, maybe, just might have to do with God or church or something?

I'm not trying to sound facetious. (OK, at least not too much.) I like what Relevant Church is doing with this, and I know the intention well because it rings true in every pastor's heart. We do whatever helps people so that, ultimately, they can step further aside and watch God move in their lives. I'm also in agreement with marketing guys who say churches shoot themselves in the foot most of the time by being irrelevant, lacking purpose and fumbling both the packaging and delivery. Hey, at least Relevant's leadership was smart enough to launch a Web site to coincide with the series (which, by the way, has apparently received so many hits it blew up—last I checked the site was still down).

So my objection? It's not an objection, not even a concern ... just a thought. I wonder if there will ever be a time when marketing isn't a church function, when we don't have to reek of "whatever gets your attention." A time when God is relevant by Himself, sans the cool sermon series, edgy Web designs, promotional videos and rock-band intros. Obviously, this is the age we live in, and we must reach people where they are, just as Jesus did, with whatever means it takes. So maybe I'm being religious by wondering in the first place. Maybe I'm just still in rant mode. Or maybe at this point, in a culture that has filled each second with 100,000 options and declared God's relevancy irrelevant, it's a moot point.

Warning: Political Rant Ahead

2008-02-15T12:07:00.008-05:00

I don't think I'm alone in saying this may be the most volatile political season our country has experienced in generations. I, like many of you, find myself at a crossroads: While I'm more passionate about the political process than ever before, I'm also beyond the point of being exasperated with it. For the average Joe, it's annoying enough that the media frenzy surrounding this November's election seems to have started around, oh, 320 B.C. But for those who actually like the fact that The Biggest Loser or another CSI rerun have been routinely pre-empted by a televised debate, there's a greater annoyance: this season's brash, blatant and maddening media bias.

You don't have to be a political junkie (which I'm not) to realize this is nothing new. In fact, it's very old news when you consider the machines that have run the parties for decades. And yet can you ever remember such a barrage of hyped-up public debates, forums and Q&A sessions that overtly squelched the predetermined "losers"? Regardless of where this season ranks in terms of dirty politics, it still scares me to see the effects of such coverage on the common voter.

Case in point: My wife was at a coffee shop the other day, where at the next table two older women adamantly discussed their dislike for Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain. It became obvious that the women were Christians, so my wife was curious about their interest in other candidates. "I'm sorry, but I couldn't help overhearing your conversation," she said while leaning over to their table. "If you don't mind me asking, who are you voting for?" Neither had decided, but they certainly knew who they weren't voting for. "So what about Mike Huckabee?" my wife asked. Both paused for a while, shrugged a bit and then matter-of-factly stated that he probably wouldn't win.

[Warning: Editor rant ahead]

Therein lies the heart of the current problem. It's one that's equally frustrating for fans of Ron Paul, who I think beautifully epitomizes the stirring, rabid underground movement that is fed up with conventional party politics. Paul and Huckabee are two different candidates, with unique positions, unique theories and unique followers. And both, we've been repeatedly told for the past year, are surefire losers. Can't win. Don't have enough cash. Don't have the support of key figures. Don't have the evangelical vote. Don't have enough charisma, experience, hair, Armani suits—you name it, they've been doubted because of it.

Surprise, surprise ... here we are, mere months from the party conventions and at least two of those "losers" are still hanging on, despite a process that is bent on dismissing them. They're certainly not surviving because of air time. Mainstream media outlets have, as usual, been successful enough to brainwa—er, convince the general public who the real winners are. As a result, we stand a few delegates away from McCain gaining the GOP nomination. Still, I believe people are finally catching on to the reality. When Ron Paul gets invited to a two-hour debate but isn't asked a single question, you know something's up. Or when Mike Huckabee is asked to attend the same event yet only gets tossed the token "evangelical" questions, it's just as infuriating. It doesn't help that major Christian leaders have added to that frustration by either supporting those who seemingly contradict their core values or, as in the case of guys like James Dobson, offering endorsements that reek of settling for the "best remaining choice"—and too late at that.

So who wins in all this? I honestly don't know. On one hand, I'm confused by Christians who say they stand for certain fundamental values but refused to get behind a former pastor and denominational leader simply because he supposedly wouldn't win. And on the other hand, I feel for a 10-term Congressman who is propheticly bold enough to call this a political scam—while being a victim of it. What I do know, however, and what gives me hope for the future, is that things are being exposed. Slowly, yes ... but at least they're being exposed.

[End rant]

What to Do When Your Own Congregation Thinks You're Demon-Possessed

2008-01-30T12:07:00.000-05:00

I saw this clip on Tim Stevens' site (from Granger Community Church) and thought it worth posting here. For every pastor that's been through anything similar to what Mark Beeson is talking about, this is definitely worth the 6 minutes viewing time.

What Charismatic Leaders Are Talking About

2008-01-16T10:26:00.000-05:00

We just wrapped up the Charismatic Leadership Summit held here at Strang over the past two days. And while my mind is going 180 mph trying to process some of the dialogue that went on, I wanted to quickly highlight some of the thought-provoking statements that resonated among this group that included some of the most renowned and respected charismatic-Pentecostal leaders around. (I'm intentionally leaving out which leaders said these to avoid detracting from the statements themselves.)

"You've exited your calling when you seek to please people."
"I think [humility] is something that in many parts here in the West is sadly lacking. There's an arrogance, there's a pride, there's an assumption that we do it best, we know what we're talking about. There's not the humility to learn from those who maybe aren't as wealthy, who don't dress right. They don't speak English very well, they don't have degrees and they don't have slick books with their pictures on the back of them. Their videos and TV stuff is way behind, it isn't cutting edge. But humility demands that we learn to listen and learn. The heart of this gets back to that posture of humility before God."
"One of the reasons that the reformation of justice or transformation of society makes a momentary impact and then 20 years later seems to dissipate (of course there are exceptions to that) is that the vessels of reformation and change don't have an intentionality about sustained connectedness with the Lord or to passing that on to the next generation--which is the key, I believe from Jesus' words, to sustained change in society."
"The overriding power of a church is in simplicity."
"Why haven't we seen sustained results after the many revivals? I think it has to do with the lack of keeping a kingdom culture DNA."
"I am committed to still believing that we don't have to acquiesce or surrender the power of God in order to win a generation. If we're going to win the Muslim world, if we're going to win America over, we need to demonstrate the power of God. ... There should be a continuity of 'We believe' even to the ballot box. We can’t articulate a message of righteousness, justice, holiness and integrity and a commitment to our core Christian values and then surrender them for the sake of political expediency at the end of the day."
"Moves of God and revivals themselves are not the endgame; the kingdom of God is the endgame."

And my personal favorite ...

"I have the privilege of interacting with a lot of international pastors and church leaders in the developing, underserved nations of the world. It's clear to me that God is raising up a new kind of leader in the body of Christ, a new kind of charismatic leader in this two-thirds world. He is raising up men and women who have anointing without arrogance, boldness without brashness, power without pride. I don't believe I've ever heard a sermon by a charismatic on James 2:5 that says, 'Has not God chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith?' We think that those are somehow contradictory."

Barna's Body Work

2008-01-11T12:45:00.000-05:00

I love the body of Christ. I love how God structured us each to be unique yet instrumental to the overall health of His kingdom work here on earth. Paul's description of the body at work in 1 Corinthians 12 has always struck me as one of the most liberating passages in scripture—particularly for ministers. Some of us function as the eyes, constantly seeing what lies before us; some serve as the feet, traveling tirelessly to places for the gospel's sake. Others work primarily as the hands, touching those around us with the power of Christ through us.

Then there are those of us who, like George Barna, David Kinnaman and the rest of the team at the Barna Group, get to be the brains of the bunch. I'm convinced that just as the human brain has millions of fascinating, intricate parts to it that help direct the rest of the physical body, so does the body of Christ have countless individuals whose insight and wisdom help us process what the rest of the body is reporting. In my opinion, the Barna Group serves as one of those guiding forces for American Christendom. No, I'm not labeling these guys the sole geniuses of the pack—though they are brilliant. I'm just praising them for the pivotal role they play in the lives of countless pastors and church leaders looking for some help in understanding those they're called to shepherd and guide.

And on that note, I'm excited to point you to the latest Barna study released earlier this week about the changing face of American Christianity. Bottom line: It's an exciting, challenging time for charismatic and Pentecostal churches nationwide. A few of the interesting nuggets to whet your appetite:

While only 8 percent of the overall population is considered evangelical, almost half of all evangelical adults can be described as charismatic.
One of every four Protestant churches in the United States is charismatic.
Among nondenominational congregations, four out of every 10 are charismatic.

Though George and David contribute to every issue of the print edition of Ministry Today, I'm especially excited about the upcoming March/April 2008 issue, in which George will be expanding on the study and offering some application specific to pastors and church leaders. You definitely won't want to miss it. (To avoid this happening, here's a helpful link. Because, after all, aren't shameless plugs from the "platform" part of our charismatic tradition? :)

Caught up in the Hype?

2008-01-04T11:07:00.000-05:00

We all know evangelicalism plays a major role in today's political process. Old news. You can hardly turn on a news network today without hearing another talking head comment on the presidential candidates' faith—or lack thereof—and how it affects so-and-so's standing with a certain demographic. What I find interesting, however, is how many people can get caught up in the media frenzy of meshing the political and spiritual arenas. By caught up, I don't mean carried away; I mean literally trapped like a fish in a net that is slowly pulled ashore.

I wonder if Joel Osteen feels a bit like that after seeing the ripples caused from comments he made a couple of weeks ago—with one of those aforementioned talking heads, no less. On Dec. 23, the Lakewood Church senior pastor appeared on Fox News Sunday, chatting with host Chris Wallace about everything from his "Christianity lite" label from critics to the true meaning of Christmas. The interview, as always is the case nowadays with prominent leaders within the evangelical movement, eventually touched on the role of faith in today's political world. More specifically, Wallace steered Osteen into the heavily trodded territory involving Mitt Romney's beliefs and whether Mormonism is just another form of Christianity. Here's the exchange (click here for the video link, and here for the entire transcript):

WALLACE: And what about Mitt Romney? And I've got to ask you the question, because it is a question whether it should be or not in this campaign: Is a Mormon a true Christian?
OSTEEN: Well, in my mind they are. Mitt Romney has said that he believes in Christ as his savior, and that's what I believe, so, you know, I'm not the one to judge the little details of it. So I believe they are. And so, you know, Mitt Romney seems like a man of character and integrity to me, and I don't think he would ... anything would stop me from voting for him if that's what I felt like.
WALLACE: So, for instance, when people start talking about Joseph Smith, the founder of the church, and the golden tablets in upstate New York, and God assumes the shape of a man, do you not get hung up in those theological issues?
OSTEEN: I probably don't get hung up in them because I haven't really studied them or thought about them. And you know, I just try to let God be the judge of that. I mean, I don't know. I certainly can't say that I agree with everything that I've heard about it, but from what I've heard from Mitt, when he says that Christ is his savior, to me that's a common bond.

I refuse to join the ranks of online heresy hunters who have quickly run to the gallows with a pre-fitted noose for Osteen. Internet forums and the blogosphere are already jampacked with those continually crying how Osteen is weak on biblical truth yet strong on motivational, self-help "sermonettes." It's well-known that America's "smiling pastor" purposefully avoids hot-button issues. That's his schtick. Even Wallace asked him about this:

WALLACE: Unlike a lot of preachers, you don't—and I can sense a little discomfort on your part—you don't get involved in politics. You don't talk a lot about abortion and gays and the so- called social issues. Why not?
OSTEEN: Well, it started back with my father. He never did. And I just don't feel comfortable as well. I don't feel like that's my main gifting. And I feel like when I stay focused on encouraging people, and giving them hope, and helping them live their everyday life, I think that's where I can have the most impact. And I even heard Billy Graham say this, and I think it's true. Sometimes when you take strong stands, if you're not called to do it, you're dividing the audience you're trying to reach. I'm trying to throw a big net out there to say to anyone that God loves them and He's in control. And I think the moment ... even our church is so diverse. We have Republicans, Democrats, independents. And I think the moment I start saying, "Well, go this route," well, this group's going to just say, "I'm not going to listen to him because of the political stance."

The real tragedy in this, however, isn't just that Osteen hedged on a theological issue but that this is the second time he's done so before millions of those he's going after with a "softer" gospel." Some will recall his ambiguous responses on Larry King Live in 2005 to matters of Christ being the only way to salvation. He later issued a heartfelt public apology to the Christian community for being "unclear on the very thing in which I have dedicated my life."

I admired Osteen for that then, and I continue to admire him now for, among other things, choosing to reach as many as possible with an appealing message of hope. The guy would rather err on the side of inclusivity, projecting a gospel that highlights (almost solely) God's unconditional love, acceptance and life-changing power. But I wonder if you can truthfully represent such a gospel without ever mentioning its inherant exclusivity. Unfortunately, it seems that in becoming "all things to all men"—which is what I interpret Osteen's deeper intent to be—the gospel represented has become skewed.

YOUR TURN: What do you think of Joel Osteen's answers to the questions on Mormonism? Was he simply put in a no-win situation, or is he preaching a diluted gospel?

Shooting Close to Home

2007-12-10T15:21:00.000-05:00

We all wear different hats. Most of the time I blog here while donning a magazine editor's hat. Today, though, I know of no other way to respond to Sunday's shootings in Colorado than by taking off that professional garb and putting on a more personal one. Not six months ago my family and I moved from Colorado Springs. We still consider it home. Though we didn't attend New Life Church, we know countless people who do. It's hard to live in that city and not have some connection to the church. We drove by it almost daily on our way to our closest friends' house. In fact, I recognized virtually every camera angle of the church campus offered to us yesterday as the news networks relayed the latest information. And though no one I know was killed or injured, the tragedy still hits home—hard.

The same is true of the equally senseless shootings at the Youth With a Mission base in Arvada. As a missionary kid who grew up in Hong Kong, I've been impacted by YWAMers my entire life. They are a wonderful and rare breed. Most recently my sister-in-law returned from serving on a YWAM team in Cambodia, and many of her friends lived in Colorado Springs and were semi-connected to the Arvada campus. (They also knew someone who was shot at New Life.)

There's a sense of déjà vu in all this. More than eight years ago, a friend of my wife's was gunned down at Wedgwood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas. Seven people were murdered and seven more injured after a gunman stormed into a Wednesday night youth service and opened fire during a prayer rally. Some of my closest friends' lives were drastically changed that day, and the tragedy has never left them—or me, for that matter.

Things like this don't leave us, nor should they. And yet, as I scroll down the ever-increasing list of churches and ministries affected by senseless violence, I can't help but notice how this is about something that is anything but senseless. This is about the church. It's about the natural, foretold opposition against those who stake their lives on the name of Jesus. It's about a spiritual war being fleshed out with greater frequency on this earth, in this day and in our society.

I see this daily during my workday routine. Each morning after logging onto my computer I start by scrolling through a list of church- and ministry-related headlines posted online the previous night from around the world. Every day it's filled with stories of African Christians tortured, Filipino pastors gunned down or Indian believers martyred for their faith. And every day I'm struck by the same thought: How is it so easy for me to just keep scrolling down and treat these headlines the same as I would another Britney Spears headline? OK, that may be a slight exaggeration. But the reality is that those events have yet to become my reality. I don't comprehend them, therefore I'd rather not think about them. The only time I really let things sink in is when tragedy hits home—like now.

The worldwide church is deeply familiar with a violent opposition; for the American church, it's relatively new. Does this diminish the tragedy? Of course not. We are called to mourn with those who mourn. And I'm currently grieving two events that hit closer than I'd prefer. But in the midst of praying for the families who have lost loved ones, for a church and ministry facing an unexpected path and for a pastor (Brady Boyd) who, only months into leading his new congregation, must comfort them through the unthinkable ... in the midst of all this, I'm also reminded that the church in the United States is not the norm. We are far from the standard set by the church described in Acts. We hardly look like many of our sister congregations overseas who are regularly persecuted yet continue to grow in strength and number. We are, for the most part, a glamorous, comfortable people who are finally getting our makeup smeared through recent tears.

Wouldn't it be like God to continue to use such persecution as we've seen in recent years to reshape us into the church He wants rather than the church we've become? If we follow the belief that God does not cause this persecution but allows it (2 Tim. 3:12), then I know His plan is more powerful than any madman's bullet. He mourns while knowing we are stronger than our tears. We are His people, called by His name. That means not only will we overcome through Him, we'll be given the strength to glorify His name through the darkest of times.

YOUR TURN: What are your thoughts on the Colorado shootings? How did the news affect you? What do you see these latest attacks signifying for the church?

Evangelism Summit

2007-12-03T13:33:00.000-05:00

Strang hosted an invitation-only, 24-hour "Evangelism Summit" last week that brought in some of the most respected evangelists within the charismatic-Pentecostal sphere. Maybe the biggest treat was seeing guys like Reinhard Bonnke, Rodney Howard-Browne and Larry Tomczak just shooting the breeze with the likes of Peter Lowe, David Shibley and Sam Rodriguez. Of course, when you get more than 40 well-known pastors and evangelists together in a room, it isn't hard to get some serious group dialogue going. And with Rice Broocks from Bethel World Outreach Center in Nashville, Tenn., mediating, that's exactly what happened around a single subject: evangelism in America.

The summit was based on the premise that what the American church is currently doing simply isn't working. Rice laid down the basics, citing Ron Luce's oft-referred 4 percent next-gen statistic, as well as those claiming that for every church opening its doors, three more close theirs. And of course, there was talk of faulty methodology, cultural and generational irrelevancy, a deteriorated credibility and an in-house disconnect between evangelists and pastors. All great points ... but not everyone bought into them—or even the summit's premise. And I found that to be maybe the most interesting part of the entire 24-hour period.

It was hugely important that these leaders met together. Their mere presence at the meeting proved evangelism isn't just a hot topic in need of being discussed, it's a (if not the) vital component of the church's calling in these days. However, we've still got a ways to go before we're on the same page with regards to the current dilemma. Not everyone believes the church is a sinking ship. Others swear it's just a matter of time before the United States, like Europe, becomes an entirely postmodern culture where Christianity is deemed obsolete. Some feel that's a matter of years away; while others believe it's mere months. Still others seem more bothered by the fact that the church has relegated evangelism to a calling, and the role of the evangelist to just that—a role.

Whatever differences of opinion there were, there was no denying that these men and women share a similar, unifying passion for the lost. It's the passion that brought them together. It's a passion that regularly requires them to sacrifice their family time for trips across the world to territories that have never heard the gospel. It's a passion that won't allow them to stay quiet. And it's a passion that's infectious.

The summit ended last week, but my head is still stirring with reflective waves. Whatever results from the meeting—a similar one with pastors in early 2008, an evangelistic onslaught of Nashville—it reminded me of these simple yet profound elements:

Evangelism is simply a lifestyle. That's become cliché, yes—but also forgotten.
Evangelism has its styles, methods and tools; but ultimately, it's about sharing some really, really good news. When you find out you've just received a special award at work, what's your first reaction? You tell others. How is that any different from telling others about the gift Jesus continues to give you? Yes, it's that easy.
Evangelism is a big word for story. We've all got one. Tell it. Better yet, live it.
Some people are obviously gifted in sharing their faith. And sure, if you're like me, that can be a bit intimidating at times. But seriously, how hard is it to strike up develop a relationship with someone? How hard is it to serve? How hard is it to listen, care or simply be there? (I'm preaching to myself here.) These are all just as valuable in the process of planting the seeds of salvation in someone's heart as the "preaching" part. And yet ...
The message has to be preached. At some point, things have to be defined. And this is what we're now discovering an entire generation has seemingly missed. It's why we have a nation that calls itself Christian while a puny minority are in fact biblically defined "born again" believers. Obviously, the "preaching" comes in different forms. It's best when it comes in the form of you—which is why, I believe, Christ extended a blanket calling of evangelism to all His believers, not just those who have the gift of this. He made you to share the good news of Him in your own unique way. I don't know about you, but that's liberating.

YOUR TURN: Is the church in America a sinking ship? Have we neglected evangelism in this country? Has it become just another "ministry" in the American church? If evangelism is on the decline, why? How can we right the ship?

As If for the First Time

2007-11-12T16:50:00.000-05:00

My wife and I had a magical time this past weekend. Her birthday was Sunday, and in the Yoars household, that translates to a weekend-long (if not weeklong) cause for celebration. Along with an unforgettable day spent at Disney World—alone—we had an unexpected treat on Saturday. While going through boxes of old books that afternoon (man, do we know how to party or what?!), Amber discovered a couple of journals she'd kept around the time we first met. We've read through them before, and unlike many couples, we actually keep our "story" somewhat fresh in our minds. It's a still-intact, blissful memory for both of us. And yet it had been awhile since we'd reminded each other of why we fell for each other so hard and so fast.

This time, though, our story seemed new all over again. I could recall certain smells, what we wore on different occasions during those first few weeks, how Amber looked in certain situations, how the butterflies in my stomach felt each time I waited for her to arrive at our meeting place ... every sense came back to life. And all because of a simple reminder of my first love.

Today, as the romantic nostalgia wears slightly from my mind with the busyness of a renewed workweek cycle, my heart is still soft from reliving such a precious time. It's also rejoicing in the understanding that the same underlying principles apply to intimacy with God. Because just as my love for my wife matures into newness, so can my love for my true first love. I don't say that to sound romantic, super-spiritual, hokey or anything else that comes with the roll of an eye. It's simply that I realize this: A newfound liberty awaits us when we understand our relationship with God can perpetually grow younger, fresher and more alive—all while it ages through the taxing years of ministry, service, works, doing.

Simple concept, right? And yet it's somewhat backward given the nature of everything else in life. Since the fall, we have been programmed to decline. We're born to wear down. But in typical God fashion, our Maker offers a kingdom principle of renewal. This is the same God who designed rebirth, who tells crusty old men that to be saved they must be born again. His is the upside-down kingdom where weathered souls must become like little children all over again. To be the greatest, we must become the least; to be first, we must be last. Is it not fitting, then, that to age in your love for Him, you often must return to the very root from which the vine first grew? His fruit is eternally young, fresh ... and maturing.

We all need a reminder of this, no matter what our title or calling. From time to time, we need to hear our stories all over again, as if for the first time. As pastors and ministry leaders, it's not just easy to get buried in the everyday tasks, it's the natural path of our flesh. We become consumed with others, with tasks, with service, with a God-given commission ... all to the point of forgetfulness. We may have taught dozens of sermons about what it means to return to your first love. We may have even referenced Revelation 2:4 countless times and counseled others who misplaced intimacy with God with service for Him. Yet it makes no difference what we've told others in the past; how are we today? Have we remembered our first love?

In the midst of self-analysis, remember this liberating thought: Maturity does not require that we stage the scene all over again. In other words, I don't believe God asks us to make sure we've kept intact that virginal reaction we had toward Him. Instead, I believe He seeks a love that is always expanding and growing yet never loses sight of that first interaction—because it can't. No matter how much my love for my wife expands and grows, if I continue to truthfully nourish that love, I will never bury the memory of why I first wanted to journey the rest of my life with her. (Obviously, that memory can be buried; but in true love, it won't be.)

So it is with our true first love. Maturity may add some beautiful wrinkles to that love, but its skin will forever tell the story of a miraculous connection between a flesh-man and his spirit-Maker. Our DNA cries out for His intimate renewal. In all your wonderful work for God, in every task to which you give 110 percent to in His name, please, as a minister commissioned by Him, don't forget this: He commissioned you first to love Him. Everything else is simply a derivative of that sweet spot.

Who Wants Another Black Eye?

2007-11-06T13:11:00.000-05:00

Sigh. Here we go again.

As if the charismatic/Pentecostal community hadn't taken enough hits this year, it's now bracing for a few more black eyes. Following the ongoing sagas involving Paula and Randy White, Juanita Bynum, Richard and Lindsay Roberts and Oral Roberts University, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) delivered a 12th-round blow to the gut for five more high-profile charismatic leaders. The ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, Grassley announced today (Tuesday) that he's investigating the ministries of the Whites, Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, Kenneth Copeland, Eddie Long and Creflo Dollar. The allegations, while unique to each ministry, involve a common thread of "possible misuse of donations" and abusing the tax-exempt status those ministries have as church organizations. At the core are questions about the leaders' lavish lifestyles that include private jets, multimillion-dollar mansions, cosmetic surgeries, fancy cars and CEO-like salaries. In letters faxed to the ministries Monday, Grassley requested various documentation regarding both personal and organizational finances, due by Dec. 6. (For extensive coverage on the story, click here or here.)

So many thoughts, so many angles on this developing story. And yet in the midst of what's sure to be a wildfire-like response amidst bloggers, ministers and talking heads alike, let me take a personal step back for a moment. I have been affected in some way over the years by these ministries, and I'm guessing that if you're reading this, you probably have too. Maybe your connection has been as simple as gleaning an invaluable nugget of truth from one of their TV broadcasts. Or maybe you were, in fact, a faithful donor who supported—maybe still supports—them. So I begin by emphasizing that certain aspects of these ministries have done outstanding works for the cause of Christ. I have dear friends who work closely with one of the aforementioned ministries, and they receive a substantial donation each month to support their own work with orphanages and underprivileged children. I am sure they are not an isolated case.

Yet even if that ministry comes through this investigation unscathed, it still saddens me. Because for all the wonderful things the organization has done in the name of Christ over the years, I have to wonder how its leaders—and those of all the ministries questioned—slowly ventured into territory that made them targets for scrutiny in the first place. While Paul talks about leaders living "above reproach" (Titus 1:7 NAS), Jesus' standard for both leadership and accountability is equally as explicit: "For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more" (Luke 12:48).

Unfortunately, the "given" and "committed" parts of this equation have become a mangled concept within various Spirit-filled streams. We've preached a prosperity gospel that has no connection to building the Kingdom, only to enlarging personal portions, tents and thrones. And when, for example, a $100 million-a-year ministry has given away 90 percent of that to other ministries, we've apparently had no qualms buying into the idea that since God has blessed its leaders with the remaining $10 million, they're therefore entitled to do whatever they want with it. We're the children of God, joint heirs to the throne ... we deserve it, right? And (here's my favorite line) isn't God the god of "the cattle on a thousand hills" (Ps. 50:10)? Surely He wants us to enjoy the riches He's given us.

Sigh (again). The truth is, He does. And I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that our God—who, yes, owns everything in the entire universe—is a lavish God who has a habit of dousing us in unimaginable riches. But I have a hunch that means something different on this side of heaven, that wealth and riches aren't necessarily what we think they are in terms of the Kingdom that Jesus spoke about so often. My reasoning for that comes from what I believe is a pretty good source: God's Word. Somehow I still can't seem to find any examples in the Bible of a believer being called to lavish God's gifts and riches upon himself. I'm still searching for any teachings of Christ that talk about rewarding myself with money, houses, cars—you name it—because I deserve it. Instead, I find the Son of the universe's owner consistently giving away everything He has until there's nothing left ... and then giving more. I hear a Savior whose warnings are to the rich, not to the poor. I see a God-Man who is more apt to hang out with the lowly and have-nots than the loaded and surgically enhanced.

There's a reason for that, and it has everything to do with why these ministries—guilty or not—now find themselves under the microscope.

YOUR TURN: What reaction do you have to today's news about the investigations? How does this impact ministries of all size? How does it impact the church? To what degree do ministry leaders have a right to "compensate" themselves?

Help Wanted

2007-10-24T09:45:00.000-05:00

Only a few months after officially taking the helms of this blog, I have a confession: I stink. Royally. And to make matters worse, I have a serious case of blog envy.

The main problem, as I see it, is time. I just don't have enough of it. (I know, I know ... it's a universal complaint—deal with it, right?) Behind the scenes of Ministry Today, there's a ton of changes going on. I love changes. In fact, I'm always excited by new things. But I've also been through enough changes to know that they always usher in a season of sacrifice. In my case, that season has involved a significant increase in workload, which has invariably cut into how much blogging I can do. In between the deadlines, meetings, planning, writing, editing ...

At this point, 75 percent of you reading this just cranked up the ol' violin theme music. Either that or you're about to click to another Web site, some other blogger who can handle the stress without whining to his or her readers. BUT WAIT!!!

Here's the deal: I'm honestly dying to know how you bloggers do this. Because the truth is, we're all busy. We all have too much on our plates, say yes to too many people and, in the name of being ministry leaders, take on too many burdens both in the workplace and outside of it (as if those lines are ever clear). So what am I missing?

Every day I get to work and, in my 30 minutes or so that I allot each morning to research, run down my list of "can't miss" ministry blogs. Right now that includes guys like Mark Batterson, Perry Noble, Tim Stevens, Tony Morgan ... the list seems never-ending of leaders who somehow have this blogging thing down pat. And I'll say it again: I'm sinfully jealous! I'm sure each lives a life as hectic, if not far more hectic, than mine. Many of these guys are senior pastors and company CEOs, for crying out loud! And yet each seems to squeeze enough time to share a thought or two each day—and, most of the time, a valuable thought at that! (Otherwise I wouldn't keep coming back to their blogs, now would I?)

So how do you do it? What's the secret to successful blogging? How do you find time to regularly post something meaningful and worthwhile (yet concise) without it significantly eating into God time, family time, personal time, the occasional R&R time, etc.?

YOUR TURN: See previous paragraph. And I'm dead serious: I need advice! :)

Taking Potshots

2007-10-10T08:46:00.000-05:00

Leaders draw criticism. It's in the very nature of our role. But as any pastor knows, the magnetism of unsolicited potshots for church leaders is astounding. We, apparently, are classified as open targets—take your shot, whether we asked for it or not. Politicians get reemed, as do celebrities. But I believe neither of those two types receive as much tell-it-to-my-face, jaw-dropping punches to the gut as a church leader.

"You know, your sermons need some help. I think people would pay more attention if you just told a few more jokes or stories or something."

"Why haven't you started a [FILL IN THE BLANK] ministry? The Lord sent me to tell you that this church needs to start it now or you'll miss out on His blessing."

"My old pastor would stop by our house every once in a while to pray with me. Why don't you? I thought compassion was supposed to be a spiritual gift of every pastor."

So what do we do with these voluntary "assessments"? How do we handle the caustic e-mails (both anonymous and named), raging voice mails and ranting rumors?

Wisdom says we don't listen to them. Seriously ... we tune them out. Now, I'm not talking about sticking our heads in the sand and never listening to a word our congregations say. Hopefully we're wise enough to surround ourselves with a circle of mentors and counselors from whom we can receive even the most blunt yet truthful words (Prov. 12:15). Yet there is a reason God established you as a leader and gave you a vision for leading His people. That fact should by no means prompt a degree of pride in you, but rather continue to send you to your knees in humility. Leaders are best positioned when reaching up for divine help on a moment-by-moment basis. Fortunately, part of that help comes in the form of godly human counsel.

But that still doesn't answer the question of what to do with the cheapshots, er, "suggestions." Last week I heard Ed Young of Fellowship Church talk about this at his C3 conference. He was as honest and upfront as I've seen a pastor be in leading other pastors, but he spoke from more than 17 years of experience in handling every type of criticism. Today I read a great blog from Perry Noble of NewSpring Church that (somewhat) dealt with the same thing. Both guys echoed a similar sentiment: Just walk away. Your time is too precious to waste debating the critics. As long as you stay in the appropriate leadership posture—humbly, prayerfully leading in the assurance of God's mission for you and the people—then you can ignore the naysayers and doubters. Critics will naturally be those with the loudest, sharpest voices. Yet even when they challenge you personally, you'd be better off realizing that there are more important things to do than fight back.

YOUR TURN: How have you dealt with harsh criticism within your church? What lessons have you learned over the years on how to handle your critics? Should leaders pay more attention to these unsolicited "assessments"?

Size Matters

2007-10-03T09:24:00.000-05:00

Outreach magazine just released its annual report on the 100 largest and fastest-growing churches. No surprise at the top of the "biggie" list: Houston's Lakewood Church, led by Joel Osteen, sees a whopping 47,000 people come through its doors each weekend. And the fast-growing church in America? According to this year's report, it's Iglesia Cristiana Segadores de Vida, located in Hollywood, Fla.—which is indicative of our country's influx of Hispanic believers that we highlight in the current issue of Ministry Today.

For those with an aversion to ranking congregations, there are still some valuable points to be gleaned from the study. Ed Stetzer of LifeWay Research, who partnered with Outreach for this year's report, noted the following trends:

From "mega" to "giga": There are more megachurches now than ever, and they continue to grow—so much that Outreach now categorizes congregations of more than 10,000 people as "gigachurches." Thirty-six of the top 100 fell in this category, while No. 100 on the list of largest churches still has an attendance of more than 6,000.
Go forth and multiply: Going multi-site is becoming the norm among churches. In 1990, there were only 10 multi-site Protestant churches in the entire country; today 16 percent of all churches are currently considering expanding to an additional site. In addition, 25 percent of all megachurches today meet on multiple sites (that's five times what it was in 2000). Among multi-site churches, 60 percent plan on adding another site in the next year.
Mega-mixture: With Hispanic and Asian populations on the rise in this country, so are the number—and size—of the churches predominantly made up of those segments of society. Obviously, most megachurches have a representation of both Hispanics and Asians within their congregation. Yet judging by the number of Hispanic churches on the fastest-growing list, it's clear that churches exclusively reaching these cultures are experiencing growth.

Though not particularly trend-related, I found a few other stats from this report both fascinating and telling.

From 2006 to 2007, the average growth of the churches on the fastest-growing list was 1,385 attendees.
Seventy-one percent of churches on the "biggie" list reported an increase in congregation size within the last year, while only 19 percent reported a decline.
Of the 100 largest churches on this year's list, 47 were non-denominational.

YOUR TURN: What do you make of the two lists? Do you think it's helpful to list the 100 largest and fastest-growing churches, or does it fall into playing "the numbers game"? Where do you see megachurches going in the next 10 years?

Living by the Book

2007-09-27T16:32:00.000-05:00

What Morgan Spurlock (Super Size Me, 30 Days) is to experiment-based documentaries, A.J. Jacobs is becoming to experiment-based books. In 2004, the author and senior editor for Esquire penned The Know-It-All: One Man's Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World. It humorously chronicled Jacobs' reading of all 32 volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

His latest book, The Year of Living Biblically, is about—you guessed it—spending a year trying to follow every command in the Bible to a tee. I'll admit, I haven't read any of Jacobs' writing. But after reading this fascinating Newsweek interview with him, I just might go get a copy of his latest when it comes out. A couple of telling quotes from this experimental seeker:

"One thing I learned is that the outside affects the inside; your behavior shapes your thoughts."
"The Bible affected every single part of my life. It affected the way I walked, the way I dressed, the way I hugged my wife, the way I ate. The year was the most extreme makeover of my life."
"I started the year as an agnostic, and now I am a reverent agnostic. Whether or not there is a God, I believe in sacredness. Rituals can be sacred; the Sabbath can be sacred however you choose to observe it."

It's sad to think a person can spend an entire year strictly adhering to "the Good Book" yet still walk away and hardly recognize its central figure. Obviously things haven't changed much since Jesus' time, when He blasted those who boasted in their religious performance (not that I'm saying Jacobs is boasting). Following the law still brings the same results now as it did then. And Jesus—thank You, God!—still offers the same salvation today as yesterday. Maybe Jacobs' book can somehow point people from the emptiness of religious duty to the only Person who's fulfilled every law.

Anything to Hook 'Em

2007-09-13T17:15:00.000-05:00

For churches, summer's end and fall's beginning usually means coming up with a parade of creative ways to draw new attendees. Families are getting back into their routines, which makes it a perfect time to invite them into the church community. To broaden their reach and appeal to those on the fringe, some churches offer sermon series with pop-culture appeal: "Extreme Makeover: God's Way." "Lost Without Jesus?" "God & Your Bourne Identity." Other churches will host a massive fall kickoff event, inviting the community to a no-strings-attached festival with food, games and concerts for everyone.

In the past few weeks, however, I've run across an unusual amount of innovative church "marketing" methods. Not all of these were seasonally centered, but each caught my eye.

·In Coral Springs, Fla., Church by the Glades offered free iTunes gift cards (worth $15 apiece) to first-time guests as part of an iThemed series about living in a self-absorbed culture.

·Nearby in Palm Beach County, St. David's Episcopal Church held a U2charist—a Eucharist doused with U2 songs and Bono-typical messages about social justice. While St. David is far from being the first church to incorporate the band's tunes into worship, it joins a host of others that have specifically launched the communion service to attract a younger crowd.

·In similar fashion, Element Church of Chesterfield, Mo., gave away two free trips to Disneyland as part of a series called "Life's Short—Have Fun."

·It's not just U.S. churches that are pulling out all the tricks, either. In Cardiff, Wales, St. Paul's Church will host a special service later this month revolving around popular BBC show Dr. Who. To draw the teen and twentysomething crowd, the Anglican church will intersperse music and video clips from the sci-fi hit with communion and a sermon paralleling Dr. Who themes with those from the Bible.

Obviously, this is nothing new. As church leaders, we're always trying to think of innovative ways to present the gospel, to draw folks who would normally rather skip out on church. What I find most interesting, though, are the extents we'll go to "hook" people. Another article I recently read talked about various Southern Baptist ministers who, in an attempt to evangelize bikers and NASCAR lovers, give away such things as Harleys, free bull rides and thousands of dollars in cash. There was a catch, though: People couldn't enter to win these things unless they'd sat through a three-minute presentation of the gospel.

Trust me, I understand the motive behind these innovative tactics. Jesus proved that sharing the Good News always involves meeting people where they are. But I honestly wonder if our efforts to give the gospel a relevant, timely coating ever wind up souring the whole thing for some. Should God's invitation to salvation really be cast out with a free car as the bait? I pray the catch, both in quantity and quality, speaks for itself.

YOUR TURN: Do you think churches go overboard in trying to attract newcomers? What creative outreach ideas has your church implemented? Is it necessarily wrong to "hook" people into hearing the gospel?

Sexy Scandals From a Sexy Church

2007-08-31T08:50:00.000-05:00

What a week and a half it's been. Within the past 10 days, Randy and Paula White, pastors of Without Walls International Church in Tampa, Fla., announced their divorce amid personal and church-wide financial scrutiny. Evangelist Juanita Bynum allegedly was beaten by her husband, co-pastor Thomas Weeks III outside an Atlanta hotel. And while New Life Church of Colorado Springs, Colo., voted in its new pastor, Brady Boyd, the megachurch's former pastor, Ted Haggard, solicited donations in an email without his overseers' knowledge and was publicly reprimanded—which was then followed up by a report in the Colorado Springs Gazette that Haggard directed potential donors to an organization run by a twice-convicted sex offender.

Each of these stories has a trail of unclarified details and mangled truths on its own. What I find fascinating, however, is the amount of coverage each continues to garner from the mainstream press. Ten years ago, would any of these have made the front page, much less the ticker? We're in a new day where any God-angled story is attractive not because of content so much as the audience it gathers. Without sounding sacriliegious, the church has become sexy.

God is not suprised, I am sure. I'm also sure He grieves over both the situations mentioned above—Jesus' name has been tainted, after all—and our tendencies to quickly judge those involved. As leaders, it's a crucial time that we remind those who we influence of the right response. We must lead those who are suddenly in the limelight (believers) back into the closet—to pray. We pray that God's peace, truth and presence would bring healing and restoration to these leaders. We pray that He would be glorified in the midst of scandal. We pray that the church would be strengthened like never before.

And while we pray, I hope we're reminded of God's constant, global overriding work that will roll on when all the scandals of this earth have fizzled out and all the spotlights have dimmed. It's a work that quietly shows itself powerful even now. Because for every pastor whose name hits the headlines amid a sexy scandal, 10,000 others are being anonymously used by the Holy Spirit to transform the lives of those in even worse situations. That's worthy of our attention.

YOUR TURN: How have you responded to any of news items mentioned above? Do you think they would have garnered such media attention 10 years ago? Why or why not?

Incongruity at Its Finest

2007-08-24T15:32:00.000-05:00

Talk about a double standard. At its recent biennial meeting, the Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America reminded everyone that it officially opposes homosexuality and doesn't allow gays or lesbians to be ministers. Then it turned around and passed a resolution telling its bishops not to discipline or dismiss clergy if they're gay or lesbian.

According to the New York Times, the assembly—the American Lutheran church's largest—agreed to postpone any action on this issue until 2009, when it will discuss "a social statement" on human sexuality that's currently in the works. Yet bishops within the denomination who oppose homosexuality in the ministry have already indicated they don't intend to adhere to the recent direction. And while the resolution displays the assembly's current bent, it certainly doesn't prevent them from taking such action.

I don't think I'm alone when I say this is beyond disturbing. It's also a tiring issue. I'm frustrated that certain segments of the church have cracked the door open and allowed both the gay agenda and political correctness to gnaw away at its doctrinal foundation. At the same time, I'm reminded of a point I heard last night while watching the third part of CNN's "God's Warriors." Though argued for centuries by a wide array of believers, it was reiterated this time by pastor Greg Boyd of Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, Minn. Homosexuality in the church—or anywhere, for that matter—is sin. So are gluttony, envy and strife, just to name a few (see Gal. 5:19-21). In fact, the latter receive much more attention in the Bible than homosexuality does.

A non-believer with no knowledge of the Bible would never know this, though. That's because we as the church spend so much time debating what to do with the "majors." As Boyd said, we've created a sin gradient by which certain ones are greater than others. Is it any wonder the secular media picks us apart for such hot-button debates? I imagine if we stuck closer to Jesus' words in Matthew 7:1-3, we may not convey such a sense of polarity (or foolishness, for that matter). That's not a cover-up for gay clergy—the Bible is explicit on what it has to say about homosexuality. It is, however, a truth directly from the mouth of our Savior that we would do well not to forget as we rank our sins and sinners.

YOUR TURN: In your opinion, what should the church's approach be toward clergy who have recently come out of the closet yet are still in ministry? Have you encountered this at your own church or in your hometown? Why do you think the American church focuses so much on the sin of homosexuality but ignores others?