conjectural navel gazing; jesus in lint form

tuesday videopost: biennial reflections

Baby Smith
Alan Rudnick
Jonathan Malone

check these out

twittering the biennial

I'm off to Pasadena. I'll see you guys when I return early next week. If you want to follow my on Twitter, I post as anglobaptist. Be well. Take care.

two links of note

We have some new faculty here at the U.

Ibrahim Suheyl - The Uncomfortable Chair for Moslem Apologetics and Fast Food
Heather Maria - Ayn Rand chair for Creative Nicotine Reasearch

a series of thoughts

I guess I'm going to be blogging in brief snippets...

Comfort, comfort ye my people...
This is not the same as "be comfortable, be comfortable, ye my people..." is it?

I'm thinking not.

homo orans?

A quotation:

"If we are machines, we can only do as we are bidden to do by the mechanical laws of our mechanical nature....But suppose we don't subscribe to this determinism. Suppose we don't believe that creatures are machines....To confuse or conflate creatures with machines not only makes it impossible to see the differences between them; it also masks the conflict between creatures and machines that under industrialism has resulted so far in an almost continuous sequence of victories of machines over creatures....It is easy for me to imagine that the next great division of the world will be between people who wish to live as creatures and people who wish to live as machines." - Wendell Berry, Life Is a Miracle

meals?

Do meals count as work when you meet during them? I am certain they do. Yet, I find the presence of food strangely altering to the work-like atmosphere. Interesting.

come together

Yesterday I preached on the third chapter of Joshua. What struck me as most powerful in the passage was how little the knew about the promised land and how they all stepped across the Jordan together. Choosing to enter into the Promised Land is certainly an individual choice but enacted as and in community. I have been meditating/ruminating on this quotation from John Chrysostom for a couple of weeks.

It is not enough to leave Egypt; one must enter the Promised Land.

As a community we must choose to move from the wilderness into the Promised Land. We can rejoice that we are no longer "enslaved," but have we chosen to be God's people yet? Have we chosen to enter into the Promised Land?

In July I will spend two Sundays looking at the Ascension of Jesus and how the story reinterprets this crossing over. Also, a related aside, Jesus Baptism in the Jordan is a post-figuring of the people of God crossing over. Jesus is both the people and the Ark of the Covenant. Jesus' ministry does not end with his ascension, but it does change. Crossing the Red Sea, Crossing the Jordan --> Baptism, Ascension...It is not enough to be Baptized, one must enter into The Kingdom of God which is here with us now.

These are very early thoughts. I'm going to be in Pasadena next weekend for the Biennial. It should be an interesting event this year. There are some important things for us to decide as a denomination. I am hoping to have this stuff fleshed out in a couple of weeks.

Enjoy your day.

christian culpability

I like being Christian. I know some people don't like it, you know, being Christian. And some people don't like Christians. None of this is new. There are lots of reasons to not like Christians and Christianity. We've kind of mucked it up from time to time. There's no doubt about it.

This morning I seem to be stuck on this dynamic. People are pissed and for good reason. In reading Joshua this week, it's not hard to imagine why. In walking through history, it's a simple conclusion, really. It is no wonder that some people think that people like me are insane for even being a part of this thing.

But then I look at Joshua again. It's revisionist history at best. So, it's probably wise to not ask it to serve as history at all. It's a story, a narrative, an attempt to develop self-understanding and to proclaim where they think God might have been in the process. It's slippery stuff. It's not something you can nail down.

The book is also about how they blow it. The Hebrew scripture contains story after story of how they blow it, how they leave God behind, how they deny themselves and become cruel and destructive, and finally how they themselves fall. It's not prescriptive. It's not moralistic. It's not a guidebook. It's a warning to the rest of us.

Christianity has no such resource except for the Hebrew scripture. Sadly we have overdone the whole "predicting Christ" bit and have missed many of the other points like the one I just mentioned. Our scriptural history ends with the Resurrection. Now, this is a powerful sentiment, but it means we have no sacred stories of blowing it. We have no sacred story that says "Yeah, so this is where we left God behind and became _____."

Some days I wish we did. Then I wouldn't have to do it myself. Then I wouldn't have to say to people "Yeah, we ruined it." again and again as if I were denying the faith in the process. To say we cannot do it, to say we ruined it, to say that the world is fallen and we don't have all the answers is part of being Christian. I have been reminded of this again.

Culpability. That's part of the journey.

"We are a culture without the will to seriously examine our own problems. We eschew that which is complex, contradictory or confusing. As a culture, we seek simple solutions. We enjoy being provoked and titillated, but resist the rigorous, painstaking examination of issues that might, in the end, bring us to the point of recognizing our problems, which is the essential first step to solving any of them..." David Simon ala Scandal of Particularity

a dark and stormy night: a preacher's dilemma?

It was indeed a dark and stormy night. The aforementioned storm woke me and my lovely spouse at about 3:30 and kept us up until 5am. Ye olde body clock is ruined for the day. Ah well. How did you sleep?

I was checking through my facebook page and was reminded of the many birthdays being celebrated today. Two of my very good friends are turning 40 today. To them I say "blessings!" Please let me know how the water is. I'll be there in six months.

So, not that I have a truly concrete rhythm for sermon preparation, I am still a little thrown by the sleep deprivation. I was going to use the early morning hours to write some more. Instead I slept through them and now the day is upon me and I have a long list of things that I need to do. I don't know what it will mean to recover those hours. We'll see.

In some of my research for this Sunday's sermon, I stumbled upon this video featuring Anna Carter Florence. It's really quite good. I like her thinking a great deal.

Take a gander if you have the urge. It's not a long video. Enjoy your day. I'm going to have some more coffee and a little breakfast to see if that helps.

Joshua...What's going on with Joshua?

rethinking the cluetrain

Ten years ago the book Cluetrain Manifesto was published. In seminary some of us tinkered with the possible implications it might have in the ways we think of being missional as church. I posted this in 2006.

So, how do we understand marketing then in the paradigm of the congregation. "In the beginning was the Word." We have a conversation. We can invite people into conversations about us, about God, and perhaps most importantly in the end...about them. This is an inexact course of action/marketing, but it is an honest one and, I think, in the end, may be the most reliable if growth is supposed to be deep as well as broad. Discipleship is a conversation with the Living Word within the community who is the Body of that same Word.

I think that a new (updated?) edition of the book will be released this year. Here are the 95 Theses that the book proposed. I still find them intriguing.

95 Theses

1. Markets are conversations.
2. Markets consist of human beings, not demographic sectors.
3. Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.
4. Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, uncontrived.
5. People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice.
6. The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.
7. Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy.
8. In both internetworked markets and among intranetworked employees, people are speaking to each other in a powerful new way.
9. These networked conversations are enabling powerful new forms of social organization and knowledge exchange to emerge.
10. As a result, markets are getting smarter, more informed, more organized. Participation in a networked market changes people fundamentally.
11. People in networked markets have figured out that they get far better information and support from one another than from vendors. So much for corporate rhetoric about adding value to commoditized products.
12. There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone.
13. What's happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical construct called "The Company" is the only thing standing between the two.
14. Corporations do not speak in the same voice as these new networked conversations. To their intended online audiences, companies sound hollow, flat, literally inhuman.
15. In just a few more years, the current homogenized "voice" of business—the sound of mission statements and brochures—will seem as contrived and artificial as the language of the 18th century French court.
16. Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone.
17. Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch their ads on television are kidding themselves.
18. Companies that don't realize their markets are now networked person-to-person, getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are missing their best opportunity.
19. Companies can now communicate with their markets directly. If they blow it, it could be their last chance.
20. Companies need to realize their markets are often laughing. At them.
21. Companies need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to get a sense of humor.
22. Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate web site. Rather, it requires big values, a little humility, straight talk, and a genuine point of view.
23. Companies attempting to "position" themselves need to take a position. Optimally, it should relate to something their market actually cares about.
24. Bombastic boasts—"We are positioned to become the preeminent provider of XYZ"—do not constitute a position.
25. Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers and talk to the people with whom they hope to create relationships.
26. Public Relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of their markets.
27. By speaking in language that is distant, uninviting, arrogant, they build walls to keep markets at bay.
28. Most marketing programs are based on the fear that the market might see what's really going on inside the company.
29. Elvis said it best: "We can't go on together with suspicious minds."
30. Brand loyalty is the corporate version of going steady, but the breakup is inevitable—and coming fast. Because they are networked, smart markets are able to renegotiate relationships with blinding speed.
31. Networked markets can change suppliers overnight. Networked knowledge workers can change employers over lunch. Your own "downsizing initiatives" taught us to ask the question: "Loyalty? What's that?"
32. Smart markets will find suppliers who speak their own language.
33. Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can't be "picked up" at some tony conference.
34. To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.
35. But first, they must belong to a community.
36. Companies must ask themselves where their corporate cultures end.
37. If their cultures end before the community begins, they will have no market.
38. Human communities are based on discourse—on human speech about human concerns.
39. The community of discourse is the market.
40. Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.
41. Companies make a religion of security, but this is largely a red herring. Most are protecting less against competitors than against their own market and workforce.
42. As with networked markets, people are also talking to each other directly inside the company—and not just about rules and regulations, boardroom directives, bottom lines.
43. Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when the conditions are right.
44. Companies typically install intranets top-down to distribute HR policies and other corporate information that workers are doing their best to ignore.
45. Intranets naturally tend to route around boredom. The best are built bottom-up by engaged individuals cooperating to construct something far more valuable: an intranetworked corporate conversation.
46. A healthy intranet organizes workers in many meanings of the word. Its effect is more radical than the agenda of any union.
47. While this scares companies witless, they also depend heavily on open intranets to generate and share critical knowledge. They need to resist the urge to "improve" or control these networked conversations.
48. When corporate intranets are not constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the conversation of the networked marketplace.
49. Org charts worked in an older economy where plans could be fully understood from atop steep management pyramids and detailed work orders could be handed down from on high.
50. Today, the org chart is hyperlinked, not hierarchical. Respect for hands-on knowledge wins over respect for abstract authority.
51. Command-and-control management styles both derive from and reinforce bureaucracy, power tripping and an overall culture of paranoia.
52. Paranoia kills conversation. That's its point. But lack of open conversation kills companies.
53. There are two conversations going on. One inside the company. One with the market.
54. In most cases, neither conversation is going very well. Almost invariably, the cause of failure can be traced to obsolete notions of command and control.
55. As policy, these notions are poisonous. As tools, they are broken. Command and control are met with hostility by intranetworked knowledge workers and generate distrust in internetworked markets.
56. These two conversations want to talk to each other. They are speaking the same language. They recognize each other's voices.
57. Smart companies will get out of the way and help the inevitable to happen sooner.
58. If willingness to get out of the way is taken as a measure of IQ, then very few companies have yet wised up.
59. However subliminally at the moment, millions of people now online perceive companies as little more than quaint legal fictions that are actively preventing these conversations from intersecting.
60. This is suicidal. Markets want to talk to companies.
61. Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false—and often is.
62. Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.
63. De-cloaking, getting personal: We are those markets. We want to talk to you.
64. We want access to your corporate information, to your plans and strategies, your best thinking, your genuine knowledge. We will not settle for the 4-color brochure, for web sites chock-a-block with eye candy but lacking any substance.
65. We're also the workers who make your companies go. We want to talk to customers directly in our own voices, not in platitudes written into a script.
66. As markets, as workers, both of us are sick to death of getting our information by remote control. Why do we need faceless annual reports and third-hand market research studies to introduce us to each other?
67. As markets, as workers, we wonder why you're not listening. You seem to be speaking a different language.
68. The inflated self-important jargon you sling around—in the press, at your conferences—what's that got to do with us?
69. Maybe you're impressing your investors. Maybe you're impressing Wall Street. You're not impressing us.
70. If you don't impress us, your investors are going to take a bath. Don't they understand this? If they did, they wouldn't let you talk that way.
71. Your tired notions of "the market" make our eyes glaze over. We don't recognize ourselves in your projections—perhaps because we know we're already elsewhere.
72. We like this new marketplace much better. In fact, we are creating it.
73. You're invited, but it's our world. Take your shoes off at the door. If you want to barter with us, get down off that camel!
74. We are immune to advertising. Just forget it.
75. If you want us to talk to you, tell us something. Make it something interesting for a change.
76. We've got some ideas for you too: some new tools we need, some better service. Stuff we'd be willing to pay for. Got a minute?
77. You're too busy "doing business" to answer our email? Oh gosh, sorry, gee, we'll come back later. Maybe.
78. You want us to pay? We want you to pay attention.
79. We want you to drop your trip, come out of your neurotic self-involvement, join the party.
80. Don't worry, you can still make money. That is, as long as it's not the only thing on your mind.
81. Have you noticed that, in itself, money is kind of one-dimensional and boring? What else can we talk about?
82. Your product broke. Why? We'd like to ask the guy who made it. Your corporate strategy makes no sense. We'd like to have a chat with your CEO. What do you mean she's not in?
83. We want you to take 50 million of us as seriously as you take one reporter from The Wall Street Journal.
84. We know some people from your company. They're pretty cool online. Do you have any more like that you're hiding? Can they come out and play?
85. When we have questions we turn to each other for answers. If you didn't have such a tight rein on "your people" maybe they'd be among the people we'd turn to.
86. When we're not busy being your "target market," many of us are your people. We'd rather be talking to friends online than watching the clock. That would get your name around better than your entire million dollar web site. But you tell us speaking to the market is Marketing's job.
87. We'd like it if you got what's going on here. That'd be real nice. But it would be a big mistake to think we're holding our breath.
88. We have better things to do than worry about whether you'll change in time to get our business. Business is only a part of our lives. It seems to be all of yours. Think about it: who needs whom?
89. We have real power and we know it. If you don't quite see the light, some other outfit will come along that's more attentive, more interesting, more fun to play with.
90. Even at its worst, our newfound conversation is more interesting than most trade shows, more entertaining than any TV sitcom, and certainly more true-to-life than the corporate web sites we've been seeing.
91. Our allegiance is to ourselves—our friends, our new allies and acquaintances, even our sparring partners. Companies that have no part in this world, also have no future.
92. Companies are spending billions of dollars on Y2K. Why can't they hear this market timebomb ticking? The stakes are even higher.
93. We're both inside companies and outside them. The boundaries that separate our conversations look like the Berlin Wall today, but they're really just an annoyance. We know they're coming down. We're going to work from both sides to take them down.
94. To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.
95. We are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not waiting.

Thoughts? Concerns?

slowing down

During the summer I trying to slow down and focus. This is perhaps no more than the honoring of lazy summer days spent on a lake fishing or paddling the john boat. How many volumes of fiction would I read in a summer? Sometimes the inactivity drove me nuts, but usually I loved the pace. At any rate, I try to make June and July a time of sabbath somehow at CCW.

This morning it's raining. It's a gentle drizzle right now. We have the windows open in the parsonage. Some birds are huddled in a bush in front of the house. People are heading off to their jobs. I wonder if they are grateful or are wishing they could laze around. Both?

A couple of days ago I was speaking to a woman who was picking up her kids from a program held at the church. She's recently been laid off. She joked that it would be the first summer in many, many years where she might get to relax. The cost seemed prohibitive in spite of the opportunity.

I have a breakfast meeting planned with a parishoner. I've a sermon to muddle through. I may have to practice "Deep River" for Sunday as well. I need an arrangement that does not require me to sing a high g so early in the morning. I don't know what the day holds...and that makes me happy.

a day in review

This morning I awoke at 4:30 just because. The birds were excited. Our windows were open. I read through some work e-mail and responded to a couple. Then I sat down to read some of Home. Then I recorded this:

As the morning progressed I discovered some of my friends on Twitter. One of them, Jen (aka Jenzatron) commented on this video suggesting that my love of the dustcoverless book was simply because then it reminded me of a Bible. Indeed?



I may be the only one who finds humor in any of this. Ah well. It was an excellent start to an excellent day. I had coffee later in the morning with on of the matriarchs of the church. Her husband passed away seven years ago now. Today would have been their 65th wedding anniversary. Yeah, somehow I think the rest of us married folk must simply be kidding around. Unreal. He died while she held his hand. She told me the story as we sat there in a local cafe. Tremendous. Moving. I thank God for her.

In the afternoon I went downtown to talk to another parishoner about writing an article together and what it might mean to get baptized. It was a great conversation. Could it be that baptism is the middle point, not a beginning or the end, but the creative midpoint? We'll see.

It was a good day.

gitali 47 sermonating

Understand these words well:
You absolutely must achieve freedom!
You definitely must go down the path
that leads to the shore.
With an undaunted heart and singing
with a bold strong voice
you will cross over.
You will have to breast the waves cheerfully
in spite of the storm's blasts.
Even if the entanglements of illusions
cause you to reel in bewilderment
you will still have to get release.
On the path there are indeed thorns;
trampling on them, you will have to go on.
Don't die fearfully
while you hold dreams of happiness
tightly in your embrace.
In order to have your fill of life
You will have to sustain
the blows of death.

Now, if you wish, read Joshua 3. That's the text for this Sunday.

home

I am reading Home by Marilyn Robinson. Wonderful...just incredible. Glory was just musing about the Victorian furniture with the claw feet that apparently populate the home of her childhood. The descriptions were so vivid that I was suddenly in my grandfather's house on Hanes Avenue in Richmond, VA. What do you do with that furniture? You treasure it. But then I have the grandchild's perspective.

Home is a volume of the Giliad series or what I take will be a series. It's entirely worth your time. I thank my friends for the very thoughtful gift of it.

art and hands that bless

On Sunday we enjoyed the homiletical stylings of Shawna Bowman. She's a recent seminary grad and has been serving at Wicker Park Grace. She's great. What is truly tremendous, however, is her artwork. I cannot rightly express what it's like for us to have her murals in our space. I posted this picture before, but here we go again.

Last week I spoke of "Holy Ambiguity" and the balance one has to strike between legalism/fundamentalism in a faith tradition and relativism/subjectivism in a faith tradition. It all hinges on encounter, of course. Moses and God encountered one another on the mountain, but both were hidden in part from one another so the midrash goes. There's something to that for me that I still need to contemplate.

This Sunday Shawna preached on the hands of blessing. She offered this image of her own hands for the cover of the bulletin.

Moses died in the scripture passage read on Sunday. Shawna spoke of how suddenly it seems to come in the story. Though we know he cannot enter the promised land still his death surprises us. It's simply mentioned. No more. No less. Moses died. So who buried him? Who carries his wisdom? Who blesses in his stead? Whose hands are those that bless. "What now?" Shawna asked. At the end of the worship service we held hands with one another, we reached out and touched one another and offered a blessing.

God is often found in these moments of blessing, in these opportunities to reach out to one another. The spaces in between are the Godly spaces. It was a good day. There's more to tell, of course. A member of the church has recently returned from Rwanda. She has a powerful story to tell of her time there. I wonder if there is an agency or ministry with which our church might partner. It would be good for us. We need to remember our place in such ministry, to remember that our hands are for blessing.

This coming Sunday I preach again. We're crossing the Jordan into the Promised Land. St John Chrysostom is quoted as saying "It is not enough to leave Egypt. One must enter the Promised Land." How often have we done this? You know, left a situation only to find ourselves in the same kind of slavery somewhere else? It is only as a people living into the promises of God can we cross into the Promised Land. And it doesn't just happen on it's own. We have to want it, too. Both things must happen. The gift of God is waiting for us. But we still must choose to open it.

commitment to what?

We have been chatting about ecclesiology in the comments of "it's not the size of the ship...or is it?" How do we understand membership? Is it simply being on the rolls at First Baptist or is it about one's baptismal identity? Is it both? I have read or head arguments saying that membership is the height of consumerism. I have also read the exact opposite, that non-membership is the height of consumerism. Sometimes it's just like that. Oi.

Steve Hayes said this about Communion and consumerism.

But in Orthodox ecclesiology the church is not a factory, producing goods for consumers to consume. It is a communion, a fellowship, a koinonia, a “oneness of sit-down acquaintances” in fact. Communion is not just something we receive as consumers, it is something we are in. ... We cannot just casually walk into and out of communion like anonymous consumers at a supermarket.

His point is entirely valid, and that's the line of thought I want to play with. We are in the community by virtue of (desired?) identity with Christ.

Steve chimed in with the last point in the comment thread of "ship" and I wanted to tinker with the thinking for a bit. I read somewhere that polity matters, that how we structure our churches and measure/navigate membership matters. Are we rather fluid with a parish system allowing geography to have the greater say (theoretically)? Or are we congregationalist to the extreme and get baptized every time we change our congregational membership (Note: some Baptist traditions still do this. The Congregation is the Whole Church. To leave it is to leave The Church. So, one must find a church to join in the new place and get baptized again. Remember, Baptists typically do not have a sacramental understanding of baptism. So we can get wet as often as we like. Moving on...)? I think that we should be parsing that out in our conversation.

Membership is about commitment. Of course it is. And, as we all know, it is no guarantee of commitment to a congregation or even to Christ. I posit that there is no such guarantee no matter what our polity or process might suggest we do. So, let's leave the coercive nature of some of this at the door. No matter what the process is for joining a community, people will only do what they want to do, whether motivated by duty or by baptismal identity. We cannot control people. That being said, what are we left with?

We are left with what the congregation says about relationship to itself and between those who participate in the life of the gathered community. That's all. Unless we're ready to police attendance or tithing or whatever, all we have are the relationships and how Christianity interprets them. What do we say we are?

I believe we are the Body of Christ. And I believe that in terms of church governance we should nurture commitment. Absolutely. But it needs to be through relationship and self-identity with Christ, with God, with the Holy Spirit. Again, people will slip, fall, or generally bail. It is unavoidable.

Regarding consumerism: We are a consumerist culture. People shop for a good theological fit. They shop for truth. They shop for the right kind of music, the right time for mass, the right kind of liturgical penache. People shop. I don't like it, but it's who we are. The Mega Church folk figured that out a while ago. Sometimes it bites them in the butt, but they do know how to navigate this reality.

Again, the only way around this is for the church to interpret who it is and how it understands relationship in Christ. This is why I included that quotation from Steve's blog. Koinonia is what we are after. Certainly it is about salvation in Christ. Certainly it's about being transformed by God. Or is it not these things? I do sometimes worry that we will fall into the trap of entertainment or being known for a program when what can happen is so much more. People will be Christian, committed followers of Jesus with all the challenges and joys that entails.

Such commitment can take many forms and people can be in a variety of levels of theological acceptance in this. I'm not suggesting an inquisition. Even Peter fell in the water, no? Thomas needed a sign? "Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief." So, we have pretty strong suggestions that following Christ is not a straight line. But somehow a community of believers need to gather to that purpose first. Everything else good is a sign of that initial purpose, that core identity.

No? Thoughts?

An Open Letter

This letter should appear in the Sunday Sun Times. It is currently on the TribLocal.com. It may migrate from their as well. Please read on.

To our Friends and Neighbors,

We the Jewish, Christian and Baha'i members of the Wilmette Interfaith Religious Leaders express our grief at the crime of hatred perpetrated this past Wednesday at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. As religious leaders in Wilmette we have sadly seen in our own history occasions of white supremacist activity on the North Shore. We have experienced the tragedy that can result when we live in fear and suspicion of one another, convinced of our differences and that our safety and security reside in sequestering ourselves away from---or harming or eliminating--- those who live or worship differently. Because we lived through such events in our own community in the spring and summer of 1999, and because we know that fear, suspicion and violence are not the last word, we feel the need to share another story.

Once a month we gather to share what each of our congregations and communities of faith are doing. Jewish, Christian, and Baha'i leadership in Wilmette gather for fellowship and to uphold one another in prayer. We endeavor to work together on programs and charity. We worship together at Thanksgiving as a group and at other times of the year in twos and threes. We make music together. We study together. This is the face of interfaith relationships in America that we hope people see and come to love.

In the light of the terrible shooting at the Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. we need more of this kind of community and not less. We need to come together more to find common ground and to celebrate our differences. We need to praise God where God is found in our various traditions. We are not the same. Nor are we called to be. That distinctiveness is our gift to one another...and to the greater community.

Our world seems increasingly polarized and violent. Hatred takes center stage and we find we cannot escape our own insanity. Racism, violence, and any number of communal ills threaten us. We must respond to such threats. We must respond in love.

We hope you will look to your faithful leadership. Many communities have an organization like ours. Your religious leaders gather and pray with and for one another. Look to those moments. Nurture those moments. Gather at Thanksgiving if that is your tradition. Visit the neighboring synagogue, mosque, or church. Be good neighbors. Learn to love one another.

Love triumphs over hatred and violence. May you find love.

Peace and All Good Things,

on behalf of Wilmette Interfaith Religious Leaders:

Rev. Robin Brown, Wilmette Lutheran Church
Rabbi Sam Gordon, Congregation Sukkat Shalom
Rev. Tripp Hudgins, The Community Church of Wilmette
Rabbi Debra Newman Kamin, Am Yisrael
Rabbi Allan Kensky, Beth Hillel Congregation Bnai Emunah
Rev. Joseph McInnis, St. John's Lutheran Church
Ari Poster Moffic, Congregation Sukkat Shalom
Rev. David Musgrave, St. Augustine's Episcopal Church
Rev. Stephanie Perdew, First Congregational Church of Wilmette
Fr. John Pollard, St. Joseph's Catholic Church
Rev. Kirk Reed, Trinity United Methodist Church
Fr. William Sheridan, St. Francis Xavier Parish
Cheryll Simmerman, The Bahai Community
Rev. Nancy Waite, NorthShore University Health System
Cantor Ross Wolman, Congregation Sukkat Shalom

it's not the size of the ship...or is it?

Sorry if the pun offends, but I could not help myself. Here's a post that I found interesting: Mega Church, Not So Mega Commitment. The Rev. Alan Rudnick does a good job discussing what smaller churches can learn from larger churches and vice versa. Commitment is an important (essential) virtue within a faith community if it is to flourish and grow. That's not news. The larger the church, as the equation suggests, the more room one may have to slack off or hide. This is one of the attractions of the Mega Church and other larger congregations. Some people simply want anonymity. People who are exploring Christianity for the very first time may especially desire to sit in the shadows for a while. No wonder the Mega of us attract non-believers. It's not just the programs that attract. It's the anonymity.

Of course, this has me thinking of one of the better known models of church development from Back In The Day. Once upon a time in the third century (or some equally ancient period of time) becoming a Christian took years. Yes, years. You had to serve in the ministries of the congregation. Help the poor and widow and whatnot. You know the drill. Then you went to classes. Then one Easter you were baptized and were taught some more and were finally allowed to the Table and considered Christian. Our present day conversation about allowing anyone to the table was likely nowhere on the radar.

Now, they had persecution and other things to worry about. Vetting potential members was important. (This is still true today in places like Sudan.) And they took their traditions very seriously. Many present day churches and traditions still do. The RCIA (Rites of Christian Initiation for Adults) that the Roman Catholic Church in the US is utilizing right now assumes a year of committed time and study before one becomes Christian. Even Willow Creek assumes that you are giving a certain amount of time/money if you wish to maintain membership (This may have changed since the last time I looked.). You don't become Orthodox overnight either. Commitment matters. Identification with community matters.

I've been seeing this conversation on the net more and more lately. Rev. Elizabeth Hagen of Washington Plaza Baptist Church discusses the importance of membership and commitment in a recent post ("Living in the Culture of the Better Offer"). She's one of those so-called young pastors and bucks the stereotype by insisting on membership. Good stuff on this blog.

I've been thinking more and more about memberless church. Is there a way to foster commitment without asking for explicit membership? I really don't know. Being Christian and belonging to a specific congregation may or may not be connected. I am leaning more and more to focusing on commitment to Christian life and community as not necessarily the same thing as commitment to a specific congregation. I'm still working that out. If I could have 150 on a Sunday morning and no members, I would be fine with that. Yes, as long as we keep the lights on and the roof leak free. I may be asking for the impossible. I know. And no, I don't live for numbers, but empty pews bug me.

It's an interesting conversation. A larger community allows for greater anonymity. Also, the smaller the congregation the greater the focus may have to be on membership and/or commitment. Again, this assumes that the congregation has a physical plant to support, and various ministries to support. Not all do. But when you do, as my congregation does, then it may be essential to be able to measure commitment in some way so that you can simply make plans. It boils down to basic logistics. Again, membership may not be the best way to measure commitment. I'm willing to explore other options.

Here are some ongoing questions I have:

1. Is church membership a guarantee/reasonable metric of commitment?
2. Should baptism and congregational membership be conflated?
3. Should any congregation these days be thinking in terms of "membership?"
4. What does it mean to make a Christian? What is conversion?
5. Is a small congregation a safe/reasonable/likely place for conversion?

Ah...but it gets complicated quickly. Thoughts?

is emergent is dead? again?

Julie Clawson has been blogging about Emergent Stuff for a good while now. I know her husband through some Chicago networking. Julie is a brilliant thinker and I like to read her blog. Surprising myself, I don't usually comment. I just read. This post, however, had me commenting. It seems that some think that the Emergent Movement is dead. Apparently it has been taken over by insincere bandwaggon jumpers and "snake oil salesmen."

Julie posted a reply where she discusses language and experience. In the spirit of disclosure, I'll offer a little of where I am coming from. I have to admit that the original "disappointment" post pushed some buttons for me.

I was not raised in the church, per se. So sometimes I feel like I just don't have a dog in this fight. Sometimes I just don't get it. But once I found myself in the church (and in denominational life in particular) I was surprised to find myself in the Southern Baptist Convention. In Virginia in the 1980's and 1990's (when I was paying attention) the SBC was tearing itself apart. I was in Virginia and the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship was just an idea. I was attending the then clandestine (too strong a word?) seminary in Richmond, BTSR. I was up to my eyeballs in drama and disappointment, and people trying to take the church from other people...I learned a lot in those years.

First, I learned that no one can take the church from you. Second, I learned that every movement (see: CBF) has to compromise somewhere along the line and loses some of its originators in the process. The most passionate of the leadership cannot always make the transition from movement to institution.

I have helped to start a so-called emergent congregation in Chicago. Though I think Reconciler is more "of the emergence" than part of the Emergent Movement. And I am bringing much of the emergent sensibility to my current pulpit.

The Emergent Movement, if it is purely a movement, cannot be taken over, killed, or generally done away with. It can, however, fade, dwindle, lose steam and/or passion. The language I've encountered in these posts is the language of institutions. Perhaps the movement is now an institution and part of the disappointment is the realization of that truth. I don't know. I'm asking more than stating. And as I write this, perhaps movements can change so dramatically that they do die. But the proclamation of said death seems premature to me in this instance.

I see the originators of the conversation are still out there talking. Some of them have moved on to other things by simply following their own conclusions and networking in different communities. McClaren is hanging out with the Anglicans. Pagitt is doing his own thing. The new monastics have their own concerns. There may simply be no one person at the helm of Emergent right now. That's okay.

It may be that the movement is now in so many places that it seems dead to someone looking for a center. It has decentralized. People like Phyllis Tickle and some "hyphenates" are taking the concept of "emergence" and living into it within their own traditions. This is not death to me. It's a new life.

I think that emergence (to use Tickle's understanding of it) is happening. It's everywhere and not just in the church. The Emergent Movement is one aspect of how it has made itself known in American protestant Christianity. It's liberal, conservative, evangelical, Catholic, ecumenical, and everything else imaginable. So, its charism has found its way into various traditions. And the movement struggles under its own weight.

I am truly sorry to hear that people are pained by the changes. The demoralizing old fights are finding their way into the Emergent Movement. The fights are, sadly, unavoidable. We bring them with us. They won't go away, though I believe we will do a better and better job at working through them. I believe we've learned something over the generations.

I would love to know what others think. Please feel free to chime in. If you have followed a link this way, don't hesitate to chime in. I'm hoping for some gentle and productive wrangling here.

the power of legacy

How we met is more of an accident than anything else. My college choir was singing at Franklin Baptist Church. We were on some tour or another. I think it was 1990 or 91. I cannot recall. Members of the church took all of us in. I stayed with Tuck and Janet Hudgins. We had never met, but were distant cousins.

We took a moment to make the six degrees (or generations) of connection and lo and behold Tuck had been life-long friends with my step-mother's father, Rev. Dr. Paul Watlington, Jr. Paul died a few years ago. Tuck presided at the funeral. Both of these men were Fosdick groupies, believers in the Social Gospel with plenty of the Gospel. When we returned back to Richmond, I contacted my step-mother and the rest is history.

I stayed in infrequent contact with Tuck, but the connection still made itself known. The Executive Minister (read: bishop) of the American Baptist Churches Metro Chicago is an old friend of Tuck's. I have run into many others who knew and loved Tuck...and who knew and loved Paul. The memory and the experience of these two men has shaped me as a pastor in more ways than I can explain.

I love my biological grandfathers. Gordon and Pappy loved me in return. They are both gone now, too. I hope that my expressions of affection and admiration for Paul and Tuck does not give any indication that I do not love Gordon and Pappy. They have all influenced me and I have inherited their legacies.

Reading Tuck's obit was eye opening. My wife laughed. We both did. The gene pool is so shallow for the Hudgins men. It's nice to know I am in good company. And it is good to know that I have come by this particular vision of being Baptist honestly. It is in the genes. It has been nurtured in me. I have inherited it in both ways.

Rest in peace, Tuck. Some of us are still carrying this torch. I hope you know that. We will continue to follow in your footsteps as well as we can. Well done, good and faithful servant. "The bishop of Blackwater," indeed.

an aside

What did Moses do in the crag of the rock?

He tweeted.

Moses: Hangin w/ YHWH. Breezy up here.
Aaron: @Moses Ask about the statues! We like statues!
Moses: @Aaron No go. Sorry.
Aaron: @Moses Where are you?
Moses: @Aaron In a rock. Can’t see a thing!
Aaron: @Moses LMAO. What? Too much incense?
Moses: @ Aaron Will explain later. C U soon. Hide the pigs!

mawage is hwhat bwings us togevah todeh

As hard as this might be to believe, I am going to be away from the blog for the weekend. Maybe I'll post something on Sunday morning, but it's doubtful. You see, I am performing a wedding.

Si and Laura, friends of mine and the children of other friends of mine (this guy, for example) are getting married. It is said that they were introduced at my wedding. So, any ensuing relationship is somehow my fault. How my wife dodges culpability I will never fully comprehend. In any case, I will be performing the ceremony. What happens when a Lutheran educated American Baptist ministers' kid marries the charming offspring of Episcopal theologian clergy educators? We sing the anaphora, of course, but in baptist garb, in baptist space, and with baptist theological flair...but with Lutheran music.

May God forgive us.

I can't wait!

ruminating, sermonating, and the art of baptist midrash

You probably need to see the mural in person to get the full effect. The murals are 6' x 8' (ish) and are overwhelming in person. I've posted an image of the sanctuary below.

Shawna Bowman is the artist. She is a Presbyterian candidate to ordained ministry and has been working with Nanette Sawyer and the gang at Wicker Park Grace. There are several of these murals on the walls there. We just borrowed the three. They are meditations on moments from the Exodus story. This week we are focusing on "God's Face."

"God's Face" is based on the moment in Exodus 33 when Moses is placed in the cleft of the rock and God passes by. Moses gets pushy with God. They've become friends and Moses really wants to see God, wants to experience that glory in full. God does what God can to grant the request. When I look at the image, I see Moses silhouette framed in the fiery presence of God. Moses is rejoicing, arms skyward in a dance...

Moses dances in the cleft of the rock...and all we get are rules? I don't know yet, but this is the beginning of the "midrash." I'm not Jewish. True midrash may be beyond me. But I shall offer what this poor Baptist can offer.

We dance in the presence of God.

I'm preaching this week. Shawna is preaching next week on the image to the left in the photo below, "The Death of Moses" and I'll return the following week to preach on the image in the center, "Crossing the Jordan." During the first two Sundays of July, Shawna will join us during worship again to create a mural for CCW during worship. She'll paint while we sing, pray and preach. It should be great.

If you are around...come on by.

Our space...good stuff.

almost forgot to say it here

I mentioned it through a Facebook status, but neglected to say something here. This month marks my third year at Community Church of Wilmette. It's been a powerful three years with great people and constant learning. I am told by Those in the Know that the learning thing never stops. Holy cow.

Anyway, thanks to CCW for the time and faithfulness. Here's to the future! I'm hopeful the next three years will look something like this:

Then Jesus, filled with the power of the Spirit, returned to Galilee, and a report about him spread through all the surrounding country. He began to teach in their synagogues and was praised by everyone.
When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written:
‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’
And he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant, and sat down.

hmmm...

A Song of Deliverance (Isaiah 12.2-6)

'Behold, God is my salvation;
I will trust and will not be afraid;
'For the Lord God is my strength and my song,
and has become my salvation.'
With joy you will draw water
from the wells of salvation.
On that day you will say,
'Give thanks to the Lord, call upon his name;
'Make known his deeds among the nations,
proclaim that his name is exalted.
'Sing God's praises, who has triumphed gloriously;
let this be known in all the world.
'Shout and sing for joy, you that dwell in Zion,
for great in your midst is the Holy One of Israel.'

monday videopost: jumping the bones

the bible is a story book

My grandfather, Pappy, it is said, used to hit his kids on the elbow with the back of a butter knife if they put their elbows on the table. Every year when we gather for some kind of family dinner, one of us will ask my father or my Uncle Joe to tell the stories. Pappy stories are standard fare at family gatherings. Some are funny. Some are sad. Some are just odd, like the elbow on the table stories and the time when Joe was stabbed with a fork. But that's another tale.

We tell these stories for a variety of reasons. Pappy was (and still is though he passed away in 1991) a significant persona in the lives of many of my family. He served as mentor and personal foil to many of us. He hated comic books, swore by Jack London, loved little kids, hated teen agers, lived alone, and was a tremendous gardener. He also hit his kids on the elbow with a butter knife when their arms strayed.

Now, we tell this particular story mostly to remember Pappy. We don't tell it as a warning to younger cousins to mind the knives on the table. We just tell the story. It's become part of us somehow. And, truth be told, we try to honor the virtue of keeping one's elbows off the table when we eat. It's rude, you know. But somehow telling the story has become as important as the virtue itself if not moreso. The story and the virtue are wrapped up in one another and telling the story is how we express who we are as a family.

Sometimes clergy friends of mine and I will gather and we'll talk about the place of the Bible in the lives of our church communities. We will question how to interpret it, how to honor it, and, as frightening as this might sound to some, we'll question even using it at all anymore. It's so misunderstood, so ancient and odd to many listeners, that without a Masters Degree there's no point in bothering with it...Personally, I can't hold that last position. Pappy is probably to blame.

I understand the Bible to be a storybook, a faithful storybook about God and those who attempt to be God's people. The stories convey the importance of a variety of spiritual experiences. It's not a rule book, per se (though there are some sections of the Bible that are rule books - another post for another day), any more than our telling the Pappy stories is an excuse to pop one another on the elbows with a butter knife. Some stories are told simply because they are who we are. We are the stories we tell.

Some of the stories in scripture are terrifying. Some are silly. Some are just confusing. They are all essential. We hold on to them because the give continuity to communal identity. We hold on to them because the virtues (not necessarily the practices) they highlight still matter to us. Usually on Sunday we gather as God's family and tell the stories. We read scripture. We celebrate identity. We learn once again who we are and how God loves us and how we can love God, self and neighbor.

So, if you do, why do you read the Bible?