Category Archives: Reflection

Sprint or Marathon

Leave a reply

Watching the Olympics this evening it was interesting the juxtaposition of the pre-recorded men’s 100 m sprint (dash) interspersed with the live women’s marathon.  Then later in the evening again the live swimming coverage began with the women’s 50 m and was followed by the men’s 1500 m.  It both categories was the shortest event paired with the longest event.

In each case the strategy for running (or swimming) the race is different:  all-out for the sprint, pace yourself for the distance.  The start is incredibly important for the sprint, not as much for the distance.  When the sprint starts the eyes are on the finish line, when the marathon started every one of the competitors looked down at their watch as they started it so they would know their pace.  For me, the latter image of starting the watch so you have a “standard” or “measure” to guide you is one of the strongest object lessons I have seen in these games.

Now you could come up with all sorts of object lessons from both the sprints or the distance events:  Pacing yourself versus keeping your eyes on the goal; having the endurance for the long race versus the importance of all aspects, start, sprint, and finish for the short distance.  One of the interesting lessons from the Romanian woman who won the marathon (who lives and trains in the US) is the commentators’ comment that she figures out her strategy for the race and then runs it regardless of what is happening around her.  Another interesting and related object lesson is that after she made her move (she was about a minute ahead of her closest competitor for the last 10 miles of the race) she did not look back until she got close to the finish. 

[Other inspirations this evening: The marathon winner, Constantina Tomescu, and U.S. Swimmer Dara Torres, with an individual silver in the 50 m freestyle, were second oldest and oldest competitors in the events at 38 and 41 years old.  As Dara said later “You don’t have to put an age limit on your dreams.”  And the 1500 m swimming event was won by Oussama Mellouli from Tunisia, the first swimming medal ever for Tunisia (although he also lives and trains in the US).]

So, if our Christian life is a marathon, set your pace, run your race, don’t let the pack throw you off your plan to reach the goal.

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses,
let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily
entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. – Hebrews 12:1

Reflections On The Church Virtual #1

13 Replies

In a couple of previous posts I began my “out loud” reflections on The Church Virtual, the concept of Christians gathered in Covenant Community not face-to-face in a specific geographic location, but in virtual communities like those now developing in a Web 2.0 world.  I opened this line of thought back in early March and posted some preliminary development of it about a month later.  Since April I have been doing some serious theological reading and thinking on this idea, but then I went to General Assembly…

I’ll return to that in a minute.  But since April I have been trying to form a framework or grid to help me think about, or “measure” or “test” how the church as virtual community would exist or function.  I am trying to be careful not to unduly constrain thinking about the Church Virtual, while still trying to have something solid on which to hang the thinking.

So let me throw out there the basic outline for thinking about this.  For me one of the most basic measures of the church is from Chapter 18 of the Scots Confession, the “notes of the true kirk (church):”

The notes of the true Kirk, therefore, we believe, confess, and avow to
be:

  • first, the true preaching of the word of God, in which God has
    revealed himself to us, as the writings of the prophets and apostles
    declare;
  • secondly, the right administration of the sacraments of Christ
    Jesus, to which must be joined the word and promise of God to seal and
    confirm them in our hearts;
  • and lastly, ecclesiastical discipline
    uprightly ministered, as God’s word prescribes, whereby vice is
    repressed and virtue nourished.

This is a start, but as the following lines in the confession indicate it applies to specific or particular churches.  The virtual community usually does not pretend to take on the role of a particular church, but rather a fellowship or community of believers that guides and supports across geographical boundaries.

My second guide for the Church is the six “Great Ends of the Church:”

  • the proclamation of the gospel for the salvation of humankind;
  • the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God;
  • the maintenance of divine worship;
  • the preservation of the truth;
  • the promotion of social righteousness;
  • and the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven to the world

Not that the notes of the true church should be disregarded, but this gives a little more to work with for on-line community.

Now, I am going to try to tackle, or at least poke on, all nine of these points in one post or another as I get time to convert my random musings into coherent, or at least less random, reflections.  But even as I put this one together I struggled with some overlap between various of these concepts.  And I decided “live with it.”  So here it goes…

Maybe the most obvious and natural way that the on-line community relates to these various points is in the category of “shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God.”  For example, different blogs fill different niches in cyberspace and many do not have the explicit intent of fostering “fellowship.”  I know that I personally don’t write this blog to be “warm and fuzzy” and there are a bunch that I read which are the same way.  But even while reading more scholarly posts about the emergent church, or global economics, or ecclesiology, if you read the blog regularly you get a sense of the person behind the blog and do develop an emotional connection.

Getting a sense of the person behind the blog is easier when the blog author does mix in the personal news and comments with the other items and for those bloggers who post almost exclusively their personal journeys the connection is easier.

OK, so there is a one-way connection there?  Does that make it part of the virtual covenant community?  I think it is in a qualified sense.

Anytime we care about, and especially pray for, another Christian, whether they know it or not, that interaction is mediated by the Holy Spirit which formed the covenant community to begin with.  Because God is involved we were linked as Christian brothers and sisters to begin with even before we began reading each others blogs.  The sharing in the virtual community did not establish the connection, it “realized” it.  But while the implicit connection is present in the existing relationship established by divine facilities, to live into that community we need to have some two-way interaction.  While the obvious source of interaction in these cases is the comments section at the end of the blog (one of the reasons that I and others have noted the inability to comment on the blog of the Moderator of the Church of Scotland), I would argue that since God is the creator of the covenant community and the Holy Spirit empowers it, that responding back with prayer is another valid response to blog posts that establishes us in the two-way divinely-mediated relationship.

And there are cases where it seems the authors are, by design, trying to facilitate Christian community on the web.  In my reading through blogs I have found a few of these that have really touched me and in which I have felt the presence of the Holy Spirit.  One is a blog by Kristin called “Barefoot and Laughing” where she is chronicling her journey with cancer and treatment.  There are other blogs and web sites where people are sharing this journey, but something about Kristin’s writing, her transparency and honesty in this journey reached out and grabbed me.  Check out the posts I’m Scared and Crucible.  Your mileage may vary.  But I hold this up as an example of very real and intimate writing that draws us into community with one another, even if our only response is to lift the person up in prayer.

Another blog that I regularly read is “journalling” by Liz, a minister in Scotland.  In each of these brief posts, all illustrated with a single photograph, she shares with us a little bit of each day and a spiritual insight.  Again, you may prefer something different, but I look forward to reading each installment and following the twists and turns of her call and ministry.

A final example is “Our Table Must Be Full” by Carl Mazza.  As one of the candidates for Moderator of the General Assembly Carl was writing blog posts about his ministry as his time and circumstances permitted.  What was most touching about these entries was that they were usually not about him but were wonderful stories about individuals he met in his ministry to the homeless.  Once I got a chance to meet and hear him at GA it was very quickly clear that the blog entries were just as much about who Carl is and his enormous heart for those people in difficult circumstances that he ministers to.  With the conclusion of GA I do hope that Carl continues sharing these stories with us.

I hold these up as examples of blogs through which I find myself much more connected with the Christian community around the world, ones where we do participate in the “shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God.”  I would guess that if you are a regular blog reader you have your own. (And note the overlap here because these blogs can sometimes include “proclamation of the Gospel” and “exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven.”)

The question is frequently raised as to whether there are limits to how open, transparent, and honest one should be in their blogging.  In an ideal world there would be no limits, but in this fallen world not everyone is part of the covenant community, and even those of us who are can take things the wrong way sometimes and the blogging can impede the spiritual fellowship.  This is probably more often the case when you are blogging about others rather than just about yourself.

In my reading, Mark Smith over at Mark Time is at the forefront of thinking this through.  Through his hard experience of trying to be open and honest in the virtual community he has offended and hurt some in his particular church.  As a result of that, and in consultation with his pastor, he is leading the charge on a scripturally-based foundation for what is and is not appropriate sharing in the virtual community.  Thanks Mark for taking that on.  It is interesting to note that this has overlaps with other of my nine thinking points, maybe particularly “ecclesiastical discipline
uprightly ministered.”  And as you can probably surmise by how he got in trouble, he is another blogger who shares the twists, turns, joys, and disappointments of his life with us regular readers of his blog.

So this brings me to General Assembly and my experience there.  Having established certain relationships in the virtual community I was amazed by the added dimension to the relationship when there was the opportunity to meet my “imaginary friends” (as we were calling each other) in a face-to-face setting.  My EP has as a constant theme the vision of gathering at the table, with the various sacrament, meal, and discussion implications.  This was truly the case for me in meeting several of those that I had known only through their blogs and podcasts.  Having known them from their virtual persona the element of in-person contact seemed considerably more significant.

As Christians this should not surprise us.  In his earthly ministry Jesus was about human contact:  Touching those he healed, taking time for the less important in society, sharing a meal with outcasts and sinners.  In fact, while I believe that Jesus was capable of doing most, if not all, healings from a remote location he almost always did them in contact or close proximity to the individual.  Only in the case of the centurion’s servant can I think of “action at a distance” when the centurion tells Jesus he understands orders given and obeyed. [Matt. 8:5-13]

So while the advent of Web 2.0 has enhanced ministry and fellowship opportunities in the virtual community, I have so far come to the conclusion that it is a tool that can initiate, enhance, and maintain our spiritual fellowship, but I don’t see the Church Virtual as a total replacement for “the shelter, nurture, and spiritual fellowship of the children of God” within the particular church.

Happy Anniversary Mom and Dad

Leave a reply

Fifty years ago today my parents were married at a historic Presbyterian Church.  They now have many great years together, three children, three children-in-law, five grandchildren, and lots of friends of which many have been with them through the fifty years.  It is a marriage well practiced and lives well lived.

Looking at our family, it is in some ways a cross-section of the mainline churches today.  Now there are some differences, one of which is that we, my parents and all my baby-boomer siblings and all the grandchildren, are presently active in churches.  But in the youngest generation the mainline is losing its hold.

With my parents, myself, and my siblings, we take the mainline church seriously.  Besides my service as an elder, including the stint as a presbytery officer and now the synod circuit, my parents are elders and deacons.  My wife is an elder and deacon as well.  My sister is an elder and her husband is a Minister of Word and Sacrament and was a TSAD.  And of course, their grandson is, at this moment, a YAD.  From the foundation and example my parents gave us we have continued to find our connection to Presbyterianism.

So Mom and Dad — Congratulations, thank you, and well done!  Love Ya!

Thoughts About Natural Disasters

1 Reply

In my day job I am an earthquake geologist working in an academic setting.  As part of my religious and spiritual life I obviously spend a lot of time thinking about Reformed theology.  So, in a week like this with a major deadly earthquake in China, how do the two halves of my life inform each other?

I have laid this all out, at least to my preliminary satisfaction, in a longer theological discourse that I have presented in multi-week adult education classes at churches.  Here is the executive summary:

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.  [Genesis 1:31]

At the beginning of the Bible we are presented with the situation that when God looked at “all that he had made” he found it to be “very good.”  So if we now have a “created order” that has the potential for natural disasters that can cause the loss of tens of thousands of human lives is that still “very good” or did something go wrong?  As Christians we believe that within human nature something did go wrong and that is the Fall in Genesis 3.  But when humans fell did the created order fall with it?  It seems clear to me that the created order was corrupted as well.  This is not in the sense that the creation is sinful the way humans are, but in the Fall and humans becoming sinful they had to leave the garden and the world we live in now is not the ideal that God originally created.  In the New Testament Paul writes in Romans 8:21 “that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay” and we see that release from bondage in Revelation 21 with a New Heaven and a New Earth, and the New Earth will be the dwelling place of humans with God.  Just as we have the image of humans being raised in a perfected form, this echoes the redemption of creation that Paul talks of with the earth being made new for the perfected humans to live in.  In a more controversial reading of the Greek, the argument could be made that John 3:16, “For God so loved the world…” could foreshadow this as well since for the word we translate “world” John uses the Greek word kosmos, which can mean the “created order,”  rather than using some term specific to human beings such as ethnos.

That is the first part, that the world we live in is corrupted just like us humans are.  So are earthquakes a curse in this corrupted world?  I’m not sure that they are.  While they have been viewed as God’s judgment or His hand upon the world at times through history, in the Bible they sometimes clearly are, and sometimes they are not, sometimes even being neutral phenomenon.  In this present world earthquakes are the mechanism by which mountains are built.  Mountains are important for providing new fertile soil in their erosion, for producing rain clouds, for renewing the surface of the earth, for providing many important mineral deposits.  The argument could probably be made that in a “perfect” world we don’t need mountains, or if we did need them that they could rise and fall aseismically without earthquakes.  But in this world it seems to me that we need mountains, and mountains and earthquakes are inseparably linked.

Therefore earthquakes as a class are not a curse or punishment from God, but a functioning part of a created order that was corrupted in the fall.  This means that when a large devastating earthquake happens, like the one that just hit southeast China, we are not looking for God’s punishment in it, or for a sign of the end times, but rather as a part of the renewing of the earth, the created order, that can have the unfortunate side effect of causing this destruction and loss of life because the created order is fallen and corrupt.

That is the approach from a natural history perspective.  This can also be considered from a human perspective which does more integration of the scriptures and a consideration of modern civilization.  That is for another time, but I would note that in times of devastation like this faith-based humanitarian organizations can have more access to otherwise controlled areas to bring in the Gospel, at least the Gospel enacted if not spoken.

I don’t know if this makes sense in an executive summary form.  When I do the six hour version people seem to follow me and it holds together.  As I said at the onset, this was a necessary formulation for me so that I would be able to understand my profession in the context of my faith.  Being in a field where I can work to reduce human suffering is important to me.  But at times like this my academic theological explanation only helps slightly when I see the death and destruction in the area of the earthquake and still ask God “why?” or “for how long?”  And I think that because of my professional ties to these events my heart aches a bit more for the victims of an earthquake than for any other natural disaster.

What Language Do You Speak?

Leave a reply

In our presbytery Pentecost takes on additional meaning:  On any Sunday we have congregations worshiping in ten languages.  While not quite up to the list of fifteen enumerated in Acts 2, (and seventeen if you implicitly include Aramaic and Greek), our area is over half-way there.

But yesterday, as I was making my way on public transportation to a meeting at the synod offices, I began reflecting on the “other” languages.  Now this is Los Angeles, so while the local list might include several of the spoken languages mentioned in Acts, it was actually the “unspoken” languages that grabbed my attention.  What began this line of thought was a car that stopped in the second lane to let the subcompact that was trapped behind my stopped bus get out and around.  The gentleman in the fancy SUV behind the car that allowed the other in must have been in a hurry because this moment of grace on the first driver’s part elicited a honk on the car horn and a hand wave (not obscene) that said “what are you doing” or “get moving” from the driver of the SUV.  Communication in non-spoken language.

This triggered my asking the question: In this day and age, what does it mean to be empowered by the Holy Spirit to proclaim the Gospel to “every nation under heaven”?  Yes, foreign missions are important.  But with all the discussion over the last week about what it means to be “evangelical” (again) and whether there is a coherent concept of “emergent,” I began reflecting on speaking the “cultural” languages.

Do we, the institutional church, speak in a language that those who have never been to church will understand?  Do we, as the mainline church, speak in a language that my children will hear?  Do we, as a historic church, speak in a language that modern upwardly-mobile professionals will listen to?  Do we, as a traditional church, speak in a language that those throughout the theological spectrum can relate to?

Please be very clear:  In the Pentecost account Peter preached the Gospel message rooted in the scriptures of the Hebrew tradition.  I am not advocating changing the Gospel message for the audience.  I am asking whether we communicate it in a language, form or way that the different “nations” (think “people groups”) of our modern American society can understand. 

Now, I realize the argument can be made that there is not agreement on some of the fine points of the Gospel message.  That is not my point here.  Whatever nuances a church may put on the Gospel message, they may present the same consistent message in multiple ways to multiple groups. (traditional, blended, contemporary, modern, emergent, to use some of the buzz words)  The point is that a consistent message can be delivered faithfully in multiple cultural contexts.

Also, I realize that the Pentecost story in Acts is first and foremost about God taking the initiative in the sending of the Holy Spirit.  (Being in the Reformed traditions we believe that the initiative is always with God.)  So God acts and the apostles respond, to the end that the Gospel is preached and people come to believe in Jesus Christ.

So in this day and age, are we open to contemporary movements of the Holy Spirit empowering the church to proclaim the Gospel in faithful ways, yet in a different “tongue”?

What Happened to “Sinful”?

Leave a reply

Over the last ten days there has been a lot of discussion about “Sin” in the media and out in the blogosphere.  What there has not been a lot of discussion about is being “Sinful.”

In an obligatory Holy Week piece USA Today has an article on “Has the ‘notion of sin’ been lost?”  This caps off a couple of weeks that have seen a governor resign for indiscretions, his replacement admit to his own arguably questionable actions, and the media spin an interview with a Vatican official about modern responsibilities into a list of the “new seven deadly sins.”

But as I read through the USA Today piece I kept thinking that “this is missing the point.”  What the article talked about was the view of sin as a list of things we should or should not do.  A recent survey by Ellison Research shows that if you put together a list of sins some are roundly accepted on the list (adultery by 81% of Americans, racism by 74%) and some are struggling to be recognized as wrong (only 30% think gambling is).  But while it is one thing to come up with lists of specific actions, what the USA Today article dances around is the larger question of what is Sin anyway what about humans as Sinful beings.

There are hints of the larger view in the article.  The Rev. Albert Mohler is quoted in part as saying “I wonder whether even some Christian churches are making the connection between Christ’s death and resurrection and victory over sin — the linchpin doctrine of Christianity.”  Note that he said “sin” as a singular, a condition or concept.  The article just keeps on going with the lists.

Later on the article gets closer with material from Michael Horton:

People have to see themselves as sinners — ultimately alienated from God and unable to save themselves — for Christ’s sacrifice to be essential.

and from Pope Benedict XVI

“People who trust in themselves and in their own merits are, as it were, blinded by their own ‘I,’ and their hearts harden in sin. On the other hand, those who recognize themselves as weak and sinful entrust themselves to God, and from him obtain grace and forgiveness.”

So the measure of sin is not ourselves but God.  And our ultimate condition as humans is that we are sinful and unable to save ourselves.  It is not about committing sins that are on a list.  It is about our Sinful human nature.  If sin is only about what society says I should or should not do and I can work on that myself, this weekend is just about jelly beans and chocolate.  If we recognize that there is no way we can save ourselves, that we can not even come close to what God requires, that we have violated the image of God in us, and that we can not be saved by our best efforts but by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, then this weekend becomes a joyous spiritual celebration.  When it comes to sin and our sinful nature we don’t want “fair,” we need Grace.

So from the Westminster Shorter Catechism

Q. 14. What is sin?
A. Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law of God.

Q. 16. Did all mankind fall in Adam’s first transgression?
A. The covenant being made with Adam, not only for himself, but for his posterity; all mankind, descending from him by ordinary generation, sinned in him, and fell with him, in his first transgression.

Q. 20. Did God leave all mankind to perish in the estate of sin and misery?
A. God, having out of his mere good pleasure, from all eternity, elected some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace to deliver them out of the estate of
sin and misery, and to bring them into an estate of salvation by a Redeemer.

Q. 25. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?
A. Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice, and reconcile us to God, and in making continual intercession for us.

Q. 84. What doth every sin deserve?
A. Every sin deserveth God’s wrath and curse, both in this life, and that which is to come.

Q. 85. What doth God require of us, that we may escape his wrath and curse, due to us for sin?
A. To escape the wrath and curse of God, due to us for sin, God requireth of us faith in Jesus Christ, repentance unto life, with the diligent use of all the outward means whereby Christ communicateth to us the benefits of redemption.

Thanks be to God for the gift of His Son.

Have a meaningful Easter Weekend.

Happy Feast of Saint Patrick Today

Leave a reply

Today I wish you a Happy feast of Saint Patrick, Bishop and Confessor.

But wait, that’s on Monday.

Well, for the vast majority of the world it is, but in an interesting application of “The Rules” that a GA Junkie would appreciate, if you are “observant,” then today is the day to celebrate.

You may have heard that in predominantly Roman Catholic areas there is a problem because Holy Week starts tomorrow and nothing trumps Holy Week in the church calendar.  To be specific, this is all laid out in a set of rules known as the General Rubrics (GR).  On the Roman calendar this Monday, March 17, would be the feast of St. Patrick except that is a third class feast day and since Monday of Holy Week falls on the same day this year and it is a movable feast of the first class with very high precedence [GR 91] then St. Patrick’s day is “commemorated or omitted altogether” [GR 95].  It gets a bit more complicated on the church calendar since there is an allowance for saints that are patrons of a particular city or nation making the feast day one of the first class in those places [GR 57(a)].  However, this is still not good enough to trump Holy Week since the patron’s day comes out twelfth in the order of precedence and Monday to Wednesday of Holy Week are in seventh place.  (For reference, Christmas, Easter and Pentecost are highest precedence and Ash Wednesday is also in the group that is seventh.)  In this whole precedence and rules thing, the rule would be to celebrate the feast of Saint Patrick on April 1. (Quick version: Rescheduled feasts are to be pushed after the day that displaces them but both Holy Week and the week following Easter Sunday have higher precedence (the week following Easter just barely) and then there is another displaced feast of higher rank to be celebrated first on March 31.)  There are a couple of variants floating around which would move it earlier, but technically it should go later.

Well, you can’t just omit St. Patrick’s day in some parts, and April 1 was too long to wait, so a compromise was reached by the Irish bishops with the approval of the Vatican to celebrate it today.  See, the PC(USA) is not the only ones with “creative polity.”  And of course, secular celebrations will go on virtually unaffected.

I personally find feast days helpful as a spiritual exercise, but not in a veneration or patron saint sense.  As regular readers know, I welcome All Saints Day (November 1) as an opportunity to remember those that I have know who have been a spiritual inspiration to me and are now part of the Church Triumphant.  In the same way, I appreciate the historical saints, beatified by a particular church or not, who are a witness to the faith and can encourage us in our “running the race” and “fighting the good fight.”  May we be found faithful as well.  Sola Dei Gloria

Sin Is Not Just Present, It Is Pervasive

Leave a reply
The doctrine of original sin is the only empirically verifiable doctrine of the Christian faith. — Reinhold Niebuhr

I won’t say that yesterday was a “good” day for sin, but it was clearly a day that it was prominent.  On the serious side a crime fighting and “squeaky clean” politician was caught in scandal.  And as the Reformed community we shake our heads in disappointment but not in surprise, for “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

And while in this news event several of the traditional “deadly” or “mortal” sins were transgressed, the Vatican comes out with their list of seven new “social” sins.  (Technically, as this Toronto Star article says, a Vatican official discussed modern problems with a Rome newspaper and it was the news media that distilled and spun them down to the more attention-getting “seven modern sins.”)

Update:  There is a good story over on GetReligion called “Seven Sensationalist Sins.”  But for us geeks, the diagram of the combinatorics of the original seven deadly sins, chose two is priceless.

Modern Parable of the Banquet

4 Replies

This is a true incident that happened in my university department last week:

There was a university department that had an “Important Visitor” that was to meet with as many of the graduate students as possible for lunch.  When the appointed time came the “Student Leader” met the Important Visitor but they waited and nobody else showed up.  So the Student Leader made some frantic phone calls but found only one other student to join them for lunch.

Upon returning from the meeting the Student Leader sent out a “heated” e-mail that elicited the usual responses:  One student said “nobody is required to attend.”  Another replied “why should I care about this if others don’t care about me.”  Others excused themselves with “I had a class,” “I had another meeting,” or “I had to TA.”  One of the students even commented that if the lack of attendance bothered the Student Leader so much, maybe they should not be the Student Leader.  This caused a third student to rush to the Student Leader’s defense saying that the Student Leader has “put in a lot of time and you can ignore them if you want, but don’t insult them.”

Here endith the parable.

I tell this story because while there are some character shifts from the original in Luke 14:16-24, and while the Gospel version has eschatological overtones that this does not, I still saw echoes of the original that give a modern tone to the “I can not come” and the ecclesiology of the version Jesus told.  I think what surprised me the most in this department incident was that there were greater implications for “professionalism” and “networking” that the students either were not aware of or ignored.  While for many there were legitimate conflicts with classes, for many others the concern was for “here” and “now,” not for taking the long view of their career.  And it is tempting to look for a “parable of the vineyard” ending where the Department Chair comes on in and “destroys” them all.  But that is mixing parables.

So I make the jump to the contemporary church.  These graduate students are one of the most under-represented groups in the Christian church today in the U.S.  What holds their attention?  They want to know how this relates, affects, and benefits them right now!  A time line of a year or more is not much of a concern and eternity is not even on the radar.  And their connection to the church may be tenuous at best if they did not grow up in a faith tradition.

How do we work with the Holy Spirit to get them into church?  Is it the energy, vitality, and uniqueness of contemporary worship?  Do we need to be ready when they have hit rock bottom? (And believe me, many of them will.) Do we need to be in relationship with them so we are ready when they ask “what makes you different?”  Do they need to see a faith community that looks like them, not like me and their parents?  It is tough, but from where I sit these are the question I keep asking myself.

The Future of the Mainline Church

Leave a reply

This is one of those “convergence of thoughts” posts were several things coalesce in your thinking and you realize the significant common thread running through them.  What was probably the catalyst for this was the report that the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life released last week titled “ U.S. Religions Landscape Survey.”  I’ll return to specifics of that survey in a minute, but in that report I saw nothing that I did not already know from my experience and anecdotal evidence; it just quantifies the observations.

The bottom line is that the report says, among other things, what we already know about mainline Protestant denominations:  the members are getting older and the denominations are getting smaller.  Not a surprise to anyone following the PC(USA) membership trends which saw a 1.4% decrease in the number of churches between 2003 and 2006 and a 5.7% decrease in membership in the same time period.  The one year decline for 2005-2006 was 2.0% for the PC(USA).  Over the same three-year time period the PCA reported a 5.7% growth in the number of churches and a 4.2% increase in membership. (Note that I chose the PCA and not the EPC so there is not an argument to be made that those gains are mostly departing PC(USA) members and churches.)  Similarly for the United Methodists, the title of a Christian Post article yesterday pretty much says it all: No Future for Methodists Unless Change Occurs, Say Leaders.

For the PC(USA) (and, while I did not dig up the statistics, the “mainline” Presbyterian branches in other countries as well), one observation is that we do not retain our young people.  That is supported by the Pew Forum study.

First, another academic survey which again quantifies in today’s college students what I saw happen among my peers at a state university 25 years ago.  The Pew Forum has a Q&A on their site with Alexander W. Astin, the director of the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA on “ Spirituality in Higher Education: A National Study of College Students’ Search for Meaning and Purpose“.  As they define it, college students become less “religious” (they stop going to church) and more “spiritual” (things like “attaining inner harmony”) between their freshman and junior years.  There is also a measure of their political thinking and the students tend to become more “liberal” in their thinking.  (Note that the Pew Forum Q&A does not include confidence intervals but if it is like most national surveys it is about +/-4% which actually renders some of the statistical differences for politics on the Pew page as indistinguishable.) (Digression: If you want an interesting discussion of differing impacts of “progressive” and “conservative” faculty on college campuses check out an article by Harrison Scott Key from World on the Web.)  I’m still doing some thinking about the UCLA study’s categories and classifications, but they support what many of us recognized over the last couple of decades, if not longer. [I will note that my day job is in academania so I have a front row seat to this. I was in a group recently where two students were having a discussion over whose form of yoga was better.]

If I had to summarize the Pew Forum study in one line it would be that today American churches, religion, and spirituality have become a commodity with individuals looking for consumer satisfaction and not brand loyalty.  And no, I’m not the first to say that.

As background, for the total population they found that 78.4% of Americans self-identified as Christians breaking down to 51.3% Protestant, 23.8% Catholic, and the balance of 3.3% other Christian including Eastern Orthodox and two groups not everyone would group with the Christians, Latter Day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses.  The next largest group was “Unaffiliated” comprising 16.1% of the population but within that group, in addition to the atheists and the agnostics there is what you might call the “apathetic,” although the study calls them “nothing in particular.”  Now apathetic is not quite right because part of the “nothing in particular” are “secular unaffiliated” who would be the apathetic, but there is also a “religious unaffiliated” who do say religion plays a significant part in their lives, but apparently not organized religions groups.  If you care about particular states, regions, ethnic groups, or other demographics the report is extensive and the web site easy to drill down through to get some very detailed information.

One other interesting detail is that among the Evangelical Protestants the second largest group is Nondenominational.  Baptists are the largest group among Evangelical Protestants with 41% of the group and then Nondenominational and Pentecostals are tied for second with 13% of the group for each.  For the record, Evangelical Presbyterians, led by the PCA, are 3% of the group.

I should mention that in the survey there is a third Protestant tradition tracked, that being the “Historically Black Protestant Church.”  However, since Presbyterianism comes in at 0% in this tradition I won’t be regularly referring to it.

One more little detail:  Since the individuals in the survey self-identify their religious affiliation I am curious about the “Mainline Presbyterian” breakdown.  While 1.1% of respondents were PC(USA), <0.3% identified themselves as “Other Presbyterian in the Mainline Tradition” and 0.7% as “Presbyterian in the Mainline Tradition, not further specified.”  So if you are Presbyterian in the Mainline Tradition, but not PC(USA), what are you?  Ex patriot Church of Scotland, PC Ireland or some other global Presbyterian branch?  Another American Presbyterian who thinks they are mainline? Someone who has left the PC(USA) but still identifies with the mainline church, whether or not attending elsewhere, or someone who won’t admit to being in the PC(USA)? According to the narrative of the study these were individuals who identified themselves as Presbyterian but no further, and who said they were not “born-again or evangelical.”  And what about PC(USA) members who identified themselves as “Evangelical?”

With that overview, let me turn to one small piece of the Pew study, specifically the religious landscape with young adults and migration patterns away from the denomination of their upbringing.  The study finds that 62% of Americans over age 70 identify themselves as Protestant while only 43% of those in the 18-29 age bracket do.   As for Unaffiliated, it is claimed by 25% of the 18-29 age group while claimed by only 8% of the over 70 group.  And in each of these groups the age distribution, while not strictly linear, does increase or decrease consistently. The survey also looked at shifting religious affiliations by comparing the tradition an individual was raised in versus where they are now.  (Note that multiple changes or changes back to the original are not seen.)  The biggest changes are seen in the Unaffiliated group with 7.3% of the population being raised unaffiliated but 16.1% claiming it now.  And most of that gain was in the “Nothing in particular” cat
egory.  The second largest gains were seen in the Nondenominational Protestant category with 1.5% raised in that tradition but 4.5% currently identifying with it.  Within those currently self-identifying as Protestants, 18% of Evangelical Protestants were raised outside Protestantism and 31% switched from another Protestant family while for those in Mainline Protestantism it is similar with 16% from outside and 30% from another Protestant family.  That leave 51% and 54% respectively who are currently in the tradition they were raised in.

Now that is a bunch of numbers, but breaking that last one down by denominations the Baptists have the best retention rate at 60% with no change while Presbyterians have one of the worst with only a 40% retention rate.  Of those that were raised Presbyterian and changed roughly equal numbers, about 15% went to each of other Evangelical Protestant denominations, other Mainline Protestant denominations, and No Religion.

I will point out that some of these numbers about migration apply to individuals across the age spectrum.  But considering the UCLA study, the fact that Unaffiliated is strongest among the 18-29 age group, and my qualitative observation of college and college age being the time that young people now lose touch with the church, I would argue that while these trends are not specific, they are at least representative if not dominant in the college age group.

With each of my three children, there is a clear attraction to the energy, vitality, and relationships that certain other churches in town have.  All three, while growing up at home and faithfully attending and serving at our Presbyterian church, also regularly attend the youth group at another church.  (And there are two different “other” churches between the three of them.)  These other churches have thriving youth programs that attract, hold, and educate the kids.  They are not attracted by the theology, they are attracted by the energy and the relationships.  These two other churches are not Presbyterian, but I have seen nothing that a Presbyterian church could not do.  In fact from reading his blog, I think Mark Smith’s church does do things like this with their youth.  But from what I have seen it takes work.  Not just work by the Youth Director, not just work by the Youth Team, but work by the whole church.  The whole church?  Yes, because some of us “frozen chosen” have to be ready to sometimes have worship music that might include a drum set and electric guitars.  Yes, because some of us need to get off our duffs and be ready to help out with youth events like Mark does.  Not only can a small youth team not do it alone, but if we want to empower the younger generation of our members (note, not the “future of the church” or the “next generation”, they are with us today) we need to show them that they are valued by the broad community and have a place in our worship and the life of the community.  And I think we can do that without compromising our Reformed faith and traditions (I’ll have to think more about how some of this might interact with the “ regulative principle of worship“).  [I think I just outlined an upcoming moderatorial sermon.]

[Please forgive me if I seem hypocritical by making these suggestions and yet my own kids also attend other church youth groups.  I would point out that 1) they are still engaged in our church and its youth group and 2) My wife, and I to a lesser degree, have been active with youth events and the youth team.  But we are not above looking at what makes other youth programs successful and it takes the time and the efforts of a lot of people to change the climate and educate the faith community.]

A final piece of anecdotal evidence:  Over the last week I have been part of two interesting conversations with two young men.  The first had just finished high school and was starting at a local community college.  He grew up in the Baptist church and from what we adults could piece together he was now in rebellion against a strict upbringing.  He could clearly and succinctly exposit his religious views and they were clearly theistic and non-Christian.  Here, I thought, was a college student headed for the Unaffiliated, but I hope that in the near future he is able to work out some of his uncertainties with the help of an understanding and non-judgmental faith community.  The second conversation was with our son who requested that we have him excused from the last few minutes of his school day so he could attend the memorial service for a member of our church.  While it was a wonderful and faithful gentleman who had gone to be with the Lord, he was not a close friend so my wife and I were initially skeptical that all our son wanted was an excuse to get out of one of his least-favorite classes.  But as we talked with him we realized that he was serious about wanting to be part of the faith community that gathered to remember this saint and so we pulled him from school for the worship service.  It demonstrated for me that something had clicked for my son about being community in the church.

Within the PC(USA) this spring it will be interesting to see if the denomination can get and hold the attention of young adults.  One driving force is the Rev. Bruce Reyes-Chow and his standing for election as Moderator of the General Assembly with a Web 2.0 campaign.  Yes, the other three candidates, Rev. Bill Teng, Rev. Carl Mazza, Elder Roger Shoemaker, all have web sites and Mr. Mazza is blogging.  But Bruce’s web site is updated frequently and has the Web 2.0 bells and whistles like DOPPLR, Facebook, yelp.  From one of his posts it is apparent that questions are being raised about this modern style and whether that is an appropriate way to run a campaign.  For the Moderator election I’m not sure how much of that will help him; it is my experience that few commissioners are in the demographic that appreciates Web 2.0 or that it would influence their vote.  But taking a long view, it should be the hope of those who care about the future of the PC(USA) that Bruce simply doing that will attract and hold the attention of the younger generation of PC(USA) members and leaders.  Or maybe wake some of the rest of us up to what we need to be thinking about.

As I work through my GA 101 series I am thinking about how Reformed Theology, Presbyterian polity and Web 2.0 intersect, inform each other, and maybe conflict.  From a traditional Reformed approach, does an on-line community gathered together in the “virtual” world differ from the covenant community gathered together in the “real” world?  Can you have a true Reformed “Second Life” church?  (That is not Second Life as in The Church Triumphant but as in “The Church Virtual.”)  So I plan to revisit this piece of Reformed theology in detail in my concluding installment of the GA 101 series: Reformed theology and Presbyterian polity for the future — The Church Virtual?

But for now I have written enough and probably glazed over a bunch of eyes with all the statistics.  The take-away is that the numbers continue to not look good for the PC(USA) in the long run and we need to think about how our community, within the bounds of our Reformed faith, needs to adjust.