I had lunch with someone from the church this past week who encouraged me to "trust the God in others."
As it turned out, the timing -- and the advice -- could not have been better.
Because yesterday at Good Shepherd was a first of its kind: an invitation to "salvation by grace" in all environments of the church, from the "grown ups" in the Worship Center to the students at BigHouse, and, most powerfully, the children throughout the KidVentures ministries.
Which meant that the dozens of children's ministry volunteers -- from tech support to worship leaders to drama actors to class leaders -- had to be equipped in, as we Methodists say, "offering Christ" to the kids.
And then the volunteers had to be trusted to do just that.
And so they were prepared.
And so we did trust.
All morning long, the volunteers kept giving me reports of how many children gave their lives to Jesus and how empowered they as leaders felt in issuing the invitation.
So we trusted the God richly resident in our volunteers. And He came through.
Wisdom given, advice followed, God glorified.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
But For The Grace Of God
I think the series art is beautiful.
I believe the lobby refresh and logo redesign will be exciting.
But it's the message that I am most excited about.
And not just the message in the Worship Center.
Across all the different venues of Good Shepherd -- in that Worship Center, with our BigHouse students, and for all areas of children's ministry -- people will hear the same truths about grace and receive the same invitation to become eternally rescued by that grace.
Simultaneous salvations all across Good Shepherd United Methodist Church.
It's why we're in this ministry in the first place.
Sunday.
8:30. 10. 11:30.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Re-Stating The Obvious
Pastoral ministry goes better when you are in love with Jesus than when you aren't.
I know this to be the case because I've tried it both ways.
I know this to be the case because I've tried it both ways.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Some New Math
I've realized something in talking with church leaders and trying to understand momentum in church:
When you simplify the proclamation, you multiply the impact.
Here's what I mean. We at Good Shepherd have quite consciously become less clever and more bold on Sundays. Less innovative and more emphatic. Dare I say it? Less modern and more ancient.
Yet the response, both numerically and spiritually, has been overwhelming.
We've remembered something: the gospel has its own power. While it must be contextualized, it doesn't always have to be dressed up.
As far as the power inherent in the gospel, you can't improve upon I Corinthians 15:1-5:
1 Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Peter,[b] and then to the Twelve.
Simplify the proclamation to that and watch the impact multiply.
When you simplify the proclamation, you multiply the impact.
Here's what I mean. We at Good Shepherd have quite consciously become less clever and more bold on Sundays. Less innovative and more emphatic. Dare I say it? Less modern and more ancient.
Yet the response, both numerically and spiritually, has been overwhelming.
We've remembered something: the gospel has its own power. While it must be contextualized, it doesn't always have to be dressed up.
As far as the power inherent in the gospel, you can't improve upon I Corinthians 15:1-5:
1 Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Peter,[b] and then to the Twelve.
Simplify the proclamation to that and watch the impact multiply.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Top Five Tuesday -- Top Five Play-By-Play Broadcasters
The role of a play-by-play announcer in a sports broadcast is a delicate one.
The good ones strike this balance of emotional detachment and personal involvement. They're not supposed to betray who they want to win nor even offer many opinions on what is occuring on the field or court -- that's the role of the "color" commentator.
Yet to keep viewers' attention, they have to communicate the drama they are watching as well as give background information that lets viewers feel as if they somehow know the players who are competing.
And above all, they have to have a voice. A voice that hooks and holds the viewer with its resonance and variety.
With all that, here are my five favorite from a variety of sports ... though, as you might expect, football dominates.
5. Don Criqui, football. Criqui's career has floundered in recent years, but he called two terrific games in the early 80s: Chargers-Dolphins in the '81 playoffs and, most memorably, the 1984 Orange Bowl with Miami & Nebraska. I always felt the timbre of his voice enhanced the natural drama of the game.
4. Keith Jackson, college football. Whoa Nellie! Fumble! Alabama! For a lot of us, Keith Jackson is collge football.
3. Charlie Jones, football. Charlie Jones always broadcast the late afternoon games played first in the AFL and then the AFC. If it was a war between the Raiders and the Chiefs, or a playoff with a West Coast team vs. the Jets, Charlie and his rich, melodic voice were on it.
2. Joe Buck, football, baseball. Buck comes under a lot of criticism these days, and I can't figure out why. Whether he's with Troy Aikman in football or Tim McCarver in baseball, his cerebral, understated approach somehow makes the games feel larger than life. I hate what happened in the clip below but love what Buck brings to it.
The talent runs in the family:
1. Dick Enberg, football, basketball, tennis. Oh my. It's the versatility -- and the love for Wimbledon -- that clinches it. Unforgettable voice and a brilliant essayist.
The good ones strike this balance of emotional detachment and personal involvement. They're not supposed to betray who they want to win nor even offer many opinions on what is occuring on the field or court -- that's the role of the "color" commentator.
Yet to keep viewers' attention, they have to communicate the drama they are watching as well as give background information that lets viewers feel as if they somehow know the players who are competing.
And above all, they have to have a voice. A voice that hooks and holds the viewer with its resonance and variety.
With all that, here are my five favorite from a variety of sports ... though, as you might expect, football dominates.
5. Don Criqui, football. Criqui's career has floundered in recent years, but he called two terrific games in the early 80s: Chargers-Dolphins in the '81 playoffs and, most memorably, the 1984 Orange Bowl with Miami & Nebraska. I always felt the timbre of his voice enhanced the natural drama of the game.
4. Keith Jackson, college football. Whoa Nellie! Fumble! Alabama! For a lot of us, Keith Jackson is collge football.
3. Charlie Jones, football. Charlie Jones always broadcast the late afternoon games played first in the AFL and then the AFC. If it was a war between the Raiders and the Chiefs, or a playoff with a West Coast team vs. the Jets, Charlie and his rich, melodic voice were on it.
2. Joe Buck, football, baseball. Buck comes under a lot of criticism these days, and I can't figure out why. Whether he's with Troy Aikman in football or Tim McCarver in baseball, his cerebral, understated approach somehow makes the games feel larger than life. I hate what happened in the clip below but love what Buck brings to it.
The talent runs in the family:
1. Dick Enberg, football, basketball, tennis. Oh my. It's the versatility -- and the love for Wimbledon -- that clinches it. Unforgettable voice and a brilliant essayist.
Monday, January 30, 2012
I Am A Traditionalist
I learned this weekend what people who prefer traditional worship over contemporary and post-modern worship feel like.
And it was tennis that taught me that lesson.
Yesterday featured what many experts are calling one of the greatest, if not the greatest, tennis match of all time: Novak Djokovic's epic 5 hour, 53 minute victory over Rafael Nadal in the final of the Australian Open.
The match was simply brutal: mesmerizing rallies, impossible retrieves, bold aggression, and dramatic turns of momentum. The match was so good, in fact, that ESPN 2 played it twice again on Sunday, dubbing it an "Instant Classic."
And I could barely watch it.
(Now . . . I couldn't watch it live as Sunday night in Australia is Sunday morning in the U.S. and I'm otherwise occupied at that time.)
But the little bit I did watch live and then attempts to watch the replay didn't really grab my attention the way an instant classic should.
Why not? (And this is how it relates to traditional worship . . . )
Because it's not tennis the way I learned it or the way I remember it or even the way I enjoy it.
Now: these guys are better than players of yesterday. They're bigger, fitter, and, taking advantage of the improvements in technology, they hit the ball harder and with more spin than the Lavers, Ashes, and McEnroes of my childhood could even dream of. Like I said, their game is brutal.
But in my mind, the beauty is missing. There's no coming to the net. No serve & volley. No passing shots. Today's points are longer, to be sure, but less interesting. In the way my mind is conditioned, nothing is more beautiful than a spinning serve followed by a putaway volley, a la John McEnroe in his prime.
Today's game is bigger, bolder, and better . . . but I'm not comfortable with it.
Which brings me back to worship style. All the largest churches in the U.S. (check here and here) are contemporary with barely a nod to the kind of traditional worship that dominated in the early part of the 20th century. Those churches are bigger and bolder, for sure, and "better" at attracting large crowds than congregations which feature robes, organs, and hymnals.
Yet for people who have memories steeped in a worship style from that earlier era, no argument from boldness or effectiveness will ever do. There is a gap in comfort and aesthetics that simply can't be bridged.
Of course, we at Good Shepherd have from the outset been a "contemporary" church with a commitment to "classic moments" in worship.
But after this weekend, I understand better than ever why that style won't appeal to everyone.
Because some people just prefer tradition. In a different setting, that includes me.
And it was tennis that taught me that lesson.
Yesterday featured what many experts are calling one of the greatest, if not the greatest, tennis match of all time: Novak Djokovic's epic 5 hour, 53 minute victory over Rafael Nadal in the final of the Australian Open.
The match was simply brutal: mesmerizing rallies, impossible retrieves, bold aggression, and dramatic turns of momentum. The match was so good, in fact, that ESPN 2 played it twice again on Sunday, dubbing it an "Instant Classic."
And I could barely watch it.
(Now . . . I couldn't watch it live as Sunday night in Australia is Sunday morning in the U.S. and I'm otherwise occupied at that time.)
But the little bit I did watch live and then attempts to watch the replay didn't really grab my attention the way an instant classic should.
Why not? (And this is how it relates to traditional worship . . . )
Because it's not tennis the way I learned it or the way I remember it or even the way I enjoy it.
Now: these guys are better than players of yesterday. They're bigger, fitter, and, taking advantage of the improvements in technology, they hit the ball harder and with more spin than the Lavers, Ashes, and McEnroes of my childhood could even dream of. Like I said, their game is brutal.
But in my mind, the beauty is missing. There's no coming to the net. No serve & volley. No passing shots. Today's points are longer, to be sure, but less interesting. In the way my mind is conditioned, nothing is more beautiful than a spinning serve followed by a putaway volley, a la John McEnroe in his prime.
Today's game is bigger, bolder, and better . . . but I'm not comfortable with it.
Which brings me back to worship style. All the largest churches in the U.S. (check here and here) are contemporary with barely a nod to the kind of traditional worship that dominated in the early part of the 20th century. Those churches are bigger and bolder, for sure, and "better" at attracting large crowds than congregations which feature robes, organs, and hymnals.
Yet for people who have memories steeped in a worship style from that earlier era, no argument from boldness or effectiveness will ever do. There is a gap in comfort and aesthetics that simply can't be bridged.
Of course, we at Good Shepherd have from the outset been a "contemporary" church with a commitment to "classic moments" in worship.
But after this weekend, I understand better than ever why that style won't appeal to everyone.
Because some people just prefer tradition. In a different setting, that includes me.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Sin's First Consequence
It seems as if everybody knows the story of Adam, Eve, and the Garden.
But few people have actually read it.
Which is why I love teaching it to a group of people.
Such was the case last night in our First Step class for people considering church membership.
We realized that the heart of the story comes in the reaction of the man and the woman to getting caught:
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”
13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”
The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
If you went to commercial at the close of that particular scene, you'd be left the image that is supposed to stay with us.
Confronted with the reality of sin, the man and the woman stand, naked and exposed, with their fingers pointed firmly at someone else.
The man blames God -- "the woman YOU PUT HERE WITH ME" -- while the woman points to the crafy snake -- "the serpent deceived me."
Sin's first consequence, then, is what we call today passing the buck.
And it is a consequence that we in 21st Century America have made into an art form.
In the wake of your deceptions, transgressions, and failures . . . where are you pointing fingers?
What a day that will be when we break the cycle of buck passing and start new patterns of acknowledging guilt and accepting responsibility.
But few people have actually read it.
Which is why I love teaching it to a group of people.
Such was the case last night in our First Step class for people considering church membership.
We realized that the heart of the story comes in the reaction of the man and the woman to getting caught:
11 And he said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?”
12 The man said, “The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”
13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”
The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
If you went to commercial at the close of that particular scene, you'd be left the image that is supposed to stay with us.
Confronted with the reality of sin, the man and the woman stand, naked and exposed, with their fingers pointed firmly at someone else.
The man blames God -- "the woman YOU PUT HERE WITH ME" -- while the woman points to the crafy snake -- "the serpent deceived me."
Sin's first consequence, then, is what we call today passing the buck.
And it is a consequence that we in 21st Century America have made into an art form.
In the wake of your deceptions, transgressions, and failures . . . where are you pointing fingers?
What a day that will be when we break the cycle of buck passing and start new patterns of acknowledging guilt and accepting responsibility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
