In the Coracle

Featured on Next-Wave

PatJune 20, 2008

Very fun news - Bob and Charlie and the crew at Next Wave.magazine picked up the article that I wrote here titled “Things They Tell Church Planters That Are Simply Wrong” and which has been generating a good deal of traffic and comments.

The article is in the current issue (June 2008, #114), and a direct link is here. Enjoy!

Posted in Uncategorized |
No Comments »

Exegeting a Community

PatJune 13, 2008

One of the foundational beliefs for Ray Bakke and for Bakke Graduate University is that location, place, physical context, city, georgraphy - space is important. Ray writes in “Street Signs: A New Direction in Urban Ministry” (Ray Bakke, Jon Sharpe) about the process of doing this work. Here is a handout from my Overture I class on the topic of exegeting communities. If you’re not familiar with the term ‘exegesis’, you may think of it as a critical analysis of a text, specifically within its context. Or just read the wikipedia entry. Usually we speak of exegeting sacred texts like the Bible, so the idea of exegeting not a text but a city is unique.

I’m revisiting this topic in order to make sure I understand it well. Here’s a link to the journal entry for the day in class that we learned this subject.

I’m going to draw directly from a handout from Ray Bakke titled “Exegeting Communities - an Overview”. This entry will be nearly a direct quote of the entire handout. I’ll add my comments in italics between square brackets [like this].

Some Primary Assumptions

1. The idea assumes a fallen humanity and a sinful word, but we also assume that the Trinitarian God revealed in all Scripture is committed both to the spiritual transformation of persons and to the social transformation of places.
2. This idea assumes an ecological view that spiritually healthy person s and families benefit from what reformers like Luther and Calvin called “common grace institutions,” i.e. good schools, health systems, economies and employment, freedoms and security.
3. In America at least, this concept assumes the idea that pastors are stewards of churches which receive local property tax exemptions and national income tax deductions, which were placed into the Constitution by national founders who understood the social benefits of churches.
4. This idea assumes that Church and mission persons are leaders of institutions of and for their communities, and not merely in them, which is the “club house” model of church or agency.

Some Primary Steps

1. Visit every member of your congregation where they work and affirm their calling in that work place as their primary mission field. Equip and empower their ministries in the marketplace with all the issues, challenges and agendas, as well as the ethical and moral challenges. [Here, Ray's perspective is that of a full-time paid pastor in an existing church.]
2. Map the assets of your community (a la “Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets” (John P. Kretzmann, John L. McKnight), seek to affirm the signs of hope that exist, and increase the capacities of those things you discover truly are God’s gifts to building a healthy community.
   [Instead of looking at a community to find its problems, you instead look at a community to find its strengths and the places that God is at work. This perspective - looking for the good instead of the bad - reminds me of the Celtic perspective on humanity as carrying the image of God even in infancy]
3. Visit every church in the community, first to learn of their histories, calling and ministry, but also to thank them for serving in the community and helping people you will never reach. Ask the priests or pastors, “What is the most important lesson you have learned in serving your community?” You will be amazed at what you did not know and what you will learn.
4. Then, visit every other social organization in the community, such as schools, police, hospitals, fire departments and businesses, such as realtors and others who have community data and up-to-date information. Even pubs can teach you a lot. Feel free to apologize for not coming to see them sooner. Invite them to your church, along with the pastors you meet, to introduce, to interview, and to see what they can teach you.
   [You may be able to tell that Ray's background is Baptist :-), but the basic idea is this - meet the community leaders and get to know them. Network, and invite them to your church to appreciate them, but NOT to evangelize them in the classic sense. Ask questions and listen well.]

My experience, and that of countless students over four decades, is that if you spend 20% of your pastoral time networking your way into significant relations of church and agency leaders, within a year you will know the community as well as anyone, and they will know you. Given that 90% of urban people especially come to Christ through relationships, and not programs, and evangelism, put simply, is “scratching people where they itch in the name of Jesus”. Your networking time will then pay huge dividends in your ministry.

[During our class time, Ray mentioned that for church planters, he would bump that number from 20% of your time networking to 50% or more of your time.

He strongly suggested riding along with local police to get their sense of what's happening in your area. For parents, network at kids' activities. Work from a local coffeeshop instead of your office.

The bottom line is this: Learn to listen to your cultural context, ESPECIALLY if you want to transform the context and not just to draw people out of it to some theoretical safe zone.]

My question for you is this: How have you learned about the area in which you live? Who have you listened to, and what have you heard?

Posted in Faith, Grad School |
No Comments »

United By Faith - Section 2, Multiracial Congregations in the United States

PatMay 30, 2008

I blogged a bit about race here last week as I began to read “United by Faith: The Multiracial Congregation As an Answer to the Problem of Race”. Here is my summary of Section 1 of the book.

Section 2 is “Multiracial Congregations in the United States”.

Chapter 3 - Congregations and the Color Line (1600-1940)

British colonists evangelized Native Americans but did not integrate them into their churches. Instead, they established “prayer villages” for Christianized natives who then were removed from their own tribal culture, and not assimilated into the British Christian culture. (44)

The institution of slavery in the American colonies was the result of a growing capitalist economy and “required the creation of the philosophy and the practice of white supremacy” (44). This philosophy was justified by whites who trumpeted the benefit of African slaves becoming Christians in the New World, ignoring the possibility that Christianity had been in Africa for centuries.

As African-Americans were evangelized, biracial congregations grew. In the second half of the 1700s, congregations were blended - African Americans and whites worshiped together; they “even addressed each other as family using the terms ‘brother’ and ’sister’ (46).

Even more startling was the fact that African Americans served in pastoral roles at some biracial congregations. [....]

When the pastor of a mixed-race Baptist congregation in Virginia resigned from leadership the church invited an African American man to preach for them. The church was so delighted with his sermons that they paid for freedom for the man and his family.” (46-47)

However, by the late 1800s, biracial congregations had failed. Congregations separated the races by different pews, different entrances, and even at times erected dividers between white and black sections so that whites would not have to see blacks when worshiping.

In response, African Americans formed their own religious communities, precursors to African American congregations and denominations. (49).

In parallel with what occurred in the Protestant churches, the Catholic church also failed to reconcile the races. In addition to separate seating and doorways for African Americans, African Americans were not invited to enter the priesthood. In the Catholic view, the priest is the mediator between God and humanity, and ordaining blacks to the priesthood would “trumpet the moral and intellectual equality of blacks and whites” (50).

Various opportunities for racial reconciliation occurred in the years head. After the Civil War, white racism and the African American desire for freedom quashed meaningful reconciliation. (53) A promising movement, the Church of God, practiced racial unity but resulted in separate congregations for whites and blacks. The Azusa Street Revival in the early 1900s, pastored by an African American, showed promise for several years until white racism made reconciliation difficult. (57-59)

Although there were “brilliant moments when reconciliation was being practiced” (60), “the history of the church in the United States leads one to believe that sustaining multiracial congregations is a near impossibility due to racism.” (61)

Chapter 4 - The Emergence of Multiracial Congregations (1940-2000)

Mystic theologian Howard Thurman became the foremost proponent of racial reconciliation in the United States from the 1940s through the 1970s, in response to a trip to India in which Thurman was repeatedly asked, ‘Why is the church powerless before the color bar?’ (62).

In response, Thurman established The Church for the Fellowship of All Peoples in San Francisco, California, which he co-pastored with a white man, Alfred Fisk. They “alternated their preaching in order to maintain an interracial character in the pulpit” (64).

As Thurman stated, ‘Fellowship Church was a unique idea fresh, untried. There were no precedents and no traditions to aid in structuring the present or gauging the future.’ yet Thurman felt he had two insights from his experience to aid him: ‘a profound conviction that meaningful and creative experiences between peoples can be more compelling than all the ideas, concepts, faiths, fears, ideologies ,and prejudices that divide them; and absolute faith that if such experiences can be multiplied and sustained over a time interval of sufficient duration any barrier that separates one person from another can be undermined and eliminated. (64)

Fellowship Church was rare in the 1940s and 1950s, but there were others. The Catholic church began also to integrate its congregations in the 1950s. (67) The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s did much to provide congregational ground for racial reconciliation, and the Pentecostal movements from the 1970s onward have had strong multiracial components.

The 21st century “holds the potential to be the century of the multiracial congregations, despite the relatively small percentage such churches represent among total congregations” (74).

Chapter 5 - A Closer Look at Four Multiracial Congregations

Four multiracial congregations are now examined. A multiracial church for these authors is

a congregation in which no one racial group is 80 percent or more of the people. We use the cutoff of 20 percent of the people of a different race or races because this is the point of critical mass. (76)

These congregations have “a history of being multiracial for a number of years and through mroe than one pastoral administration.” (76) Therefore, they have remained multiracial through shifting sociological trends in their neighborhood, and through more than one leader’s vision.

The first congregation examined is The Riverside Church in New York City. Riverside is an interdenominational, liberal, mainline Protestant church. It is a racially integrated church whose members tend to be middle class.

It was at Riverside church in 1969 that James Forman delivered the “Black Manifesto”, calling or reparations for slavery from white churches (80).

Current pastor James Forbes has intentionally fostered reconciliation between blacks and whites in the church , and states a “75 percent” philosophy on compromise and on the comfort level at a church:

A truly diverse congregation where anybody enjoys more than 75 percent of what’s going on is not thoroughly integrated=. So that if you’re going to be an integrated church you have to think, “hey, this is great, I enjoyed at least 75 percent of it,” because 25 percent you should grant for somebody’s precious liturgical expression that is probably odious to you; otherwise it’s not integrating. So an integrating church is characterized by the need to be content with everything. You have to factor in a willingness to absorb some things that are not dear to you but may be precious to some of those coming in. (82)

“The Riverside Church is an example of a “successful multiracial congregation that is bound together by theological liberalism, a legacy of tolerance and inclusion, a tradition of community outreach, a conscientious leadership, and a healthy sense of compromise for the sake of unity.” (82)

The next church examined is The Mosaic Church of Los Angeles, California.

Mosaic’s major goal is to evangelize the urban areas and the arts and entertainment district. It is now pastored by its second pastor, Erwin McManus, a Hispanic born in El Salvador. His philosophy of ministry emphasizes evangelism, cultural relevancy, and artistic creativity.

One of the lessons to learn from Mosaic is that a multiracial congregation possesses the potential for drawing individuals who are comfortable with a multiracial social atmosphere and individuals from a uniracial social atmosphere who become interested in surrounding themselves with people of other races. (86)

Mosaic has been successful at developing a highly multiracial Christian community of mostly young adults.

The authors next examine St. Pius X Catholic Church of Beaumont, Texas.

St. Pius has been racially integrated for at least forty years, and has done so quietly without grand communication outside its community or even among its own members. As a congregation, it has been on the leading edge of innovations within the Catholic community.

It was the first to adopt changes from the Second Vatican Council, the first congregation to hae a full-time social worker; the first to use lay people to distribute Communion at Mass and for home visitations, and Father Perusina was the first priest to join the Beaumont Ministerial Alliance. (88)

Members have forged deep bonds across racial boundaries, and members who were interviewed for the book repeatedly spoke of the joy of their shared life across races.

The fourth congregation is Park Avenue Methodist Church in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Begun as a white congregation, it is now mixed between whites, African Americans, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans. Its early integration came as a result of a thriving youth ministry to the neighborhood.

Robert Stamp, the pastor beginning in 1988, recognized the need to bring on board an African American pastor who would share preaching duties with him in order to facilitate racial reconciliation. He also placed into leadership worship leaders who would blend a wide range of musical styles.

After Stamp’s departure, Mark Horst became Park Avenue’s pastor. The picture painted of Horst as a leader is powerful:

Even though he had a background in urban and multicultural settings, he made himself vulnerable at many points to grow in his leadership abilities. He even invited one of the leading African American preachers in the area to critiique his preaching and coach him in ways to connect with his diverse congregation. (93)

As the surrounding community is becoming more populated with Latinos, Horst chose to go to a language immersion program in Guatemala.

Each of these four congregations is intentionally multiracial. Each congregation got there by a different path, and each has different theological traditions and leadership styles. But each proves that multiracial churches can happen, and are powerful expressions of Christian reconciliation.

Posted in Faith, Grad School |
2 Comments »

United By Faith - Section 1, Multicultural Christianity in the Bible

PatMay 19, 2008

I blogged a bit about race here last week as I began to read “United by Faith: The Multiracial Congregation As an Answer to the Problem of Race”

I’ve just finished Section 1 of the book, and rather than rushing onward (grad school reading pace is so different than real reading pace) :), I want to take a few minutes to blog a summary of each chapter. Well, not chapter so much as chapter grouping which is 2-4 chapters.

Section 1 is “Biblical Antecedents for Multicultural Congregations”, aka “This is not a new idea”.

Chapter 1 - Racial inclusiveness in the Gospel stories

The culture of the first century Roman world experienced race and culture differently than we do. American history comes from a colonial expansion which decimated indigenous populations, and transported and enslaved millions of people, creating a racial hierarchy that placed people with white skin and European ancestry in a superior position, and relegated people of color to inferior positions. The world of Jesus had similar distinctions that produced discriminations. From the Jewish perspective, many of these grew from the oppression that the Jews had faced at the hands of Gentile nations. (p.11)

Jesus’ life and ministry spoke to issues of cultural and racial divides. In fact, the very stories told by the Gospel writers - carefully selected to illustrate the Jesus story - illustrate this issue very specifically.

Two of the Gospels begin with stories of Jesus’ birth. Luke calls attention to the inclusion of the shepherds (universally despised in this society) as primary historical witnesses of the birth event, and the prayer of Simeon at the temple over Jesus in Luke 2:30-32 tells of Jesus’ ministry as “a light for revelation to the Gentiles” as well as “for glory to your people Israel”. (p.13).

Matthew’s Gospel includes the story of the Magi coming from Asia to pay respects to the infant Jesus, which also alludes to the inclusion of Gentiles in the salvation story. And Matthew describes Jesus’ early life in Egypt, expanding Israel’s savior beyond its national boundaries and fulfilling Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15. (p.13)

Luke bookends the Jesus story in Luke 24:47, as does Matthew in 28:19, confirming that the Gospel is “for all nations”. (p.14)

The time span of Jesus’ ministry written in the four Gospels also point to stories of racial inclusiveness.

The Gospel writers wanted it to be known that Jesus was raised in an environment that maintained his own Jewish cultural and religious identity yet was enriched by the influence of various Gentile cultural elements. This prepared Jesus for a ministry that was radically inclusive. (p.15)

Jesus’ close-knit circle of disciples was radically inclusive, containing both a tax collector (a collaborator with the Roman empire) and a zealot (dedicated to violent overthrow of the empire). (p.15-16) His close followers also included many women.

Jesus demonstrated willingness to include outcasts by speaking with them, eating with them and touching them in contrast to Jewish purity regulations. These decisions were not simply acts of kindness, but were radically inclusive, highly political acts that demonstrated the expansion of the story of God beyond the Jewish nation to become “a house of prayer for the nations”.

Chapter 2 - Racial inclusiveness in the early Christian congregations

The transition from a fellowship of believers who followed Jesus in his earthly life to the post-crucifixion era marked its transition point at Pentecost. On that day, the Jerusalem church grew from 120 Galilean Jews to over 3,000 multicultural, multilingual Jews (Acts 2:41). (p.22)

The church was multicultural and multilingual from the first moment of its existence. (p.22)

However, the inclusiveness of the early church was not without conflict and struggle. The early church in Jerusalem was on the verge of ethnic conflict described in Acts 6:1-6. The complaint that widows from Palestine were being favored in daily distribution of food over the immigrant widows (Greek speaking Jews). Rather than dividing into different ethnic congregations at this point, the apostolic leadership made a definitive statement about servanthood and inclusivity by appointing Greek-speaking leaders to oversee this social service, empowering the disempowered community.

As Christianity expanded beyond Jerusalem, the reconciliation between Jews and Gentiles (non-Jews) continued to be the model for the church’s growth. The church in Antioch of Syria was the first such church. The city of Antioch was a world-class city with world-class problems: extreme poverty, homelessness, crime, ethnic strife, race riots. (p.27). The Antioch church continued the inclusive practice of Jesus by selecting an ethnically diverse leadership team. Paul and Barnabas were fluent in Jewish traditions but were raised outside of Palestine in Greek culture. Manean grew up in the household of Herod Antipas, who beheaded John the Baptist and interviewed Jesus during his trial. Lucius of Cyrene came from North Africa, and Simeon the Black was likely a black African. (p.28). The congregation included Jews fleeing persecution in Palestine alongside Gentile converts.

The Antioch model of church planting was used throughout the Mediterranean region. The churches in Corinth and Ephesus included Jews and Gentiles, people with names of Greek, Latin and Jewish origins. (p.32-33)

The growth of the multiracial and multicultural church posed challenges to unity.

Paul often reminded his congregations that there was no Jew or Gentile in Christ (Romans 10:12; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 2:11-26; Colossians 3:11)

Paul had to fight for the inclusion of Gentiles into the new community without forcing them to be culturally Jewish (Galatians 2), to the point of challenging Peter that requiring converts to become culturally Jewish compromised “the truth of the Gospel” (Galatians 2:14). A summit on this issue between leaders in Jerusalem and Antioch is recorded in Acts 1:1-31.

It is most important to note that during this phase of church expansion, the church leadership “chose not to take what seemed the pragmatic course of action, that of ‘founding a separate and entirely Gentile church’” (p.35). Unity in the church did not happen in an abstract universal sense focused on doctrine, but must also include intimate relationships, to the point of sharing meals together. In this culture, sharing meals spoke of agreement, peace, friendship and brotherhood, not merely food. But we must recognize that this commitment to unity came at a cost and with sacrifice by all involved. (p.37)

Ultimately, the unity of the first-century church was the result of the miracle of reconciliation - a conversion from their ethnocentrism to the intention, practice, and vision of Jesus. (p.37).

Next up: Section 2, Multicultural Congregations in the United States