Choice of Purpose

Okay, I admit it, I thought I was done with this subject a couple weeks ago, like most blog posts that make the rounds with my friends the various "Let/Don't Let Your Kids Choose To Not Go To Church" posts came in a bunch and then we'd move on to whatever else someone thought was killing the church.  But NO, another round of "Get your kids into Sunday worship" posts are showing up. 

So, I've made my points on choice previously, but my issue with these are that they tie into everything I'm struggling with regarding this whole "church survival" culture. There are lots of points where this culture goes astray, but this recent series of articles hits two main ones.  1) Church = Sunday Morning Worship (or at least that large corporate worship is central to the idea of Church).  2) The objective of Church is to survive, and that means indoctrinating kids into the culture so that (maybe, hopefully) they'll find it essential to their adult lives. 

So let's talk about this: The church built around a large corporate worship as the only, best, or even "right" way to do church is dying.  Not for every congregation or context, but as a whole it is.  This is NOT what church is or what church needs to be in the new paradigm.  Worship will happen, but it's quite probable that it will happen in smaller groups, or at special times of the year, or both, or connected to mission and other parts of "Church," or who knows exactly, it should based on the new paradigm be contextual, organic, and relational.  And to be quite honest, for most churches, large corporate worship is not, and quite probably can not be that sustainably. 

So why then is this the drum that so many beat when it comes to the ideal of "helping our children be Godly?"  Probably in large part because it's what they know.  For many, Sundays at church was the norm, but it also was rarely (and most of the posts I've seen state this) the only way faith, religion, and/or spirituality interacted with their life.  The problem is that having spent most of our life in the Postmodern Transition, we create a false duality and over emphasize the roles of institutions which support our "truth."  This is not where we are today, and certainly for kids who have spent most of their life in the new paradigm is actually completely illogical.  Not saying that all kids who go to a Sunday large service of worship will turn against it, but coming to that will NOT keep anyone involved in the church or with their faith by itself.

If anything, for those who have spent most their lives in this relational paradigm of convergence, the separation of the world at the "worship hour" is going to present large issues with finding purpose unless it is supported by a connection to the rest of the world around us.  At some time in the near future there will be a tipping point where this struggle to maintain and survive will be the very thing that brings about an inevitable ending.

It is though the fear of this ending that I think causes us to write so many of the posts, to spend so much time reflecting on how to survive. Yet, it seems too often rather than being willing to risk letting things that we've always known and make us feel safe and connected to our ideas of "God," we think that we just need to focus on making others think the same way we do.  This is especially risky (in my opinion, as if everything we right isn't based on our opinions) when it comes to our children.  I struggle a lot with parenting, the ideas we ask our children to accept just because we hold them close to ourselves aren't always ones we should impose on our kids.  I started struggling with this with sports.  So often I see babies dressed in school or team colours, told to cheer on "our team" just because it's "mom's team" or "dad's team."

The thing is we don't stop with sports (and even if we did, I'd have lots to say, but that's a different post), we basically tell our children for years who God is, what God thinks, and sometimes go as far as to turn God into the global boogie man without meaning to.  We want our kids to think like we do, and we do it to the point of indoctrination.  That's a problem, I see it time and again at confirmation age.  There are kids who have never asked questions, they come to church because they're told to, they answer questions with certainty because they've been told what the right answer is, but when faced with realities that conflict with these answers, they don't know how to doubt, they don't know HOW to make a CHOICE! 

We've created a world filled with anxiety because these children have never existed within a world where there was a "right" path to a "single" truth.  Their world is relational and every thing that happens adds to the book they are doodling in (see previous blog posts for more on this) creating new understandings.  But we want faith not to be in THAT book, we want faith to be already written.  We want them to memorize the text book and never deviate from or question it. 

Have you looked at a GOOD children's educational book recently?  Many have more questions than answers.  Most new one's I've seen aim to put kids into the world their studying and then leave them room to go find more about the questions that matter to them.  We just finished our first youth literary circle here, they read the BFG by Dahl and they had so many different thoughts on the BIG stuff (Fear, Hope, Pain, Life, Ethics) that came from the reading it was hard to keep track of who asked what and who answered what and what all that lead to. 

We cannot indoctrinate our kids and expect them to survive in a world where the constant stream of information means that their reality is ALWAYS changing.  They need room to figure it out.  The things church provides are useful and important in that formation, but the idea that the other things of life are somehow less important, or even unequivocally less Godly than that Sunday morning thing is very misplaced.

So let's sum this up before the few people who have made it this far move on:
Going to church as a kid WILL NOT mean that they'll come to church as an adult.  This NEVER should have been our intent. I've seen in a number of posts the idea that when we have kids, people come back to church.  There were once statistics to support this, but that was mostly part of a modern way of thinking that became paramount in the postmodern transition to the idea that our truth was a truth based on a singular path.  The fact though is: if we're not going to be the kind of place that an individual thinks is important to THEIR OWN LIFE at any certain time, there was never anywhere to go but down, because as we are more able to see the complexities of the world, we look for places to engage our passions, and those places and people become most important.  The church CAN be that place, but we have to make it that place.  We have to let go of the idea that getting people in the door is our purpose, we have to let go of the things that make us comfortable, we have to stop trying to survive and become whatever it is our context needs most.  If we allow ourselves to be moved by the Spirit that envelops all things, WE will find our passions, our children can find their passions, and God's reign will move ever closer. 

<End Rant>

Love is Logical

When I look back over my life there are some key things that most every girl I ever liked had in common.  On the other hand I can also look back and see some great people who really liked me that I wouldn't even give the time of day.  What was it that kept me from being attracted to these girls?  In reality, I just wasn't, I had a very specific type of personality and physical look that would keep my attention and moved me romantically.  I couldn't then, and can't now logic being attracted to others in that way.  Of course at one time that inability to logic attraction made me wonder how ANYONE could be attracted to those who I wasn't.  As I though came to a greater understanding of how we communicate and began to better see the world through others eyes, I saw that everyone had things that they were attracted to, but they weren't always the same things.  

I now feel this is THE most reasonable argument for why same sex attraction is normal.  It's not that everyone should be, but that some just ARE.  It is what they are romantically interested in, just as I have only certain people who attract me, they do too.  There is no difference.  So if you are to tell someone not to be attracted to those of the same sex, you are also saying that you shouldn't limit who you're attracted to by anything other than a set of external rules.  I'm not even sure how we could determine these external rules. It's just illogical to think that we should all only be attracted to the exact same people.  I have never seen anything that makes that seem realistic.  

Why do I use this as my core argument?  Because it is all the same love.  Beyond the complexities of Gender Identity, Roles, Physical Sex, and all of that, who we're attracted to is just that, a short list of people that is different for every person.  It is just how we all do it, regardless of where we may fall on a spectrum.  I can argue with you from a theological standpoint, from a justice standpoint, from a legal standpoint, from any number of other standpoints, but this simple idea to me seems the most universal to all.  Even if you're not attracted to anyone at all, you know what you don't feel.  Why can we not understand that this just is what it is, and we can't really just go change it?  

I tried after my divorce to date a few people different than my ex, mostly physically different but also personality.  My wife now is physically similar, and in some core places is almost the same, same with her personality, there are differences, but there are some key similarities.  I know for some these core attractions do adjust over time, but we all I think can find some patterns either throughout life or within a season of life.  

I don't care what you think about people's actions, there is a serious issue with judging who a person is attracted to, regardless of if that judgement is based on gender or personality or a person's look.  It is like judging another for other differences in thought, such as if you were to judge me because I'm an aspie and can't think the same way as "most" or judging me for what I choose to eat because I am a diabetic.  I do not fit simply into either of these boxes, and to simply use your experience with others who are labeled with these labels to define me is unfair and judgmental   These are both complex situations I find myself in that I have to work with.  But they are more than illnesses or disorders, they are part of me, part of a full me, a core me, a real me that is as real and complete as any other.  

Equality is not as simple as the rights to do what others get to do.  To allow all legal rights does not make us equal.  What makes us equal is seeing all people as complete people and treating all that way.  That means there is no one set of rules that will always make everyone fit, that is actually the core of a relational theology.  God is three and God is one in relationship.  All three are different, but they are all fully God.  It is the same for us, we are each individual, but it is in our relationships with others who are different but still fully human that we ourselves can be fully human ourselves.  

Let people be who they are.  No law is going to change us, we have to change us.  We have to see people as fully equal to us if we want to move forward and bring the kingdom.  Time to get rid of the fear and embrace the same love one for another that we have been given since creation when we were made in the image of Love.

Why I don't vote (a rough sketch)

**Note: This would be much better stated within a RL dialogue.  I don't think anyone should just accept this fully at face value.  This is complex even within my own head.**

Who are you going to vote for? I hate that question mainly because the answer I give usually turns into an argument with whomever may have asked it.  For most people there is a "right" answer to that question, or at the very least an acceptable "wrong" answer, but very few people are willing to even try to dialogue with someone who says: "I'm not voting."  The only response I ever seem to get to that is one of frustration often with a side of anger.  Things are said like "Well then I better never hear you complain about things!" or "You are neglecting your duty!" or "How can you not use the great freedom you have, do you not care?!?"

Yet when I ask them why they feel this way, and to help me see what I might be missing, they tend to speak to the exact things I've thought about time and again as voting seasons come and go each and every year.  Let me first address the 3 big reactionary statements listed above because I feel those are a bigger issue than what I really want to talk about.  

"You don't vote, you don't get to talk" is a bull response.  I don't get to say "I wish we had a different X" or "If Y had just gone the other way."  I'll agree with that.  But can I still say my views on social, family, world, and even government issues? Yes, I'm still welcome in the world of the public square and honestly I'm quite active there, I just don't vote instead choosing to act in other forms.

"You have a duty, You must use your freedoms."  You know what makes things free? They're not your duty and you don't have to do things. There are lots of freedoms that I don't use and there are good reasons why I don't.  For example, I don't bear arms, and there are many who agree with that choice, so why is voting different? Also, do you know what I feel my duty is?  Love others, Love God, Love creation, act as a good steward and servant through faithfully discerned actions.  That (in my case) doesn't include voting. 

Okay, now that all of that is out of the way:  Why don't I vote?  I wish there was a simple way to state this that everyone would understand and not just ignore as if I'm ignorant, but I know my reasons aren't that understandable to most, especially when I tell them that I WANT them to vote.  The simple answer is that in my lifetime of discerning my call from God, voting has never been something I've discerned as an act faithful to my understanding of that call.  

That though is just a reactionary answer.  The deep answer is that I feel very called to certain acts of ministry, certain stances on what it means to act as a Christian, certain things that God has placed before me, and voting could damage that work, and honestly might be seen by some as hypocritical of what I claim.  

I am called to relational work, work with all those who I come in contact with.  I am called to help them in the moments I have with them and try to empower them going forward.  I expect many readers now are thinking: well that's why you vote, to better empower others and to help them, but that's not where I fit in, I feel that I am called not to change the system, but to be change in the world.  

I am called to love all.  The way our political system is set up, to vote is to choose a side, but this is not God choosing the side of the oppressed, this is us choosing an ideology which we then defend, even as it (as all ideologies do) oppresses others.  My love for all is relational, I can only fully love those I know.  I feel my call is weakened when others see me as a label.  

I am called to a world beyond principalities and powers.  This world for me is not some future place, or some other plane of existence  but here and now within the Kingdom of God here in the Creation of God.  I cannot be part of choosing other powers over God's.  I feel I must be willing to do that which I choose to do regardless of its place within society.  I was once asked by someone upset at me not voting why I didn't go to China or Russia where I couldn't be free.  All I could answer was, "I would like to think the legality of my actions will always be secondary to the faithfulness of those actions."  I cannot be sure that I would actually do so, but here and now in the country in which I live, I will render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's as long as I first render unto God that which is God's.  

I have been called by others a "Utopian Anarchist" and I have redefined that term to fit as a compliment.  I do believe in a world where we will do what is right for one another in all cases without a government to "make it so."  I believe I am called to work towards that world.  There is the need for many to vote for whomever they discern to be the faithful choice as they are able to understand it, for me that need is to not vote, to speak through actions to a world possible regardless of what worldly powers exist.  Jesus did not overthrow the government, Jesus changed the world through his individual actions, changes that have influenced so many to do things in their lives faithfully as well.  God's world is not political, and for me that is key to my faith at this time.  

Frisbee and Faith

Tonight while playing Ultimate Frisbee there was a moment that reminded me a lot of what I've seen going on through social media with my the PCUSA.  In this blog I want to present a series of quotes (as I best remember them) that I heard there and how I've seen them at play in my denomination recently.

First some background: I've played with the same basic group of people for the last 5 years.  Some members have come and we've added some new ones but there has always been a core group that had come together just to have fun and play.  We've had a few come in with different views of what "fun" was but they tended to come and go fairly quickly.  Recently the always open invite has brought a large group of diverse points of views, and tonight the core group was certainly a minority.  A number of college and club players were there as well as others who "want" to fit into that world. 

So that is where we start.  And it doesn't take long for tensions to increase and interactions such as the following to begin. (all expletives are adjusted out)

"You can take it out and bring it back in"
"Sorry, that's not how we play here"

"Cut IN, Why won't you cut?"
"Because that's a normal throw to make."
"Not if you're REALLY playing"
"Well that's how we play"

"Stack"
"What's that?"
"UGH!"

These types of interactions I find common in the PCUSA.  It's like we're speaking two different languages and the longer we don't feel like others are getting what we're trying to say, the more agitated we get. 

Finally after some comment that I did not hear one of the core group (we'll call him Kurt) started picking up the cones (his) and running off.  The rest of the core group also slowly faded to the sidelines.  As Kurt ran away from the field he yelled "Who do they think they are, they came to play in OUR game!"  One of the other players yelled back "We're just trying to play the right way."  At that point the rest of the core group outside of me left as well (mostly just uncomfortable with what happened). 

I again see this time and again in PCUSA.  Take our toys and go home? Sure.  Tell people that they need to get with the "right" way to do things or to think?  Sure.  Yell it back and forth because both sides have decided to hold their ground at all costs? For Sure! 

As they left, a series of questions and comments came my way as we made use of waterbottles and hats as cones. 
"You've played with them the longest, what was that about?"
"Let them go, let's just play"
"Seriously, are they always like that?"
"I've never seen them that way, what's going on?"
"That was uncalled for"

I wasn't sure what to say.  No one really wanted the answer it didn't seem ("You've taken what they saw as fun and made it something they don't recognize without really including them in the changes."  "Why they are here doesn't mix with this well without first feeling like you respect who they see themselves as")

Yet, so often I feel like that's what I'm called to try to explain within my church and denomination.  Why does one side not see the world the way another side does on an issue or as we tend to camp together with like thoughts as a general worldview. 

Both sides didn't want to dialogue, they didn't want to work together, they wanted what they wanted and wanted it now because they both felt like they had the "right" answer and the "right" to dictate how things should be.  They wanted to poke holes in what the other side wanted and prove to them why they should change.  They didn't want to hear a different viewpoint and then find a way to move forward and find what would be what things "should" be for the good of all.  Yes, the good of all may have ended the same way, but really there was no desire to do so. 

So often this is exactly what I hear.  I work with a conservative Head of Staff who really wants to dialogue but gets defensive because he's been attacked so often.  I tweet regularly with people who consider themselves progressive and liberal who likewise take up defensive stances from the attacks they've suffered.  I can't blame either side for being defensive honestly from a cultural point of view, but I feel we're called to be counter cultural as the church.  So how do we begin to actually dialogue, discern, and live faithfully together into whatever the future will bring?  We're far from it, our current GA thus far seems to be pointing to a culture much like our Frisbee game.  Some are tired of fighting, some are very much standing their ground, some are stuck and unwilling or more likely unable to help anyone move forward.  Regardless of what you want for the church, we need to move against the culture of "us" vs "them" and show another way to struggle with things that are divisive and with worldviews that just do not match up. 

In Acts 10, Peter sees a vision of a sheet and it is filled with things that he correctly labels as unclean, yet God gives him a new way to interpret what he sees.  It is not a simple revelation, it is one we see many struggle with over time: "Do Not Call Common (Unclean) What God Has Purified."  I believe we all have sheets, some of them include people we disagree with, some include actions we find unforgivable, some include things we don't understand in others lives, but we all have a sheet.  We need to realize that God has created all of us in God's image and God is always working towards unknown ends.  That will always leave us with a certain uncertainty, and it is that uncertainty that we need to focus on.  We don't have the answers, we're just asked to struggle together towards that distant, hazy goal that is beyond all the stuff that we have to get through to get there.  Let us focus on struggling together, realizing we don't KNOW anything about what is going to happen or how it is going to happen and live at peace with the uncertainty of "What's Next" or even "What Now."  If we are able to do that we may have a chance to do discernment together and be something more than people fighting over how to play a game.

College or Hypocrisy? NEITHER!

Let's get this out of the way: Going to college has NOTHING to do with young adults not being part of church or identifying as "no religious affiliation."  There are so many issues with that idea it's barely worth discussing at all. But let's point out a few major issues:

1. It's based on a weak view of God, one where God cannot even "win" against "human ideas." So many places in scripture and in the Christian tradition we see this is a false idea.
2. It also requires us to think that we can fully understand God and God's ways.  Also a view that holds no water in scripture or tradition.
3. It also seems to assume we're better off not being part of the world we're created as part of, as well as assuming that we shouldn't learn about and discuss with those who challenge our ways of thinking.  Even Paul would laugh at these pieces, and many who hold this type of belief often point to his works as THE authority on what Christ and God mean to the world first and foremost.  
4. Many who make this argument have advanced degrees themselves.  Which just makes no sense.  So many issues here.

 Okay, so now with that out of the way, let me also say the response I've seen often recently seems to be just as problematic and weak.  I am going to oversimplify them all a bit for the sake of brevity and call it the "It's the hypocrisy" argument. Yes, the church is full of hypocrites, has been for ages.  We often do not do what we should, and we often preach and act in illogical ways.  Yet, I don't think this has any more to do with why young adults are not in church than the argument that their education is the cause of this phenomena.  There is hypocrisy in so many places in this world, we understand it's existence, and are willing to accept it most places, yes we may have slightly higher expectations of our religious organizations, but let's be honest: This is small fries for most who just don't see a need for a church.  

So why don't they see the need for a church home, for a community of faith, for a place in the body of God?  Because they are adolescents.  People trying to find their individual identity, people who have been for most of their life.  Adolescence is extended in our society, and as much as I wish we could just fix that problem, we can't, we have to deal with the reality of that is what it is.  We have to stop having church for adults, and become where adolescents take what they are discovering about themselves and connect to something greater. 

Which makes the church a place that nurtures people towards adulthood together. Which of course is not as simple as it sounds.  Yet, I think until we deal with the fact that we live in a society where adolescence is expected/allowed/encouraged to exist for 20-25 years of a persons life, we're not going to actually do anything that changes the end result for the church. Seeking identity with great freedom will always look something like this.

Young people aren't going to have the same attachment to the institutional church that any other generation has had. Yet, we, as the church, can create new relationships with those who will one day want to find a home community of their own. We just can't expect them to act like what we have seen in the past. Forty year old adolescents who are raising eight year old adolescents aren't going to come back to the church, but they do know a community that shares their passions for justice and a better world when they see one. How do we connect to those who are seeking those things while not expecting them to fit our adult mode until they get there in their own lives? 


That is the question that I think we should be asking, that is what the "Next Church" looks like.  It is both a bunch of individuals who think they may share similar passions within their larger world.  Not brought together by a set of beliefs or even a "faith," but by the commonality of searching and becoming.  Giving people that space and opportunity will become a larger part of who we are.  


All of this is to say we need to not focus on what is causing a certain group to not be active in the church, bur rather on the "whys" that they are looking for.  This means more focus on Human development and communication theory as we move forward, which does mean less simple answers, but as seen above the simple answers just don't hold up.  Let's move forward in reality and let God deal with what makes the world ideal.