Written by joshrhone on 09 March 2010
A smartly dressed business woman, in her mid-thirties, walks between the smudged glass doors which automatically open in front of her. The smell of burnt coffee mixes, not so pleasantly, with the pungent aroma of cleaning solvents. The hospital’s emergency waiting room is crammed full with the usual blent of snifflers, projectile vomiters, dislocated fingers, and severed limbs.
Briskly, the woman scurries through the waiting room. Without uttering a word, she makes her way toward the “Tower Elevators,” which will permit her access to the floor to which she is headed. Pushing the button rather impatiently, she stands at the door, eagerly waiting for the doors to part and beckon her enter.
Eventually the bell chimes. The doors part. The empty elevator beckons her welcome.
Stepping inside, the woman inadvertently bumps the button which inspires the doors to remain open. Sighing, because she does not want to wait, the woman searches the control panel for the button which will cause the doors to close immediately. Unable to readily locate the button, she pushes “3″- the number of the floor to which she is headed.
After what seems to be an eternity the doors close. The elevator slowly, and with what seems to be a great deal of labor, begins its ascent to the third floor.
The elevator slows.
The doors part.
Immediately in front of the newly opened doors is a sign, indicating that the path which the woman must travel to reach her destination is to the left.
Slowly. Reluctantly. The woman makes her way down the silent corridor. The hum of the florescent lights seems unbearably loud. The walls are barren. The paint is flaking.
A mere three hundred feet from the elevator, the woman reaches her destination. She looks at the door. Gingerly, she reaches for and turns the door knob. Walking into the waiting room, the woman approaches the receptionist and explains her reason for coming. As if unsure of who she was, the woman stutters, as she tells the receptionist, “My name is Jeanette. I have an appointment. I’m here to see Dr. Watters, the oncologist.”
She subsequently assumes her place, in an uncomfortable chair, waiting to be called upon to go back and see the doctor.
As she sits, her mind is filled with questions. Questions that she wants to ask. Questions she is wondering if she should ask. Questions that she wonders if there is an answer to.
The door creaks. A nurse peers out from behind the door, beckoning for Jeanette to follow him to an exam room.
Jeanette follows the nurse. Upon having her height and weight checked, she finds a seat atop the exam table.
She waits.
And she waits.
Finally, Dr. Watters enters the room.
Jeanette, looking with saddened eyes, at Dr. Watters, curtly says, “Just give me the cold, hard facts, doctor.”
For the next hour, Jeanette and Dr. Watters talk about her condition, the treatment options that are available, and the cold, harsh reality of the situation. It is an encounter marked by many questions which receive a thorough and ready answer.
Whether we are at the doctor, sitting in a classroom, defining our responsibilities at work, etc.- we want the “cold, hard facts.” We want the truth. We want a simple, straightforward explanation. If we have questions we expect answers.
When it comes to the Christian faith, we are no different. Whether we are at a Bible study, searching the Scriptures for advice, or listening to the pastor preach- we want answers. We want to know with utmost clarity and certainty things such as: who God is, what God is like, and what God’s will for our lives is.
Some of the things that we wonder about; some of the questions that we ask are able to be answered clearly and with utmost clarity. We can say, for example, that we, as human beings, have been created, according to Scripture, to love the Lord our God with every fiber of our being and that we are to love others as we love ourselves.
Yet, there are some things that defy being adequately explained. For example, someone recently asked me to “explain God” to them. Where does one begin? and, where does one end such an explanation?
I was talking about this challenge that was posed to me, with some others. They suggested that I explain God as being love, since Scripture clearly states that “God is love.” Other suggested that I explain God as omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipresent (everywhere). Still others suggested that I explain God according to His “three-in-Oneness.”
As these suggestions were being made, it occurred to me that I should possibly explain God the way Exodus 34.6-7 does- as being slow to anger and abounding in love, forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin; yet not leaving the guilty unpunished. In other words, maybe I should explain the paradoxical aspects of God’s nature and character.
The more that I ponder this enterprise, however, the more convinced I become that no matter what I will say, it will be inadequate. While it is true that God is love; while God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent; while God is Triune; and while God’s nature and character is bound up in many paradoxes- even if I were to explain each of these things I would still fail to adequately, clearly, and fully explain God.
After all, one of the things that we have forgotten, it seems, in our modern quests to know, categorize, quantify, and explain everything is that there are still many things that are a mystery to us. One such example is God; for, God, while all of the things that I have mentioned (and many more) is something that I failed to mention- INEFFABLE. In short, God defies explanation. He cannot be explained in words. To do so would be to limit God, to confine Him, which would make Him less than God.
Written by joshrhone on 04 March 2010
Yesterday, I received the latest copy of the Expanding Wave Newsletter, which is published on a weekly basis by the Evangelism and Church Growth Department of the Wesleyan Church. This week’s featured article was entitled, “Cultivating a Culture of Yes,” a copy of the article has been included for your review and to help provide perspective for the comments that I am about to make. The article was written by Rev. Isaac Smith, the District Superintendent of the Dakota District of the Wesleyan Church, whom I have never had the privilege of meeting or discussing any of the insights that he has expressed in this article regarding.
With these items and disclaimers noted, I’d invite you to read what Rev. Smith suggests with respect to “cultivating a culture of yes,” and then to hear what I perceive to be some weaknesses and flaws of a “yes” culture within the church, or any organization for that matter. Smith writes,
I often ask my horse to say yes. When I want to put a halter or bridle on his head, his tendency is to hold his head high, and I ask that he lower it. This makes the process easier and calms his emotions. I put gentle pressure on the top of his head until he lowers it. Even if he only drops it an inch, I immediately release the pressure. He has said yes and he is rewarded.
What gets rewarded gets repeated. I reapply pressure until his head is where I want it. I then put on the halter and feed him a treat. My horses line up to get caught, because saying yes gains a positive reward.
He weighs 1,200 pounds and is very strong and very fast. He could bite me, kick me, knock me down, run away, or simply stand there and do nothing. Like leading volunteers, I have to lead him by persuasion. I often ask him to take me on steep mountain trails or through dense forests where there is no trail and no obvious exit. Since he is a prey animal, he hates that. But he says yes to my request because he has said a lot of yes’s to get to that point and we have developed a relationship of mutual trust.
To cultivate a culture of yes in a local church or district we need relationship, trust, time, and a compelling vision. One of the strongest deterrents to this kind of culture is fear. “We may fail, we can’t pay for it, the risks are unknown, etc.”
John Lyons, a Christian horse trainer, says; “Ride a horse where you can; not where you can’t.” Eventually you will build his confidence and yours so that you can ride him through scary stuff. People are a lot like that. Start with small, relatively safe yes’s and people will build confidence in God, in themselves, and in you as a leader. If you start with a big scary request, you may get bucked off.
Sometimes you need to dismount from your position and lead by walking ahead. For instance, if you are trying to create a culture of building redemptive relationships with messy people, you need to model it.
If you are creating an environment of saying yes to church planting, please understand that this is a big scary ask. Establish trust, take good risks, celebrate success, and don’t lose momentum.
If you are the leader, be a yes person yourself. Don’t take stupid risks, but look for ways to say yes, not for ways to say no. Make it a high priority to raise up leaders around you who are yes people. In shaping a board you don’t want all of them to be “early adopters”, but you don’t want any “never adopters”, and only one or two “slow adopters”. Saying yes will get you in trouble occasionally, but saying no will get you nowhere.
Saying yes can be contagious. If you are in step with the Holy Spirit, if you get me to say a series of little yes’s, if my peers are saying yes, and if you have a God-given vision, then I will say yes and influence others around me to say yes.
(Contributed by Rev. Isaac Smith, District Superintendent of the Dakota District of the Wesleyan Church. Taken from the 3/3/2010 edition of the Expanding Wave Newsletter, which is put out by the Evangelism and Church Growth Department of the Wesleyan Church)
At the present moment, I find myself in a period as a pastor and leader in which I am pastoring a church in transition. We are a church in transition in every sense of that word. We are a small church and over the course of the last two-and-one-half years that I have served as pastor, I have performed fifteen funerals. Not all of these funerals were for people from our church, although a great number were. When you are a church of seventy-five-or-so, any funeral lowers attendance, results in a lost leader, and dramatically changes the dynamics of the congregation.
Add to that the fact that as a leader I have been through what is commonly referred to as the “honeymoon stage” of leadership in which everyone is excited that you are around and truly believes that the best days lie ahead. The truth of the matter is that eventually the rose-colored glasses are removed, which results both in a great many people staying and rallying behind what they perceive to be a clear sense of God-given direction as well as a handful of people transitioning on to another church. Once again, with each departure attendance drops, a potential leader is gone, and the dynamics of the congregation are in constant flux.
Additionally, one of the startling truths of life that we must all come to grips with is that we will not remain young forever. The implications of this truth have a significant impact upon the church, its culture, and its ethos. As congregation members age, some elect to remove themselves from ministry whereas others have to forgo leadership responsibilities because their age and/or declining health make it impossible to be as involved as they would like.
Each and every one of these things, as well as many others, create an environment, in the church, in which there is constant fluctuation and movement. When new families and leaders are infused into the system things change even more.
For that reason, I can appreciate what Rev. Smith suggests. If we can create a culture of “yes”- then we introduce into the system some equilibrium that is often sorely needed. Change of any kind often results in fear, worry, and paralysis; yet, if we can create a culture that is willing to say “yes” and therein push through the fear and worry by continuing to risk then there remains the potential for growth, health, and multiplication.
I also believe that I can sense that it is Rev. Isaac Smith’s heartfelt desire that God’s church would reach a point where with clarity of vision and purpose they can whole-heartedly agree (say “yes”) to move forward and take some risks to make that vision and purpose become a reality.
My concern, however, is that far-too-often the unity of which Rev. Smith writes results in consensus rather than collaboration, which I think can be incredibly destructive. Let me explain…
Joseph Myers, in his book Organic Community, writes, “The spirit of cooperation is a rigid spirit, one that stifles creativity and discovery. It is more concerned with sequence than rhythm. It squashes the human spirit. The master plan becomes the master.” [1] Cooperation, for Myers, is a negative thing that causes a person to become less creative. From an organizational perspective, it quashes momentum and the natural rhythms and life that occur naturally. Cooperation does this by providing us with a master plan which every member of the system is expected to fall in line with. As such it leads to conformity rather than out-of-the-box thinking.
This, I think, is a potential downfall of the “‘yes’ culture” that Smith suggests we cultivate. At the heart of the “‘yes’ culture” is the idea that one person or the organization as a whole has a clear understanding of the idea or the goal or the vision. With a clear sense of vision uniting the church, Smith asserts, the church and its leaders can move forward and agree to say “yes” and therein take risks that allows the church to move towards the fulfillment of its goal/purpose/vision.
The problem with such thinking, on a practical level, is that far too often it results in paralysis. A huge vision or goal exists but no one knows how to get from where we are right now to that blueprint of how we believe things should be. An unintended (or maybe intended) result is that the leaders of the church tend to look to the pastor or pastoral staff of the church for clear pathways forward. The pastor or pastoral staff then becomes the bearer of the vision, the protector of said vision, and the authority on how to make that vision a reality.
This begs the question, however, in many respects. Should the pastor or pastoral staff be the sole bearer of the vision? What qualifies the pastor or pastoral staff as the authority with respect to the question of how we move from where we are to where we want to be?
Of greater concern, I believe, is what a culture of consensus says about the way that we view people and how God works in and through people. A culture of consensus, in which lay members of a board or leadership team, always say “yes” to a pastor or to the pastoral staff implies that the clergy clearly have a monopoly on God’s vision and its implementation (something which we, in Protestant circles, have firmly rejected since the Protestant Reformation and its emphasis on the priesthood of all believers). Yet, it happens. I’ve sat on leadership teams as a lay member of a congregation in which we were expected to say “yes” to whatever the pastor proposed. The result was that we did risk, but many times problems arose that could have been avoided had we, as lay members, felt that we could voice or opinion or share our wisdom.
Moreover, a culture of consensus implies that the pastor has a much better understanding of the church culture and the wider culture than do those who live, work, worship, and converse in said culture(s) on a daily and weekly basis. Within a denomination and within the church this type of scenario is far-too-common. The leaders and those who are in positions of power and authority surround themselves with those who say “yes” and as a result decisions are made which are neither helpful or beneficial at the local level where life happens. Denominationally this happens when decisions about how ministry should be done are made by those who haven’t pastored a local congregation for a number of years. In the local church this happens when full-time pastors, who for better or for worse are disconnected from the factory where the majority of people in town work, make decisions about how best to minister to a group of people that they don’t know and have little or no clue as to the issues that Joe and Jane Every-person are dealing with.
Furthermore, a culture of consensus oftentimes results in the devaluation of the various gifts, passion, and wisdom that God has distributed to the various members of His church. As a
pastor, if everyone around the table looks to me for the answer and/or the way forward, then we don’t take into account the fact that God has gifted some of the people around this table with a better financial mind than I have; or a more observant eye with regard to building upkeep and maintenance; or even with teaching knowledge or ability that could improve the teaching ministries of our church.
In fact, some of the best ministries, outreaches, and things that we have done as a church have been the result of people standing up to me and saying, “No. I respect what you are saying, but I don’t think that is the best way forward.” I’ve then had the privilege of listening to them share about something that God has given them the skills, ability, and passion for and, in turn, have found myself saying, “Yes! I think we should do that.”
Unlike a “culture of yes,” in which consensus seems to reign supreme, a culture of collaboration, writes Myers, “has a generative quality. It generates energy. It generates ideas. It generates power.” [2] James Surowiecki, in his book The Wisdom of Crowds goes on to note that, “Collaboration allows [us] to incorporate many different kinds of knowledge, and to do so in an active way (rather than simply learning the information from a book). Collaboration also makes it easier for [us] to work on interdisciplinary problems.” [3]
For both Myers and Surowiecki, and even within my own culture and ministry context, the beauty of collaboration lies in the fact that “it guarantees a diversity of perspectives” [4] because there are no top-down directives that govern the system. Rather, the various parts of the system are capable of doing “a remarkably good job of organizing themselves.” [5]
[1] Myers, Joseph, Organic Community (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2007), p. 116.
[2] Ibid., p. 123.
[3] Surowiecki, James, The Wisdom of Crowds (New York: Anchor Books, 2005), pp. 161-162.
[4] Ibid., p. 162.
[5] Ibid., p. 161.
Written by joshrhone on 11 February 2010
LOST is in its sixth and final season.
Mysteries abound.
What is this mysterious island?
Will everyone be rescued?
Who will survive?
Who will die?
What was with the polar bear?
Why was the black smoke monster so darn angry?
The writers of LOST have done a tremendous job of keeping their audiences attention and creating a whirlwind of speculation that grows fiercer and gains momentum with each new episode. Chris Seay, pastor of Ecclesia Church in Houston, tosses his hat into the ring and does what he has done many times before- he examines the story and characters of this incredible show through the lens of the greatest story ever told- the story of God.
Seay examines the characters- from their names to their various proclivities and idiosyncrasies- by employing the various lenses of Scripture, theology, psychology, and philosophy. Drawing comparisons at times between the story of LOST and the stories of the Pentateuch, Seay helps the casual reader of Scripture make the connections that might have otherwise been missed.
Where this book succeeds is in helping the reader make connections that they otherwise may have missed. For example, many of the views of the show may not have realized that John Locke actually has a namesake whose life and writings have had a bearing on the story and its ongoing development.
Where this book fails is in regards to the fact that fact that Seay’s writing style can be, at times, a little too rambling and conversational- sometimes it would be better if he just made his point. Additionally, the book explores many biblical allusions, theological tie-ins, and connections that have been served as fodder for discussion on many a blog or fan forum.
All-in-all, the book is okay. If I had a few hours on my hands and didn’t know what to do, or if I was able to pick up this book at a bargain price- I would in no way hesitate to do so. However, if I had a bookshelf full of books (which I do)- this wouldn’t be the first book that I would grab off of the shelf.
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received one or more of the products or services mentioned above for free in the hope that I would mention it on my blog. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will be good for my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Written by joshrhone on 11 February 2010
There’s so much more to life and faith than this. And we all know it. We all crave something that will vanish soon. Many people chase their cravings into sex, money, work, service, or religion without ever realizing none of these will satisfy. But others of us are beginning to see our cravings were for one purpose and one purpose alone. So what do you crave?
(from the back cover of Crave)
Chris Tomlinson presents his readers with a book that is intelligible, well-written, and witty. With each flip of the page one easily gets absorbed in the material in large part due to the passion and exuberance that Tomlinson has for the journey of faith, but more importantly for the God for whom He is desperately and passionately craving.
Tomlinson’s chapters on the subjects of silence and the Pager were startlingly insightful and provided the reader with many opportunities to pause, reflect, and stop to interact with the material by actually applying it in one’s life.
That said, however, Crave falls short in that it treads a path that so many books in the Christian market have already travelled. Like Blue Like Jazz and Plan B, among many others, Tomlinson’s book mixes thoughts on spirituality and cultivating a vibrant relationship with God with personal stories and anecdotes that serve to underscore the point that is being made, while at the same time helping the reader to understand that he or she can actually take the material and apply it to their life.
All-in-all, Crave was a good read, by an author who I hope to read more from in the future. While at times the book seems overly anecdotal and periodically meanders down a path that appears light on substance, Tomlinson is a good writer whose passion is infectious.
To order your copy of CRAVE click here.
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received one or more of the products or services mentioned above for free in the hope that I would mention it on my blog. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will be good for my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Disclosure of Material Connection: Some of the links in the post above are “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will add value to my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
![Subscribe toJOSHRHONE [DOT] COM](http://www.joshrhone.com/wp-content/themes/producer/images/newsrss.png)
![Subscribe toJOSHRHONE [DOT] COM](http://www.joshrhone.com/wp-content/themes/producer/images/commentsrss.png)
