The Essence

Over the last several issues of Presbytery Matters, I have been highlighting some different models for being the Church in our day.  These came from a sabbatical study I undertook in 2010.  I hope that those articles will continue to engage us in prayerful and thoughtful conversations...some of which already have begun to take place.

In the paper I wrote as a result of my sabbatical, I also spent some time examining an overarching look at the nature of the Church.  Specifically, I identified several things that I believe have been Biblical hallmarks of what the Church is to be about. I also reflected on what our Book of Order lists as the "notes of the true Kirk" (distilled from the Scots Confession in our Book of Confessions.)

If an integral part of being a Reformed Christian is taking the written Word seriously, then what does the Bible, and particularly the New Testament, say about what makes a church the Church?  In other words, what are at least some of the biblical marks of the true Church?

There are many words used to describe the Church in the New Testament, of course, but at least these five seem to me to come up often enough that one could argue that they are the key descriptive words for what the Church is and how the Church ought to live in community and in witness.  These words are kerygma, didache, diakonia, koinonia, and agape. These words can have various translations.  As I studied these words, it seemed to me that these five words make up what might be the New Testament "marks" of the Church.  I would translate them as:  proclamation, learning, service, hospitality, and love.

Adopted in 2011, the newest section of the Presbyterian Church's Book of Order affirms these "notes of the true Kirk," as the Scots put it.

"Where Christ is, there is the true Church.  Since the earliest days of the Reformation, Reformed Christians have marked the presence of the true Church wherever:

·      the Word of God is truly preached and heard,

·      the Sacraments are rightly administered, and

·      ecclesiastical discipline is uprightly administered." (F-1.0303)

The Form of Government of the Book of Order continues to emphasize these notes of the Church in its description of the work and witness of all of the various councils of the Church, focusing each one's specific responsibilities and ministries around these three notes.  (See G-3.01 in its general descriptions of councils, and then G-3.0201 concerning the session, G-3.03031 concerning presbyteries, G-3.0401 concerning synods, and G-3.0501 concerning the General Assembly.)

So, true to our heritage, Presbyterians believe that the Church should be about the tasks of making the proclamation and hearing of the Word of God primary in our worship, celebrating the Sacraments as Christ's claiming and nurturing gifts of grace to us, and living out the belief that good order better serves our communal life and witness than does chaos.

My question then was, and continues to be, this... What would it look like if a  congregation (and/or a presbytery), after a period of prayer and reflection and discussion, decided upon what "marks" it would identify as being crucial to its nature, mission, and ministry, and focused solely and exclusively on those things only...that everything - everything - else would be cast aside in order to focus on those key elements?

I pray that this might be worth some further conversations together.

What's Next?

Right now several Presbyterians (and undoubtedly some others) from across the country are meeting at Fourth Presbyterian Church in Chicago for something called the Next Church Conference.  "Next Church" first met in Indianapolis, Indiana a few years ago.  I attended that initial gathering.  The purpose of these gatherings is to discuss, share, dream, pray, discern about where God might be leading the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) in the future... to help discern what's next.  This is from the group's website:

"NEXT Church is a network of leaders across the Presbyterian Church (USA) who believe the church of the future will be more relational, more diverse, more collaborative, more hopeful and more agile. We provide hopeful space for robust conversations about the theology, culture, and the practice of ministry, to serve as a catalyst for new mission callings, and to support strong leadership in a time of adaptive change. We are fostering a conversation about how to follow Christ in our particular day and age. We are a movement seeking to change the culture of connection in the PC(USA) so that we continue to share faithfully the good news of the gospel in ways that bear fruit in a fractured world."

As I've been following the Twitter comments from folks at this year's gathering (#nextchurch2015), people are sharing some of the insights, thoughts, and questions that are arising.  This comment I found particularly insightful:  "Why does your church exist?  Hint: 'Because we have an historic building' is not the answer."  When he was Stated Clerk of the General Assembly years ago, Dr. Clifton Kirkpatrick asked the question a little differently:  "If your church were to close tomorrow, what would your community miss, if anything?"

In 2010, I took a three-month sabbatical from the congregation and presbytery I was serving at the time.  I tried to find, and then write about, different ways in which people were trying to be the Church in our culture.  I don't know that the paper I wrote from that study came up with anything particularly groundbreaking or unique, but I did identify several different models that people have been exploring about how to be the church in this very new and very different time.

I entitled the paper, "A New Church - A New Day: Models for Being the Church in New and Challenging Times."  This was my thesis statement:

"We need a new Reformation.  By that, I mean something different than transformational thinking, emergent worship, or missional focus.  For more and more congregations, the day is rapidly drawing to a close when each can have its own building, run its own programs, support its own mission causes, and call and hire its own staff.  Resources are too limited.  Our continued insistence on doing things by ourselves results in fewer members, an inability to support staff or buildings, and closing church doors.  It has seemed to me that, just as the Scriptures affirm that the Spirit hovered over the waters of creation, giving birth to new life on the earth (Genesis 1:2), so the Spirit seems to be hovering over the Church, in the process of giving birth to a new way of life in the community of Christ's Body."

Over the next few issues of Presbytery Matters, I thought it might be helpful and timely for me to share some of the different models I identified.  A few of these we already are doing, but there may well be something in these that will ignite a spark within you as you consider your congregation and where God might be leading your church.

In the meantime, I do think that the questions above are worth pondering a bit, don't you?

·      Why does your church exist?

·      If your church were to close tomorrow, what would your community miss, if anything?

These questions, of course, are just as applicable to presbyteries... and synods... and denominations as well.

May our explorations and discernment bear fruit, by God's grace.

A conundrum about weddings

I remember very clearly one interview I had with a Pastor Nominating Committee years ago.  We had been in conversations for a couple of months, and we were getting serious.  We had a Saturday morning time set aside to make a final discernment together.  I regretted having to call them a few days before that time to tell them I had to reschedule our interview, since a member of the congregation I was serving had just died, and the funeral had been set for Saturday morning.  (I was not far from the PNC's church, so rescheduling was fairly easily accomplished... thankfully.)  We agreed to meet on Saturday afternoon.

When I got to the church the committee was already gathered.  After some informal visiting, we prayed together, and then began our discussion.  Someone asked me how the funeral went... which I always find to be an interesting, if not a little peculiar, question.  I vividly remember looking at this person, and then at the rest of the committee, and saying, "You ought to know this about me.  Most times I would rather do a funeral than a wedding any day.  At least in a funeral, the focus is clearly on God and our need for God's presence in our circumstances.  In many weddings, the focus is on the dress, the tuxes, who's standing next to whom, where to sit family so no one is offended... in other words, almost anything except a clear focus on God and our need for God in that circumstance!"  There was a marked pause, and then folks slowly started to shake their heads in understanding and agreement.  "I can see that," said one.  (By the way, they ended up inviting me to candidate, and I ended up serving as the pastor of that congregation for eight years.  So, they clearly weren't too shocked at my comment.)

To be sure, there are weddings that are an absolute joy to be a part of, and I am grateful for times when I have been invited to be a part of such a celebration of covenantal love.  But then there are "those" weddings... where family members can hardly keep good manners, where everyone is distracted by things (like clothes and who stands where) that really don't make one bit of difference in the long run, where my mention of God almost seems an inconvenient interruption in the events of the day for people.

Over the years, I've come up with an easy solution... but one I doubt if I'll ever see... although one never knows.  I believe that our Presbyterian Book of Order ensnares us in an inescapable conundrum in the first two sentences in the section on marriage (W-4.9000 for those "inquiring minds" among readers).  Here is what it says:  "Marriage is a gift God has given to all humankind for the well-being of the entire human family.  Marriage is a civil contract between a woman and a man."

Now, the Church is going to be wrestling once again at this year's General Assembly in two weeks, focusing on the second sentence above... but focusing on the last six words of that sentence.  I contend that it is the first five words that present us with our dilemma... or at least with the dilemma I have felt over the years.  I'd welcome a day to come where the Church no longer is in the "business" of overseeing "civil contracts" between people in a marriage.  We Presbyterians believe strongly - even vehemently at times - in the separation of Church and State.  Yet here we continue to put ministers at weddings in the position of functioning as an official at a State ceremony, having to sign a State-issued marriage license.  It would be cleaner, in my opinion, and would solve all sorts of dilemmas, if we just declared that we were getting out of the wedding business as a Church!  If people want to be married, then go to the State and have a civil ceremony to satisfy the legalities of a marriage relationship.  But then, if the couple wants to proclaim and give witness to the importance that their faith in God has for their marriage, that is when you would come to the Church.  Then is when there would be a joy-filled worship service, clearly focusing on God as the source of all love and the one who blesses our covenant relationships.

As I said, I'm not going to hold my breath on this one, but I do think that wedding ceremonies then really could be services of the worship of God, asking the Lord to bless this already-married couple and their relationship, giving public witness to the joys, responsibilities, and blessings of what it means to the Church and to our society to live together in a covenant relationship.

Who knows?  I might be surprised some day... and it would be a surprise that I would surely welcome.

Fire Stations and Churches

You perhaps read the tragic article last week about the man who died 15 minutes after firefighters in a D.C. station refused to cross the street to help him after they were summoned by his daughter and passersby.  (The CNN article is here).  For five years I was the lead chaplain of a fire department, and this news report both saddened and infuriated me.  I'm sure it's possible that there are firefighters out there who simply are too tired, too jaded, too burned out, or too lazy that would have allowed this to happen... but that would surprise me.  Firefighters by and large are incredibly compassionate, competent, dedicated servants of the community.  I only can imagine that there was some sort of tragic miscommunication or absurd misunderstanding of rules and regulations that led to this incident happening.  My prayers are with the family and friends of the man who died, and also with the fire department there that will have to live with what happened.

The story did make me think, however.  What would have been the scenario if the building had been a church instead of a fire station?  Do people view the church as somewhere they can run to when they or a loved one are in trouble?  Oh, to be sure, they come to us for funerals and for weddings at times.  But what about other times of crisis... or transition... or doubt... or pain... or danger?  Do people see us as a place of help, or refuge, or, as our worship spaces declare, "sanctuary?"  Do people see us Christians as people who are safe enough, or who care enough, or who are responsive enough that they would think to come to us in times of need?  If so, how would we respond?  If not, then how can we continue to carry the name of Christ in our identity as communities and individuals?

And, to take this one step further, is our Presbytery a place where teaching and ruling elders, and church members, feel that they can come?  If so, then thanks be to God!  If not, then what needs to change in our system... and what needs to change in each one of us?

As you can tell, this made me think.  What do you think?

Weddings or Funerals? Confessions of a pastor...

I remember the surprised looks on the faces of the Pastor Nominating Committee during an interview a couple of churches ago.  We were having our penultimate interview, trying to decide if God was really leading us all to journey together as pastor and congregation for at least a while.  The interview was scheduled for Saturday morning, but I had had to ask them to reschedule it because someone had died and I was officiating at the funeral that morning.  So I met them that afternoon.

When I walked into the room at their church, we greeted each other and then sat down.  One of them asked how the funeral went, and, for whatever reason, I remember saying, "It was good.  This might sound strange, but I'd rather do a funeral any day than most weddings."  Then came the surprised looks.  After such an outburst of pastoral honesty, I realized I needed to explain my statement!  (And, by the way, I've talked with lots and lots of pastors about this very issue, and most all of them share my sentiment).  I explained what I'll try to share here.

I don't find funerals "fun," although there often is appropriate chuckling as memories are shared.  Neither do I find weddings somber, soul-less events.  What I told that search committee, and what I still find to be true more of the time, is this... In funerals, the focus clearly is on God.  To be sure, there is grief to be shared and memories to recall, but, at least in my religious tradition, the focus on the service is how our trust and belief in the Resurrected Jesus informs how we view death, dying, and grieving.  The focus is clear.  In weddings, the focus is on... what...?

• How the dresses turned out.
• Who's standing next to whom without the order of standees somehow resulting in someone feeling that they've been slighted.
• If the divorced parents are going to be able to behave themselves and play nicely during the wedding and the reception.
• If crazy Uncle Larry is going to refrain from making his usual crude comments about something or someone.
• If cousin Sue is going to put aside her years'-long fight with the MOTB (Mother of the Bride) and show up, or if she's going to boycott the wedding and/or reception.

To say that the focus is on things other than God and our faith is, well, an understatement of incredible proportions.

Then there's the issue of the cost of weddings.  In my part of the country, the average cost of a wedding is about $25,000.  That's the average cost!  And it's a lot higher in other parts of the country.  To me this is, quite plainly, insane!  Do you want to have a wedding, or do you want to use that money to pay for 15% of a pretty decent house?  Seems like a no-brainer to me... but what do I know?

Now, I don't hate weddings.  Well, not many of them anyhow.  But I've tried for the 36 years of my ordained ministry to help couples be relieved of the sometimes unbearable social pressures that have become inseparably bound up in weddings, so that they can actually enjoy the event, and so that their wedding can be what it's supposed to be when it's held in a church:  a service of the worship of God.  This is the one area in which I most consistently have not succeeded in my pastoral ministry.

Maybe I'll be surprised yet before I retire.  Maybe someday a couple will come to me and say, "You know, our parents gave us $25,000 for our wedding, but we decided we'd buy a house instead.  We'd like a wonderful, simple wedding ceremony that allows us to express our undying love for each other within the context of God's never-ending love which sustains and nurtures us.  We'd like our family and friends to be there.  We'd like some coffee and tea and a nice sheet cake in the Fellowship Hall afterwards.  Then we'd like to go away for a few days for our honeymoon, and then return to move into our nice, new home."  Do you think I'll ever be surprised like that?

Nope.  Me either.  But I can still dream, can't I?