Synod

Carl is attending the General Synod meeting and will post new issues of The Shiloh Insider after his return from Long Beach, CA.

Old Friends

The Robinson family has remained in touch with a few friends that we had made in communities where we had lived before coming to Dayton in 2000. One such family is Brian and Linda Perry, who live in Evansville, IN. Linda and Brian were part of a small group of parents whose children were competing gymnasts through a gym in Evansville. There were four couples who hung pretty closely together: The Perry family, the Cartwrights. the Currents, and us, the Robinsons.

 

The Perry's daughter, Meghan, competed on team with Casey for around four years. Meghan gave up on Gymnastics around the age of 12. Casey remained a competing gymnast through high school. Meghan had taken up golf through high school and now in college. She plays for the Ball State University Women's Golf Team and is a very accomplished golfer.

 

Meghan is playing this week in the Western Women's Amateur Golf Tournament, played at the Dayton Country Club. Linda, her mother, came with her. On Monday, Casey and I walked with Meghan, as she played the course to a 77, six over par. She shot a 75 in the second round of stroke play qualifying. Of the 144 competitors, Meghan finished in a tie for 50th, qualifying for the match play quarter finals.

 

Meghan plays today and, if she wins her match, tomorrow. The finals will take place on Friday and Saturday. We plan to walk with Meghan and Linda as often this week as we are able.

 

While this may seem an unusual topic for The Shiloh Insider,  I think that it is sometimes important to realize that religious issues have direct impact on how we have and how we will live our everyday lives. In fact, maybe that is the exact point of religious discussion...to try and figure out how faith and practice impact everyday life.

 

We treasure the Perry family and the friendships that we have established through life and ministry. I wish all of you the kind of joy that we have known this week in seeing them again. Good luck, Meghan!

Association Blog

For a long time now, I have felt that the Associations of the United Church of Christ could best serve their local churches by attempting three very important tasks: 1. Provide direct assistance for the Search and Call process; 2. Form a matrix of networks throughout local churches and ministries to enhance strengths and overcome some challenges that the local churches face; and 3. Provide a public witness to basic United Church of Christ theology and practice.

 

The Associations have long been engaged in the first of these tasks. The Search and Call process comprises the majority of communication and experience with Associations in local UCC congregations and ministries. The second task, that of forming networks between and among local churches, is the aim of the current strategic planning within the Southwest Ohio Northern Kentucky Association (SONKA). Instead of the Association being expert in every category of ministry and mission, is it not more faithful to UCC covenant to assist ministries and churches to assist one another? If congregation A struggles with finances, for instance, could we not link them with congregation C, which has a very successful stewardship theology? The local setting can benefit greatly from sharing strengths and challenges with other portions of the local setting, building relationship and formulating covenant.

 

It is the third task that has been traditionally missing, in my judgment. Would it not be beneficial to local UCC congregations and ministries to provide public statements that both distinguish the United Church of Christ from other denominations and encourage understanding of alternative forms of Christian witness? Not argumentative, but informative, information about the core stances of the United Church of Christ may invite some interest and generate some excitement. It would certainly give rise to some passionate discussion.

 

I am pleased to say that, thanks to the excellent leadership of Interim Minister, Kathryn Anadein, SONKA is currently formulating a blog team of five or so writers who would have the challenge of sharing the basic theology, stances and applications of both to the general public, to our local ministries and congregations. While the blog posts might be intended to communicate information, I imagine that they can also be quite provocative for local settings of the UCC.

 

I am happy to lend my writings to the effort. Stay tuned for more information.

 

See You Sunday!  

Staff as Team

A friend and colleague called. He was having a problem with his church staff and was wondering if I might have any advice.

 

I asked him to explain the situation.

 

Two members of this church staff have been constantly at odds with one another, while another member feels excluded and isolated. One is a director of Christian Education and Childhood Ministries. Another is the Business Manager. The third is the Organist and Choir Director. My colleague, the Senior Pastor, is male. Each of the others is female.

 

The Business Manager, a person in her 50's, is constantly aggressive to and critical of the C.E. person, who is in her 20's. True, the C.E. person has made, and continues to make, a series of mistakes that have invited the criticism of the Business Manager. The music person is making arbitrary decisions about the weekly worship services that directly affect what others are able to do within the services, but not communicating those decisions.

 

The mess has come to a head, and the church's Personnel Committee has gotten involved. The tension between the Business Manager and the C.E. Director is obvious, as is the "exclusion" of the Music Director. The situation has begun to create tension in the wider congregation.

 

I should add that the Senior Pastor, my friend, has been in the position for less than a year. Each of the other staff members preceded him.

 

After a fairly lengthy discussion, in which I asked an array of questions, we determined that there is no weekly staff meeting, that each member of the staff feels that she is responsible only for the issues that arise under each one's employment responsibilities, and that they are in competition for attention, recognition and budgeting.

 

My recommendations were both practical and theological. First, we need to get members of the staff to recognize and support the ministries of others on the staff. Isolation results in division. When we share ministry with others, we have a stake in what they are doing. This staff is isolated. Worse, it is so focused on each task description that they are competing. Competition within a staff destroys the unity. It turns persons against others. It makes them critical and judgmental.

 

So, a weekly staff meeting, where each member of the staff shares what is being done and thought about under each area of focus, is absolutely vital. Members of the staff must feel an investment in what every other member is doing. Sharing the responsibility, and sharing the workload, lightens the onus on any one staff member. A team approach, with a unified purpose and vision, works best for the sake of the congregation.

 

The Senior Pastor likely needs to meet with the staff as a whole, laying out clear expectations and calling each member of the staff to accountability for shaping and maintaining staff unity. The Senior Pastor needs to help staff members assist one another in the course of shared ministries, instead of allowing staff members to compete against one another. Each staff member takes a place in the boat, and the boat sinks if each staff member fails to work as part of the team.

 

The climate needs to change there. Shiloh is fortunate indeed to have a staff that understands that none of our ministries exist in isolation to any other. The Shiloh staff is a team, sharing a common vision and working toward a single goal, that functions in a mutually supportive atmosphere that values each ministry. Shiloh's staff is a remarkable collection of diverse gifts, talents, energies and passions. I hope that readers of The Shiloh Insider understand how fortunate the congregation is to be served by such a gifted and unified set of ministers.

 

See You Sunday!

Association Summit

Readers of The Shiloh Insider will recall that there has been some tension in the relationship between the Ohio Conference and its five Associations. The ground of the tension is certainly important for the local churches of the Ohio Conference.

 

You may remember that a proposal of the Conference Board of Directors was to take control of staffing configurations and OCWM giving that had previously been under the control of each of the five Associations. The move would "save" over $500,000 per year, and is sold as being more responsible stewardship.

 

Instead of arguing the points of the proposal, let me just say that four out of the five Associations have officially rejected the Conference Board's proposal as the course that each Associations finds most favorable for Ohio UCC churches. In order to air the concerns of the Associations, and in order to begin the work of drafting an alternative joint proposal, a summit meeting of leadership from each of the five Ohio Associations was held this past weekend.

 

The discussion was initiated by the Southwest Ohio Northern Kentucky Association. The summit meeting took place on Saturday, May 25,  in Mansfield. We were hosted by St. John's UCC. The hospitality, the food, and the kindness of the staff and volunteers was much appreciated.

 

As Church meetings go, the summit meeting of the Ohio Association leadership contained a wealth of "Whereas" but absolutely no "Therefore." There was consensus on many issues. Most agreed, for instance, that the process of making and communicating this proposal was extremely poor. The methodology failed to include conversation with Associations and local churches. It was a top-down, hub-and-spoke process. It was divisive and exclusionary. It was arrogant and authoritative.

 

Most also agreed that a centralization of control of staffing and OCWM dollars seemed contrary to the basic polity of the United Church of Christ, where the primary unit of ministry and mission rests with the local setting. Most thought that the proposal was isolating to congregations and authorized ministries and ministers. Local support would have to be sought from a centralized Conference instead of a more regional Association.

 

There was additional consensus, though it must be said that one of the Associations, Central Southeast, seemed more supportive of the proposal than did the other represented Associations.

 

Another summit meeting of Association leadership is scheduled for Thursday, April 20, at which time, we might hope, the summit is led to configure some "Therefore." What concrete proposal might the Associations recommend to remain faithful to God's calling and, at the same time, be more responsible with OCWM dollars? Can we reduce redundancy and come out of a process of structural renewal that better serves the church in the local setting?

 

Stay tuned for more information.  

Bible @ Boston's

Shiloh's Bible @ Boston's program continues to be a curious oddity for many of our church partners and local community members. How can a church do bible study in a bar? Isn't there a disconnect between the two audiences? Does doing so not demean the sacredness of the Bible?

 

Accessibility is the issue, I think, and application is its aim. Let me explain...

 

So many in the communities around the church feel unequipped to engage the Bible. (So, by the way, do many within the church community.) They find the dense language and the difficult phraseology difficult to understand. They think the the repetitiveness of scripture too tedious to manage. They have not been informed about the cultural and historical factors that lead authors to write in distinct periods of matters that simply do not apply, or that apply differently, today. They think that the Bible is irrelevant to everyday life.

 

The opposite mindset is true as well. Some people in the community are convinced about what they have been told that the Bible says. (Again, so have many in the Church.) They are so convinced of what they have been told that the Bible says that political and cultural positions are shaped around those beliefs, even when those beliefs fail to genuinely reflect the intent of scripture. 

 

Bible @ Boston's utilizes a distinct form of scriptural study. In order to make scripture accessible, both to those within and those around our church communities, Shiloh's program adopts an approach known as Historical/Critical Methodology. In Historical/Critical Methodology, we acknowledge that every author writes from a particular context, to a particular community (or audience), for a particular purpose. If one can comprehend the intent of the author, and the circumstances of the community to whom that author writes, then one can more easily imagine the intended meaning of the text. The intended meaning of the text can then be applied - or not - to the contemporary setting.

 

Historical/Critical Method:  

   1. Define authorship: Who wrote, when, from where and why?

   2. To what community is this author writing? What is the historical and cultural setting?

   3. Derive the meaning of the text from the context of the audience and the intent of the author.

   4. Make contemporary application of the intended purpose.

 

The methodology is fairly sophisticated. It can seem pedantic or academic. It can feel as though it is out of reach for persons in the pews, let alone those who have not sat in pews for decades, if ever.

 

Shiloh is committed to the idea that Bible study makes the Word of God accessible and applicable. It is true, of course, that the Historical/Critical Method increases the pressure on people to actually work at the process of serious scriptural study. It requires us to use the native intelligence and inquisitiveness that God gives us in discerning in scripture what may or may not be God's Word. The end product certainly enhances one's understanding of God's Word, scripture, and any difference that may exist between the two. It renders the Bible directly applicable.

 

The current curriculum runs through the next seven weeks. It is an examination of the systematic theology of the distinct streams that flow through New Testament literature. Come and join us, every Wednesday evening, 6:00-7:00 p.m. at Boston's Bistro and Pub, located at the corner of North Main Street (48) and Westbroook Rd. (Dogleg) in Harrison Township. Shiloh engages in serious Biblical study in a secular setting. Maybe we can learn to take our faith more boldly into our secular lives. 

 

What is the Goal?

Sunday's texts provided an interesting opportunity for me to verbalize an element of the Emergent Church movement that I have often mentally and emotionally considered, but had never before said. That element is the different goal/aim of the Emergent Church, when compared to the traditional, institutional model of the modern age.

 

It seems to me to be quite clear that the Christian faith began in its infancy to be something entirely different from the bulk of its historical identity. That is, the ethic of Jesus - and maybe even Paul -differs significantly from the institutional developments that take place in the Church within the next several hundred years. The theology changes. The practices develop. Orthodoxy replaces the ethic of Jesus. Institutional adherence displaces spiritual energy. Within several hundred years of Jesus, the burgeoning institution that bears his name became an organization with a completely different goal, aim and outcome.

 

The aim of Jesus' ethic was a radically fair and just way of life that embraces every person, bringing peace and joy to every life. The aim of Jesus' ministry is a universally shared ethic of self-sacrifice and mutual concern that results in care for every person. Paul picked up Jesus' theological ball with the suggestion that Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection might serve as archetype for those who would follow Jesus. The aim and goal of the faith was establishment of God's kingdom on earth. In Paul's age, the urgency of establishing a cultural order that served every crease and crevice of Creation overshadowed the selfishness and myopia of traditional Judaism.

 

Soon, though, a whole new theological component replaced the ethic of Jesus and Paul. Instead of the energy for establishing a new cultural order, the faith's goal and aim soon changed to providing its adherents a means of eternal reward. Hope of Heaven displaced an ethic and urgency for peace and justice. As the institutional Christian Church developed, it offered a clear path to eternity in paradise. This hope was other-worldly, after-life, beyond death. The more it became the aim and goal of the Christian faith, the less the Church embodied the ethic of Jesus and Paul. 

 

The cultural changes that began sometime in the late 1960's have highlighted the core hypocrisy of the Christian Church. While the faith began with an ethic of servanthood, equality and radical unity, it quickly became self-serving, ritualistic, divisive and reflective of social order and status. The new culture will not be deceived by the righteous words and dire warnings of eternal damnation. It knows better. Christian faith is only Christian faith insofar as its adherents follow its base ethic in Jesus and Paul.

 

The Emergent Church therefore has as its goal and aim an ethic for human life that reflects the ministry of Jesus Christ and Paul. It offers a rejection of the divisive and exclusionary claims of a theology of Heaven or Hell.

 

So, I have come to see the Emergent Church movement as a further step in the Church's spiritual evolution. It is a re-awakening of the ethic that drove the faith in its infancy. It is recovery of the most ancient attitudes of the faith, those that rested with Jesus and Paul...and maybe others. While the Emergent Church movement calls the contemporary Church to retool, undoing a great deal that the institutions holds sacred, this step forward in the spiritual evolution of the Church is necessary to its relevancy and meaningfulness, as much as it is to its survival.

 

Can we give up a theological aim and goal of eternity in Heaven?  

Authenticity

Members and friends of Shiloh Church have been discussing the character and nature of the Emergent Church throughout the month of April at the church's Bible @ Boston's series. The conversations have been important for shaping Shiloh's next steps into a somewhat hazy future. Those who came have talked about worship, structure and organization, authority (Biblical and otherwise) and definitions of that movement.

 

Following the final series' discussion, a person approached me and said what I believe to be at the core of the Emergent Church movement. She said, as nearly as I can recall, "It seems like the Emergent Church is an authentic witness to the ministry of Jesus Christ, without all the trappings." What she meant, I think, is that the Emergent movement allows the Church of Jesus Christ to move from traditional arrangements around practice of the faith to direct application in the community. The Emergent Church, at least at this point in its spiritual development, is less concerned with buildings, decorations, pageantry, appearances and positions of authority than it is with an authentic Christ-centered life-style.

 

While the traditions of the institutional configurations of the Church deal primarily with private practices that take place within the walls of any given congregation, the Emergent Church movement pushes the witness through the walls to the community. It is a public act of faith, a public witness. The Emergent Church cares less about what songs we sing as part of our corporate worship as what help we as persons provide in and to our communities. The Emergent Church cares less about how we practice Sacrament as how Sacrament leads to mission and ministry in the public arena.

 

I therefore agree with the woman's assessment. The Emergent Church movement, at the current level of spiritual development, seeks a more authentic public witness of Jesus Christ, not as much in words as acts. It is precisely this level of authenticity that resonates with community needs and public demand on the Church of Jesus Christ. A lack of such authenticity is, I think, the primary reason that we have created such a large population within the church alumni association. It certainly makes up the bulk of public claims of church hypocrisy.

 

In short, I firmly believe that the Emergent Church movement is a next step in the spiritual evolution of the Church of Jesus Christ. It is a step away from traditional trappings of the faith and embrace of genuine public work that defines the faith. While the movement steps on toes of traditional religious practice, I can imagine that it might revitalize the Church universal, calling it beyond itself to the community to which it is sent.

 

What do you think?  

 

 

Exploring the Emergent Church...in a Bar

On the Wednesdays in April, members and friends of Shiloh Church, along with some community guests, have been engaging in discussions around the issues of the Emerging Church Movement. On the first Wednesday, we discussed the nature and character of the Emergent Church Movement, how it is shaping a relevant response to the cultural transition that we have experienced since the late 1960's. On the second Wednesday, we talked about worship configurations that might be meaningful to persons of the digital, post-modern world. Last week, we discussed structure and organization of an entirely new church model. The conversations have been interesting and meaningful.

 

This week, we wrap up our conversation around the Emergent Church movement with a look at Biblical and Ecclesial authority in the Emergent Church. What will the cultural changes mean for Biblical studies, for professional Pastors, for Judicatories, for Denominationalism? How might the church shape itself to return to a point of cultural relevancy and social import?

 

The bottom line of this week's discussion will rest on the notion that the developing culture rejects all institutional authority. Politicians, preachers, teachers and elders are no longer granted authority on the basis of position or experience. Denominations and Judicatories are not held in high regard. Elected officials are, simply by virtue of being part of a corrupt system, particularly distrusted. Teachers and elders are believed solely on the basis of the utility, reasonable status and both internal and external cooperation with what persons have come to know.

 

The Emergent Church Movement recognizes that persons of the developing culture refuse to park their intellect and knowledge at the front door of its religious institutions. If religion counters what we know of the world, if it denies scientific and practical knowledge, then religion is not to be believed. If it fails to improve the quality of personal and communal life, then it has no purpose and no meaning. It is seen as manipulative and coercive, "the opiate of the peoples."

 

Come and join us for this most meaningful conversation. We meet at Boston's Bistro and Pub, located at the corner of North Main and Westbrook Road in north Dayton/Harrison Township. We meet from 6:00 - 7:00 p.m. in the Dog House.

 

Remember, too, that the new curriculum for Bible @ Boston's begins on May 8. We will utilize the material that I taught at The University of Dayton's Life Long Learning Institute's Class, "You Believe...What?" We will examine the theological diversity of the New Testament as a means of understanding contemporary theological diversity. Plan now to be with us each Wednesday.

 

See You Then!    

Boston

There are no adequate words to express appropriate outrage, fear and sorrow that result from the attack on yesterday's Boston Marathon. Many of us have friends who have run in it, were running in it, or were scheduled to run in that race. It is difficult for us to imagine what it must have been like to be so victimized.

 

There is no word yet on responsibility for the bombing.

 

A friend and colleague asked this morning, "Why is there so much hate?" I can answer that question. There is so much hate because there is so little love. Human beings can put an end to hatred by practicing acceptance, tolerance and love. This process entails more than simply believing in acceptance, tolerance and love. We must, as persons, organizations, churches and nations embody love in direct and intentional acts of kindness, generosity, mercy and forgiveness.

 

Why is there so much violence? Because there is so little peace. Somewhere, at some point, the culture in which we live turned a corner around which resides a tremendous lack of respect, a deeply abiding selfishness, and a disregard for the wellbeing of others. Peace is impossible if it is not derived from an authentic desire for the wellbeing of others.

 

If there is any calling in the tragedy of Boston, April 15, 2013, it is to exercise a sense of urgency in changing the world. The methodology for achieving that new world is the direct action of men, women and children to embody love, acceptance, tolerance, peace, grace and forgiveness. It is an intentional turn from the divisive vitriol of the political and economic realm. It is stemming the tide of selfishness, greed, disregard, intolerance, bigotry, and isolationism.  

 

If we fail, we can anticipate more Bostons, another Oklahoma City, another Atlanta, another London, until we reach the point of destroying ourselves for the sake of political positioning. If we fail to do that to which we are called, the world suffers.

 

If, however, we can embody the ethic of Jesus Christ, that which lies as a common core of all of the world's religions, then we can indeed usher in a new age. We can live in love. We can live in peace. We can live in God's kingdom on earth.

 

It is time. Boston is clear evidence.  

A Body in John

Shiloh tends to structure its worship around the texts that are suggested by the Revised Common Lectionary. That Lectionary recommends four texts (an Old testament text, a Psalm, and Epistle and the Gospel reading) for each Sunday of the Liturgical Church Year, in a three-year cycle. That three-year cycles is shaped according to the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke). Instead of locating some fancy theological title for each of those three years, we refer to the years as "Year A," following Matthew, "Year B," following Mark and "Year C," using Luke's Gospel. There is not yet a "Year D," shaping itself around the Gospel According to John. Therefore, readings from John tend to be interspersed throughout the three-year pattern.

So it is with the weeks of Easter, 2013. While we are in Year C of the Revised Common Lectionary, reading from the Gospel According to Luke, we are reading in these weeks from the Gospel According to John. Last week, we read of doubting Thomas, who was challenged to believe without having seen the resurrected Lord. Thomas' practicality and/or cynicism renders him unable to believe without having seen for himself the hands and side of the bodily resurrected Jesus. Jesus appears again. Thomas sees and believes. But, as the Gospel story makes clear, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."

This week, we read about Jesus' third post-resurrection visit with his disciples. They are fishing, but catching nothing. The disciples/apostles come ashore in the morning and find Jesus there. He knows that their expedition has been fruitless. He instructs them to cast their nets one last time. The resulting catch is so large that the nets can barely hold it without breaking. The disciples/apostles drag the catch ashore and find Jesus making breakfast for them. He cooks some of the fish from the vast catch and shares a meal with his followers.

I find the themes of John's resurrection narrative interesting. Why would a text that is based on demonstrating Jesus as a spiritual reality that has become incarnate, a physical reality, so adamant about drawing the resurrection of Jesus as a physical event? Why was "Doubting Thomas" invited to touch Jesus' hands and side? Why does Jesus eat bread and fish with his followers? Why is Jesus' resurrection in John a physical reality instead of a spiritual one?

The answer may be as simple as claiming that John's author was interested in answering the gnostic charges of docetism. Docetism was the early church heresy of believing that Jesus was something of a phantasm, never actually a human being but always a spiritual instead of a physical reality. John's fascination with the post-resurrection physicality of Jesus may be a response to the early second century skepticism that surrounds Jesus' resurrection. John may be attempting to add something to the post-resurrection experience of Jesus' followers that he finds lacking in the synoptics. 

Whatever the case, serious students of the Revised Common Lectionary have to wonder at this Easter series of readings. What are we to do with them? Are we simply to "believe without having seen?" Are we to see Jesus around the open-air meal of fish and bread? Does he come while we are fishing? 

Let the curiosity bring you to worship in these very interesting weeks of Easter. Resurrection is clearly the theme, but is new life a physical or spiritual reality? Are we transformed at Easter? Is that transformation physical or spiritual, or both? Come and experience for yourselves the continuing Easter celebration at Shiloh Church.

See you Sunday! 

April @ Shiloh

One would think that, since Easter took place on the last day of March, April might be a slower month around Shiloh Church. One might anticipate some down time. While that may be the case with some churches, it is certainly not the case at Shiloh.

 

Some physical changes are taking place this month. Many of you have noticed the removal of the huge sign that had been located in the circle drive yard. It has not been stolen and sold for scrap. Instead, that sign has been removed, and given to another local church, in order to make room for two other changes in Shiloh's signage. On the point, a new programmable electronic sign is scheduled to be installed at some time this month. In order to accommodate that new sign, it is necessary that we remove the banner system that we had been using for communicating to our neighbors and the community upcoming public events. That 20' banner system will now be placed in the circle drive yard, in place of the old sign. This change allows Shiloh Church a great deal more flexibility in its communication with the neighborhood and a sign that something is happening here. Remember, too, that a volunteer painting day will take place on April 20.

 

A significant amount of mission takes place in April. On the 13th and 27th, Shiloh will be part of the national Rebuilding Together program. Our designated home is in Shiloh's extended neighborhood and requires that we hold two work days. For more information, contact members of the Mission and Social Concerns Committee. Shiloh is also collecting hygiene products throughout the month to help support the mission of the St. Vincent shelter. Both mission efforts will serve persons in our community, even as Shiloh continues planning for a June trip to the east coast, for Sandy relief efforts. You can still sign up for that trip by talking with Sue Cox.

 

Educational ministries step up in April. Since we completed our two-year chronological walk through the books of the Bible at Bible @ Boston's in February, the program has been on a short hiatus. A new eight-week curriculum, based on my class at University of Dayton, called "You Believe...What?" will start on Wednesday, may 8. In April, we will gather at Boston's each Wednesday to discuss planned topics. (You can see the topics for weekly discussion on Shiloh's website: www.shiloh.org. The information is in the online connection, within the Pastor's article. Shiloh will continue to hold its regular Tuesday Bible studies, at 7:00 p.m., and its regular Thursday Bible study at 10:00 a.m. There is an informational meeting on Monday, April 15, 7:00 p.m., for those who may be interested in attending another installment of the Shiloh Confirmation program. Confirmation at Shiloh is open to anyone over the eighth grade level and adults.Come and learn about the program.

 

Regular Sunday worship is still provided at 8:30, 10:25, and 7:00 p.m. each Sunday. The 8:30 service is for those who prefer a quiet time of reflection, prayer and meditation around the themes of the weekly texts. The 10:25 service is for those who prefer a slightly more traditional liturgical form of worship, while Shiloh's 7:00 p.m. service is for those who prefer a more praise-oriented, contemporary style. Come and be with us. Whatever form of worship you prefer, Shiloh's aim is to provide an authentic and meaningful worship experience.

 

See You Sunday!

Divine Plan

I have always found it personally irritating and professionally troubling that persons in the church seem to be so enamored with the notion that all things happen as a part of God's divine plan for each of us. Facebook is filled with daily posts that decry the troubling aspects of life as some passing occurrence, as "God's will." If we believe in and trust God, the posts seem to suggest, then we will tolerate the turmoil and chaos of life as part of that plan. If bad things happen...God's plan. If good things happen...God's plan. People of faith have only to live out their lives as part of God's plan.

 

Now, I have read Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Faith. I find the concepts challenging and internally cohesive, yet flawed by the notion of a personal God, like a human. This deity "decides" who is cursed and blessed, who is fated for eternal salvation and who is doomed. The Reformed Church movement still holds to some of these basic notions, but I find the idea of a God who arbitrarily decides the fate of human salvation troubling at best.

 

Firstly, believing that salvation is fated limits the possibility of God's Holy Spirit being at work in each and every one of us. Secondly, the concept allows persons who are fortunate to believe that their advantages are of divine origin. The corollary, of course, is that those who are unfortunate also find themselves suffering at God's will. It is God's will, therefore, that some suffer while others take advantage. In the system that upholds a divine plan as the course of human events, the fortunate should be fortunate, by divine will,  and the unfortunate should be left unfortunate. Human beings should morally do nothing about the situation because "it is God's will." Moreover, human beings can do nothing about configurations of what might be construed as God's will because God is more powerful than humans.

 

I am aware that most who simply post Facebook phrases and pictures do not tend to think through the extended theological ramifications of a "divine plan." I am just concerned that it seems to large a part of our cultural and theological mantra. The mantra can be especially troubling when it is meant as comfort. I have heard it twice recently. The first occasion was the death of a person that I know in the community. A person passed at the visitation that preceded the memorial service. A well-intentioned person said, "I know it's hard, name-of-person, but it is all part of God's plan. You will see your husband again." The other was an on-line discussion of social equality. The person with whom I was discussing the need for social justice had just called me a "socialist," and added, "Did you ever think that the way things are is part of God's plan?"

 

Ummmm, no, I certainly have not. Nor will I. Ever.

 

So, what do you think? Is there a "divine plan," and does it mean that human will is negligible at best and meaningless in reality? 

Emergent Church Movement

On Sunday, I was handed a news release entitled, "Emergent church movement comes to Sandpoint." The article was written by David Gunter, who is a feature correspondent for the Bonner County Daily.

 

The article is announcement of a new church start, I suppose in Sandpoint, located somewhere in Bonner County. It compares the present situation of the Church of Jesus Christ with that of the Great Reformation and even the human history of Jesus. Quoting the new start Pastor, Bob Evans, the article suggests that the Catholic Church at the time of Martin Luther failed to appreciate the radical actions and demands of the movement that resulted from Luther's theological disagreement with the Church. In the same vein, the Temple and synagogue at the time of Jesus failed to embrace his challenge to their traditional faith practices.

 

Evan's argument is that the Church today resides amid the chaos of such change. Like the 500 year cycle of seismic shifts that are suggested in Phyllis Tickle's "The Great Emergence," today's cultural changes demand that the Church of Jesus Christ change radically. If the Church is to survive, if it is to remain relevant to and within the newly developing culture, that Church will need to recapture a form of faith that precedes Pauline Christianity. That is, we need to recover the faith formation and spirituality of the "Historical Jesus." 

 

There is nothing new here for those who have been striving for decades to understand the cultural changes that necessitate spiritual evolution. Shiloh Church has been laboring for years to become the "Emergent Church" in a traditional setting. The questions raised by the article are important, but perhaps for a much different reason that the author or the Pastor intended.

 

The question is not whether or not a new church start can be the Emergent Church. The question is whether existing congregations, some traditional and historical, can change to become the Emergent Church. Is it possible for existing congregations to retool, both theologically and practically, to represent the faith and spirituality of Jesus? Is it necessary for existing congregations to go out of existence and new church starts to replace them? Can the Church be reformed?

 

The evidence remains mixed, even at Shiloh. Can the congregation represent emergent thinking and theology? Can it free itself enough from trappings of traditional and historical Christianity that it becomes relevant once again in a newly developing culture? Can a church population, traditionally and historically trained, change its thinking and behavior, or will everyone leave? 

 

Shiloh is, in many ways, a test case for the Emerging Church movement. Our time, talent, prayers and effort have, for more than a decade now, been dedicated to developing an emergent theology and practice from the traditional and historical foundations of the Church of Jesus Christ.

 

Shiloh relies upon the dedication, vision and focus of its members and friends to direct us toward cultural and social relevancy. We wish Sandpoint the very best in its new church start. We will pray for them. Perhaps they are the future of the Church of Jesus Christ.

 

See You Sunday! 

Culture Shock

I have been invited to speak at quite a few events recently, some in the wider church realm and some in the educational community. Most of the invitations have come with the plea to speak on how changes in the culture are leading to changes in the Church of Jesus Christ. I have written on these issues fairly widely here in The Shiloh Insider. I encourage readers to look back through the posts to attain a clearer vision of just how culture is leading the way in a universal church spiritual evolution.

 

It is something of a surprise, then, when I speak before an audience of persons who have seemingly never heard of such cultural influence on the Church. For many, the news of a changing culture directly impacting the direction of the Church catches them like deer in headlights. The news is met with icy stares. Heads shake. Tongues wag. "How dare he say such things?"

 

The first series of books on the subject of a changing culture shaping the future of the Church, at least within my experience, were published by The Alban Institute in the mid-1990's. Almost twenty years have passed since "Congregational Megatrends" was published. Of course, the initial writing took place almost thirty years after the advent of cultural transition. By the time we reach Thomas Friedman,'s "The World is Flat," in 2005, cultural transitions had taken full hold on the future formation of the church universal.

 

This is not news to those in and around Shiloh Church. We are fully aware that the digital age has brought new means of communication and information sharing that have rendered the old-world religious institutions irrelevant and counter-intuitive. Increased individualism and a distinctly anti-institutional attitude have led persons to opt for spirituality instead of organized religion. While the numbers of those who consider themselves "spiritual" has held fairly constant, the number of those who belong to any religious institution has diminished by more than half.

 

It is shocking that people in churches and the academy seem unwilling to notice. They certainly seem unwilling to change. This next step in the spiritual evolution of religion necessitates that the church become a training ground for the spiritually equipped. The Church must begin to understand itself as a means of the salvation of the global family of God, not so much by coming out from the world but by investing in its systems. If we fail, we die. If we refuse, we cease to exist. If we do not know, our ignorance brings the Church to the brink of extinction.

 

This week's contribution to The Shiloh Insider is therefore a call to my colleagues, to middle judicatory personnel, to denominational representatives, to church members and all who have a stake in the future of religious institutions of any kind, be emboldened in declaring the next phase of our spiritual evolution. Embrace it fully. Then, plan with us to alter the religious institutions of our age. If we do not, out fate is already written. If we succeed in changing the religious institutions to be more about the developing spirituality of persons in and around the Church, then we have at least a chance of survival.

 

See You Sunday!

Installation

A friend and colleague invited me to preach at his installation service this past weekend. On Friday, Lisa, my wife, and I traveled to Evansville, Indiana, where we had served a congregation before coming to Dayton, Ohio in 2000. On Saturday, I had some discussion with some of the church staff members and leaders. On Sunday, I delivered the message at my friend's installation.

 

Several things arise from the experience. As a rule, I do not attend installation services. I find the liturgy pedantic and tedious. I find the robing of clergy an arrogant example of what is wrong with trying to help laypersons embrace their own empowerment, when there is clearly a division for those who are "called to ministry." As a rule, I find the entire process a painful reminder of precisely that which younger generations find to be stuffy and repugnant about church life.

 

I do not know if others feel this way, but lack of clergy support and low attendance at this past weekend's installation service seem to indicate that there is something here that is not functioning. There were very few clergy colleagues in attendance. There was little wider church support, outside of those who had an official role in the ceremonies. Clergy robed...or most of them did. Despite the fact that they were "set apart," there was scant involvement.

 

The congregation was only partially in attendance. Clearly, this was not a pivotal event in the life of the congregation. Despite the fact that it was the installation of the congregation's newly called Pastor, people from the congregation were simply not present. One might assume that such a pivotal event in the life of the church might be marked with wide involvement of those for whom the installation is taking place. Scant support from clergy colleagues and low congregational attendance indicate that there is something lacking in the process of installing UCC Pastors.

 

The service was a good one. Several people provided excellent charges. The music was plentiful and well thought out as part of the service. The Installed Pastor provided a very warm and engaging benediction. There was just no energy. There was no excitement. Persons under the age of 40 would have been bored and easily distracted. I imagine persons in any but the present age category, which may have averaged somewhere in the 60's or 70's, noting to not again attend a service of installation.

 

How can we breathe some excitement into the process of clergy installation? How can we make it less about the establishment and maintenance of a "clergy class" and more about the congregational calling and empowerment? How can we draw congregation members and clergy colleagues to be present, even if they are not directly involved?

 

These issues are, I think, rather important in how the church understands what it is doing, how it sees itself, and how it embodies the ministry and mission of Jesus Christ. It will certainly cause me to rethink installation services, and how they might be occasions for congregational joy and celebration.

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

   

 

 

Intrigue Expands

Last week, I wrote of the intrigue within the Ohio Conference of the United Church of Christ and its five component Associations. You may recall that the Ohio Conference Council decided to either ratify for implementation or ratify for study a proposal from a task group that had been named to study the systemic issues of Ohio's middle judicatory. Whether the proposal is ratified for study or implementation is a matter of debate, depending upon the source of information.

 

Last May, a group of those responsible for strategic planning within SONKA travelled to Columbus to meet with the Conference Minister and representatives from the other Ohio Associations. The theme was just such an investigation of the middle judicatory structure in Ohio. During that meeting, the SONKA contingent, of which I was a part, suggested that the Conference/Association dilemma in Ohio be resolved in favor of the Associations, and that the Conference be reformed as a collegium of the five Associations, thus reducing redundancy and unneeded overhead.

 

The Conference proposal recommended the centralization of staffing and OCWM collection and control  to the Conference level, thereby eliminating those actions from the Association level. This proposal was made without Association input or participation, outside of those representatives that sit on the Conference Council.

 

The intrigue expands. Last week, churches and leaders received a letter of resignation from Conference Minister, Bob Molsberry, who is moving to St. Louis, where he will serve a local church and be nearer to his children and grandchildren. We wish Rev. Molsberry all the best in his transition and future service in the Webster Groves community. But we wonder what the Conference Council will now do with the proposal that was made just weeks before. Will the Council adopt the proposal as implementable direction, or will it now construct as thorough study in and throughout the Conference? Will the conversation or implementation include Association leadership? How?

 

As the music rises in the background, SONKA's strategic planning team suspects a coming crescendo. If we are to avoid the coming cymbal crash, maybe it is time that Conference and Association leadership sit and work through some of the details, as the strategic planning team from SONKA attempted almost a year ago.

 

Ohio and northern Kentucky cannot yet claim with certainty the shape and structure of its future middle judicatory. What we have is not working, that is for sure. Just what we will shape as a result remains a matter of intrigue and contention.

 

See You Sunday!    

Intrigue in Ohio

Ohio is unique across the national United Church of Christ. Of the thirty-nine Conferences that make up the UCC, Ohio is the only one with strong Association organizations and a strong centralized Conference. There is a fair amount of resulting redundancy in the functions of the Associations and the Conference. Due primarily to shrinking OCWM dollars and the diminishing numbers of those involved, the middle judicatory level of our denomination must either change or die.

 

At a recent meeting of the Ohio Conference Council, the group heard a proposal from a task force that had been named to study the dilemma. Their recommendation, and that of the Ohio Conference Minister, has been interesting to those who have been in leadership in the Associations. The proposal seeks to further centralize the staffing and financial control of the Associations under the rubric of the Conference. No longer would monies flow through Associations to the Conference. If this proposal were established as practice, all OCWM contributions would flow from the Conference to Associations. Staff configurations would also be determined by the Conference. Associate Conference Ministers would be responsible for the regional and area functions now performed by Association Ministers. The number, site placement and function of each Associate Conference Minister would be determined by the Conference.

 

As one might imagine, there is a fair amount of push back coming from Association leadership. Association leadership wants to maintain control of OCWM financial contribution, as well as function, site placement and number of staff.

 

The process of developing the Conference proposal did not include Association leadership. Many of the Ohio Association leaders are planning alternative proposals that reverse the control and judicatory function to Associations instead of the Conference.

 

There is great intrigue in the Ohio Conference of the United Church of Christ. How will the middle judicatory change to meet the challenges of decline and diminishing dollars? Will we have a centralized Conference or reasonably autonomous Associations? The local churches can no longer support both.

 

I invite you to become part of the conversation by planning now to attend the Spring Association Meeting of the Southwest Ohio Northern Kentucky Association, where we will discuss in plenary and small groups, both the Conference proposal and any that might come from a joint effort of Ohio Associations. That meeting will take place on Saturday, April 27. It is to take place at one of our congregations in northern Kentucky. Why not make an overnight of it and combine it with some fun and fellowship?

 

See You Sunday!

Marching on Jerusalem

Lent begins on Wednesday. As unbelievable as it might seem, Ash Wednesday is this week. Shiloh Church will recognize the change of liturgical season with a special evening Ash Wednesday service, which will start at 7:00 p.m. in the church's sanctuary.

 

Because Ash Wednesday is this week, Shiloh is suspending its Bible @ Boston's program for a week. There will be no session on February 13. The program will resume on the 20th, with an examination of I and II Timothy, followed on the 27th, with study of I, II and III John. The two-year chronological walk through the books of the Bible will come to an end on February 27. Thanks to all who have taken part, to Dave Boston, who allowed us the back room at his bar, and to people bold enough to think about and allow Bible study in a bar.

 

But Lent is upon us. Throughout the season, we will walk with Jesus toward Jerusalem, where he will sacrifice himself for the salvation of people everywhere and throughout time. This year's Lenten theme is "Marching on Jerusalem." By using the term, we mean to suggest that Jesus' march on Jerusalem is about the liberation of God's people from the dual powers of sin and death. It is the ultimate act of liberation.

 

Because we are in year "C" of the Revised Common Lectionary, and because I choose, as a personal and professional discipline, to follow that lectionary, our focus will remain on the Gospel According to Luke. Written sometime after the fall of Jerusalem in 70, probably during a time of persecution, like that under Domitian, in the 80's and 90's, Luke's Gospel is written to a Gentile community. Its agenda is the recruitment of Gentile followers for Christ. Its Christology is unique among the Gospels. in Luke, Jesus is superhuman, sent from God to serve as Savior of all humankind, universal and cosmic.

 

Luke's Gospel is also concerned with social justice and civil rights. This Gospel is as much about the equality of those who had been systemically rejected in Jesus' day, as perhaps now, as it is about the reformation of the synagogue and Temple. Jesus seeks in Luke to change the people and systems that reject the lame, the blind, the oppressed, the prisoner, the poor and the genetically "other." Luke's Jesus leads us on a march on Jerusalem, where we demonstrate concern and care for those who suffer at the hands of our systems and cultural prejudices.

 

Join us each Sunday through the Lenten season. March on Jerusalem with us, and with Jesus. Be a part of the movement that claims equality and justice for the invisible and unmentionable populations of our age. Come and walk beside us, as we accompany Jesus in the work of universal liberation.

 

See You Sunday!

Spiritual Evolution

I have been thinking lately about the possibility of spiritual evolution.

 

Accepting the science of physical evolution, that species, through time, develop in ways that better suit survival in changing environmental systems, I am interested in the notion of the same survival mechanisms in the realm of spirituality.

 

Let me explain my curiosity.

 

The recent inauguration of an African-American President, juxtaposed with the celebration of the ministry of the champion of the Civil Rights Movement in America, has led me to wonder about cultural change. Is cultural change actually an aspect of a spiritual evolution? Is the move toward wider acceptance and embrace of cultural diversity less about cultural maturity than it is an indication of progressing spirituality?

 

Since around 1968, American culture has been undergoing seismic shift. Characterized, as such cultural shifts seem to be, with means of communication, (This new age is often referred to as "The Digital Age," or the "Technological Revolution.") the shift in which we find ourselves is about electronics and technology. While it is dehumanizing and isolating, at least at its onset, the shift is also characterized by a renewed acceptance of ethnic, behavioral, racial and gender diversity.

 

Perhaps, our culture has matured to the point where we sense that it is in our best interest to accept persons who are different from us. Maybe the acceptance of diversity is simply a utilitarian aspect of communal life. Thomas Friedman may have approached suggesting such a thing in his 2005 book, "The World is Flat." As our communities expand, due mainly to improvements in information and communication, our experiences of other cultures and life-styles expands. As our experience expands, our acceptance increases.

 

Perhaps there is something more powerful afoot here. Maybe the correlation between expanded communication and increasing acceptance is simply part and parcel of our improved spiritual existence. More than simple utility, maybe a spiritual relationship with a progressive divinity is compelling us toward, forward, outward.

 

Is spiritual evolution as much a part of the human story as a physical evolution? Does our sense of being improve through time, and is its culmination qualitatively different than what our religious tradition refers to as "The Kingdom of God?"  I choose to entertain the possibility, if not the probability, of a spiritual evolution that accompanies or leads our physical one. Maybe there is not much difference between the worlds of science and spirituality.

 

What do you think? Spiritual evolution?