Hello again!
I recently had a very good conversation with a friend about the role of expression and reverence at church. My friend, who shall be called Billy, shared that he had attended both charismatic and evangelical churches on a consistent basis over the years. He had found that he didn't much like the expressiveness of his charismatic church and favored the more traditional teaching-focused church that appeared more reverent. He didn't intend to generalize all charismatic churches into one category, but was simply sharing his experience.
Then during the service the pastor joked about how much more engaging and expressive the congregation is on Sunday mornings after the Razorbacks win a football game compared to when they lose.
After the service Billy said that the pastor's comments bothered him. He cited an example where another church has done an experiment. Billy described how the pastor in the experiment told the congregation he would show them two video clips and instructed them to respond naturally. The first video clip was of their favorite football team scoring an amazing touchdown. Naturally the crowd went wild! The second video was a baptism, and the crowd gave the classic 'golf clap.' Of course the point of the experiment is to expose our lack of excitement as demonstrated by our lack of expressiveness at church. Why would be cheer, jump and shout at the top of our lungs for football but not for God?
I found this a funny inconsistency with Billy's comments before the service, but perhaps I misjudged. It brings up a good discussion, however, about expression and reverence. For instance, some people wear what they call their "Sunday best" to church, usually formal attire like a suit. Others dress casual or even bring their dancing shoes (you know who you are). Is one more reverent? I don't have an answer because I don't think it's about our attire, ultimately. Maybe it's both! What about the difference between one who raises their hands during worship and one who sits?
Your answer may be determined by the way you were raised, but I am encouraged to look beyond the action and into a person's sincerity. Ah, no, sincerity is the wrong word... because you can be sincerely wrong (trust me I know). I mean how/if that person is genuinely relating to God. I think both can be great! Inexpression is not always the absence of passion, and expression is not always the absence of reverence. Perhaps what we all must learn is how to judge a little less.
Monday, September 15, 2014
Spontaneity v. Structure at Church
Hello again!
I have had a few very encouraging conversations recently. One of them was about the difference between spontaneous and structured church services and the benefits of each. I thought I would share my thoughts because I greatly benefited from the conversation.
Structured church services tend to have a clear set of goals with a detailed schedule and prepared elements to help accomplish those goals. I am naturally a fan of structure and this would describe the majority of church services in the west. The difficulty with structured services is that they easily become routine and entire congregations become accused of "going through the motions" week after week.
Spontaneous church serves may have a clear set of goals but have a very flexible schedule and few(er) prepared elements. The draw of spontaneous services is the breaking of routine that insights a heightened level of expectancy in the attendees. You can't "go through the motions" when there are no motions. Spontaneous services are often criticized for emotionalism and a lack of consistency.
The conflict arrises when spontaneous services among a typically structured church service. Something spontaneous happens (maybe the time of worship is extended or the preacher changes his topic) and result is increased engagement from a partially confused yet intrigued audience. If the spontaneous accident is a success then the debate raises about if all services should be more spontaneous. Suddenly everyone in the room was on the edge of their seat in expectancy for God to do something and this radical engagement is attributed to the spontaneous nature of the service. So the conversation becomes about rejecting structure and incorporating more spontaneous elements (thus the pendulum swings).
I would guess that many of these discussions are inconclusive because (I believe) they are founded on a misconception. Where does the Bible say that God cannot be active in structure? Honestly, I think the whole thing is in our heads and that God can encounter us equally in both formats. The spontaneous element merely triggers something that should always be present: expectancy. Why can't we go to church expectant to encounter God in every form of service? Why aren't we always engaged? Honestly, it's not about spontaneity or structure, but about the readiness of our hearts to receive.
It is true that structure creates a routine and that routine can become monotonous, but that is not an inherent fault of structure but of our hearts. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy spontaneous stuff as much as the next guy, but I feel like sometimes we misunderstand structure and spontaneity. The congregation's engagement and expectancy are not the result of your church's latest promotional idea or service format. They are the result of leaders casting vision and setting the example of encountering the living God.
I have had a few very encouraging conversations recently. One of them was about the difference between spontaneous and structured church services and the benefits of each. I thought I would share my thoughts because I greatly benefited from the conversation.
Structured church services tend to have a clear set of goals with a detailed schedule and prepared elements to help accomplish those goals. I am naturally a fan of structure and this would describe the majority of church services in the west. The difficulty with structured services is that they easily become routine and entire congregations become accused of "going through the motions" week after week.
Spontaneous church serves may have a clear set of goals but have a very flexible schedule and few(er) prepared elements. The draw of spontaneous services is the breaking of routine that insights a heightened level of expectancy in the attendees. You can't "go through the motions" when there are no motions. Spontaneous services are often criticized for emotionalism and a lack of consistency.
The conflict arrises when spontaneous services among a typically structured church service. Something spontaneous happens (maybe the time of worship is extended or the preacher changes his topic) and result is increased engagement from a partially confused yet intrigued audience. If the spontaneous accident is a success then the debate raises about if all services should be more spontaneous. Suddenly everyone in the room was on the edge of their seat in expectancy for God to do something and this radical engagement is attributed to the spontaneous nature of the service. So the conversation becomes about rejecting structure and incorporating more spontaneous elements (thus the pendulum swings).
I would guess that many of these discussions are inconclusive because (I believe) they are founded on a misconception. Where does the Bible say that God cannot be active in structure? Honestly, I think the whole thing is in our heads and that God can encounter us equally in both formats. The spontaneous element merely triggers something that should always be present: expectancy. Why can't we go to church expectant to encounter God in every form of service? Why aren't we always engaged? Honestly, it's not about spontaneity or structure, but about the readiness of our hearts to receive.
It is true that structure creates a routine and that routine can become monotonous, but that is not an inherent fault of structure but of our hearts. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy spontaneous stuff as much as the next guy, but I feel like sometimes we misunderstand structure and spontaneity. The congregation's engagement and expectancy are not the result of your church's latest promotional idea or service format. They are the result of leaders casting vision and setting the example of encountering the living God.
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Awkward Moments in Support Raising
Hello again!
I have had my fair share of awkward conversations surrounding the topic of support raising as a missionary. I'm talking about the idea of inviting others to pay part of your salary because they believe in you/your work. "How can you raise a family on that kind of pay?" "There's not financial security in that." "That isn't a real job." But perhaps the most awkward and discouraging conversations go unsaid: "Are you trying to monetize our relationship?" "You want me to put a dollar amount on our friendship?" I understand these reactions as support raising too often misused by many. This grieves me because the rampant misuse of support raising hurts people. It damages relationships and can even destroys entire ministries. After enough bad experiences many people simply disengage from that kind of giving.
Here is my perspective, whether someone is inviting me to support them or I am doing the inviting. Support raising is part of our God designed the modern missions movement to run ("goers" and "senders"). The partnership between the missionaries and the funders creates a shared experience of the missions movement. Support raising is not a popularity contest because the missions movement is not a popularity contest. Rather, the partnership of the goers and senders is about fostering one thing: OBEDIENCE. The missionary has to be obedient to be willing to do the work that God has called him/her to do, and the senders have to be obedient to give their finances where God leads them to give. Therefore, the invitation to support a missionary is not an attempt to monetize your relationship or take advantage of your income, but it should be an invitation to seek the Lord and find out how/if He would lead you to give. If we understood that, so many awkward conversations and relationships would be saved! My best friend could ask me to support him but if God told me to give somewhere else, I would be obedient because obedience is the goal! "Yes" or "No" doesn't matter! Obedience matters.
That may or may not make sense, but I'll leave you with one other thought. I hear a lot of advertisements about getting a "guaranteed income for life" and "complete financial security." Americans are obsessed with that stuff, but the truth is there is only ONE PLACE where you can expect to have a guaranteed income or total financial security: radical obedience to Jesus. I don't care how rich or poor your are, all of that can change in the blink of His eye. "Seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well" (Matthew 6:33).
Practical Tip: In the event that someone does ask you to support them but you do not feel led to do so, please don't ignore them. It isn't personal, it's obedience. Just tell them "no" and they will thank you for it!
I have had my fair share of awkward conversations surrounding the topic of support raising as a missionary. I'm talking about the idea of inviting others to pay part of your salary because they believe in you/your work. "How can you raise a family on that kind of pay?" "There's not financial security in that." "That isn't a real job." But perhaps the most awkward and discouraging conversations go unsaid: "Are you trying to monetize our relationship?" "You want me to put a dollar amount on our friendship?" I understand these reactions as support raising too often misused by many. This grieves me because the rampant misuse of support raising hurts people. It damages relationships and can even destroys entire ministries. After enough bad experiences many people simply disengage from that kind of giving.
Here is my perspective, whether someone is inviting me to support them or I am doing the inviting. Support raising is part of our God designed the modern missions movement to run ("goers" and "senders"). The partnership between the missionaries and the funders creates a shared experience of the missions movement. Support raising is not a popularity contest because the missions movement is not a popularity contest. Rather, the partnership of the goers and senders is about fostering one thing: OBEDIENCE. The missionary has to be obedient to be willing to do the work that God has called him/her to do, and the senders have to be obedient to give their finances where God leads them to give. Therefore, the invitation to support a missionary is not an attempt to monetize your relationship or take advantage of your income, but it should be an invitation to seek the Lord and find out how/if He would lead you to give. If we understood that, so many awkward conversations and relationships would be saved! My best friend could ask me to support him but if God told me to give somewhere else, I would be obedient because obedience is the goal! "Yes" or "No" doesn't matter! Obedience matters.
That may or may not make sense, but I'll leave you with one other thought. I hear a lot of advertisements about getting a "guaranteed income for life" and "complete financial security." Americans are obsessed with that stuff, but the truth is there is only ONE PLACE where you can expect to have a guaranteed income or total financial security: radical obedience to Jesus. I don't care how rich or poor your are, all of that can change in the blink of His eye. "Seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well" (Matthew 6:33).
Practical Tip: In the event that someone does ask you to support them but you do not feel led to do so, please don't ignore them. It isn't personal, it's obedience. Just tell them "no" and they will thank you for it!
Friday, August 22, 2014
The Most Disturbing Trend Among Youth
Hello again, everyone!
Every once and a while I am struck by fact that there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Our youth in America are experiencing a unique era of technology and population growth but honestly I think the core principles of the issues we are facing today are nothing new to humanity. Many people like to think that this generation faces challenges that no other generation has, maybe even greater challenges that any generation in history. I think the issue of technology may be a valid point but honestly I don't think you could read history and tell me that this generation faces greater struggle than any other, especially when our greatest struggle may be self-imposed.
I think that we are in the midst of a unique generation in light of the acceleration of the missions movement. Never before has it been possible for every people group to be reached, or for the Bible to be translated into every language. This is the first generation in history that is projected to see the completion of those tasks. That raises several questions and intriguing implication, but let's leave that alone for now.
What really disturbs me about most Christian youth in America is their growing dependance on sentiment. Like I said, this is not something that is unique to this generation. There are many periods of history where generations have traded truth for sentiment and we can see clearly the consequences of their decisions. Honestly I have not heard of any society that traded truth for sentiment and survived long.
The danger of becoming dependent on sentiment is how easily we can slip into it without even realizing it. I don't think most people make a conscious decision to set aside the rule of objective truth for subjective sentiment, but it appeals to our iniquity by validating our insecurity. I don't know if that makes sense...
Let me lay it out like this: the general assumption that humanity possesses an inherent good, even suppressed, is a very appealing sentiment. That idea bears no weight of truth, but it sounds good and the fact that it sounds good seems to be to make it acceptable among the youth. Most of the youth in the church have, in all honesty, left their Bible on the shelf in favor of whatever tickles their fancy regardless of if it stands the test of truth. I find myself looking to the great teachers of our fathers and recognizing that they let the Bible rule over their opinions and make their sentiment subject to the existence of truth. Not so with the youth. Rather the greatest offense has become the idea of imposing one person's truth upon another, effectively subjecting truth to sentiment and becoming vulnerable to delusion.
Let me be clear, this young generation in America is ripe for delusion because they literally have no heading to their moral compass, no foundation of truth to direct their opinion, thus becoming ruled by their emotions and sentiment. In fact, this is the culture described in Scripture as the one that would most readily receive the Antichrist. If you really want to break down the implications of the acceleration in the missions movement, current events in Israel and the general pulse of our western culture, we are quickly becoming the ideal recipients of one such leader.
The most effective element that could turn the tide of this sentiment-driven culture is a resurgence of Spirit-filled, prayerful, Bible-believing grade-schoolers and teenagers. Nowadays their friends would call them extremists, fundamentalists and intolerant, but we need nothing less than young people filled with glory and truth of God. Six years of ministry to high school campuses made this very clear to me.
By now I have probably confused several readers and possibly offended a few others. That's okay. I like you. Bear with me... I am not the best at this whole blog thing but I promise I'm getting better :)
My Struggle With Blogs
Hello again, World!
It has been a long time since I have written any significant content on my blog. That isn't necessarily to say that I haven't had anything to say, but I have had an internal struggle with the purpose/validity of my blog. You see, lately I haven't cared to share my thoughts just for the sake of sharing them. I find that there is far too much of that going on around the internet. I have shared many a 'hasty' blog in the past; ones where I write like a blunt-force hammer with no real consideration for my readers, especially in my teen/college years. I could even look back on some of my currently published blog posts with a certain level of appreciation for the growth I have experienced since then coupled with a sour feeling of regret in my stomach...
All that to say I'd like to try and 'reboot' my blog and actually post meaningful things, but I struggle with defining what would really be meaningful for me to say in such a public and yet impersonal format. I am a written processor, so writing my thoughts can have a sort of therapeutic purpose for me, but not all of that really belongs on the internet. I don't find that my personality transfers very well through writing since I tend to be overly-objective (which you are probably experiencing right now).
In all honesty I am amazed at how highly I used to value my own opinion. In fact I think recent years have shown me how much less my opinion matters than I think it does. This has driven me to pursue God's opinion and the truth of scripture. I can't be comfortable with any conclusion over an issue without the truth of Scripture. I find Scripture continually challenging me to measure my words and spend them less.
My previous goal for my blog was to comment on current events and share topics of biblical study with some assumed authority on the subject matter. I think for now I'd rather just be a little more transparent and maybe share a few stories now and again and try to practice allowing my personality to express itself in writing. I may share my opinion here or there, but over all I want my posts to be encouraging and uplifting and more personal than they have been. If you want to hear more of the biblical study side of me, I have found a proper outlet for that in a video series included in my monthly ministry newsletter found at www.loganbloom.com/newsletter.
Feel free to let me know what you think and what you would like to see happen here!
It has been a long time since I have written any significant content on my blog. That isn't necessarily to say that I haven't had anything to say, but I have had an internal struggle with the purpose/validity of my blog. You see, lately I haven't cared to share my thoughts just for the sake of sharing them. I find that there is far too much of that going on around the internet. I have shared many a 'hasty' blog in the past; ones where I write like a blunt-force hammer with no real consideration for my readers, especially in my teen/college years. I could even look back on some of my currently published blog posts with a certain level of appreciation for the growth I have experienced since then coupled with a sour feeling of regret in my stomach...
All that to say I'd like to try and 'reboot' my blog and actually post meaningful things, but I struggle with defining what would really be meaningful for me to say in such a public and yet impersonal format. I am a written processor, so writing my thoughts can have a sort of therapeutic purpose for me, but not all of that really belongs on the internet. I don't find that my personality transfers very well through writing since I tend to be overly-objective (which you are probably experiencing right now).
In all honesty I am amazed at how highly I used to value my own opinion. In fact I think recent years have shown me how much less my opinion matters than I think it does. This has driven me to pursue God's opinion and the truth of scripture. I can't be comfortable with any conclusion over an issue without the truth of Scripture. I find Scripture continually challenging me to measure my words and spend them less.
My previous goal for my blog was to comment on current events and share topics of biblical study with some assumed authority on the subject matter. I think for now I'd rather just be a little more transparent and maybe share a few stories now and again and try to practice allowing my personality to express itself in writing. I may share my opinion here or there, but over all I want my posts to be encouraging and uplifting and more personal than they have been. If you want to hear more of the biblical study side of me, I have found a proper outlet for that in a video series included in my monthly ministry newsletter found at www.loganbloom.com/newsletter.
Feel free to let me know what you think and what you would like to see happen here!
Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Cardinal Burke On Obama's "Freedom of Worship"
I have not posted a blog unrelated to our newsletter in quite a while, but a U.S. Catholic Cardinal who oversees the courts at the Vatican has made some profound observations of Obama's "freedom of worship" terminology. Recently Obama has avoided using the term "freedom of religion" in his speeches and has mysteriously gravitated towards the term "freedom of worship." Cardinal Burke has noticed this change and compared with Obama's policies has 'put two and two together' for us.
The following excerpt is a direct quote from an interview originally published by www.lifesitenews.com:
The following excerpt is a direct quote from an interview originally published by www.lifesitenews.com:
[Question (Izabella Parowicz)] - The policy of the President of the US towards the Christian civilisation becomes more and more aggressive. Does Your Eminence notice any symptoms of Catholic reactions against this policy? If yes, what are they, if not why?
[Answer (Cardinal Burke)] - It is true that the policies of the President of the United States of America have become progressively more hostile toward Christian civilization. He appears to be a totally secularized man who aggressively promotes anti-life and anti-family policies. Now he wants to restrict the exercise of the freedom of religion to freedom of worship, that is, he holds that one is free to act according to his conscience within the confines of his place of worship but that, once the person leaves the place of worship, the government can constrain him to act against his rightly-formed conscience, even in the most serious of moral questions. Such policies would have been unimaginable in the United States even 40 years ago. It is true that many faithful Catholics, with strong and clear leadership from their Bishops and priests, are reacting against the ever-growing religious persecution in the U.S. Sadly, one has the impression that a large part of the population is not fully aware of what is taking place. In a democracy, such a lack of awareness is deadly. It leads to the loss of the freedom which a democratic government exists to protect. It is my hope that more and more of my fellow citizens, as they realize what is happening, will insist on electing leaders who respect the truth of the moral law as it is respected in the founding principles of our nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)