Building a Legacy vs. Leaving a Legacy

The Rev. Bill Tully, Rector of St. Bartholomew's Church (where Julie Nelson, St. Edward's Priest Associate for Evangelism, once served) has written an excellent article in the Washington Post. Among his many keen observations, Bill stays this:

Episcopalians are the ultimate and extreme “legacy church.” No matter how committed the local rector is to change, no matter how deft she or he is in managing it, there is a huge and nearly immovable weight of tradition. Some of it is so good that it might--rightly reinterpreted and freshened--be the way forward to real growth in size and health. But it takes a lot of energy. We almost inevitably tilt backward for every step and a half we take forward.

I would very much agree. The very thing that is the most distinctive about the Episcopal Church--our stability--is also what makes it difficult for us to change. I've likened the Episcopal Church to a battleship or an aircraft carrier: incredibly difficult to sink, but also very difficult to turn! Unfortunately, the navy stopped making battleships years ago and the only thing that keeps aircraft carriers from going the same way is that they carry nimble and highly mobile aircraft. To continue the metaphor, evangelical mega-churches are aircraft carriers, Episcopal congregations are battleships. Both exist in an era when fast patrol boats seem much more suited to the way things need to be.

I have no real interest in leading The Church of What's Happening Now--a place that uncritically reacts to the current fashion and "felt needs" of the surrounding culture. Just troll around the Internet and you'll find a whole range of programs that are guaranteed to grow churches. In contrast to fashion, tradition is an excellent anchor in the midst of a cultural storm, holding us fast to the things that are important. However, tradition in and of itself is not enough. Tully goes on to say:

Bishop Budde of Washington is absolutely right about concentrating on the meat and potatoes of local congregational life: worship, music, compelling preaching, education, pastoral care. Taking stands on issues at the national level (where few people pay attention to us any longer) might be satisfying, but we’ve just about spent ourselves doing that.

That's what we're in the process of re-creating at St. Edward's: a place with vibrant worship, quality music, compelling preaching, a variety of educational offerings, and many ways of caring for others and being cared for as well. That kind of tradition is worth building on! The difficulty lies when we concentrate so much on leaving a legacy for "future generations" that we end up building and sustaining museums of ancient faith rather than concentrating on building a legacy alongside those right outside our doors that may not worship in the same way we are used to doing, but have a deep (perhaps even unnoticed) love of ritual, a more progressive theology, and a need for community. Building is challenging, but do-able!

Vunerability and Radical Welcome

Another colleague of mine (as one of my seminary professors used to say "I am not original.") recently highlighted the following talk by Dr. Brene Brown discussing the necessity for vulnerability in our lives. Take a look:



This dovetails with the talk about Radical Welcome from The Rev. Stephanie Spellers at our clergy conference a couple of weeks ago. At that conference, she invited us to share with one other person two experiences: an experience of being unwelcome and an experience of being welcome. In the midst of that, I realized that my entire ministry has been about creating and nurturing community--a place where people feel welcome and connected. A place, frankly, where people can be free to be vulnerable and admit their imperfections.

Frankly, and highly ironically, the church often makes this difficult. One would think that a faith tradition that is founded on the paradox of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ would be the most welcoming to imperfect, shameful, vulnerable people. Instead, we've put ourselves out there as perfect people who have it together and just need a little touch-up or polish on Sunday mornings. Our perhaps unintentional message is that you are welcome to come to church if you are certain of what you believe, your life is nearly perfect, and you can navigate your way around a church service pretty easily.

I seriously doubt anyone qualifies to come to church under those restrictions.

Few people are certain of what they believe, and the ones that are most certain are often the most resistant to growing in their faith and understanding. Few people's lives qualify as anything close to perfect, especially in the world we live in today. Few people who have not grown up in the church have any idea what to do and when to do it.

So where does that leave me as a pastor and priest and St. Edward's as a congregation? It means that we need to be intentional about creating a place where anyone, doubter, seeker, or curious visitor, can explore the Christian faith. We need to be explicit that our church is a  place where you don't need to be perfect to walk in the door. We need to be helpful to those people who enter our doors for the first time so that they can be participants and not just spectators in our services. Finally, we need to proclaim far and wide that we're doing this, we're going to repeatedly fail at it, but we're going to keep trying.

2010: A Church Odyssey

As the first decade of the new millennium comes to a close, there will be innumerable "top 10" lists, retrospectives, and even a few forecasts for the future. For myself, 2010 saw me complete my first year as Priest-in-Charge of St. Edward's, move into the Rectory (cutting my commute from 40 minutes to 40 seconds, as I like to say), and launch our new two-service Sunday morning schedule. It also saw us make some significant beginnings in addressing long-deferred maintenance on both our buildings and our programs. Sadly, the year ended with a decision to close the preschool we've been sponsoring for more than seven years. In many ways if feels a lot like the Rectory looked in early August halfway through the renovation--lots of potential, but lots of mess and a lot of work to do!

I think that is perhaps my chief reflection on my own ministry this year--a sense of digging into everything, clearing away accumulated stuff, and really getting a sense of the challenges ahead for me and for this church. These challenges are by no means unique to St. Edward's! We recently completed an Advent series where we invited my colleague and former Interim Rector here at St. Edward's, the Reverend John Buenz, to talk to us about "What's happening in our world?" and to suggest some trends worth watching. While there are many, the bottom line is that the era of the Christendom-based institutional church that simply opens its doors and welcomes the hordes of people clamoring to enter is finally dead after decades of decline. Few people not already in church are waking up on Sunday morning with the idea "Hey, I really need to find a great church to attend this morning!" The beauty of our buildings and our liturgy is lost on those who would never think of walking in the door.

As I've been reflecting upon this, and upon the spiritual hunger that still permeates our culture, I've come to one conclusion that seems pretty obvious: It's all about Jesus. What I mean by that is that it is not all about the church for the church's sake, but the church for Christ's sake. The purpose of the church, if one cuts through all of the flowery and perhaps overly theological language, is to introduce people to a life-changing relationship with Jesus Christ, to facilitate the growth of that relationship by linking them with fellow spiritual pilgrims, and to equip them to express that relationship in the world in word and deed. Period.

That purpose is why I do what I do as Priest-in-Charge. That's why we gather on Sunday morning. That's why I just spent a couple of hours choosing hymns for our 8:30 a.m. service for the next two months. That's why we keep the lights on, the rooms heated, and the roof fixed. That's why we invest money in both buildings and programs. That's why we close down programs--not to save money per se, but because we believe that God is calling us in a new direction best served in a different way. It isn't all about the church, it's all about Jesus. In 2011, St. Edward's will no doubt focus on the question: "What can we do, as St. Edward's Episcopal Church in San Jose, California, to better introduce people to Jesus, disciple them to maturity in their faith, and send them out as witnesses to the world?" In working out the answer to this question, I have the able assistance of our new Priest Associate for Evangelism, the Reverend Julie Nelson. I look forward to that process of discovery!

As the church considers how to make real its own mission, I will also be thinking about what can I do as Priest-in-Charge to both model that and help it happen. Certainly one aspect of that will be to revive my own journey of discovery of Jesus, discipleship, and service in Christ's name. The institutional church often imposes a heavy administrative burden that can distract clergy from tending their spiritual life, and I have found that to be true for me in 2010. So, as St. Edward's discovers its spiritual heart, I will be re-discovering mine as well.  Stay tuned....

Beyond Modernity: Episcopal Evangelism

There is an excellent presentation by Brian McLaren: the keynote address for the Diocese of Washington (DC). It is well worth watching, but I include his talking points below to wet your appetite.

In his presentation he mentions four advantages that Episcopalians have in the twenty-first century. They are:

1) A "Via Media" Mindset: Many Anglicans never surrendered to the modern mindset.
2) A Celtic Mindset: We have vestiges of non-Roman Christianity in our makeup.
3) A Diverse Mindset: We give people space to differ in their opinions.
4) A Liturgical Mindset: Space to experience God, bonding to meaning, beauty of worship, participatory.

He also notes some disadvantages:

1) An Upper Class Mindset: Elitist, "civilized", older, one-size fits all.
2) An Institutional Mindset: Centralized, controlled, change-resistant, risk averse, bureaucratic -- averse to charismatic leaders.
3) A Christendom Mindset: Parish/geography, people ought to come to us.
4) A Bi-polar Mindset: Cold war liberal-conservative.

He goes on to suggest some things that are needed:

1) A "bring them in" spirit (not merely welcoming within a caste): Diversity, innovation, welcoming all seekers (especially the young!), inviting friends, relatives, associates, neighbors. Question: What would it take for you to be excited about inviting your friends to church? What embarrasses or concerns you?

2) A "let's experiment" spirit (not institutional): Entrepreneurial, self-organizing, evolutionary, experimental--adding experiments (for 4 to 8 weeks), adding new services, planting new congregations (inside existing?), adding new models or examples (Fresh Expressions, Anglimergent?).
Question: Who says "no" to new ideas? Who can say "yes"? Who can bring new ideas?

3) A "we're beginning again" spirit (renewing, not conserving, a history): Demography, adaptive, agile--a huge rummage sale "What needs to be put on the curb?", getting rid of the junk in "cleaning house", changes in physical, social, and/or spiritual architecture.
Question: Would you rather be motivated by desperate necessity or surging creativity? What would your church look like if it could seize the possibility of a total makeover?

4) A "transcend and include" spirit (above liberal and conservative): Where is the via media? Which future do you prefer (conservative, liberal, centrist, or transcendent inclusive)?

...and

5) The Holy Spirit! People aren't seeking religion, they are seeking spirituality. You can't give what you don't have (you have to smoke what you're selling). People need to experience God, worship, transformation, belonging, participation in God's creative and healing mission in our world...
Question: Are you eager to become a "sample" of what God wants to do in the lives of others?

McLaren goes on to cast a vision for the church as a collection of individuals in partnership with God for the transformation of the world. I'll let you listen to the talk for specifics, but this sounds like a mission that the Episcopal Church, as a incarnation-centered, socially active, and spiritually rich church could really get behind!

Why should I be an Episcopalian?

This is an excellent question! Here is our Presiding Bishop's answer:



What I find refreshing about this answer is that it summarizes the great features of the Episcopal Church without being shy about our shortcomings--sometimes they are the same things! Part of what we are having to learn in the Episcopal Church is to articulate what is means for us to be Christians in the Episcopal tradition. That is a challenge for many, especially those of us who are "cradle Episcopalians" who have grown up in the church and barely know any other way of being Christian. Yet there are many disaffected and disaffiliated Christians out there and even more people who would not call themselves Christians at all. What does the Christian Gospel as seen through the lens of the Episcopal Church offer them? Answering that question is indeed the challenge.

MDGs, Outreach, and Evangelism

As any readers of this blog know, I have written in this blog about my reservations regarding using the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as a primary task of the Episcopal Church. This is primarily because I am just evangelical enough to think that the Great Commission should be the primary task of the church and am having a hard time seeing how that relates to the MDGs.

Having said that, today is the "MDG blogging day" and I've been thinking a bit on this. I think that the falacy that we as Episcopalians operate under is that at least some of those whom we serve in Christ's name as clients and recipients of various charitable endeavors during the week will find their way into our churches on Sunday morning and become members of our congregation. In other words, our outreach is our evangelism! However, in my experience, that rarely happens. So, rather than kidding ourselves that we are doing evangelism when what we are really doing is social service, let's just say "yes, we're serving the poor because that is what Jesus did and would do in our place and we are serving Jesus as we do so." Nothing else should be necessary. Part of our call as Christians is to reach out to others with the love of Christ, and supporting the MDGs (whether locally, nationally, or internationally) is a way of proclaiming the Kingdom of God even if we never use Jesus' name in that proclamation.

So, support the MDGs through Kiva, Episcopal Relief and Development, or via supporting Episcopalians for Global Reconciliation--just don't forget to do a little evangelism, too!

Winding Down and Wondering

As I wind down my time here in Seattle and my time at the Church Development Institute (CDI), I find myself with thoughts that are turning to the Episcopal Church and my own diocese and congregation. At the same time, I find myself with an inordinate amount of time and a high-speed Internet connection with which to surf the web for various and sundry tidbits about what is going on these days. While doing so, I came across a great blog entry from Fr. Tony Clavier which, among other things, includes this wonderment:

But have the losses [in membership in the Episcopal Church] we have sustained been largely the fault of "The 1960s Religious Establishment" or of our own lack of enthusiasm?

As someone who was born in 1968 I was largely a child of "The 1960s Religious Establishment." The only real memory I have of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer is that of removing it from the pews so that the "new" prayer book could take its place. Perhaps the fact that this is the world I have lived in my entire life predisposes me to a more liberal-leaning worldview. On the other hand, I find myself theologically conservative on many issues. As both a centrist and a self-styled Evangelical, I wonder if Fr. Clavier has a point there: What if the numerical decline of the Episcopal Church is not due to theology but to our lack of enthusiasm for our faith?

I submit that if we as the members of the church cannot articulate why their faith makes a difference in their lives, why we come to church, and what is worth sharing about the Episcopal version of being Christian we should not be surprised when people don't beat down the red church doors clamoring to join us. Perhaps what Episcopalians need much more than a cohesive theological statement is both a competence and a comfort in articulating our own individual faith stories and an enthusiasm for what Jesus Christ means to us and what is means to be a Christian of the Episcopal flavor. If such an identity means nothing to us, we should not be surprised that it means nothing to anyone else, either. Perhaps the question might be asked of each of us: "What's your story?"

Evangelism, Conversion, and Mission

I just ran across the Episcopal News Service (ENS) story on the "Everyone, Everywhere" missions conference currently happening in Maryland. While I'm pleased that the Episcopal Church is talking about mission, I don't notice much about evangelism. Even when conversion is discussed in the article, it is done so only in the context of the "perils of conversion" mentioned by The Rev. Paul-Gordon Chandler, Episcopal missionary and author and the conference's June 6 plenary speaker.

It seems to me that the Episcopal Church in the 21st century appears to think of mission exclusively in terms of social service, relief of suffering, and development. Episcopal Relief and Development, a wonderful agency, thus seems to be our primary "evangelism" tool. In a church that is losing members daily, I find it somewhat disquieting that evangelism is number three on the list of the Episcopal Church's five budget priorities.

As much as I applaud an emphasis on the Millennium Development Goals, I'm wondering if we're simply substituting something that the Episcopal Church has generally been unable to do well--evanglism--with something with which we have had more success--social service. While I don't think this is an either/or proposition, I do think that we have perhaps had the pendulum swing too far over from the evangelism side to the social service side. A balanced approach would seem to be needed. Perhaps we need to be less linear and more circular in our thinking. Rather than simply implicitly saying "My faith compels me to be of direct physical service to Christ in all people" and letting it stop there, might we also then say "My service to Christ in all people is part of the story of my faith that is worth sharing"?

If a life-transforming relationship with Jesus Christ is the goal, and the mission of the church is to "restore all people to unity with God an each other in Christ" (BCP, p. 855) then how will that be accomplished without at least a mention of that transforming relationship and the unique role of Jesus Christ in our unity with God? Inquiring minds want to know...

Gloom or Gospel?

As I troll the various blogs (including the always informative Fr. Jake) whose authors opine about the state of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, and as I keep up with the various news stories (via the episCope blog), I am hardly encouraged. Yet, I find myself wondering if the current state of dis-ease and anxiety is simply a symptom of a larger problem: We have forgotten the good news! Unlike more evangelical churches, a sizable majority of the Episcopal Church does not subscribe to the idea that folks that do not declare faith in Christ are "lost", much less destined for hell. Because of this, we do not have the evangelistic fervor of people on a divine rescue mission. Rather, we seem often to be more like a server at a buffet or, at most, a street vendor hawking our wares. Our favorite quote is the one widely attributed to St. Francis: "Preach the Gospel at all times and, if necessary, use words." The caveat to this is that, at least in the Episcopalians I've met, the necessity for using words is rare!

My point in this is that I have for a long time felt that the greatest threat to the health and wellbeing of the Episcopal Church is not schism or even heresy, but silence. Most people I know are not even able to begin to articulate their own faith story, have little concept of God's ongoing work in their lives, and often come to church "because that's what you do on Sunday morning!" Even if they do have a healthy, vibrant faith and story, they are reluctant to share it, as if doing so would somehow be rude, gauche, or intrusive.

The question I have posed, and which I have never really received a satisfactory answer, is "What is our motivation for evangelism?" If we do not see ourselves on a divine rescue mission, if the concept of Jesus as Savior, much less Lord, is not something with which we are entirely comfortable, then what is the driving force behind Episcopal evangelism? Regardless of what happens in the Episcopal Church or the Anglican Communion, if we cannot answer that question with something compelling, then we risk sliding into moving from being the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society (the legal name of the Episcopal Church) to the Society for the Preservation of Nice Buildings.