Feeds:
Posts
Comments

A couple of days ago, I asked you to help me with word choice for a revision of what we used to call “Guidelines.”  I received many good suggestions, so I thought you might like to see what the current final product is.

I went with Expectations, which was by far the most popular suggestion.  I like expectations too because it carries some weight while not feeling as negative or authoritarian as rules. Several suggested great words like covenant and promises, but expectations won!

I don’t know when the idea of a two-part entry hit me, but I thought it might be helpful to separate the principle from the concrete actions. By separating these, it certainly allows us to appeal to the principle even if a corresponding action has not been mentioned specifically.  We were desperately trying to avoid any attempt to capture every possible situation or every possible disruptive action that might occur on an LST project. We did not want to become Scribes and  Pharisees!

Feel free to ask questions or comment on any of these expectations and commitments. There is a story behind each one. If you will apply to go on an LST project, you will get to hear the story, though I suspect if you read enough of these blog posts, you will hear the stories as well.

EXPECTATIONS AND COMMITMENTS!

 

EXPECTATIONS COMMITMENTS
1)      God first! 1) I will begin each day with my team devotional and put God first in all I do and say!
2) Put others before Yourself! 2) I will put the needs of my project first and my teammates next. I will not insist on my way!
3) Be affirming, not critical. 3) I will affirm my missionary, my team members, and the local church. I will not criticize, correct, or debate with anyone, either in person, or in my communication to people at home!

 

4) Serve those you came to serve 4) I will not use electronic access to keep me from engaging and serving. I will not be distracted or disengage from the project to which I have committed.
5) Develop spiritual relationships 5) I will not get involved romantically in any way with anyone. All relationships will be pure and not perverse, chaste and within God’s boundaries for single and married Christians.
6) Adapt in culturally appropriate ways.

 

6) I will dress, speak, and act in ways that the host church holds to be spiritually and culturally appropriate
7) Protect the integrity of your testimony! 7) I will abstain from tobacco, alcoholic drinks, illegal drugs, bars, discos, nightclubs, and any other activity or situation which I, my team, LST, or the host church believes will diminish my witness for Christ.
8  Be responsible for yourself! 8  I will make only myself legally, financially, and morally responsible for my own actions, and I will not blame others.
9) Submit to the local host. 9) I will cooperate completely with the local host. I will bring all Readers asking about salvation to the local host, and I will only help local people financially through the local host, so that the most good can be accomplished. I will not try to be independent of the local host.
10) Submit to the Let’s Start Talking Ministry I will cooperate fully with the Let’s Start Talking Ministry by following the letter and the spirit of these expectations, as well as all other instructions given by LST. I will not commit LST funds, LST teams, or the LST ministry unless specifically authorized.

 

 

Sunday, January 9 was the first official Sunday at the new Southlake campus of The Hills Church of Christ.  Sherrylee and I attended the service as did 524 other people—a number too large for the sanctuary—a wonderful problem to have!

The energy was high and the sense of anticipation strong. Lots of young families were there, lots of children! Chris Hatchett, the campus minister, did an excellent job of introducing himself to those attending the adult class at 9:00.

That things were different was obvious from the moment you walked in the door and were greeted with the bulletin and worship program from The Hills.  The worship team on this Sunday was mostly from The Hills, and even the call to prayer and benediction were The Hills style.

God provided a little icing for the cake: as the back doors of the auditorium were swung open at the end of the service, all were surprised to see that it had begun to snow during services—a Bing Crosby moment for everyone!  We left feeling the Breath of Blessing on this place in the Kingdom of God!

As I told you in the initial post about the Southlake/Hills merger, I am not in any way involved in any of the decision-making groups nor in any of the leadership groups, so whatever I report to you as well as any thoughts I have are strictly from the pew.  (But I do like to sit up front!)

I woke up this morning, thinking about the kinds of questions that these leaders are asking and praying about. I guess this kind of thinking is just in the blood of us missionary types. Sorry! I still drive by vacant commercial property and briefly evaluate it as to whether it would be a good place to locate a new church, just like we did in Germany so many years ago.

Anyway, for those church leaders who might be in similar situations—or who are thinking about being in similar situations—I suspect these are some of the questions our church leaders are facing—questions you might need to ask at sometime as well:

How alike and how different should the campuses be from the mother church? The current metaphor governing The Hills new campuses is, according to the public announcements, that the campuses will be “twins, but not identical twins!” This approach is probably based on this assumption: The Hills has a successful program, a successful style, one blessed, so why change the formula?

While this approach is perfectly rationale, I suspect the leaders have had to wrestle with some or all of the following questions—and if they haven’t yet, I think they will certainly be on their agenda in the future.

Question  1.  Is it possible that different campuses will have different demographics from the mother  church  which might require significantly different approaches?

The Hills is currently launching two new campuses, one on the west side of Fort Worth and the Southlake campus in the northeast corner. The west campus is about thirty miles from the Southlake campus. Both satellite campuses are 10-18 miles from North Richland Hills, where The Hills is located.

Having grown up in Fort Worth, my sense is that the west side campus is located in a more western, pick-up truck demographic, and the Southlake church in a suburban, SUV demographic. The mother church is enough of a megachurch to draw from a much wider area than its geographic location.

What this says to me is that you have the potential of very different subsets of people likely to attend the different campuses. If these differences are real, that would argue to me for allowing enough variety and differentiation on each campus to address those differences.

Question  2.       Is a blended church different from a new church plant? The west campus is a true church plant while the Southlake campus is a merger/blend—two very different starting points.  The Hills has provided all of the new leaders and staff for the west campus by either reassigning people from the main campus or hiring new staff.  The Southlake campus had a full slate of elders and a small staff. The elders resigned and the staff members were kept on the staff of The Hills—at least for a while–though some were given different assignments.

I kept wondering yesterday if the working assumption—a perfectly natural one– is that the main campus staff and leaders were more gifted than the ones inherited from the merged church?  I raised this question at lunch yesterday and a corporate attorney  friend  replied that in his experience,  in every takeover there is a winner and a loser and whoever takes over is the winner and calls all the shots! He said, all corporations talk about equality in the new blend—but it never happens. The winners stay and the losers go home!

I know this is true in the business world, but my prayer is that churches who are seizing an opportunity to merge or blend will never frame any of their decisions with this winner/loser framework! I don’t believe The Hills/Southlake leaders did this.

Not using this corporate framework, however, would mean that even the bigger church would be open to learning from the smaller, that the stronger church would recognize the golden nuggets that even weaker churches might contain.  What if the minister of____ from the subsumed church is more gifted than his/her counterpart at the main church? Who should be setting the agenda for that ministry? Is it automatic who goes and who stays? Could the main church be improved by the campuses?

Question 3.  Isn’t it likely that each campus will grow and change at a different rate? Won’t the need for the inevitable changes that accompany growth occur at very different moments? A good example of this is that the Southlake campus began with just one service, but probably needs to move to at least two services already. The plan currently is for two elders from The Hills to shepherd the Southlake campus, and for “local” elders to be selected sometime in the future.  Having two or three services immediately, mushrooming  children/youth programs, greater benevolence needs, unique outreach opportunities –all of these evolutions demand more leadership, more prayer, more attention and more resources.  And each campus will face them in different moments!

Finally, I’m thrilled that The Hills has had the vision, the boldness, and the courage to accept these Kingdom challenges. I’m sure these questions have been raised and discussed by church leaders at The Hills  who think about these things 24/7! It is a great time to learn from their experiences.

I also believe the option of merging churches for the good of the Kingdom will be seriously considered more and more in our fellowship, and if we talk and think and pray together, God will do even greater things than we can imagine! Thy Kingdom come! Thy Will be done!

 

I must say that the shooting of a member of Congress does not surprise me! I have often thought the atmosphere is ripe for such horrible violence. After all, where can the completely polarized, virtually radicalized current political situation lead to except to attempts to eradicate the enemy.

Almost no one in our country will condone the violence done today—almost no one! It’s the Few that make it dangerous for everyone else.

But do you think it is possible we in the U.S. could ever see things on TV like those reported from Pakistan this week, where the assassin of an outspoken governor is publically celebrated as a hero by those who would further radicalize Pakistan?

Our historians know of many times like this in U.S. history.   In my own times, I remember much too vividly the jokes being made that JFK better not come to Dallas—and then the jokes became reality!

The harsh divisions in the United States during the Sixties and Seventies over Viet Nam, Civil Rights, as well as the resulting political extremism represented by Watergate, these all led to an era of assassination. Let me just remind those of you who are younger what kind of atmosphere such political radicalization can create:

1963       –              President Kennedy assassinated

1965       –              Malcolm X, Civil Rights leader, assassinated

1968       –              Martin Luther King, Civil Rights leader, assassinated

1968       –              Robert F. Kennedy, presidential candidate, assassinated

1972       –              George Wallace, Governor of Alabama, paralyzed by assassin’s bullets

1975       –              President Gerald Ford , escaped assassination attempt

1975       –              President Gerald Ford, two weeks later, survived another assassination attempt

Four killed, but all afraid during those twelve years of bitter strife and division. And now our heated, uncompromising rhetoric suggests a similar atmosphere is on the horizon, unless we repent.

I’m also puzzled by the widely touted description of today’s post modern society holding one of its chief values to be tolerance! Those who know say that post moderns have moved from the dispassionate “whatever” to a passionate spirituality, but one that is for each person individually and probably of their own making. The individuality of it all means that it is not really considered right  to coerce—nor even try too aggressively to persuade—someone to accept your own values as theirs.

Religious radicals have seemed to be worse in very recent years. Radicalized Christians assassinate doctors who perform abortions, and radicalized Muslims carry explosives in their shoes and underwear with which to kill as many as possible,

I’m afraid this worst brand of religious passion is infecting the political process. By making every debate a moral debate about absolute truths, all are trying to claim God for their caucus.

And what do we say about a nation of people who make stars out of radio and TV personalities who promote themselves and their products by consciously radicalizing their political language and purposefully polarizing those who listen to them? Does this type of entertainment promote harmony, good will, peace on earth?

Christians must start with themselves and be full of grace and truth, speaking the truth in love. Christians should vote for those politicians who show a spirit of grace and truth. Christians must avoid H-rated radio and television, those who fill your ears with Hate and who call for anything but Grace and Truth.

My prayers are with Representative Giffords. My prayers are for our country and the world! My prayers are for you—and me!

 

My task this weekend is to re-write what we have long called the Let’s Start Talking Guidelines. They are a list of non-negotiable behavior expectations that have grown up over the thirty years of our history.

For instance, we do not wish our workers to get involved with anyone romantically while on their mission project, so we have a No Romance policy.  I hope this seems reasonable enough to you, but because we work with many college students and because being away from home creates an exotic ambience even for adults, this is one problem area that seems to surface every year!

There are only sixteen such guidelines in their current form, so it is not cumbersome,  but over the years we have continued to revise them to the point that sometimes the primary expectation is no longer obvious.  For instance, our No Romance guideline now reads:

“Dating team members is a major distraction to the commitment you have made with LST. Spend that love, time, and attention on those who need it in order to find Jesus. Romantic relationships with Readers will block their ability to find Jesus. Involvement with church members will create undesired problems. From our years of experience, this area is one of the most sensitive. Keep your focus on spending all of your energy sharing Jesus.

See how mushy this is!  So let me tell you what my biggest problem is in this assignment. Maybe you can help!

I cannot find the right word!   Which word or phrase will describe this important document in a way that is neither offensive nor condescending to both our college and church workers? Which word might perhaps even motivate or inspire them to full ownership?  HELP!!!

Rules of Behavior is too authoritarian, but Guidelines sounds like The Ten Suggestions, which has no teeth.  Standards does not ask for commitment, but Commitments is a pretty strong word that makes people run for cover!  A Code sounds military (just think about A Few Good Men), Pledges makes me reach for my wallet, and Promises evokes strains of The Wedding March! Where is Shakespeare when you need him??

As we talked about this in our office common room today, it was interesting to notice which personalities went for which words!

Wait a minute! Therein lies a clue! Outside of gross criminal actions, we live in a society where no one really wants anyone to infringe on their own right to make their own decisions about their own behavior!!  Everybody wants to choose their own word!

How can we live in such a community? How can we live and work together?  How can two walk together unless they agree—on how to describe the mutual expectations to which they are willing submit?  I begin to think my semantic problem is a symptom of a spiritual problem!

After I finish my assignment, I’ll tell you some of the stories behind our guidelines, so you can consider them for your short-term mission project.

What word or phrase would you suggest I use?

Church leaders seem to be the center of lots of controversy and criticism—and not without cause! Today though, I can’t wait to tell you about two groups of leaders who have done things extraordinarily well in a very difficult situation.

Let me just say to start that I am not in either of these groups, nor do I have unusual access to the inner workings of these groups, so I don’t know anything but the public version of the story. I also do not intend to tell the whole story because it is not mine to tell. What I want to do is share with you two instances of great church leadership!

The Southlake church has had a pretty tumultuous history during the last decade or so. We were told that in 1998/99, this church had over 1000 attending services each week.  Then came a series of splits, some involving doctrine, some involving styles, some involving leaders, and all involving personalities.

The congregation found itself in 2010 very diminished—200-250 in attendance—and with no readily apparent means of reversing the decline.  Elders in this kind of situation usually have very limited options.  Southlake leaders certainly considered some, if not all of the following:

  • Continue to function as a large church and continue to overwork and underserve their members.   Prognosis: Rapid decline!
  • Restructure to be a small church: reduce staff, reduce programs,  and be content.  Prognosis: Slower, but continued decline!
  • Disband and sell the property.  Assimilate into other churches. Prognosis: Members and leaders alike see their work for God and His kingdom as failed. The community understands closed doors as failure as well.
  • ?????   Something else!

Praise God – these spiritual leaders at Southlake chose to explore something bold, perhaps controversial, but something that would seem to hold promise for expanding the Kingdom.  They chose to approach The Hills Church of Christ, a large, thriving congregation in the same city about a merger that would be a blessing to both groups.

Here is where I simply want to stop and praise the leadership at Southlake for the following reasons:

  • They put the Kingdom first and their own identity as a congregation second!
  • They put the Kingdom first and did not claim ownership of the church.They did not make the high value of their property either an issue or the center of conversation!
  • They put the Kingdom first and emptied themselves: all of the elders offered to resign—and did.  The senior minister took a different position in the church.  Other ministry leaders let go of their territory—gave up their keys!
  • They put the Kingdom first and did not let the minority of naysayers either lead or derail the leadership. There were those who were fearful of losing their identity. Others were fearful of losing control over their own destiny. Others were—just fearful!

These faithful Southlake leaders are setting an example for all leaders in declining churches.  Many of our churches are beginning to reach a critical point in their decline, where just keeping the doors open is a matter of concern.  The Southlake solution is not the only solution—but putting the Kingdom first and emptying yourself should be part of every solution that every leader considers!

The leadership of The Hills Church of Christ also showed boldness and great vision. Again, I am not in the inner circle at The Hills, but here is what I know from the outside:

  • At the time they were approached by Southlake, The Hills was in the middle of a 10 million dollar campaign (Greater Things) that was demanding a great deal from the entire staff and eldership! They could have easily been too busy to even look at the Southlake dilemma.
  • Part of the 2020 Vision of The Hills as well as part of the Greater Things campaign that had already been announced was the establishment of a satellite campus on the west side of Ft. Worth that was going to require staffing and over a million dollars of investment to launch in 2011.  They could have easily said that starting one new campus was enough for this year!
  • With all of the above, The Hills could have easily offered only a half-way solution or a temporary arrangement—but they didn’t! They went all the way. Even this week, less than a month after the official merge, the Hills is spending a large amount of money on renovations at the Southlake building so that it will be the same quality as the North Richland Hills campus—if not better!  Key staff members as well as selected elders have already shifted locations. Not all the foundation is in place, but it will be soon!

The result of the prayerful work of these two groups of church leaders is that two congregations are now one. Both are stronger, both are excited about the new beginnings, and rather than a funeral, the community of Southlake is going to see fireworks!

I am almost at the end of my first year of blogging, so an email from WordPress that arrived yesterday surprised me.  I did not know that I was going to get an evaluation from them.

Of course, I was interested in the raw statistics. As of just sixty seconds ago, WordPress recorded 14,972 views since the first blog on February 10. Now that does not represent a large number in Blogworld, nor is it the actual number of people who read some post. It could have been my mother clicking hundreds of times, trying to figure out how to get my blog to come up with her WebTV (yes, it still exists!). No, really, I know people are reading because you tell me—and I appreciate that!

I have to say that I have really enjoyed writing this year. I’ve enjoyed the discipline, the challenge, the exchange of ideas with many of you, both on and offline, but perhaps most of all, I’ve enjoyed being of some benefit to you.

Many commented on the “Great Churches” series. A lot of you enjoyed the “Raising Your Kids To Be Missionaries” project, and I got lots of great feedback on the “History of LST” I did in September. On the other side, the Advent series did not seem to resonate—or maybe we were all just too busy. Timing does seem to make a difference, and I have a lot to learn there.

As we start this new year together, here are some of the things that I want to do make this site more useful to you and to the Kingdom!

  • Re-do the basic site so that I can control the pages a little better and make them friendlier.
  • Allow comments to show up more readily and try to encourage more dialogue.
  • Show popular posts that some may have missed.
  • Make the site more useful with ready links to other pages like LST, and FriendSpeak as well as other important blogs.

Content-wise, I want to focus a lot this next year on the area of Leadership. I’ve already got two major projects I want to tackle, one being a look at the leadership style we promote at LST called 1A Leadership.

The other area I want to explore with you will draw on Sherrylee’s and my experiences over the last thirty years in starting, building, and continuing to lead a non-profit ministry. The non-profit sector is growing rapidly. More than 30,000 new non-profits registered with the IRS between January and August 2010, and many of these are faith-based.

In addition, I’d like to go a little deeper into some of the topics we touched on this last year—not too deep, just a little more, along with a chance to respond to some of the comments you made.

I’d love for you to make suggestions, comments, or criticisms. Tell me what you would like to talk about. I promise you that I will listen!

If you and I were sitting down in a cozy room together with an hour to talk about anything, what would you want to be sure and talk about?

Some people are more inclined to reflection than projection! I tend to wonder more about the future and what it will be like!

When I was a boy, the future was way off in 1984! That date was so far away that George Orwell still had time to project his own dystopian fears into what has often been called a Orwellian future!  (And, by the way, Social Security was predicted to be bankrupt by then and our government in danger of spending us into financial collapse!)

As 1984 approached, the far-out year became 2001! Of course, you remember Stanley Kubrik’s movie 2001: A Space Odyssey , which, in a very realistic way, cinematically showed space travel, video phones, robotics, and created the infamous HAL—a computer that (or who?) developed its own morality in jeopardizing competition with the humans.

The New Millennium actually came in a year earlier with great fanfare—or fan-fear. Remember the 2K end-of-the-world predictions, when all the computers on earth were going to crash, when people stockpiled canned goods and bought rifles to defend their underground cellars if need be!.  All of this future came and went, Social Security was still solvent, and the government was still in place.

Here we are ten years later—2011. Occasionally some report will surface about how things will be in 2025—just fourteen years from now—and that seems like a really long time off—except 1997 doesn’t seem like very long ago at all.  So how should we feel about looking into the future?

In the last three weeks, two men that I have known died of massive heart attacks—one was 60 years old and one was 29 years old.

A pretty common joke circulating among older people says something to the effect of being so old that they don’t even buy green bananas anymore. On the other hand, my little one-year-old granddaughters could live into the next century—into 2100–if blessed with long lives.

When times are good, be happy; but when times are bad, consider this: God has made the one as well as the other. Therefore, no one can discover anything about their future.  Ecclesiastes 7:14

The Preacher is always disturbingly blunt! His father David was just as precise –with better rhyme and meter–when he said in Psalm 37:37:38

Consider the blameless, observe the upright;
a future awaits those who seek peace.
But all sinners will be destroyed;
there will be no future for the wicked.

So what about 2011? What about the future?  Here’s what we can say

  • 2011 will surprise us with things expected and unexpected
  • 2011 will not be the end of the world—but it might be!
  • 2011 will be a season of beginnings and endings!
  • 2011 will be memorable for a while—but quickly forgotten.  (What happened in 1911?)
  • 2011 will be a long time ago soon!

The older I get, the less I worry about much of the future, about whether social security will be around or which party is in control, about malware and oil reserves.

The older I get, the more I think about using today well. I think about leaving a story that will point my children and grandchildren towards God just as Joshua left stones by the river so future generations would know what God had done there (Joshua 4:6).

Happy New Year in 2011! May we be righteous and seek peace, so that we can be certain of our future—as certain of our future as we are of the eternal, everlasting, infinite I AM.

 

1.     Thoughts About Pepperdine

2.     Raising Children to Have A Heart For Missions: Can They Sleep Without Their Blankey?

3.     GREAT CHURCHES AND EMERGENT CHURCHES- PART 11b

4.     Don’t Report on Your Mission Trip Like This!

5.     Great Churches and the Emerging Church – Part 11a

6.     November 14-16:  Can A Church Be Exemplary in Germany??

7.     Raising Children to Have a Heart For Missions? Is That What You Really Want?

8.     What If Our Kids Can’t Tell The Story?

9.     Tips for Good Short-Term Missions, Part Two: To Mom and Dad

10.   Is Your Church Slipping Towards Unitarian Universalism?

And my favorite series of blogs:  A Personal History of Let’s Start Talking Ministries, Part 1: The Idea

Reading: Luke 2: 1-6a

1 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born . . . .

The day before The Coming! I’m sure Mary and Joseph knew that it was almost time. They didn’t have ultrasound, but they certainly knew the very day of conception.  Did they have a calendar with a certain day circled like we do today when we know we are going to have babies?  Did they think this baby might come early—like most first-time parents think today?

And I just can’t get over that very long, hard trip from Nazareth to Bethlehem in Mary’s last days of pregnancy! Doctors today will hardly let women travel any distance even with air-conditioned cars . Was Mary afraid for her unborn child?  Was she afraid for her own life?

The day before The Savior of the World is born! The shepherds had no idea; they were just watching the same old sheep wander around in the same old fields. The innkeeper felt sorry, perhaps, for the pregnant lady sleeping in his barn, but he was thinking about how much money he was making off all the census visitors!  The three wise men were just getting on the road. The star was pretty amazing, like they had never seen before, but it fit the description of the sign they had been watching for!  Somewhere a king was going to be born, and they had to get there!

The day before God comes down and dwells among men! Was there preparation in heaven? Did the angel choir have a special practice for their new song? Or were the heavenly hosts busy with the business of the spiritual realm, not knowing that in just twenty-four earth hours, something was going to happen that would change heaven perhaps even more than earth!

So few words are written about the birth of Jesus. In four accounts, Matthew focuses on Mary and Joseph, Mark gives us nothing, Luke rehearses what he heard from witnesses, but he had not apparently interviewed Mary—or she didn’t tell him much about the day.  And John is caught up in the theology of the incarnation, not in the story itself.

While the world slumbers, while we go about the Day Before, The Coming is about to happen! Everything is going to change. The course of the world, the meaning of life, the menu for lunch—everything is going to change forever!  The lights are going up! The curtains of heaven are beginning to open, the orchestra is tuned—it’s the moment before the greatest Moment.

It is the Day Before The Coming! I wonder what I should be doing?

Postscript:  I’ve really enjoyed these four weeks of preparation for Christmas and hope you have too. I am going to take a break to be with my family until after New Year, so you will see no new posts from me for a while. A couple of days after Christmas, you will see, however, a list of the top ten posts from me for 2010, which will give you something to read if you get tired of eating and watching football games.  Merry Christmas to all of you and a Blessed New Year!

Mark