As an adjunct faculty member with Malone University, I get various resources sent to me by a number of their departments.
This week I received two documents from their Campus Ministry Department to help students broaden their reading and comprehension of scripture.
They are very basic forms, but may be a resource to help give the people you minister to a foundation in scriptural reading and study.
You can download the Bible reading guide HERE, and the Bible study guide HERE.
I have often wondered about the need for men’s ministry within today’s mainline, evangelical churches.
Here is the question that I keep wrestling with:
In an environment where the bulk of your leaders and teachers are men, unavoidably leading and teaching through a male filter, how much more “manly ministry” do you need?
I realize this goes against the Promise Keeper’s ideals, but I often find myself grappling with this question.
Sure, there is a difference between being led and taught through a male perspective and communally engaging with other men…but does something like that need to be programmed or added to their church community experience?
Any help in processing would be grateful.
The Daily Show’s John Stewart went “all scripture on us” in last week’s show as seen here:
A few questions to consider:
In their book, “The Family,” Dr. Jack and Judy Balswick provide a key foundation for healthy, well-balanced families. They state, “We propose a theology of family relationships which involves four sequential, but nonlinear, stages: covenant, grace, empowering, and intimacy.”
Using scripture and Christ as the model of such relationships, they then break down each component, to show how we are to commune with one another:
Covenant: To Love and Be Loved
Grace: To Forgive and Be Forgiven
Empowering: To Serve and Be Served
Intimacy: To Know and Be Known
They further explain these four cores by writing:
Examining biblical themes which have a bearing on the nature of family relationships, we have suggested that 1) commitment is based upon a mature (unconditional, bilateral) covenant, 2) family life is to be established and maintained within an atmosphere of grace which embraces acceptance and forgiveness, 3) the resources of family members are to be used to empower rather than control one another, 4) intimacy is based on a knowing that leads to caring, understanding, communication, and communion with others.
Yet imagine running with this family theme within your church family. Can you see the progression it would take in developing deeper community? What steps are needed within your biblical community to ensure balance and progression?
Jack and Judy go on to write:
These four elements of Christian family relationships are a continual process: intimacy can lead to deeper covenant love, commitment fortifies the atmosphere of freely offered grace, this climate of acceptance and forgiveness encourages serving and empowering others, and the resultant sense of esteem leads to the ability to be intimate without fear. The end product of this process is deep levels of communication and knowing.
Adopting Sande’s scripturally-based, peacemaking principles, my church community will be adopting the following steps for all inner-office conflict:
Step 1: Admit the conflict.
Step 2: Recognize your own faults first.
Step 3: Attain 1-2 sounding boards.
Step 4: Talk to the other person.
Step 5: Include supervisor if needed.
Any steps missing? Anything you have seen or done to better this process? Anyone you need to conduct these steps with within your family, network, or business?
(I suggested a 6th step of “kiss and make-up”…but it was denied)
Which video clip from the film Vanilla Sky represents how you mostly feel about your church community and why?
Disconnected/Alone:
Connected/Communal:
Quotes don’t work! (most of the time)
For some reason preachers throughout the land believe that stating a number of literary quotes throughout their sermon will somehow better explain a thought or passage while also being a good use of their valuable communication time.
Sure, there are exceptions, but those are usually times when quotes are used to be an example of something, and not to explain something.
Going back to Kotter and Rathgeber’s, “Our Iceberg is Melting” I personally like how they start off their book, explaining the writing of change-strategy principles through the use of a fable about penguins.
They state,
Our method is showing, much more than telling, and showing with the method that has helped more people learn over the centuries than any other single technique: the fable (pg 3).
Yet, today’s preachers prefer to explain a passage through techniques of telling, building layers of informative quotes and didactic, linear, monologue.
Kotter and Rathgeber go on to say:
Fables can be powerful because they take serious, confusing, and threatening subjects and make them clear and approachable. Fables can be memorable, unlike so much of the information that bombards us today and is forgotten tomorrow. They can stimulate thought, teach important lesson, and motivate anyone—young or old—to use those lessons. In our modern, high-tech world, we can easily forget this simple yet profound truth (pg 4).
Yet quoting some author or historian from the past will only add to the confusion and threatening barrier most people have approaching this ancient text. Are we wanting to take the easy road out and simply back up our teaching points with quotes generated from a google search, or will we do the hard, metaphoric work of finding that perfect story to bridge the present and ancient worlds, unleashing a whole new understanding and owning of God’s Word?
In their book Our Iceberg is Melting, John Kotter and Holger Rathgeber write a short fable based off of Kotter’s legendary management book, Leading Change. And through this entertaining read of how a group of penguins deal with their melting iceberg the surfacing key steps for change within any organization follow:
Set the Stage
Decide What to Do
Make it Happen
Make it Stick
In regards to the role of thinking and feeling within the process of change, Kotter/Rathgeber make these distinctions as well:
Thinking differently can help change behavior and lead to better results: collect and analyze data, present information logically to show the need for change, so that if you change their thinking, you can change behavior.
Feeling differently can change behavior MORE and lead to even better results: create surprising, compelling, and if possible, visual experiences, so that people change how they feel about the situation, which leads to significant behavior change.
Some very basic, but easily forgotten nuggets of wisdom and power on leading change.
Last week I had a friend request some advice on what to do when you are leading people in worship, yet internally distracted over external issues and conflict.
Essentially, what occurred was that prior to coming to our p.m. corporate gathering to help lead in worship through song, he had a pretty intense argument with his wife (another reason to have services in the morning, so you can get out of the house before anyone wakes up!). And though he was able to apologize via text, he still felt disengaged and hypocritical over leading people in this holy moment, when just moments before he had said some very unholy things.
As we later discussed this issue further over the phone, our first exchange occurred through e-mail. Here was my response:
I think a lot of this is the paradox of God using sinful people to lead his divine, holy plan. In some ways it is reassuring to know that it is much bigger than us, as he can take anything and make it work for His pleasure.
So, I think this is a natural feeling…and in many ways a good one to have (I would be more worried if you always thought you were “the worship wonderman” up there, showing a lack of humility and not truly recognizing your position vs. God’s). You never want to think that the response of those you are leading in worship comes down to you and your “pure heart”…it always comes down to God and what he chooses…but obviously doing it with a pure heart is a good thing for other reasons.
There are times we just suck a living a Spirit-filled life and then are asked to lead others into such a life. I would say if these times are fairly consistent, then that may be a problem, and cause you to rethink being a consistent leader of worshippers.
I don’t see that as being you.
I think if you felt no dissonance up there on stage, that would be a problem. It wouldn’t show a true integration of your faith, life, and worship.
So maybe you “not feeling” like worshipping, but still serving Him through the playing of your instrument to invite others into worship was the greatest act of worship you have ever given to God on stage before? (no matter how unauthentic it felt)
Yet, it still feels you are going through the motions to some degree…we have all been there. And again, I think that is due to the tainted nature we have, and won’t be overcome in this lifetime…but we can definitely strive to allow him to sharpen it for us.
There are times I just screamed at my son for doing something that didn’t deserve a fraction of my anger and then tell them it’s time to pray for the meal, and I think, “what the hell am I doing?” I hate that. I am glad I still hate that, I always want to, as well as work on my anger and father more like Him and less like me.
Let’s talk more on the phone.
There is no question those that spiritually lead their families, community groups, or churches have felt this tension. How do you wrestle with it? Where does the demand of consistent purity come in to play here for church leaders? How does 1 Timothy 3:1-7 speak to this situation? Is my response theologically inaccurate, incomplete, or in question? Further thoughts welcome!
A few years back my three sons attempted to get into the comedy business. To help with their future careers, please vote on which joke is the funniest:
