How many leaders you got? Now that's a better question

The other day I received a similar question to the ones mentioned in my previous post. The question, probably posed out of mere curiosity, provoked a little more thought than the standard: "how many you got" type questions. Instead of how many kids do you have, it was more like, "How many leaders do you have?"

That is a different type of question and one that deserves a little more positive dissecting.

One common thread I've noticed the past several years in books/articles I've read, seminars attended, ministry leaders I've talked with, and years of extensive personal experience/reflection is that the kids who walk with Jesus have several things in common. 

And having one dynamic youth leader really isn't tops on the list. But what seems to always be present is that the youth have had a number of adult relationships. Perhaps it looks like adults investing in their lives through a youth group, Sunday School, mentoring, or simply an "unstructured" but invested relationship involving hospitality, normal activities, or a retreat. 

One youth leader, and/or two parents are not enough. It's a great start, but kids need multiple adult relationships. By the way, I'm not de-emphasizing parent-child discipling relationship for that is primary; I'm merely emphasizing the responsibility of those in the covenant community. The principle "the more the merrier" could not be more apropos.

So here is the kicker: kids aren't going to naturally seek out adults. Adults have to seek them out. That may look like volunteering to teach Sunday School or youth group. That may look like filling in as a sub from time time. That may look like simply doing something very novel and creative: trying to talk with them on a Sunday morning. It may look like serving alongside of them as they rake leaves or participating in fantasy football with them. It may look like inviting them over to share a recipe or grab a latte. Regardless, if you are an adult male/female without a record who loves Jesus and currently has a pulse, you can play a part. Take that first step.
They actually do like adults. And they need adults. But they probably won't take that first step, and we probably shouldn't expect them to. 

When I prayed for the graduates last Sunday, I thanked God for the number of adults who were involved in their lives. I'm hopeful for these kids leaving school. For the most part, they are connected to other youth and adults.

I'm hopeful in a God who is faithful even when we as parents, youth leaders, or the rest of the church are faithless. But I'll take that as encouragement instead of a license to laziness. We often think of our kids in this way: "We ONLY have 18 years with them and so need to take advantage of this time." But for some reason I don't think we often view our covenant children with the same sense of urgency. Time is of the essence.

Thanks for all of you who have invested in not only your children, but the children of others. I hope you realize how important that time and relationship really are in the eyes of your Heavenly Father. Whatever the impact you notice or fail to notice (remember sometimes the impact isn't seen for years down the road, and sometimes there may not be the impact we desire), remember it isn't that type of "numbers game." And remember Henry Lyte's hymn Jesus I My Cross Have Taken, "Think what Spirit dwells within thee, think what Father's smiles are thine...." Those are the only smiles you need to motivate and remind you that you cannot fail.

How many kids you got? What ministries you got?

Every so often I field about questions like, "How many kids do you have in your children's ministries or youth group?" Sometimes the answer will determine whether that person will or will not choose your church. That's why they ask. And of course, sometimes folks are simply curious and want to know what's there.

In addition to the "how many you got" question, I'll also get "What ministries do you have?" Sometimes that will determine if the person will or will not come to your church (and I'm not saying that this is inherently wrong by the way!). Sometimes folks want to be aware of what's there.

A dear friend created a scenario of someone hit by a car and going to heaven. This was the first thing they said, "Well, Lord, at least as I looking for a church with a good youth program!"

Often times a consumer mentality overtakes us like a Jamaican sprinter-I refuse to give any more glory to the glory hound-and yet we don't necessarily recognize it at first.

The Good

First of all, I do want to say that these questions do have an element of goodness to them. You should care that your children have fellowship, good teaching, Christian friends. And so it's good to ask how the covenant community can assist you in raising up disciples. Some Christian parents don't care, feel like dragging them to church each Sunday completes their promise to look to Jesus for their and their child's salvation, raising him/her within the covenant family (alluding here to Presbyterians). So these questions are in and of themselves necessarily bad questions. They can be healthy.

The Bad

However, not all of our inclinations toward ministries are necessarily good. In fact they can be quite, well, bad-to stay consistent with the title of this section. Behind our questions (even my own) is often a deeper question: what can you do for me? This can manifest itself when our main choice of churches is simply what can you do for me, before, what do you believe, what is your mission, how do plan to accomplish that mission?

The Ugly

Another question behind the question (the one that is stated) is how can this ministry replace and lessen my involvement in the child's growth in the grace or coming to faith? What ministries do you have that can now let me off the hook in regards to MY teaching, discipleship? What can you do for me so that I can now be concerned about my child's social life, sports, grades, etc.....? 

So these questions, if unexamined, can leave us in our natural state of consumer.

I would like to pose some other questions that people can ask when looking for a new church, or staying at a current church. These aren't from Mt. Sinai, as Steve Brown always says. Just my thoughts which might be helpful to battle against our consumer mentality and put us more in a participatory mode.

1.) How many kids do you have in your youth ministry? If I come to, or join, or stay at this church, will I attempt to invite kids to the children's/youth ministry? Instead of focusing on the current numbers, might God use me to grow the current ministry? And if I go to a big church, will I and my child still be likely to invite un-churched kids to come? Or will it make it easier to invite? In other words, how can I participate in Christ's mission in either setting? Practically speaking if each person leaves or doesn't come because of there are low numbers, it can't grow.

2.) What ministries do you have? Again nothing inherently wrong with the question, but I would encourage asking more questions. If it fits in with the vision of the church, could I help start such and such ministry? Or how can I use my gifts to plug into existing ministries, or informal things like having parties at my house? I think some of the greatest ministry happens informally. Regardless, Church ministries usually have to start somewhere. The best ones seem to come from members who see a need, refuse to leave, but instead stay and meet that need.

Caveat: The longer I pastor the less black and white I get regarding a "good" (obviously meaning my opinion) time to leave a church or what things must be in place for one to connect and serve. I realize that sometimes the Holy Spirit "leaves the building" and Jesus removes the lampstand. At that point it is hopeless. If that is your conviction, then it might actually be better to head on down the road. My request is that you don't necessarily ignore these questions, but instead spend some time examining and adding deeper follow up questions. The church today desperately needs participators more than it needs consumers. Remember that pastors and members are naturally wired towards consumerism but the Holy Spirit supernaturally enables us to become participators in the gospel. What a privilege.

What to do with personalities?

Yesterday I continued my slow sermon series through the Beattitudes, landing on "Blessed are the peacemakers...."

I mentioned the ways our personalities tend to get in the way of real peacemaking, primarily because our personalities more often than not, become our starting point for peacemaking. We tend to either be peacefakers (ignore the truth) or peacebreakers (ignore the love). Sometimes I find myself fluctuating between the two, and I think that might be common as well.

I call this personality-based peacemaking, which is often not real peacemaking. 

But then two questions may arise (at least in my mind): 1.) What role should our personalities play in peacemaking2.) To what extent CAN or SHOULD our personalities change?

1.) What role should personalities play? Whether you tend to fall into one of these two camps, or fluctuate back and forth, it is necessary to honestly examine your own tendencies. We naturally run from conflict or run over "conflicters." So self awareness is key.

Here's a practical difference it can make in your relationships. 

Ken Sande's The Peacemaker encourages folks at times to "look over" an offense. Because the gospel is the motivation, you can now do so. How do you know when to do so? Consider your personality. If you are naturally someone who enters into the fray, often times with your "truth guns" blazing, it's probably wise to not voice every concern you have. Even if you're right. Why not overlook or keep quiet at times? Like George Costanza, who chose to do the opposite of what he naturally thought (he realized he was always wrong) why not consider doing the opposite of your natural reaction? There's a good chance you could be mistaking the Holy Spirit for your personality. If you tend toward peacefaking, then it might be wise to pull the trigger a bit quicker, because you know you're tendency is to say nothing.

2.) What extent CAN or SHOULD your personality change? Unlike Lady Gaga or Oprah, Christians never make "just being ourselves" our highest aim or standard since we are now honest about ourselves: the thoughts of the natural man/woman are "only evil continually (Gen 6:5)." Now of course Christians have had hearts of stone replaced with hearts of flesh (Ezek 36:26), but we still have left-over sinful residue. So just being yourself is never the goal. 

However, personalities that are tainted with sinful residue still bear the image of God and so some parts should not change. Only you can be you and only you can image God in a unique way. So when the gospel is applied to a personality, the sinful parts experiences tweaking. For instance someone very timid may tend to overlook all offenses (because of fear), but that same person can and will speak up when necessary (now having a Spirit of power). And it's beautiful when that happens. The gospel has now freed that person from their personality constraints (always peace-faking) and enabled them to speak truth humbly and gently. And yet its that person's personality, now freed and highlighted by the gospel, which makes them a great truth teller when they need to be.

So personalities can provide limits on what we naturally do, but when the gospel gets a hold of them, individuals can then uniquely image God.

How much can personalities change? For some folks, personalities are changed by the gospel in the same way a sprinter improves from race to race. Allyson Felix is fast. Allyson Felix has always been fast. But in the last two Olympics, she has only landed the silver. Through much training, she is now the fastest lady at 200 meters in the world. Sometimes personality changes but a "hundredth of a second."

For other folks, who may have sinfully dominated personalities, the opportunity for change may look more like a distance runner. With much training, a 1500 meter runner, can improve by 5 seconds, whereas a sprinter may not change more than 5 hundredths of a second. Sometimes personalities can change a lot. 

Regardless, the gospel can redeem the sinful parts of our personalities and highlight those which best image God's glory. And when it comes to peacemaking, a careful look at Jesus, then an honest look at oneself, can make a big difference than if you simply start with "that guy" who needs to change.

Allyson Felix, Lashinda Demus, and Ricky Bobby

Last night I had the opportunity to watch someone win and watch some "lose." The gal who won, Allyson Felix, had been a "loser" the last two Olympics. Now that is accurate you want to define "loser" in a traditional Ricky Bobby "If you ain't first, you're last," sort of way.

Lashinda Demus the 400 meter hurdler, lost just a bit before Felix won. She got the silver. If you had seen the look on her face-which maybe you did since a number of people actually watch the Olympics-you probably thought someone had just kidnapped her cat or something. As though she had stumbled on a hurdle while in the lead as Lolo Jones 4 did years ago in Bejing.

Maybe she listened to her inner Ricky Bobby?

Silver on the highest stage possible with her husband and boys cheering her on is not too bad of a gig. She belied a tiny bit of thankfulness in the post race interview, but vowed to keep vying for the gold. Only gold would seal her "legacy." Although I would have preferred she use more accurate terms like "personal worth," or "reason for living," because I think her kids are probably OK with a silver legacy. They probably just love their Mommy for who she is and want to spend time with her. But maybe I'm reading too much into her twin 4 or 5 year old boys.

The interview was quite sad. But I didn't feel sad for her loss, just sad for her. Sad for the idol she had put her hopes in: behind the gold was a real search for significance.

Allyson Felix didn't "lose." She got gold after 4 years of intense training with a somewhat unlikeable at times coach Bobby Kersee (husband of Jackie Joyner Kersee). She wanted that gold bad. She might have tried-and might still try-to get that gold in Rio. But from what it appears, I think the interview might have gone in a different direction.

I've always pulled for Felix. Now I know why. She grew up a preacher's kid and her father is now a professor at The Masters Seminary. Check out this great article about her. Here's but a snippet.

My faith is definitely the most important aspect of my life. My dad is a pastor and I grew up in a very strong Christian home. Our family was very involved in our church. I came to know Jesus Christ as my personal savior at a very young age. Ever since then, I have continually been striving to grow in my relationship with God.

She plans to be a school teacher some day. I can imagine the kids not in her class will be quite jealous of the lucky ones some day!

Tim Tebow's meekness

When one thinks about a Christian athlete, one who works hard and plays tough, he can't get around Tim Tebow. Clearly this guys is as tough as beef jerky.

However many in the media, besides Skip Bayliss (who is a huge Tebow fan), critique or rather criticize Tebow for his inability to throw a crisp spiral and complete more than 50% of his passes. 

It's hard to find great examples of meekness in today's culture, and I'm not willing to nominate myself either. For good reasons. But I think Tim Tebow gives us a more than a picture of strength, but one of meekness. And I think this is helpful, because we usually think of meekness as weakness or timidity. But I really think meekness flows from a poverty of spirit and expresses itself in an unwillingness to defend oneself. Your strength is used to defend others and you simply let God or others defend you. At least that's the picture I see in Numbers 12 and Matthew's Beattitudes. 

Yet another media personality and former QB Boomer Essiason-those guys seem to be the greatest of the Tebow haters (remember Bronco's Hall of Famer John Elway got rid of Tebow)-has spoken out against Tim. I'm OK with people who don't like Tebow, for any reason. I really am. But it has become almost cliche to pull against this kid. Kind of like the word "interesting" or the expression "It is what it is." I expect a little originality.

Here is a good display of meekness in action:

“I’ve heard nothing but great things about Mr. Esiason,” Tebow said, in comments distributed by the team. “I know he was a great player here, and I just wish him nothing but the best in his announcing and God bless him.

No need to defend.

Tebow later goes on to explain that he's heard all of this stuff before in high school, in college, and now in the NFL. In other words, "I disagree with him, and I have reason to disagree." But I don't need to defend myself or attack him; instead I'll let God make this guy look prophetic or idiotic. He'll take care of it and He'll take care of me. 

Meekness.

Non-political reflections on "You didn't build that"

The other day President Obama ruffled a few feathers with his statement on business, "You didn't build that." These words below have certainly rubbed Republicans the wrong way, and I would imagine perhaps Democrats-though I can't confirm that. I've just seen facebook post after facebook post mock Obama's infamous or in-famous (depending on your vote) speech.

“If you’ve been successful you didn’t get there on your own....I’m always struck by people who think ‘well, it must be because I was just so smart’. There are a lot of smart people out there!  ‘It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.’ Let me tell you something—there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there!”

And you can imagine that within the same dialog, this probably didn't endear him any further to many:

"If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."

Now this blog is for the most part like myself, fairly a-political. So I won't comment on the political or economic component, but instead the anti-individualistic undertone which comprised Obama's speech. Mitt Romney and other Republicans have opposed this idea, as well want to remain consistent with their own ideology. But I want to say that I think Obama is actually on to something here, that would be quite beneficial to all Christians. Let me explain.

Obama's driving force behind this comment is his own democratic ideology: successful businesses should pay a larger amount of taxes than those less successful because they have benefited from someone else's hard work or government structure. At least I think that's the gist. They didn't do it entirely by themselves: they sprang up from good soil.
 
I think the Christian has to agree with this to a large degree. For instance, none of us could run a succesfull business in communist China, right? But consider the other factors of success. Yes some folks work harder than others; that's hard to argue! Yet who gives man the intellectual and physical capability to do hard work? Clearly some folks just don't have it; they were not born with the right tools.

Now think of environment. There are always rags-to-riches stories, but consider the fact that these are in fact "stories," meaning they are not the norm.

Now none of this obliges you to pay higher taxes to the government. I get that and don't necessarily see the tit-for-tat connection.

But don't we (I'm saying those of a more Republican persuasion-which is my personal bias) carry the, "Yes I did build that with my hard work" sentiment into church? I worked hard and continue to work hard at this job, therefore it's my money. It is my house, so I'm not accountable to use it for hospitality. These are my kids and this is my family so why should I bring someone else into the picture for Thanksgiving or Christmas?

On the contrary, we are dependent upon the Lord who ordains all things. Perhaps this passage may help remind us (I'm pretty forgetful) that ultimately we didn't build our families, houses, or businesses independently. This is what God has to say on the matter in James 4:13-16

¹³ Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— ¹⁴ yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. ¹⁵ Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” ¹⁶ As it is, you boast in your arrogance.

God does ordain all things and has ordained your opportunity, experience, background, situation, environment, and even ability and drive to do hard work.

I think its hard at times to tithe-though I get that I'm a pastor and it would incredibly hypocritical not to-because we have to trust that God will take care of us when we give back 10% of our income. But I really don't think fear is the primary driving force.

I think it is primarily an issue of ownership. Whose money is it? If it's God's money, God's house, God's business, God's family, then it's much easier to trust Him with continuing to provide the money, or provide for our houses, businesses, and families.

If you are one who has worked hard, regularly works hard, has taken great risks for a business venture, I personally applaud you. Any sort of work, particularly starting businesses, takes guts, vision, determination, risk, and perseverance. I just think that the hardest working among us are perhaps the most vulnerable to forget the truth found in James 4:13-16.

Distinctly Republican thinking (of which I lean) or distinctly American individualistic thinking (of which most people lean) can sometimes replace-albeit in a subtle way-distinctly gospel-centered thinking and living.

Missy Franklin vs. Gabby Douglass

Last night I had the opportunity to watch the Olympics "live" (I know that technically that is not true, but its more "live" than 2 degrees removed on the DVR) with my 4 year old. His nap "promoted" him to watching gymnastics and swimming "live" with Mom and Dad. 


When I look at him, I wonder how good he will really be at baseball (he is better than most 4 year olds I know-though I confess to know a dearth of four year olds). Right now I think he's pretty good. But does that mean a decent player, an all-star, high school standout out, college scholarship, etc....?

Parents want the best for their children. That is typically the case and it should be so. However "their best" can present quite a problem when "their best" becomes the ever-consuming-yet-leaving-you-drained idol that "their best" most often is. For the kids, but more often for the parents.


As a parent, will I be willing to do all that I can to make sure he is able to do his "best?" There might be good things which I should ask myself will I be willing to sacrifice? Like fishing, watching football, sleep, etc..

But there is another pertinent question for parents: should I do all that I can do so that he can do his "best?" What should parents sacrifice and what should they not sacrifice? I'm at somewhat of an advantage (in my opinion) in that I'm a pastor, and so travel leagues taking Connar away from worship on Sunday are an impossibility. So will he then be able to do his best? Most parents jump to the conclusion and say "no." But I would caution folks to not jump to such a conclusion.

For many Olympic athletes not in communist countries, yet still in high school, the question really resides with the parents. Will parents do ALL that is possible to see the young athlete succeed?

When that "best" is not the all consuming idol of power, significance, fame, pleasure, I do think that it is possible to do your "best" without taking the normal "at all costs" sacrifices to which most parents willingly offer. 

Let me give you two examples of different approaches, yet both seem to have done their "best."


1.) American gymnast Gabby Douglass moved from Virginia Beach to Des Moines, Iowa, to get the best training possible. Wow. Her older sister had to convince her to keep training, when she clearly wanted to quit. Looks like it paid off as Gabby is competing in the individual all around competition in place of favorite Jordyn Wieber. Doing her best however, meant sacrificing much of her childhood.

2.) By contrast, let's look at Missy Franklin. Missy is just a teenager. An incredible swimmer already with a gold medal, she's still just a normal kid. When questioned about moving away to Florida (would have been tempting for me!) or California from Colorado because it wasn't a "swimming state," she responded, "Why leave family or school or friends?" In other words, the pursuit of swimming was not an "at all costs" thing. It wasn't an idol upon which she would sacrifice other more important things. She stayed at home, even resisting the sponsors which would have precluded her from competing on her high school swim team. She didn't sacrifice her childhood.


Now whether her parents had a say in the whole "we're not moving so you can do your best at swimming" decision, I don't know. The interview was silent on this part. But perhaps they had parented her in such a way that "her best" didn't become an idol? She could do her "best" in Colorado, alongside family and friends who would love her even when she fell short of her best.

Was her training stunted because of inferior coaching? Doesn't seem to be. This girl is gifted and a hard worker. In this case, that seems more important than the "opportunities" she could have had elsewhere.

I wish more Christian parents would think through these two questions more carefully

1.) Is honoring Jesus more important than my/my kids' performance?

2.) If my kid is really gifted and works really hard, can he/she still compete at the highest level, even when my commitment to Christ may preclude some "opportunities" which would regularly take him/her away from corporate worship?

We see the answer to the latter question is yes. Talent and hard work makes some "opportunities" superfluous. You can say NO and still see your kid succeed. 


Just some things to think through when we look at our little ones and genuinely want for them to be the best that they can.