Flourishing

Brian Moss is going to be leading worship at FC08. That’s something that really excites me!!

I first heard Brian lead worship at the Open for Business track of Urbana 06. A little over a year later, Brian led worship at the National Staff Conference for InterVarsity’s Graduate & Faculty Ministries (that’s who I work for).

Leading worship is more art than it is science. It requires, at least in my opinion, a humble reliance upon the Holy Spirit. And more than that, it requires the musician to be willing to metaphorically step aside and allow those present to look beyond into the face of God. Brian is able to do this.

Brian’s also a pretty thoughtful guy. I like that, especially in a worship leader. Brian has a blog. Recently he wrote a thoughtful piece about how we approach art and how that affects the way we approach worship.

Has there ever been a generation with so little time actually to take time and enjoy the world?

–Bauckham and Hart, Hope Against Hope.

Brian uses the quote above to help us think about how we worship. He writes,

“The questions they [Bauckham and Hart] ask reveal the close connection that exists between all of our lives and the making and receiving of art. If anyone is to appreciate or even begin to understand art they must slow down. Try as you might, you cannot read Gerard Manley Hopkins quickly.”

So, how do you worship? It’s a provocative question. One that becomes increasingly so the more we let it settle within us.

Are we rushed as we worship? Is the sense of chronological time ever with us? In our world, it takes a lot of effort to remove ourselves from our society’s default way of life: busyness. It can be nearly impossible to step outside of these patterns to a sense of timelessness in worship, especially when our churches tend to mirror society in the way we design worship services.

Brian’s post challenged me to something more. I hope it challenges you too.

One of the amazing things about Following Christ conferences (and there are, let’s face it, a ton of amazing things) is that it is animated by worship. At its most essential level, FC08 is worship. Of course, its more than that, but its not less. Everything we do, regardless of its intellectual complexity or profundity, is an expression of worship through the offering of our selves, our callings, and our gifts to God.

That’s pretty darn exciting.

This is part 2 of our series based on The Economist’s special report on the ways wireless technology is altering society. In the last post I wrote about how these technologies are allowing us to be physically mobile in a way that hasn’t been possible before (through advancements in laptops, smartphones, etc). In this post I want to explore how sociologists are mapping the ways that relationships and society is changing.

I’ll be interacting with “Family Ties,” on page 11 of The Economist’s section by the title, “Nomads at Last.”

Basically, it seems that the techno-bedouinism we’re talking about is transforming our social cohesion. Here it is in summary form: we’re getting closer and closer to those we already know. That closeness, however, is almost precluding social interactions with people we don’t know.

The article gives a surprising example that may ring true to many of you. Norwegian sociologist Richard Ling was standing on his front porch saying goodbye to some friends who had been visiting his home. Up walks the plumber he had called to come and fix a broken pipe. It just so happens that the plumber was talking with his wife (on his phone). With not so much as a “by your leave,” the plumber walked directly into Ling’s home pausing only to remove his shoes.

What was happening here evoked a response from Ling (as a sociologist) that might be lost on me until after the fact. He was excited. On display before him was one of the fundamental tensions of life in a nomadic society. In one moment, the plumbers interaction with his wife (mediated by a phone) was in competition with his (unmediated) communicating with Ling. For an even more bizarre example, remember Rudy Giuliani answering his mobile phone and talking to his wife, while addressing the National Rifle Association. It was one of those, how shall we say, campaign-ending moments despite the awkward applause following his painfully protracted farewell.

In Linger’s situation and Giuliani’s we see mediated conversation (with a close relative) trumping unmediated conversation with a total stranger. The same happens every time you’re behind that dude in Whole Foods who simply cannot get off his phone while he coordinates the next two hours of his life with all the precision of a team of Recon Marine’s calling in a air strike. The goal? Getting the kids here, here, and here while picking up this, this, and this for dinner.

What is more, the data substantiate Mr. Ling’s experience. Using data from Norway he established that 50% of mobile-phone calls and text messages go to the same three or four people, all of whom are typically within 6 miles of the caller. Further validation comes from a study at Middlebury College (in Vermont) that found that undergraduates were calling home, on average, ten times per week. Growing up is hard to do.

A say byproduct of the new, high levels of cohesion and connectedness between friends and relatives is that it is increasingly difficult to meet strangers. In the parlance of sociology, strong ties (such as relations and close friends) are reinforced and weak ties (such as strangers and acquaintances) are further weakened. You know how awkward the church meet and greet is. We may all be member of the church community, but where that community is large enough to have total strangers sitting near one another all the weight of societal trends is pulling against our ability to form relationships.

Not only is this sad, but it is a challenge that ought to be addressed by the Christian community. Many mocked when last year the Vatican released its ten commandments for motorists, or some such thing. While to many Protestants it seemed, on its face, ridiculous a reading of the document shows that Catholicism is seeking theological engagement with the technology that is shaping our society. This is, of course, the church’s role. By way of criticism it might be apropos to suggest that the Vatican is a wee bit late in addressing the motorcar, but in principle it is a fantastic and important corrective word.

“The way that leaders have loosened their ties to churches in their own communities–in the places where they live and work–is deeply troubling. It signals the loss of one of the few social settings where the average “Joes” used to rub shoulders with the powerful, and where the powerful kept in touch with the concerns of average folks.” - Michael Lindsay, author of Faith in the Halls of Power: How Evangelicals Joined the American Elite.

A recent op ed piece in USA Today by Mchael Lindsay laments the departure of evangelical elites from local churches.

Lindsay spent five years interviewing some of the country’s top leaders. These included two former U.S. presidents, 100 CEOs and business executives, Hollywood icons, accomplished artists and renowned athletes, all of whom openly identify as Christians of the evangelical variety.

During the course of these interviews, Lindsay discovered that some 60% of these cultural leaders were not involved with a congregation in any meaningful way. Some of them were members, a designation that often did not translate into meaningful participation in the life of the community of faith. Others had actively disengaged from church life and sought spiritual development through other means.

Several CEOs, for example, noted their frustration that churches seemed intent on maximizing inefficiency. Churches, some claim, are “unproductive,” and “focused on the wrong things.” A substitute for such a frustrating experience can be service on the board of an organization such as the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, the very zenith of evangelical groups. Why mess around with a church when you can function in the boardroom of a global organization?

In some ways this is a natural expression of the evangelical impulse that favors efficiency and also of our preoccupation with impact. To many evangelicals small is irrelevant and local is vanilla. We prefer our leaders to be icons who inspire global movements with strong brands and multiple spin-off products for our niche market. A church, after all, may only be able to reach a community, but a satellite broadcast can reach millions around the globe.

That this is a natural expression, however, makes it neither helpful nor right. And this development shows that the (already weakened) fabric of evangelical ecclesiology may be at the point of unraveling.

Evangelicals have launched hundreds of invitation-only programs and organizations for everybody from business leaders in Manhattan to diplomats in Washington. This is a good thing, a means of seeking to contextualize the Gospel and Kingdom values to a specific place or profession. It’s my job, after all, to help do just this at Wake Forest so I’m not knocking it. However, these innovations mean nothing should they serve to sunder individual believers from the community of the church. The very robustness of these groups is based on the bedrock of a visibly community of people united to Christ through baptism and sharing life together as they follow Christ.

Let’s face it, Following Christ 2008 is a conference for people who may well one day fit into the constituencies outlined above. And certainly if and when you find yourself working in DC or on Wall Street, you will want some time of fellowship with others similarly situated. But that fellowship, as helpful as it may be, will fail to meet the full scope of our spiritual needs.

For the purpose of meeting these needs, God instituted the church. That evangelical elites are abandoning the church is worrisome not only in that it perpetuates the divorce between average Joes and elites, but more so in that it is a trend toward the abandoning of God’s primary redemptive vehicle. Does the church do some silly things? Sure. Does it sometimes seem like we’re trying very hard to show people the door? Yes. However, all of this doesn’t change the fact that the church is foundational.

John Calvin notes:

“[L]et us learn, from her single title of Mother, how useful, nay, how necessary the knowledge of her is, since there is no other means of entering into life unless she conceive us in the womb and give us birth, unless she nourish us at her breasts, and, in short, keep us under her charge and government, until, divested of mortal flesh, we become like angels. For our weakness does not permit us to leave the school until we gave spent our whole lives as scholars. Moreover, beyond the pale of the Church no forgiveness of sins, no salvation, can be hoped for….” Institutes 1: 4

There is nothing wrong with being involved with a myriad of evangelical organizations that relate to your specific vocation. However, it can never be a substitute for your membership and participation in that new community called church.