Megachurch Bubble?

There's an interesting discussion currently as to whether a "megachurch bubble" exists. You've heard of the housing bubble and similar "industries" that have overreached. Exhibit A for anyone who advocates a megachurch bubble would be the Crystal Cathedral and it's demise/restructuring. In that situation, and in general, there do seem to be commonalities. A key issue is the question of economics and which churches are sustainable. Others would point to leadership and the transition to the next generation of pastors. Still others might point to the ministry approach that worked with the last generation which doesn't seem to be as effective today. Megachurch Bubble offers an interesting review of the possible megachurch bubble and a focus on particular Nashville area megachurches. Those with a solid financial base, entrepreneurial spirit, and current plan of active ministry including succession of leadership proves a strong approach no matter the size church.

Does $ Solve Everything for a Denomination?

What would happen to your denomination if you received $1.5 billion with strings attached? Would it help you accomplish your mission?

That's the intriguing drama being played out with the Salvation Army and the communities which have received KROC Centers. The original plan from the Joan Kroc estate envisioned 30 KROC Centers around the US as community centers affiliated with the Salvation Army. The receiving community would need to raise half the funds and then be matched by KROC. See the 2006 story from a philanthropy perspective. The NY Times offered this update in 2009 as the economy struggled and some metropolitan areas gave up on the projects for lack of community funding support.

The nearby Augusta GA KROC Center broke ground February 2010 and held their grand opening August 2011. They are situated in the old mill village of Harrisburg. It's a neighborhood in town often in the news for one problem or another. The KROC Center has an impressive building with an incredible array of programming. Here are the early numbers from 2009 regarding the projected impact and later explanations to the public . Despite the media coverage there still seems be be some confusion even today. Questions still remain whether KROC is intended for the local neighborhood, which also houses the Salvation Army, and will meet the needs of the poor of that community. I've noticed many recent Facebook posts for our Augusta branch reminding everyone that SA is a church. That seems to somehow have gotten lost in the excitement. Will folk be as excited as KROC rightfully presses the church aspect of their agenda?

But back to my initial question. How does a ministry/denomination that seems to specialize in serving the poor and those hit by disaster juggle a programming approach to ministry using a community center/recreation approach and keep their focus? The local effort will soon unveil their First Stop social service approach as they gather various partners to meet the needs of the poor. But how will the poor and those needing social services mix with the middle class and those served by the community programming of KROC? Most church ministry attempts at this take a stronger lead with the spiritual component to help integrate various socio-economic or ethnic groups. Of course, we all know that recreation is a great and easy place to gather a great mix of people. Perhaps the program approach taking the lead is a good solution.

Across the U.S., and even here in Augusta, many of us are watching to see how the millions and billions of dollars from the KROC Foundation will impact the mission of the Salvation Army. The next year will be interesting as these answers will soon be revealed for the Salvation Army, our local KROC Center, and Harrisburg.

Confusing the Kingdom of God and the Church

It's funny how blogs work. Often I get interested in a topic and then end up following the links from one blog to other blogs and articles.

Yesterday Ed Setzer had a blog on what it means for the Church to be missional which he portrayed in the 3 dimensions of missionary, mission, and the missio Dei. See the full article at Seeing Missional in 3-D-- A First Draft. Much of the discussion is a recap of the 20th Century Missionary movement, including the World Missionary Confernces with origins at Edinburgh in 1910 & then the important early meeting of the International Missionary Council in Tambaram (Madras), India in 1938. Setzer says,

The Tambaram conference called the whole church to be the bearers of the Gospel in every sphere of life.[5] In other words, mission is not to be a subdivision of the church’s life; it exists to accomplish a divinely ordained mission and the accountability rests upon every Christian in and outside of the church.

Setzer notes there were detractors. Most notable was the rhetoric of the Methodist missionary E. Stanley Jones. "He immediately questioned this emphasis on the church in missionary thinking, fearing that the substitution of the church for the Kingdom of God might fleece the missionary movement of the 'needed fires of imagination, enthusiasm, and self-criticism.'[6] He continued, 'Madras looked out and saw the Kingdom and the Church at the door, opened the door to the lesser and more obvious, the Church, and left the Kingdom at the door. So Madras missed the way.'[7]"

I had to know more and followed the footnotes!

The main conclusion of the Madras Conference was that church and mission are inseparable. It said, "World evangelism is the God-given task of the Church. This is inherent in the very nature of the Church as the Body of Christ created by God to continue in the world the work which Jesus Christ began in His life and teaching, and consummated by His death and resurrection".35 It is the church that is God’s missionary to the world. So from Madras on, it was impossible to speak of mission without directly linking mission to the church. Further, in summoning the churches to become in itself the actualization among men of its own message, it appeared that Madras had identified the church with the Gospel. Hence the Conference at Madras could announce to a baffled and needy world that the Christian church was its greatest hope and that the church could not be destroyed. These were very bold and strong statements to make about the church and its place in the economy of salvation.

E. Stanley Jones, an American missionary working in India and a participant at the Madras Conference, immediately questioned this emphasis on the church in missionary thinking. He feared that the substitution of the church for the Kingdom of God might rob the missionary movement of the needed fires of imagination, enthusiasm, and self-criticism. From his experience in India as a missionary to the Hindus, he felt that the idea of the church was anathema to the Hindus. In an article for the Christian Century entitled, "Where Madras Missed its Way", he wrote:

In general the Madras Conference was great, but centrally and fundamentally the Conference missed its way. Why? Because of its starting point - the Church. It began there and worked Out all its problems from the Church standpoint. Hence the confusion and hesitancy. The Church is a relativism. At its best it is so. When you work out from one relativism to other relativisms in human affairs, the result is bound to be confusion... Alongside of the pseudo-absolutes of the race as in Nazism, the state as in Fascism, the class in Communism, the Madras Conference put another pseudo-absolute, the religious community, the Church.36

According to Stanley Jones, Madras had no absolute conception from which it worked out its main problems. In his view, Jesus worked out His thinking from the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom is God’s absolute order confronting human need. The Kingdom is absolute while the church is relative. The Kingdom is the end while the church is only the means. For Stanley Jones, one could not be a revolutionary in one’s thinking and acting, if one started from the church. Then the Gospel becomes a limited one. "The conception, the Church, binds you in relativities and limitations," he wrote. The complaint of Stanley Jones was that while Jesus went about preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom, Madras went about preaching the gospel of the Church. He wrote, "Madras looked out and saw the Kingdom and the Church at the door, opened the door to the lesser and more obvious, the Church, and left the Kingdom at the door. So Madras missed the way".37

.T.V. Philip, "Church & Mission"

Who Is a Real Catholic?

Who Is a Real Catholic?

David Gibson got me with the title. Then he made me nod in the affirmative and think about similar applications and questions of other religious groups as well.

Find below an excellent editorial which serves up religion, politics, sex, value clashes and all in very few words. The quandary of Catholicism in the U.S. is likely relevant to most religious groups though some of the particulars of their system of authority may be somewhat different.

"All you need to know to diagnose the state of the Catholic Church in America today is that Pope Benedict XVI -- who has a knack for ticking off Muslims and Jews -- spent the past week wandering the Middle East, yet Catholics here barely noticed. They were too busy fighting over Barack Obama's appearance as commencement speaker at Notre Dame or arguing about the fate of a popular Miami priest known as 'Father Oprah,' who was caught on camera sharing a seaside embrace with his girlfriend."

If you've been near any electronic media you've likely picked up on the above stories. If you are totally out of the loop it would be worth your time to Google the Notre Dame commencement brouhaha or the story of Father Cutié.

"A tabloid published shots of popular Cuban American priest Alberto Cutié -- a multimedia star among U.S. Hispanics -- in risqué poses on the beach with a woman who turns out to be his girlfriend of two years. Nothing draws media flies like a sex scandal, especially one involving a man of the cloth, but a funny thing happened on the way to Father Cutié's disgrace: He did not slink away in shame but instead proclaimed, with Luther-like dignity, that he wasn't worried what the hierarchy thought. 'What worries me most is how God views me. The institution, the church, is something else.'"

As I read the opinion article I couldn't help but wonder who defines Methodism today-- bishop, agency, clergy, or in fact laity? What are the most important things for religious people to be doing? to be saying? And how does the younger generation of clergy see itself in religious vocation?

Enjoy the article and let me know if you have any answers to my questions, or come up with some questions of your own.

Who Is a Real Catholic?

Possibility of a New Methodism?

I've been asking since December what the plan is for the UMC so we don't go the direction of GM or the Big 3. How do established institutions redefine themselves and streamline quickly in order to remain viable in the current economy? I suspect this will come more easily to businesses which run on "the bottom line," that is finances, as opposed to denominations, religious institutions, and nonprofits.

My fear that the UMC is moving too slowly seems to be confirmed. Anyone who knows me or has read a blog or two from me realizes I'm a fan of the arly days of Methodism when the organization was extremely lean (minimal)and the field workers -clergy & lay- are on the move and in the majority. I'll blog some other time about selling all the conference offices and moving the small conference team into a wing of an inner city church! Remember I'm a deacon called to emphasize mission!!

Here are some of the main issues and something of a response by the UMC. I've known since October that the apportionment giving was shifting dramatically in response to the economy as the campus ministry I lead (like all Wesley Foundations in Georgia) got notice of an immediate 40% reduction of funding from the conference. So, 7 months after this impact upon one of my ministry areas the Council of Bishops has met.

Excerpts are from Realign Resources

"At their spring meeting, the denomination’s Council of Bishops voted to take a pay cut as a sign of solidarity with those affected by the economy. Bishops cited 'the present financial challenges of our general church, general agencies and annual conferences and local congregations,' and approved a rollback in salaries to the 2008 level for the 50 active U.S. bishops. (Effective January 2010, their annual pay will drop from $125,658 to $120,942.)"

Other key notes from the meeting:

"Though the denomination is still rich in land and resources, its annual conferences are hurting financially due to debts, benefit obligations and guaranteed appointment for clergy, said Barbara Boigegrain, top executive of the United Methodist Board of Pension and Health Benefits. 'We are starting to have a cash problem and we need a workout plan,' she said."

The group offered something of a plan though I'm not clear that it is nearly enough. "Immediate challenges for the United Methodist Church include deficit spending of nearly $1.5 million from the 2008 General Conference, and a projected shortfall of over $3 million for the 2012 conference. The bishops will be collaborating with the General Commission on General Conference and the General Council on Finance and Administration to redesign the 2012 assembly."

"Statistics from the denomination’s General Council on Finances and Accountability show that total year-to-date giving has increased in 18 annual conferences by $500,000 compared to 2008, but total giving for apportioned funds is down 16.5 percent, or $2.8 million, from 2008. The church can either let the crisis 'cause us to fail faster,' Ms. Boigegrain said, or 'start identifying available resources and making decisions to realign them so that we can continue to feed people and sustain church activity where people need it most.'"

"The Rev. Kendall Waller, a financial officer from the Missouri Conference, said that while annual conferences are being affected differently, he predicted that within four years, 22 of the 62 annual conferences in the U.S. would not be able to underwrite the current pension program."

"United Methodist schools also have suffered, with endowment losses of nearly 25 percent and less money available for tuition subsidies. 'A number of our schools are seriously hurting,' Mr. Alexander said."

Are the actions fast enough? Are they substantial? Here's where I struggle as I believe annual conferences ought to be "steering the ship" and that we must move more quickly in this economy from our old approaches to new practices. Otherwise, we're like the Big 3 presenting their December 2008 plan to Congress when something more radical is necessary. Check out the response by the agencies:

"In light of the crisis, Mr. Alexander said, the denomination’s general agencies are becoming increasingly 'clear on what is the main thing,' and have cut paper costs, trimmed the length and frequency of meetings and reduced personnel."

"Church leaders also are considering ways to trim costs of General Conference, as well as how to 'retool the structures and practices at every level of the church,' Mr. Alexander said. He called on the church to demonstrate 'creative frugality' and an understanding of 'real-world urgency.'

I know many churches and church leaders have the answers if the agencies are willing to hear what must be done. Many local congregations have been through this process of retooling, showing an annual responsiveness to available resources, and being creatively frugal even when resources shift dramatically. The necessary wisdom for this day is in the local congregation and should be actively sought and followed.

It is time for the UMC to follow the lead of the current circuit rider. The circuit rider doesn't benefit from the work of most UM agencies. The local congregation is asked to give to the UM agencies but receives little or no benefit from many UM agencies. In general the agencies are too far removed from the action in the field by the local congregation in ministry, too far removed from the everyday life and faith of the Methodist laity. Yes there are good people there, and yes they stay busy, but it is time to put our best and brightest back to work in the annual conference and in the local ministry. There must be ways we can express a connectional Methodist system that is vibrant and able to move quickly (economically and organizationally) in this new world order.

If an agency has little or no impact upon the work of local ministry does that express retooling, creative frugality, or real world urgency? Return the majority of resources- finances and people- to the work of local ministry and the annual conference. Without too quickly dismissing this outrageous thought entertain the notion for a few moments on paper, and imagine a new day for Methodism. You might suddenly find a Methodist freedom of funding, personnel, and thought you never believed possible again for our beloved movement.

"The United Methodist Church at 40" by Dr. Russ Richey

Dr. Russ Richey, Professor of Church History at Candler School of Theology, Emory University, is someone I've gotten to know a little better in recent months as we both sit on the North Georgia UMC conference board of ordained ministry. I confess he isn't exactly what I would have imagined only having known him from a distance previous to our shared service to the larger Church. But you can't judge a person by his bow tie!

I am beginning to think the good professor of church history, and some who serve in similar capacities, might be some of the best people who understand where Methodism has been and how we might move forward in more vital ways which better express our doctrine and polity.

Find a great resource at Methodist Review which shares academic thinking with many possibilities for practical application. "Methodist Review is sponsored by the Candler School of Theology, Emory University; the Perkins School of Theology, Southern Methodist University; the Association of United Methodist Theological Schools; and the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry of The United Methodist Church. Free, one-time registration is required." If these first articles are any indication you will find it well worth your time.

I continue to struggle with what I am beginning to think of as the necessary deconstruction of a denomination as we've known it (similar to GM) and the new organizational structure which better allows us to be in effective, sustainable ministry while better expressing Methodist Christianity. Find Russ Richey's article on "The UMC at 40: Where Have We Come From?" and find many answers rooted in our history which will also help us see more clearly a strong future. Dr. Richey offers good analysis with focus on "connection enhancing" and "connection straining" aspects of Methodism. Another nice quote: "One century's initiatives become another's burdens."

After an overview of key trends and influences for Methodism of 1884, 1939, & 1969 Richey "brings it home" (as they would say of a preacher in these parts). Check it out.

Speaking of United Methodism Richey writes:

"We have been a church of partial visions and fragmented leadership. Each board or agency functions independently, competing with the others, acting like it alone were the church. Board directors and committee members view themselves as representing their respective jurisdiction or caucus. Caucuses pursue their agendas. Bishops operate in diocesan fashion, serving their respective conference, itinerant general superintendents only when they fly off to a meeting. Clergy-in-conference worry over pensions and health care. We have left it to individual pastors to try to deal the the big problems in American cities. Many responded creatively, heroically, and stoically. No one, nobody, capitalized on experimental success, conceived a national strategy, and established new implementation procedures for Methodist and United Methodist witness to a changing American society. To be sure, a board policy here and a Key 73 there imagined Methodism doing something coherent, extensive, coordinated, sustained. But to naught."

Read more of Richey (and an intriguing article on "What Makes Theology 'Wesleyan'?") at the Methodist Review.

Pastor Salaries

Want to REALLY get into trouble? Here's an opportunity as we mix religion, money, and politics.

This comes from a congregational church polity, but some of the ingredients can just as easily appear in a denominational church. I've never heard of a clergy making 600K, so this got my attention.

"Live... from New York City... it's Sunday Morning Jive!"

Here's a teaser from the article:

"Longstanding tensions among parishioners at the renowned Riverside Church erupted again this week as a group of congregants went to court to stop the installation of a new senior pastor whose compensation package, they say, exceeds $600,000 a year."

"In a motion filed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, the group said that the new pastor, the Rev. Dr. Brad R. Braxton, and the church board that selected him last September after a yearlong search, had dismissed their calls for transparency in financial matters. They also complained that Dr. Braxton was moving Riverside away from its tradition of interracial progressivism and toward a conservative style of religious practice."

See the full story and all details at Pastor Salary

Rediscovering an Easter Methodism; Relighting Our Matches

This is an extended excerpt from the Autobiography of Peter Cartwright, Chapter VII “Primitive Methodism”

My business was to preach, meet the classes, visit the society and the sick, and then to my books and study; and I say that I am more indebted to Bishop M'Kendree for my little attainments in literature and divinity, than to any other man on earth. And I believe that if presiding elders would do their duty by young men in this way, it would be more advantageous than all the colleges and Biblical institutes in the land; for they then could learn and practice every day.

Suppose, now, Mr. Wesley had been obliged to wait for a literary and theologically trained band of preachers before he moved in the glorious work of his day, what would Methodism have been in the Wesleyan connection to-day? Suppose the Methodist Episcopal Church in these United States had been under the necessity of waiting for men thus qualified, what would her condition have been at this time? In despite of all John Wesley's prejudices, he providentially saw that to accomplish the glorious work for which God had raised him up, he must yield to the superior wisdom of Jehovah, and send out his "lay preachers" to wake up a slumbering world. If Bishop Asbury had waited for this choice literary band of preachers, infidelity would have swept these United States from one end to the other.

Methodism in Europe this day would have been as a thousand to one, if the Wesleyans had stood by the old land-marks of John Wesley: but no; they must introduce pews, literary institutions and theological institutes, till a plain, old-fashioned preacher, such as one of Mr. Wesley's "lay preachers," would be scouted, and not allowed to occupy one of their pulpits. Some of the best and most useful men that were ever called of God to plant Methodism in this happy republic were among the early pioneer preachers, east, west, north, and south; and especially in our mighty West. We have no such preachers now as some of the first ones who were sent out to Kentucky and Tennessee.

The Presbyterians, and other Calvinistic branches of the Protestant Church, used to contend for an educated ministry, for pews, for instrumental music, for a congregational or stated salaried ministry. The Methodists universally opposed these ideas; and the illiterate Methodist preachers actually set the world on fire, (the American world at least,) while they were lighting their matches!

Easter Denomination Part II: Agile Enterprise vs. Traditional Bureaucratic Model

While my typical "lead card" would be to go with either Scripture, tradition, or my experiences that have worked well I'm intrigued by an article I stumbled upon while looking for something else on the internet. I think this concept has application to denomination, church, and clergy in the current context of ministry.

Do you know about an Agile Enterprise?

While there are problems with imposing a business model upon the institutional church the concept does help me realize that many of the current denominational models were built on industrial era approaches to management. Of course, now you overlay life in the information era and many who either have prejudice against institutions or have no experience or perceived need for religion and the number of significant issues most denominations are facing is apparent. I find many elements of Agile Enterprise to be more reflective of what the church and the Church should be.

Forgive the extensive copy & paste, but I like the whole article which you'll find below. I have bolded a few concepts that catch my attention for current denominational church work. Here's the link if you are interested at Agile Enterprise

"The traditional bureaucratic model is exemplified by Scientific Management, which was developed during the Industrial Era for use in conditions that were easily measured, controlled, and replicated. It is characterized by routine, streamlined work and close supervision of workers who have clearly defined responsibilities. Mass production, which is characterized by centralized hierarchy, standardized product designs, and specialization of labor, is typical of a bureaucratic organization. During the Information era, however, rapid technological changes, extensive globalization, and intensive competition have created significant pressures on organizations. The Agile Enterprise is an appropriate alternative to the bureaucratic model under these conditions. The Agile Enterprise uses concepts from complexity science, which is based on the assumption that relationships between actors are autonomous and continuous. The result is self-organizing emergence, or the spontaneous formation of constantly evolving work teams, that produces novel products, services, or solutions through iterative and incremental development. The Agile Enterprise relies on the ability of its participants to rapidly evaluate feedback and new information, to continuously learn, and to morph and evolve as needed, often spontaneously."

"An Agile Enterprise is a fast moving, flexible and robust firm capable of rapid and cost efficient response to unexpected challenges, events, and opportunities. Built on policies and processes that facilitate speed and change, it aims to achieve continuous competitive advantage in serving its customers. Agile enterprises use diffused authority and flat organizational structure to speed up information flows among different departments, and develop close, trust-based relationships with their customers and suppliers."

"The Agile Enterprise focuses on (often dramatically) improving its 'front office' and 'mid office' processes, i.e. those processes which are directly or indirectly customer facing, and help the enterprise to move its products and services, and associated information flows, efficiently, effectively, and as quickly as possible."

"'Agility' in this context, could be defined as the sum of "Flexibility + Visibility + Responsiveness" - and the whole being greater than the sum of the parts."

"For an organization to achieve marketplace agility, it must be organized in a way that supports continuous change. External adaptability derives primarily from a self-organizing workforce. A Self-organizing workforce requires employees to assume multiple roles, improvise, spontaneously collaborate, and rapidly redeploy from one work team to another and another, while simultaneously learning from and teaching their peers. For this type of organization to succeed, its employees must be open to new ideas and be able to collaborate with others to accomplish shared goals."

Characteristics of an agile enterprise
"In their book The Starfish And the Spider[1] by Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom describe several characteristics of a starfish organization, a term they use as a metaphor for an Agile Enterprise because of the starfish’s ability to adapt to trauma by rapidly regenerating lost limbs. Separated limbs are capable of returning to health and surviving on their own, much like autonomous work teams in an Agile Enterprise. (These authors use the term spider as a metaphor for bureaucracy because a spider’s body is controlled by a central nervous system and cannot survive severe trauma, much like a bureaucracy that is dependent on top level management to make all major decisions.) Brafman and Beckstrom offer several characteristics of a starfish organization that are consistent with views of the Agile Enterprise. Some of these can be summarized as follows:

1. Projects are generated everywhere in the organization, and many times even from outside affiliates.
2. No one is in control; thump it on the head and it still survives.
3. If you take out a unit, the overall organization quickly recovers.
4. Participants function autonomously, which facilitates workforce scalability.
5. Roles are amorphous and ever-changing; tasks are performed on an “as needed” basis.
6. Knowledge and power are distributed; intelligence is spread throughout the organization.
7. Working groups communicate directly, not hierarchically.
8. Key decisions are made collaboratively, on the spot and on the fly."

Sound like a church/Church/clergy that would work well today? What does this say in response to the current UMC constitutional amendments under discussion?

Confidence in Organized Religion

Mark Chaves at Duke blogs that

"Between 1973 and 2008, the number of people with a great deal of confidence in religious leaders declined from about 35 to under 25 percent. Higher percentages of regular church attendees express a great deal of confidence in religious leaders, but the trend is the same. It is difficult to know which leaders of which religious organizations people are thinking about when they answer this question (local leaders? national leaders?), but if you lead a religious organization you probably will find this a disturbing trend under any interpretation."

We're in a time period where almost all institutions and leaders seem to be fighting long odds in terms of public favor. Does anybody believe in anything anymore? Do we have confience in any organization or leader? What might help Easter occur in the everyday life of a denomination and especially in how they are viewed by the world?

My guess is it won't be a PR campaign, but most likely a local emphasis where people see something in the Church which expresses the Kingdom of God. Maybe we all need to get a community of faith focus on how to express this reality TODAY.

"Everyone was amazed by the many miracles and wonders that the apostles worked. All the Lord's followers often met together, and they shared everything they had. They would sell their property and possessions and give the money to whoever needed it. Day after day they met together in the temple. They broke bread together in different homes and shared their food happily and freely, while praising God. Everyone liked them, and each day the Lord added to their group others who were being saved." Acts 2:43-47 CEV

Declining Confidence

Great WSJ Article on Managing the Facebook Gen

This is a fascinating article, shared in its entirety, that has huge implications for EVERY institution.

Gary Hamel’s Management 2.0: A look at new ways of managing

"The Facebook Generation vs. the Fortune 500"
By Gary Hamel

The experience of growing up online will profoundly shape the workplace expectations of “Generation F” – the Facebook Generation. At a minimum, they’ll expect the social environment of work to reflect the social context of the Web, rather than as is currently the case, a mid-20th-century Weberian bureaucracy.

If your company hopes to attract the most creative and energetic members of Gen F, it will need to understand these Internet-derived expectations, and then reinvent its management practices accordingly. Sure, it’s a buyer’s market for talent right now, but that won’t always be the case—and in the future, any company that lacks a vital core of Gen F employees will soon find itself stuck in the mud.

With that in mind, I compiled a list of 12 work-relevant characteristics of online life. These are the post-bureaucratic realities that tomorrow’s employees will use as yardsticks in determining whether your company is “with it” or “past it.” In assembling this short list, I haven’t tried to catalog every salient feature of the Web’s social milieu, only those that are most at odds with the legacy practices found in large companies.

1. All ideas compete on an equal footing.
On the Web, every idea has the chance to gain a following—or not, and no one has the power to kill off a subversive idea or squelch an embarrassing debate. Ideas gain traction based on their perceived merits, rather than on the political power of their sponsors.

2. Contribution counts for more than credentials.
When you post a video to YouTube, no one asks you if you went to film school. When you write a blog, no one cares whether you have a journalism degree. Position, title, and academic degrees—none of the usual status differentiators carry much weight online. On the Web, what counts is not your resume, but what you can contribute.

3. Hierarchies are natural, not prescribed.
In any Web forum there are some individuals who command more respect and attention than others—and have more influence as a consequence. Critically, though, these individuals haven’t been appointed by some superior authority. Instead, their clout reflects the freely given approbation of their peers. On the Web, authority trickles up, not down.

4. Leaders serve rather than preside.
On the Web, every leader is a servant leader; no one has the power to command or sanction. Credible arguments, demonstrated expertise and selfless behavior are the only levers for getting things done through other people. Forget this online, and your followers will soon abandon you.

5. Tasks are chosen, not assigned.
The Web is an opt-in economy. Whether contributing to a blog, working on an open source project, or sharing advice in a forum, people choose to work on the things that interest them. Everyone is an independent contractor, and everyone scratches their own itch.

6. Groups are self-defining and -organizing.
On the Web, you get to choose your compatriots. In any online community, you have the freedom to link up with some individuals and ignore the rest, to share deeply with some folks and not at all with others. Just as no one can assign you a boring task, no can force you to work with dim-witted colleagues.

7. Resources get attracted, not allocated.
In large organizations, resources get allocated top-down, in a politicized, Soviet-style budget wrangle. On the Web, human effort flows towards ideas and projects that are attractive (and fun), and away from those that aren’t. In this sense, the Web is a market economy where millions of individuals get to decide, moment by moment, how to spend the precious currency of their time and attention.

8. Power comes from sharing information, not hoarding it.
The Web is also a gift economy. To gain influence and status, you have to give away your expertise and content. And you must do it quickly; if you don’t, someone else will beat you to the punch—and garner the credit that might have been yours. Online, there are a lot of incentives to share, and few incentives to hoard.

9. Opinions compound and decisions are peer-reviewed.
On the Internet, truly smart ideas rapidly gain a following no matter how disruptive they may be. The Web is a near-perfect medium for aggregating the wisdom of the crowd—whether in formally organized opinion markets or in casual discussion groups. And once aggregated, the voice of the masses can be used as a battering ram to challenge the entrenched interests of institutions in the offline world.

10. Users can veto most policy decisions.
As many Internet moguls have learned to their sorrow, online users are opinionated and vociferous—and will quickly attack any decision or policy change that seems contrary to the community’s interests. The only way to keep users loyal is to give them a substantial say in key decisions. You may have built the community, but the users really own it.

11. Intrinsic rewards matter most.
The web is a testament to the power of intrinsic rewards. Think of all the articles contributed to Wikipedia, all the open source software created, all the advice freely given—add up the hours of volunteer time and it’s obvious that human beings will give generously of themselves when they’re given the chance to contribute to something they actually care about. Money’s great, but so is recognition and the joy of accomplishment.

12. Hackers are heroes.
Large organizations tend to make life uncomfortable for activists and rabble-rousers—however constructive they may be. In contrast, online communities frequently embrace those with strong anti-authoritarian views. On the Web, muckraking malcontents are frequently celebrated as champions of the Internet’s democratic values—particularly if they’ve managed to hack a piece of code that has been interfering with what others regard as their inalienable digital rights.

These features of Web-based life are written into the social DNA of Generation F—and mostly missing from the managerial DNA of the average Fortune 500 company. Yeah, there are a lot of kids looking for jobs right now, but few of them will ever feel at home in cubicleland.

So, readers, here’s a couple of questions: What are the Web-based social values that you think are most contrary to the managerial DNA one finds inside a typical corporate giant? And how should we reinvent management to make it more consistent with these emerging online sensibilities?

Facebook Employees

Forget the UMC Amendments, There Is a Bigger Issue

I've struggled for a few weeks through Lent, tried to be about my local ministry and denominational service in the conference, and NOT blog in a negative way! Oh, I've got some drafts saved, and there have been a number of blogs I wrote and then deleted. Instead, I've tried to point more toward ministry practice or inspiration when I have had time to blog.

But there is something that is still bugging me and I can't shake it. I'm going to take this as something from God plaguing me here in Easter season, as my prayers are for resurrection and a present redemption for my life, my family, my church, my denomination, and my world. Matter of fact, I'm feeling a calling to this, as I'm a 47 year old who might be a "bridge" between where we've been and where we need to go. Generationally, institutionally, and in regards to career perhaps there are others like me who have experienced the one approach yet see something new developing.

After admiring the efforts of other bloggers in writing about the pros and cons of the upcoming conference votes on UMC amendments I attempted to follow suit. I waded through all of that, thought through aspects of it, and found myself of a split mind, yet still thinking there is something bigger going on.

I share this as one who loves the UMC, appreciates the Wesleyan doctrine and approach, and as one who has benefited tremendously as I wasn't born into this denomination but have been drawn to it and found a home in it. Yet, I don't think we've made it on to perfection just yet with the UMC.

Bear with me as I try to be concise yet express some varied issues that are nagging me.

Some Historic Institutions are Dying and Others are Transforming

Call this the emergence of postmodern institutions, or organizational restructuring, or streamlining, but it's a significant trend. Think GM, think of the 2nd largest mall company going into bankruptcy, think of schools struggling to reform, and certainly think of denominations. It's a new economy emerging, but it's also something more.

Mark Chaves certainly captures some of the issue with his blog on declining confidence . We live in a new, different, and challenging day and old institutional ways are not as efficient today as we need them to be.

Possibility of a New Denomination for a New Millenia?

Just as GM has been pushed to a new structure which is much more radical, much more aggressive, and much more imposed than anything they would have imagined on their own. No one within the "family" who has come up through the beloved institution would place on the table in late 2008 what they now see as a path in April 2009. The numbers, the economy, and the future weren't that radically different in the few months in between.

In our system, it seems to me, something so radical might only occur if God imposed a reformation upon us. And I don't tend to think God works that way! My fear then would be our huge, lumbering ship would "stay the course" and slowly dwindle. Of course, we'd positively redefine that, continue to be the Church, continue to express our doctrine and calling, yet we'd be slowly dying. You've seen that local congregation live out it's life once the "die is cast." :) We're beginning to see this in some conferences, and the thing will spread. Now, I'm not talking about the international, or southern hemisphere UMC as much as I am the United States version.

But what if we found a new energy, a new mission, and a new calling as we find new life in these days of a Risen Savior. In my campus ministry I find MANY college students who are not from church backgrounds, or who come from other religious stances, who are very open to Methodist thinking and Methodist ways. We are distinctive and we have some very real opportunities in this generation even with a postmodern and secular majority. I don't think we've got to yield any ground to anybody! I don't believe that it will make us spiritually superior to fight to the death in legislative sessions, or amend ourselves into more exotic configurations, or become a minority by attrition and institutionalization.

Not Anti-Institution, But A Radical Call for Reform

I no longer think we can take small steps in this "redenominational" effort. I am not anti-institutional as I see both doctrinal and practical value in our coordination for mission. And having served at various levels I know we have some of the best people doing the best they can. The thing is we haven't gotten it right just yet, & I strongly suspect it's a systemic issue. The whole process of us trying to be church and Church is now encumbered and no longer free for mission. And to place this within the context of postmodern thought, the individual finds too many barriers due to the institution.

I can't vote for more amendments that create more institution. We're already overly institutionalized. Instead, if we have opportunity to strip the institution down to the primary elements I'd be ecstatic.

Focus on local ministry such as congregation, chaplaincy, and campus ministry. In United Methodism substantially streamline so that the majority of input of resources impacts the local ministry level rather than draining the local work. The work of the denomination is then to equip, encourage, and radically support effectiveness in ministry at the local level.

Redo the Book of Discipline so it doesn't look and feel like the laws added to laws. We keep doing addition but never do any subtraction! I'm fairly certain that Wesley WAS NOT trying to recreate the Church of England, and it appears that we have successfully acheived this. We are too top heavy with structure and the BOD illustrates this.

Now here's the radical call for a dream denomination. Purge & eliminate the agencies, refocus the seminaries and colleges, strip and redefine apportionments, and after the demolition reconstruct a system that is streamlined and has strong connection between the elements at every level. Many congregations have gone through this and found tremendous benefit for mission, enthusiasm, finances, leadership development, etc. I'd still have churches "pay forward" for mission, but we wouldn't want to use mission language to fund purely institutional "stuff" with no direct relationship beyond the local ministry. Local church, district, conference, & UM college and seminary would depend upon and trust one another in pursuit of expressing God's kingdom today. The majority of input would be upon effective spiritual leadership for clergy and laity, and there would be a strong predisposition to working everyone while also finding the best place of service. This seems to me to be the priority which has gotten lost in the denominational business and largeness of the enterprise.

Forget most of those amendments because there are some MUCH larger issues which the UMC is being slow to address.

A Church Music Death

I've been away from the world of blogging for the last week as my work sometimes moves beyond the local church ministry and extends into denominational service. With that larger world of the Church in mind the death of a seminary church music school got my attention. This was my seminary at one time. It was a place of rich tradition, of mainstream classical theological education, which drew a diverse student body of 3500 students in masters and doctoral work engaging students from throughout the national and world. But things changed rather dramatically.

Numbers of us left the Southern Baptist Convention in the early 90's as the "fundamentalist takeover" had run its course and permanent changes were in place in all arenas of religious life. For any moderate types there was little room in the new scheme despite the historic tradition that found strength in the combined thinking and efforts of the revivalists (Sandy Creek tradition) and the more liturgical, high church element (Charleston tradition). So, many of us became independent, or community church, or Methodist, Presbyterian, American Baptist, or other. Having served a UM church in New Albany IN while in seminary I found my home and context for ministry within United Methodism.

Through Facebook many old friends from college and grad school days have reconnected. I didn't realize it until my old college roommate posted a link informing me that part of our past died this week. He too has moved on and has Presbyterian identity while serving as a music professor at a university. He wrote about this as "remembering mourning" and I can't capture the feeling any better.

The extended excerpt below is taken from the link explaining the death of the School of Church Music at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. While music and maybe worship has undergone changes I think the model (though likely not the size of the model) still works even if the SBTS approach is officially dead. I remember SBTS music school for producing incredible musicians with the broader theological education, creating worship experiences and modeling some variety that helped many of us broaden our views, allowing me to live next musicians in Seminary Village (they'd practice music at 11 PM every night!), and allowing me to learn in a worship class with Raymond Bailey and Milburn Price as a teaching team. Perhaps death will lead to a new resurrection?

Southern Seminary Closing School of Church Music
By Bob Allen
Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is closing its 65-year-old School of Church Music and Worship, combining it with the School of Leadership and Church Ministry into a new School of Church Ministries.

Southern Seminary opened the music school at a time when the Southern Baptist Convention's growing seminary system began moving beyond training preachers to additional tasks, like improving the quality of worship and discipleship training in Southern Baptist churches.

While taken for granted for more than a generation, combining classical music training with theology studies in a seminary setting is primarily a Southern Baptist innovation, said Paul Richardson, professor of music at Samford University in Birmingham, Ala.

Richardson said Southern Baptists began purposeful training of church musicians in the early part of the 20th century. Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary established a School of Gospel Music in 1915.

In the 1940s, the SBC's Sunday School Board established a church-music department led by B.B. McKinney, a famous writer of hymns and gospel songs who taught at Southwestern Seminary from 1919 to 1931. Under his leadership the board released the Broadman Hymnal, creating a common worship tradition in Southern Baptist churches so pervasive it earned comparison to the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. The new pavilion will house Southern Seminary's admissions and security offices.

The National Association of Schools of Music began accrediting undergraduate degrees in church music in 1952. Before long many Southern Baptist congregations came to expect that a full-time minister of music would complete seminary training or comparable training at a university.

Influenced by the models of Westminster Choir College and Union Theological Seminary, SBC music schools focused on sophisticated choral music, graded choirs and more formal worship. While not alone in the effort, Southern Baptist seminaries were often considered unparalleled, in the theology-school world, in their commitment to church music. They grew into programs unsurpassed in size and scope.

For instance, only three schools accredited by the Association of Theological Schools offer doctorates in musical arts, and all are SBC seminaries.

By the 1980s and 1990s, enrollments in schools of church music reached record highs.

Seminary Change

Easter Bloggers

There are many Easter friends I've never met, but who encourage me and challenge me everyday with their blogging. I won't list the 20 plus bloggers I review most weeks though you know I'll often vigourously "cut and paste" from some who really strike a chord or nerve with me.

Wesleyan Basics says:

"The basic move - the Wesleyan root - seems to be an energetic creativity and willingness to innovate inside our outside the establishment if it gets people over the hump from being “Almost Christians” to fully Christian. Of course, doctrine matters. But even Wesley’s famous arguments with Calvinism strike me as being about practice. He found “double predestination” outrageous because it tended to undermine people’s love of God and cool their zeal for good works."

"But - and this is where I probably go way off the path - recapturing Wesleyan practice is not about adopting his innovations. It is not about going back to field preaching or societies and band meetings. Those were well tuned to his setting. Our settings are not his."

"We might end up in some of the same places that Wesley did, but we should not start there."

"We need John Wesley’s spirit and zeal. That is a Wesleyan root to which our United Methodist Church would do well to graft itself."

United Methodist Deacons Aren't Pastors??

Did you see the info out of the recent United Methodist General Board of Higher Education Ministries meeting? The main topics that got my attention relates to a recent survey result and a comment as part of the article.

See Deacon which speaks to a high degree of deacon job satisfaction. This mirrors what I know from other colleagues who enjoy their specialized calling and the opportunity to devote their lives to that ministry in service to the church and world.

Many folk know that deacons in the United Methodist context are a more recent development since 1996. So, in many respects this order of clergy is an odd mix of specialized ministers, e.g. youth ministers, music ministers, or other emphasis on discipleship, women, prayer, etc. which is in contrast to the more general ministry of an "elder" or pastor in charge. Some of us who serve as deacons (this is my order and calling) have emphasis in mission which may either be in the local church ministry or in some other context which connects Church and World.

Here's the section of the article I want to examine more closely:

"The Rev. Anita Wood, director of Professional Development, said she was surprised to find that 21 percent of deacons who were appointed in the local church selected the title of associate pastor in the survey. 'Deacons are not pastors and that indicates that we have some work to do in communicating the role of the deacon in connecting the church and the world,' she said."

While I'm not too surprised I think the clearer distinction is that we are not elders, i.e. pastors in charge. As a mission pastor in a large church I think I serve in the perfect situation to connect Word and Service (the work of a deacon). I'd imagine most others who are called to specialized ministry would express similar sentiments whether they are called associate pastor or something else.

In a practical way if a deacon has other responsibilities in a local ministry that makes them indispensable, such as an associate pastor, we strengthen our ministries and we strengthen the local ministry. So, when our church cut a program staff position in January I could add evangelism to my existing work of mission and campus ministry, and had the experience and background to absorb this ministry and advance it. In all this I'm speaking very practically and from my experience. As deacons we are still responsive to the needs of the church/Church in the local ministry context where we serve. So while we may have a calling and skill set which is more specific than an elder, I think we are also gifted and flexible to meet the needs of the Church.

I could write more about my understanding of deacon ministry and order from perspectives of the Book of Discipline, Methodist doctrine, scriptural relevance, or practical life in the church, but I'll save that for another time. I believe that the deacon ministry offers great opportunity to help a local church be in ministry, and under the supervision of an elder, district superintendent, and bishop we should allow latitude in how the order continues to advance to connect the church and the world.

What is your experience and thinking about this? Are deacons pastors or not?? As an order that is still evolving and defining itself I think this is an important conversation and value your thoughts and experiences.

Failed Leadership Fill in the Blanks Story

Here's a fun little game using major excerpts from a current story which can readily be applied to a local church or to a denomination. You fill in the blanks and create the rest of the story. It's about a leader who has been axed and the reasons why his company has declined due to his leadership.

"He apparently was a nice guy who got along well with everyone else in the old-boy network."

"_____ _____ showed how much he and his whole insular, inbred industry hadn't learned when ________"

"...he demonstrated that he still hadn't learned very much, as he dragged his feet on doing the necessary and drastic things needed to give his company a chance to survive."

"What's wrong, in a nutshell, is that it is a narrow, insular culture. Those who make it to the top of the heap, like _____ , tend to be white Anglo-Saxon males who have worked at the same company their entire career, and have come up with the same set of buddies."

"It is very hard to fire your old pals or even do things to make them uncomfortable."

"They gave ___ ____ some time to fix it, but guess what?"

"Sadly, in the end, he seems to have been a smart guy with no vision beyond whatever pieces of paper lay in front of him."

" Three years ago, he actually conceded that his worst mistake was killing the _______ program and 'not putting the right resources into ________.'"

"Unfortunately, he was too dull to comprehend why. 'It didn't affect profitability, but it did affect image,' he said."

"Talk about not planning for the future! Wacky old Henry Ford I once said that if he had asked consumers before starting out, they wouldn't have said they wanted an automobile at all. 'They would have said they wanted a faster horse.'"

"Now, ___________ has a little less than two months to try to invent a future, in a corporate culture where vision has mostly been punished. For all of our sakes, good luck with that."

What does this exercise teach you about your organization? about your leadership?

Full Story

Of Zombie Banks and Zombie Clergy & Churches

Have you heard about the zombie banks?

Me either, until tonight.

I don't usually use Wikipedia though I liked this thought about zombie banks. "A Zombie Bank refers to a bank with a net worth which is less than zero, but which continues to operate because of implicit or explicit government guarantee." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_bank

It turns out the zombie banks are a huge problem for our economy. Maybe you've heard about those banks that are insolvent which we are keeping alive with outside, intravenous capital. With the "old rules" such an entity could "survive" by feeding off of others. The losses are sustainable only as they have been spread over the larger market, and the collapse now is very much related to the approach and the lack of regulation. The risk is now much riskier and unlikely sustainable as we've gone through this meltdown. A little too little, too late changes are coming as scrutiny tightens and restructuring will eliminate this drain.

"A 'zombie bank' keeps draining bailout capital from the government but doesn't respond with any meaningful lending that helps the economy recover. The prevalence of zombie banks made the long Japanese recession of the 1990s especially painful." http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100762999

Of course, there could be any number of zombies running around. It makes me wonder about "zombie churches" and "zombie clergy." Think of those organizations and individuals that aren't living on their own, those who never move beyond feeding off of others, those who are sustained by others.

On this first Sunday of Lent the text is in Mark 1 including verses 13-15 speaking of Jesus.
13He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him. 14Now after John was arrested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God, 15and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news.”

Perhaps it is time for all to spend some time in the wilderness. Zombie churches, clergy, agencies, and denominations that aren't brought to life should be offered our prayers and a fitting memorial service. Everyone else needs to follow Jesus and be launched "immediately" (to use one of Mark's favorite words about Jesus) into the mission because in these challenging days the time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is upon us and we certainly need every available resource for the task at hand!

Positioning to be Part of a Missional Denomination

George Bullard offers a Typology of Denominations which is worth consideration. http://bullardjournal.blogs.com/bullardjournal/2008/11/typology-of-den.html

I think he is on to something that is helpful in understanding where a denomination is, and where it is headed. That can be a challenge for honest assessment of a local congregation, and significantly more challenging if you consider numbers of churches composing a judicatory or national or international denomination.

Bullard offers:

Emerging Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which was organized during the last 15 years, or has experienced a radical restart in the past 10 years, and is significantly empowered by its current vision. It is probably focusing on one of several emerging models for denominational organizations.

Institutionalized Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which focuses on the institutions, programs, and management aspects of being a denomination. It seeks to build long-term loyalty to the denominational organizations, and uses this as a test of fellowship for ministers and congregations.

Missional Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which has figured out how to be on a continual transformational mission that takes the denomination and its affiliated congregations into new frontiers of mission and ministry with a mission adjusted to meet the context it serves.

Preparing Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which realizes that it has been in decline and too institutional in its focus, and seeks to rediscover congregations and prepare for a new spiritual strategic journey in the direction of its full kingdom potential.

Para-Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which has determined to become a para-denomination which provides products and services to and beyond its affiliated congregations, and focused on a small, specific set of services that might appeal to various affinity groups of congregations rather than visualizing that it has a non-exit relationship with its affiliated congregations.

Pursuing Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which has prepared itself and it engaging in a new transformational journey. It is clearly on a new spiritual strategic journey where it is experiencing increased vitality in multiple areas. It is making obvious progress that attracts more loyalty to the denominational organization, and interest from congregations outside this organization.

Surviving Denomination: This is a denomination, or a region or judicatory within a denomination, which has diminished vitality in multiple areas of emphasis, and has difficulty sustaining a resource base to support whatever mission it continues to define. It may have been through several rounds of cut back and is in or approaching a permanent cut back syndrome situation.

A Lenten Economy and Return to Basics

Sorry to be so absent, but the day job is hyper busy these days.

Of course, the big news item these days is the state of the global economy, and all the ramifications of the pendulum swing which is taking us back to something more sustainable and likely closer to what "normal" should look like. A week ago one report shared that "Former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Tuesday the current global recession will 'surely be the longest and deepest' since the 1930s and more government rescue funds are needed to stabilize the U.S. financial system." http://recession.org/news/worst-recession-since-1930s

Hmmm, what to do? Do we keep on living like we always have in our families, businesses, churches, etc?

I keep wondering what meaningful ministry in the church and in a community context must become in the next year/s or so. It seems to me that some things are going to need to change. Key issues will relate to the basics of life- employment, housing, food, and the attendant needs during a time of change for peace of mind, peace, and hope.

I've noticed more discussion from the experts and in general media about "getting back to basics" and a necessary return to those things which are most essential in our lives. It makes sense in Lent to apply such a focus and discipline upon the Christian life and the congregational/denominational life as well. And I suppose that such a movement isn't a retreat into individualism, but will actually result in that Depression era approach my extended family talks about of everyone working hard AND helping ALL the neighbors realizing we're all in this mess together!

So, it's time to take some steps back off the build up of the last 70 years. It's time to refocus our lives, to quite depending so much on our riches and find again our dependence upon God. Perhaps the biggest challenge will come to the denomination and church to find this old way as we practice a Lenten discipline, discover God in a Lenten economy, and return to the basics of life and faith. This won't be easy, it will take sacrifice, but perhaps we'll find our feet on the right path of faith.

Shameless Society and Sin?

I'm reading an interesting book by a professor who is comparing early Methodism with life today. Actually his writing is more of a critique and corrective to Methodism today than anything else. While that might bore you to tears, he does get into a subject that could create some discussion.

The prof gets into some broader issues about society, and how that tends to shape religious folk more than anything. Said another way, Methodists (and any other group for that matter) replaced our earliest historic peculiarities which made us different with a "bland acceptable almost civil religion." So the focus becomes upon us, people like us, and the national or cultural status quo in our religious thinking and practice.

Now this is where the argument gets interesting. The challenge is how a religious group conceptualizes and practices their need of God, and then how this is revealed as the group defines their theology/doctrine, e.g. say their understanding of sin. Notice how various groups define sin in different ways that matches their position in the nation and world. If we are so enmeshed in our society, culture, or subculture that we can't take a step or two away from it for a realistic view we may totally abandon a way of thinking or living, even if it is a historical and primary tenet of our religious heritage.

Here's the striking passage in one section of the book which brings this all home. Dr. Scott Kisker in "Mainline or Methodist?" writes:

"Americans will do anything, say anything, consume anything in the pursuit of the measures of worldly happiness. We are not a shameful society. We are more accurately a shameless one.

"People in societies defined primarily by consumer capitalism are not walking around wondering what they can do to win the approval of an angry God. We live in a culture of entitlement. We simply assume, no matter how we live, that God should accept us.

"Even when people recognize they are not living how they should, the offer of God's forgiveness and acceptance has very little impact. People are more likely to think, 'Why wouldn't God forgive me? My sins deserve forgiveness as much as the next persons. Of course God loves me. I'm lovable.'"

I'm curious how this strikes you. What are your thoughts on the topic/s?