Discipleship?

I am asked: “A person decides to follow Jesus. What is the next step for them? What is the next 10? All of this in the context of developing a system in a church to help them to go through these steps.” 

With this question, we’re not just talking about what kind of program we can tack on to our existing list of options or renaming things that we already do; but we are digging into the ethos of the local church and our understanding of the local church entity’s role/purpose/function within the Kingdom and within the community- with the possibility/neccessity of reimagining our  answers to the question: “What exactly ARE we (churchies) doing here?”

If you really have to have a church system for discipleship (which you do, by the way, there’s no getting around it), then you may consider a central nervous system. If Christ is the Head, we may take the analogy seriously and consider the local church as the organised, central nervous system- deeply connected and in tune with the Head, sending out pulses to the body providing direction and instruction.

Viewed this way, consider renaming your connection groups as ‘pulse groups’- just don’t use silly medical graphix or an “E.R.” theme to advert it or i’ll retract the licensing on the idea.

The pulse group is probably the best place to start in terms of a first step. A new believer should be placed in and paired up. That is, assignment (bad word, probably) to a pulse group that makes geographic sense, and paired up with an experienced believer (qualifications?)  within that group. This pairing may lead to connecting outside the group, but can be very effective within the group as well. People have both group and individual needs and these can be met, i think, thru the pulse group/pairing idea. It’s going to feel top-heavy at first- until people catch on to the idea- but imperative that the course be set correctly.

I’m rather in favor of the geographic division of pulse groupings, btw. Cara and I have found that if you live in close proximity to people, getting together happens pretty naturally and spontaneously, whereas making plans to meet with people from across town usually requires making plans at least several days in advance. Proximity determines a great deal of how difficult/easy it is to assimilate/grow friendships.

This concept also leads to the idea of pulse groups as the front lines or first-responders (depending on the scenario) of the local church- rather than the church offices or the front doors of the local HS where you meet. I’m all about the church as a living organism, free-flowing and all that… but/and all organisms have a directed pupose and function (or variety of functions) that requires a smart, well-designed system from which they function and take their cue. Hence, the local church and the leaders thereof.

What about the next 9 steps? No idea. My church would have like 3 people in it and they wouldn’t attend consistently. and they’d probably drink alot. and half of them would leave to start a new church- so my credibility is already shot.

Now. Critique this wasteland of an idea! 

Books (the second- mostly about tools)

I am asked: “What book do you wish everyone would read?”

Which is a little like asking, “what tool should everyone have in their toolbox?” Answer: Well, there are a few tools you’ll need to keep handy under the kitchen sink. There are a number of books I’d like every xian to read (this week, if possible- then we can all be on the same page for next week), in this order:

1. Experiencing the Depths of Jesus Christ, Madame Jeanne Guyon

2. The Importance of Being Foolish, Brennan Manning

3. The Cost of Discipleship, Dietrich Bonhoeffer

4. The Divine Conspiracy, Dallas Willard

There, that should clear up a few things around here. These books are all in the “Spiritual/Personal Development” category. Would you like other categories covered here? Write to us and tell us what you think! The links to the books and authors are on my “cloning list” page.

A note on #1: this little gem could prob be categorised as “devotional”- but not quite. It was written in the 17th? century and is a collection of letters which Guyon wrote to new believers in her circle of friends- so its very warm and personal. She wanted to give them a foundational understanding of the mystical aspects of the xian faith- that is, the “personal relationship” thing. I didn’t read this ’til i had been a xian for 20 years (or maybe 10 years- depending on your understanding of what that means), and wished i had been taught these things back when. It’s basic, dynamic and really short.

Books (the first)

I am asked: “What book do you hope no one picks up or thinks about reading because is was a huge waste of time for you?”

I answer: “Herman Melville’s ‘Moby Dick’ was the biggest waste of book time ever. You should read it because it’s a classic- don’t ever read it. Listen to this guy instead and keep it in the family.

Beating the Daylights Out of Bobo.

Mike asks: “What is the most complicated concept that you’ve ever pondered before?”

I’ll take pondering to cancel out all of the thoughts i’ve had that began and ended with: “Hmm. That’s really complicated and way over my head- i think i’ll leave that one alone.” and stick with the concepts that go further than that and into some actual critical thinking.

The most complicated are my favorites- because i make them complicated. I have a penchant and panache (read: possible mental disorder) when it comes to making the simple complex. This turns around and bites me sometimes- but i’ll take it. I feel like if i’m going to think about something then its worth my time to think about it in a new way… which requires, generally, creating at least a slightly more complex way of thinking about it. 

One of the ways  i like doing this is to draw from a range of paradigms and viewpoints on a single topic- these paradigms can (seemingly, at first) be complimentary or conflicting. The main point (for me) is that you (i) don’t end up with something you (i) could have read out of a book in less time- b/c then you (i) might as well just read the dumb book to begin with. Drawing from multiple disciplines is key.

Think of it as a spreadsheet. Your topic is peanut butter and you want to think about peanut butter outside the classic sandwich paradigm. Label the first row, “Peanut Butter”, and label the first coloumn “Sandwich”. In the cell where those two intersect, you put all your observations regarding peanut butter within the classic context of two slices of bread. Next coloumn, label it “Triscuits”. Next coloumn: “Apple Slices”. in each corresponding cell, insert your thoughts on that paradigm. This gives us multiple ways of thinking about peanut butter arranged side-by-side for comparison and deconstruction. You can make it more interesting by adding a row labeled “Grape Jelly”. And these are just some of the standard peanut butter paradigms- nothing outlandish. For terrible ideas, you can add “Toasted Bread and Butter” or “Pancakes”.

You may not value peanut butter enuf to put this much effort into it, but you can see the potential of the spreadsheet idea if you substitute Patience for Peanut Butter. Your columns can be labeled “What”, “Why”, “How”… and then additional rows of “Christian Bible”, “Hebrew Tradition”, “Psychology”, “Aesop”… to get a nice Westernized overview of the topic of Patience. What this does is put in front of your eyes ideas and concepts related to the topic that you would otherwise simply never see- even without throwing in outlandish ideas.

If you’re going to teach something, you’ve got to know it first. When i talk about making things complex for analysis, I’m talking about learning something so well that you know it front and back, inside and out, and can tackle it from multiple angles- all for the purpose of being able to draw out the core idea (heath?) and communicate it so that your given audience gets it and understands it and could turn around and communicate it to others.

I have an uncle who makes experimental aircraft for kicks and cash (passion meets profit!) and he once explained to me (over cheap chinese food) the core idea behind his gyrocopter by comparing it to a pancake. Fabulous. I got it and love telling other people about the gyrocopter/pancake because it’s so easy and simple, but you come away actually understanding the physics of it.

Make sense? Complexity for the sake of complexity is dumb. Complexity for the sake of synthesis, accessibility and understanding is the point.

Next, I’ll drop Ken Wilber’s name. This guy does lovely things with spreadsheets- read the first chapter of his “Integral Psychology” to get the hang of what he’s talking about, then check out the appendices. Whether you agree with his conclusions or not, his knack (read: ridiculous amount of work) for critical analysis is unbelievable. I’d mention Brad Sargent first here, but i’m only guessing that he has created similiar resources- i don’t know where to  locate them.

Finally, to answer the question: Violence. You know, the old Rene Girard thing i’m always dragging up.

Free Speech

Hi. If you’re the prominent, progressive christian thinker/author/cultural architect who recently removed my comments from your blog, would you mind shooting me an email and letting me know why? (technical error, right? stupid internet.) I’d appreciate that. Thanks!

Entitlement

Well, since two people asked me yesterday what my thots are on this subject, i’ll stick them here. You may stick them wherever you feel appropriate. You may also not feel that these are connected- but i’ll do my best to make clear the connections that i see. Question 1 was about why some people, irregardless of socio-economic status, seem so self-absorbed and completely without table manners of any kind (it sounded more like a real question and a lot less whiny in person). Question 2 was “If you were to have control over the values and belief systems of someone from the time that they were born until they were 20, what are the values and belief systems that you would want instilled in who they are?”

Well, don’t know that i can completely answer #2, but this is what pops into my head when i hear these questions… Entitlement. You can also call it poverty mentality, but it doesn’t really seem to have anything to do with economic poverty- entitlement is two basic asuumptions about the world rolled into one:

A. the situation (always considered in a negative light) i find myself in, and the person i have become (note the finality) is/are the responsibililty/fault of someone else (God, government, etc.).

B. the solution to this problem is the responsibility of someone else (God, government, etc.)

A+B=Entitlement. Better minds have tackled this issue and could tell you where it comes from and how to break it. In raising a child, it would be one of my ongoing intentions to discourage any sign of this mentality for a number of reasons:

1. It’s a completely self-centric way of viewing the world and completely destructive on both micro and macro levels. The implications range from silly to pathetic.

2. You are purposefully handing over your destiny to someone else. (We accidentally encourage this in the church with the “give your life to God” thing w/o really explaining what that means.) People have their life mapped out for them against their will in some cases- we call this things like ’slavery’, ‘entrapment’,and ‘holocaust’, among others. Why would you choose that? (rhetorical question b/c any affirmative answers would be stupid.)

3. Biblically, life is a gift; not a hand-out. The concept of stewardship is powerful and dead-on accurate. Each life is the responsibility of the individual it was handed to at birth. The passage into adulthood is the passing on of that responsibility from caretakers to the individual. W/o that passing and acceptance of responsibility, the individual remains a ‘child’ indefinitely.

But what’s the antithesis of entitlement? because you can’t just raise a kid to NOT be something. It creates a vacuum that all sorts of scary things can fill. You have to raise them up to something, right?

A Long-Expected Post

It’s easier to come back here than it is to write new stuff elsewhere. I wanted to leave some thoughts for myself here (it’s okay if you peek) after some time away for reflection and goofing-off. Mainly, this is about blogging and what i’ve learned/unlearned.

1. Blogging is marginally about my thoughts- but it is increasingly about sharing. Blogging is not just the act of posting; but of posting, reading, commenting, observing, tracking, communing…. No blogger is a blogland unto themselves- by signing up to blog, we sign up to actively, proactively, increasingly and faithfully connect and support.

2. It takes six months to figure out what you don’t want your blog to be about. I’m someone who generally has a clearer idea of what i don’t want than what i do want. I begin most creative work with deconstuction- i set out to create something beautiful with a sledgehammer. At some point, i come around and lay down the demo tools (blunt and large) and pick up the constructive tools (precise and articulated).

3. Visiting other people is a lot more fun than waiting for people to visit me. It’s oddly addictive to check one’s traffic counters for ego than to find out what people actually care about- but not nearly as much fun.

4. Comments make the world go ’round. Momentum is a big deal and comments have a snowball way of making things like blogs seem bigger and more appealing to the blogger- and thus, easier to keep up the momentum of good, faithful posting. One good comment will last me a week.

5. Understanding #4, i don’t post enuf on other blogs. I like to visit a lot and take- i rarely leave anything behind. I devalue others’ momentum by my ommisions, and that’s not right.

6. Blogging is alot more personal and connective than i thought. It often brings a smile and always sparks live, in-person conversations that wouldn’t otherwise happen.

7. Blogging is a lot of work- but the kind of work that you want to work hard at.

8. Pages are largely undervalued in the blogosphere. The nature of posts is that they are often written in the moment- as Gary Larson said, “Whether you’re an airtraffic controller or a brain surgeon, you’re going to have off-days.” and our posts reflect that- even my journal skips from depressed to elated to moody within a few days. Pages provide an opportunity for context. When visiting a new blog, it’s helpful if that person has laid out some stuff that’s a little more thoughtful, a little more static/concrete that will give me some insight into how they think. It allows me to understand where that person is coming from and provides a context for the in-the-moment posts.

9. Because they are largely undervalued, pages have to be promoted hard-core within the blog. They need credibility loaned to them until they can stand on their own.

Extra Credit: How many tenses did i use? and how many times did i switch from first-person to second-person and back?