Al And Tipper Gore And The Advent of Term Marriage

One of the popular news items being reported today is that Al and Tipper Gore are divorcing after 40 years of marriage. Aside from the media obsession with people’s private lives, there are some interesting aspects to this story. If you listen carefully you’ll notice that the fundamental idea of marriage continues to be redefined by our society, particularly by the baby-boomer generation.

For example, in the sub-headline of this MSNBC article the Gore’s are quoted characterizing their divorce as a “a mutual and mutually supportive decision.” Divorce used to be an ugly and shameful thing in America, then for a time people strived to make their divorces “amicable,” and now it’s widely considered mature for you and your ex-spouse to remain friends.

Don’t get me wrong, I think moving from a culture of shame to a culture of forgiveness and reconciliation is a very good progression, but what I find most interesting is that it has set the stage for a redefinition of what a “successful” marriage is.

This morning on the Today show Matt Lauer and his guests proposed the idea that perhaps we shouldn’t consider it a “failure” that a 40-year marriage is coming to an end in divorce. After all, they were together for 40 years – an admirable feat by today’s standards!

In other words, the very purpose of marriage is being renegotiated right before our eyes by our society at large. My wife’s response to the comments on the Today Show was, “In my opinion a marriage that ends in divorce after 40 years is a bigger failure than one that ends after 5 years. It’s like quitting the race 10 steps from the finish line!” Jenell feels that way because we see marriage as a lifelong exclusive union between two people, the purpose of which is to grow in intimacy. We think growing in intimacy requires some degree of hardship, pain, and most importantly, a lifetime of commitment.

(I should add here that I firmly believe some divorces are right and good. Some people simply should not be married.)

But that is increasingly not how American society practices marriage. We largely see it as a partnership that exists for making its partners happy (I think happiness and intimacy are very different goals). Therefore, as soon as you no longer make each other happy it’s time to end the partnership. Pretty simple. The idea of remaining in unhappiness is not only seen as absurd, more often it is even being characterized as immoral (especially where children are involved). If you make each other happy for 2 or 3 or even 5 years, well, that’s pretty good. But if you made each other happy for 40 years, that’s nothing short of amazing these days!

Hence, the Gore’s had a highly successful marriage.

Term Marriage?
This progressive redefinition of marriage opens the door for some interesting possibilities, so today I’m going to make my first prediction on Pastoralia: in my children’s lifetime we will see the advent of “Term Marriage” in America. People will marry for a pre-determined period of time – say, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years at a time – and very specifically spell out the contractual terms of that period. Those who enjoy each other for short terms will likely re-up – perhaps for a longer term, or even a lifetime term. Those who don’t make each other happy will simply part at the end of their term. This is essentially what we already have to a lesser, and legally softer extent with the current practice of co-habitation. All we need is to add some legal protection to that current arrangement and divorce will largely cease to be a failure, and simply become part of the expected transition.

Of course in some ways this will be significantly more complex than traditional marriage. The terms of the contract will have to be stipulated in detail (expectations for children, finances, etc.) but we have already laid the groundwork for this with pre-nuptial agreements. There will also have to be safeguards that prevent it from simply becoming a way to legalize prostitution and female exploitation (through extremely short hour-long, day-long, and week-long “marriages” – a problem that already exists in the obscure Shia Muslim practice of Mutah).

But in other ways – ways that I think are more compatible with the values of our rapidly changing culture – Term Marriage will be much more simple; there is a lighter burden of responsibility and a more tangible and accessible horizon of success.

If that does happen, what will be the Church’s response?

From Seeker Sensitive to Seeker Generating

“Seeker-sensitive” churches made a big splash in the 1990′s, lead by Willow Creek, with a great concern and care for helping people find God. This was generally accomplished by creating a worship atmosphere that was relevant to contemporary culture in order to provide a seamless transition from the secular world to the sacred world. The motto, via Donald McGavran, was “Nobody should have to cross cultures in order to find God.” Thanks to Willow Creek, and its clones, people were able to come and see God in a way that added sacred meaning to their beloved secular forms of soft-rock music and the corporate-marketing culture of success. It was church the church of Madison Avenue. Of course, during the 1990′s many of the more traditionally-minded churches and leaders vilified this approach, seeing it as a kind of “watering down” of the gospel message.

What the traditional churches and leaders didn’t realize was that seeker sensitive churches were the logical extension of the very form of Christendom they had passed down. Both traditional and seeker-sensitive churches assume that Christ is at the center of cultural and that God is to be found within the gates of the central palace (so to speak) that is the walls of the church. Hence, people must come to church to find God.

But during the early years of postmodernism the markers of Christendom were being rejected – religious heritage, religious symbolism, and Judeo-Christian socio-political norms – which resulted in a cognitive dissonance between those who might still want to “find God” and the keepers of the message who were still primarily speaking through the liturgies, music, and symbols of a rejected culture. In other words, “church” in it’s older forms no longer made sense. The emerging Church leaders – that is, the baby-boomer children of the traditionalists – still essentially wanted what the traditionalists wanted: God at the center of culture (perhaps even more so), but they realized that emerging generations were rejecting those symbols and traditions (as were they). Therefore, they created churches that stripped these symbols away. Seekers of God, then, could go to church to “find God” in a friendly and accessible culture that utilized recognizable idioms like soft-rock inspired worship music, entertainment-based media, and corporate-styled cafes.

Missional churches reject the most fundamental assumption underlying all of this; that Christ is the center of human culture and power. Eddie Gibbs has referred to this turn as “seeker generating churches.”

We are no longer in the business of welcoming “seekers,” or even stimulating the latent “seeking” tendencies in the otherwise pluralistic population, Rather, we are the seekers. We are not the custodians of the Kingdom. Rather, the Kingdom is the reign of God produced by a missionary God who is “at work to this very day” in the world around us. Therefore, our task is to go out and seek to find where God is already “at work” in the community and the world around us and, wherever we find God at work, to join God in that work.

Our task is to be seekers of the Kingdom and to generate new seekers of the Kingdom among us.

Questions:

1. To what extent has our culture in North America already rejected Christ at the center of culture? To what extent is Christ still at the center?
2. What can we do to most effectively generate seekers of the Kingdom among us?
3. To what extend should we still be prepared to receive “seekers” in the Christendom sense?

What (Four) Teenagers Think About Religion And Our Biggest Problems Today

As part of a grad school class I’m taking I asked four teenagers three questions about their main concerns in life and how religion or faith impacts those concerns. I thought it would be fun to ask Pastoralia readers those same questions. So first, here are the questions and the responses I received from 4 teenagers:

1. What 3 issues stress you out most?
2. What are the 3 biggest challenges facing our world?
3. Does religion/faith help you deal with these concerns better or make them more difficult? How?

Respondent #1:

1. Figuring out what my priorities are, figuring out how to discover myself, and figuring out how to maintain grades without going crazy knowing that next year is going to be tough and that I procrastinate. I also dislike how my response to having a ton of things to think about is not thinking about any of them. I’m a very relaxed and mellow person… See more though, stress doesn’t get to me too much.
2. Disregard for the environment, poverty/greed, and parochialism.
3. Religion and faith do little for me. I see and respect how faith motivates people and gives them a sense of purpose, but it would be stupid to say something like “We are God’s instruments.” That belittles free will and extraordinary individual morality. What I mean is no because putting things in the hands of some unknown might make you feel better, but it does little to help your problem. Religion does get in the way of the global warming challenge though because some people deny science and endorse the supernatural.’

Respondent #2:

1. School, Grades, finding a job
2. Global warming, america doesnt care what other people think of them, the global and national economy
3. I don’t know, i would say neither. to say that i think religion helps in MY opinion wouldn’t be how i feel but i have this guilt feeling that if i say no it doesnt it would be wrong. i think saying that religion helps … See moreis something we have been accustomed too and for the most part is accepted by society. i dont think i could say yes or no though in regards to religion/faith

Respondent #3:

1. Thinking about college, self-image, and excelling at what is important to me.
2. Realizing the worth of a human being, disreguarding race or gender. Finding more diplomatic ways to solve world issues if possible. Letting go of selfish natures to benefit those in greater need and those with less opportunities.
3. My faith helps me because it gives me hope that someday these issues might be solved or improved. it pushes me toward the direction of helping make a change.

Respondent #4:

1. Future, Family,
2. World Hunger, Religious Conflicts, Environmental damage.
3. No it does not help me, religion tends to create conflict, especially in today’s world. We don’t need religion to solve our as well as the world’s problems or challenges.

Does this tell us anything useful about the worldview of these teenagers? In your experience, to what extent are these responses typical of American teenagers? What does this mean for churches and church leaders?

And, finally, how are their responses similar or different from your own?

My brief thoughts:

• Teenagers today (or, these teenagers at least) are way smarter than we give them credit for.
• Their concerns are more or less exactly the same as mine.
• With the exception of one, there is very little connection between daily concerns and religion/faith and the connection between religion/faith and global concerns is mostly negative. I myself have a great deal of hope for how faith can impact global concerns, but quite frankly I share the disconnect between my faith and my daily stresses. If anything, being a person of faith has only increased by level of concern and responsibility.

Why I’m Reluctant To Tell People I’m Planting A Church

Because this is what “excellence” looks like.

“Sunday’s Coming” Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.

UPDATE: A nice little conversation has sprung up around this video over at Bill Kinnon and Dan Kimball’s blogs. Bill wrote a classic piece on the subject a while back titled, What Is What, that I would highly recommend.  If you don’t already know my thoughts on the use of media in the church, you can check out these recent posts:

• 5 Arguments Against the Use of Media and Marketing in Church
• Church As Screen Time and Pastor as Parasocial Personality
• The Prostitution of the Gospel Through Marketing

The Death Rattle of Christendom

She sank more and more into uneasy delirium. At times she shuddered, turned her eyes from side to side, recognised everyone for a minute, but at once sank into delirium again. Her breathing was hoarse and difficult, there was a sort of rattle in her throat.

~ Fyodor Dostoevsky. Crime and Punishment

Dear Fyodor,

It’s getting rough for the old girl. Despite the rattle of death in her chest, there’s still a hint of the former beauty and dignity behind those eyes and, as anyone would tell you, she’s as feisty as ever. Still, the truth is she’s dying and there’s nothing to be done about it. As we sit around her bed praying and waiting, her moments of lucidity come with rapidly decreasing frequency.

Everyone here is dealing with the ugliness of her death in their own way. My sister refuses to let her go. She stands just beyond the door, arguing in harsh whispers with the doctors and nurses. She won’t believe the facts of the case, and it’s easier to argue over the interpretation of charts and data than to look straight at the old girl herself. I don’t blame her. Looking is hard.

My older brother looks but doesn’t see. “She’s just a little out of shape,” he says optimistically. “If we can get her up and out she’ll be back to her old self, ruling the roost!” And so he hangs a dress on her and rolls on rouge and glides her round the ward in a wheelchair festooned at the handles with curly ribbon and helium balloons so she might speak with the people. I tell you it’s horrible. Such a thing would be bearable (commendable even!) if compassion was his aim, but it’s not compassion he seeks from her fellows in the ward. No, it’s her rulership he hopes to re-animate and so he props her up like some animatronic relic – a broken-down ecclesiastical Chuck-E-Cheese promising fun-and-games for all the good little children.

Sadly, she scares the children. They weren’t around when she was bright and beautiful. They never attended her grand parties. They don’t know who she was (and let’s face it, as good as she might have been she was also a hard taskmaster, perhaps taking her job of keeping us safe too seriously and – I think – secretly hoping we would never grow up). So the children shrink and shriek and their lack of piety (or pity) has fermented my brother’s optimism into a swill of bitter insistence, rendering him defensive and defiant and refusing the temporary inebriation of grief.

(Can I tell you the truth? I fear her death is more than he can take. He always seemed the stronger one growing up, but I’m not sure he can keep his sanity without her strict order around the house – without her barbed-wire fences to separate the wild vines from the cultivated ones. I don’t think he realizes it was always her intention that we harvest the whole field, and I think all these years later she might even be happy to see us tear down those fences if keeping them meant letting the whole field go to waste.)

For me, it’s her delirious rants that are the most heart-wrenching. She’ll stubbornly hoist herself up to rebuke people who aren’t even in the room – resurrected memories of conflicts and passions long dead and gone to everyone but her own cruelly vivid memories that now, in her mortal distress, seem to have taken on a quality that simply overwhelms her present reality. Perhaps it’s for the best – perhaps it’s mercy – but for better or worse I find I’m not just grieving her death, I’m grieving the robbery of her chance to see the transcendence of death by the legacy she leaves in us. I think she would rejoice in that. I think she would look us in the eye and say, “It’s good to grieve me, but celebrate too. If I live on like this then death wins by making me into a mockery of life. But if I die then the life I lived will be victorious by passing on to you. Now take the best and go.”

She deserves that moment; it’s her birthright. But we won’t let her have it. We insist on preserving her because somehow we think our life is in her, when actually her life (all life!) is a gift that grows in the giving, until one day it grows so fat it swallows every one of us whole, death and all. Who would have thought, Fyodor, that the nihilism you so strenuously decried would lead not to the depraved insistence on rationalized death, but to the dogmatic insistence on irrational life?

You must be wondering how she can possibly endure for so long. It’s the machines that keep her alive. Pray for a death rattle in the chest of those monstrosities so she might finally be free from our obsessions, and enjoy a long night of rest in a well-deserved sleep.

The Community of Suffering Mercy

³Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, ⁴who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. ⁵For just as the sufferings of Christ flow over into our lives, so also through Christ our comfort overflows. ⁶If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer. ⁷And our hope for you is firm, because we know that just as you share in our sufferings, so also you share in our comfort.

~ 2 Corinthians 1:3-7

As if pain and suffering weren’t bad enough, one of the common features of suffering is that those who are afflicted tend to feel terribly alone in their distress. We often contribute to that isolation by distancing ourselves – either physically or emotionally – from suffering people because we just don’t know what do say or do. We want to solve problems, not just acknowledge them, and when we don’t know how to solve the problem we sometimes make the mistake of not acknowledging it at all.

The Christians in Corinth are going through a particularly difficult time and Paul wants them to know they are not alone, so he charges right out of the gate in this letter with a praise for the “Father of compassion and the God of all comfort.” Paul wants these believers to know, first of all, that they do not suffer without relief, for our God is the God “who comforts us in all our troubles.”

But notice, Paul says here that at times comfort from God comes not in the form of a solution, but in the form of empathy and understanding from others who have suffered! Paul says

“[God] comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves have received from God” (v4).

Paul then uses a powerful image to drive home his point: Picture a large kettle filling up from a rapidly flowing tap, the liquid racing to the brim and them gushing over the edge, splashing down the sides and running out onto the floor.

This is the suffering of Christ.

As the people who place our trust in the faithfulness of Christ, his suffering inevitably spills out onto us. Yet, this overflow is also the comfort of Christ, and as he comforts others we too are bathed in that merciful flow.

Paul’s evocative image illustrates a surprising and distinctively Christian truth that we can receive comfort and empathy from God for our sufferings because we serve a God who has himself suffered. Christ meets us in our pain and misery – not from a sympathetic distance, but shoulder-to-shoulder in the muck and mire of our broken humanity. He has been there as a broken human, and he offers us mercy from the wellspring of his empowering grace.

When we have received this mercy  – sometimes in prayer, sometimes in scripture, but mostly in community – we respond by sharing it to others around us. That is the community of mercy in action. The gift of grace must be moved or else rot and spoil like lay-old manna. We are common sufferers, and common comforters, in Christ and with Christ, and by this activity we begin to enjoy a kind of equality that is peculiarly meant for the people of the Kingdom of God (2 Co 8:13-15).

Announcing the Winners of the Pastoralia Membership Giveaway!

Today we conducted the random drawing of members for our April membership drive giveaway! First and foremost, thank you to everyone who bacame a member of Pastoralia! Your contribution will help us continue our mission to bring the gospel to post-Christian people in North County San Diego in creative and non-traditional ways. We ended up bringing in the equivalent of 189 memberships. Not quite enough to give away an iPad (250), but enough to make a difference for our mission. Thank you!

Now, a quick word about how we conducted the giveaway:

Everyone who contributed as a member during the month of April was entered into this drawing. Those whose donations were over $25 were given multiple entries depending on the donation amount ($50 = 2 entries, $200 = 8 entries, etc.). Beginning with the iPod Touch, we drew one name randomly per prize until all prizes were assigned. In the case of multiple entries, we limited one prize per person (so people with multiple entries couldn’t win more than once, even if their name came up more than once). Each name was assigned a number and drawn blindly using the engine at Random.org. With the print book giveaways I drew 10 names at random, then tried to match titles with what I thought the winners would find most useful or interesting (it helps that I know all of you somewhat!).

Here are the results:

Grand Prize Giveaway

iPod Touch: Erin Thomsic

Audiobook library giveaways from christianaudio.com

Library of Classics: Sean Campbell

Postmodern Church Library: Dave (from saintsofvirtue.com)

Library of Contemporary Theology: Jacob Evans

Church and Culture Library: Jesse Schroeder

Renovaré Library: JR Rozko

Audiobook download coupon from christianaudio.com

christianaudio Download Code #1: Tracy Wilcoxen

christianaudio Download Code #2: Linda Orem

christianaudio Download Code #3: Krysten Case

christianaudio Download Code #4: Peter Kipley

christianaudio Download Code #5: Christie Harwood

christianaudio Download Code #6: Jason Clark

christianaudio Download Code #7: Carin Pollack

christianaudio Download Code #8: Aaron Boerboom

christianaudio Download Code #9: Jaeson Ma

christianaudio Download Code #10: John Hindes

Print Books Giveaways:

ViralHope copy #1: Jason Dougherty

ViralHope copy #2: Cynthia Taylor

Practice Resurrection by Eugene Petersen: Rick Dumas

Practicing Greatness by Reggie McNeal: Duke Lancaster

Urban Christianity and Global Order by Andrew Davey: Geoff Hsu

Experiencing the Trinity by Darrell W. Johnson: Denise Lawson

Christ Based Leadership by David Stark: Bryan Dormaier

Imaginary Jesus by Matt Mikalatos: Peter Coker

Soup, Soap, Hugs, and Hope by Harold Kutler: James Loesch

Formational Children’s Ministry by Ivy Beckwith: Joshua Hopping

Details, details…

If you won a hardgood item, such as the iPod Touch, audiobook libraries (which are on audio CD’s), or the print books, you should expect to receive delivery of these via USPS within 7-14 days (we need a little time to pack everything up). If your prize is a download coupon for an audiobook through christianaudio.com, expect to receive an email this week with your coupon code and instructions.

Condolences

Obviously not everyone won a prize. For those who didn’t win, my sincere condolences. Perhaps next year I’ll have enough prizes for everyone. At the very least, I hope you’re comforted by the fact that you received the coolest t-shirt on the planet : )

[UPDATED] Hurry! The Membership Drive Ends At Midnight!

UPDATE: Our first ever membership drive is now closed! Thank you so much to everyone who joined and became supporters of our missional efforts here in North County San Diego. The winners of the drawing will be announced later tonight.

Our month-long membership drive is about to come to a close! In just seven hours you’ll lose your chance to win great prizes like a new iPod Touch, and tons of great print books and audiobooks from christianaudio. For only $25 you can support our missional work, get a great t-shirt, and be entered into the drawing we’ll be conducting tomorrow!

Click here for all the details or just go straight to the membership page to become a member!

Between Emerging & Traditional: My Interview With Jim Belcher

One of my favorite things about working at christianaudio is that I get to conduct author interviews. In was in this capacity that I was fortunate enough to speak with Jim Belcher, author of the recent book, Deep Church: A Third Way Beyond Emerging and Traditional:

In this edition of “Author Sketches” we talk to Jim Belcher, author of the recent popular book Deep Church, A Third Way Beyond Emerging and Traditional. Jim talked to us about his own struggle to find a “third way” as a pastor and church-planter, his motivation for “theological peacemaking” and revealed how his friend Rob Bell became the catalyst for writing this book in the first place.

You can download the interview for free at christianaudio.com by clicking here (registration is required). You can also read my review of Deep Church by clicking here.

The Parable of the Royal Invitations

(This parable was originally my contribution to the discussion of re-imagining Vineyard values over at Jason Clark’s blog, Deep Church. My task was to re-imagine the value, “Come as you are, but don’t stay as you are.” I’m re-posting it here just to add it to my own archives.)

Once there was a royal family who loved their people and ran their city as best they knew how.

They were generous, so they threw regular parties at their royal mansion in the center of town with all the best food, wine, art, and music. It was quite a spectacle. Because most people were fairly poor compared to the royals, everyone wanted to come to rub shoulders with the powerful elite and be influenced by them and, perhaps, gain a little power for themselves. Pretty soon, these parties were so popular that only certain people, from certain families, and dressed in certain fine clothes could gain entrance.

In time, however, the royal family fell on difficult days and lost some of their wealth. The local economy changed, and many of the “common” families made their own fortunes. Many still respected the royals for their heritage, but being royal wasn’t as prestigious as it once was, and truth be told, many resented them for their power. And so, fewer and fewer people wanted to come to their parties. There were other parties being thrown by newly-wealthy families and people seemed less interested in queuing up or wearing pretentious clothes.

Sensing they were losing their power, and desperate to revive their status, the King struck upon an idea: They sold all their fancy furniture and bought affordable Ikea tables and chairs just like the common folks and dressed in jeans and un-tucked Hawaiian shirts. Then they sent out party invitations to the whole city. The invitation read:

“Come as you are, but don’t stay as you are.”

The idea was that everyone would feel perfectly “at home” in the royal residence, and in so doing could, in a way, become like a royal family member too and be changed for the better by the influence of the royal family.

It worked beautifully.

Some still wanted to be like the royals, so wearing the same clothes and sitting on the same affordable furniture made it seem, for a time, like everyone actually was royal. Many people flooded back into the royal mansion and everything returned to normal.

Or so it seemed. In reality, the economic and political landscape was still steadily changing – and with it, the royals gradually lost all their political power until one day the family was overthrown and evicted from their mansion at the center of the city. To some, these seemed like the hardest times they had ever experienced.

At first the old King was determined to gain back their status because he thought that was the only way to continue taking good care of the city. “How can we do what’s best for them if we’re no longer in charge?” he asked. So he decided to keep throwing their once-famous parties right there in their ramshackle hut on the outskirts of town. He rallied all the sons and daughters and aunts and uncles to paint the plywood walls and sweep the dirt floors and they sent out invitations to the whole city, which still read: “Come as you are, but don’t stay as you are.” And they waited.

But nobody came.

For most folks, going to a party on the poor outskirts of town was plainly absurd. And what was all this about “Don’t stay as you are”? People thought it arrogant that the family still believed they had something to offer. Truth be told, they thought the royals were merely trying to win back their place of power and prestige.

Then one night the old King was struck by a realization. So he gathered the old party invitations, scrawled something inside them, and addressed one to each member of his family. The next day at breakfast he carefully handed out the invitations and said, “Our family has been called to care for this city – wealthy or poor, powerful or weak – and there has never been a better time to do so.” At that, everyone opened their envelope and saw that the old invitation, now given to each of them, had been changed:

“Come Go as you are, but don’t stay as you are.”

And with that each member of the royal family understood that the time for asking people to come had passed, and that it was they who would now be changed.