Saturday, June 28, 2014

The Problem with Choosing

So many choices...
(from grammartales.wordpress.com)
In the 1980s a friend of mine moved to Dallas, Texas. He tried to find a church community to worship with, so (pre-Internet, remember) he turned to the Yellow Pages. He figured that it would have taken over 100 years, visiting one church per Sunday, to try them all. How could he possibly pick the best one? And this is not only a problem for city-dwellers. In my rural community I drive past three other churches on my way to preach on Sunday mornings. (It would be 4 times that many if I had to drive through town on the way.)

How does one begin to choose which church to worship in? Is it a denomination? Style of music? Day and time of the services? All the above? Church-growth consultants have been working on these questions for years. Suggestions for how churches can win in the war of choices range from better parking lots to singing popular songs to playing video clips during sermons to offering communion more often. Each of these suggestions has had varying levels of success. But I believe that the problem is with offering too many options rather than too few.

Barry Schwartz has made a career of writing and speaking about how too many options to choose from can make us miserable. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, greater freedom through more choices does not result in happiness. In fact, having too many options can make us depressed. Think about the last time you went to a new restaurant and spent several minutes poring over the menu. At some point you had to limit your options and choose just one meal. Chances are that someone at your table ordered something that appealed to you more. Schwartz says that when faced with many choices we tend to regret what we did not choose, which makes us the opposite of happy. (That's why restaurant managers create daily specials--so we will stop trying to decide and just order something. Making it seem like a good deal makes us happier with choosing the special.)

My last blog post was about how the limitations of certain art forms (like icon painting) actually create freedom. By limiting what is possible, the worshipper can stop thinking about all the creative possibilities and instead focus on the subject at hand. This applies to all the choices we make around worship--from where to when to how. At some point we have to limit our options as worshippers by deciding which church we will join. And then we have to further restrict our freedom by making the commitment to be active there, in spite of other appealing activities that present themselves on Sunday (or whenever).

As a pastor, the choice is easy for me. On Sunday mornings I don't have to decide if I want to go to church, nor do I have a pick a place to worship. That's done for me through the appointment process. Does it make me unhappy to be limited in that way? Absolutely not. I love the congregations I serve and view each Sunday morning as an opportunity to meet God along with people whom I love.

The quest for your perfect church will never end and it will leave you miserable. Just choose a church. You can narrow the field slightly by investigating theological and doctrinal positions. Then plant yourself there. Watch how God works in and through you.




Saturday, June 21, 2014

Praying with Icons: Freedom in Limitation

Christ the Light-Giver from
orthodoxinfo.com
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. - Colossians 1:15

The Orthodox tradition continues to preserve and maintain the ancient spiritual practice of painting icons. From the earliest centuries of the church other branches of Christianity have discouraged or misunderstood the purpose of worshipping with these images. Icons present a physical likeness of the man Jesus who was also God. While no one has seen the Father, the Son walked and lived among us. These paintings use physical materials like paint and canvas to remind us that Christ was a tangible, physical incarnation of the second person of the Trinity. The Christian worshipper who prays in the presence of an icon is instructed not to pray to the image. Rather, the icon is a reminder of the God that the image represents.

Icons have been controversial almost since the beginning of the church. Some have said that the Old Testament laws against making images were warnings against idolatry; any image of a deity is therefore prohibited. The influence of Islam in Europe since the 8th century played no small part in the debate, since Muslims traditionally reject the creation of human images. The word 'iconoclast' -- one who rejects the use of icons -- is a word that remains in our vocabulary today, referring to someone who rebels against the practices and beliefs of others.

In order to counter these accusations of idolatry, icon painters make their images according to certain guidelines. These rules -- or 'conventions' -- are meant to remind us that icons are not mere physical representations of whomever is portrayed. At a retreat at Duke Divinity School, Father Edward Rommen of the Holy Transfiguration Orthodox Church taught that these limitations on artististic expression actually provide freedom for the worshipper. For instance, you may notice that the icon's images appear "flat." That is, there is little sense of depth or dimension in the paintings. This goes against the standard conventions of Western art found in the kinds of paintings that you typically see in a museum. That's because since the time of the Renaissance artists have developed a sense of "perspective" -- often through sets of disappearing planes that create an unseen vanishing point somewhere in the painting. (You may have had lessons on drawing in perspective in your elementary school Art classes.) The viewer of one of these "normal" paintings can get the idea that she is the center of the viewing experience.
The Nativity of Christ  from
morningcupofsalvation.wordpress.com

By contrast, icons use a convention known as "reversed perspective." This turns around the typical artistic notions about who or what is in focus. Icons flatten things out by taking the away the classical sense of a perspective. When you pray in front of an icon, it reminds you that you are not the center of the universe. The God represented in the icon does not need your sense of perspective in order to exist. God is the center, not you. Praying with icons is intended to be an exercise in humility.

Worship also provides freedom through limitations. Whether we are singing in church, listening to the scriptures being read, or praying in a small group, real encounters with God remind us of Who is the center. Idols are things that reverse this order and place something else as the focal point of creation, and idolatry leads to bondage. In this sense, icons are the opposite of idols. They challenge us to do battle against the idolatries of the age that try to convince us that the world revolves around something (or someone) else. True worship frees us from living in a way that makes self a god.

Use the images in this post to reflect on the God of the universe. Pray that God would reveal the habitual sins and ways of thinking that have reversed proper perspective in your own life.  Experience the freedom that comes from worshipping God as God and removing yourself from the center of life. While looking at the images, you can pray this simple yet ancient prayer, known as the Jesus prayer:

O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

Saturday, June 14, 2014

Why I am a United Methodist: Connectionalism

2014 North Carolina Annual Conference
delegates meeting at the Greenville Convention Center
There are a lot of reasons why I am a United Methodist. One is that I was born into the denomination: baptized as an infant, and confirmed as a young adult. So of course I resonate with the tradition that formed me spiritually as a young person. These childhood events constantly remind me that God's grace was working in my life well before I had the ability to make any kind of choice about where I should attend church.

But one of the main reasons that I am still a United Methodist, 26 years after becoming a member, is an odd 18th century word that is still used in Methodist traditions: Connectionalism. This week I have been attending the Annual Conference for the North Carolina Conference. Yes, I wrote the word "conference" twice in that sentence. One of the defining features of the United Methodist Church is that the annual meeting of our churches, represented by equal delegate numbers of laity and clergy, is our most fundamental organizing structure. The Annual Conference is when we define our mission for the upcoming year, celebrate what happened since our last meeting, and do the necessary business to prepare us for what God is calling us to. The Conference -- that is, the meeting -- is so important to our church life that it defines our very group identity.

It is while conferencing that United Methodist congregations connect with each other. We are reminded that in the UMC there are not singular churches, operating independently and left on their own. It's not perfect; there are certainly advantages to being a solitary congregation that makes its own decisions and hires its own pastors. (This is known as the Congregational model). But one thing I love about the UMC is that all its churches are connected through its governance systems -- from top to bottom. The bishops oversee all the appointments of our pastors, meaning that congregations need not exert time and money searching for their own leaders. The financial gifts of our churches are pooled and distributed in a coordinated fashion -- from mission and evangelism to disaster relief efforts.

Last year when I attended my first Annual Conference I only knew a few people. This year, after serving as a pastor for a full year, I recognize many more faces. Some people I know from Duke Divinity School. Others I have met at pastor meetings that are held throughout the year. Some delegates are even my neighbors from Oxford who attend another UMC nearby. As I have grown in my pastoral skills this year, I have also become more connected to my brothers and sisters in Christ. These two developments go hand in hand -- it is from others that I learn how to be a better shepherd.

Bishop Will Willimon wrote a book titled Why I Am a United Methodist. Chapter 7 of the book is "Because Religion Is Not a Private Affair." I'm still a United Methodist because the entire structure of the denomination reminds us that we were created to be connected -- joined in covenant to God, and joined in mission with one another. As Trinity Sunday approaches tomorrow, we are reminded that God is also joined together -- three persons in one. God is about bringing together what others would divide. Division is not the work of God. I hope and pray that our United Methodist Church does indeed remain united and connected in its disparate parts long into the lives of my children and grandchildren.

Bishop Hope Morgan Ward presiding over Holy Communion
at the 2014 Annual Conference

Saturday, June 7, 2014

The Importance of (appearing to be) Earnest

In my last post about performance and worship I included a link to the hilarious Contemporvant video about contemporary worship formats. The facial expressions of the song leader help to make the parody work. He is really "feeling it" and wants to make sure that the entire congregation knows it. This kind of public emoting is a pretty common phenomenon in many churches. Monique Ingalls describes the look this way:
I think we can all recognize what I’ve heard referred to as the “worship leader’s grimace”—the signature facial contortion meant to convey sincerity that falls somewhere between excruciating pain and divine ecstasy.
Somewhere between pain and ecstasy...
Image via Cassidy Boatright on Pinterest
I have long wondered how the scrunchy-faced worship leader phenomenon got started. Like anything, it is an action that we learned from someone - an imitation of a practice that has been passed down from somewhere. When did that start, and who started it?

And what is this all-too-earnest-look supposed to communicate to the congregation? I wonder if it is an informal way that worship leaders can show their "credentials." Pastors and priests earn degrees to demonstrate their professional development, but how does a worship leader earn respect for being good at her job? By being more "spiritual" or "into it"? Almost every blog and website on contemporary worship mentions authenticity as the worship leader's most important quality. Is this kind of public display of godly affection the badge of a "real" spiritual leader?


Oh yeah. The keyboard player is really feeling it.
Image from markmoore3bc.com




A Manual for Personal Piety: The Book of Hours

Book of Hours manuscript kept at Harvard University People have always encountered God outside outside of the times and spaces designat...