College Ministry Social Network

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

If you are involved in college ministry and haven’t joined Collective Muse yet, then stop and do so now!

[Go to source]

---

College Ministry & The Ascent Network

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

One of the most important college ministry conferences is happening May 16-19 up in Seattle at The Inn. The Ascent Conference is a gathering of those involved in college ministry, and it has been real influential in shaping college ministry under the leadership of Mike Gaffney and his staff.

Church-based campus ministries gathering for… refreshing, equipping, and vision-casting.

Campus ministry is the adventure of a lifetime, but it’s not easy. Ascent was formed out of a felt need by campus ministers and students to come together around the common goal of sharing Jesus Christ with college students. Ascent is for staff, students, and lay leaders involved in church-based campus ministry.

I will not be up there this weekend, though I really wish I was. Too much going on in my family right now as we are in the midst of huge life transitions vocationally, as well as a huge move to Dallas that awaits us in the next few months. Hopefully you will be going up there, and if you aren’t, I hope you do get the chance to get up there at some point to the conference in the next few years.

I have been asking a couple of questions at our college ministry social networking site Collective Muse, and the blog as well.

1. What is the best thing about working with college students? Or what do you love about college ministry?
2. What is the biggest need in college ministry today?

What do you think?

[Go to source]

---

File This Under: One Reason I Love Working in LA

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

I absolutely love that this is our college ministry administrator’s “other job”…and passion.

Cassie Boyd is amazing to work with, and it’s awesome hearing the things that you usually aren’t privy to in someone’s life outside of church. This is just one of the reasons I have loved working in Los Angeles with those involved in the entertainment industry. Such fun, passion and creativity. Makes going to work everyday really fun.

If you need voice-over work, contact Cassie.

Cassie, I expect some voice-overs on my answering machine at work

[Go to source]

---

The Collapse of Traditional Hierarchical Structures (”The Death of the Alpha Leader”)

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

I have blogged a lot on this site about the collapse of hiearchical structures, especially within the Church, and the rising level of leadership from the bottom. I see this change in structure as a good thing and I saw a couple of good posts over the weekend.

First, Hugh Hewitt has a great piece on his blog that was written by Randy Elrod. Here is just a sample from his post, The Death of the Alpha Leader, but make sure you read the whole thing.

Servant leaders have the ability to provide a new type of leadership. A collaborative mentoring and releasing of people with varied and mystical gifts in order to create culture. Alpha leaders value control, servant leaders value collaboration. Alpha leaders value individualism, servant leaders value community. Alpha leaders value affluence, servant leaders value influence.

After reading his post, what are you initial thoughts? Is this a new concept to you, or are you “on board” for lack of a better term?

Second, Hugh Hewitt links a very fascinating interview in the Wall Street Journal with Clay Shirkey who just authored Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations (which I just started reading–it is a great book). The title of the interview is Wisdom on Crowds: What CEO’s Need to Know About the Social Web. Here is the snippet that Hugh links:

Buzzwatch: Sum up the basic changes you’re talking about.

Mr. Shirky: My five word summary of the book is: Group action just got easier. The thesis is that humans are natively good at doing things in groups. We know how to share, collaborate, converse. So whenever you get a new tool or technology that makes it easier for people to share or collaborate, you’re going to see a lot more of that going on. The Internet–and increasingly, mobile phones–have provided us with a platform of huge new tools and services to do exactly that. So we’re seeing now the first phase of experimentation and people saying, “What can we build on top of these tools?”

Buzzwatch: What does a CEO need to understand about the ways collaboration is changing?

Mr. Shirky: There are two different big things. The first is: Inside your hierarchy is a network. This isn’t about networks replacing hierarchies–we’re still going to have managers and promotions. But particularly for large companies, there’s a lot of value that can be unlocked by letting employees work with one another. There were two research groups at IBM separated by the Atlantic Ocean–one in Armonk and one in the U.K. They were working on the same problem, but of course they didn’t know that. They employed a tool IBM built called Dogear, a tagging tool. These two groups discovered–without any managerial oversight–that they were working on the same problem. They said, “Why don’t we get together and collaborate?” That’s the kind of enterprise value that can’t be driven by the manager. In any complicated field, the people you’re managing know more about the problem than you do. This is a way of getting at that value.

The outside message is: Your customers, who have previously been relatively separated from one another, with their principal connection to you, may start becoming your competitors or your collaborators. CEOs need to be in the position of understanding what might happen and then try to work out strategies for the threats and for the opportunities.

I think the last part is very telling in the context of the Church. Before, laypeople usually had to go through the hierarchy of the Church structure to get things done, approved, ask permission, etc. This doesn’t need to happen anymore.

Example: Students can come to me with some ideas, which then I need to sometimes get approval through a committee, etc. That can take days, even weeks. Or they can go online and use one of the many tools (in this case, usually Facebook) and take care of it that same day by harnessing a large number of other students, and then begin collaborating. All without needing to coming to me, and often without me knowing.

I think this is a good thing. I think what we will see is not a disappearance of authority (because I think most of us would agree that authority is important to any structure at some level), but rather a disappearance of the hierarchical structure or organizational chart that is commonplace.

And in fact, let me say this:

I find it to be true that the more power and authority one gives away, the more authority, respect and power they will have (hmmmm…I guess Jesus knew what he was doing when it came to his style of leadership).

So the more we collapse some of these structures, and begin to give our power and authority away, then will I think we will really see a collaborative work in the body of Christ like is described in 1 Corinthians 12, Romans 12, or at the end of Acts 2.

What are some ways that you have been able to create a more collaborative environment in your workplace or church? Can you give some examples that have worked? And what were some of the failures? Successes? Fears?

[Go to source]

---

Twitter: News Before It Becomes News

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

A little over a week ago I was having coffee and talking technology and ministry with Cynthia Ware of The Digital Sanctuary. And she told me a story about some friends of hers and how they had received information from Twitter regarding some events that later became the news.

Basically, because of the posts on Twitter, these people had firsthand accounts of news before it hit the major news stations. She talked a little then about how Twitter or even some tool like that (who knows what the future holds) would basically produce/create people who were journalists on the ground and would be able to convey news stories before the major outlets got a hold of it (Cynthia, if my details are off on our conversation, let me know).

So it’s not really a surprise then that I found out about the China earthquake this morning from Andrew Jones on Twitter. I read, “reading about twitter and china earthquake”, and then quickly turned on the news.

When I get online in the morning Twitter is the first site I check in with and it often delivers news to me that I had not known, or that would become important for that day. My Twitter network is more valuable to me then turning on some major news outlet. With that diverse group I know I will get the stories, news and updates that are important to me.

How many of you check Twitter first thing when you go online for the day? If not, what is it?

Check out Andrew Jones’ post China earthquake, where he links to this fascinating story about Twitter and the China earthquake:

China Quake–Twitter Comes of Age as THE Breaking News Tool

Fascinating reading…I think. Especially when I think about Twitter and it’s use in ministry. Very powerful tool. I will posting next week about Twitter and college ministry.

And though Twitter is an awesome tool, let’s be praying for all those affected by the quake itself.

[Go to source]

---

Unrealistic Expectations?

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

My co-worker RO Smith and I have been talking a lot recently about expectations in the Church.

RO has been concerned with what are some unrealistic expectations placed upon pastors which he wrote about in the post, We Are All Pastors.

After reading the post and talking with him more about the topic I have become concerned with what I think are sometimes unrealistic expectations of those employed in the Church (i.e. pastors, directors, etc.), upon the rest of the congregation.

As a pastor, director, church employee or whatever, it is basically our job to do things in service of Church (really in service of Jesus Christ, but we know how that can become clouded). Without diving into debates over what that “service” means, and what a vocational position in the Church entails, or whether or not we should even be called “professionals” (John Piper deals with this topic extensively in Brothers, We Are Not Professionals: A Plea to Pastors for Radical Ministry).

The reality is this: In ministry we have very flexible schedules, and can cater our schedule however we want to make meetings, meet with people, plan events, make time for events, etc, etc. But I’m starting to wonder about whether or not we take the average church attender into consideration when we plan things or expect them to serve with the same passion, effort and time that we do on an event.

Example: My full-time job is as college director at Bel Air Presbyterian Church. My vocation revolves around thinking about that ministry. But a college student in the ministry for example (and this may be a bad example since college students tend to have the most leisure time of any when you compare them amongst other demographics) has school, work, homework, family, friends, etc. Their schedule does not revolve around the college ministry, and yet sometimes I have expectations of them that it should. We as pastors and directors don’t fully think about the family with two income parents, driving across town in traffic running errands, shuttling kids, and all the demands that revolve around that family. And yet we have expectations of how much time they should volunteer, and how many events they should be at.

So the expectations head in both directions–clergy to congregation, and congregation to clergy–and it seems to create a vicious cycle of stress, burnout and an overprogrammed church and ministries.

So please read RO’s post Stress and the Unrealistic Expectations of the Church at our collaborative youth ministry site (though I have not collaborated to the site very much lately).

After reading RO’s post, I’m looking even more forward to Anne Jackson’s upcoming book, Mad Church Disease: The Church-Wide Burnout Epidemic.

[Go to source]

---

Showing Skin Continued…

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

I just want to acknowledge that there were and are many angles that I could have gone yesterday in my post Showing Skin at Church.

I knew this going into the post, writing the post, and at the conclusion. And it was even more evident when I received lots of feedback from a lot of you, most of it not in the comment section, but via email, Facebook chat, etc. All good thoughts.

I could have addressed the issue of men more, and the responsibility they have in this issue.

I could have gone deeper on the issue of why modesty is important.

I could have talked about the disposition of our hearts, and how that can be a guide to what modesty looks like in our lives.

I could have tried to offer guidelines. That gets messy quickly.

I could have talked about the nuances of dress, and how what might be modest in some cultures, is or isn’t in others.

So you see…lots of angles, lots of positions…lots of places to go.

And though none of my commenters or friends talked to me about this, I do want to be clear about something: This is not just an issue that we are to put on women, or blame them. That would be like Adam blaming Eve for eating the apple, taking no responsibility for himself. There is a vicious cycle at work here, and I think we all contribute to it to some degree. So the best thing we can do is to come together as communities and be open and honest about it, and the struggles that proceed. And we can be of encouragement to each other.

My friend Wess has a great post where he delves deeper into the heart of the issue: On Immodesty: Too Much Skin (At Church and Elsewhere)?

Also, I’m sure Anne Jackson could have taken her post in many different directions as well, but was speaking out of her heart based on certain circumstances, etc. She continues to raise great questions in her writings.

When we think of the issue of modesty, or showing skin, in church or elsewhere….What are some angles or points of discussion that you would like to see raised?

As a woman, do you feel like the Church blames you, or puts the focus on you most of the time for this issue?

Or what questions do you have in your mind that you would like to see answered or at least wrestled with? One friend was asking me if there are appropriate times, places and contexts for women to dress sexy? So you see, there are a million rabbit trails we can go down, and I’m no expert. So let me hear from all of you.

[Go to source]

---

Showing Skin at Church

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

I don’t know if this is an issue (too much skin) at your church, but it definitely is one at ours. I can’t tell you how many conversations there have been about this topic. Doesn’t matter how many times our pastor has talked about dress and modesty, it only seems to get worse.

And I don’t want to pick on women here, it’s just that men don’t usually show skin because women aren’t usually visually stimulated the same way men are.

But it’s definitely an issue and I’ve become more and more shocked by what young women are wearing, not only in church, but when I step out the door and head into public. I’ve thought on this issue before, but now that I have a baby daughter I’m thinking more about the issue of modesty and what my wife and I want to teach her as she grows up.

No matter what we as parents do I know there will always be that cultural peer pressure on my daughter to do something different. But in the midst of that pressure I hope that we can convey the message of the importance of modesty, and that showing skin is not what she should value or want approval from others for. Doesn’t get easier for parents when teen stars provide much of the cultural peer pressure (i.e. Hannah Montana).

And I know this is a difficult issue for men. A little skin on a woman can send a man’s thought process hurling into outer space and in a direction farthest from purity. So on the one hand a man might get excited and tempted by it, but it’s also the same thing that can destroy him or make him make decisions that he would otherwise not make. That’s power.

It’s a vicious cycle. Women are admired in our culture for their sexuality, but we as Christians are also trying to send a different message that doesn’t usually succeed.

I don’t know where we head on this issue in Church. But maybe it needs to be an open conversation between men and women where we can encourage each other to strive for lives of more modesty, rather than just blaming each other.

How powerful is “skin.” So powerful that I decided a couple of weeks ago that I needed to sign up for online accountability with Covenant Eyes. What does that mean? It means for $7 a month all of my online behavior is monitored and flagged where necessary. And then each week my wife, my brother, and two of my best friends get a report of what I was looking at during my online time during the week. I spend a lot of time on the internet, and I’m smart enough to know the power of sexuality, skin, porn and more online. It doesn’t matter that I’m a father, husband, friend or pastor. We are all susceptible to its temptations. I’ve heard people complain about paying for online monitoring, but come on…are you kidding me? This type of accountability is worth what it would cost two lattes at Starbucks.

I want to leave you with this latest post from Anne Jackson, my thoughts on boobies. Definitely a catching and controversial title. Anne is a pastor at LifeChurch.tv, and is the author of the book Mad Church Disease: The Church-Wide Burnout Epidemic. Check out her post at Relevant Magazine, Dirty Girls, The New Porn Addicts, as she talks about her struggle with pornography and the effects of it on her relationship.

Here is her entire post:

my thoughts on boobies
Written by Anne Jackson on May 7, 2008 – 12:32 pm

did you know?

–there is a female feature we call breasts. they can also be referred to as “boobies,” or “the twins,” or “the rack,” or “jugs,” so on, so forth.

–most men find this particular feature interesting. tempting. and amazing.

–upon catching a glimpse of said feature (regardless of how much is actually exposed), it is likely for a man’s mind to go to places it shouldn’t.

–with above knowledge, women, you now are educated and have no excuse.

–PLEASE USE WISDOM WHEN YOU DRESS YOURSELF.

aside: call me a prude. call me whatever. i don’t really care. and as much as this may seem like “casting judgment” (said in a very, scary, echo-y loud voice) on members of the female gender, please get a freaking clue.

i was doing some bloggy-clicking-around during my lunch and it amazes me how many “nice christian girls” (some who are even in church leadership - gasp!) show quite a bit of skin. in the office, at church parties, whatever (oh, and then post them ALL OVER THE INTERNET!)

please forgive me if it seems i have something stuck, as they say, where the sun don’t shine.

I DO.

it’s called modesty.

and if you are supposed to be living examples of godly women…you should too!

that is all.

sermon over.

please, carry on.

[Go to source]

---

Emerging Church: 5 Books–Reviews, Thoughts, Critiques…

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

Thanks to Andrew Jones for linking this post, Dr Reg Codrington on the Emerging Church, at his blog.

The great thing about the internet is the ability to hear voices from all over the world which is a must needed remedy for us to step outside our American lens theologically.

The Emerging Church is always a hot topic so I appreciate Dr. Reg Codrington’s synthesis of some various books and critiques out there on the topic.

Thoughts on the Emerging Church, by Dr Reg Codrington

Here’s a sample:

I have spent the past several months reading various works by writers from the Emerging Church Movement. These have included Brian McLaren’s “A Generous Orthodoxy”, Leonard Sweet’s “Carpe Manana” (which I am re-reading for the 2nd time), McLaren’s “The last word and the word after that”, Reggie McNeal’s, “The Present Future”, and Shane Claiborne’s mind-blowing book, “The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an ordinary radical”. I have also surfed the Web and been the recipient of several “blogs” and related emails on the subject.

With certain reservations, I enjoyed “A Generous Orthodoxy”, since I believe it raised some important issues about failures in the contemporary evangelical church, even though McLaren tended to slide over a number of issues I could have wished he had dealt with in more detail. He also introduced what I see as side-issues which diminished the effect of his bigger questions.

“Carpe Manana” needs a second read, but I found it fascinating, with Sweet putting his finger on problem areas in the modern church with unerring skill. He was forthright, yet gracious, and I found the entire book challenging and helpful.

McLaren’s “The last word” was troubling and unsatisfying. He left me with the impression that he was tackling an area which has many unanswered questions for the Bible-believing Christian (hell and eternal punishment) only to leave us with a different set of unanswered questions and a stance on penal substitution and universalism which I personally find unacceptable and unbiblical.

McNeal’s “The Present Future”, by contrast, put a finger on crucial issues which the church needs to confront, without introducing the kind of red herrings which McLaren did.

My favourite book of the decade was Claiborne’s challenging “Irresistible Revolution”, which put in writing a summary of all that has been occupying my mind and study time over the past few years. This is a must read!

It was against the background of all these books that I read Don Carson’s book, “Becoming conversant with the Emerging Church”. Having read with appreciation some of his other writings, I expected this scholar to approach the subject in a balanced and unbiased way. I was deeply disappointed!

[Go to source]

---

What does it mean to be a pastor?

Rhett
12-31-1969 07:00 pm

My co-worker RO Smith posted some great stuff on our blog Collection of Crumbs last night.

We Are All Pastors

Here is some of what he says:

Without getting into detail, there have been some issues at our church. I know all churches have issues, so that is nothing new. But the issues occurring at our church have got me thinking about what we value in being ministered to by others, in particular those with the title of “pastor”. It seems that there has been a disconnect in the pastors and the rest of the staff when it comes to being ministered to. Now, please know that I am not letting the pastors off the hook, or saying anything about their leadership style; I am going for something deeper…

I guess what the entire situation has got me thinking about is this: Why do we put so much onus and credence in what the person with the title of “pastor” does or doesn’t do? And how do we get people to see that we are all “pastors”?

It seems that all of us in church ministry want to be ministered to and be acknowledged by our pastors. In looking at these passages, I can not help but ask the question: Why? Why does it matter what those with the title of pastor think? What does it matter if they do not minister to us? What does it matter if they barely even know who we are? (Speaking from a mega-church perspective) More importantly, is it fair to them to have the these expectations placed on them?

Thoughts?

[Go to source]

---