Life Lessons Learned From TV

My wife loves “So You Think You Can Dance.”

I (by contrast) hate it.

Yet, while feeding the baby or folding laundry, I am subjected to an unconscionable amount of this show. I really don’t mind that much – sometimes I get into it. But the most interesting thing about the show is the critiquing of the judges. I know, I know. You were thinking it was the dancing that fascinates the nerd within. Sorry to disappoint… 

We were watching last week and the judges said some things that really interested me as someone who deals with people’s perception of right and wrong on a regular basis. Channing Cooke with Phillip Attmore had just finished a jive routine that seemed to be done well. It’s early in the program so the judging tends to be a little softer at this point. I perked up at Mary Murphy’s comments. She was impressed but pointed out that the couple’s leg movements were not up to par. Now, this is the part that caught my attention: she attributed their lack of sharpness to laziness. There’s something significant about that. Mary attributed their deficiencies to a personal lack of internal moral motivation. Nigel Lythgoe went next. He commented on the same lack of sharpness, but attributed it to the couple not quite being in shape for the dance style. In essence, he said their tiredness resulted in the lack of sharpness - a much softer critique attributed to external factors, not their personal integrity.

As a minister, I began to reflect on how such a simple change in perspective can make criticism harsh or constructive. The church walks a fine line in this regard. We deal with issues of the heart but have to be careful not to make a difficult situation look hopeless. If I was physically incapable of performing a task and was told that my failures were intrinsic/moral, I would feel crushed under that assumption. And that’s all it is – an assumption. We don’t have access to the motivations of others. We merely have the outward manifestation of those intentions. Often times, bad intentions are easy to spot based on the actions that follow. But there’s plenty of gray area where intentions are hidden. Some people automatically chalk up the suspect behavior of others to time-honored doctrinal catch phrases like “Original Sin” or assume that failure is always preventable. When tarred with the moral brush, that will always be assumed. But sometimes people are just weak and scatter-brained and frail. Grace gives the benefit of the doubt in those situations. “Bad” does not always equal “weak.” After all, Jesus gave rest for the “heavy laden,” not the morally corrupt.

That’s why I liked Nigel’s critique better. When you’re a world-class dancer (or anything else for that matter) it’s easy to moralize/spiritualize the amount of work required to be the best in a given field. It helps us tolerate the extreme conditions in which that expertise is developed to the detriment of other areas of our well-being. Mary, at least at this moment, seemed to be trapped inside that paradigm. Nigel transcended above it. He gave grace by attributing that weakness to joints, ligaments, and muscles – something to be strengthened – rather than to inherent laziness – something to be ashamed of. Preachers know that both of these can motivate. But which one preserves the dignity of others? As Christians continue to confront sin, we need to spend less time making sure we call “a spade a spade” and more time concerned with making sure we never call something a spade when it’s really just a heart or a club. Guilt can motivate – there’s no doubt about that. But grace preserves and strengthens. I’ll go with Nigel’s approach anytime.

Come Join the Revolution!

I have a unique opportunity to share with you during the upcoming Advent season…

A few years ago, TFUMC (as part of the Advent Conspiracy movement) launched something called Advent Revolution. We asked our congregation to spend $50 less  on Christmas gifts per person and give that money to an international cause. We chose World Help - an organization that helps fight poverty, disease, and lack of education in over 40 countries. We have raised roughly $25,000 each year to build homes for orphans and families affected by the Rwandan genocide. It’s been one of the most rewarding events our church has ever undertaken. Along with our yearly Advent Revolution ministry, we have sent groups of missionaries to help build the homes and minister to the locals on a personal level.

The most rewarding part of the process is the personal connections we’ve made with the people of Rwanda. We’re no longer giving money to an idea or concept or even images on a brochure cover. We’re now giving to people with names and faces who know us as well. For example, recently a church member gave money to help a former prostitute named Diana finish her university education. Since Diana’s personal conversion, she has also led several women out of that same bondage. Our team met Diana on our last mission trip and heard her testimony of receiving Christ. She brought a friend with her that day and the team prayed with him to receive Christ as well.

We’ve managed to cause a stir in the process.  The United Methodist periodical The Interpreter is featuring Advent Revolution in this month’s issue. We’re excited about the exposure the ministry will gain – but more importantly, we hope other church (Methodist and otherwise) will join in. Visit our website www.adventrevolution.com for more details on the movement and how it’s impacted our church in such a significant way.

An Eastern Family in a Western World

The Bible is an Eastern book. It has Eastern culture, economics, social stigmas, literary style, etc., at its core. I believe that without this contextual “lens,” the ultimate meaning of the Bible at best is less impacting than in Jesus’ time.

However, some aspects of the Bible’s Eastern flavor seem to find their way into our lives without searching for it. Two of them are 1) the Eastern understanding of family roles and 2) the Oriental emphasis on shame and honor. It’s significant to me that there are technically two types of “shame” in Eastern societies. One is negative and the other is positive. The negative one condemns inappropriate behavior and the positive one helps individuals “save face” when confronted with a difficult situation. For example, with the persistent friend in Luke 11:5-8, Westerners assume that the friend banging on the door late at night has commited a cultural taboo. But actually, it’s the man who refuses to open the door and provide food for a town visitor that would have infuriated Jesus’ listeners. He violated basic Oriental cultural standards of hospitality.

Though these Eastern ideas don’t make it into our Bible interpretation very often (which means we usually miss the intended point), the Christian family can easily adopt these Eastern cultural norms for their own simply by reading the Bible together. My family did. We were different than other families I knew just based on emphasis of lifestyle. Though it certainly had to do with our Christianity, it also stemmed from living like an Eastern family in a Western world. Just by studying scripture, my brother and I absorbed Eastern understandings of right and wrong. We valued time, honor, authority, family rank, and so on without really understanding that the cultural emphasis for these concepts came straight outta scripture (not Compton). When I went out with friends or on a date at age 16, I fully understood that my family’s name and honor were on the line with each decision I made. I understood “losing face” without knowing what to call it. That was a greater deterrent than any punishment that may have followed an infraction. My other friends often saw themselves as individuals apart from their families – doing their own thing. I saw myself as part of a larger picture. Honestly, it made my decisions look weird to my friends.

Sometimes, those same cultural understandings, though appropriate for a family unit with children, become burdensome later in life if parents still enforce them on their adult children. But that doesn’t invalidate their usefulness during the parenting years. In fact, they may be vital to helping a child understand the impact his/her decisions have on others. Some of those “Eastern” family practices are still used with my two daughters now. Others aren’t. But I know this much: families with an Eastern understanding of honor are aware of one another. They respect each other more. And that makes them treat one another better, something all families could use a little more of.

The Best Decision a Methodist Pastor Can Make…

Several weeks ago, I heard about a Methodist pastor who did something radical this past year. Those of us who are not  involved in a plant or an overly contemporary Methodist church work through a number of committees and groups who help foster the growth of our congregations. For the record, I don’t think this is a bad idea. I welcome accountability and input from those I am attempting to serve. At the same time, interaction with these committees can be precarious at best. Ministers must balance progressive ideas with the amount of change they believe a congregation is willing to undertake. Every church has a saturation point. Depending on the circumstances, sometimes that’s not very much. I’m blessed in that our congregation is open to innovative ways of church growth and has done a great job of balancing a vision for the present and future.

Anyway, back to this Methodist pastor. He did something amazing. He put a 35-year-old woman with three children as chairperson of the administrative board at his church. Female. Mid-thirties. Children everywhere. Family-oriented. So, why is this such a big deal? For two reasons, really. First, who is typically in that position in traditional Methodist churches? Male. Mid-forties and fifties. Empty nester. Business-oriented. After all, he can run a business – certainly he can run a church, right? And because of this, many of the programs and mentalities that receive attention by the administrative arm of the church are the ones that meet the needs of that demographic. There’s nothing wrong with that, of course…unless that’s the only ”type” of leader to ever be appointed to that position. This pastor broke rank. He appointed a homemaker. What type of programming do you think receives attention/vision from the chairperson of their administrative board? Children’s ministries. Relationally-oriented programming like small groups. Gender-based accountability groups. Marriage enrichment programs. In other words, the areas most often experiencing atrophy in traditional church environments.

Second, their change of personnel and subsequent programming direction speaks to a truth often lost in contemporary leadership discussions. People, not systems, lead the church. Now, I love systems. I love efficiency and forward-thinking models that anticipate church growth and beat it to the punch.  But in every fast growing, progressive, innovative ministry environment, there is always a charismatic, personable visionary who drives that ministry forward. You can copy Northpoint Community Church…but you need Andy Stanley to do that. Like Mars Hill’s model? Go find a Rob Bell. Like Cornerstone in Simi Valley? You need Francis Chan for that model. All of those churches exist because those leaders were there first. Leadership is not a program or a system - it’s a person. And that’s a common mistake – investing in the system rather than in the leadership utilizing that system. Systems merely complement a well-established vision carried out by someone who is relentless in conveying it. That Methodist pastor changed the game…not when he changed systems…but when he changed leaders. And their church culture is being re-made in the process.

Is this type of change the best decision a Methodist minister can make? Maybe not. But I thought it was nothing short of genius.

Seeing Ministry Through a Child’s Eyes

About five years ago, I got a call from a mother who was in the throes of a battle with her seven year old. The problem? Her son wanted a pair of green and orange shoes for the new school year. Mom was much more interested in buying some respectable (and cheaper) white and navy sneakers – the kind you’d expect to be mother “approved.” So, she called me asking me what I thought she should do. I asked some leading questions: do they provide support for his feet? Are they structurally inferior? They were only ten dollars more expensive (and within budget). Then, I asked her the question that really mattered: why didn’t she like the green and orange shoes?

“Because they are ugly and embarrassing.”

“Ugly and embarrassing for whom?” I asked.

And that’s when the conversation went in another direction. Eventually, this concerned mother saw that her shoe preference had little to do with the happiness or protection of her seven year old son. It had to do with her.

Of course, I thought about the larger context of this conversation in regards to children’s ministry. I wear several hats at my job. One is the minister to families. That includes creating a healthy environment for everyone - from marriage enrichment to casting a vision for children’s ministry. Most often ministers, when making renovations to children’s ministry areas, look at the responses of the adults and volunteers when pitching ideas. In fact, as we were planning for our own recently completely renovations, we visited different churches. And sure enough, we focused on the comments and concerns of the adults. But about halfway through the field trips, I began to completely ignore the parents and staff members. I began to look at the children’s faces – their responses, smiles, singing, and dancing. I also paid attention to their looks of boredom and (for some) downright torture. And those images became my ministry goal for our church renovations.

Months later, as we unveiled our new ministry areas, I stood back and watched the children’s faces as they walked in for the first time. Many smiled. Others were not impressed. So, we added more. More smiles. And after a few more over-the-top items, every child began smiling. That’s when I knew we were heading in the right direction. Do I like everything about the design and curriculum choices? No. They are much more “green and orange” than “white and navy.”  But I’m not the focus. The children are. And they think it’s great. Adults forget this. I see volunteers and staff beam with pride after a children’s production while the younger participants behind them would rather stick a fork in their eye than be there. They are telling us something…but we’re not listening.

Children’s ministry is very important in church life. Happily involved children bring their happily involved parents. But sometimes, ministers forget the most important aspect of children’s ministry: follow the children’s lead. If we are looking and listening, they rarely lead us astray in meeting their spiritual needs.

Aggressively Pursuing a Life of Peace

We have some life mottos around our house that guide our life decisions. Often times, these mottos aren’t always obvious to everyone. They hold a higher value on spiritual things than material things. They place more importance on relational harmony than personal gain. It also keeps us from bowing to the peer pressure that young couples face, like trying to “keep up with the Joneses.”

The first and probably most important motto comes from the verse “Seek peace and pursue it” (Psalm 34:14, 1 Peter 3:11). Romans 12:18 relays a similar idea: “Do all that you can to live at peace with all men.” We call it aggressive peace. Beth and I make decisions around the idea that in every situation, there is a peaceful and overall beneficial decision that keeps balance among our family members. If at all possible, we choose that “peaceful” solution. That’s how we make vacation plans, buy new appliances, choose schools, choose television shows or movies, etc. You get the idea. If there is a choice that leads to unrest, strife, anger, impatience, and irritation, we usually opt for something else.

Now that may sound obvious to you. But there’s a subtle difference. We don’t wait for peaceful decisions to come to us. We make peace happen for our children and for each other. We’re aggressive about pursuing peace. We fight for it. We plan for it. We do whatever it takes to maintain it. A lot of people have financial goals or material goals – and we do as well. But all of that comes from our overall peace goal. What lies behind “peace” for us? Questions like, “Which choice promotes the most security for our children?” “Which choice creates ease of life and rest for our retirement?” “How can we peacefully discipline our children?” And most importantly, “Which choice honors God and draws us to him, not away from him?”

But not only do we not wait for these options for peace to come our way. We take it a step further: we “agressively pursue” them. Beth and I discuss questions like, “What makes for a peaceful marriage?” or “What brings peace to our children?” or “What does financial peace look like?” Then we take agressive measures to implement those details into our lives. For example, with finances, we list a second round of details. Financial peace means ultimately means no financial stress: little debt, no collections calls, solid retirement plans, college saving for children now rather than later, choosing economical and sensible cars and houses, and not living paycheck to paycheck if possible. Then we aggressively make those our goals.

I guess pursuing peace as a lifestyle can only be done by someone who believes they have the ability to make their life what they want. I believe all of us can do that. But it takes a lot of thought and premeditation. And often times our decisions are not the most conventional choice. We’re not experts at this and sometimes lose our focus. And plans can certainly change. But the key is to at least have some plan in place and be willing to adjust it accordingly when life throws a curve ball. Personally, living a life of peace is a way to honor God with what he’s given us – a way to proactively reflect his image in us. Taking the initiative to make life good is not anti-Christian at all. It actually reflects the productive nature of God and his willingness to be involved in every aspect of our life. In the end, life truly is what you make of it. Our goal is to make a life of peace for each other and for our children.

Reconciling Faith and Science: A History Lesson, Part 1

I went to see G.I. Joe two weeks ago. It was absolutely horrible. But one quote in the movie piqued my interest.  A supposedly really smart and highly educated soldier (played by Sienna Miller) said to another soldier “Emotions are not based in science, and if you can’t quantify or prove something exists…well, in my mind it doesn’t.” That quote is a great example of the popular understanding of why faith and science are incompatible to many people. I started this series of posts talking about the “humanness” of science. For some readers, that may have made you uncomfortable. Science should be as absolute as it was for the soldier in that movie. The reason we have this idea is from the historical event called the Enlightenment, a cultural paradigm called Positivism and their modern love child: something called naturalism.

Listen to a quote from Jim Collins’ book Good to Great. Collins describes the Enlightenment in one paragraph: “…the ‘God is the answer to everything’ perspective…held back our scientific understanding of the physical world in the Dark Ages…But with the Enlightenment, we began to search for a more scientific understanding – physics, chemistry, biology, and so forth. Not that we became atheists, but we gained a deeper understanding about how the universe works.”  Everything is so simple and neat isn’t it?  We’re not talking about a science book – it’s a business/management book for crying out loud!  But it’s not at all. What Collins gives us is actually naturalism’s triumphal take on the Enlightenment. God took a backseat once science explained things. Unfortunately, this ”Cliff’s Notes” view of history is the norm for many folks. So, let me unpack this idea for you so you won’t be enslaved by it.

So, how did the Enlightenment happen? Well, it wasn’t an overnight change like it’s often presented. The Enlightenment spans from the 1600s all the way into the 1800s. It was a slow gradual shift in perspective.  For me, the beginning of Enlightment thought started with Rene Descartes. He was a philosopher in the 1600s who came up with a unique way to view the world. Assimilating the discoveries of the Scientific Revolution (Copernicus, Kepler, etc.), he described a perspective in a way that would permeate science, religion, philosophy and politics to this day. The name is Cartesian Dualism: it’s the belief that the world can be artificially divided into two parts – the natural and those things above nature. The physical and the metaphysical. The term “supernatural” didn’t exist until the Enlightenment. Up until then, spiritual answers were acceptable to explain natural phenomena on earth. But Descartes came from the opposite direction. He said that we must approach everything with the assumption that nothing is proven until empirical evidence makes it so.

What’s funny about all of this is that Descartes, a religious person, was actually attempting to “save” God and religion from the onslaught of criticism that began when scientific discoveries began to “prove” the church wrong. Now, there was certainly nothing wrong with challenging the authority of the church…but people began to doubt the importance of religion, too. So, Descartes was attempting to remove God from the natural realm in hopes that critics would leave religion alone since God’s value was beyond empiricism’s grasp. But what this did on a popular level was create an “either/or” approach to our world. Feeling the unncessary need to prioritize different values, the second generation of Enlightenment thinkers pushed God out of the frame completely choosing to value what could be scientifically tested: the natural world order.

Rather than find solace and meaning in religion, something else took precedence in the 1800s: Positivism. Positivism is just a fancy word for choosing to believe that legitimate forms of knowledge are only gained through sense experience. But during that time, Positivism carried other cultural and intellectual connotations. Intellectuals and the general public fully believed that scientific progress was the key to the future. After all, they saw technological inventions and scientific discoveries left and right that confirmed this idea. God was no longer meeting society’s needs; science was. Progress became marked by a culture’s willingness to throw off the chains of religion (often relegated to ”superstition” by Enlightenment thinkers) and embrace the triumphs of science. Everything is supported by natural laws. If humans can learn those laws and utilize them in the lab and in mathematics, we can make a better world for ourselves.

We’ll pick up our history lesson next post…

“Change We Can Believe In,” Part 3

As usual, God offers us an alternative. Self-esteem is derived from something deeper: God-esteem. I am convinced that deep down, what we think about ourselves is directly related to what we believe God thinks about us. Behind each of our motives lies a deeper truth: the core of our being is directly tied to how we view God. If you believe God thinks little of you, then you’ll think little of yourself. If you wake up every morning to a God who plans to bully you through adverse circumstances all day to teach you some patience, then your day isn’t going to go very well. If you believe God tolerates you, then you will merely tolerate others. But if you believe God is gracious and kind…if you believe that God not only loves you, but that God likes you, you will esteem yourself differently. Honestly, 99% of events in a day have little effect on your life. Yet, we swing back and forth, acting like insignificant issues are life-changing. There are only two reasons for this: 1) we’re bored or 2) we have nothing more permanent to base our outlook on.

God-esteem places full confidence in the permanent character of God. For me, this is based solely on the unyielding love of a God who wants my affection and devotion. His love for me is unconditionally the same at all times in life. Churches have heard about the love of God so much that they fail to realize what it entails. The key to understanding the love of God is to understand that it’s unconditional. Before I understood what unconditional love meant, I had assumed that God’s love was like that of a parent or friend – it rose and fell based on my performance for him. When I say that I mean I believed that although God “loved” me the majority of the time, I felt like God rarely approved of my walk with him. His love, acceptance, and approval was conditional – based on the circumstances of my behavior.

Unconditional love is love that isn’t swayed by performance. And though I knew that there was nothing I could do to make God love me less, I had missed the other side of unconditionality. There was nothing I could do to make God love me more. So, all my attempts to get God’s attention were not increasing his delight in me. I was not winning him over with my scripture memory or my praise and having my radio preset to K-Love. He was winning me over with his unconquerable, unstoppable, undaunted love for me. I was the center of God’s full, intense, and romantic affection. And I was not getting his attention – he was stalking me with an undying level of infatuation that never ends. And there was nothing I could do to change that – all I had to do was lay back into his love and rest there my whole life.

Love without conditions. Without reservations. Without qualifications. Though others may see me as a failure, in God’s eyes, I never am. So my outlook on life never changes – and my view of myself reflects that permanence of God’s unconditional love. My self-esteem is really God-esteem. How does God esteem me? He loves me. And there’s nothing anyone can do about it! That’s the ultimate “happening” in life…a truth that lives above the ups and downs of life’s circumstances. God-esteem keeps us stable in times of change – it’s the only permanent thing on the planet. And that’s the root of lasting joy and fulfillment. When you can stake your life on the reality of Zephaniah 3:17: that God takes “delight in you with gladness/With his love he will calm all your fears/He will rejoice over you with joyful songs,” then you have something that gives you permanent joy. That’s what God thinks about me. That’s what God thinks about you.

Our scripture this morning reflects this truth. How do we know that God loves us unconditionally? We find the answer in Jesus. Jesus is God explaining himself to the world…inviting us into his forgiveness and grace. “God became flesh and dwelt among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. For the law was given through Moses, but God’s unfailing love and faithfulness came through Jesus Christ. Jesus, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.” We were created to connect with God in such a way that the changes of life seem trivial when we’re basking in the glow of God’s unconditional love.

Coping with change involves resting in the truth that something more permanent lies beyond the changes we see in life. Circumstances come and go, but at no point do we cease to be the sole focus of God’s intense unfailing, unconditional, eternal love. That’s a reality that doesn’t happen overnight for most people. You may feel you are undeserving of that type of love. I have good news: you’re in good company. No one deserves it. That’s the point. Yet, we gladly receive it. And as we learn to live our lives in that awesome truth, our dependence on the accolades of others, the tyranny of the workplace, and the desire for material things are seen for the second-rate things they are. Nothing compares to the unconquerable love of God. It’s waiting for you this morning.

“Change We Can Believe In,” Part 2

My question this morning is: how do we find worth in something greater than our circumstances? How can we live with a sense that we are a part of something greater than our individual agendas? Our culture doesn’t teach us that. Our culture teaches us to be self-occupied and egotistical – completely consumed with our circumstances. It’s the disease of our nation. And we thrive on it. I know a lot of people who aren’t happy. Or at least they aren’t happy for long. Most people ride a roller coaster of reactions to what happens to them in any given day. In America, this is compounded by our affluence. We really don’t know what real suffering is! When asked about work, we complain, “Oh today was horrible!” When asked why, we mention things like, “I couldn’t finish my Excel spreadsheet because my email inbox was overflowing and my Blackberry just wouldn’t stop ringing!” or “It took forever to get my special order latte this morning, someone just had to get in a car accident and that put me behind schedule all day!” Obviously, I’m being facetious, but we have to admit we generally only have “small” problems.

If I remember correctly, the etymology of the word “happiness” comes from “happenings” – events in life that produce a specific emotion. In other words, the emotions of “happy” people rise and fall according to what “happens” to them. We live lives of reaction. If, of course, you have to perfect life, then you’ll always be happy. But remember, we’re the same people that complain if our dry cleaning isn’t ready for pickup. Our lives suffer at the hand of our circumstances. Our treatment of others, our attitudes, and personal worth rises and falls on the praises or criticisms of acquaintances and co-workers – people that really have little bearing on who we truly are. Yet, we let the actions of others and the “grind” of life mold us into people we don’t want to be.

I like history a lot, so I like to study how we came to believe in the ideologies we value as a nation today. One of the more fascinating ones to date is the idea of “self-esteem.” Now, when I say self-esteem, I mean the general ability to evaluate ourselves and have that self-image affect our behaviors and moods. We live in a culture that values the idea of a healthy self-esteem, and rightfully so. We spend a tremendous amount of time securing the self-worth of children in our educational systems, our governmental programs, and through non-profit organizations.

So, where do people go when looking for worth? Well, since the rise of the Human Potential Movement in the 60s, we most often seek healthy self-esteem in our value as human beings. By developing our potential as humans, we can achieve the quality of life that we desire. We can be fulfilled and content and…well…happy. And though psychologists go into more complex forms of self-image, this is the idea that drives the popular movement towards happiness. In other words, this is the “Dr. Phil” version. So, we grow up with the idea that we should think well of ourselves and recognize our merit as individuals with valid hopes and dreams. Everything we need to live a happy and fulfilled life is already present in us.

But after 40 years, we’re beginning to see the reality of that paradigm. In 2004, the American Psychological Association put out a report that challenged that idea. After surveying 600 people from the ages of 50 to 90, they determined that many of the individuals had “high” self-esteem but said they were unhappy. They knew they were smart, talented, resourceful, and educated. But they felt they had missed something along the way – some set of goals they didn’t meet. In other words, though they felt comfortable with who they were, they recognized that all the things they had accomplished were of little significance outside of the praise and accolades they received at the time. Even those with “healthy” self-esteem are slaves to their circumstances.

And here’s what we can learn from that: the idea that we possess within ourselves those qualities that will ultimately make us happy is false. It’s a self-defeating model because it attempts to derive worth and value from a source that always fails. Society tells us to be happy with who we are and then barrages us with qualifiers to that self-worth: education, credentials, social connections and the like. You are only as good as your ability to out-perform the next guy. That’s why people ride the roller coaster of life reacting to the changes that come our way. And though none of those things are necessarily bad, we give far more value to them than they actual give back to us…and it creates a constant reminder that we will never measure up to the standard to which we are held. Reputation, status, financial stability, high levels of education, physical attractiveness, athletic prowess, even personal integrity leaves us empty. And because we’re empty, we grasp and claw and hold on to whatever circumstances validate who we are: a job, a community position, money, our children, our spouse, even the reputation of our church. But when change comes, we’re devastated – because the familiar is gone and our security is threatened. In the end, change is something we can’t believe in. If we do believe in it, we won’t for long.

“Change We Can Believe In,” Part 1

Change We Can Believe In

June 28^th, 2009

John 1:14-18

When Mike came to the office two Thursdays ago, I told him that I wasn’t sure what I planned to talk about this morning. He suggested something about new beginnings or change. I had actually been thinking about something similar to that, but until last Sunday I wasn’t sure what angle to take in speaking to you. But I wrote the initial notes to this sermon while I heard Mike speak in the traditional service last week. Mike was preaching from the same place that Leigh Ann had been just two weeks before. And though that’s not a bad thing, it is different. Change is a part of being human. Life is in a constant state of flux. One season of life ends as another one is beginning. Nothing stays still for long. Life is sometimes quick and ruthless with our feelings – we often have little time to adjust to much less navigate the twists and turns that come our way. But that’s because life encompasses something bigger than that change we feel.

Now, when we talk about change it can be approached from two main perspectives. One way is to emphasize the need for change – the idea that God has entered our heart to bring us to a place that is different that we we’ve been before. In that way change is not only good, it’s godly. But the second perspective is the one I’d like to address this morning. And that is when we feel like we’ve seen too much change. When enough things in life have shifted so that we feel off-balance. Uncertain. Maybe even fearful. For even though change can be positive, too much of it can also threaten our security. I think that’s part of human nature. In the counseling I’ve done, I’ve noticed that people don’t always choose the best option available to them. Rather, they choose the familiar option – the one they know will make them feel secure. Too much change sends us clamoring for something familiar to hold on to. This morning I want to talk about coping with change…and finding our identity and self-worth in God, not in our circumstances.

We’ve heard a lot about change over the past year: politics, financial markets, national and international conflicts. We can start with the campaign slogan for Barack Obama in last year’s presidential election: “Change We Can Believe In.” That’s an unusual saying, isn’t it? It encompasses the belief that in changing our circumstances, life gains meaning. This, of course, isn’t any old change – it’s change for the better. That idea is very much a part of the fabric of our society – the idea that we can pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and make our circumstances bend to our will. And I think a healthy work ethic is important. But there’s another side to that equation. What if things don’t improve after change comes? Well, most of the time, people begin to feel that they have done something wrong. That they aren’t worthy of the success and progress they long for. Somewhere along the line we have been given the impression that our value and worth is tied to our circumstances. We’ll come back to that idea in a minute.

I was thinking the other day about how many opportunities for change exist in our lifetime. What makes the first year of marriage so difficult is the struggle to adapt to that new spouse’s paradigm. We spend hours learning the mindset and emotional clues of the person we love. Eventually, we think we may have them figured out a little bit. We become comfortable with them and peace effortlessly floats into our home, right? And then you have children. People told me that my perspective would change and that I would actually get a clue about life when I had children. Of course, they we being condescending…but they were right, too. Nothing makes us put our own wants and desires on hold like raising a family. At no time must we juggle the impossible schedules of several individuals like when our home is full of children. Children are great – but they also keep us on our toes and require us to plan and think far into the future…when really we’d rather be thinking about well, at least for guys, sports. At other times we are thrown into national and international conflicts that threaten to disrupt everyday life. Those of you who have served in our military understand probably more than anyone what it means to serve, honor, and protect something greater than yourself at a moment’s notice.