Thursday, March 08, 2012

This is How We Are Changing: Five Stages of Change in Religious Renewal Movements

Diana Butler Bass has this outstanding way of breezily introducing new patterns and stats. In fact, she is so good at describing current realities that sometimes, I think her descriptions actually end up being prescriptive (but that is for another post).

Her outline of anthropologist Anthony F.C. Wallace's "revitalization movement" framework is outstanding:

1. During a crisis of legitimacy individuals cannot 'honestly sustain the common set of religious understandings by which they believe they should act.' People wonder if they are the only ones who see the problems and experience the frustrations of the old ways. Thus, they begin to question conventional doctrines, practices, and their sense of identity.

2. People then experience cultural distortion, during which they conclude that their problems are not the result of personal failings, but rather 'institutional malfunction,' as they seek ways to change these structures or reject them.

3. Significant individuals or communities then begin to articulate a new vision, new understandings of human nature, God, spiritual practices, ethical commitments, and hope for the future. New possibilities begin to coalesce that make more sense in the light of new experiences than did the old ones.

4. As a new vision unfolds, small groups of people who understand the necessity for change begin to follow a new path; they experiment, create, and innovate with religious, political, economic, and family structures in a search for a new way of life. They develop new practices to give life meaning and make the world different. They embody the new vision and invite others to do so as well.

5. Institutional transformation occurs when the innovators manage to 'win over that large group of undecided folks' who finally 'see the relevance' of the new path and embrace new practices. When the undecideds 'flip,' institutional change can finally take place. (Christianity After Religion, 33-34)

Butler adds, "Given the limitations of any such pattern of human experience, Wallace's stages and McLoughlin's use of them can be very helpful. When many people feel lost, this can be a simple and empowering orienting device."

Absolutely. Butler uses the framework as the basis for her book.

Organizations and churches would be well served to print out this framework, then talk it through in worship, council meetings, and so on, in order to get a sense of "where we are" and so howe are are moving. 

Sunday, March 04, 2012

Prayers of the Church for Lent 2

P: God of Abraham and Sarah, we come before you in prayer, humbled by your creativity and call, awed that you are constantly doing new things. We are wondering and dreaming and hoping, imagining what you might do next.

A: Promising God, we remember your promise to Sarah and Abraham to make of them a great nation. We hear these words, "Kings of people shall come from her," and we think of our own children, our own nieces and nephews, our own grandchildren. We cherish who they are, and we dream of what they might become. Lead our children, our offspring, by your Spirit, and guide us to be the kinds of parents, adults, leaders, teachers they need in order to flourish and thrive in your world. God of Abraham and Sarah, you keep your promises. 

A: Faith. Trust. Hope. You offer us many models of faithfulness, give us reason to trust, and are our only hope. Help us learn from the saints who have gone before us and now rest in you. Let faith be our center, trust be our glue, and hope be our guide. Open us, through this faith, hope, and trust, to engagement with those of other faiths--Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, agnostics, atheists, other Christians. Give us a vision of how you see them. Envelop us in your dreams, Lord. God of Abraham and Sarah, you keep your promises.

A: We pray for families who long for children, for foster families, adoptive families, and expecting families. We pray for those, like Jesus, who remain single and build community, and give birth to new ministries and communities, in other ways than biological. We pray for those with disabilities, and we name before you now out loud those in need of healing (Linda, Albert, Bob, Fern, Debbie, Judy, Zach). As a community we take time now to voice our many prayers aloud to you [pause here for time for the congregation to pray out loud]. God of Abraham and Sarah, you keep your promises.

A: We continue to pray for our elected leaders and those campaigning for public office. We pray for the many needs of the world, for the nations of Syria, Iran, Israel, North Korean. Let each nation do the work necessary that leads to peace. We pray for those who lose their lives for the sake of your gospel. As we continue in this Lenten season, turn us to you in prayer, out to our neighbors as we give to the poor, and away from self-indulgence as we fast. God of Abraham and Sara, you keep your promises.

P: Into your hands we commend all for whom we pray, trusting in your mercy, gifted with faith in you, and hopefully dreaming of your tomorrow. Amen.

Saturday, March 03, 2012

Campus Ministry Outside the Camp

I'd get the "total poser" award if the substance of this post attempted to indicate that I knew oodles about campus ministry. I don't.  I have a bit of experience, having served in campus ministry at Luther College, and continuing affiliation with campus ministry wherever I have lived.

It is something I care passionately about but don't work at professionally.

I know just enough to know that the campus ministry scene is changing even faster than the change so much of the world is experiencing. 

Here's what I can claim and avoid the "total poser" award. I am in full-throttle learning mode. Most of my learning is just going around listening. I've been meeting the campus ministry folks at the university. I attend the Council of Religious Organization meetings at the U of A. I go out for lunch with our university young people. I try to spend time on campus.

I'm trying to faithfully help our congregation birth a ministry in the university context.

And every once in a while I read a book. The one I'm reading now is Stephen Lutz's College Ministry in a Post-Christian Culture. It's not long, and it is helpful and wise. Those are sufficient positive attributes to recommend the book wholeheartedly. I tend to agree with its central thesis, that "college ministry is the most strategic mission field in the world today" (41).

A central missiological orientation of Lutz's book is a commitment to "going outside the camp." He argues that most campus ministry focuses on people groups that are already culturally close and open to Christian faith (m0 and m1 in Ralph Winter's scale of cultural distance from the gospel). Campus ministry typically focuses very little energy, or is ill-equipped to mentor those already in the Christian fold, to reach those more culturally distant (m2, m3, and m4). Here's how it looks:

m0: Those already in the Christian fold.
m1: Perhaps churched but disaffected.
m2: The generally silent, apathetic-toward Christianity group.
m3: Suspicious, skeptical, reacting to negative examples in church.
m4: Active in beliefs or religious very negative to Christianity, even antagonistic.

One could also point out that churches in general focus on m0 and m1, and don't quite know how to orient themselves to reaching m2-4. Churches love to reach their inactive members. They rarely even know how to talk with people who genuinely dislike the church and Christian faith.

However, on most university campuses, m2-4 is the largest percentage group. So there is a missiological mandate to reach these groups, somehow. That's Lutz's point, and his passion.

Lutz works to reach these culturally more distant groups by offering "faith and doubt" conversations in culturally more distant places, and by drawing close to humbly, and in conversation with, atheist groups and other distant groups on campus. 

He tells a lively and compelling story.

He also links to some great resources on-line, so if you don't want to buy his book (but I wish you would buy his book), you can link to these:

Tim Keller, "The Missional Church," http://www.redeemer2.com/resources/papers/missional.pdf

John Stackhouse, "Engaging the University," http://stackblog.wordpress.com/engaging-the-university/

An excellent case study on missional ministry at University of Texas-Austin: http://apollosleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/HCBC-UT-Case-Study_20091.pdf

Karin Fischer, "Number of Foreign Students in U.S. Hit a New High Last Year,": http://chronicle.com/article/Number-of-Foreign-Students-/49142/

What have you been learning about campus ministry lately?

Thursday, March 01, 2012

What would I like my bishop to know about social media?

Michael Rinehart, bishop of the Gulf Coast Synod of the ELCA, recently asked on the ELCA Clergy Facebook page, "What would you like your bishop to know about social media?" Bishop Rinehart also happens to have been my youth pastor when I was growing up in Davenport, Iowa.


My current bishop is Michael Girlinghouse, of the Arkansas-Oklahoma Synod, so this blog post could be addressed to him. I hope he enjoys some of what I write here.


But really, what I write below is what I would like everyone to know about social media, not just bishops. And of course, everyone, including my bishop, will already know quite a bit of what I write here. Nevertheless, Bishop Rinehart's question inspired me to "collect" these random thoughts in one place.


Media Ecology


1. The medium is the message. Really. And although this is the phrase popularized by the work of Marshall McLuhan (see especially his Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man), the deep philosophical insight of McLuhan includes a further step, that the message is the messenger. The messenger is the message, because all media are simply extensions of humanity.


2. Much more is media than we typically realize. We always notice the new media (and I bet when Bishop Rinehart asked about "social media" he really meant "digital social media"), but really everything is media and mediated. Language is social media. So are letters, or the many posters and tracts published during the Reformation that sparked the Reformation. The paintings of Lucas Cranach are media. Clothes are media. And so on. Contextualizing digital media in this wider sense of what media is helps us avoid alarmist tendencies (these new media are corrupting our souls) as well as naive acceptance.


3. we are all avatars now. The generation now coming into adulthood is the first generation of people who have had to write themselves into existence as a part of their socialization. They have had to make decisions about their Facebook, Twitter, and texting avatars. Yes, people had "avatars" even before the advent of digital social media, but in the new media era, you can't be in the medium without writing and crafting an avatar/persona. This is now native. Similarly, bishops like Michael Rinehart have figured out that they can craft an avatar for online presence. They can "manage their brand." And brand matters, and it isn't a bad thing to be a brand.


Participation and Mediation


4. If I could get others to read another book on this topic in addition to McLuhan, it would be Pete Ward's Liquid Church. He writes, "“Liquid Church expresses the way that ecclesial being is extended and made fluid through mediation. The Liquid Church moves beyond the traditional boundaries of congregation and denomination through the use of communication and information technologies." Bishops should already "get" this, since they are in an ecclesial setting at one remove from the local congregation, and yet are an "expression" of the church. In fact, perhaps if bishops thought of themselves as a part of the liquid church, they themselves might be considered a "social media." 


5. So far very few bishops that I know are active in digital social media. Bishop Rinehart is an entrepreneur. As a bishop, you don't have to be active in social media. But bishop, here comes everybody (Clay Shirky) so if you want to be where your pastors are (and where their parishioners are) at least some portion of your time should be spent in the digital social medium.


6. This doesn't mean just Facebook. Or Twitter. Everyone participates in different media depending on interest and habits. I just had a fascinating conversation last night at the church soup supper about recipes on Pinterest. I myself probably love Spotify more than any other social media right now because of the access to new music. Lots of this is just a call to experiment and learn what works. And permission not to overextend yourself. Engage what makes sense to you, and comes natural.


7. Social media represents a shift to consumption as a networked practice (see, for much more on this, Henry Jenkin's amazing and important book, Convergence Culture). Convergence represents ever more complex relations between top-down corporate media and bottom-up participatory culture. This is certainly true in the church as it is elsewhere. Pastors are now networking with bishops in ways they never had before. CEOs are now networking with consumers. Rock stars Twitter back and forth with their fans. The more bishops and other leaders "get" this, the better off they will be in the new social media landscape. Bishops could especially learn from a Lutheran leader in this area, the CEO of Augsburg Fortress, Beth Lewis


Play and Hierarchies


8. The more serious the whole "death of the church" thing is getting, the more we need our leaders to take an experimental, playful approach to things. It's not in our hands, finally, after all, it's in God's hands. In the meantime, social media allows for, and often models, playful interaction. In fact, some forms of social media, such as MMORPGs, teach much about how to embed new kinds of learning and practices in contexts that are immersive, fun, and thrilling. Maybe more synod assemblies should be playful and open source, like the increasingly popular Unconferences.


9. Social networks like Facebook or Twitter are scale-free and non-hierarchical, enabling us to reimagine the kingdom of God in such terms. Perhaps the most radical insight arising out of this is that networks are often more yeasty than we give them credit for. We prefer to think of networks as direct, so we try to leverage them to impact directly the people or groups we are directly in contact with. However, networks often have their greatest power and impact as they pattern out through indirect and secondary connections. Again, the work of a bishop is quite like this description--just so bishops can learn something from social networks about the Trinitarian implications of their ecclesial "nodality."


10. Digital social media has turned more people than ever before into "productive users," what Axel Bruns in his Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond dubs produsage. Harness this energy in creative ways, and bishops can be leaders in the shift to the social changes implicit in the new digital media. Some of this will feel threatening to traditional understandings of the office of bishop, but it is worth considering. Take this one for example, that Axel Bruns says a mark of produsage is "fluid heterarchy, ad hoc meritocracy." Leaders in the system hold that role through the quality of what they produse. No hierarchy is needed to elect people to positions of authority. Instead of a bureaucracy, you find an ad-hocracy (see Alvin Toffler).


I could go on and on, and have probably gone on long enough. But this "top ten" list hints at the seismic shifts occurring as a result of the rise of new forms of digital social media. The world really is flattening, and truly here comes everybody, but it isn't the end of the world as we know, because the end of the world is in God. Oh, and what has already become a kind of church apologetics cliché, social media isn't a place to learn about ministry--social media is ministry.