i'm not sure how i let march 22nd slide by without formally taking notice.
what does it say about my journey that i had forgotten it was one year ago on that day i had my recurrent cancer forcibly (but happily) removed from my body.
the "bullet" holes above have faded. the memory must have, too, right?
maybe. the last year has been such a different experience, on the whole, than the year that followed july 23rd, 2009. that year, i had been told to "celebrate". the original tumor was contained inside my now gone kidney, and i should have a champion's chance to never have to worry about cancer again. at least, kidney cancer. i had a hard time owning the news, though. something didn't feel right. what about the chemo? the radiation? the surgery wasn't "easy", but it seemed like i hadn't paid enough to the cancer gods to be rightly healed and moving forward with my life. it was psychological warfare. every day and every night was a different paranoia. a different lump here. a knot there. a blurred vision or something akin messing with my mind, convincing me that all was not right. i did that dance with the man in the mirror over and over and over and over, for months on end.
about the time i was starting to feel comfortable in my own skin again, well, if you know me, you know what went down.
march 22nd, 2012, they shaved me down again. they put me to sleep. and with the help of a skilled robot, my urologist cut into me again. this time, my journey to healing and peace would require more. i haven't been able to spend nearly as much time being scared over the last year, because most of those 365 days i've been sick or in pain or super tired or some combination of all because of my chemotherapy.
the unfairness of it all has been replaced with getting to the next day, trying to feel a little better, efforting to feel a little less sorry for myself, to make weak attempts at being a husband or a father or a friend.
i am reminded all the time of how lonely this journey has become. through no one's fault (everyone has their own life and their own pain to deal with), i don't hear from many folks anymore asking me how i am. more than likely, they are probably just giving me space. more than likely, they need to focus on their own lives. i tell the same people multiple times how many months i have left to go, how many pills there are still left to take. it bothers me for half a second. i've told you this three times, man. in the latter half of the second, though, i remind myself that they have no reason to remember my timetable. they aren't counting the days, marking off weeks on a calendar attached to their fridge. they are just living their own life.
while i live mine.
if the november clean scan was really clean, i'm a year removed from having active cancer in my body. four years away from being considered "cured". it may not be anything to celebrate, but it's something to note here, in this place.
the "bullet" holes have faded.
have i?
#35
(#ftcs)
dear diary,
i'm hurting today. have been for about a week now. two weeks in to the last couple of cycles, the muscles in my neck and shoulder area have started to revolt against me. i thought i must have slept in a poor position or something. not until i reached my break and everything went back to normal did i realize that it was another fucking symptom of the medicine poisoning my body.
it's worse this time around. the neck and shoulder areas are equally as bad as they were a month ago. taking off my shirt kills. if and when i work out, the muscle feels like it is trying to rip away from my bones. but now the stiffness and pain is climbing down my back and into my legs. as sad as it is, it was really kind of hard to get out of bed this morning.
but, i climbed out of bed this morning.
i got up, because, what the fuck else am i going to do? just lay around all day?
no.
in other news, unless something unexpected pops up on my may scan, i've only got 35 pills left to take.
so, fuck this pain.
and fuck this cancer shit.
Thursday, March 14, 2013
better know a (current) humc staff member
(interview with andy)
((part three))
Let's tackle this topic of relevance. For the last several years, I've worried that HUMC has lost its place in the community, therefore being on the cusp of becoming irrelevant.
Last week, though, I got some interesting feedback on a question I asked to Facebook. I am interested in the idea of adopting a church planters perspective in our church, and one of the comments I got in a conversation on that topic suggested to abandon the pursuit of relevance. Now, I realize they and I may have been thinking in different terms, but religious thinker, Mircea Eliade, suggests people are looking for more of the sacred to contrast the profanity of daily life. I am not sure I agree with that, either.
Either way, how do you define relevance, and what role do you see the church filling in a person's life?
----------
I think this is a very interesting conversation to have, that of relevance. I don't think there is a question that the church must be relevant. Irrelevance equals death, at least eventually. But the conversation to be had us what, exactly, is meant by the word. In speaking if the church, I don't think relevance has anything to do with worship styles, or music, or the perceived hipness of a pastor. Many contemporary churches are irrelevant, and many liturgical churches are relevant. (The other interesting question is the one you brought up regarding a sacred contrast to the profane we see in the rest of our life. I'm not all in on that idea, but on some level I think there may be something to it. But, I digress...)
What I mean when I say the word relevant is the churches ability to speak into the real life mess of someone's life. The ability of the church to help someone manage the joys and sorrows that are inevitable in life. To pitch a tent, so to speak, squarely in the middle of where people actually live and move and breathe, and provide hope and direction and relationships that help people live into the kingdom that God is building. Clearly, this doesn't have much, if anything, to do with the style of worship.
So with that said, I think the church's role in a persons life is to provide the community and the context for living a life of faith. That's a pretty big idea to unpack, and I don't know that this would even be the space to unpack it, but I do think that when the church gives you the relationships and the meaning and guidance to live with the kingdom of God as your focus, it is being incredibly relevant.
----------
In your experience, how often has a church been helpful in the context of living out your faith journey versus how often it has hindered that process?
----------
to be honest, more often than not, the church has not been helpful to me personally in living out my faith. i wouldn't say it has always hindered me, but it certainly has not given me the freedom to question or the direction in how to live in the tension of faith and doubt. to be fair, this has a lot to do with the role i have been in at nearly every church i have been a part of. a staff minister is supposed to have arrived, and be sure and confident (at least that is how it is made to seem). i am not there yet, so the tension is there.
for me, there have always been people who have been helpful to me in the process. more of my issues have been worked out over ribs with the editor of this blog than anywhere else. for that, i am grateful. but i do dream of the day when the local church is this community for me, and everyone else there.
----------
I resemble your comments about staff persons not being allowed to continue developing. More often than not, that scares the crap out of me. For, if you ever convey that you have "arrived", you've decided that you have figured it all out and can sense God in a way others can't.
You and I share so many of the same frustrations with the local and global church, and, yet, we keep coming back for more. In fact you continue to believe in being on staff. Do you consider yourself a masochist, old-fashioned, or is it something else that brings you back in time and time again?
----------
I definitely considered the masochist angle. For me, though, I guess it just comes down to the fact that I still believe that the church, local and global, can be what it was intended to be. Certainly there is a long way to go, but it is ground that can be covered.
I also can't stress enough how necessary it was for me to step away for a few years. Not only did it recharge the batteries, so to speak, it gave me a different perspective. In ministry, it is very easy to think that the world that exists is the one where you get paid to pontificate on religion and always be at church. Working a regular job gave me the chance to have the same struggles and issues as any given congregant may have. And that is invaluable. And where five years ago I considered my career to be youth pastor, now I don't think of it in those terms. Don't get me wrong, I am very proud to call myself the Director of Youth Ministries at HUMC, but if it is the last time I hold this position, I am ok with that, too.
I guess if I could boil it all down to one thing, though, it would be the people. Churches good and bad, big and small, are filled with good people who are sincere in their faith. And I very much enjoy the chance to work and live my faith alongside them. (And it definitely doesn't hurt that HUMC was full of friends before I came in staff).
----------
This sounds like an appropriate place to stop for now. Thanks for taking some time out of your last few days to give us some insight into your worldview. Your thoughtful and reasonable responses should be quite enlightening for my readers that only know you by your name.
Thanks, brother!
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
better know a (current) humc staff member
(interview with andy)
((part two))
That all sounds pretty fascinating. Are there any pitfalls that you can foresee with trying to incorporate that new way of thinking into your ministry? ----------
There are certainly pitfalls that could arise with this, or any, paradigm change. But I don't think they are any worse or more numerous than the ones we may face if we choose not to engage. Just different.
The initial one that I think most people would see is that the change in authority might lead to some pretty aberrant ideas. That is, I guess, possible, but the guardrails in place are the leadership (person or people) and, quite honestly, the community itself. Bad ideas, I believe, would be called out and shot down much quicker. The challenge in that is making sure that happens with a spirit of love and grace.
The biggest pitfall I see is that it could become too easy to only engage in the online side of things, which could lead to superficiality. For that reason, the efforts in "real life" must be that much more fervent. Both must exist in concert.
----------
We've seen this type of thing play out in the national political scene. If someone disagrees with the President, no one is afraid to blow up the social media forum of choice with their disapproval. How willing or open do you see pastors, in general, as being to the day where every person in their congregation has a Twitter account and are willing to use it for the greater good of the community of faith?
----------
That's a fair enough question. My best guess is that a lot of pastors would be leery of this if they were honest. Many pastors (not all) get quite concerned with maintaining peace in their congregation (and a modicum of popularity from the congregation) at the expense of innovation. I don't say this cynically, just as an observation. It's easy to choose the path of least resistance when your success and livelihood are tied to keeping certain people happy. I have experienced this first hand under a pastor at a smallish baptist church who failed to do the right thing and risk angering some members. The result was a very plugged in family leaving, but I heard the pastor say that that was acceptable because if he stood with them (which would have been the morally right thing to do) he could have lost more. It's a shame this happens, really.
I'm not saying that pastors shouldn't exercise discernment when it comes to what they say or what stand they take. But it can become easy to lose your prophetic voice when you become overly concerned with keeping the flock happy. One of the reasons I stepped away for a few years from vocational ministry was I felt pressured to conform to certain expectations that I didn't believe in. Spiritually, it was suffocating me. I have had to commit to myself that I won't let it happen again.
As far as what can be done about this, I don't know that there is a simple answer. I do think that the reason it's so easy for the haters to jump on the President or other public figure is that they don't really see them as people, just a human representation of a cause they are either for or against. It's much harder to publicly disapprove of someone when you see them twice a week. I do think it would require a lot of courage from a pastor to let go in a sense and be ok with an increased voice from congregants. And a great degree of integrity, so that any attacks that threaten to become personal are met with trust in the kind of person they are. And a good support network that can speak truth to him or her when any controversy may threaten to overwhelm.
----------
Choosing the path of least resistance doesn't sound very revolutionary, does it? No wonder the church, corporate, is in such a quagmire. It's this blog's opinion that being "all things to all people" has taken Paul's original sentiment and perverted it into oblivion.
Given the restrictions you identify, how do you find yourself working within those constructs to maintain a feeling a being spiritually fulfilled and making tangible impact in your ministry of choice?
----------
to be clear, the path of least resistance is not an option. it only serves to prolong the careers of the ones who choose the path, and the descent into irrelevance of the church corporate, and local. maybe that sounds harsh, but i don't think we can afford to think like that. and i agree with the blog's assessment that Paul's original intent has probably been perverted. either way, i would rather take my cues from Jesus, and i'm not sure his sentiment was always the same as Paul's
personally, as far as finding the balance in working within any restrictions that are directly or indirectly placed upon me, and its effect on my personal spirituality and ministry of choice, i have had to identify a couple of foundations. first, i have to remember that my voice and viewpoint has value. the church doesn't need a chorus of voices in unison who say and do things all the same. i have sort of accepted that i am somewhat of an outlier. i don't always know where i fit, but i believe that the umbrella of the kingdom of God is large enough to include me, even when the umbrella of a local church may not be. i do believe that huffman is a community in which my viewpoint will be heard and considered and respected. so far, it has certainly been that.
perhaps most importantly, i have moved to the point where i would much rather stand up for people rather than causes. much of the time, one's faith is declared strong if they are willing to stand up for a cause. too often, this is at the expense for standing up for people. Jesus never equated your love for God with your willingness to stand against gay marriage or only vote republican. he did equate it, quite directly, with how you love people. the best, most recent example of this that played out on a national stage was the brouhaha about chick-fil-a and their support of anti-gay groups. it suddenly became a "christian" thing to do to eat a chicken sandwich to show some sort of solidarity with God. meanwhile, many gay and lesbian people (who God loves by the way) felt very unloved by Christians. and that is tragic.
within these ideas i have identified, i try to teach and lead from a place of honesty and sincerity. i don't necessarily think sharing all my doubts and struggles is beneficial to the students i am entrusted with, but i do think it is important that they know that i have struggles. if i don't know the answer to a question or issue, i won't act like i do, just to wrap a nice theological bow on the issue. many times, i just defer to what i believe is the most fundamental thing we have, which is God loves us, pursues relationship with us, and calls us to do the same to those around us, both friend and enemy. therefore we can trust God with our doubts, because of our confidence in who he is.
----------
to be continued...
Monday, March 11, 2013
better know a (current) humc staff member
(interview with andy)
((part one))
last week, we talked with and posted an interview with former humc associate, chris perry. we appreciated the insight on several different topics we got from chris, even if he would probably admit, himself, that he kept some of his thoughts closer to his vest than our conversation. that's fair, though. we weren't looking to get him any trouble. honestly, i think the tone of chris' answers allows us to see just how much pressure our ministers feel when trying not to rock the boat of their congregation in a way that would inject more drama than holy tension.
this week, we offer something a little different. over the same period of time, i asked huffman's newest staff member, andy rickles, to participate in a like-minded interview. we started with the same first question, but the conversation evolved in a much different way after that.
i hope, once you get to the end of these two or three or four posts, you'll be excited about the thoughtful talent our church just hired. if nothing else, you'll have some good stuff to start a conversation with andy about the next time you shake his hand.
without further ado, we proceed.
ee cummings and i appreciate andy's similar disdain for capital letters.
"If you don't mind, tell us your general thoughts on social media and it's value to the global discourse. As a follow-up, how have you integrated social media into your own person ministry?" ----------
i believe that social media has not just changed the methods by which we communicate, but the very essence of the conversation. we are connected on a global scale like never before, and this has given way to an ever shrinking world. one in which we can connect in real time to friends and family around the world. i believe that this has led to a decentralization of authority, as the availability of voices has exploded, and we no longer rely on traditional media outlets and authority figures for our information and direction. personally, when i am looking for news, i head to twitter, not cnn or msnbc. though this may have an inherent danger of wrong information getting out, it seems an acceptable risk for the benefit of getting the news quicker and more directly.
in my personal ministry, i am almost forced to communicate this way. when i began at huffman, the first, and it seemed most necessary, thing was to set up accounts on twitter, facebook, and instagram. and i have had to think beyond just using those for the spread of information or to generate buzz (both of which are good uses for this media). at its best, and what i am working toward, is creating a community that exists online alongside the one we create in our face to face interactions. this is beneficial in that it can expand our sphere of influence. it is necessary in that it is the language that my students speak. it is indeed an exciting and scary proposition, but one in which the church, and specifically youth ministries, must be on the forefront of if we are to have any place at the global conversation of the 21st century.
----------
how do you see your approach to social media differing from what you have experienced in your former years as a youth pastor and your most recent experience as a lay person? do you believe churches have any idea what to do with social media?
----------
as far as my approach, i would say that i am just now really developing one. at the time of my last job as a youth pastor, social media was still in its toddler years, struggling with figuring out how to move. facebook was certainly a thing, but not as pervasive as it is now. basically, social media (and electronic media in general (email, text, etc.)) was simply another way for me to disseminate information. keep parents and kids in the loop, so to speak. in the ensuing "lay" years, it was not my responsibility to figure this out, so i approached it as an observer, and ultimately a user. i saw how other churches, blogs, charities, websites, etc used it and learned my lessons positively or negatively from that. now, i see it as an absolutely integral part to what i am trying to create. the online and "real life" communities must exist together. because i am just beginning this journey at huffman, this is all in its infancy stage, but i foresee a time when the online community builds upon the face to face, and vice versa. for example, one experiment that i am building toward is the idea of "crowd-sourcing" our teaching times. as we build toward a wednesday or sunday gathering, begin several days earlier with preliminary sorts of discussion questions. draw from those answers, stories, and more questions to create a "real-life" discussion that was organically created by the entire community, not just poured from the head of the so-called expert. dangerous? maybe. interesting and potentially life-giving. certainly.
as far as the church, i don't think most churches fully realize the potential of social media. some do, of course. but on a large scale, i think that they are floundering to scratch the surface of the possibilities. i think the reason for this is it requires the decentralization of authority from a "professional" pastor, who has the answers and leads the conversation, to the pastor as a conductor of a choir full of myriad voices, who are not necessarily singing from the same page, or in the same key, and certainly not in the same room. somehow, s/he must coax out something melodious from that.
to be continued...
Tuesday, March 05, 2013
"are you not entertained?"
i think about this clip all the time. i used to quietly think of it when it had become obvious i had rubbed somebody the wrong way with the blog or on facebook.
"are you not entertained?! are you NOT entertained?!!! is this not why you are here?!"
because, honestly, of course it is.
sweet baby jesus, kevin. why would you say such mean things and use such foul language to make such a blunt point?
i would think to myself and, to some degree, still do, "what ship have you been sailing on, lady? don't you know who i am? this isn't shtick, bro. this is me. you came here. you typed in the address. you saved this place on your favorites bar. i didn't invite you to this party. the internet gave you a choice. and you chose here."
that was kind of then.
this is now.
my feelings on the issue have softened a bit, because, nowadays, i do invite you here. i'll post something and shoot a link out to facebook. again, i don't have any mind control powers over you. so, if you are worried about being offended, you can still scroll on down that happy facebook trail. in the end, though, i'd rather you click and read and join in the conversation that i am having with myself from time to time.
for almost eight years now, i've been creating this place "for all the world to see", but, more specifically, to create a very vague and abstract outline to my girls to what made their daddy tick when all they worried about was who was controlling the remote and their hardest daily decision was "disney hd, or pbs?". i suppose, at some point, i'll start feeling comfortable talking to them about this kind of stuff at the dinner table, but we are still several years away from that.
i digress.
no, i used to think about this clip all the time as it concerned me and my personal opinions i put on HACAJAM. now, i think about it differently.
i think about it when i drive down parkway east in eastlake, huffman, and center point. when i drive by the empty storefronts and the check cashing joints and the title loan places and the fast food and the guy dancing out in front of the little caesar's pizza place. when i see folks on camera petty thieving from me and the store. when i look a homeless guy in the face and then turn the other way.
"are you not entertained? are you NOT entertained?! is this not why you are here?!"
this is what some people want, do they not?
god help me. is this what i want?
those that aren't living paycheck to paycheck want the poor on that wall. they need to poor on that wall. the helpless. the broken. the "takers".
those poor, in a very wicked and perverted sense of the word, are entertainers. faceless and nameless masses that make some of you us feel better about themselves. make them feel okay about their lot in life. to celebrate the deluded idea that they have worked harder than others. to celebrate having gotten past hard times while the faceless, poor black people masses didn't have the work ethic to make it to the better side of the tracks. to perpetuate the issues of our community by white flight-ing our asses out of the city.
"this is america, goddammit. if you want to make it in this country, all you have to do is try!"
such bullshit. such fiction. such entertainment.
how many times have we jumped on facebook and read some lazy ass e-card that shitted on another human but also reinforced our self-righteous worldview? we think about sharing it, condoning the lazy ass sentiment and hoping to get some passive aggressive likes. and then, what's worse? we do it. we share that shit. even worse? we get some some passive-aggressive likes, and then we stare slack-jawed or get offended if someone comes along and pushes back at us.
"are you not entertained? is this not why you are here?!"
of course it is.
in the scene from gladiator, maximus has just slayed a bunch of humans, blood and guts and limbs lay before a now somewhat conflicted crowd. they were not prepared for the underdog to win. they were there to cheer maximus being torn from limb to limb. to celebrate the violence they were already desensitized to. but then the community maximus pushed back. and we the onlookers were confused.
don't we do the same thing? we are totally fine with there being poor people, just so long as we aren't one of them. we are totally fine with war, so long as we aren't the ones fighting it. we are fine with kids on the corners of east lake dealing drugs, just so long as they aren't our kids.
but we get offended when one of those underdogs pushes back? really? robs us? puts a gun to our head, figuratively reciprocating the suffocating feeling they've always known???
"are you not entertained?"
you should be, man. because this is what you are asking for. each and every time you prop up your worldview on someone less fortunate than you's back, you're asking for it. every time you share that fucking ignorant e-card about people on welfare not being allowed iphones, you're asking for it. because you consider yourself to be more committed or more valuable than another human being without knowing shit about another person's life and circumstances.
i wonder, "why?"
why on earth would you think that was okay? what happened to you to make you think that poverty isn't every bit your fault as it is mine? why won't you we do something more about it?
can we at least start giving some thought to other humans instead of our stupid-ass rights? please???
can we stop pretending like doing one unselfish thing every once and again builds up some imaginary credit in our imaginary head banks to be assholes or, worse, ignorant the rest of the week?
can we stop whining about how early we have to get up to go to work? can we stop bitching about how bad we feel if we aren't willing to get up off our couches, stop smoking, start exercising, and start making efforts to help our bodies function without the literal and figurative shit we thrust upon it? how about we only share the stupid e-cards that poke fun at our human experience, and we stop forwarding anything that makes us sound any more high and mighty than our neighbor? deal?
a love deal? a hippie commune kind of deal? that we are all in this together, fighting for the greater good and we won't stop building our hippie commune 'til there are more of us than there are of them kind of deal?
it's your choice, of course. i don't own the guns to force you to do anything.
but if you opt out, if you keep bullying your "friends" because you've arrived at an arbitrary endpoint to your existence that will no longer allow you to adapt to other people's perspectives, don't be surprised when the underdog eventually pushes back.
"are you not entertained?!"
Monday, March 04, 2013
interview with a vampire pastor
(last part)
read part one here.
read part two here.
read part three here.
concluding...
Have you been challenged by a congregation member or anywhere other than Facebook (or me) about your pro-gun stance?
----------
Oh sure. Not often, though. The overwhelming majority of my current congregation (I mean all except maybe 2 or 3) are hunters and/or gun owners. In this more rural part of Alabama pretty much everyone is a country person, or grew up country, and hunting is a way of life. Millbrook has only really been a growing suburb in the last 10-15 years. And the majority of people who have moved into this area that aren’t “country folk” are military and so are quite comfortable with guns. There’s also the fact that I don’t make a big deal about the issue. I certainly don’t get into the pulpit and talk about my .40. Those I do talk about guns with are generally only those I go hunting with. I certainly don’t publicize it or brag about it. But, I have had the occasional discussion. It’s never been a “How can you as a pastor/Christian think about owning a gun” type conversation, just more my thoughts on it, where I’m coming from. They share their thoughts on it. Respectful, thoughtful conversation.
----------
Alright, then, I'll ask the question then. ;) How can you as a pastor/Christian think about owning a gun?
----------
lol, how did I know that was coming? That’s not really the focus of this interview is it? But, to give a brief answer – I like to hunt. I like to sport shoot at the range. One provides good, healthy, inexpensive food for my family and the other is just a hobby. If someone broke into my home and attempted to harm my family would I use it to defend them? You better believe it. I guess that’s where you get into a “just war” kind of theory. But I don’t see anything, biblically, that would prohibit any of that. Can guns be used for evil? Absolutely and I’m all for discussions that would limit that evil (i.e. magazine size, more stringent background checks, certain types of weapon availability, etc). I don’t really want to get too far into this issue in this format since that wasn’t our original topic, but I didn’t want to cop out on you completely either. So, consider that a partial cop out.
----------
Since, you've been kind enough to spend a few days with us, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and grant you "partial" cop-out. ;) We'll finish with a couple of questions on another subject. Church attendance continues to decline. There are equal numbers if not more than that that are every bit as cynical about religion and church as you are about politics. Where do you see the United Methodist Church in ten years?
----------
The brutally honest answer is I don’t know and that scares me. The UMC will most likely be around still in 10 years, but in what form? I don’t see any real desire for a split even from those who stand opposed on some very emotional issues. The 2012 General Conference really broke my heart, and the heart of a lot of clergy, last April. I went into that General Conference with so much optimism. There were proposals on the table that really could’ve made a difference in our church such as a complete restructuring to do away with a lot of waste and red tape. A proposal was made, that I thought was awesome, to remove guaranteed appointments from the UMC clergy. No longer could clergy coast, or just be bumped from church to church if they messed up. The bishops could actually do something about it. What actually came out of GC2012? Nada. All of the restructuring proposals, that we had spent 4 years and tons of money preparing, were shot down. The removal of guaranteed appointments passed, but then the Judicial Council struck it down as unconstitutional on a technicality. So, we spent 2 1/2 weeks and, literally, several million dollars for nothing. Even the supposed big showdown over the homosexual issue amounted to a few people pitching a temper tantrum, acting the fool and disrupting the order, and everything else staying status quo. So I’m afraid I’ve lost a lot of hope in the General Church. And it’s for the many of the same reasons I’m cynical about Congress. At the General Church level it’s ludicrous to call us a “United” Methodist Church. We’re hardly that. We have some pastors and conferences who won’t even acknowledge the Trinity as Father, Son and Holy Spirit any longer. I mean forget the divisions over homosexuality. Our divisions go WAY deep to some really core theological issues. And everyone is so dug in that they aren’t willing to listen to any other viewpoint and the result is gridlock, a la Congress.
All of that said, I have a ton of optimism and hope for the UMC on the local level, and even somewhat at the conference level. I see some local churches really start to break out of their shells, engage their communities, and do some awesome things for God. Things that might make a real difference because they’re trying to change their community and not just grow their membership. What HUMC is doing is a perfect example, and I will be HUMC’s biggest cheerleader through that process. I think my current church has accomplished that. There’s churches all over stepping up for God. If the UMC is to be saved, that’s where it has to start – at the grass roots level. And I see that starting to really happen. The original Methodist movement was a grass roots movement of a few clergy and a lot of laity when the general church (the Anglicans in that case) lost sight of their mission and became too institutionalized, too concerned with looking in the mirror than impacting the world for Christ. That kind of movement is at the core of who we are as Methodists and I’m becoming more and more hopeful that it’s starting to happen again.
----------
This feels like a pretty good place to stop. An appropriate mix of melancholy and hope. Thanks so much for taking some time over the last few days to do this. It's been a lot of fun. Let me know when you're up for round two, where I do nothing but give you crap about your guns.
Take care, brother.
(ed. - we hope you enjoyed the interview. In the next few days, look for another entry from huffman umc's newest staff member. we started with the same first question, but then the conversation went in a very different direction. we'll let you be the judge as to why.)
I'm jealous. It sounds like I need an administrative assistant, too! #sarcasm How might you counsel someone in your congregation that is strugging with their spiritual journey because of how "busy" they are but don't have the luxury of a personal secretary? ----------
Having such a great admin assistant has been a real blessing. I definitely don't take her for granted, especially after having such a bad one last year which added to my workload as I was having to do my job while constantly checking up on hers. So, the way I would counsel someone is the same way I counseled myself during that time - prioritize. I write out each week the things I have to do, the non-negotiables, and I include time with my family and personal time with God in that. Then I look at the optional stuff, the things I would like to do - what of that is most important. Back in the day I did the Franklin-Covey time management training where you assign everything on your 'to-do" list a priority letter - A,B, C, D (A being something that absolutely has to be done this day/week and D being something with no time-table on it). I still use that and teach others to do the same. I'm able to get done probably a little more than the average person because I function just fine on 4-5 hours of sleep. 4 is probably my average. That lets me get some of my private stuff, like my prayer and devotional time, done without rush but I still have plenty of time to do other things. Someone who needs their 8 hours would have to prioritize a little differently.
The problem, I think, with our hectic, busy world is we allow the "world" to dictate too much of our schedule instead of us intentionally choosing it. People are always demanding a piece of my time and if I'm not very selective and intentional with my calendar I would never get anything accomplished. I think the same applies in any situation, not just a pastor.
----------
Talk more about your ideas on how the "world" dictates too much of our schedule. It is this blog's opinion that people too often use the excuse of being "too busy" to never actually do or care about anything of substance. How do you encourage a congregation to avoid those types of trappings?
----------
I 100% agree with your assessment. I don't think that's too often intentional, though. I think it's more lack of intentionality. Or maybe I should just say laziness. So, when I say the world dictates our schedule, I absolutely believe that's a choice on our part. Because we don't prioritize, because we don't see what's most important and honor commitments, we allow our schedule to fill up with just whatever comes along. That's especially the case with kids. We need to realize that our kids don't need to run us ragged doing every activity under the sun. It's not good for the parents or the kids. I let my kids play a fall sport and a spring sport. We take the winter and summer off. The kids need unstructured time as much as the parents. They kids also (like the parents) need to spend time focusing on others, serving in some kind of mission work, and not just wrapped up in their own activities. So, again, it goes back to understanding truly what's most important and intentionally building your calendar around those things.
----------
Let's switch gears and readdress some of what brought us together for this conversation. Politics and the art of political discourse. You have remarked earlier in the interview that you do not subscribe to one party's complete set of ideologies. Yet, congregations often look towards their Pastors to test their own internal barometers when it comes to how they participate in the national and local political conversations. How can you toe the middle and also empower your congregants to explore issues of social justice when those issues often become hot button talking points?
----------
I think you’re quite right that people often look to their pastors for guidance, especially on perceived moral issues, but even just on overall political discourse. I don’t want to tell people how to think. The last thing I want in my church is a bunch of zombies or clones. And I don’t think it’s my job as pastor to tell them what to think. I do think it’s my job to guide them through the principles and so I do that. For me, the Bible is the final word. And I’m not talking about scripture ripping. I’m talking about solid foundational theological principles. The general stance I take is where the Bible is clear, I will be clear. Where the Bible is gray, we will allow room for differences of opinion. Let’s take the big hot button issue right now – gun control. I think the Bible is extremely clear that all life is valuable and no life should be taken. I think the Bible is also very clear that we should protect innocent life and do everything in our power to do so. I think it’s safe to say that neither of us would disagree with those two foundational statements. But does the Bible address whether or not a person should own a weapon in their home? Does the Bible address whether taking the life of a perpetrator is worth it to save an innocent life? Not really. At least not without some excessive scripture ripping. I think it’s pretty gray on that matter. And so we allow room for disagreement. You and I share the same goal, yet we see very different solutions as to how that should happen. We’re still friends and brothers in Christ.
So, to answer your question, I will be clear when I think the Bible is clear, but I try to empower my congregants to think through these issues on their own, not believe it just because I say it. I’m not Jesus. I don’t have the final say on things. I would never intentionally lead people astray but some very smart, spiritual people have held opinions different from me. I especially try to teach, and model, that we love each other even in our disagreements. Where we go wrong is trying to declare an absolute when scripture does not just because it’s our opinion.
----------
So, you are pro-guns but against the death penalty?
Talk a little more about times in your ministry you've felt like you been beaten up or maybe been beaten back to the middle or being neutral. I feel certain many, if not all, pastors have felt this type of push and pull. Is it your opinion that pastors are intended to be vanilla and that just isn't something they spend time on in seminary? Or is it more that any human has a tendency to back away from conflict if it's not something they are truly passionate about?
----------
I guess the answer is both/and. I definitely agree that every pastor has felt that tension and been faced with similar issues. If they haven’t, then they’ve never put themselves out there enough. The human tendency is definitely to pull away from conflict unless we are truly passionate about the issue. At least for most people. Some folks are just looking for a fight and some people are natural doormats. But, for the most of us I think we’ll stand up for the right issue, but would rather avoid conflict otherwise. The pastor is in an even trickier position. This is a relationship business. My whole universe revolves around building and growing relationships – between me and my congregants, me and the community, church members with each other, husbands and wives etc. Conflict will either grow (iron sharpens iron) or destroy relationships. The problem is that the vast majority of people in our culture don’t know how to handle conflict well. They perceive conflict as being personal. It’s not “you don’t like my opinion / agree with me on this issue” it’s “You don’t agree with me therefore you don’t like me.” So, the pastor is forced to decide, which issues are worth risking a relationship over? For a church that is struggling losing a relationship, in practical purposes, means losing numbers – dollars, seats in the pews, ministries, etc. People are our resource and we have to cultivate and protect that. I don’t always like it, but it’s reality. You wanted an inside look at being a pastor and there you go. A pastor with a large, growing, thriving church can say, “Let them walk out the door. Someone else will take their spot.” and they’re right. They’re not so concerned about what they say. But I’ve been in a church for 7 years now fighting tooth and nail for its existence. We’re in a much healthier place now, but I’ve run off plenty of people since I arrived over various issues. There are times I look through old directories and think, “How many people would we have in this church now if I could have kept my mouth shut?” And that’s not completely fair because some of the things I stood up for were worth fighting for. But, I try to be more careful and ask, “Is this worth falling on my sword for?” If not, stay silent and move on. I’m an opinionated person and that’s hard for me, but it’s the best interest of the church, and my best interest.
No one prepares you to be a pastor in seminary. Seminary trains you to be a theological expert or a religious professional. They teach you how to craft carefully worded sermons and perform flawless weddings and funerals. They teach you to exegete Hebrew and Greek scriptures and present your findings with eloquence. No one prepares you for the reality of the day-to-day life of a pastor. No one prepares you for living in a fishbowl, being on call 24/7/365, for being expected to be able to read minds, solve every conflict, answer every question, always be present, always be a shoulder to cry on, study and present awesome sermons and bible studies while at the same visiting all the old people, shut-ins, and sick. No one prepares you for the personal attacks you take when someone in your congregation feels wronged, of not being able to share what happened that day with your family because you don’t want to bias your wife or kids against that person who just spent 2 hours chewing you out. You deal with that long enough and some pastors get to the point where they just want to do what’s expected, keep their head down and mouth shut, and survive. I’m not at that point by any means. I’m not looking to survive. I want to thrive, but I have become much more careful through all of this about which battles I choose to enter.
You ask if pastors are intended to be vanilla. I don’t think it’s that. I think everyone wants their pastor to agree with them. People don’t want pastors to be neutral, they want them to be on their side. They want to be affirmed in their thinking. That’s why I think you end up with so many homogenous congregations. Either the pastor runs off all the ones who might disagree or the church (in a congregational polity system) chooses a pastor that fits them. In the UMC a “bad fit” won’t last more than a year or two before the Bishop yanks them. No pastor wants that because that’s a strike on their career record. We don’t want to end manning the proverbial radar station in the Alaskan wilderness. That career ladder mentality keeps a lot of UMC pastors vanilla. They go into churches with the mindset, I won’t rock the boat, I’ll do everything I’m “supposed” to, people will like me and in 3-4 years I’ll get “promoted” to the next highest steeple. It’s more about advancing my career than advancing God’s Kingdom. Maybe I’m revealing too many “insider” secrets here, but that’s the way it plays out in lot of cases. Not everyone, but certainly a large number. Jesus said we have to take up cross. That means sometimes follow him will be painful. None of us like that and some try to openly avoid it.
----------
I think my readers would love for you to throw a couple of your contemporaries under the bus. Would you like to name some names of Pastors in our conferece or yours that are only interested in the next, best appointment? ;)
----------
lol, I think I’ll keep that one on the inside. I will say this about it – it’s one of the side effects of our Methodist system. We train clergy to be religious professionals. We have to have masters degrees and extensive training so that professional, career-orientation over mission orientation can sometimes happen. Other denominations have different issues.
----------
That's the politician I've come to know and love. Fair enough. Let's get back to something you said in your previous comment. You said said seminary didn't prepare you to be on call 24/7/365. And yet, we've already joked about how much you seem to involve yourself in outside of your congregation. How have you made that happen?
----------
Ha! Only through insane attention to detail with my calendar and a great administrative assistant! Honestly, I’m so obsessive with my calendar I even pencil in appointments for my family. That way when I need to have family time and someone calls me I can, honestly, say “I already have an appointment” and not be tempted to surrender that time. 2006-2011 I had an awesome admin assistant which freed me up to do more because I didn’t have to worry about a lot of day-to-day stuff. 2012 I had a not so good one and my stress went through the roof. However, I know have a top tier admin assistant again and my stress levels are coming back down.
When I came to RSUMC I made an intentional choice that I had not made previously in my ministry. I’d say during my time at Huffman UMC and FUMC Huntsville I was much more inwardly focused. Most of what I did, I did for the church. Being an associate pastor I also had a lot less responsibility and freedom. To some degree at our church plant in Huntsville, and then definitely at RSUMC, I intentionally chose to be very outwardly focused. We didn’t have a building at Common Ground so you and I were both forced to be out in the community. But when I arrived at RSUMC I saw a dying, struggling church and I figured the only way to turn it around was to throw myself into the community, try to impact it as much as possible, and get RSUMC back on the map as a viable church in Millbrook. Renae and I talked about the sacrifices of time that would entail, but they paid off. I do an insane number of things to advance this church in the community but the church is now growing and pretty healthy. Some of the things I’ve picked up have been purely practical. My boys are getting older, they’re involved in sports now, I love sports, and if I’m going to have to be at all the practices anyway, I might as well get out there and coach and have the opportunity to impact more young lives. Plus, coaching is fun.
Keeping the schedule I have here has been really tough. But I chose it. When/if I move to a new church I’ll have to examine that situation and see what God calls me to there. It probably won’t be the insanity of what I’ve done here, but one lesson I’ve learned is I want and need to be out in the community. I don’t ever want to just be inwardly focused again.
----------
to be continued...
interview with a vampire pastor
(part one)
way back on february 12, i jumped on facebook to take the pulse of my respective "nation" and their quick hit thoughts on that night's state of the union address. one of the original commenters on that thread was the professional united methodist pastor, chris perry. in short, his opinion was fairly cynical as it concerned the overall worth of the speech, and it took the thread into a much more interesting place than my original sarcastic post intended. midway through, i asked chris if he would be interested in subjecting himself to an interview to talk about all sorts of things. he agreed. that conversation follows below. i hope you enjoy it. chris gives some good perspective on his life and the general life of a pastor and will maybe help us lay folk have a better appreciation for his and our pastor's efforts.
we're going to break this up into several, easily digestible parts.consume away! please forgive all the capitalization!
"Pastor/Samurai/Director/Coach/Father Christopher Perry. Welcome to HACAJAM. Thanks for the interest in giving our kind readers some insight into the world of a Methodist Minister. Why don't we start by laying a foundation. This interview was prompted by comments in a Facebook thread where you made the comment, "Most of the time I just keep my mouth shut." The comment was made in a political conversation, but the sentiment likely is true in many different arenas. If you don't mind, tell us your general thoughts on social media and it's value to the global discourse. As a follow-up, how have you integrated social media into your own person ministry?"
----------
You forgot Doctor/Professor/Chainsaw Disaster Response Expert in your titles.
Yes, I recall that conversation and it does, indeed, transfer into many arenas.
I view social media as being inherently morally neutral. It’s neither good nor bad. The value comes in how we use it. I suppose one of the negative sides is that it seems many people have lost their ability to filter, possibly because of the perceived anonymity of the internet. I mean, can you really not go to the bathroom without tweeting about it? There also seems to be a lack of civility on occasions because I can type whatever I want without having to actually see the impact it has on you. War is much different when you’re using a knife versus pushing a button and firing a missile. In that regard, social media has dehumanized interactions. We live in an extremely wired, yet still very disconnected, world. I do become annoyed when I see people sitting in the same room texting away with no face-to-face interaction. We seem to live in a world that prefers virtual interaction to “real” interaction.
But, on the positive side, social media allows interactions with ideas, cultures, and events I would never know about or engage otherwise. In the “real” world we tend to only surround ourselves with a homogenous community, at least as much as possible. We hang out with people who are “like” us. Via social media that’s not always the case. I don’t de-friend people on Facebook because they’re an Auburn fan or disagree with me politically. I enjoy being exposed to this variety of ideas. And I don’t even mind the minutiae (someone’s at the gym, someone’s at the grocery store, someone’s kid made a macaroni drawing today). It gives me insights into the lives of people. I have friends, literally, all over the world and social media allows me to share, somewhat, in their culture and interact with them in a way not possible previously. Sometimes I get annoyed with all the shared posts, and I definitely hate the “if you don’t share or like this you hate Jesus, are going to hell, and probably kill puppies in your spare time” posts, but I get to see how other people think and, occasionally, I’ll enter into dialog with them. Maybe without social media I’d never engage someone about a certain topic, especially if they disagreed with me, and through social media I get to see how they think and enlarge my own thinking.
As far as how I incorporate social media into my ministry, I think it’s an opportunity for me to share some of my life. I am somewhat guarded in what I post – the language I use and the content/topics I allow to go on my wall – but I think it allows my congregation,especially, to see me as a “real” person, which is not always the case with pastors. We’re often seen as robots locked away in the closet and wheeled out when holy words or deeds are needed, no feelings or life outside of the pulpit. I also use social media as a mini-blog to write on topics that touch my heart or to share information.
----------
That's a great place to start the meat of our meal. You talk about being somewhat guarded in what you choose to put out there in the social media world. Having known you as long as I have, I have seen you become more and more guarded as the years have gone by. Can you tell us why that is? Have there been specific instances that led you to back off in that regard?
----------
Yeah, I would agree with you. I have become a lot more guarded since we first became friends. Part of that would be maturity – I don’t feel the need to express every thought I have. Part of it is conformity, honestly. When I was a young associate pastor I could get away with a lot more. People would brush it off as long as the senior pastor were still respectable. There is a whole different expectation when you’re “the” pastor or senior pastor. So, in Paul’s words of being all things to all people I’ve dialed it back a little. Were I in a less traditional ministry setting I probably wouldn’t be quite as reserved. It’s a hard balance finding where it’s okay to push people and where I need to stay reigned in.
Now, to be blunt, there have been some painful experiences that have impacted how much I share. I’ve really put myself out there some, with some controversial issues, and gotten badly burned. I’ve had people attack me and leave the church over some of the stands I’ve taken and ministries I’ve chosen to be involved in. That’s caused me to be a lot more careful. Partially because you get tired of being beat up after a while. The biggest reason, though, is trying to be more reflective about choosing my battles. Is this something important to advancing the Kingdom of Christ or just something I’m on a kick about? If it’s the former, then I’ll take my stand and I don’t care what the consequences are. If it’s the latter, it’s not worth it.
Finally, I would say I’m more reserved because I want to be able to effectively minister to every person. I lean more towards the right, politically. If I had to put a label on myself it would be a “moderate conservative.” I don’t affiliate myself with any political party because I don’t find either one completely satisfactory. That said, I don’t want a congregation full of only Republicans. The Body of Christ is diverse. Having a homogenous congregation may make us all feel good, but it doesn’t help us grow or reflect the full expression of God. I want people in my congregation I disagree with on issues because it brings a different perspective to issues. Well, in order for me to allow people to express themselves and feel comfortable I feel like I have to stay pretty neutral, outwardly. I want someone who is a flaming liberal and a tea-party conservative to feel equally at ease around me, and everyone in between. We have a tendency in our culture to categorize people so if I openly and often express more conservative (or liberal, whichever you like) views on the “hot button” topics like gay marriage, gun control, abortion, or anything else those on the “opposite” side likely won’t feel as comfortable openly talking with me. If I’m asked my opinion, I don’t hide it, but I don’t go blasting those views from the pulpit or on Facebook. When I feel strongly about a topic I prefer to discuss it in a Bible study or small group type setting. From the pulpit I would rather stay focused on disciple-making and spiritual growth issues, things all Christians need to hear. In this manner, if you asked most of the folks in my congregation where I stood about a political party or issue, they probably couldn’t tell you. But, hopefully, they could tell you I would listen to you and care about you no matter your opinion.
