Archive for the ‘emerging church’ Category

E-registration for my webinars is now active

Thursday, July 9th, 2009

I’ve had some questions about how to register for the online workshops – or webinars – I’m offering this month. Well, I have good news!

As of today, I have online registration available. You can click on any of the titles below to go directly to the event registration, and you can use any major credit card. In the future I hope to add Paypal Express Checkout, but we’ll start with this. You can also visit my website for more detailed workshop descriptions.

All webinars are $20 (though it will increase to $25 per session after July), and will last between 60 and 90 minutes. Registration is limited to 15 people per session, so be sure to reserve your spot as soon as you can. If you have questions about these webinars, if you have another topic you’d like for me to cover or if you’d like to participate in one of the events listed below on an alternate date, email me and let me know.

Podcasting 101
Tuesday July 21, 12 Noon (MST)

What is podcasting? How do I do it? Do I even need to? What can it be used for? Get an introduction to podcasting, including how to set up your own podcast, ways to promote it and content ideas for your episodes.

Blogging 101
Wednesday July 22, 10 AM (MST)

Learn how to blog, what it can do, and how to best promote your blog for maximum exposure.

Using Facebook as a ministry tool
Thursday July 23, 1 PM (MST)

Learn the basics of “2.0″ social networking, how to set up a Facebook account, take a tour of Facebook and learn strategies for using it as a tool to connect with people throughout the week, beyond the walls.

When “Left Behind” takes on new meaning

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

When “left behind” takes on new meaning

by Christian Piatt

(Originally published in PULP)

 

The phrase “left behind” brings to mind for most people the apocalyptic religious fiction series, apparently scaring people into adhering to Christian doctrine “or else.” But for me, it raises strong feelings about what sucks the most about being a part of organized religion.

 

If there’s one word that defines the relevance of a community of faith, it’s just that: community. Sure, we can practice faith alone on a mountaintop or study it in a book, but as my wife, Amy says, a book can’t visit you in the hospital, and a mountain can’t hug you back.

 

There’s a basic human need for community that started in primitive times when we, not being the fastest, fiercest or strongest species, had to depend on one another for survival. Since then, community has remained an essential part of our social fabric, and certainly not just in religion. But in that context, community not only provides love and support, but at its best, it also stretches and challenges us to become more as part of the whole than we are on our own.

 

The hard part, especially when you commit to the community over the long term, is that you set yourself up to be left, over and again. For some, communities of faith – and, I expect, other communities too – are there simply to serve them, to accommodate them like a pair of shoes. If the fit becomes less than ideal, or if something new and exciting comes along, they split.

 

For some, dealing with the inevitable conflict that comes from being a tightly-knit, interdependent group is worse than starting fresh. So again, they walk. It’s kind of like being committed to a relationship where you’re always the one getting dumped, and never the other way around.

 

Of course, this sort of vulnerability is a part of any relationship. It’s just that the traditional values of sticking with one particular group, simply because or out of a sense of moral obligation, has changed with the increasingly dynamic nature of our culture.

 

We see it everywhere; people stay in jobs for less time than in the past, but we also get laid off more suddenly. So why do we owe a company our lifelong fidelity if they will turn on us at the next economic downturn? And sure, marriage is a nice idea, but we’ve seen enough divorce and infidelity to compromise any sense of permanence the institution held before. So it may work for us right now, but there’s always an exit clause, right?

 

In a perfect world, communities of faith would be the welcome exception to this cultural norm. When we made a covenant to one another and to the Divine to stick it out, that’s what we mean – for better or worse. But I think before we can expect others to follow in this spirit, the institutions themselves have much healing and re-creation to do from within.

 

It’s not religion’s job to accommodate, and to ensure comfort and “customer satisfaction” for all comers.  However, it is incumbent upon all who call themselves sanctuaries to offer the hope, healing, nurturing and love that allows each of us to feel we’re a part of something bigger than ourselves.

 

Over time, this mantra may become practice so that it’s something in which we can trust again. Until then, we may just have to stick together, behaving as if we get what we need from one another. Hopefully, by committing to one another, we can live into the community we imagine we might someday be.

Webinars to grow your church brain

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

I’ve had a number of requests for web-based workshops – or webinars – on various topics from blogging, facebook and podcasting, all as tools for ministry. I’ve finally set some dates up, so check out the info below and let me know ASAP which classes you’re interested in so I can reserve your spot.

Webinar Training Sessions
Click here to sign up now!


The following web-based training courses (webinars) are being offered. All courses are $20 and will last between 60 and 90 minutes.

Each session is limited to fifteen participants, so sign up early to confirm your spot in the training.

Using Facebook as a ministry tool
Tuesday July 7, 10 AM (MST) or
Thursday July 23, 1 PM (MST)


Learn the basics of “2.0” social networking, how to set up a Facebook account, take a tour of Facebook and learn strategies for using it as a tool to connect with people throughout the week, beyond the  walls.


Podcasting 101
Wednesday July 8, 10 AM (MST) or
Tuesday July 21, 12 Noon (MST)


What is podcasting? How do I do it? Do I even need to? What can it be used for? Get an introduction to podcasting, including how to set up your own podcast, ways to promote it and content ideas for your episodes.

Blogging 101
Thursday July 9, 11 AM (MST) or
Wednesday July 22, 10 AM (MST)

Learn how to blog, what it can do, and how to best promote your blog for maximum exposure.


Want to participate? Click on any of the blue links above, or email me at cpiatt@christianpiatt.com and I’ll send you payment information.

After payment clears, your space is reserved and I’ll send you everything you need to log in to the seminar.

New podcast is up: Bridging the Gap

Thursday, June 18th, 2009

I posted my latest podcast episode titled “Bridging the Gap,” which is adapted from a message Amy offered recently. The idea centers around where people of faith are called, which is not to take sides, but rather to act as a bridge to bring sides together.

You can download it on iTunes, or you can go directly to it by clicking this link:

http://christianpiatt.podbean.com/

Christian

Can you be both an atheist and a Christian?

Thursday, June 4th, 2009

I probably spend at least as much time discussing theology with people who claim atheism or agnosticism as I do with other Christians. I tend to prefer it this way.

 

For one, it challenges me to really think about and articulate what I believe and why. For another, I’d much rather have some lively dialogue with people who think differently than I do than to sit around and agree with everyone.

 

After one of these kinds of chats recently, I started wondering if someone actually could be a Christian, while also not believing in a divine being. It began as a fairly abstract intellectual exercise, but the answer I came up with actually surprised me.

 

Depending on your personal Christology, I am pretty confident that you can be both a Christian and an atheist.

 

I should explain here what I mean by Christology. There’s a sort of Christological spectrum that helps define how each person perceives Jesus. Those who focus more on the divinity of Jesus, his miraculous works the significance of the crucifixion and resurrection within their theology of salvation would have what’s called a high Christology. Those who emphasize Jesus’ humanity, his works of compassion, his teaching and his love for all of humanity would have a lower Christology.

 

Though I’m not a big fan of the connotations that “high” and “low” attach to one’s beliefs, I didn’t make up the terms. As someone who has a pretty low Christology, it feels a little bit demeaning to be considered by others to have a faith system that lingers at the bottom of the God Chart.

 

But that’s not really the point. If you consider that the lower Christology focuses not so much on divinity and more on humanity, it begins to make sense how someone could adhere to the moral teachings of Jesus, and even try to pattern their lives after how he taught and lived, without actually having to believe in God.

 

Sure, there’s the challenge of what to do about the whole praying thing, but I’ve met plenty of atheists who still meditate without any intention of communing with God. But I’ve met plenty of people who don’t consider themselves to be Christians, but who I think are very Christ-like in the way they live their lives.

 

So are they Christians? It probably depends on who you ask.

 

One thing I’ve noticed about those with a higher Christology is that they tend to limit the definition of the word “Christian” to the boundaries of their own understanding. They’ll back up their belief with Biblical scripture, but in the end, the understanding that you must accept Jesus as your personal lord and savior is the only way to be a true Christian.

 

Through the research I did for a previous book on the spirituality of young adults, I found that younger people are increasingly comfortable with recognizing Christians as anyone who conducts themselves in a Christ-like way. Though high-Christology believers will likely decry this as an erosion of basic religious principles, I think it actually offers an opportunity to open up the best of Jesus’ example and teaching to a lot of people who have felt shut out or judged by Christians.

 

Even if we maintain a high Christology, do we really need everyone to agree with us before we even have dialogue? Is it possible that there’s a both/and reality that can counter our tendency to think in either/or terms? Can I arrive at my own truth through reflection upon the life and teachings of Jesus, possibly among others, without recognizing him as divine?

 

Some will feel the need to assert absolute authority in answering this question, and that’s all right. Personally, I think I could spend the rest of my life trying to understand the essence of what I think it means to be a Christian, and still only have a dimly lit view of the whole picture. Other people, atheists included, help me understand a little bit more about my own spiritual reality every day.

 

That personal growth is way more important to me than knowing who’s right and who’s wrong.

Lent: Celebrating the Common (from PULP’s April issue)

Friday, May 1st, 2009

I know this is a little past Lent now, but I think you might still enjoy the sentiment of this column, originally published in April’s PULP.

Lent: Celebrating the common

As some may know, this is the period known as Lent – the weeks leading up to Easter – on the Christian liturgical calendar. Lots of Protestants aren’t even familiar with it, but our church tries to recognize it as a spiritual discipline if nothing else.

There are a few things Lent is known for, namely Fat Tuesday, or Mardi Gras. The idea behind this is that, since you’re supposed to give something up in Lent to remind us of the selfless or often-called “sacrificial” love demonstrated by Jesus. This begins on the first day of Lent, which is Ash Wednesday.

Some of us may know this holiday by some embarrassing moment when we’ve gone up to a person observing Ash Wednesday and said something akin to, “dude, you have some shit on your forehead.” The tradition actually is that the palm leaves from Palm Sunday, which is the Sunday before Easter, used in worship the year before are burned and mixed with oil, then used to place a mark of the cross on a person’s forehead. This is to serve as a reminder that we all came from dust, and hence will return to dust.

Fat Tuesday, then, being the last day before this period of fasting and reflection, is the last chance to get all the naughty bits out of your system. Problem is, a hell of a lot more people observe Fat Tuesday than Ash Wednesday.

Oh well. Everybody loves a party.

I actually had a college student friend of mine say recently that Lent is her favorite time of the Christian year. Whereas days like Christmas and Easter have largely become as commercialized as Valentines or other Hallmark Holidays, Lent actually requires something of us, and causes us to search inward to discern what’s really important in our lives.

For those who like to complain that all young folks are a bunch of narcissistic self-indulgent whiners, I might suggest that a growing movement known as “neo monasticism” suggests otherwise.

Neo monasticism, which is based on the ancient lifestyle of monks, emphasizes simplicity and communal interdependence. The best example of this is the monastery in Taize, France, where more than 6,000 young people travel every summer to sleep on the floor, cook meals for one another, sing chants and pray four times every day.

No rides or movie theaters. No iPods. Not even a Chipotle for miles. It’s about as different from contemporary life as one can get without being completely off the grid. And that’s pretty much the point.

This movement, brought to the forefront during this Lenten season, celebrates the common in our lives, embracing simplicity and freeing us from the shackles of want. It may be a passing fad, but it speaks to something deeper in our culture. We may have become dependent upon constant distraction and obsessed with comfort, but when we spend even a little while reflecting on what really matters, there’s something in us that’s restless for deeper meaning.

Faith 2.0 – May PULP

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

Faith 2.0

 

What’s the difference between religion and theology?

 

There are two different definitions for religion, with one focusing on the belief in a supernatural deity or deities, and the other referring to an institution used to express this shared belief by a community. Theology, however, is a rational process based in systematic thought that sets about analyzing religion and its many facets. There are many different types of theological inquiry, but the root words come from Greek meaning “to study God.”

 

Why are there so many years of Jesus’ life unaccounted for in the New Testament?

 

It is true that Christian scriptures only record Jesus’ life from birth until he was about twelve, and the picks up again at around age thirty. Though no one knows for sure what went on during those “missing years” there are lots of theories. Some believe Jesus went east and studied the great eastern philosophies, whose influence arguably can be seen in his adult teaching. Another myth is that he traveled with Joseph of Arimathea, the wealthy man who provided Jesus’ tomb at upon his death, to England. There are also theories that he spent time in Alexandria, Egypt, with which he seemed to be familiar as suggested by the gospel texts.

Big Fat Jesus Head podcast, Part 2, now posted

Saturday, March 14th, 2009

I posted part two of the Big Fat Jesus Head podcast series last night. you can catch it on iTunes and other podcatchers of course, or go right to it with this link:

http://christianpiatt.podbean.com/

Also, if you have not already signed up for my new free monthly E-Zine, “Faith Portals,” just go to www.christianpiatt.com and drop your email in the box at the top of the home page.

Christian

Church 2.0: Spider vs Starfish (Part three)

Wednesday, March 11th, 2009

Church 2.0: Spider vs. Starfish – Part three

Originally published on DisciplesWorld’s News Muse blog

 

I’ve been tossing out obscure phrases like “starfish church” and “church 2.0,” more or less to keep people curious, but these actually are legitimate concepts when considering future models for organized religion.

 

After World War II, churches were booming, and we could hardly build or expand the worship halls fast enough to keep up. Married couples generally stayed together for a lifetime, people stayed in the same job and the same home for decades, and there was an inherent trust in institutions to care for of us.

 

Then things changed.

 

Since the sixties, our relationship with institutional structures has changed, and in many ways, has become more suspicious. From government and religion to corporate America and even the institution of marriage, we approach such systems with an increasingly critical eye.

 

Along with this skepticism has come a new sense of resourcefulness too. The post-boomer generations have begun to learn to create a sense of community, belonging and “place” where and when they can, unable to consistently depend on institutions, or even their families of origin, to provide the stable foundation they seek.

 

Enter the Digital Age, which has expanded time, space, communication and community in ways most could not have even imagined before. Though some are suspicious, or even critical, of phenomena such as Social Networking (Facebook, MySpace, etc) tools, they are unquestionably filling a need. With more than 250 million subscribers, MySpace is one of the largest networks in the world.

 

The curious thing about Social Networking tools – also considered to be a part of Web 2.0 – is that they technically offer very little, if anything. Although Facebook offers users some memory space on a giant computer somewhere, and a few handy applications, the content primarily comes from the users. In the end, Facebook creates nothing except for the opportunity for community to happen.

 

Amazon, which is one of the biggest Web 1.0 companies, actually has an inventory of products they sell to consumers. Craigslist, on the other hand, which is a Web 2.0 system, helps to connect people who have things others want, like a giant international classified ad site. They own nothing and sell nothing to consumers, but they create a forum within which billions of dollars worth of goods and services are exchanged every year.

 

Historically, churches have been possessors and purveyors of information, organizing and managing the systems in a top-down structure within which the faithful can acquire what they seek. However, this “Church 1.0” model assumes a general trust in the systems in power, which continues to erode. Our instinct as church is to ratchet down, to tighten the reins as we sense the threat of our own irrelevance.

 

But perhaps it’s not the message we bear that’s no longer relevant, but the way we impart it. Perhaps the institutions that once represented security and authority to the culture now actually hinder our mission more than they help.

 

Perhaps there’s something to this whole Web 2.0 thing that we could learn from.

 

Such systems are not novel. From Apache tribal systems to Facebook and arguably the first-century church, so-called 2.0 systems operate with little or no budget, with little or no paid leadership, and like the early church, cannot be stopped once they catch fire.

 

Before Church was an institution, it was a movement. Its only purpose for existence was to spread the gospel – the good news – with a sense of urgency more powerful than fear of the risks. And like a starfish, the forces bent on dispelling them only caused them to scatter and multiply.

 

That is, and was, the essence of Church 2.0 – the Starfish Church. The model is right there in scripture. The children of the digital age get it, but do we?

Church 2.0: Spider vs Starfish (Part two)

Monday, February 16th, 2009

Originally posted at the DisciplesWorld blog.

Last week, I threw a bit of a teaser out there, with this whole “Spider vs. Starfish” concept. As I’m sure many of you have lost hours of sleep, and perhaps have had a hard time forcing down a decent meal in eager anticipation of the follow-up, I figured it wasn’t fair to keep you waiting any longer.

The whole concept came from a book on business management practices, called The Starfish and the Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations by Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom. The model presented here resonates with the idea I’ve had for a while now that church could learn a whole lot from the structure and governance of organizations like twelve-step groups like Alcoholics Anonymous. After all, they have reached millions with virtually no budget, and they seem immune to economic conditions, flourishing while we institutional churches struggle to keep the doors open.

So what’s the difference?

I might help answer that question with another question; if you cut the head off a spider, what happens? We all know it dies, right? But what if you cut off the arm of a starfish? It just grows another starfish. Where you once had one, there are now two. In trying to stop it, you actually only made it stronger.

So, how many of our churches are more like spiders instead of starfish? I thought so.

Here’s where the advent of recent technology might teach us an awful lot. If Rebecca Woods will indulge me in the future, I’d gladly post some other blogs about using applications like facebook, podcasting and blogging to further our ministries, but for now, let’s consider them a little more systematically.

In particular, consider a phenomenon known as “Web 2.0.” This is much like the so-called “leaderless organizations” that Brafman and Beckstrom are referring to. They are viral in nature, highly adaptable and scalable, and relatively easy to manage because the users generate the content.

I’ll offer a few examples to clarify the differences between a 1.0 – or spider – model and a 2.0 – or starfish – system. Amazon, which has become a behemoth presence for online commerce, would be considered a 1.0 model. They have a product that they sell to customers, pretty much in the traditional model, despite their lack of storefronts. Though they’ve been successful up until now, they are depending on some basic truths about the market. If, for example, the cost of paper or transport fuel went through the roof, it would affect their business model significantly, or if a supplier shut down, they might be stuck.

eBay, on the other hand, is a 2.0, or starfish, model. eBay, as you probably know, doesn’t actually sell anything. All they do is create the framework within which people can conduct business. This means they can be a conduit for everything from sweat socks to automobiles and homes. If the price of gold plummeted and jewelry markets crumbled, people could just sell more baseball cards or used books on eBay.

Another comparison might be looking at the difference between the traditional military structure versus a network like Al Qaida. Though you can throw an entire military into chaos by attacking its senior leadership or supply lines, Al Qaida is hard to stop in one sense because it is a headless beast. You kill or capture current leaders, and a dozen more pop up in their place. The system is so adaptable, it’s hard to stop.

Our churches have been based upon a 1.0 “spider” model for centuries, and so far, it’s worked pretty well. But now, we’re surrounded by starfish like facebook, Craigslist, BitTorrent, MySpace, eBay and the like, and we wonder why it is that we, the institutional church, don’t seem relevant to younger people.

For starters, we not only don’t look familiar: we don’t even look relevant.

People may not be able to put their finger on it, but they know 1.0 versus 2.0 when they see it, especially younger people. There are consequences to being a starfish organization instead of a spider, such as letting go some control over the content exchanged within the system, but there’s great opportunity as well.

In future installments, I’ll discuss a few more ways in which we can employ Church 2.0 methods in or existing congregations, both with technology, and even on our boards and in our Sunday School rooms. But for now, look around you and see if you can start spotting the differences between the spiders and starfish, all around you.

Until next time!

Christian Piatt is the author of MySpace to Sacred Space: God for a New Generation, and Lost: A Search for Meaning, and he is a columnist for various newspapers, magazines and websites on the topics of theology and popular culture. He is the co-founder of Milagro Christian Church in Pueblo, Colorado with his wife, Amy. For more information about Christian, visit www.christianpiatt.com.