Talking about music is like dancing about architecture… Rotating Header Image

February, 2010:

4 Important Things About Strengths, Skills, and Talents

Developing other leaders and mentoring them is a core component of pastoring. Matt Perman (Desiring God | What’s Best Next) makes some excellent observations on the difference between “what I’m good at” and “what my strengths are” and the difference between skills and talents:

1. “What I’m Good At” vs. “What My Strengths Are”
People should make sure not to confuse “what I’m good at” with “what my strengths are.” Your strengths are what make you feel strong. If something is a strength, you are also good at it. But you can be good at something that you hate doing. That is not a strength, and shouldn’t receive your focus.

2. Know What You Enjoy
This shows more specifically what role the individual has to play in discerning his or her calling—for nobody but the individual knows what he or she really enjoys. The community is critical in identifying “misyearnings”—things you enjoy but are bad at. That then needs to be integrated with something that only the individual can asses—your own awareness of what you find most energizing.

3. Lack of Skill vs. Lack of Talent
It’s worth noting that lack of skill can often be confused for lack of talent. The community of advisers needs to keep this in mind. Talent can be defined as the innate ability that allows you to do something well. This is a basic feature of one’s personality and isn’t chosen. Skills, on the other hand, can be learned. If you have talent but lack skills, you might not be very good yet. So people might encourage you to go in another direction, but in reality you could get the skills and, combined with your talents, become very effective.

4. Talent, Skill, and Knowledge
Strength in something comes from talent, skill, and knowledge. The key to developing a strength is to add knowledge and skill where you have talent. Your talent multiplies the effect of those skills and knowledge, resulting in a much greater effect than adding them in areas where you lack talent.

Point #2 is very important, especially this part: “The community is critical in identifying ‘misyearnings’—things you enjoy but are bad at.” There is no easy way to do this. People get hurt and sometimes leave. In order to avoid this, leaders sometimes allow people to keep doing something everyone knows they’re bad at for the sake of not hurting their feelings.

Point #3 is another tricky one to manage. We often cut the line too early on people who have undeveloped talent, but it is important to allow them to development in an environment that will ensure that this development will continue. Allowing them to lead in the wrong setting too early in their development can damage their confidence and can form a strong perception in those they are leading that they are incapable and/or inept.

(HT: JT)

Naysaying (Part 3): Rules of Engagement

Let’s review:

In Part 1 Naysaying and the Naysaying Naysayers Who Naysay we looked at the practice of naysaying and second-hand naysaying and examined how it works

In Part 2 The “Anti-Book” we looked at the “anti-book”, which is a scrapbook of sorts that claims to be authoritative on all matters relating to the one(s) who have been issued “nay” status.

In Part 3 I offer the following advice for dealing with widely naysayed materials:

1. Go ahead: read the scout’s report

If it’s a report from a scout you trust, by all means take his advice. A trusted scout is one whose reviews you usually agree with after having read the same books yourself. You may both be completely out to lunch of course, but at least you know you think the same way and will probably process future books in a similar way.

2. Seek balance

Read at least one positive review of the naysayed book, especially if you can find one from an unexpected source. An unexpected source is someone who usually falls in line with the naysay posse but occasionally breaks away.

3. Don’t pretend

Go ahead and warn others off of reading the book if you’ve chosen not to read it based on a trusted scout’s report. But make sure you point them to a review by someone who’s actually read the book – DO NOT TALK ABOUT THE BOOK AS IF YOU’VE READ IT YOURSELF. This is dishonest and misleading.

4. Obey the rules of context

You may quote passages from the book if you have at least read the entire chapter from which the quote is taken.

5. Never, never, never publish an anti-book

If you have that much time on your hands, spend it telling people what you’re for, not what you’re against.

6. Don’t be a sycophant

No one, regardless of his status among those you trust, is infallible. Absolute trust in any man leads very quickly to cultish devotion. And that goes for Piperettes* as much as McLarenites**.

* A Piperette is someone who puts more faith in John Piper than in Jesus Christ

** A McLarenite is someone who puts more faith in Brian McLaren than in Jesus Christ

Naysaying (Part 2): The “Anti-Book”

In yesterday’s post I focused on the common practice of second-hand naysaying. I also mentioned something that serves as a the naysayer’s source book: the “anti-book”. This book (an example here) is a scrapbook of sorts that claims to be authoritative on all matters relating to the one(s) who have been issued “nay” status. It is seen as “the One Book to rule them all” and is used to surgically dissect current candidates for heresy.

Part 2 : Dealing with the “Anti-Book”

Here’s a rule of thumb when encountering such a book: if you haven’t heard of or read anything by half of the authors you’re reading about, STOP READING, PUT DOWN THE BOOK, and most certainly do not distribute the book to others with an encouragement to read it.

Reading this type of book can lead to the type of heresy hunting that causes us to reject biblical ideas because those we accuse of being heretics have adopted them. For an (unfortunately real-life) example: Rick Warren uses the word “reconciliation”, therefore reconciliation is part of the heretic agenda, and therefore we shouldn’t speak of it.

Some folks are so naively over-protective of their doctrine that they occasionally reject what they actually believe because it is taught by one they consider a heretic. This is usually evidence that the person is spending more time reading anti-books than the Good Book they claim to be protecting.

You Can’t Quote That…

Another attack mode is source assassination. In this practice, the truthfulness of a quote is judged not on its own merit, but on its source. This is done in an effort to expose the sin of association. Regardless of the length or content of the quote – it could be the most biblical statement this side of scripture – if the messenger is on the naysay list, the quote is rejected outright and you get closer to making the naysay list yourself.

The general idea here is to make you mindful of whom you quote, regardless of the content of the quote. You may get away with the quote if you leave it unattributed, but attributed to a certain name, it will be rejected simply on the basis of its source.

I once sent a very conservative friend a great quote about the mission of the church, which he wholeheartedly endorsed and agreed with. He was not pleased to learn shortly thereafter that the words were actually uttered by the newly minted Pope Benedict XVI.

As I remember it, he accused me of trickery, and I confess that he was half right.

Tomorrow: (click here to read)—>Rules of Engagement – what should you do with naysayed materials?

An Overview of Canada


Tom Brokaw (NBC) narrates an accurate and respectful overview of my home and native land – Canada.

The Bible: Rated R?

There’s a good post over at iMonk.com by Chaplain Mike about Bible stories. This is timely since I just finished reading Genesis again this morning. Some excerpts below… read the whole thing here.

Most of us have the idea that the Bible is a nice book for nice people about nice folks who said and did nice things, where everything leads to a nice and happy ending.

Take the first book in the Bible, the book of Genesis, for example. It’s likely that many people have Sunday School images in their minds when they think of Genesis—they picture God creating the world, Adam and Eve frolicking in the Garden of Eden, Noah gathering cute little animals onto the ark and God putting a beautiful rainbow in the sky, Abraham and Sarah having a baby in their old age, and Joseph wearing his coat of many colors. Nice.

But here’s what’s in the real, unedited version:

  • A man and woman standing in nakedness and shame, blaming each other for what they did wrong.
  • An angry and envious man, lures his brother into a field, brutally murders him, and then tries to cover it up.
  • The world becomes so corrupt and violent that God decides to virtually wipe out the human population and start over.
  • Noah gets drunk, and one of his son dishonors him by committing an immoral act in his father’s bedroom.
  • Abraham twice tries to pass his wife off to another man to save his own skin. Later, his son Isaac does the same thing.
  • Abraham sleeps with one of the household servants so he can have an heir. This was his wife’s idea, but she becomes so jealous after it happens, that she angrily throws the woman and her son out of house to live in poverty and shame.
  • Lot offers to let a violent mob gang rape his daughters. Lot’s daughters later get their own father drunk and sleep with him so that they can have children.
  • Jacob, Isaac’s son, is a deceitful mama’s boy who tricks his father and brother out of important family legal rights. He has to run away from home so his brother won’t kill him.
  • He goes to work for his ruthless uncle, who keeps him in virtual slavery for decades. Jacob escapes by tricking him and running away.
  • Jacob’s wives live in constant jealousy and competition, continually tricking Jacob and each other in an ongoing battle for supremacy in the family.
  • Jacob’s sons loathe one of their brothers, sell him into slavery, then lie to their father and tell him he died.
  • Jacob’s daughter Leah is raped. Her brothers exact revenge by deceiving and then murdering the perpetrator, destroying and looting his city, and taking all his family members captive.
  • Judah refuses to find a husband for his widowed daughter-in-law, Tamar. So she disguises herself as a prostitute, tricks her father-in-law into sleeping with her, and becomes pregnant.

I had a pastor friend who once told me he was planning to do a family teaching series from Genesis. I’m afraid I wasn’t very kind. In fact, I laughed out loud and said, “What are you going to talk about, how to be a complete bum and still have God bless your family?”

He didn’t think it was funny. He had a overly pious view of the Bible that didn’t allow for the ugly stuff. However, that’s what Genesis (and the rest of the Bible) is like!

I encourage you to read the Bible for what it really is and says. It’s not very nice, but it’s real, and I believe it puts broken things back together.

Read the whole thing here.

Making an Idol of Ambition

John Starke dishes out four things every Pastor I know (myself included) needs to hear. These are a few things for the ambitious — those who tend to make an idol of work, accomplishments, and their self-worth — to keep in mind:

1. You cannot accomplish everything – only God can
God limited the day to 24 hours and designed our bodies to sleep a good bit of it. We should be thankful workers – thankful for sleep and thankful that God is faithful to finish all that he promises.

2. The universe does not rely upon your accomplishments – only God’s
It is amazing how quickly people forget how little the world relies upon what we accomplish in one day, week, year, or lifetime. This is a good reminder for pastors. The future of your Church relies upon the faithfulness of God, not the amount of work accomplished in your work week. It doesn’t take long to realize the implications this point should have upon our prayer life.

3. We are only the means to what God accomplishes, not the source
A Christian work ethic has at its core the Creator-creature distinction. We are not God, but a created being which God delights in using to accomplish his will. His will does not depend upon our inclusion in it.

4. We are only the means to what God accomplishes, not the culmination of God’s accomplishments
It’s easy to over-estimate the importance of our daily tasks. A good perspective to keep concerning our tasks is that they are not the culmination of all God is doing. They are small means to the end God has intended.

If you’re a Pastor and you’re like me, these are not things you need to be reminded of occassionally, you need to read these every day.

In fact, why don’t you print this out and post it on your office door?

Freedom: Love (Bailey Book Study – Part 4)

These posts will be a series of study notes and questions for the book that our Life Group is studying together. The book is “Upsidedown” by Tim Bailey. You can read a review of the book and order it here. Feel free to read along and join the discussion in the comments section below.

The content for these questions is found on pages 33-50.

FREEDOM

“Freedom can be frightening after being in bondage for so long.” Can you talk about any examples of this, either from your own life or someone else’s?

“The deep human tragedy is that we are in bondage to ourselves – the freedom we need is freedom from ourselves. We are the most oppressive master we’ll ever know… demanding more than we can give – and never being satisfied.”

Why is it then that freedom is most often seen as “being able to do whatever you want to do?

When given the choice between choosing God or choosing self as master, we always seem to choose self?

Romans 6 talks about freedom and slavery. It is a passage that is packed with implications about to what and to whom we are to be enslaved. The point here is not escaping slavery but to be enslaved to the right thing.

“Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.” (verses 16-18)

What can it possibly mean to be a slave of righteousness?

LOVE

“Imagine living life as if you are loved -not for who you are, what you have done, or what you could do – but simply because of who it is that loves you.”

We often hear that “In order to love others, first you have to love yourself.” Is this really the way it works?

Keeping Sabbath

Do you keep a Sabbath? Do you have one day every week where you ignore the phone, your email, and your “to do” list? I was going to write a great post on what it means to take a sabbath… and then I saw that Darryl Dash already had. In “God’s Gift of Sabbath”, he points out the following:

1. See the Sabbath as a time to cease work and to enter into joyful activities that refresh the soul.

2. Sabbath begins to set the pattern for my entire life.

3. Sabbath is an act of trust in God and a statement about ourselves

4. Be radically counter-cultural and figure out how to enjoy the gift of Sabbath in your own life

Above are just the section headings. Read the whole post here.

I can’t really claim to be succeeding at this at this point but I’m working on it. As I’ve mentioned before, switching from a job where 44 hours was way too much time to do what little work I had to do to a job where 60 hours hardly seems adequate has its thrills but also its drawbacks. On the thrill side, I can’t wait to get to work every day. I’m doing all the things I love AND I’m getting paid to do it. On the drawback side, consistently working 60-hour weeks is tiring.

The main issue is making the adjustment from a “work that bores me” to a “work I can’t get enough of” culture. It is very easy for me to work too many hours. Anne Marie can verify this.

Additional resources:

1.       The Rest of God by Mark Buchanan

2.       Keeping Sabbath: A Neglected and Necessary Discipline by David Barker

Reasons for keeping sabbath (David Barker):

  1. The release from the tyranny of (over) work
  2. The cessation of the need to be productive
  3. To bask in the blessing of God
  4. To consciously reflect on something holy
  5. The celebration of redemption and release from slavery (slaves were never allowed to keep Sabbath in pagan cultures)
  6. It anticipates the life to come
  7. To reflect on being and not doing—a day not to get things done, but to reflect on what God has done and is doing.

3.       Matt Chandler preaching about Sabbath (

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

PDFstudy notes in PDF).

Delusions of Emergent Utopia – A Review of Phyllis Tickle’s “The Great Emergence”

I’m no historian. You probably aren’t either. Fortunately, this fact probably won’t serve as a handicap when reading this short book of history.

“The Great Emergence” is a book that makes sweeping generalizations about large swaths of world history. Many conclusions are drawn from these generalizations, which leaves us non-historians in a bit of a bind: in order to accept Tickle’s conclusions, we must first accept her version of the events. Without extensive knowledge of these historical events, it is difficult to refute or agree with either.

But before this really becomes a problem the book shows itself to be an exercise in unintentionally amusing hyperbole. Likewise, the concerns with historical accuracy subside, inversely proportional to the level of – again, unintentional – humor that accompanies the escalating hyperbole.

Pretending to be a short but concise assessment of current events, the book is more like an impressionist painting than an accurate portrait. The subtitle sets the goal of answering “How Christianity is Changing and Why,” but it is a small book with too few pages (165) in which to accomplish the task. In many places, the historical flybys leave so much unsaid that regardless of your level of historical knowledge it’s pretty easy to tell that too much of the story is missing. At other points in the book, inordinate amounts of space are spent on tangential developments at various historical junctures in church history.

Tickle sees the current period of upheaval as an event in significance equal to the Great Schism and the Great Reformation. What we are living through, by her estimation, is the Great Emergence – and this is a cause for great elation.

In one particularly effusive section, Tickle pictures the movement itself as a great healer:

“One does not have to be particularly gifted as a seer these days,” she says, “to perceive the Great Emergence already swirling like balm across that wound, bandaging it with genuinely egalitarian conversation and with an undergirding assumption of shared brotherhood and sisterhood in a world being redeemed.” (p29)

A sentence of greater utopian delusion has seldom been written.

It is little wonder that those who are leaders of emergent Christianity call Tickle a friend and ally. Of Doug Pagitt she says he is “one of emergent Christianity’s most influential and brilliant thinkers.” She calls Brian McLaren “the symbolic leader of the Great Emergence… in the same way that Martin Luther became the symbolic leader and spokesman for the Great Reformation.” It’s all a bit much, regardless of the contributions these two may have made.

Sola Scriptura

Tickle chooses as a common thread for the book the metaphor of a rummage sale, and though the metaphor appears at regular intervals, it is never quite explained or successfully coaxed into a relevant illustration of historical upheavals. We’re not sure what is being sold at the rummage sale or what the current one has in common with past one, etc.

A third of the way through the book 46, Tickle goes to work on the Reformation doctrine of sola scriptura, claiming, “Even many of the most die-hard Protestants among us have grown suspicious of ‘Scripture and Scripture only.’” She goes on:

“We begin to refer to Luther’s principle of ‘sola scriptura, scriptura sola’ as having been little more than the creation of a paper pope in place of a flesh and blood one. And even as we speak, the authority that has been in place for five hundred years withers away in our hands.”

Her evidence: Paul’s injunctions against women, the one-time acceptance of slavery, and flat-earth theology. For her, this evidence is damning evidence; she leaves no room for other options. Paul says one thing (women must keep quiet in the assembly), we do another (women are allowed to speak), therefore sola scriptura is an illusion and scriptural authority is eroded. This narrow view of Sola Scriptura is laughable. Occasional doctrinal corrections cannot be used as indicators of future change, as Tickle proposes on the following pages.

Tickle also makes parallel comparisons between the current and historical hegemony. Hegemony is leadership or dominance, esp. by one country or social group over others. In the 16th century, the ruling hegemony was the Roman Catholic Church. It is pretty difficult to draw a modern parallel of a uniform hegemony against which Emergents are protesting or which they are attempting to reform.

In short, her parallels are too labored to be convincing, and too weak to maintain their connection to their supposed historical equivalents. Just who or what constitutes the current hegemony? We’re not told.

Grandma, Tin Lizzie, and the Decline of Protestantism

On pages 86-87, she proposes a line of social theory involving grandma (yours), Norman Rockwell, and the automobile that defies reason. Of Grandma, Tickle claims that “When the Tin Lizzie took away her kingdom of influence, it was Protestantism more than Grandma that came untethered and was diminished.” This attempt at a two-page synopsis of a wide range of events ends up looking more like the work of Salvador Dali than Norman Rockwell. Like Dali’s paintings, Tickle’s words are fun to look at but making sense of them is an arduous task.

Shortly after (91-93), in what seems to be another attempt at a “Dali Word Picture”, Tickle claims that pastoral authority was singlehandedly supplanted by Alcoholics Anonymous. Huh?

In another episode of incoherent and unfounded “fact-stating” Tickle claims that, “In the hands of the Emergents, Christianity has grown exponentially, not only in geographic base and numbers, but also in passion and in effecting belief in the Christian call to the brotherhood of all peoples.” Is there some evidence of this of which none of us are aware?

Tickle’s penchant for hyperbole is, if nothing else, amusing. I quote the following (p135) at length for your amusement:

“There is enormous energy in centripetal force, especially as it gathers more and more of its own kind into itself. Centripetal force, though, is usually envisioned by us as running downward, like the water in a bathtub drain. The gathering force of the new Christianity did the opposite. It ran upward and poured itself out, like some bursting geyser, in expanding waves of influence and nourishment. Where once the corners had met, now there was a swirling center, its centripetal force racing from quadrant to quadrant in every widening circles, picking up ideas and people from each, sweeping them into the center, mixing them up there, and then spewing them forth into a new way of being Christian, into a new way of being Church.”

Gathering… running… pouring, bursting, expanding, nourishing! Swirling! Racing! WIDENING! SWEEPING! MIXING!!! SPEWING!!!!!!

If you want to know what reading The Great Emergence is like, imagine your newest married-in relative attempting to write your family history. She may have something to say and plenty to add in the future, but hearing a few of Uncle Joe’s stories hardly qualifies her to write a definitive history of your family – or a map of its future for that matter. Tickle may well be truthful to a mainline perspective on historical events, and she may even have something to offer in predicting the trajectory of mainline denominations, but this book’s target is primarily Evangelicals, with whom, as far as we now, she has little affinity or experience.

Conclusion

Unfortunately, the book is more an exercise in poetic impressionist prose than historical analysis or prophetic utterance. It is a short read, but in the end not really worth the time. This much history deserves a more thorough treatment than 165 pages in a small book.

Are we on the verge of some significant shifts in the Western Church? It’s pretty safe to say that we are. It would be difficult to name another period in history where so many questions and debates and trends and issues were at play.  But to draw a parallel between this time and the periods of upheaval of the past is a bit overblown.

I have not read any of Tickle’s other books, but I’ve heard they’re quite good. I have heard numerous interviews with her and enjoyed them. Tickle’s thoughts, analysis, and prescriptions for our current age of upheaval are far narrower in scope than the book purports them to be. There is plenty of revision here masquerading as synopsis.

The Absence of Solitude – (The Medialle House Journals – 8)

***This is a series of posts based on writing I did on personal retreat in October 2009. Read earlier posts in the series here: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 |Part 5|Part 6|Part 7***

The most famous work on spiritual disciplines among Evangelicals is Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth by Richard J. Foster, but the origins of my interest and practice go back a bit further. Around 1993, as an 18-year-old I began to read my first Thomas Merton book, Thoughts In Solitude. I had just begun my adult life in a way as I was beginning my first full-time job after graduating high school.

I decided to start daily morning devotions and Merton’s book was the one I decided to start with. And these two days at Medaille are an attempt to re-experience those days when I first discovered the nourishment I found in the works of Thomas Merton.

The book (Thoughts In Solitude) is now in very rough shape, having been read more than once, and referenced countless times. The cover has come apart from the pages; the pages themselves are coming apart from one another.

It was written in 1953 and 1954 during an intense time of solitude and meditation afforded to Merton, as he puts it, “by the grace of God and the favor of his Superiors.” There was no intention on his part for the book to address advanced or sensational adventures in these disciplines, but rather to state their basic function and importance in the life of a contemplative.

“Society depends for its existence,” Merton sets out in the introduction, “on the inviolable personal solitude of its members.” Indeed, we are in deep trouble then. “When society is made up of men who know no interior solitude,” he continues, “it can no longer be held together by love: and consequently it is held together by a violent and abusive authority.”

John Calvin said, “Without knowledge of self there is no knowledge of God.” Merton echoes this thought in saying that, “Real self-conquest is the conquest of ourselves not by ourselves but by the Holy Spirit. Self-conquest is really self-surrender. Yet before we can surrender ourselves we must become ourselves. For no one can give up what he does not possess.”

More precisely – we have to have enough mastery of ourselves to renounce our own will into the hands of Christ – so that he may conquer what we cannot reach by our own efforts.

The driving force of Merton’s thinking and subsequent writing was the nature and conquest of “true self.” However, this was no self-absorbed, pop-psychology, self-fulfillment endeavor.  Merton believed that the “true self” could only be found in God, that seeking God and seeking self were one and the same pursuit.  To seek and then know God’s will is to know one’s own purpose; to know what God has planned is to know how to proceed; to know what God is doing is to glory in the trials we face.

The search for self begins and ends in the search for God. By seeking the One who created us, knows us, and has a plan for us, we will know both Him and ourselves.  For we are only truly ourselves as we are in His will and nothing short of that self is the true self.

Two references – both positive – can be found, not in the works of CS Lewis but in his letters.  In a letter to Dom Bede Griffiths on December 20th, 1961 Lewis asks, “Have you read anything by an American Trappist called Thomas Merton?  I’m at present on his No Man Is an Island.  It is the best new spiritual reading I’ve met for a long time.” Lewis mentions Merton again three days later in a letter to an American friend.  “I’ve been greatly impressed,” Lewis writes, “by the work of an American Trappist called Thomas Merton – No Man Is an Island. You probably know it?”

Lewis in league with Merton. Who would have guessed? Could this be a doorway for others also to take interest in the works of Thomas Merton?