Suburban Legend: White Flight, Black Flight and Inner City Blight

Most of us have heard an urban legend or two.

But have you heard of a Suburban Legend. Here’s one: The wealth of people who live in the suburbs has grown tremendously while the wealth of those who were stuck in the central city has never materialized. Unfortunately, this suburban legend is true. A 5-bedroom house in Harlem or downtown Philadelphia is worth a fraction of what a 5 bedroom house in the suburbs is worth.

If you live in the suburbs, like I do, you may be thinking, “Great! What luck! So glad I got out when I did!”

(If you are aware of our history as a nation, then nothing I’m about to write will surprise you. But, seeing that I am just learning all of this, I decided to write about it just in case anyone else is left who is as ignorant as I was before this week.)

Several weeks before his death in 1968, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., told a group of sanitation workers in Memphis:

“Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know now that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger?”[1]

Makes sense, right? But, then again, I always admired Dr. King and thought that he made a lot of sense.

Here’s the part I didn’t know:

A huge number of people in our country were screwed out of the ability to increase their wealth. As a country, we played a game of  “3-card Monty” with them. We created huge factories in the cities. The cities had everything. Jobs. Housing. Transportation. So, we invited these people to come into the cities, work hard and get a taste of the American Dream.

When they came, homes were built for them. Lots of homes, but not suburban homes. Mostly these homes were built up. Huge apartment buildings were built one after another to house these factory workers. We even used Federal money to subsidize them.

These people moved in and worked hard. (Living the dream.)

Everyone knew we needed more housing and with better transportation, people, especially the middle class, could afford to travel a little further to work. So we built suburbs. Some of these suburbs were very specific about who could and who could not live in them. Levittown is possibly the most famous example, but not an isolated one. (Google it, if like me, you had never heard of it.)

Levittown received those same government subsidies. (And lots and lots of people were shut out from receiving any of the benefit of that money.)

They were free. Free to live where they wanted, work where they wanted, and grab hold of the American Dream just like everyone else. But, they just weren’t free to live there, in Levittown or in a hundred other suburbs like it around the country. And, because of that many were stuck in the inner city.

Whites left the inner city to move to the suburbs, to find a better life. Good for them. Eventually, the jobs followed them out of the city. So, there were the blacks, left in the city, with fewer and fewer jobs, no place to move to, and free. (Free for what? Were they supposed to survive and thrive on the simple fact that they were no longer slaves?)

But, some blacks did make it out to the suburbs. Some builders were very clear that their suburbs were open to blacks. We will sell to anyone. (That makes me feel better. How about you?)

But, when someone said that, guess what happened more often than not. Blacks would buy houses and move in. Actually, just blacks would buy houses and move in. Whites usually wouldn’t.

Why? You may wonder.

Because whites are racist? Maybe some of them were. Others were just smart. A home in Levittown, which catered to 90% of the population was worth more than a home in a suburb that was perceived as catering to 10% of the population. It wasn’t a smart investment for a white to buy in these mixed race communities.

In other places, whites had already moved in and when laws changed, circumstances changed and blacks started to have greater opportunities, so they moved in as neighbors. Fearing their property values would decrease as more blacks moved in and more whites moved out, many whites bought homes further out into the suburbs, aka White Flight.

Were these fears legitimate? Yep. In almost every case, as whites left communities and blacks moved in, the property values stagnated and began to fall.

Why? Because blacks brought with them city problems higher crime, more poverty, and greater dependence on government programs? Nope. How do I know? Because it didn’t take that long for property values to drop.

They dropped fast. Too fast. So, why did they drop so fast? Because whites left these communities in droves. Supply and Demand. All of a sudden, a few black families move to a neighborhood and whether out of irrational prejudice or rational fear of losing wealth, whites fled to new communities.

If whites had stayed put, their property values would have stayed put. Since they didn’t, blacks now had a new community to move into, but there was still little true integration. And, the ability of blacks to build wealth remained stagnant.

So I can prove my point: there was a community that tried things a little differently. Oak Park, a suburb of Chicago, saw diversity as a positive thing for their community. They knew that the fears behind White Flight were legitimate, so they insured the property values, so that a family could be assured that their home would not lose its value.

As a result, whites stayed, blacks moved in and diversity was realized. Win-win.

I’m sure there’s more to it than a “They lived happily ever after,” but it serves to prove the point, that the argument has merit. White Flight is to blame for property values dropping, not an influx of blacks into a neighborhood.

So, again and again, as whites moved further into the suburbs, blacks were left closer to the center of cities. All in the name of building wealth. Blacks who were trying to better their lot in life, for themselves and their children, were shut out, again and again.

Three-Card Monty. See here it is, come get it. Oh, did you think it was there. No its here. Come get it. No, not there. Now it’s here. Meanwhile, the whites acquired wealth through hard work, careful planning, good investment, and a system that was tilted in their favor. Meanwhile blacks continued to lag behind in every respect, always fighting for a level playing field. But every argument is met by, “What about innocent whites? They didn’t do anything to you.” In other words, “Don’t blame me. I worked hard and played by the rules.”

But, the game was rigged from the start.

Forget race for a moment and think about the frustration that you would feel if this happened to you. You hear about a job opportunity, so you leave everything you know and go to a city hoping to make a better life for your family. You work hard, save your money, and see that your children aren’t safe in this neighborhood. So, your kids grow up and they decide to move out of the dangerous part of the city into a nice neighborhood in the suburbs. They work hard, save their money and move, but when they get there, the landscape begins to change almost immediately. The neighborhood they saw when looking for a home is not the one they wind up raising their children in. Many of the neighbors they had seen when shopping for a home have left, taking with them their businesses, money and the infrastructure starts to fail.

And, your kids once again are growing up in neighborhoods that aren’t safe. And. All of this. All of it is subsidized by the government.

Now remember we are back in reality, and we are talking about blacks. If you are white, none of this happened to you. So does that make it any easier to swallow?

But, the government is supposed to be the good guys. Really. The government is the provider in our minds. It was through the government that blacks received freedom from the atrocity of slavery. It was through the government that the civil rights movement made huge strides toward integration and equal rights under the law. It is the government that makes discrimination illegal in the workplace.

It is natural that blacks would look to the government to solve this problem as well.

But, it was also the government that enslaved blacks in the first place, created these laws and then loopholes in the laws that allowed blacks to be shut out from wealth.

But, then I read about a woman applying for a job year after year without success until she alters her profile slightly, only changes her name, telephone number and checks off one box differently: the white box instead of the black box. In other words, you’re trying to tell me that a qualified black woman can’t get a job that a qualified white woman can get in a heartbeat. Today! This pisses me off. (Actually, it happened 2 years ago and this is the first I am hearing about it. That just makes me feel completely out of the loop. Because I am white, I have no idea what it is like to be black. Giving your child a “black sounding name” can hinder their ability to get a job? Really? Really. What world have I been living in? A world of white privilege.)

The disparity of wealth that Dr. King saw as the next hurdle is still the next hurdle. In today’s society, there is enough blame to go around. Whites are to blame for being racist or prejudice, for working the system to their benefit while not being concerned by the negative effects to blacks, and, even if unwittingly, benefiting from a system that is tilted in their favor. Middle and upper class blacks are to blame for Black Flight which continues to have a devastating effect on primarily black communities. Poor blacks are to blame whenever they give up, stop working hard, stop trying to make a better way for their kids and turn to drugs to numb the pain, crime to take what should have been given, or wait for the government to save them.

Ok, there is enough blame to go around. Now I see that more clearly than ever before.

For whites and middle/upper class blacks, the work that needs to be done is the easiest and for poor blacks, the work is the hardest. For one simple reason… resources. We have them and they don’t. There are tremendous obstacles standing in the way of American blacks, some cultural, some societal, some internal and many external. In light of all of this, every one of us bears responsibility and has an opportunity to make change.

So, we all have a role to play in bringing about true equality. Equality of opportunity. Equality of wealth building potential. Equality of income.

So what do we do?

First things first, see reality. Blacks stuck in a cycle of poverty today need more than just a good work ethic to pull themselves out of poverty. Disparity of wealth in this country was in large part by design. It is going to take a thoughtful plan to change it.

Then, we each have to acknowledge our part in this tragic story, whatever that may be. Confess it.

But it can’t end there. There must be a change in our actions. We have to act based on that new knowledge and understanding. We have to make different choices. We have to talk differently, spend our money differently, teach our kids differently, have different relationships, live in different communities.

We need to see diversity of race and culture as a benefit worth creating, worth building together. Then we need to sacrifice in order to make it happen.

Please comment and let me know what I am missing, who else I should read, or what your thoughts are about the next steps. What is my best next step and what is yours?

Bonus tidbit about race: Race is a human construct. Scientifically speaking, there is only one human race. Skin color and other differences in appearance, shape of eyes, type of hair, etc. are not genetically significant. “On average, any local population contains 85% of all genetic variation and any continent contains 94%.”[2] This is because as a race, humans have migrated and intermarried throughout their history. There has not been enough time or isolation for us to have developed into different races.

So, what we refer to as different races, white, black, etc. are only recent additions. “When the US was founded, equality was a radical new idea. But our early economy was based largely on slavery. The concept of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.”[3]

---

[1] Read more at: http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-03-06.htm

[2] http://www.pbs.org/race/004_HumanDiversity/004_01-quiz.htm

[3] http://www.pbs.org/race/001_WhatIsRace/001_00-home.htm

The "Routine" Procedure

The "Routine" Procedure

My 12 year old son had to go through a “routine” medical procedure a few months ago. I did okay getting him to the hospital. I did okay in the waiting room as we each read our books and watched old time Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons. I was feeling unsettled, but I could block that out with the tales about Coach Wooden and his dad. Then, we were called in and Ethan was given one of those hospital gowns. We told him which side was the front and how the breezy side was the back. And, that unsettled feeling I had been trying to ignore was rushing to the forefront. I hated this.

I wanted to be anywhere in the world but here. But, I had a choice. I could be somewhere else. But, I wanted to be here, here with my son to bring him comfort and peace and hope and confidence. So, there I sat or stood or paced and prayed and trusted and prayed and doubted and prayed and hoped. And this was a “routine” procedure. I cannot imagine living in a world where this was routine.

The anesthesiologist asked him if he wanted gas to relax him before she put the IV in to help rehydrate him. He shook his pale smiling head and said that he just couldn’t watch the needle go in, after that he’d be fine. She kept talking to him about how brave he was. He was brave. I wasn’t feeling brave.

I walked alongside him into the procedure room, praying and holding his hand until they put the tube in his mouth and started the real IV that knocked him out.

He was in the room for less than an hour when the doctor told us that everything was fine, maybe a little area of concern, but we could treat that with medicine if need be. They would let us know when the results came back from the tests they took.

Then, we sat watching him as he slept. And, I couldn’t help but feel completely helpless. The only thing I wanted in that moment was for my son to be okay, to wake up and be okay. The machines were all hooked up and every indication that modern medicine could offer told me he was okay and was going to be okay. But, my whole life was upside down.

I hated seeing him like that. I hated that helpless feeling, knowing that there was nothing I could do to fix this and make everything okay again. I could not protect him from this, and I could not speed his recovery. I could only wait and hope.

Even with the full confidence of science and medicine, my heart ached and my body followed. I felt like throwing up.

I bet most parents have felt that way about their children at one point or another. Hopeless and helpless. Even most of those without children can relate to seeing a loved one suffer, a parent, a sibling, or a friend.

Comparisons

If you compare your situation to mine, you might think I was overreacting.

I recently met a couple who lost their young son to cancer after a prolonged battle. I am sure they experienced every emotion and fear and doubt that I experienced in those few hours, but with greater intensity and prolonged over years instead of minutes. There was even a time when they thought he had won the fight and was in remission.

A woman from our church found out about her son’s death after he crashed his car on the way to the prom. I’m sure she experienced the same feelings of helplessness and hopelessness.

Surely my situation doesn’t compare to theirs.

That is the thing. They don’t compare. My pain doesn’t compare with your pain. My life doesn’t compare to your life. My faith doesn’t compare to your faith. We are all gifted by God with different hopes, different dreams, different courage and different faith. Because we all face different suffering, different heartache, different pain, and different loss. There is no way to compare ourselves with one other. There is no objective standard, no measuring rod.

And, besides, if there was a measuring rod, we would all fall into the deception of thinking that our lives are worse than somebody else’s, that life is unfair, or that we are better than someone else because of how we have lived our lives compared to them. And, I think we all know how destructive that is. It leads to bigotry, hatred, condescension, insults, arrogance, and that awful feeling that we are all alone, isolated from everyone around us.

That leads to the death of compassion. We close our hearts to others because we feel that they have closed their hearts to us.

And, that is where our suffering and pain is meant to lead us. When we compare ourselves to one another it separates us, divides us into those that are like us and those that are not.

Us vs. Them.

Compassion

But, compassion draws us toward one another. When we see someone else in pain and are drawn by God to feel, to have empathy, we experience oneness and unity. We feel compassion for them and love for them. We feel what God feels when he sees our suffering.

As Mother's Day came and went, I could not help but ache for those who have lost children.

It is obvious that our new friends have experienced peace and grace and hope throughout the torture of walking with their son through cancer and grieving his death. It is clear that the struggle for life and the defeat of death was not the whole story. They spoke about their son with smiles and love and hope. Together we laughed and played and spoke of Christ's love. They have a peace and confidence that doesn’t make sense.

They have a peace and confidence that medical and scientific progress couldn’t give me as I looked into the colorless face and lifeless expression of my son lying on that hospital bed.

Strange.

Their peace brings me peace. Just like their struggle can’t be compared to my struggle. Their peace can’t be compared to my peace.

But, I can draw strength and hope from it. I can and I am.

They have gone through hell manifesting itself on earth. They have experienced the result of sin on this earth fulfilling its goal, leading to death.

They have also experienced heaven on earth. A oneness with God, a peace, a love that they attribute to Christ.

This reminds me of a verse from the Bible that I have memorized over the years.

Christ was using an illustration about branches needing to remain connected to the vine in order to have life when he said, “apart from me you can do nothing.”

When I live apart from Christ and apart from the people he gave me to love, I die. If you have ever felt so depressed that you didn’t think you could get up out of bed, you didn’t think you could take another step, you didn’t care whether you lived or died, you couldn’t eat and all you wanted to do was sleep, then you have experienced this verse to some extent. “Apart from [Christ] you can do nothing.”

If you have suffered through addiction and felt powerless to break from the chains that you feel, then you too have experienced the truth of this verse, "apart from [Christ] you can do nothing."

If you have ever faced a life controlled and confined by fear, anxiety and worry. If you have ever said, "No, I just can't do that," because you were afraid you might have a panic attack. If you have ever not done when you knew in your heart was the right, good and best thing to do because you were terrified what might happen. Then, you have experienced the reality of the verse, "apart from [Christ] you can do nothing."

The flip side of that verse is one that many of us teach even to our youngest children. “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”

If apart from Christ we can’t even go to work or stop from taking a smoke or walk into a crowded mall, it makes sense that whatever Christ gives us the strength to do, we can do.

Like I said, I wanted to be anywhere in the world except there with my wife watching my son go through that. But, Christ gave me the strength to do what I wanted to do even more, be there for him. As Rachel and I sat by his bed, Christ gave us strength and peace and hope and courage. Christ gave us love that overcame our fear. My heart said to run and hide and try to numb the pain I felt. But, Christ’s love gave me the courage to sit and wait and pray and hope.

I guess that is always our choice. Face the fear and the pain and the suffering of life with love or not. We can always choose to run and hide and numb the pain or stand and fight in our own strength of mind and will and body.

But, in the end, the only choice we have is whether or not to remain in Christ. “Apart from me you can do nothing.” OR “I can do all things through Christ who gives me strength.”

Live in strength. Live in Christ.

Live in peace. Live in Christ.

Live in love. Live in Christ.

Choose life. Choose Christ.

Then, we will have compassion and empathy for those around us. Then, we will be a bright light offering hope and a way to those around us.

Thank you Jesus for being our light, our way, our hope, our peace and our strength.

One Protestant Pastor’s Response to the Pope’s Interview

If you were to ask me, a Protestant, how best to describe the Pope, and I answered, “He is a sinner,” you might take offense. But, when the interviewer asked him who he is, Pope Francis humbly responded, “I am a sinner.” Then, in Latin, he whispered, “I am a sinner, but I trust in the infinite mercy and patience of our Lord Jesus Christ, and I accept in a spirit of penance.”

Pope Francis is a humble man.

This glimpse into the Pope’s heart sheds light on some of his recent comments during an interview conducted in person by Antonio Spadaro, S.J., editor in chief of La Civiltà Cattolica. He has drawn some high praise and some strong criticism, but one thing that is plain from reading the interview: he desired neither. He spoke from his heart.

And, except in his traditional Catholic views which differ from my own, his words are hardly controversial. If anything he is seeking to reignite a commitment to the foundational truths of the church found in Scripture.

Church must remain open to all

As a church, whether Catholic or Protestant, he reminds us that the church is not a social club for a select few: “This church with which we should be thinking is the home of all, not a small chapel that can hold only a small group of selected people. We must not reduce the bosom of the universal church to a nest protecting our mediocrity.”

Harsh but true. Churches can easily cling to their mediocrity, to their legalistic, rigorist interpretation of Scripture or to their lax, nonchalance toward sin.

Walk with our neighbor

Pope Francis reminds us to walk alongside our neighbor, whether he is homosexual, whether she has had an abortion, or whether he denies God’s existence entirely. He claims that the pastor’s role, and arguably all Christians share this responsibility, is not to judge or condemn them but to walk beside them, offer them all kinds of “healing”, “warm the hearts of the people,” and “walk through the dark night with them.”

Pursue the un-churched

He challenges the church to be audacious in their pursuit of finding new roads into the lives of those who do not attend church, “who have quit or are indifferent”. 

Focus on the essentials

One of his most controversial statements came in this context: He said, “I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life.”

This leads to his oddly controversial statement, “We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”

He states his point clearly that not all of the teachings of the church are of equal importance. And, it is not the job of pastors to teach lists “of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.”

He goes on to say that we have to proclaim the essentials, on the necessary things, the Gospel. If the church tries to maintain a moral stronghold but ignores the Gospel, it is likely to fall like a “house of cards.” Our morality must flow out of the “simple, profound, radiant” Gospel.

Look to the past for courage not methods

“Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security,’ those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists­—they have a static and inward-directed view of things.”

God is in every person’s life

“God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else—God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.”

How can we call these controversial statements? They simply remind us all who God is and what he desires for His church. We must focus on the Gospel. Jesus Christ died on the cross to the penalty of sin for all humankind. Faith in Him is our only hope. 

The Mission, the Men, and Me

Peter Blaber wrote a book by that title. He wrote about his time as a Delta Force commander, his training and his pursuit of Osama Bin Laden. It is a fun read if you like to read about military strategy and maneuvers. It is also a condemnation of the military's over-dependence on hierarchies, unwavering commitment to its plans and of course, to transport helicopters and their systemic mistrust of ingenuity and improvisation. Mostly, it is a thinly veiled book on management and working with teams.

Blaber's lessons are easily applied to the church.

Like the military, church systems put up many of the same obstacles to accomplishing the Mission that God has set for the church and which most churches have signed onto.

I described that Mission like this yesterday:

The Mission is to live in community, grounded in the love of Christ, demonstrating that love to the world of people within their reach and influence. "Go out and train everyone you meet, far and near, in this way of life, marking them by baptism in the threefold name: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (MSG).

This is sometimes called the Great Commission. It was some of Christ's last words before leaving the earth and returning to heaven.

It's important.

It's clear.

And, it's clear that it is not that important to many of us.

The main principle that Blaber used to make decisions, even split-second decisions, was the inspiration for the title of the book. Early in his career, a battalion commander and Vietnam veteran taught them to him when he reported for duty in Korea.

"The first M stands for mission; it's the purpose for which you're doing what you're doing. Whether in your personal of professional life, make sure you understand it, and that it makes legal, moral and ethical sense, then use it to guide all your decisions. The second M stands for the men. Joshua Chamberlain, a Medal of Honor-receiving schoolteacher in the Civil War, once said that 'there are two things an officer must do to lead men: he must care for his men's welfare, and he must show courage.' Welfare of the troops and courage are inextricably linked. When it comes to your men you can't be good at one without being good at the other. Take care of your men's welfare by listening and leading them with sound tactics and techniques that accomplish your mission, and by always having the courage of your convictions to do the right thing by them. The final M stands for me. Me comes last for a reason. You have to take care of yourself, but you should only do so after you have taken care of the mission, and the men. never put your own personal well-being, or advancement, ahead of the accomplishment of your mission and taking care of your men."

Though we may disagree on how best to accomplish it, it's obvious what our first M, our Mission is.

The second M, Men, is our church. The Church all over the world, but specifically those around us, those we know personally and intimately and love deeply and sacrifice for and mourn with and celebrate with and have coffee with and pray with. They are the ones that we call when need someone to watch our kids while we fly to be at a family funeral. They are the ones who call you when their child is running a fever, and they can't decide whether to bring him to the ER or wait until morning. Those are your Men and women and children, friends, mentors, and more. "By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

The third M is Me and mine, my family, my career, my hopes, my dreams, my self-interest, my health, my wealth, and all that is mine. "Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment."

"Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves."

We need to consider all three M's and we need to keep them in a proper balance, not neglecting any one of them, not even ourselves.

One of the fatal mistakes that the military has made over the years, according to Blaber is that it has not been adaptable enough. It has not trusted the "man on the ground" to evaluate the situation and adapt the plan to meet the mission. Instead, they process the plan through all of the levels of hierarchy and get it signed off on by superior after superior, each one covering his own butt, making sure that they are not ultimately responsible for anything.

Then, the plan is etched in stone, no variations can be made or else whoever gave the orders to allow adaptation is on the hook if anything goes wrong.

Within Delta Force, which often depends upon small groups of soldiers, open communication lines despite rank or experience, and creative adaptation as a situation unfolds, Blaber found success when he wasn't bogged down by the military system.

He stressed the importance of preparing instead of planning. In all of life this makes complete sense. We prepare as best we can by being physically, spiritually, mentally and emotionally ready. Then, we head out on the mission. The plan is basic and leaves room for imagination. Success is defined as accomplishing the mission as opposed to following the plan.

In churches, the mission can easily get confused with the plan. Whether we are planning a potluck dinner or a missions trip across the world, we can spend countless hours developing a plan. We need this many people to arrive at this time and do these things. And, we need to make sure that we are all on time and that everyone knows what they are in charge of and who they report to. Got it! And, if we follow the plan, no one gets angry and lots of people are helped, then the plan is a success!

But, often, though we start with the Mission in mind, we end with only the plan in mind. Afterwards, we talk about whether or not we raised as much money as last year or whether we had enough people to help. And, we decide that in order to follow the plan better, we need to do things different next year.

It can be a rare moment when someone decides to forget the plan, "We are seeing God at work and we are going to follow the Holy Spirit's leading right now in this moment."

It might look like this...

Tom arrives on time to the church dinner, a little tired from work, but he has been praying about this opportunity to serve Christ for weeks. He reports to Sue, the head of the servers, and she gives him some simple directions. He prays one more time, "God use me to honor you."

While he is serving, he notices someone sitting alone and feels the compelling voice of the Holy Spirit, urging him to get some food and sit down next to him. Such a simple request from God that he would gladly obey.

But, he struggles in his heart with the pressures of the system. He signed up to serve, not to eat. If he doesn't serve, who will? What will Sue think of him if he abandons his post? What will the other servers think?

Then, he thinks, is it really God speaking to me? Maybe it is but maybe it's not.

I believe that this happens a thousand times in a thousand different ways because the system of the church is as broken as the system of our military. (In fact, I think the same could be said about our educational system, our governmental system and every system ever set up by people to control other people and protect them from themselves.)

One obvious example is church fundraising. Why is the church raising money? What does the church need money for?

To pay the pastor? It is the responsibility of the church, the people who are the church, to take care of the needs of the pastor (and not just his or her financial needs).

To pay the bills, for electricity and heat and to buy hymnals or a new video projector? Isn't that all just maintaining the system? What does that have to do with the Mission? Unless we think we need things in order to accomplish the Mission. In that case, it is the church's responsibility to pay for accomplishing the Mission. (And, it is God's responsibility to provide it to them.)

Maybe, they need the money to do something great and meaningful and totally focused on the Mission. Maybe they need food to give out to the hungry, want to rebuild a home lost in a fire, or want to purchase Bibles to give to those who cannot afford them for themselves.

A fundraiser, really? Is that the best idea we can come up with? The Girl Scouts do fundraisers. The soccer team does fundraisers. Should the church who serves the Almighty God, be doing fundraisers?

Trust in God seems to preclude fundraising. Anything beyond making the need known is coercion and not faith. (There is one exception I would make for this. If the fundraiser is designed not to make money but to raise awareness that would further the Mission. But enough about that.)

But, fundraising is not alone. So much that is done in churches is based on a different mission. It is a base and self-serving mission. It might sound like this if a church was honest.

The Mission of ABC Church is to keep ABC Church open for as long as humanly possible.

Churches can become so enamored with themselves that they cannot imagine life without them. Those who have power in the church want to keep it. Those who have built and served in the church for many years want to relive the days of their prosperity and youth. Closing the church would feel like a personal attack. Those who enjoy church and feel at home there want to keep enjoying church and keep feeling at home there.

Christian love is a devotion to people not to an institution, a way of life, a philosophy or a religion. Love for one another is the heart of what it is to be the church.

The Church can survive without buildings, without budget meetings, without children's programs, without paid staff, without great preachers on TV and radio, and definitely without pressure to keep the system going.

The Church cannot exist without you and me expressing Christ's love to those that we meet. It cannot exist apart from relationships.

What then? Leave church?


This morning, someone asked me, "I realize that working with kids and talking to them about having a relationship with Christ, you prepare them for something much deeper (hopefully) than what traditional churches usually provide. What do you do then about church leadership? Would you leave the idea of paid pastor positions and lean more toward taking turns at leadership like the Quakers? Could you do community outreach without some planning or should Christians be prepared to do it individually rather than waiting for church organization?"

Great questions that I am wrestling with every day. Here's what I am thinking at this moment, though it is constantly changing.

Paid Pastors

The decision about whether or not to pay a pastor is based on the church. Remember, the church is a group of people who know and love each other intimately. It is impossible to have a church of a thousand people. You cannot know and love that many people. If a church building has that many people come through it each week, then in order to help them be the church, it must help them find an intimate number of people that they can share life with. And, that is then, their church.

In our spiritual journeys, we may decide to go to a church building and participate in any number of church programs, worship services, etc. Or, we may not. Either way, we are designed to be in a church, connected.

Together as a church, we need to decide whether or not to help support a pastor financially and to what extent. The Bible teaches us to raise up pastors and elders and leaders and to support them. But, it doesn't give clear guidelines about how we should do that.

Though this may sound like it may put some of us pastors out of business, the current system in many churches too often treats their pastors more as employees bound to their low mission rather than servants of God bound to His Mission. I think many pastors would gladly make that exchange.

So, whether we pay our pastors or not, we should find pastors and elders to lead us, and we should provide for their needs in all aspects of their lives.

From my brief look at an informational site by and about Quakers, I think that this is similar to their thoughts, but maybe not a typical understanding of them. Some Quakers have pastor-led gatherings. Some do not. Some have more form in their services and others are happy to sit in silence until receiving guidance from the Holy Spirit.

The key for me is that the church itself decides what is the best method to accomplish the Mission.

Community Outreach

Community outreach would be done with the Mission in mind. There may be a plan, but it would not be an intricate plan with unchangeable details. The Mission would take precedence over the plan. The plan would be to pass out water during the community day or to go where the homeless are sleeping and help meet their needs.

The plan would set the ball rolling, but the Mission, the Men and Me would be the guiding principle for all the decisions made once the community outreach began. If we run out of water, should we go get more or not?

The low mission would ask, "Do we have time in the schedule? Do we have money in the budget? Have we passed out enough water to consider this plan successful?"

The Mission would ask, "What is the Holy Spirit leading us to do? Based on what we've seen and heard and experienced here, would it be better to not have water to hand out and continue talking with people and developing relationships? Would we be more effective at accomplishing the Mission if we had Gatorade or Hot Chocolate to pass out, or hamburgers and hot dogs?" Together we can ask, "What are we sensing from the Holy Spirit, from the people we are trying to reach out to and from our own hearts?" And, then we adapt the plan to fit the situation.

Communication is crucial for this. Communication with Christ and with one another in the church. Together, we need to discover the next step.

Any plan has to incorporate room for adaptation or else it is only as good as our ability to predict the future.

When we label something a "Community Outreach", it may betray an underlying problem in our thinking. We might think that we are setting apart time from our regular lives to reach out to people in our community for some purpose, (either to fulfill our mission or His Mission, usually).

The problem with this way of thinking is that we are asked to reach out to everyone we meet. So, yes, we should not wait for the church to organize an event in order to reach out. But, we can organize events that will create opportunities to connect with people that we might not ever meet otherwise.

But, the plan must remain submissive to the principle of the Mission, the Men and Me.


We must stay focused on the Mission, look out for the welfare of the Men, and not lose track of caring for Me.

Going to Church is a Good Idea, But Don't Go

We need to be the Church, not go to church. Part of being the Church is joining with other believers for relationship and worship and teaching and mission. I agree with the premise of an article in Relevant magazine that tells Millennials to go to church. They need to be grounded in a local community for relationship building over time to those who need to see the love of Christ lived out. They also need mentors and a secure place to return to after taking risks in their faith.

The systemic problem of the church is what limits the church's connection to this generation. What God-fearing Christian wants to spend their life energy, passion and resources maintaining a broken system.

Millennials, like other sane people, don't want to spend time filling positions on planning boards, redecorating the church foyer or making photocopies for Children's Church. They want to connect with people who are in need (spiritually, physically, emotionally, socially...) and pour out the love of Christ into their lives.

The Mission of the Church is as clear as the mission of most churches is muddled. The Mission is to live in community, grounded in the love of Christ, demonstrating that love to the world of people within their reach and influence. "Go out and train everyone you meet, far and near, in this way of life, marking them by baptism in the threefold name: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (MSG)

The typical church structure hinders this. It is much more direct to walk the streets, strike up a conversation with a homeless person and invite him to lunch than to sit in a planning meeting about the next church barbecue.

Church-owned property, church-centric programs, and finance-driven decisions betray the anemic mission of most churches.

When I mention that our family has started a home church, we sometimes get asked questions that reveal a tragic misunderstanding of the nature and mission of the church.

The first question is usually: "How many people come?" I want to say, "Really? Is that your first question? How about, 'How have you seen God working in your midst?' or if we are close friends, 'Are you fulfilling your mission as a church?'" What I usually say is something like, "Not many. It's been the most rewarding and life-giving experience of our lives."

We are called to be light and salt, to bring life to those who are dying, to rescue those who stumble, to feed the hungry and preach the Gospel to everyone we meet.

Millennials should not join a church just because there are some good reasons to. They should continue to think outside of the church systems and find new ways to be the Church. They can help the rest of us figure out how to be rooted in communities, facilitate much needed mentoring relationships and maintain a strong faith community without wasting our resources on finding creative ways of inviting people into our well-maintained buildings.

I was a pastor at a traditional church for 18 years and was unable to break through the systemic problems to get back to the important role of the church to be light and salt. In a traditional church, buildings must be maintained, bills must be paid, organization and hierarchy are necessary evils.

Every moment spent on these hinders the church from fulfilling its true mission. When we ask questions like, "How do we keep people from leaving?" or "How do we attract more people?" or "Who can we get to fill this position?" we demonstrate a commitment to the structures that is stronger than our commitment to Christ and to His mission. The traditional church model is not the answer and more and more it seems to be a hindrance.

Let's find a way forward together.

My next post is in response to questions that arose from this one: The Mission, the Men, and Me