I use that phrase, “worship culture” very intentionally. The way I think about it, each of us has a sort of way in which we find worship most, well, worshipful. For some folks worshipful worship takes high liturgy, for others it’s raising one’s hands in praise, others prefer silent meditation. Personal worship cultures can change over time of course, or adapt to different settings. But the point is that not all people find the same sort of worship service worshipful — duh, but it’s worth pointing out. And that’s great. That’s the beauty of the body of Christ.

With that careful prelude, let me now reflect on the three services I recently attended. Each of these was at a congregation in Fargo-Moorhead launched within the last 10 years. The average age of all three congregations was well under 40, and two were probably under 30. All took a much more conservative approach to Christianity compared to my personal views and that of the denominations with which I’m affiliated. This conservative approach was most clearly reflected in their very different way of approaching scripture. (In fact, at every service the pastor in some way or another distinguished their congregation from “non Bible believing” churches — as I took it, that seemed to include the ELCA and PC(USA).)

Now to specifics which I’ll bullet. They include both “wow, that’s spiffy” reflections and “boy, that’s as shame” points too.

• at each congregation someone made a point of shaking my hand and introducing themselves before I sat down. Love it!
• all three had coffee available beforehand that you then took into worship with you. (But, answer me this: why does everyone in the Midwest insist on making such crappy weak coffee?)
• none of the services were limited by time: no rushed sermons, no songs cut, worship lasted at least one hour and fifteen to an hour and a half, and that was cool
• there was an enormous emphasis one one’s personal relationship with Jesus, whether we were saved ourselves, and the import of bringing others to Christ’s salvation
• the songs (all led by praise bands) were 90% about adoration, praise, and devotion (most contemporary Christian genre but a few old hymns thrown in too)
• the sermons were 30-45 mins long, thematic, and mentioned many New Testament passages but only one Old Testament reference (Psalms)
• obvious, but should be noted: scripture lessons were not based on the Revised Common Lectionary (in fact, there were no scripture readings per se, just sermons), none of what ones thinks of as liturgy, no creeds, no confession/forgiveness sequence
• Communion was held at one service in a laid-back understated way
• No candles in sight. Lots of talk of Satan.
• people were dressed in casual clothes, worship leaders included
• all the worship locations were rented spaces in public buildings; each had a screen up front and rows of movable chairs

Suffice it to say: some aspects of these worship cultures were lovely, some were unfamiliar to me but positive, and some aspects were just painful (mostly theological statements that I consider blatantly wrong). But, I am very glad to have worshiped in these communities, in these new ways, and gotten a glimpse of some of the worship cultures in Fargo-Moorhead. Next week, who knows where I’ll go…there’s always worship at St. Mattress with the gospel of Sunday Times.

image by Carter Perrier

I’m in a teaching and technology mode at the moment — taught a sunday school class via Skype last weekend on faith and technology, planning a workshop on postmodern worship for this weekend, and beginning to map out a presbytery event on stewardship and technology for the fall. This, plus a conversation with a friend this week got me thinking: how can we best make worship more social media and technologically friendly?

I know the question scares the bejesus out of many, but hear me out. I’m not looking to make worship “hip” or “relevant,” just because. No, instead I’m building on the great traditions of worship and thinking how we might, as we have done in so many ways over the years, incorporate new technologies into the mix. Just as electric microphones enhanced the spoken voice so sermons could be heard by many, I wonder how smartphones and iPads might make our worship more faithful.

Here’s a small wimpy example, but its mere ease hints and what we may do in the future. When I taught Confirmation last fall, one week our scripture lesson for Confirmation happened to be the same as the lectionary text for Sunday. I noticed this just minutes before confirmation class. So, at the end of class, I asked the students to record a dramatic reading of the scripture lesson which we then played over the speaker system during the scripture reading time on Sunday morning. It was all really simple. I emailed the file to myself and burned it to a CD. The whole process from recording to CD took ten minutes or so. But, by it we managed to present the word in a compelling way that lifted up the gifts of our Confirmation students without focusing on the technology itself.

But that’s not really what I’m talking about. I’m wondering, instead, how we can truly harness the benefits of social media technology in worship.

I’ve known conferences to show prayers requests from conferees’ Twitter feeds during the Prayers of the People. I’ve known congregations to ask their members to text questions to a designated phone during the sermon time so the pastor can incorporate answers in her address. And, of course, there’s the “old” having the scripture passage projected  on a screen while it’s being read. But none of that really taps into the major benefits of social media if you ask me.

I feel like there’s got to be something better. Like we’re just scratching the surface. Here’s a thought experiment: pretend someone gave your congregation $1,000,000 to increase your Internet and social media ministry. What would you do with it?

In one of my presentations I referred to the danger of making smartphones our idols. I mean that. I do think there’s a real danger in holding so much power in small gadgets that we lose our focus on the God from whom all ultimate power comes. Maybe I just need to shut up and turn off my smartphone and worship in peace. But…

…but, then again, if my smartphone positively supports — even strengthens — my home life, work life, and social life then why can’t it positively enable my participation in corporate worship as well?

I’m not much of a retrospective guy, but David Von Drehle’s “2000: A Nation Divided” in TIME a few weeks back has kept me in the mood for some time now. And reading Dave Eggers’ fantastic book Zeitoun this week only drove the nail home.

Here’s what I’m thinking: if my young adulthood really has been formed by the 2000 election debacle, 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, the housing crisis, Lehman Brothers’ and AIG collapse, climate change unchecked, senseless war in Iraq, endless war in Afghanistan, SARS, a devastating tsunami, killer earthquakes, and the collapse of the publishing industry then, well, I’ve had a pretty screwed up post-high school experience. By all rights, I should despise institutions, be suspect of all money-driven media, and keep a gun and cash under my pillow each night. But, well, I don’t; I’m not. Am I too-cool-a-cucumber? A crazy cat? If not, what’s up?

First, surely the 24/7 news cycle desensitizes since there must always be a big story. I wrote about this a little in “Consuming Media Justly,” but I still don’t really have an answer. They say “familiarity breeds contempt” but maybe in problematic news “familiarity breeds nonchalance.”

Second, all institutions are suspect, so life goes on. The last decade was not a good one for civil liberties in the US, and yet I’m not outraged. Even companies whose products I love, like Apple, fail to impress me beyond the beauty of their current product line. As much as I wish things were different, I expect their computers and iThingies to be made in China under questionable circumstances. I know Apple will one day be history, as well as Facebook and CNN, and that’s ok. Trust and respect have become a transient commodity. Just as Facebook becomes popular we ask, “When will it go bust? What will be next?”

Third, the prevalence of injustice is nearly overwhelming.  This isn’t totally a modern phenomenon, but these days we do seem inundated with the world’s problems. Each day, we know, thousands die of hunger and preventable diseases. Thousands more are tortured and imprisoned unjustly. In my own country, LGBTQ folks are still treated as second-class citizens and to call our immigration system “broken” could be the biggest understatement of the year.

Now, yes, certainly, many fantastically good things also mark the last decade or so, but they’re overshadowed by the troubling times. I don’t think that’s some media conspiracy, I just think we’ve had a bad run. But, even so, I’m somehow hopeful. I get annoyed at Facebook friends who only link to pessimistic and damning articles. Maybe it’s my Christian sensibilities, my trust in ultimate love beyond our weary world that helps me remain calm. Maybe it’s my American faith that hard work and steady minds will carry the day, that the American experiment is far from over, which keeps me optimistic. As Martin Luther King Jr. put it, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” Bend, oh 2011, bend.

image by Cancia Leirissa

I’m excited and a bit overwhelmed that:

• Another article of mine was published in The Christian Century, (sorry no link, dead tree edition only). It’s entitled “Songfest: Challenges for a hymnal committee.”
• I will be the preacher for two weeks of Montreat Youth Conferences in early June 2011
• I will begin an eight-week stint blogging as The Christian Century featured blogger next week (site relaunch to come on their end soon, I’m told)
• I’m taking Comm 507: Communication, Technology, and Media at the University of North Dakota this semester
• I’ll be preaching on Oct 24th, with Dr. Martha Moore-Keish, at the 25th Anniversary celebration of my parents’ time at First Presbyterian in Tallahassee.

I’m grateful that:

• I have been at First Press Hallock for a year and much of the first-time craziness has worn off
• I just got back from a time of vacation and rest
• the food from Red Goose Gardens, our CSA, is so delicious
• I read Everything: A Novel by Kevin Canty – dazzling writing, gripping story
• Autumn temperatures have arrived
• Megan and I celebrated our four year wedding anniversary last weekend

I’m considering especially:

• if Minnesota Public Radio really means to announce their BBC Proms programming with the adjective “infamous” as in their frequently-heard advertisement this week: “the infamous last night of the Proms”–or am I just missing something?
• my first go at teaching confirmation and looking forward to using re:form
• how on vacation, I rarely looked at Facebook, and that was ok, even nice
• why pine nuts are so darn expensive
• race and how we speak of racism in American and reading White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privilidged Son by Tim Wise and Why are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? by Beverly Daniel Tatum.

image by Fred Fokkelman

A Pew research poll yesterday found that only 34% of Americans can correctly identify President Obama as a Christian. This number is down 17 percentage points from those who identified his Christian faith correctly during the 2008 campaign (apparently folks are forgetful about their leader’s faith?). 24% of Americans incorrectly believe Obama is Muslim. (And the Pew poll was conducted before Obama weighed in on the Park51/Cordoba House project question.  Here is a similar TIME poll.)

Before I go further, let me follow Amy Sullivan’s lead (here) and note what must be said at this point. Sullivan writes:

Let me pause for a moment here to say that it is of course not a smear to call someone a Muslim. It is, however, obnoxious to say someone is a member of a religious faith when he’s not–and to insist that he is not a member of the tradition he does claim. It would also be foolish and naive to pretend that conservatives who call Obama a Muslim are doing it in a neutral way and that their intention is not to raise questions about his “otherness.”

By the way, for those who actually want to think deeply on Obama’s faith, pick up a copy of The Faith of Barack Obama by Stephen Mansfield.   But here’s what this outrageous poll data causes me to ponder:

First, I’m struck by the fact that though I interact with hundreds of people personally and professionally, I’d be hard-pressed to name more than a handful who might believe President Obama is Muslim. But, according to the poll, 1 in 4 Americans believe so. This reminds me of my sheltered nature, of the cliquishness of American life, and my self-selected friends and relations. Additionally, since Obama’s faith practically never comes up in regular conversation, I wonder if perhaps I’m just way off presuming my friends and relations have accurate understandings of Obama’s faith.

Second, who knows how really to delve into such things via a poll, but I wonder how much the faith poll numbers would correspond to more overt racism if pollsters asked the right question. My guess is that many of those who believe Obama is Muslim might also be very uncomfortable with those of other faiths and those of other skin colors in general.  (For example, the TIME poll finds, “Nearly one-third of the country thinks adherents of Islam should be barred from running for President.”)  Perhaps it’s the case that maligning Islam is somehow culturally okay, while overtly using racial epithets crosses a time-honored line.

Finally, I profoundly disagree with Sullivan’s statement in her analysis that, “In a perfect world, nobody would give a hoot whether the president went to church or said grace before meals or ever uttered one word publicly about his religious beliefs.” Religious belief is hugely important to me, as is any moral underpinnings or claims about the end times, or belief in divine interventionism, or God’s loving nature, or God’s non-existence, etc.. I will happily vote for candidates of many religious faiths (or none), but I will always seek to do so considering a candidate’s faith, thoughtfulness, and positions on the issues. I appreciate Sullivan’s reporting, but I’ll go to my grave professing that faith matters matter. And that’s what’s awesome about the US and the First Amendment — and very scary about this poll data.

Update: Amy Sullivan reflects a bit more on 8/20/10 in “Are One-Quarter of Americans Freakin’ Morons”

Creative Commons image by Alex Johnson

On Sunday morning at church, the high schoolers are often seen at their own table at coffee hour, playing on their iPods. I take some blame — or praise — for this predicament as I gave them the password for the church wireless (with some ground rules). Now, even when they go to church, they are connected.

I got an HTC Droid Incredible last week. (Translation: an awesome touch-screen phone, Google’s answer to the iPhone.) It’s amazing. I can now stream NPR on long runs while charting my time and pace, I can access info like you wouldn’t believe, maintain my Foursquare mayoral status as several Grand Forks and Hallock hot spots, and tweet away.

But with all this awesome technology I wonder: is there a growing technology divide in our culture, and in the church?

I know someone, a very high-functioning retiree, who almost daily feels frustrated and challenged-to-the-breaking-point by his lack of computer skills. He wants to join in on the tech fun, but just doesn’t have the skill set.

I know other folks, even younger ones, that despise email and wouldn’t use an iPad if they were given one for each room in the house.

I know a youth who takes pride in not having a facebook account. I know people who despise electronic books — though they have certainly never read one. I know many people who see technology and know, just as instinctively as some know how to work an iPad, that it’s not for them.

And — no happy conclusion here — I just wonder what to make of all this. Will the tech divide become a real cultural barrier? Will there be a Tech Party movement to rival the Tea Party crowd? If changing technology is just in the water of the 21st century, what happens to those who can’t bring themselves to drink?

image by channah

I’ve been sporting a short beard for a few months now.  Now I get why everyone keeps asking my opinion all the time, responds more positively to my sermons, and is pushing me to become a notary.  Not really.  Actually, I’ve enjoyed more of the slightly counter-culture aspect of the beard (ok, small steps, I still tuck in my shirt at work).

My hunch is that societal opinions of beards wax and wane with the times.  I read an article a while back that analyzed the goatees of the “new evangelical” leaders, and concluded they signified, in part, their individualistic stands if I remember right (I lost the link, sorry).

To be honest, by the time my fashion sense has caught up to the cool thing, the thing usually changes.  I was a slow adoptee of cargo shorts in high school — never thought they’d catch on.  I thought grey and khaki was a fashion faux pas for years after it was styling.  And don’t even get me started on flat front pants.

I find studies like this beard one very intriguing, as they point to our stereotypes.  Often, the results are more distressing — when the studies look at our perceptions of race, or weight, or gender.  We are a culture that judges, quickly, by sight.  And then our actions reflect our snap judgements.

But, at the end of the day, this study is playful and, as it benefits me, is brilliant.  So, hopefully, this beard thing will be cool for a while.  Heck, I say it will be.  Trust me.

Last week, I heard a fascinating show on NPR discussing journalistic ethics and the presidential campaign. You can probably guess the main topics discussed: the relative ignorance of the average voter, whether journalists should vote or contribute to campaigns, FOX news, that sort of thing. The conversation was fascinating to me, mainly because it was a great example of the move from modernism to post-modernism.

This way of listening struck home, when a caller phoned in and said….

Why can’t we just have things like they used to be? When I was growing up, we didn’t worry about journalists’ political affiliation, they just reported in a balanced and unbiased way, and we read the facts. Why all this talk of bias, different perspectives, and the like? I wish we could just get back to how I remember it: when the facts were the facts and that’s what reporters reported.

I laughed out loud. I sympathize with the caller, but the “facts” of previous generations were just as biased and reflective of culture and perspective as today–actually, probably much more so. We can’t put the proverbial monkey back in its cage.

We must talk about how journalists meld their personal opinions to their news stories, because they’ve always been doing so whether we like it or not.

We must talk about advertising dollars and the news media because it’s really all about readership.

We must talk about 24-hour cable news channels because they dumb down the public square to tickers on the bottom of the screen and some star’s latest hi-jinx.

It’s a complicated world out there. The monkey is free range.  And I love it.

image by Dave Hiebert

I loved:

• the openness of the reporter and photographer
• the artist’s eye for irony
• in a different sort of way, the non-preachy sermoness
• the extension from human figures to animals too

I would have changed:

• added a piece on the poor in Atlanta’s nursing facilities
• perhaps also another on a lower-income failure-to-thrive child
• added a call to action

For the video on which this post is based click here: 11 Least Influential People

Here’s a link to Troy’s blog, the Presbyterian pastor chosen as the 6th least influential.

Finally, the article summary in Creative Loafing.

Conversations with Katie and Sam led us to Freeview, a free service that somehow reads all those signals flowing around outside and translates them into entertainment, news, music, and radio channels on the TV. All we have to do is buy a Freeview box (I’m plugging next month’s budget bigtime) and we’re off. As an added bonus, the Freeview box comes with a remote which will almost be worth the $40 on its own since we don’t seem to have a remote for the TV here.

For those of you who know me well, this may all seem a bit strange since Megan and I don’t have a TV in Decatur–and other than football Saturdays, I don’t miss it. Here, though, I am more likely to watch TV since 1) we have one, and 2) I like to think I’m analyzing Scottish culture when watching.

Time will tell, but I don’t think the fancy new box will change my viewing habits too much, just broaden my options the handful of times I do want to watch. Last I heard, the average American watches 3.5 hours of TV a day. At home, I’m more like 3.5 a month and here, less than 3.5 a week. Still, the question arises: how much is too much?

How does this sound as a general rule: time spent watching TV should be less than time spent reading.