Tag: discernment

Manic Monday: My Social Media rules of thumbs

· Leave a comment ·

How do I engage in social media? My rule of thumb is be discerning and intentional. Everyone engages differently, and that is a cool aspect of it. Here are some to the conventions I follow:

Social media is public no matter how closely I guard privacy settings. Facebook is most personal, twitter is in-between leaning towards my vocation, this blog is vocational.

I re-whatever based primarily on ministry interests or for things to consider. A re-whatever does not mean I agree or disagree with something. Discernment should always be exercised.

I do not re-whatever on hallmark comments (emotional and often well stated comments). This doesn’t mean I disagree with them, but I’m content with being a part of the 97% that don’t. One exception- I do on occasion re-whatever comments that make fun of hallmark comment’s thirst for re-whatever-ing the comment.

I’m more inclined to re-whatever things that do not contain the nefarious 3% guilt trip. Justsayin.

I talk tons about my kids because of their grandparents. Grandparents and family are part of my audience. And, let’s face it, as much as they love my wife and I, they want to hear about the grand kids, and that’s totally ok.

I am very cautious about negative comments. I do post them on occasion as it’s part of being real. Life isn’t Disneyland. Even these I try to put in a humorous tone. Praise in public, criticize in private is a great rule of thumb to follow.

I prefer to be a-political. While one may guess or otherwise already know my political leanings, the Gospel is most important to me. I chose to not have politics as part of my public discourse.

I think social media is give and take, Contribute and engage with others. I like that. I do not think it replaces human interaction, but it does help in one key aspect: it allows human interaction to focus on what can only happen in person, making the sharing of coffee that much better.

The bottom line is to be discerning in how you engage in whatever you engage in.

(especially on Monday)

Don’t try to be clever…

· 1 Comment ·

A retired pastor gave me this advice: Don’t try to be clever, you can make things worse and people won’t hear what you are saying. This post is part confessional. When you’re involved in teaching, communication and writing you crave being unique. Given our culture, cleverness seems more a vice than a helpful tactic. I’m not saying cleverness is wrong. I am saying the tactic is overplayed. What I’m writing is easier said than done.

Delivery vs substance: Democracy in America (Published 1835-1840)
Alexis de Tocqueville wrote Democracy in America about his observations and predictions of America. One key prediction as I read is book was this: Soon the appearance or things will be more important than the quality of things. This prediction has very much come true. The vice of cleverness is the appearance vs substance. In the end substance endures. Cleverness, once figured out, carries potential to be dismissed.

Action vs silence: The Pensées (Published 1600’s)
Blaise Pascal wrote The Pensees near the end of his life and did not complete it. We often think of his wager, but the central focus of his apologetic was silence from distraction. Pascal endeavored to bring people to the point of silence where they would be forced to listen to their soul and deal with aspects of life that one would rather avoid. We fear solitary confinement for this reason, he states. In America, our greatest fear is being bored, for in boredom we are forced to think and listen. Our thirst from cleverness comes from this.

Complexity vs simplicity: The Scewtape Letters (Published 1942)
C. S. Lewis described in The Screwtape Letters that distraction and complexity is one of  the best tools and tactics against people. My wife brought this up to me as we discussed the protection from leaving and acting with simplicity. This theme is prevalent throughout church history and too often is ignored. Business is the vaccine against intimacy. Cleverness often takes what can be simple and makes it overtly complex.

Captivating vs seriousness: First Corinthians (Published 1st century)
Saint Paul in First Corinthians juxtaposed man’s wisdom vs God’s. Paul’s focus was to speak the Gospel with clarity. He was not defending being uneducated. Things of a serious nature are best spoken with absolute clarity, leaving as little room for misinterpretation. Clarity sometimes is quite complex, as in the book of Romans, or simple an in the letter to Philemon. Cleverness distracts one to the speaker instead of engaging one in the message.

Fleeting vs steadfast: A friend (Still being written)
Harold H. Comings delights me with his wit. Is wit a form of cleverness? Yes. What surprises me about my friend and others who have wit-ability, is they mastered the art of substance, silence, simplicity and seriousness. The foundation of these things lend itself to being witty, and the discernment on how to engage in proper discourse.  The question of discernment is this: How can I say something in a way that it will withstand the test of time? Cleverness often focuses on the now at the cost of life down the road.

The bottom line:
Focus on substance, silence, simplicity, seriousness and steadfastness. These will carry you to the finish-line. You do not need to be a salesmen or a showman to be an excellent communicator. Enduring works and messages contain most of these elements. If God graced you with the abilities of cleverness, humor, charm or the ability to be poetic- use it to glorify God. But, don’t try to be these things and let us not make them the standard of good vs bad discourse. Perhaps conflict in public discourse would be more civil  if we ceased trying to be clever. This would allow us to listen to and hear each other.

Civil Discourse, Conflict and Social Media

· 1 Comment ·

Civil discourse does not mean the lack of confrontation, and social media brings a new avenue it. Quite a few social media stints caught my attention. The most recent was discussion about a book coming out by Pastor Rob Bell. He is not the point of this post, but the discussion did instigate this post.

Social media is public discourse
While some may disagree with this, it is true: Social media is a public face. One reality we are facing is many people do not know how to engage well in public discourse. The quip “Politics will be getting very interesting in the next 20 years because of social media” carries my point well. A good rule of thumb on social media is this: What do I want my public face to look like?

Conflict can bring clarity or collision
You cannot avoid conflict, and that is true within social media as well. Disagreements exist and there are times when public disagreement is proper and times when such is not. At the founding of our country there was vehement debate on our constitution. The book “The Federalist Papers” resulted from the collections of articles from the debate. It is wise to engage in conflict with the goal of clarity. Such is prudent, helpful and benefits all. Engaging in conflict to win or gain one’s own rights is often foolish and brings collision.

Civil discourse can be spirited
Civil discourse focuses on courtesy and politeness regardless of emotion. Civil discourse does not mean one is dull or trite. One can be quite spirited in their discourse and be polite as well. Third person is often used to support objectivity. It lacks poignancy or cheer of first or second person and is quite dry. Given our culture’s tendency towards rash speech, a little dryness may be in order, or we can chose to be polite in our discussions. Be polite. Be gracious. If you cannot, do not engage in public discourse.

The social media variable
The variable that social media brings to civil discourse, especially on conflict, is speed. This is known as trending or going viral. The problem with going viral is people often do not ‘listen’(read) and speak past each other. Discussion quickly turns to raw emotion and a mess ensues. Regarding discourse, often in the form of reposting articles, keep this in mind:

A posted article or a retweet without comment can mean many things from agreement to disagreement, from seriously!? to interesting. A reposting of something with comment also means many things from gained context, topic, or one’s view. If an article goes viral it doesn’t mean people agree with that post. Sometimes it can mean shock, anger, humor, etc. When something goes viral its best to listen more carefully and exercise far more discernment.

Christianity and social media
We should not be afraid of disagreement or conflict. Christianity is damaged more by trying to look and be perfect than being real. Silliness in public discourse comes when civility is dropped. We are family and we will disagree. Part of disagreement is resolution. In the meantime there may be fear as how the conflict will end is unknown. Such fear should not cause us to avoid conflict, even if it goes public. It is part of being authentic.

Remember that the heroes in the Bible were not perfect and their flaws are quite public. We preach about them, discuss them and even debate them. Our lives, just as those in Scripture, are open books. Social media makes this a greater reality. But, acting like there is nothing wrong is just another form of hypocrisy. Grace, wisdom and discernment should govern our public discourse. At the same time we shouldn’t be afraid when our debates become public. It’s part of ‘iron sharpening iron.’ The Gospel moved forward despite the very public mistakes of our heroes in the faith.

The bottom line:
Be civil in public discourse, especially in times of conflict. Remember that social media moves rapidly. In all things we should exercise grace, wisdom and discernment. If you cannot do that, say nothing ‘for even a fool is considered wise when he is silent.’

For Christians, do not be afraid when conflict goes public. The growth and promotion of the Gospel rests in God. We will make mistakes, but those mistakes are covered by the cross. Remember, the same man who shamed the cause of Christ also became the focus of a beautiful story of reconciliation, he gave the first sermon of the Church, was publicly rebuked, and died a hero. His name is Peter.

Why not Wednesday? Define and protect what’s #1

· Leave a comment ·

A comment by Lance Armstrong, on politics, stood out to me. Reading the morning news, I stumbled upon a USAToday article about Retirement 2.0. They asked Lance about his political ambitions. Below is the quote:

… A second career in politics someday does not seem out of the question.

“I don’t think so. I get asked that question a lot. It’s a job. It’s probably many times a thankless job. … If I were to run for any kind of office, it’s impossible or very difficult to run right down the middle,” he said.

“I would have to immediately alienate half of our constituents: ‘Wait a minute, we thought this guy was a Republican. Wait a minute, we thought he was a Democrat.’ I think the effect there would be a negative effect for the foundation. For now, absolutely not on my radar.”

Lance’s response is great in many respects and something we can learn from.

  1. Demonstration of respect for politics and their job.
  2. Communication of the nature and reality of politics.
  3. Clarification on what is most important.

I believe people should be well-educated and informed about politics. I also believe people engage actively  in politics. At the same time we must show discernment about what takes the public stage in our lives. Ponder this question:

Is there something so important in your life that other needed and important things take a back seat?

The bottom line:
I think there is something we can learn from Lance’s response. I love politics and keeping up on current events. But, for me, a person’s soul is more important. Increasingly I’ve backed away from politics, save a couple of close friends. Privately I am engaged, publicly the missions of the church is #1.

Retirement article from USAToday:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycling/2011-02-16-armstrong-retirement_N.htm

The bride is not ready yet…

· Leave a comment ·

Jesus said the meek shall inherit the Earth. I feel as though we are not always meek, for sure I am not. It seems we are awfully arrogant, more than we would care to admit. This is not bad in the sense of being overwhelming to us. It just means God is not done perfecting us yet. Here are a couple of examples:

Jesus: Whoever is not against you is for you.
I remember sitting in class and the prof started to list out different movements in evangelism, their proponents, and the ensuing criticism. The discussion fascinated me. There wasn’t a linear progression of understanding. It was a cycle we were already repeating. The realization went like this:

“How many of you thought big-ten revivals were a good thing? Uh-huh. And the seeker sensitive movement? Not so many hands this time? In about 150 years evangelism in America came full circle and is now repeating the cycle.” Ouch…

Rather than criticize form we should learn from each other. A large part of a method’s success is its context: both historical and cultural. Granted every method, movement and church carries problems. The problems may be significant, but it doesn’t make them completely wrong nor completely right. We need to listen and discern better.

Paul: Instruct men not to teach strange doctrines…
God really does care about solid doctrine. Paul did not tell Timothy to remove, separate, ignore or burn the men of Ephesus at the stake. Throughout his writings Paul told Timothy to use love and patience, to instruct as a son to a father or a brother to a brother. Said another way, Paul sent a young guy in to help, clean up and correct the church by leveraging humility. Not exactly a quick, authoritarian method to clean up what was a doctrinal mess.

I sense as Christians we speak right past each other. We are great at making straw men and even better and beating them. Confidence of one’s doctrine and humility are not mutually exclusive. The elder professors I had in seminary were very confident in what they taught, but their humility was excessive. They listened and asserted, held firm but still learned with open minds.

One day I purchased a large number book and proceeded to move them to my car. One of the elder professors put his stuff down on the floor and helped me. He taught none of my classes at that point during seminary. I saw and better understood the relationship between confidence, faith and humility when I did have him as a teacher; all based on this event. We need to pursue humility as a path knowing God and truth.

The bottom line:
Other than Christ is it seems the other thing we Christians have in common is our arrogance. We all to easily forget that it is Christ who wills and works in us. It is He who will carry our work until the day of perfection. Christ washes and purifies the bride. In the arrogance we all have in common we can continue to act that way, get overwhelmed, or we can rest in the fact that God isn’t done with us yet. We call can improve in listening, discernment and humility while also laying aside our straw men.

I wonder if we lack peace in what we do because we don’t follows Paul’s instructions if Philippians 4. We are a very anxious people. Yes, there are differences in our churches. But, we can still be thankful and pray for each other. Yes as Christians we disagree on points of doctrine. We can still learn from each other. Christ leveraged humility in leading us, and we should do the same when interacting with each other.

Book Review: Rework by Fried & Hansson

· Leave a comment ·

Written by the founders of 37signals.com, Rework is a byproduct from their development and leadership of 37signals. Its form and insights into running a business or organization are insightful. There are good ideas to implement in a ministry setting, though everything from the business world doesn’t carry over directly to the ministry world. Still, there are key insights worthy of reflection. I will give one example.

“Don’t scar on the first cut”
This chapter deals with policy making. “Policies are organizational scar tissue.” (p.260) Church ministry thrives on developing policies. Often they are one line statements posted somewhere with slightly curled brown-aged scotch tape. Be discerning about how or when to develop a policy. Be careful when making a policy based on one incident of someone lacking discretion. Deal with the lack of discretion instead.

Be human
Rework is really a business book, but it does not have the dryness, dullness or blandness of many business books. Chapters are refreshingly brief and to the point. What needs to be said is stated tersely with exactly the amount of explanation needed. (They address the dullness of many business books.) If you struggle with being verbose (yep!) this is a good work to learn from in communication style.

Irreverent
Rework goes right at the heart of the matter. The language at times is colorful (not in the artistic sense), and very casual. Rework challenges conventional wisdom. While the language and challenge of the book can rattle cages, it points to something the crucial- discernment in how we run and communicate.

Format
Chapters are grouped into larger categories. The chapter titles carry the essential point that being made. The layout and brevity of each chapter is something that many would do well to emulate.

There are some ideas in the book that are hard to carry over into a ministry context as we’re in the people ‘business.’ It is key to view the book from the lens of discernment and how to make wise choices in the moment. One thing Rework brings out often is being who you are. Discerning what this looks like is critical for any endeavor.

Bottom Line:
Rework is an excellent read that will challenge you and give you fresh eyes on how to run on an organizational level. It will give guidance in operating within who you are.