Category: Longform
You are viewing all posts from this category, beginning with the most recent.
Thoughts on Brian Zahnd and Word of Life Church
As a follow-up to yesterday’s post about Prayer School I wanted to spend a little bit of time discussing Pastor Brian and Word of Life Church (WOLC) directly. As someone who has really enjoyed Brian’s teaching via podcast, one of the questions I went in to the weekend asking myself was “If I lived in St. Joseph, could I find myself attending this church?” And right behind it was asking like I have about many guys I’ve listened to in podcasts: “is this guy and his ministry legit?”
So, about the church
I had a couple opportunities over the weekend to get insight into the church. At the lunch hour on Friday we were invited to take a tour of the building. Then on Friday night we had the opportunity to attend their regular Friday night service.
The building itself seems to speak to the history of Zahnd and WOLC. The auditorium is huge - it seats somewhere north of 2000 people - and there is a separate multi-purpose auditorium where they hold Friday night worship. The other notable feature is “The Upper Room”, a (ground-level) prayer chapel made of Jerusalem limestone that seats about 50. (This is where the prayer school was held.)
When we got a tour, we got the full tour. We saw backstage areas, back hallways, tech rooms, utility closets, the pastor’s study - pretty much everything. We were told they have built the church in several sections over the years. The building has a quality of fading opulence which likely reflects Zahnd’s own personal move from a sort of flashier Pentecostalism (a role which you can easily enough picture him in) to a more eclectic Anabaptism. The tech room holds the same message - full of video production equipment that was state-of-the-art in the early 90’s and basically obsolete today. (At one point the church’s Sunday services were produced for cable TV - that was discontinued some years ago due to the cost.) It seems clear that Zahnd’s new focus and approach likely caused a significant drop in attendance and budget, and WOLC has had to do a sort of fiscal reset to go in the new direction.
About the man
With the rise and fall of so many celebrity preachers, I came in wondering whether Zahnd might be falling into the celebrity trap, too. On this count I was encouraged. On one hand, WOLC is clearly his church. He planted it over 30 years ago and continues to pastor it today. On the other hand, the other church leaders and members didn’t seem to have him on a pedestal. He comfortably mingled with the prayer school attendees during breaks and answered questions. He could seem aloof from time to time, but I’m going to attribute that to personality and the burden of teaching all weekend. (Two sessions Friday, sermon Friday night, session Saturday morning, different sermon on Sunday morning… I’d be tired, too!) While I didn’t have more than a passing conversation with him, I did have a lengthy talk with associate pastor Derek Vreeland, an energetic and slightly younger guy (probably mid 40s) who seemed to be very much his own man and not in Zahnd’s shadow.
The one place that made me just a bit uneasy was the pastor’s study. Compared to the rest of the staff offices that are nice but not fancy, Zahnd’s study is plush. Two rooms, fireplace, leather chairs, built-in bookshelves from floor to ceiling, fancy rug on the floor… don’t get me wrong, I was a little jealous, but it did seem somewhat out of character with the rest of the building. I’m guessing that it, too, is a relic of WOLC’s Pentecostal incarnation and maybe not reflective of their current priorities.
Could I worship there?
I recognize this is a very subjective question. I really appreciated the fact that they scheduled the prayer school so that attendees could also attend the Friday night service. (Many came from several hours away and stayed for the full weekend, attending the Sunday service as well.) It was, as Brian said, a chance to get “the full WOLC experience”.
The structure of the Friday night service wasn’t unfamiliar to me - the same sort of songs, announcements, greeting, and offering that you’d find in any typical evangelical church service. Sprinkled into the service, though, were some more ancient elements of liturgy - use of the Lord’s Prayer, a longer Gospel reading, a prayer from the Book of Common Prayer, and corporate confession before Communion.
The music was pretty loud and the congregation still fairly charismatic - lots of hands in the air and people bouncing on the balls of their feet, clapping between songs. The songs themselves were (save for one) unfamiliar to me - I’m guessing they are original songs by the church worship leader. The content of the songs was really good, though focused differently than I’m used to. To say that Zahnd is not a fan of penal substitutionary atonement is an understatement, so you won’t find songs here about Jesus’ blood paying for your sins. There were many, though, about God’s love and mercy, and His desire for righteousness and justice. The songs were good, just different than what I’m used to.
The highlight of the service was the invitation to the Lord’s Supper after the sermon. Zahnd’s usual pattern is to wrap the sermon up in a way that leads to the table. He leads the congregation in corporate confession (straight from the BCP) and then invites the congregation to come forward and partake. There was one serving team for each section of seats, and ushers dismissed by rows to provide some order. I appreciated the egalitarian focus in the teams serving - for each seating section there was a man and a woman serving. In the middle section where I was seated, Pastor Brian’s wife Peri served the bread (“the body of Christ, broken for you”) and Brian held the cup (“the blood of Christ shed for you”). I’m also a huge fan of communion taken by congregants going forward rather than trays being served, both for the communal experience of going forward and for the powerful moment where someone looks you in the eye and reminds you that Christ’s body was broken for you.
So, could I attend WOLC? I don’t know. If I lived there and it were just me, I probably would. I’m not sure my wife would be a big fan, and have no idea what all they have for children’s ministries and the like. But just on the basis of the worship service? Yep.
Is this guy legit?
On one hand it seems arrogant of me to ask and answer this question. But I’m going to try to do so from a posture of humility, with the goal being to encourage those others who have become fans of Zahnd from afar and may have similar questions. Happily, I can report that from my (admittedly brief) experience at WOLC, Pastor Brian’s ministry appears to be legit and healthy. (To still be the pastor after 35 years and a major theological shift, he must be doing something right!) While the building itself holds vestiges of obsolete ministry priorities, the new ministry priorities seem well focused on important topics.
All in all, I was very encouraged by my weekend at Word of Life Church, and would love to go back sometime. Meanwhile, I’m going to keep Zahnd’s sermons cued up in my podcast app.
Brian Zahnd's Prayer School
A month ago I had the opportunity to attend the Prayer School weekend taught by Brian Zahnd at Word of Life Church in St. Joseph, MO. I’ve intended to write up some thoughts on it ever since, but maybe it’s been good to let things percolate a little while first. So many thoughts.
First, a little bit about Brian, since it’s hard for me to separate him from the prayer school. I found Brian through his sermon podcast, which I’ve listened to fairly regularly for a little over a year now. His story includes planting a Pentecostal church in his 20s, seeing it grow successfully, hitting something of a mid-life faith crisis in his 40s, whereupon he took a harder, broader look at theology. His teaching retains pieces of his charismatic background while embracing liturgy (“good liturgy”, he would say), the Book of Common Prayer, pacifism, and a strong sense of progressive revelation. He details this story in his recent book Water to Wine, which I’d happily recommend as, if nothing else, a wonderful faith story.
In this post I’m going to share my thoughts directly about the prayer school; in a future post I want to follow up with a few thoughts about Zahnd and Word of Life church directly, since I got the feeling many attending, and probably many who have read his books or listened to the podcast, are curious about the man and his ministry.
Prayer School
[Initial note: Brian only teaches these classes in person - no recordings are distributed. He says he believes it’s something that should be passed along as ‘secrets’ from person to person. I’ll respect that and not go into tremendous detail. However, there’s nothing too unfamiliar there if you’ve listened to his podcast over the past year or so.]
Zahnd organizes the prayer school into three sessions, held Friday morning, Friday afternoon, and Saturday morning. (Word of Life Church holds a regular Friday night service which we were also encouraged to attend.) Through those sessions he teaches (and models) prayer not as “getting God to do what you want” but as a way to be “properly formed”.
He encourages the use of prayers that have been written through church history both as good prayers that allow us to learn from our forefathers, and as ways to teach us to pray better when we pray extemporaneously. Brian uses a musical metaphor likening these rote prayers to a guitarist practicing scales. You don’t always play just the scales, he says, but if you haven’t practiced your scales over and over, when you get to play the second verse guitar solo, you’re not gonna do very well.
In the final session Brian talks about contemplative prayer, which he likes to call “sitting with Jesus”. (He’s preached sermons with similar titles if you’re really curious.) For this topic he draws on a long line of contemplatives in the spirit of Thomas Merton.
The whole class is structured around a morning liturgy of prayer which he challenges everyone to try for 6 weeks. It includes daily Bible readings, weekly prayers from the BCP, rote prayers including that of St. Francis, and time for personal petition and contemplation.
Thoughts
A good bit of what drew me to attend the prayer school in the first place was this seemingly odd combination of liturgy, old prayers, and contemplation. What a mix! And in that I wasn’t disappointed. Zahnd is a talented teacher, though if I were going to try to describe his personality and approach I might start by referencing some Old Testament prophet instead of a teacher. There’s an air of confident, in-your-face declaration that was a bit of a shock to this guy who is used to long brainy sermons.
I really like the emphasis on using and learning from the prepared prayers. The Book of Common Prayer is full of beautiful language and really meaningful prayers and is a rich treasury that today’s church should draw on. (I’m a sucker for the musical metaphor, too.)
Zahnd makes a compelling case for using rote prayers from Acts 2:42, which in the NIV is translated
They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.
However, he points out, in the Greek it’s not “prayer” but “the prayers”, definite article, plural. (I looked it up in an interlinear online, and sure enough, he’s right.) And devoting one’s self to “the prayers” is a horse of a different color than “prayer”.
I haven’t done a very good job of taking up Pastor Brian’s six-week challenge so far. I’ve used the liturgy inconsistently a few times per week, often getting distracted by my schedule. However, I still feel the draw to use it more regularly, so I’m going to try to make it a priority. Where previously the idea of spending 20-30 minutes in prayer was incomprehensible to me - I’d be out of ideas after 5 minutes! - with this liturgy I can easily spend 20-30 minutes in reading and prayer, which is great. I just need to find a way to make it a habit.
There’s so much more I’d like to write but I’ll save it for a follow-up post.
Hamilton's King George reacts to Donald Trump
Serenity Caldwell planted the idea in my mind…
And I couldn’t stop until I got something written down.
So how would King George react to Donald Trump? As one tyrant to another, I think he’d be rather gleeful about the rise of The Donald.
So, with (many, many, many) apologies to Lin-Manuel Miranda…
You say the price of the wall’s not a price that you’re willing to pay
You cry that Marco is little and Ted he is known for the lie
Why so sad? I thought you had charted your course out with Ann and with Rush
You can say that I’m mad - but your nominee’s tweeting out phrases and making me blush…
You’ll be back, soon you’ll see, with this leader of the GOP
You’ll be back, time will tell, let the immigration serve you well
Tyrants rise, parties fall! We will tweet each other through it all
When you reach Election Day I will cackle through the Fox News coverage
When you vote for the Toupee
Da da dat da dah…
You say the country’s draining and you can’t go on
You’ll be the ones complaining without Don
And oh don’t change the party
Cuz you’re my favorite party
The white, indignant party
The churlish, puerile party
Forever, and ever, and ever and ever and ever…
You’ll be back, like before, for no President will ask for more
For your love, for your praise
And he’ll rule you ’til your dying days
Vote for Trump! Don’t be mad
Or his gang will make you wish you had
And if you feel you have to go
Up in Canada my kingdom’s ruling through a young guy named Trudeau
Da da dat da dah…
5/4 day
Today is May 4th, which has gained an online buzz as “Star Wars Day” - “May the Fourth be with you” and all that. (My friend Geof isn’t a fan, but we all knew he’d become a curmudgeon sooner or later.)
A better idea, though, came through on Twitter this morning:
(Thanks, Bethany, for RTing that into my timeline!)
So, in honor of 5/4 day, my favorite 5/4 song that isn’t Take Five:
Hapyp 5/4 day, everybody!
Bono and Eugene Peterson discuss the Psalms
A million people have undoubtedly posted this already, but… wow. So good. Bono and Eugene Peterson sit down at Peterson’s kitchen table to discuss the Psalms. This is worth 20 minutes of your time.
Finished reading: Compendium 2
Quantum Night by Robert J. Sawyer
I’ve been a fan of Sawyer’s stuff to this point, and this one wasn’t bad… but not great either. A sort of fascinating concept - quantum states within the brain as the cause of consciousness - but how it plays out is somewhat horrifying.
The Rising (Alchemy Series Book 2) by Ian Tregillis
This series continues to entertain.
The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It by Peter Enns
This is Enns’ popular-level treatment of the subject he’s addressed in more scholarly detail elsewhere - namely, his take on how to interpret biblical (primarily Old Testament) texts that seem contradictory - whether that be contradicting other biblical texts, or the historical/archaeological record, or the conclusions of science. I appreciate that he wrote a popular-level book, and agree with many of his perspectives, but at times I wished he written it with more sensitivity towards those who are coming from a more conservative perspective. There’s a lot of things along the lines of “of course those are obviously contradictions, what’s up with that?” sort of attitude that might turn off people who’d otherwise be helped by the book. Still, worth reading.
Beauty Will Save the World: Rediscovering the Allure and Mystery of Christianity by Brian Zahnd
I picked this one up while attending Zahnd’s prayer school a couple weeks ago. (Yeah, I need to write a separate post about that.) Here Zahnd urges us to rediscover the beauty of Christian belief from amidst the American Christian culture’s desire to over-analyze and have an explanation for everything. The last two chapters alone were completely worth the price of the book. Good stuff.
The discomfiting presence of a saint
A couple friends shared this old compilation video of Fred Rogers appearing on the Charlie Rose interview show, and while my memories of watching Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood, while definitely present, are indistinct at best, I couldn’t help but spend 15 minutes listening to it. What struck me this time wasn’t so much Mr. Rogers’ lovely insights into life, but in how uncomfortable Charlie Rose looks performing the interview.
First - and I may just be imagining this, but I don’t think so - Rose is challenged by Rogers’ deliberate pace. Rose’s normal tempo is likely something a lot faster, but Rogers refuses to be hurried. And through the interview clip you hear Rose start to slow down, never quite reaching Rogers’ slow cadence, but certainly influenced by his quiet and calm.
Second, and more profoundly, Rose seems ill at ease, I think, simply because he recognizes in Rogers a spiritual and emotional quality that he wishes he had himself. Quickly behind that is the thought that the absence of those qualities is a real personal shortcoming somehow.
To say it much more simply: this is the discomfiting presence of a saint.
I’m reminded of Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 2:
But thanks be to God, who… uses us to spread the aroma of the knowledge of him everywhere. For we are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. To the one we are an aroma that brings death; to the other, an aroma that brings life. And who is equal to such a task?
To those of us who recognize and embrace the presence of Christ in Rogers’ life, it is a pleasing aroma - one that makes encourages and challenges us. To those who don’t, it can be deeply troubling. My desire is to live with such an awareness of Christ in my life that I, too, could have a transformative presence like Mr. Rogers did.
Finished reading: Partners in Christ: A Conservative Case for Egalitarianism by John G. Stackhouse Jr.
I put this one on my Amazon wishlist after reading a few posts on Scot McKnight’s blog about it. Shortly thereafter my Mom bought it for me for my birthday. Thanks Mom!
I appreciate the direction Dr. John Stackhouse takes with Partners in Christ. He wants to maintain a faithful, high view of Scripture; not to dismiss difficult passages or write them off, but to look at the Scripture as a whole and try to come to a position on male/female roles/dynamics in the church.
The title gives his conclusion away: Stackhouse comes down on the side of egalitarianism - in other words, that men and women should have equal standing and ability to have leadership roles in the church. But wait, the reader will say, what about 1 Timothy 2 (“I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet”) or 3 (“an Elder shall be the husband of one wife”)? Well, Stackhouse counters, what about 1 Cor 11 which assumes that women will be praying and prophesying? Or about Priscilla, who with her husband Aquila taught Apollos? Or Junia, who is mentioned among “the apostles” in Romans 16?
Stackhouse has an interesting approach here, which on first read makes a lot of sense - that God has an ideal end state in mind, and that at each era through history he has revealed himself and his will in ways that would stretch his people toward that end state without snapping them past the breaking point.
So, in the Old Testament, God reveals himself to the Israelites as a god in many ways different, though in many ways similar to the gods of the countries around them. He establishes a sacrificial system that is different, not but that different. When Jesus comes, he chooses men as his apostles, because choosing any women would’ve been a challenge past the stretching point of the culture. Still, he challenged the status quo by treating women more as equals than anyone in that culture would have.
So, Stackhouse argues, while Paul writes directing how men would be leaders in the church, that direction isn’t intended to be fixed for all time, but was the accommodation of the church to the culture at the time.
Stackhouse acknowledges that some will want to take this argument and run with it down other controversial paths, e.g. the debate over homosexuality. He differentiates that case by saying that the Bible appears to be progressively loosening on the gender equality issue, while staying consistent in its position regarding homosexuality.
I’m gonna need to do a re-read and think through it some more, but I appreciated Dr. Stackhouse’s take here. Worth a read if you’re interested in the subject.
Finished reading: The Christian Tradition, Vol 2: The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700) by Jaroslav Pelikan
I picked up The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, Vol. 2: The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700) (Volume 2) from an online recommendation, not really knowing what I was getting myself into. Sure, I was diving into Volume 2 of a 5-volume set, but hey, why not?
I’d heard Pelikan’s name before but really knew nothing about him. But it didn’t take long after starting the book to realize the immense brilliance of the author. The book starts with a list of primary sources, texts from the 7th - 17th centuries… that list is several pages long. (The list of secondary sources at the end is probably twice as long. Goodness.) Pelikan blessedly eschews footnotes in favor of a wide margin design where all the references are annotated in the margin, aligned with the relevant text. And goodness, there are references.
Pelikan manages pull together these sources to overview the development of Christian thought in the Eastern Church that is both detailed and accessible. In my terms, that means I couldn’t skim - had to pay attention - but it kept me interested and engaged. Which is awesome. I enjoyed it enough that I ordered Volume 1… wouldn’t be surprised if I end up with all of them by the time I’m done.
Christianity as cultural salt
Scott Sauls, pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church in Nashville, has a really good piece from earlier this week titled “No More Moral-Majority Thinking” in which he explores how the church’s influence in the culture should be viewed through Jesus’ metaphor “You are the salt of the earth”.
Salt, he notes, when taken in by itself, offends the senses. It’s bitter and raises your blood pressure. But when it is a “minority ingredient”, it can bring out the best in the culture around it. He traces through history, pointing out that the church grew quickly under the persecution of the early Romans, but then became empty when Constantine established it as a state religion.
Sauls argues that rather than trying to drive Christian principles through government, American Christians should instead focus on being that salty, enhancing presence in the culture that leaves the world better than we found it.
There are many examples of this. All of the Ivy League universities except for one were founded by Christians. Let’s keep doing that. Many hospital names begin with the word “Saint,” pointing to their Christian beginnings. Let’s keep doing that. As secular journalist Nicholas Kristof says, evangelical Christians are the most self-giving, exemplary servants to the world’s poor. Let’s keep doing that. Rembrandt painted world class paintings. Beethoven and Handel made world class music. Dostoevsky wrote world class literature. Let’s keep doing that. Evangelical leader Kevin Palau recently partnered with the openly gay mayor of Portland to resource and bless an under-served public school. Let’s keep doing that. A little Baptist church in Texas pooled funds together to pay for an outspoken, anti-Christian atheist’s medical needs. Let’s keep doing that. But what if people misunderstand our intent? What if by associating with non-believers in such intimate ways, people begin to think we are soft on truth? If we must choose, and sometimes we must, it is better to be misunderstood and labeled as too soft on sin, than it is to be misunderstood as self-righteous, harsh and strict. Jesus was regularly accused of being a glutton and a drunk, even though he was neither. Why? Because Jesus lived his life around drunks, prostitutes, shady tax collectors, and the like…and never felt the need to explain himself. Jesus welcomed sinners and ate with them (Luke 15:1-2). Mustn’t we?
I love this reminder that Christians have indeed served the culture in amazing, caring ways to serve people in Jesus’ name. My only hesitation is his assertion that “salty” Christianity “always does best” as a minority. Which historically may be true, but it raises a question in my mind.
I think it was the Mere Fidelity guys who talked about this at some point, but - sure, it’s great to be the minority element, the prophet calling out the sinful king and culture… but what happens if/when the king repents? How does Christianity work itself out in people who get elected to high office?
Maybe it’s a hypothetical point, and that Christianity always has been and always will be a minority, but to say it only really works well as a minority seems like an overstatement. Someday Christianity won’t be a minority. Of course, things will be a little different then.
Still, a really good piece from Pastor Sauls. Worth reading the whole thing.