The Four Churches I Love

• Faithbridge Presbyterian Church.  On paper, my connection here is strongest, but in actuality and function, the connection here is the most tenuous.  Faithbridge is the church I was a member of when I entered the ordination process, and therefore the church I remain “under care” of until after seminary.  That said, we now live 1,500 miles away from this church, have no family and few connections there, and I haven’t heard from my “session liaison” in well over a year.  Faithbridge played a large part in my decision to enter ministry (for which I’m eternally grateful), but it’s hard for me to consider myself a “member” there, even though of all four churches, this is where my membership officially resides.
• Middlesex Presbyterian Church. This is where my family attends every Sunday morning in New Jersey, and we are “affiliate members” here.   I consider the pastor here, Dr. Neal Presa, as “my” pastor, and the congregation is an extended family that looks out for and cares for me and my family, and we participate actively in the life of the church.  However, even though this church is a lot closer than Faithbridge, we still live 45 minutes away, making it hard to engage with the community throughout the week.  We spend long chunks of time away from this church in the summer and over the Christmas holidays–some of the most important times in the life of a church.  I also realize that this is a temporary family for us, as my time at seminary will come to an end, and we have no deep roots or family in New Jersey.
• First Presbyterian Church of Second Life. This is the online community I helped organize a little over a year ago that meets in the virtual world of Second Life.  It is probably the most cutting-edge and innovative of all my church communities, and there is a great excitement among those who participate.  My wife and I can participate in this church wherever we travel, and even worship together when we are in separate cities.  There is a very real, very embodied community in this church, that has deepened my faith and my relationship with others.  However, because our denominational polity still lags behind the technology, this church cannot yet be recognized as an “official” church, and there is no way (yet) for my children to actively participate with us.  Many members of this community are also members at other, geographically-based churches.
• First Presbyterian Church of El Paso.  This is the church where I’m currently serving as a summer pastoral intern.  On one hand, this church is entirely new to me and to my family (and has been very welcoming), but on the other hand, El Paso is my hometown, where my wife and I  grew up, met, and married. We have more family here than anywhere else, and will almost certainly return here after seminary.  I am not a member of First Presbyterian, bu t shortly after my arrival, I was given two things: An email address (neal@firstpres-ep.org) and a  very professionally made and nice-looking hard-plastic, magnetic name tag.  These things may sound trivial, and yet one (the name tag) is traditionally recognized in church culture as an unofficial sign of membership, and the other (the email address) is a clear and certain hallmark of membership in the digital culture of my generation.  For this and many other reasons (like the fact that the pastor is a former college English professor, and that the father of my high-school best friend is an elder here) I feel very much “at home” here.

Serial Monogamy vs. Polygamy

While monogamous relationships have long been the ideal in Western culture, many sociologists have noted the recent trend toward “serial monogamy” – in other words, people are likely to have multiple amorous relationships over the course of a lifetime, but in sequence, not all at once.  Church membership has seen a similar trend:  For most,  the era where a person might be baptized, married, and buried all in the same church community is long gone.  Still, in the 20th century, church members were generally committed to only one church at at time in a given location – serial monogamy.

So does that make me a polygamist when it comes to my own church membership?  Am I “cheating” on the church where my membership resides by seeking to fulfill spiritual needs elsewhere, or by contributing my time & talents elsewhere?  Perhaps this is where the metaphor breaks down, but I do feel a certain guilt in the fact that I “need” not just one alternate church community, but no less than four!

Each of these church communities, to some degree, offers something necessary and good for my faith journey.  I like to think that I have something to contribute to each of them as well.  And yet all also have shortcomings – yes, all churches have “shortcomings” but here I do not mean the sort that results from human failing or lack of effort – the shortcomings in this case are all hurdles of geography, technology, or institutional structure.  They are shortcomings for which no solution currently exists, other than “polygamous” or at least “promiscuous” notions of church membership.

Toward Post-Modern Membership

So, in case you hadn’t noticed yet, fixed boundaries are rather difficult for those of us who grew up in a post-modern world, and classic notions of membership seem to be built on expectations of exclusive fealty.  Contrast this with membership in the very post-modern world of the internet:  I have “officially joined” facebook, twitter, Second Life, Google, Wikipedia, FourSquare, Presbymergent, BrightKite, Amazon.com, Ebay, ReverbNation, Pandora, YouTube, Yelp, and hundreds of other “social networks.”  In fact, I was required to join each of them before I could “fully” participate in the life of their respective communities. This is a fixed boundary of sorts.  And yet it is fluid:  None of them seemed to object to my membership in of any of the others — in fact, the really smart (and successful) ones have found ways to actually help me integrate my participation accross platforms so that the unique strengths of each community can benefit the others.  This is the paradigm of “membership” that I think most people in my generation embrace, whether consciously or not.

So what would it look like if church membership took a page from the Web2.0 playbook?  I think the greatest fear that might be voiced is one against fragmentation and confusion.  Promiscuous membership might indeed play into our existing consumerist tendencies.  And yet, is “church collecting” really worse than “church hopping?”   Another fear might be that members would be “stretched thin” – too involved at too many places to be of any use to one.    This is certainly a valid fear.  But I think that here again, skillful integration might be the key.  Most aspects of our lives are balancing acts to begin with, and church communities that find ways to complement and contribute to one another are more likely to survive than those who prefer their members live in isolated fidelity to one community.  I participate in the Amazon.com community far less frequently than I do in the twitter community, but when I need an objective and detailed book review, 140 characters doesn’t quite cut it.  But once I find the review, chances are I’ll post a short-link to it on twitter for others to follow — and thus value is added to both communities.

Epilogue

I would love to say that from here I will now ride happily into the sunset with my four beautiful church communities in tow and live happily ever after – but I acknowledge we’re not quite there yet.  I suspect that my membership promiscuity still makes some people uncomfortable, in some communities more than others.  But I also see hopeful potential  in an expanding understanding of “membership” – for me, for my family, and especially for a denomination in dire need of new approaches and new forms of collaboration.  After all, the one thing my four church communities have in common is that they all share a common name, “Presbyterian.”

Uh oh.  Does that make it an incestuous promiscuous relationship too?

I guess I’d better stop before the metaphor gets “out of hand“…

This one draws from the lectionary passage (Amos 7:7-17) as well as a few scattered reflections from General Assembly 219 and my personal angst over the ongoing “numbers crisis” in the PC(USA). While I’m certainly preaching to myself here, I hope others may find something of value in it, too.

And I’m still tinkering, so if you have any suggestions or comments, please feel free to weigh in – you’ve got until about 9am tomorrow.

Anyhow, here’s the Link to the full text over on my wiki:

• I Am No Prophet:  Sermon for July 11th, 2010

PREFACE

I. GOD

We trust in one God, who alone is the creator and sustainer of all worlds and all realities, whether labeled virtual, physical, spiritual or otherwise.  God reigns over all. God loves all.

But we rejected God’s reign, and scorned God’s love.  From the beginning, we attempted to create our own worlds, with our own rules, where we loved our own selves above all. Virtual realities are nothing new. As a consequence, we are a broken and messed-up people, still wandering through dysfunctional worlds of our own making, longing for a better one.

God, however, didn’t sit around idly, waiting for us to come back. Instead, God came to us where we were, taking on the flesh, blood, molecules and matter that would best communicate to us in the medium most  familiar to us at the time: We know this manifestation of God’s love by name: Jesus.

And so we trust in Jesus Christ, fully human and fully divine, who entered into an existence fundamentally different in substance and structure than the one he knew before his time on earth.  He came as a child into a strange world where he had to learn to sit, stand, walk, and communicate with others. He did this with the help of two in-world natives, Mary and Joseph, who showed him gracious hospitality, welcoming him into the world and teaching its customs.

We take note of Jesus’ ministry, as he gathered both crowds and small groups to himself, effectively using the technology, language, and familiar images of his day to convey God’s love and reign to all.  He particularly embraced those outside the mainstream—the ones labeled by society as outcasts, deviants, and unbelievers. He visited the sick and comforted the suffering. He challenged powerful institutions, calling them out on oppressive bureaucracy and legalism, and calling them back to the heart of the best traditions of their ancestors.

Ultimately, he gave up his life for this cause and was subjected to cruel betrayal, torture, and execution at the hands of those he came to save. He willingly accepted a fate he did not deserve on behalf of those who did, so that we might know mercy and grace, and through this act be once and for all awakened to God’s love, saved and redeemed.

We believe that God raised Jesus up from death into yet another new form and context, giving us hope and reassurance that, following his example, we need not fear new forms and new contexts—in the life to come, or in the life we live today:  We are a resurrection people.

Before his death, Jesus promised that his presence would remain among us, even when his physical form did not. Because of this, we trust in the Holy Spirit, who comforts us, guides us, and binds us together with all God’s people in all places.  We believe there is no place, whether made of molecules and matter or bits and bytes, that God’s Spirit does not permeate.

Further, God’s Spirit provides us both example and inspiration for presence that transcends geographical boundaries, as we strive to be present with and for one another across our own geographical locations in a deep and meaningful way.

We trust that God calls together faithful believers in every age to be the church, to worship and pray together, to fellowship and study together, serving one another and the world. Historically, the church has been recognized in two forms: The universal church, and the local church.  As professing Christians, we stand together with our sisters and brothers as members of the universal Church, which is not limited by time or place.

We celebrate the remarkable diversity and adaptability of the local church through the centuries.  Christian communities have gathered in homes, cathedrals, mountaintops, prisons, airports, in prosperity and in adversity, liturgically and spontaneously, and wherever two or more have been gathered together by the leading of God’s spirit.

Until recently local churches have almost always been associated with a geographical region, and this has served the church well.  However, churches transcending geography are not without precedent.  The Apostle Paul considered himself a participant and leader of many churches dispersed across the Mediterranean. He even writes that his “virtual” presence by means of his letters should be viewed as no different than his physical presence (2 Cor. 10:11).  Paul used the information superhighway of his day—letters, roads, and messengers—to be actively present and engaged with his faith communities.

We believe it is time to acknowledge that the idea of “locale” extends beyond mere physical location. Most people today are part of one or more thriving communities that are geographically dispersed.  We reject the notion that communities mediated through technology are inferior to ones mediated by physical space, or that they are acceptable only as a substitute when physically based community is not possible.  Rather, each type of community is different, each with its own strengths to be celebrated and weaknesses to be addressed. Some people will entirely prefer one to the other, and many will seek a mixture of the two.  We believe that God’s presence, true fellowship and community, as well the human propensity for sin, can be found to their fullest extent in any of the above.

We recognize that ever since the invention of the auditorium, eyeglasses, hearing aids, and pulpit microphones, our worship experiences have already been increasingly mediated through the medium of technology, and we are thankful for the enhancements and inclusion these things have represented for the church.

Accordingly, we recognize the full legitimacy and divine calling of churches that gather partially, primarily, or solely in virtual worlds, and call upon our sisters and brothers in the universal body of Christ to join us in welcoming them into conversation, fellowship, and shared ministry.  This recognition is to be tempered with the caution that all churches—in any medium—are ultimately flawed and human institutions, and not all who self-identify as churches live up to the high ideals to which we are called.

Because of the wonderful diversity of local churches through the ages, and especially the new and unique ways in which churches in virtual worlds are evolving, we find it useful to affirm three historic marks by which Christian churches, and Reformed Churches in particular, have often been recognized: We believe that the church exists where the Word of God is truly proclaimed and taught; where the sacraments are rightly administered, and where church discipline is effectively practiced.

Our intention in affirming these marks of the church is not to define precisely how each one ought to function, or what “rightly” consists of, but rather to elevate the importance and seriousness which we ascribe to each of them.  We trust that churches who ascribe to these ideals and approach them with reverence, prayer and thoughtful discernment will be led by God’s Spirit to creative and appropriate decisions.

2.  Administration of Sacraments: At different times in the life of the church, various sacraments have been recognized, and in virtual worlds new expressions of the sacred continue to be explored.  However, there are two sacraments instituted in scripture by Christ that are recognized by most professing Christians: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  We affirm the historic importance of these two sacraments, and their significance as signs and seals of our faith.

We believe that all of these marks of the church are not just profitable, but indispensable to the life and witness of the church in any time or place.  For this reason, no church should ever be prevented from observing them publicly and visibly in some fashion within its normal context.

Right now I think virtual conferences are a ways from becoming mainstream because virtual worlds are still a ways away from becoming mainstream.  So, while virtual conferences may reduce the barriers of time and money they introduce new barriers of competency and comfort with the virtual world.

But the number of people engaged in virtual worlds like Second Life continues to grow.

Twenty years ago it would have been crazy to think you could get 10,000 people to sign up for an Internet-only, live streamed Christian leadership conference, but now that most Americans have high speed Internet access and view video online on a daily basis, the Leadership Network was able to pull that off with The Nines conference.

Could it be that in 20 years (or less), the Internet will no longer be primarily a 2 dimensional experience viewing flat text, images, and media, but a 3 dimensional experience?

He also posted this really cool video of a recent conference in Second Life, where (as some of you may already know) I’ve been spending some time recently developing a Presbyterian faith community.  Here’s the video:

I think Paul’s experience and judgment in the Christian “tech industry” are exceptional, so I respect and value his input on this subject.  I also think his analysis here is spot on, too.  Here’s my response (also posted as a comment on his original post):

Paul — thanks for posting on this.  I think you’re right that virtual conferences are still a ways from becoming mainstream.  But I’d answer your final question by saying, yes, the internet will go from primarily 2d to primarily 3d in quite a bit less time than 20 years.

I think the “web designers” of today will become the “virtual world environment and event designers” of tomorrow (borrowed from Ray Kurzweil on that idea).

But I also think that the current economic downturn will help spur a growth movement in virtual conferences right now — Unfortunately businesses intent on saving money will probably lead the way here, not churches (who are generally slow adopters).  That said, Doug Estes new book SimChurch highlights the increasing number of virtual faith communities, and real world churches with “internet campuses” — so maybe the church isn’t that far behind.

But be it church conferences or business conferences, you’ve also hit on a key point in this post:  competency and comfort with virtual worlds are the biggest hurdles to adoption.  I think this is where tech-savvy organizations can work wonders.  My experience with Second Life has been that when people join and explore in isolation, they tend to get frustrated with the experience, stuck, or even bored.

But on the other hand, when people come into virtual worlds with a fixed purpose, are met in-world by other people (represented by avatars) who walk them through a quick training session…the competency and comfort barriers fade quickly.  I imagine this is exactly what Virtualis did for their event.

For a Christian conference, providing this sort of virtual world “welcome wagon” orientation would have another advantage.  In addition to overcoming the barriers mentioned above, it would be an opportunity to practice just the sort of hospitality and welcome that many of our churches suffer from a lack of.

That said, I think what we’ll most likely begin to see in the near future of Christian conferences is a hybrid arrangement — real world conferences that develop virtual world equivalents, allowing people who can’t make the trip to participate and interact with those who do.

Weather:  As I write this, it’s snowing outside, and has been for most of the day.  We were lucky to spend a nice, warm Christmas season in sunny El Paso, Tx and a few days in Phoenix, AZ.  But that’s over now, and it’s back to freezing, freezing, cold.  Grady is having the time of his life, though, and has already built a miniature snowman, and covered the sidewalk with snow angels.  The other day when I was walking to class, bundled in multiple layers, gloves, hat, even thermal underwear — and still feeling like I might die of hypothermia at any minute — a girl jogged casually past me wearing shorts and a t-shirt.  Sigh.  Guess I’m just a weather-wimp.  Oh well, three more months to go. Then four more years…

Classes:  I’m about halfway through the January term, which, although occuring in the spring of calendar year 2009 is academically considered part of the fall 2008 semester (hey, I don’t make the rules, thank God).  I’m taking one class, which meets three days a week in the mornings: The Theological Legacy of the Dionysian Forgery, with Professor Paul Rorem (who was also my church history professor last semester).  The reading is pretty dense — the kind where you have to read every sentence three or four times before it begins to make sense, and then when you think you’ve grasped it, you suddenly realize you haven’t.  Still, the subject matter is interesting, and both influences/touches on everything from medieval scholasticism and angelology to neo-platonism,  gothic architecture, intellectual property, and even post-modern deconstructionism.  More on Pseudo-Dionysius later.

Abby:  She’s not only walking, but almost running everywhere now, and has developed quite a vocabulary over the Christmas holidays.  She yells “Da-Da!” when I walk through the door at the end of the day, and then raises her arms in the air, saying “Wee-wee!” which means she wants me to pick her up and fly her through the air like an airplane (her favorite).  She also *finally* has been letting me read to her, and will even bring me a book to read, her favorites being Go Dogs, Go!; Goodnight Gorilla; and Sandra Boynton’s Moo, Baa, La, La, La.  She dances when you play music, and loves to play peekaboo (which she says “pickabee”). In case there was ever any doubt, she’s definitlely aspiring to be a girly-girl, and will walk around the house with a purse on her arm, trying to steal her mom’s makeup.  She has a particular fondness for jewelery, watches, and cell-phones.  She also says hello, bye-bye, baby, mamma,  bubba, book, no, hat, nose, clock, tick-tock, Grandad, and meow (which she pronounces miamee).

Facebook:  A few weeks ago, I found one of my old friends from elementary school in Belgium on facebook — that led to another and another, until we’ve almost got enough for a 5th grade class reunion.  I’ve reconnected with some great childhood friends, and had to brush up on my long dormant French in the process.  Thank God for Google translator and Babel Fish to pick up the slack.

Brewing:  While my brothers were in town last week, we brewed our first batch of “Locke Bros Beer” all together — they’ve been brewing for almost a year, and  started earlier this fall.  This was my fourth batch total, and it looks to be a Strong Belgian-style Golden Ale.  We haven’t named it yet, though.   I’m almost out of the Christmas Beer I brewed in December, called IncarnationAle.  It got plenty of good reviews, though, except for a few people who were surprised when the cranberry came out of the bottle along with the beer!  Thanks to Philip Lotspeich, Drew Ludwig, and Loren Crow, who each (independently) suggested the same name.

Search for a Church:  As an inquirer on the “ordination track” I’m under care of my home church and presbytery, which means that we’ll remain members of Faithbridge Presbyterian Church in Frisco, Tx during my entire time at seminary.  Still, we’ve been looking for a place to worship on Sunday mornings, and it hasn’t been easy.  Most of the Presbyterian churches we’ve visited in this part of the country are very “high church” traditional, and almost identical in architecture, aesthetics, liturgy and demographics.  Plus, they all seemed to have everything all worked out.  Coming from a new church development, we weren’t used to that.  Some didn’t seem too welcoming, and some didn’t have much in the way of nursery/Sunday school for Abby and Grady.  But I think we finally found a place we really like:  Middlesex Presbyterian Church, in Middlesex, NJ.  It’s about a 45 minute drive north of us, and the one service starts at 9:30am, but the church is very warm, friendly, multicultural, and there are a LOT of four year-old boys for Grady to play with.  The pastor’s name also happens to be Neal — Neal Presa, and I’ve had a chance to get to know him a little via facebook, lunch, and a few other conversations — that’s important to me.  More importantly, we felt like MPC is a place we can help and contribute, and a place that isn’t afraid to be creative and even a little “wheels off” as my pastor/mentor/friend, Philip Lotspeich, likes to say.

New Year’s Resolution:  In short, I don’t have one yet.  Last year’s was the first I ever kept throughout the whole year, and it was an enjoyable experience I think I’ll keep observing last year’s resolution (to only buy clothes at second-hand stores like Goodwill or Salvation Army), just not as dogmatically.  But still, I was hoping to come up with something new.  Something that, while making a difference in my life, also helps to make a small difference in the larger world.  I’m giving myself until the end of January to come up with something, so any realistic (taking me into account) suggestions are welcome.

Blog Posts Coming Up Next: (I have to say this publically to hold myself accountable):

• Twittering and mobile-internet:  Disruptive or Enhancing?
• Princeton Theological Seminary:  A School for Wizards
• Mission Trail:  A New (and old) Kind of Border Fence

First and foremost among these ecumenical shin-digs is the Council of Nicaea (CE 325).  Seems the whole thing started from an argument between a priest, Arius, and a bishop, Alexander.  Among the things that Arius believed:

• “The Word” (aka Jesus, aka the Son, aka logos) wasn’t around from the beginning of time (whatever one construes “time” to be, of course) but was “created” by God (aka Jehovah, aka the Father, Creator, etc.).
• Therefore, God outranks Jesus in the heavenly hierarchy, conveniently preserving the monotheism argument.  But complicating the logical one…
• God and Jesus are made of different stuff.  Similar stuff, unidentifiable stuff, but decidedly different stuff.
• God is constant, but word/son/Jesus is subject to change (including suffering).

Apply the converse to most of these arguments, and you have Alexander’s POV.  Arius gathered a following, wrote some texts and even some hymns (maybe something like “Of the Father’s love begotten / ere the worlds began to be after being baptized in Galilee…”) and then everyone got their panties all in a wad.

I know that I’m supposed to agree with Alexander, and most people I’ve encountered seem to do that pretty readily, sometimes without much thought.  The two main arguments (at least from what I could find online and in talking to other students) go something like this:

• The argument of Alexander was the stronger of the two theologically and logically, and thus prevailed.

From what I can tell, there were intelligent arguments by intelligent men on both sides of the issue, and both firmly supported by different scripture passages.  I guess we could assume that [sarcasm on] Arius was just an idiot who couldn’t read, in which case it *really* baffles me that the best theological minds of the time spent half a century going back and forth before finally resolving the dispute.  Maybe we’re just a lot smarter than they were. [sarcasm off]

• Alexander’s side eventually DID prevail.  This proves God was somehow guiding the process and wouldn’t have allowed the church to wander down a heretical path.

Except that it did.  For at least fifty years after the council of Nicaea, until the next big council in 381, the church and its leaders continued to go back and forth on the issue.  And unless Arius was just some highly original genius, who’s to say that generations of Christians in the 300 years before the Nicene Creed hadn’t come to similar conclusions? (my history text indicates that Arius’ views reflected the historical tradition held by a large number of Eastern Christians).  Does that mean that God allows the church to remain in heresy, but only for 50 years?  Or is it 300?  Or…well, maybe we’re in a heresy phase right now?

I don’t know that I actually agree with Arius.  Or Alexander.  Actually, the voice that most resonates most with me in this debate is that of the Roman Emporor at the time, the famed Constantine.  He wrote a letter to both knuckleheads, saying (among other things):

It was wrong in the first instance to propose such questions as these, or to reply to them when propounded.  For those points of discussion which are enjoined by the authority of no law, but rather suggested by the contentious spirit which is fostered by misused leisure, even though they may be intended merely as an intellectual exercise, ought certainly to be confined to the region of our own thoughts, and not hastily produced in the popular assemblies, nor unadvisedly entrusted to the general ear.  For how very few are there able either accurately to explain subjects so sublime and abstruse in their nature?

Translation:  You both have waaaaay too much time on your hands.  You should try farming, or fighting barbarians sometime.  Then see how important your consubstantiation is.  Constantine continues (and I add some emphasis)…

The cause of your difference has not been any of the leading doctrines or precepts of the divine law, nor has any new heresy respecting the worship of God arisen among you.  You are in truth of one and the same judgment: you may therefore well join in communion and fellowship.  For as long as you continue to contend about these small and very insignificant questions, it is not fitting that so large a portion of God’s people should be under the direction of your judgment, since you are thus divided between yourselves…(Eusebius, Life of Constantine, II, 69-71)

But Constantine was just an emperor.  What could he know? He wasn’t even baptized until he was on his deathbed, the heathen.  So, they ignored him of course, not because he didn’t make sense, but (my opinion here) because they each wanted to be RIGHT! And we still do.  Unfortunately for Arius, democracy can be a real bitch, so he got outvoted at the council.  And excommunicated.  And then he was reinstated, and Alexander was excommunicated.  And then Arius was excommunicated again.  You get the idea…

Meanwhile, the church kept having councils, and kept on saying to those with whom they disagreed, “we’re taking our toys and going home.  You can’t play with us anymore.  Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.”  Unity and uniformity gained, diversity and freedom lost.

When I go before my Committee for Preparation for ministry, I wonder if I can take a third option?  Can I say, in reference to the creeds, I don’t care?  Affirm, not affirm, it doesn’t matter to me one way or another.  Let me simply do the things that Jesus did, rather than say the things his followers said, 300 years later.

The illegal immigrant wandering through the desert without water doesn’t really give a rip whether God and Jesus are made out of the same substance.  But Jesus tells me to give him something to drink.  To the teenager whose father died in a car accident, it is utterly insignificant whether Jesus was created by God or always existed.  But Jesus tells me to comfort him. What is ministry?  What is a minister?

Perhaps we have too long supposed that what we believe informs who we are and what we do.  Maybe it’s the other way around.  Maybe what we do informs who we are and what we believe.  Perhaps what ties me to my Presbyterian brothers and sisters is not the historic creeds we all profess nearly as much as it is the shared relationships and shared ministry I have found among them.

I hope they’ll still let me in…

• My Last Sermon — and my least prepared one at that, too.  I haven’t listened to the recording yet, so let me know if it comes out ok.
• Shine For You — this is a song I wrote for Faithbridge several years ago, and performed one last time with the praise team.  A lot of kids from the youth group also joined us for this one, playing guitar, bass, drums, and (my favorite) flute.
• Mr. Preacher Man — this is a spoof of Billy Joel’s “Piano Man,” written/arranged by Tom Bozarth, and performed by the praise team to “commemorate” my time at Faithbridge.  The words are a little hard to hear, but absolutely hilarious (and all true).

All of the recordings are hosted at the Internet Archive, and (like all my songs) are published under a Creative Commons 3.0 Share Alike License — so feel free to download, copy, distribute, remix, etc.