As a church staff member, we were privileged to be sent to several functions every year that were intended to be valuable to the church’s ministry as well as beneficial to the individual minister. One such function was called “Minister’s Retreat.” It was designed to be a casual time of teaching and fellowship with other ministers.
In 2003, Minister’s Retreat was held in Branson, Missouri. And the special speaker was a man named Earl Creps. I had heard him before in another capacity, so I knew that he was a great communicator. But this time I had no idea what was in store. We had survived a tornado. Would I survive the personal earthquake I was about to experience?
Earl spoke about three chairs. Now there was some other really good stuff, a scripture, a series of alliterative words, and an encouragement to “live and let live.” But the three chairs will always be with me.
In each chair he seated a volunteer: a sixty-something, a forty-something, and a twenty-something—all pastors. Since this was a casual affair and in order to further clarify the illustration, he gave the older man in the first chair a tie, the middle chair man a polo shirt, and the young guy a ball cap. He said that these three pastors corresponded to the three different styles of churches.
The church represented by the man in the tie, he called the traditional church. Maybe not in the same way you might think. Although he said it was usually skewed older—builders primarily—and had its inheritance from the past. He compared this church to the television program “Gunsmoke.” He said that most everything for them was black and white. He also compared them to the church in Jerusalem—the founding church. And, that they believed they would always be the only way to do things. But then they had children.
The church represented by the man in the polo shirt, he called the contemporary church—primarily boomers. He said that 60% of the churches out there fall into this category. He compared it to the television program “Frasier” and to the church at Antioch. He said that these churches were based on models created pragmatically by peers. So whereas the traditional church looked to the past, the contemporary church looks to each other. It is characterized by scripted Sunday morning productions and values similar to the traditional without the wherewithal to live it out.
Finally, Earl came to the third chair. I had no idea where he was going. He began talking about the children of boomers. (I have three of those.) He used terms like emerging church, experimental church, postmodern, and post-Christian. He talked about a generation of the tattooed and the pierced. He said that it was a church characterized by the passion, energy, zeal, and idealism of its people. He compared them to the television show “Seinfeld” and its vacuous existentialism. He also compared it to the church in Spain referred to by Paul in Romans (Romans 15:28) and pointed out that we have no record that Paul ever made it there. But, Earl said that this was the indigenous church of the 21st century.
I had never heard of it.
Listening back to a later version of this talk, I am amazed at how mild and non-threatening the message was. The podcast on Earl’s website was recorded several years after I heard him speak, so he may have tempered it based upon his audience. But when I heard it, it rocked my world.
I went home from Branson and lost sleep and more hair. I didn’t know what to do with the information I had been given, but I knew who would know.
I called Earl.
In 2003, Minister’s Retreat was held in Branson, Missouri. And the special speaker was a man named Earl Creps. I had heard him before in another capacity, so I knew that he was a great communicator. But this time I had no idea what was in store. We had survived a tornado. Would I survive the personal earthquake I was about to experience?
Earl spoke about three chairs. Now there was some other really good stuff, a scripture, a series of alliterative words, and an encouragement to “live and let live.” But the three chairs will always be with me.
In each chair he seated a volunteer: a sixty-something, a forty-something, and a twenty-something—all pastors. Since this was a casual affair and in order to further clarify the illustration, he gave the older man in the first chair a tie, the middle chair man a polo shirt, and the young guy a ball cap. He said that these three pastors corresponded to the three different styles of churches.
The church represented by the man in the tie, he called the traditional church. Maybe not in the same way you might think. Although he said it was usually skewed older—builders primarily—and had its inheritance from the past. He compared this church to the television program “Gunsmoke.” He said that most everything for them was black and white. He also compared them to the church in Jerusalem—the founding church. And, that they believed they would always be the only way to do things. But then they had children.
The church represented by the man in the polo shirt, he called the contemporary church—primarily boomers. He said that 60% of the churches out there fall into this category. He compared it to the television program “Frasier” and to the church at Antioch. He said that these churches were based on models created pragmatically by peers. So whereas the traditional church looked to the past, the contemporary church looks to each other. It is characterized by scripted Sunday morning productions and values similar to the traditional without the wherewithal to live it out.
Finally, Earl came to the third chair. I had no idea where he was going. He began talking about the children of boomers. (I have three of those.) He used terms like emerging church, experimental church, postmodern, and post-Christian. He talked about a generation of the tattooed and the pierced. He said that it was a church characterized by the passion, energy, zeal, and idealism of its people. He compared them to the television show “Seinfeld” and its vacuous existentialism. He also compared it to the church in Spain referred to by Paul in Romans (Romans 15:28) and pointed out that we have no record that Paul ever made it there. But, Earl said that this was the indigenous church of the 21st century.
I had never heard of it.
Listening back to a later version of this talk, I am amazed at how mild and non-threatening the message was. The podcast on Earl’s website was recorded several years after I heard him speak, so he may have tempered it based upon his audience. But when I heard it, it rocked my world.
I went home from Branson and lost sleep and more hair. I didn’t know what to do with the information I had been given, but I knew who would know.
I called Earl.
4 comments:
The story is buiding. I want more!!!!
You're probably building up to it, but how did the other pastor types at the retreat interpret Mr. Creps' analogy?
When given the same information, I'm very interested to hear how different church leaders integrate such knowledge.
I'm with Matt. I think God was already working on you. We tend to interpret the world through our own filter. So you embraced what you heard, and others may have dismissed it. I'm curious to know how many were with you on this, and how many blew it off.
It's good, dad! I dig it.
Post a Comment