DashHouse.com

LT adds to my list:

The "modern" church might be overly obsessed with numbers and dollars but the EC is way too concerned with looking smart, creative or cool. There is a big problem with this because the gospel is foolishness to the modern and post-modern mind. Despite this the gospel is to be proclaimed. If we ever re-brand Christianity so it there is no leap of faith in to the seemingly absurd we will have emptied the gospel message of its power. We can deconstruct church and theology forever and sit content because we think we are the vanguard of the church. In the end we are fooling ourselves because we've been tricked in to thinking we are something special because we read more books and have more creative gatherings while we still aren't making any real difference.

He ends with a good golf analogy:

Hitting a golf ball is simple but the mechanics of your swing are complex...In the end you just have to go up and hit the ball. You can only correct one thing at a time. It takes a lot of practice.

I think that is where I’m at these days. I just want to go up and hit the ball. If I worry too much about my swing I’ll just screw things up.

The podcast of the Resonate ECHO with Brian McLaren is now online. Thanks to Jared Siebert for converting the cassette tapes to an MP3.

David Fitch will be at FRWY.ca (a Resonate ECHO - free admission) to talk about the challenges of being a church planter and pastor in the cultures of post-modernity. In his book The Great Giveaway, David uses the current critique of modernity to uncover the ways traditional evangelicalism has been captured by the forces of modernity. The modern maladies of individualism, business like efficiency, me-centered gospel, and farmed-out justice are just a few symptoms of the “giveaway.” Fitch believes this captivity has not only made the church ineffectual amidst the breakdown of modernity but also allowed for its mission in Christ to be compromised in society.

How might the church “reclaim her mission in Christ” amidst these challenges? And what challenges does such a task pose for pastors and church planters? Fitch will present just a few insights from his book along with examples out of his own encounters in church planting and ministry.

He will address:

• The need to recapture community.
• The need for embodied witness.
• The need to make justice something we are.

David Fitch is the founding church planter of “Life on the Vine Christian Community” - an emerging church in the NW Suburbs of Chicago IL. He is affiliate professor of ministry, theology and ethics at Northern Seminary. And above all, even though by a freak of nature he was born in the US, he is a Canadian at heart having grown up in Hamilton ON. He has a terrific blog and is also a co-founder of up/rooted - a collaborative friendship of pastors engaging postmodernity in Chicago.

Resonate Echo w/ David Fitch
Tuesday, May 16 at 7:00PM
FRWY.ca (333 King Street East, Hamilton) - Get map
Free admission

My second column (April 14, 2006) in Christian Week:

A friend phoned on Sunday morning while we were at church. In her voice mail, she guessed we may be sleeping or out for breakfast. She didn’t guess we might be at church.

After I preached one Sunday, a woman told me she learned something new from my sermon: that Jesus and Christ refer to the same person.

These incidents, seemingly minor and unrelated, are symptoms of two major shifts taking place in Canada. First, the rhythms of church life, like weekly worship and common pause days, no longer shape our society. Second, the Christian story is no longer the dominant story within our culture. In many cases, it is not even known.

Some identify these shifts as signs of a larger trend: the end of Christendom. Southern Baptist author Reggie McNeal calls this trend the collapse of church culture. Whatever we call it, and whether or not we like it, there is no doubt it is changing the face of Christianity within Canada.

I have a theory that weaknesses are the flip side of our strengths. I don't know if this theory is true or not, but I think it is true in the case of the emerging church.

Last week I posted about what's good about the emerging church. Here's what I think is bad:

• Angst - The emerging church correctly reacts to many of the bad things they see in the modern church. It's easy to overreact and to start to see everything as wrong, and to become overly negative and cynical.
• Doctrine - The emerging church is broad, and one could argue that it defines itself by the center (Jesus) rather than the boundaries (doctrinal distinctives). I generally like this approach, but I wonder if it's worth drawing a few more boundaries while still holding to the center. To switch to a soccer metaphor, without boundaries, the ball is never out of play and the game gets a little silly at times.
• Gospel - Some say the emerging church is not evangelistic. I don't know about that; I've seen them reach people that the traditional church doesn't. But I am aware that in embracing a holistic Gospel, it's easy to go to the other extreme and forget about the soul.
• Fear of tackling some issues - The emerging church doesn't mind being provocative when it comes to tackling some issues, but it seems to sometimes back off on issues that would make it look, well, offensive and regressive. I often wish that they could tackle some of the hot button issues with the same insight and grace, even if it makes them look out of step with culture.
• Critiquing culture - The emerging church is pretty good at critiquing modernism, but could probably be more outspoken in critiquing postmodernism.

I'm painting with a broad brush here. Many of these may be accurate of some but not of others. And, don't forget, I think that when you add this to my other list, there are many things we can learn from the emerging church, and we're making a mistake if we write the whole thing off too quickly.

Let me make a prediction: those who visit here who are sympathetic to the emerging church may disagree with me on some of those points, but they will welcome critique. That shouldn't be missed. I have found that my emerging friends are actually open to admitting where the emerging church still has room to grow, especially if the critiques are offered in a spirit of generosity rather than of attack.

Last week, I was thinking about how easy it is to badmouth those we disagree with. I don't know how much glee we should take in criticizing our brothers and sisters. I would say, "Very little." For better or for worse, we're in this together, and we don't even have the option of not talking constructively and loving each other.

If you are a critic of the emerging church, and don't have any emerging friends, I'd encourage you to get to change that. I bet you'll both learn lots from each other.

The first and only time I met Bob Rae was in high school, over twenty years ago now, when he was about the age I am now. We were assigned a big project in Economics. While everyone worked hard, I got the idea to invite Bob Rae in to class. I got an A+ for minimal effort. I've always liked Rae since then.

At the time, Rae had just formed a coalition government with David Peterson in Ontario. Nobody knew whether that was a smart or not at the time. It ended up being a very good move. A few years later, Rae was premier of the province in what might be the only time the NDP ever governs in Ontario. It wasn't smooth sailing, although you could blame the economy at the time in part. You could see Rae mature, but it wasn't enough for his government to survive the next election.

Now Rae is running for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. This will drive my brother crazy, but here's why I like that idea.

Bob Rae is a great opposition leader. I don't know if he would make a great Prime Minister or not, but you always want the opposition leader to be effective. I'd love to see Rae as leader of the opposition in Parliament.

Bob Rae is brilliant. He is probably the smartest guy I've ever disagreed with on many issues (except for you, big brother David). I don't know if brains are really an asset in politics or not, but if they are, Rae has what it takes. He's principled too.

Of course, I haven't touched on policy issues. That's a whole other post. But I'm rooting for Rae and the introduction of national Rae Days (sorry again, David). Go, Rae, go!

Journey Toward the Heart of God
Leadership workshop by Milfred Minatrea
May 27, 2006, from 9:00 AM 4:00 PM
Bramalea Baptist Church, 9050 Dixie Road, Brampton Ontario

Explore how God is reshaping His church for mission by participating in Journey toward the Heart of God on May 27, 2006 from 9:00 AM 4:00 PM. This conference is for all disciples who long to experience Christ's Kingdom impact in their generation.

Led by Milfred Minatrea, author of Shaped by Gods Heart: The Passion and Practices of Missional Churches, this workshop is designed for pastors, lay leaders and hungry-hearted disciples who are desire something more than maintaining status quo religion.

Paul Martin, a pastor of a church up the road and a good guy, is blogging through a paper he's written on the emerging church. Last week he put out a challenge:

What I am really trying to find out from those who know better than me, is what specific things emergent alone has to offer the church at large. I think this is a very worthy question. If there are none, then we might as well just move on. If there are some, then we all need to know them. If there are only a few, then let's own them and press on. If there are hundreds, then let's stop and re-think everything we are doing.

And there is no point in vagueries. We need to know specifically, what are we missing that emergent has to offer?

Paul's already offered some praise, as has David Wayne at Jolly Blogger who has a nice section on what it means to be missional.

I don't think that any of the following qualities I'm about to list are unique to the emerging church. But they could possibly be gifts that can be shared and appreciated by the church at large.

I also don't want to suggest that there the emerging church is all good either. Not at all.

With those two qualifications, here's a random list of some of what I appreciate about the emerging church:

• Gospel - The emerging church is concerned that some have shrunk the Gospel to what happens after we die; that we've made it too individualistic and other-worldly. They suggest that the Gospel is about individuals and it does involve the future, but it is also about God acting through Jesus to heal, renew, and restore the reign of God to all creation.
• Missional focus - The missio Dei (mission of God) is a key theme in Scripture, and something that the emerging church wants to recapture: that mission is derived from the very nature of God, and we have been sent into the world for the glory of God.
• Church - The emerging church wonders if there is more to church than what is experienced in many modern churches. They long for a church that expresses what it means to be the people of God living in and for God's world.
• Holism - The emerging church rejects dualism and believes both body and soul are good, and believes that good ministry concerns itself with both.
• Justice - The emerging church believes that advocating for the oppressed and speaking out against injustice is part of our biblical mandate.
• Arts - We are created to be creative. The emerging church believes that art is sometimes the best way to express reality.
• Communal - The emerging church works to remember that the church is primarily a people, not a place to meet.
• Culture - The emerging church attempts to understand culture (modern and postmodern culture) and develop ways of responding to culture.
• Narrative - The emerging church is concerned that we read Scripture properly, not only for propositions but also to understand the biblical story as a sweeping narrative of God's ongoing work of redemption. They want to read the parts that make us uncomfortable and that sometimes get ignored. They reject the idea that the Bible is a how-to manual on how to live a better life. Instead, it's an account of God and his story, to which we're invited to enter. As someone's said, "We focus our efforts on trying to figure out if our lives could be relevant to the story of God, not if the Bible can be relevant to our lives."

It's often said that the emerging church is good at diagnosing problems and not as good at offering solutions. Actually, the emerging church offers a number of emphases and aspirations that I think are beneficial and worth thinking about for the church at large.

One of my biggest regrets is the way that the church has split along generational lines. Worship styles, methodology, missiology, and sometimes just plain sin get in the way.

When churches split by generation, everyone loses. Yet many churches can't seem to find a way to stay together.

That's why when I saw Faith of My Fathers: Conversations with Three Generations of Pastors about Church, Ministry, and Culture, I knew I had to pick it up.

In so many ways, we are radically different from each other, but at the same time we share a deep love and respect for one another that ties us together. If we can love one another, compromise, and choose love over dogma - the rest of the church can do the same...

The ache in the church is felt right now in my family. My grandfather was a different kind of pastor from my father, and I am yet a different kind of pastor. We disagree quite passionately, and yet we have no choice but to love and respect each other. We are not strangers who can easily be reduced to enemies and ignored. We are each other's sons, sharing each other's blood, needing each other's affection. And so we stay, and we listen, and we attempt to understand. How I wish for something as beautiful for the church as a whole. Through the blood of Christ, we are each other's sons and daughters as well, and we can't walk away from this responsibility any longer.

Just got started, but I'm liking this book, and the impulse behind it, very much.

From bob.blog:

I once attended a Good Friday service where the pastor encouraged us to look at Good Friday positively, to see the crucifixion through "Easter eyes." I could only shake my head at this massive misunderstanding and missed opportunity.

His intentions were good… He didn’t want anyone to feel bad. He wanted to protect us from feeling defeated as we meditated on the death of Christ. It’s completely understandable. But in doing so, he robbed us of exactly the feeling and experience that Good Friday is meant to give us...

Every year the pastor stands and does his best to project the words “Christ is risen!” And we half-heartedly answer, “He is risen indeed...?” Usually we have to try it a couple of times to work up any enthusiasm at all.

And the reason we don’t feel the joy at Easter that we know deep down inside we should, is because we don’t feel the grief at Good Friday that we could. We enter our well-lit sanctuaries on Good Friday, sing some songs, hear a nice message about the crucifixion, and go out for dessert afterwards with our friends. We enter with smiles on our faces and leave the same way. If only we knew how to grieve…

Good Friday ruined the first disciples’ weekend. Maybe we should allow it to ruin ours as well.

via

There's been a lot of good discussion since Brian McLaren's swing through Toronto. Some discussion has been helpful, although it's sometimes hard to focus with all the noise that's generated.

Ultimately, the real issue isn't McLaren. He's important, but the issues are much bigger than him. That's where I sometimes wish I had never heard of the emerging church. I don't really care that much about the emerging church as I do the entire church asking and answering some important questions on the nature of the Gospel and church. It's not about the emerging church. It's about the church.

McLaren's visit has got me thinking about some of the people who influence us - not just McLaren, but whoever else is out there on the circuit, speaking and writing books.

I've been thinking about James 3:1, which says, "Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers and sisters, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly." As a friend has quipped, this verse says that there will be two lines when it's time to be judged: teachers and everyone else. Those of us who are teachers will receive greater judgment. If you're not in the teaching line, you'll have a much easier time.

This is a verse that scares me. When I think about it I remember the weight of teaching.

It also makes me think of the authors and speakers who write books travel. When I speak, I influence a couple of hundred. When they speak, they influence tens of thousands or more. And those they influence also end up influencing countless others in a cascading effect.

I don't care what you think about McLaren, MacArthur, Olsteen, Hybels, or even some bloggers with big platforms. You may or may not like them, but I hope you do more than criticize them. I hope you pray for them. I sure don't envy the weight of teaching that they carry.

Mission is not a burden laid upon the church; it is a gift and a promise to the church that is faithful. The command arises from the gift. Jesus reigns and all authority has been given to him in earth and heaven. When we understand that, we shall not need to be told to let it be known. Rather, we shall not be able to keep silent. (Lesslie Newbigin, Mission in Christ's Way)

Jordon suggested I archive my columns from Christian Week on my blog. Good idea, as they'll likely disappear from the Christian Week site eventually.

My second column appears in the issue that arrived yesterday, although it's not online yet. The good thing about the time lag between submission and publication is that by the time it arrives, I find myself saying, "I wonder what I wrote about?" Sad, I know.

This is my first column in Christian Week (February 3, 2006) with a few minor corrections. The second column will appear shortly.

For the past four years, Christina has been attending an alternative school within the public school board. Alternative schools "usually feature a small student population, a commitment to innovative and experimental programs, and volunteer commitment from parents and other community members."

Christina's school ends at her current grade, which means that we've been on the search for a good school for her next year. That search ended this week.

The good news: She's in an alternative school for grades 7-8. It's an amazing school which is hard to get into, and we feel blessed that she's been accepted.

The bad news: It's the other side of the city. We will have to get used to the idea of her taking the subway clear across the city. And that will be a little bit hard.

Good thing we have half a year to get used to the idea. It's hard to let go of kids as they grow up!

Tim Challies blogged on boldness yesterday. Carla blogged on it today. I agree on the need for an appropriate boldness but I'm not always sure we're talking about the same thing.

The emerging church is often accused of having more questions than answers. On the other hand, some are accused of going too far the other way:

Everyone I've ever met who claimed to have no doubts about the basic tenants of the Christianity has turned out to be dangerously imbalanced. The more people I meet, the more this is reinforced. I don't want to be around people who have no doubts. I don't even want a faith that takes my doubt away - that's no faith at all.

Faith isn't what keeps me from doubting. Faith is what holds onto me in the midst of my doubt.

What Challies calls "boldness," I find, often has another name. When I find it in myself, most often it's "hubris," and I think the reason it's missing from a lot of the stuff you hear from the Emergent side of the aisle is simple: over on this side, we recognize it as sin, at least in themselves. It can get even worse; when "boldness" is employed to brow-beat fellow believers who express honest doubts, it has another, darker name: "spiritual abuse."

This all came up, of course, because McLaren talked about the four stages of faith on Saturday night. If I remember right, these stages come from his book Finding Faith, which I have not read.

I did leave this comment at Carla's this morning with a couple of thoughts I'm processing. Carla was writing on some passages in Hebrews which talk about approaching God with boldness and having assurance of faith. Here's what I commented:

Hi Carla,

I think that passage isn't primarily about boldness about our belief system, but boldness in approaching God through Christ.

I am thinking about this whole topic because I think there is an appropriate type of boldness and many today are losing their nerve. But I would qualify it in two ways:

1) The most important thing about our faith is not how much faith we have but the object of our faith. Jesus said our faith can be as small as a mustard seed, but that wasn't as important as the object of that faith (which is Jesus). My confidence is not in how much I believe, but in the fact that Christ is trustworthy.

2) If we believe in sola scriptura, then we need to always submit our belief systems to Scripture. Not to say we should abandon our belief systems but our confidence is not in them. Our confidence is ultimately in Christ as revealed in His Word.

Hope that makes sense. I want everyone to have an appropriate assurance and boldness, but I'm not sure we're always talking about the same thing.

As always, you're appreciated.

An appropriate confidence, I believe, neither wallows in ignorance nor pretends to have all the answers. It certainly isn't a confidence in our own belief system. It makes room for appropriate doubt, which is a sign that we are taking God seriously. It's primarily confidence in God as revealed in Scripture. That's the type of boldness and confidence that I wish for all of us.

Craig Carter, professor at Tyndale and a panelist at the Evolving Church Conference, is blogging. Right now he's taking a look at some of McLaren's books:

Brian McLaren is bound to be considered a heretic by many Evangelicals because he thinks of Chrisitanity as a huge mansion and of Evangelicalism as one of many rooms in that house. Historic, ecumenical orthodoxy, rooted in the Bible and the Apostles' and Nicene Creeds, is deeper, wider and bigger than American Evangelicalism.

He also recommends a new book called Truth and a New Kind of Christian. "He is very critical but doesn't lose his sanctification in the process. We could use more conversation like that around these issues." Amen to that.

I am fairly Reformed in my theology, and some of my closest friends are Reformed. I have many Reformed friends who give me hope (hello, Ken Davis; hello Bryan), and scholars like Michael Horton and Stan Fowler (theology professor at Heritage) represent what is best in Reformed life and theology. But I have to admit that it is sometimes tough to be Reformed, because we are known as a prickly bunch who don't engage well with those who believe differently than us.

For some years, I have been on a search for exceptions. I don't see why you can't be Reformed in theology, yet also gracious and fair in how you interact with others.

I've especially been looking for this type of engagement between the Reformed movement and Emergents. For one thing, I think the two have much in common. Both are concerned with how the Gospel has been compromised, and both have an impulse to think at the theological, not pragmatic, level. Both are similar in their diagnosis, and I had hoped to see some constructive dialogue about the prescription. But that discussion on the prescription is often derailed by misunderstanding and a lack of agreement on assumptions (example: the role of Scripture).

And it's not all the Reformed people's fault either. Some Emergents have learned to duck or raise fists when they see a Reformed guy coming. Maybe they're just coming to shake our hands and we should extend a hand of greeting instead of raising our fists. (Until they throw the first punch, of course!)

I actually think the two groups have a lot to learn from each other. People keep telling me I'm blowing smoke, but I keep hoping. A few encouraging signs:

• Tim Challies has a strongly worded post today on his experience with McLaren on Saturday night. Tim has put some good issues on the table, and he's also clarified a statement that (in my opinion) went too far. I like Tim and I think he's surfaced some important issues. People like him could be a fair and reasonable voice on the Reformed side.
• Paul Martin presented a good paper on the Emerging Church today, and he's going to start blogging it here. Paul went out of his way to be fair and wants to avoid painting a caricature. (I even got my name mentioned in the paper. Wow, I'm famous!) As Paul blogs sections of the paper, I think we could have a productive discussion.
• Nathan, one of the organizers of the Evolving Church conference, attended the meeting with Paul Martin today, and he is willing to engage and listen and learn.
• There are a few of us who appreciate Carla at EmergentNo even though we often disagree on the issues. I've seen her work to be fair. You have to respect that, even if you disagree with her. I love that people like Andrew Jones treat her like a sister and listen to her, believing she will say things we need to hear.
• There are people like Tim Keller at Redeemer around who are Reformed and able to speak into the Emerging conversation very well.

I don't know why we have to choose to be Emergent or Reformed at all. In fact, I don't understand why we're being called to make any number of choices: proposition or narrative, Gospel or social justice, red letters or black letters. Why must I choose one and not the other? Can't you, for instance, believe that the Bible is narrative but it still contains ideas that look a lot like propositions?

At the end of today's meeting, the host reminded us to not lose sight of Christ. Maybe that is simplistic, but at the end of the day, that's much more important than labels or movements.

You never know. I keep hoping the Reformed and Emergents will stop talking past one another. It could happen. I pray so.

Update: Andrew Jones has some thoughts here and here.

Originally uploaded by nathancolquhoun.

I've posted my notes from yesterday's conference in HTML and PDF (requires free Acrobat Reader).

Nathan has also posted some great pictures from the evening.

I spent the day at the Evolving Church Conference at Tyndale yesterday. Then, last night, we hosted Brian McLaren for an interactive session at Richview.

Some things I liked about yesterday:

• A 72-year-old man got up to explain why he was there. "Can I be frank?" he asked. He and his peers have a number of children, and all of them "love the Lord," he said. But none of them want anything to do with the church as it is. He spoke of his concern that Sunday mornings were consuming so much energy in the church that it's been distracted from its mission. He didn't seem to have a chip on his shoulder, but as part of the church he was concerned and not prepared to just blame the kids. He turned out to be the best speaker of the day, even though he was part of the audience.
• There wasn't a lot of anger and angst yesterday. If anything, speakers went out of their way to affirm what traditional churches are doing well, while expressing humility about what the emerging church is not doing well.
• All the speakers were great. It's the first time I've heard Chris Seay and I wasn't disappointed.
• I loved the challenge from multiple speakers to reject the free market Gospel that's about making our lives better, and to embrace and live the Gospel on its own terms instead.
• McLaren was articulate and gracious in his interaction at Richview. He always seems to try to understand the question behind the question.
• I loved that Nathan, one of the conference organizers, stayed behind to stack chairs after the event at Richview, even though I'm sure he was bushed. Classy.

What I didn't like:

• We had four white Americans addressing us a predominantly younger, mostly white audience yesterday. We're not there yet.
• After the event at McLaren, I talked to a man who began to attack McLaren. As he talked, he painted a caricature. I think it's smart to critically engage McLaren's views, but I was saddened by an attack that was more personal and, I think, inaccurate.

Other posts on McLaren at Richview:

• Bill Kinnon - "He had every reason to be tired this evening - but there was no sense of that. He was warm, engaging and gracious.
• Paul Martin - "He is a very articulate speaker... this meeting did nothing but confirm what I have written in my own mind." (Paul is presenting a paper on the Emerging Church Monday.)
• Challies weighs in - "We were subjected to long, rambling discourses that seemed to do anything but address the actual question...Throughout the evening, boldness was absent...Brian McLaren loves Jesus, but he hates God." Update: Tim has changed that last sentence to, "Brian McLaren loves Jesus, but does he love God in the same way?"
• Ian Clary - "All in all I came away from the evening saddened by what McLaren had to say - or not say as it turned out."
• Christel - "I don't think he made a single ringing affirmative about what he believes to be true throughout the evening."
• Clint - "McLaren offered much of what any good sage would possess: pithy anecdotes, measured critiques, questions for questions, and concrete applications. Surprisingly however, McLaren seemed nickel-poor when it came to supplying answers that had lasting currency."

I talked recently to a friend who's planted and grown a well-known church. He told me that one of the smartest things they did was to not read a lot of books on how to plant a church before they started.

The past three weeks, I've been on a tear. I've unsubscribed from countless e-mail newsletters, magazine subscriptions, and blogs (not yours of course). I've been drowning in too much noise.

(More on de-cluttering from e-mail here.)

A lot of what I was reading is good, but there comes a point where too much of a good thing is a bad thing. The signal to noise ratio can get out of whack and I can stop hearing from the One who doesn't always speak loudly.

There's still a place for input, but I'm finding less of the how-to stuff helpful. I don't need another model that promises the world. The best stuff out there doesn't offer ready-made solutions as much as it engages deeper issues, where the real thinking has to take place.

Behind the scenes this site is being demolished, but in a good way. I've cleaned up quite a bit of crud that has crept in over the years. The first files on this site were created ten years ago this month, which is an eternity in Internet time. So it's no wonder it needs a bit of a renovation.

Ten years. That means I was on the Internet not long after Al Gore got the thing going. Amazing when you think about it. I lasted longer than pets.com. Here's what it looked like in 1999. I wish I could remember the original design.

I've moved from Softquad HoTMetaL Pro (love this documentation from 1994: "Microsoft Windows now supported") to FrontPage (bleh) to Dreamweaver.

Anyway, my current site has gone naked on my hard drive, which means my files are now all content and no layout or style. All the styling will be handled by CSS, which should have happened a few years back (if only I had listened). CSS layout has a number of benefits and has reduced the size of this site by over 10%.

Rachel, the original designer of the site, is handling that part of the job. If any of you are looking for a designer, I'd highly recommend her.

So I haven't gone with a new style, but it's going to be changed under the hood and cleaned up a little. Maybe I'll do a redesign for my 20th anniversary online.

Brian McLaren, Don Miller, Chris Seay and others are in town this weekend for The Evolving Church conference at Tyndale. Looks like the only tickets left are for overflow. Kudos to Nathan and the other organizers for promoting this event well; good to see a positive response.

If you're not registered, don't forget that you can still catch Brian at Richview this Saturday evening.

My friend Paul Martin is giving a paper on the Emerging Church next Monday at Thistletown Baptist at 10 a.m. If I know Paul, the paper will be critical in the best sense of the word. Paul is fair and I think he's done some good reading to prepare, and I'm looking forward to the paper. Rumor has it that Tim Challies will be in attendance, as well as Trish, who is a frequent commenter at this site.

Update: Paul has posted a teaser from his paper.

My friend Terry writes:

I’m not sure if you know that my daughter...is involved in a faith-based organization that helps develop communities in Africa. They set up self-sustaining social enterprises in partnership with local people and local governments. One of the towns near their project in South Africa needs bikes and umbrellas.

Right now they have 700 bikes they need to ship to Africa. For only $10 a bike can be shipped. Please think about how you can help and spread this worthy initiates with your friends and associates.

You can help out here.

I blame Len for my discontent. A couple of weeks ago, Len commented, "you are a great blogger.. but this site looks terrible...But I love you anyway man!"

I have to admit the first thing I did was go to Len's site to see how it looked.

I was aware that the site needed to be freshened up, and I'm sometimes shocked by how it looks in other browsers, but I wasn't that unhappy until Len's comment. Funny how you can be happy with something one day and very discontent the next.

All that to say that a redesign is in the works somewhere in the future. I want to clean it up and lay it out with standards-compliant XHTML/CSS instead of tables. I always find all the browser quirks frustrating when it comes to CSS design.

I've asked for a couple of quotes for redesign, and the quotes are all fair, but I am still thinking of tackling it on my own. So, I might poke away at it over time.

Thanks a lot, Len. ;)