As soon as Christians bring up the topic of faith and education, they quickly divide into two camps. On one side are those that argue passionately for educational equity, and see the foundational expression of the Christian faith in public education as one of equal access and “closing the achievement gap.” Here, justice is the issue.

On the other side are those in Christian schools and home schools who see the integration of faith and education as a plain matter of teaching Bible, theology, and the “Christian worldview” as the centerpiece of the educational experience. For them a version of “Christian education” is the answer. Here, truth is the issue.

Yet what I find disturbing is that these two groups rarely talk to each other. And instead versions of name calling usually take place. Those committed to public schools will call Christian school and homeschool families “separatists,” – they’re ignoring the needs of their community and instead living in a “holy huddle” instead of being “salt and light” in the world. And those in the Christian school and homeschool world look at those in public school with disbelief: how could you let a secular government raise your kids? Don’t you know there’s no such thing as a neutral education?

And because parents have made these decisions for their children, their most precious of treasures, any suggestion that they have made a wrong or “unChristian” decision is most likely to incur rage rather than rational discourse. For this reason, nearly every pastor I’ve ever spoken to about this issue refuses to bring it up. Why incur the wrath of moms on both side when I can just avoid it all together, and say, “Well, it’s a personal choice.”

What we lack almost completely is a view of faith influencing the practice of education itself.

Let me try to explain with an illustration. Last week, a well known Christian advocate for educational equity came to Denver and gave a conference at a church. She spoke about her organization, the needs of low-income students around the US, and the idea that access to a quality education is a moral issue – an issue that all Christians that care about justice should support and act upon. What followed were illustrations of Christians in after-school mentoring programs and families moving into low-income neighborhoods to send their kids to underperforming schools. Her argument was supported by biblical verses about justice.

Then the issue of prayer in public schools came up. Shouldn’t kids have the right to pray in school? What about before sports games? But after some discussion, the presenters (and pastors) agreed that Christians shouldn’t just be interested in praying in school – they must simply serve the needs of their community, which, again, meant educational equality.

What was never even brought up was how the Christian faith should influence the actual teaching and learning process. Because we’ve so largely accepted the idea that the gospel belongs in the private sphere (home and personal life, or in this context, homeschool and Christian school), we’ve by and large accepted the idea that speaking the gospel in a public school context is either rude or possibly illegal, and utilizing the gospel as a framework for understanding our work in public education is simply inappropriate.

So what are you saying? That public school teachers should share their faith in front of the classroom – maybe quote a few Bible verses before literature class? Realistically, any Christian teacher that did this would get a barrage of phone calls from parents – and possibly a severe reprimand from her principal. This path won’t realistically work in a pluralistic society.

But I am saying that in a republic that protects freedom of religious expression, there ought to be freedom for Muslims, Christians, Jews, secular humanists, Hindus, or those with modern scientific worldview to openly express their beliefs. Teachers could obviously not lead prayers, but neither should they feel forced to lie about the reasons why they act, think, or speak as they do. Stephen Prothero’s book Religious Literacy cites the huge need that public school kids have for just understanding what religions believe – and several Supreme Court decisions that have protected the teaching of world religions in a public school context.

This alone would be a huge step forward. Right now, people of any explicit faith tradition feel afraid to even share what they believe openly. Instead, a dark cloud of silence rests on most public schools – and students leave schools largely ignorant of history’s most influential movements, ideas and beliefs.

But this is not what I’m arguing for. We need to begin a conversation (or, more accurately, continue from centuries past) about how the Christian faith can and should influence our actual practice of education within a pluralistic society. I see this happening on two planes: (1) placing religion back in the category of knowledge and (2) exploring the subtle, “subversive” ways in which Christian doctrine can influence how and what we teach – and so better serve students and communities.

First, teachers need to ask the basic question, Can claims about God, the supernatural, or even ethics in general be true or false in the same sense that there are true and false answers in calculus or chemistry? In the science labs, teachers expect students to have the right answers, but in literature and “religious studies” it is personal opinion that reigns supreme. Even though the vast majority of school districts would say they want their students to be people of “character” or “integrity,” when teachers try to define exactly what those are – and then teach students about a clear right and wrong, like a mathematics answer can be right or wrong – they are generally left with little institutional support.

A hard question to ask is this: Did Jesus rise from the dead? On Sunday, Christians would say, “Oh, yes. Absolutely.” But when pressed in a public school context, many of those same teachers would say, “Well, that’s what I believe.” But the question remains – did Jesus rise from the dead in the same, plain historical sense in which Caesar crossed the Rubicon or Pompeii was buried in ashes by a volcano? By raising these types of questions, public school teachers can at least highlight the historical claims of the Christian faith, and begin to usher religion back into the category of knowledge – something that can be either true or false. Something that students should all investigate for themselves.

This first strategy I see is one that will largely raise the tension level in many classroom settings. But the second strategy I think can be more covert and “subversive” – but also more of a widespread blessing to people of many backgrounds and beliefs.

My friend Bill Kurtz, the CEO of Denver Schools of Science and Technology, has built a network of public charter schools that are some of the best in the US. And he has done this in part by bringing his underlying Christian faith to bear on how he sees the human person, the human condition, and his motive for serving. So, for example, he believes students are made in God’s image but are fallen and in need of restoration. And so on Wednesday mornings all students at his schools gather to both praise students who have lived out the schools values and to hear public apologies from students who skip class or don’t “do their best” – one of the school’s core values. Restoration is a part of their school’s culture.

He also believes that each student has great potential, black and white, rich and poor, quick learner or slow. He shares this belief with his co-workers from many faith backgrounds – but it is nonetheless significant that he is animated by a hope that each student has value and each student can succeed and attend college. Such an overt and pervasive hope is indeed rare in public education. But he brings this hope ultimately from the story out of which he is living. (It is a hope which has led him to launch 8 schools so far, with 6 more planned in the next 8 years.)

Here both Christian school / homeschool and public school teachers need to begin a more robust conversation about faith and education by asking how doctrines like creation, incarnation, justification, original sin, and eschatology influence everything from how we evaluate the critical thinking movement to how we structure our lesson plans. (This, by the way, is needed just as much in Christian schools as it is in public schools.) This is the mostly untested, untried arena of Christian faith and education in a pluralistic setting. And here Christians ought to be unafraid to venture, because we believe (for there is no knowledge without belief, said Augustine) that the Christian faith is the best revealer of reality – for all people at all times and in all places.

Here is the great conversation we must begin between Christian faith and education. Here is a project that brings us beyond offended parents, fearful teachers, and cultural assumptions that say we must choose either justice or truth. Here is a better way than either crusading for our religious rights or passively adopting the assumptions of secular humanism. Here is the needed cultural space we must create between church and school – a space that is more faithful to God and a better servant of our neighbors.

Work

What would you ask Eugene Peterson about your work?

March 5, 2014

If you could sit down with Eugene Peterson, the author of The Message, and ask him any question about your work or career, what would it be?

This fall, Denver Institute for Faith & Work, along with Cherry Creek Presbyterian, New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Littleton Christian Church, and Bloom Church, is hosting a special dinner for the residents of Colorado. The dinner will feature several short video clips of Eugene Peterson answering your toughest and most honest questions about calling, theology, and career.

To get the video, this Spring we will be traveling to Eugene Peterson’s home in Montana to ask him your questions about work, vocation, career and the Bible. And so before we go to his home, we want to hear your heart and thoughts. We will be collecting questions from you for the next two week on anything related to calling, work, career and the Christian faith. The top three questions will both actually be asked to Eugene Peterson for the video recording and will earn you a free dinner this Fall.

So, if you were sitting next to Eugene Peterson, what would you ask him about your work?

Work

The Entrepreneur’s Dilemma

February 28, 2014

I sat in the car, waiting for my next appointment. I was about to meet with two CEOs back-to-back. My bag was filled with literature for my start-up. And I was ready to take the stage.

That’s what it feels like, becoming an entrepreneur. Taking the stage. After months of work, day and night, you put yourself out there to sink or swim. You believe in your idea whole-heartedly, almost to the point of being surprised that others don’t see as you do. But in the midst of the risk, the excitement, a temptation can worm its way into our hearts: I am my idea.

Several months ago, I remember speaking with a pastor in Boulder who works with young tech entrepreneurs. The temptation for entrepreneurs is to so wholly identify with their new start-up that their soul becomes bound up with the new venture’s success. This is the entrepreneur’s dilemma.

Usually one of two things happen: (1) We are successful. We get the venture capital, our insane hours produce a killer product that takes off. The cash begins to pour in. We believe those who reverently call us “founder,” and soon we begin to whisper to ourselves, “Look what I have done.” And pride begins its cancerous growth. Or, conversely, (2) We fail. Either we get the venture capital and the product flops, or the idea never takes off at all. And because our identity has become so tied in with our logo, our website, the global impact we had envisioned, when the business crumbles, so do we. This failure can lead to caverns of isolation, despair, or a simmering cynicism that bubbles over into subtle anger toward the world who couldn’t see our “true genius.”

Being an entrepreneur myself, I have acutely felt both of these temptations – pride and fear, desire for glory and the specter of failure. But as I sat in the car that day, waiting for my two appointments, I turned on the radio. A song came on, and as I was listening to it, it was if I was experiencing a small taste of a Beauty so much larger and more soul-delighting than a mere song. As I offered a quiet prayer before my appointments with the two CEOs, all of a sudden I felt a rush of emotion. I felt point to a Beauty beyond me, a Beauty so rich, so filled with life, that I remember thinking: He is my great treasure, my eternal song, and he is mine, all mine. He can never be taken from me.

As I grabbed my bag, got up from my seat and shut my car door, I remembered a quote from C.S. Lewis: “He who has God and everything else has no more than he who has God only.” That is, the Christian with wealth, power, prestige, pleasure – “everything” – has no more than the Christian with none of those things.

As both my pride and my fear began to melt away, I came to see what I wish all entrepreneurs could see: Christ himself is already the highest treasure and sweetest gift. So, if I succeed, and I can build my new venture to mythic proportions, I will have no more than what I have now. I can be no wealthier, and have no more enduring happiness than here, in this moment. And if I fail, and all my plans come crashing down, I will still have all the riches of heaven, for they are a gift that cannot be taken from me. As St. Patrick said, “Thou and Thou only, first in my heart, High King of Heaven, my Treasure Thou art.”

It’s here that the Christian faith is the truest and best support for both entrepreneurs and economic development in general. The Christian faith is based solely on God’s gift of grace. And when risk-taking entrepreneurs bring His grace into their hearts, they neither ruin themselves nor others by their new enterprises, because they become neither prideful CEOs or despairing “failures.” Instead, they are liberated to both risk everything and, ironically, nothing at all, for their greatest treasure is secure.

On a societal level, I believe Christians have the best reason of all to take big risks. Secular humanism means the risks are real and failure can crush the human person with no reference point beyond him or herself. And it can often lead to Founder’s Blues, an all too common emotional roller coaster that can swell egos but also can lead to suicidal bouts of depression. But for the Christian, to win all or to lose all are both minuscule in comparison to the unsurpassed gift of God himself.

It’s been noted that entrepreneurs are the fuel of the modern economy. What risk. What reward. What responsibility to fuel our modern way of life. But I’ve come to believe that it’s only in the Christian story that an entrepreneur can truly answer take risks without damaging his very soul and ultimately those around him – for in Christ, he already has his great reward.

It is with this confidence that I walked into those corporate offices that day. But the confidence was certainly not in my own ability. But it was with a deep sense of peace that offering my idea was not the same as offering myself. I could confidently share my business plan, and our future prospects, and not try to wrangle him for money or support. Instead, I held my idea loosely, with a balance of eager expectation and an openness to a future that is ultimately in the hands of the One who gave me this idea in the first place.

If I had just thirty seconds with every entrepreneur, I would share with him this mystery. I would give him a soul-filling reason to work, to risk, to build a new business. I would tell him: “He who has God and everything else has no more than he who has God only.”

Photo: Entrepreneur

Economy

Vocation: The Holy Grail of Corporate America

January 7, 2014

Five hundred billion dollars. That’s how much economists estimate the US economy loses every year due to employee disengagement.

A recent Gallup poll showed that 70% of Americans are disengaged from their work – either simply punching in and punching out each day, or actually working to sabotage the company they work for.

Globally it’s worse: recently Harvard Business Review noted that 80% of the global workforce is disengaged – 10% worse than America. And the numbers aren’t getting better. Back in 2007-2008, the Global Workforce Survey conducted by Towers Perrin (now Towers Watson) polled 90,000 workers in 18 countries. Five years ago, 79% were disengaged worldwide. That’s one percentage point better, showing the world has lost ground in the past 5 years.

Imagine a global economy of Dilberts, wandering in a forest of cubicle boredom– and a sea of managers doing little to stem the tide of corporate ennui. If images of The Office are popping into your head (without the entertaining antics of Michael Scott), you wouldn’t be far from the truth.

But why hasn’t this question garnered more of our attention? Employee disengagement costs not only the US economy, but it dearly costs businesses, both large and small, in annual revenue and profits. And if these numbers are accurate for Christians as well as people of other faiths, that means that 4/5ths of the Body of Christ would rather be playing Angry Birds, checking Facebook posts from high school buddies, or taking naps under their desks than actually working.

Considering we live in an economy ever more dependent on creativity and innovation, we have to ask the question: How did the modern world become so disengaged from work, and what can be done about it?

Gary Hamel, named by the Wall Street Journal as the world’s foremost business strategist, tried to tackle this question in his book The Future of Management. He introduced a simple framework for ranking employee engagement, which he called “A Hierarchy of Human Capabilities at Work.”

A Hierarchy of Human Capabilities at Work

Level 6: Passion

Level 5: Creativity

Level 4: Initiative

_____________________

Level 3: Expertise

Level 2: Diligence

Level 1: Obedience

At the bottom is obedience – employees who show up each day and follow the rules and procedures. Obedience is necessary for large-scale organizations, but people on Level 1 simply do what they’re told. Next is diligence. These employees stay until the job is done and take personal responsibility for their work. They’re hard workers, and want to do a good job. Level 3 is expertise, or personal competence. They’re not only hard workers, but they’re good at what they do. They’re well-trained, many have great skills, and they’re eager to learn more.

Here’s the problem, however, with Levels 1-3. “Trouble is, obedience, diligence and competence are becoming global commodities,” writes Hamel, in his new book What Matters Now. “You can buy these human capabilities just about anywhere in the world, and in places like India and China, they can be bought for next to nothing.” And corporations have realized this, which is why millions of jobs have been outsourced from American and Europe to the Far East. If you’re an employee under the line in Hamel’s Hierarchy of Human Capabilities at Work (Levels 1-3), it’s likely that sooner or later, you’ll be looking for a job.

What, then, of the higher levels? Beyond expertise is initiative. These are employees who see problems or opportunities, and don’t wait to be told what to do. They’re proactive, and find ways to initiate new projects that create value for their company.

Level 5 is creativity. Here, “employees are eager to challenge conventional wisdom and are always hunting for great ideas that can be imported from other industries.” They challenge tired industry norms, pay attention to emerging trends, leverage existing skills and assets, and meet needs that customers didn’t know they yet had. For example, the creatives at Apple weren’t the first to invent a smart phone, but they did combine the idea of a smart phone with web browsing, a music player, email, alarm clock, calendar and an ecosystem of other apps. Level 5 employees are culture-makers – they create new ways of doing and thinking, and in the process shift companies, and occasionally industries.

Yet the apex of Hamel’s Hierarchy is what he simply calls “passion.” Hear how he defines passion: “[These are] employees who see their work as a calling, as a way to make a positive difference in the world. For these ardent souls, the dividing line between vocation and avocation is indistinct at best…While other employees are merely present, they are engaged.” Vocation – a deep sense of calling, a zeal to work for a purpose beyond oneself – is the single greatest need for corporations across the globe. In a creative economy, audacity, imagination and passion create the most long-term value.

But Hamel sees a problem: “[Here’s] the rub. These higher order human capabilities are gifts; they cannot be commanded. You can’t tell someone to be passionate or creative. Well, you can, of course, but it won’t do much good.”

Let’s take a step back and summarize. Most of the world can’t stand their work. It costs the economy and businesses billions of dollars, and it costs individuals of a sense of purpose. The world’s best business thinker sees this problem and crafts a hierarchy that puts action, creativity, and, of all things, vocation, at the top of his list of most valuable assets. But the problem is that these traits can only be gifts. That is, they must be given.

You can probably see where I’m going here.

It’s one thing to say that we ought to think about how to live out our faith in the business world. It’s another thing to say that the most desperate need the world – and our companies – has is people who are called to initiate and to create, both activities that have their very foundation in God himself (bara is the Hebrew word for “create” or “initiate”, used to describe God’s activity in creating the universe in Genesis 1).

What’s the takeaway? One of the wisest use of resources for any company is to help people discover their vocation, and then create fertile environments whereby employees can use their gifts to grow, create, and make a difference.

I’d also say that it would be fiscally wise for corporate leaders to leave space for honest expressions of faith, recognizing that you can’t give your employees creativity or passion. But perhaps Another can.

This post first appeared on the Denver Institute Blog.

Theology

A Light in the Darkness

December 24, 2013

“Again.” That was the headline the next day in The Denver Post. I first found out from a text message from my wife: “Shooting at Arapahoe High School.” I froze, and then checked the nearest TV screen at the rec center. For Colorado, it was an all too familiar scene. Students running out of a building led by a black-armored SWAT Team. Mothers embracing their children in tears. Disbelief hanging on the faces of teenage boys.

Except this time it was different – my own cousin was in the building that day. She heard the shots – “like somebody had dropped a big pan.” She hid in her classroom, and trembled when somebody shook the doorknob. On Friday, December 13, 2013, an unwelcome cloud eclipsed the sun, and Colorado was overshadowed by a familiar darkness.

Long ago, Mary could well identify with such darkness. Living under Roman occupation, Israel was captive to a foreign power, mourning in a “exile” from home, from justice, from the long-awaited Messiah. From a “suburban,” lower-income family, subject to larger cultural tides and winds, she was small, and powerless to change her world.

Yet Israel had a glimmer of hope. Maybe as a young girl she read on her daddy’s lap the prophecy, written long ago: “The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who lived in a land of deep darkness—on them light has shined.” But what light could there be amidst such pain and suffering?

One dark night, light spilled into Mary’s room. “Rejoice, you who are highly favored,” announced the angel Gabriel. “The Lord is with you.” An odd thing to say to a teenager in such a circumstance. Rejoice. She had good reason to be “greatly troubled.” What announcement could bring joy for her people, so accustomed to suffering?

“You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus,” the angel declared. “He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High. The Lord will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”

For centuries, Christians have looked to that teenage mother, and her baby boy, and described Advent with that brief, luminescent word: joy. “Joy to the world, the Lord is come.” “O tidings of comfort and joy, comfort and joy.” “Joyful all ye nations rise, join the triumph of the skies.” “O come all ye faithful, joyful and triumphant.” Joy perhaps isn’t what Joseph was thinking that first Christmas, as he helped his fiancée recover and care for a newborn between the snorting of cattle and the dull bleating of sheep. But the light of heaven beamed from that grotto, nonetheless – God arrived in the midst of the confusion.

Yet it was joy, not despair, grumbling or lesser pleasures, that welled up in Mary’s heart (Luke 1:47). She had joy in all the everydayness of life – work, worship, cleaning the dishes. Even under the thumb of oppression, she fell on her bed, and perhaps hummed the words of Isaiah: “They will enter Zion with singing; everlasting joy will crown their heads. Gladness and joy will overtake them, and sorrow and sighing will flee away.” Or maybe Mary’s deepest happiness came simply from the angel’s first words “The Lord is with you.” Emmanuel, God with Us.

And God is not far from us today. He is not far from Arapahoe High School, or the mourning parents of 17 year-old Claire Davis, who recently lost her battle for life in the hospital. He is not far from us when we experience crushing career disappointments. He is not far from our Christmas celebrations, too often laced with family tension. God, the Almighty One, has come to be with us, even as we are.

As Colorado suffers once again, this Christmas, we can cling to Him who “disperses the gloomy clouds of night, and death’s dark shadows puts to flight.” Since we, along with Zechariah, have seen “a rising sun coming to us from heaven,” we can join the song of Mary and rejoice in God our Savior. Because in the distance we can still hear the echoes of angels, singing the praises of the Lamb, who will one day wipe every tear from our eyes.

Media

Screens, Media, and the Oracles in Our Pockets

December 19, 2013

I sit down in my car, and before I even pull out my keys, I tap my iPhone to check my email. Of course, I just checked my email an hour earlier, before my 2pm appointment. But without even thinking, more like a reflex than an action, I head to the screen in eager expectation.

But an expectation for what? That I would receive an email with revolutionary news, or even just a new lead? For that matter, what am I looking for when I check my twitter feed, Facebook account, or flip on the TV? What eager hope continually draws me to the screen?

With the rise of mobile devices, looking at a screen, whether smart phone, iPad, computer or TV, may be the single most common work activity on the planet.

Last year, Time magazine did a survey of over 5,000 people from 4 continents on their smart phone usage. The results were startling.

84 percent said they couldn’t go a single day without their phones
20 percent of respondents check their phone every 10 minutes
50 percent of Americans sleep with their phones (that number rises to 80 percent for 18-24 year olds)

And it’s not just smart phones. A 2009 survey found the average American adult spends 8.5 hours in front of a screen every day.

Apparently, I’m not alone.

But what are we to think about screens? Does the Bible have anything to say our visual fixation to pixels, to glowing “0”s and “1”s? Can we even do anything about it since most of us work in front of screens every day?

Andrew Byers’ new book TheoMedia: The Media of God and the Digital Age offers unique insight into our relationship with screens. He offers both a new way of viewing screens – and a hopeful way forward.

Fortune-tellers

During a time of vocational uncertainty, Byers recounts a time when he was desperate to find guidance for the future. Instead of “hitting my knees to listen for God’s voice, I was clicking to get online to see if my future had been revealed by way of a new email.”

In the ancient world, there was a name for mystical mediums that the gods used to make their will known to mortals. They were called “oracles.” Worried about a relationship? Consult an oracle. Crops not producing? Find an oracle. Worried about opposing armies? Head off to Delphi. They have a fantastic oracle.

Today, we treat screens much the same was as do oracles. Will my client decide to buy more this year? Consult your email. Am I loved? Check how many likes my last Facebook post got. How’s my portfolio been the last 24 hours? Check the always moving stock ticker at the bottom of the news. Better yet, download an app, and check it hourly.

A simple question: have we placed too much hope in our screens? Are we treating them like oracles, in which we place our hope? Or a more pointed question: which god (God?) do we consult when a big deal – or opportunity – is really on the line?

Gateways

A portal is a gateway to a different world. A mode of transportation to an alternative universe. No need to think Star Trek here. Each time we “surf” a website we are transported to another world. The “@” symbol of Twitter suggests we are “at” a new place, and we eagerly “follow” folks on Facebook as if they’re going somewhere we want to be.

Unfortunately, what happens in cyber-world doesn’t stay in cyber-world. We may feel that we can get away with things online that we couldn’t in person, but the all-too common snarky comments on blogs or embellished digital “profiles” (is that what you’re really like?) show that we believe the screen has taken us to another world, where cause and effect doesn’t work the same way.

How often at work do we go to screens as modes of transportation to another world? I don’t think this is just illicit Facebook browsing on the clock; we seek relief from work stress or family tensions by immersing ourselves in online articles, YouTube videos, role-playing video games like the billion dollar Grand Theft Auto or Call of Duty (not just for teenagers). Screens seem to provide relief, a fix, a new world.

Applause on the Stage

I may be the only one, here. But each time I flip on a screen and check social media, I quietly investigate blog stats, flattering (or not-so-flattering) comments, or the number of “likes” or “retweets.”

I remember in 8^th grade there was a subtle rank among students, with jocks and pretty girls at the apex, and “followers” (ironic?) and other confidence-less losers at the bottom (yep, me). Has our obsession with social shares, hashtags, and Facebook “likes” simply democratized an 8^th grade popularity contest?

This is perhaps overly harsh. Social media is able to connect entrepreneurs; it allows us to share news instantaneously (many called the Arab Spring the Twitter Revolution) and reconnect with old friends. But what is the motivation behind our reflex to check screens almost constantly?

Refocusing Our Gaze

We live in front of screens. Considering we live in a media-saturated world, what can be done to correct our tendencies to make screens oracles, portals, and stages? Here are three suggestions.

1. Faith. “Trust the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding. Acknowledge him, in all your ways, and he will make your paths straight” (Proverbs 3:5-6). Faith can move the mountains, heal the sick, and perhaps even provide you with enough clients to make it to the new year. Our influx of emails, tweets, and messages do not deserve the power we give them to heal the broken, provide our daily bread, and give us a sense of direction in life. It’s certainly a counter-cultural practice, but for every time you were going to look to a digital oracle for your future, look to Christ. Prayer may be more effective than checking one last online article…

2. Incarnation. When God became a man, he put an emphasis on physicality, on face-to-face relational nearness. Byers writes, “If God himself puts such stock in face-to-face physicality, then surely this emphasis is to be reflected in Christian communication habits.” A simple question: did you send that email to avoid a phone call or face-to-face conversation, or did you do it bring two people closer together through a convenient form of communication? With digital communication, we should always be moving from relational distance to nearness. Screens are not bad. You’re reading this blog post on a screen! But they should not be portals into the unreal (except for a possible trip to see The Hobbit), but instead tools to bring classmates, co-workers, and friends into community. After all, Immanuel, the King of Heaven, is also God with us.

3. Cross. Seeking self-glory online has become so common today it has almost slipped in under the radar. But Christ himself emptied himself of his glory, and took the very nature of a servant for the sake of those whom he loves. Action point? Again, Byers writes, “No more embittered remarks in the comment streams; no more self-centered blog posts promoting our online significance; no more vain status updates; no more tricky strategems for beefing up our pool of followers simply for the sake of augmenting our self importance.” Instead, ask a simple other-centered question the next time you consider blogging: “Who is this post going to benefit?”

Most mornings, when I stumble into the office, I push a small silver button which lights up the screen of my computer. And that light is dazzling, with all its connectivity, potential and power. Yet this Christmas, we celebrate a brighter light. “The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light; those who lived in a land of deep darkness—on them light has shined” (Is. 9:2).

It kinda makes my iPhone seem trivial in comparison.

This post first appeared on the Denver Institute Blog.

Work

How To Choose a Career: Advice From a Puritan Pastor

December 4, 2013

“What am I called to?” That’s the question it seems most of us are asking. My friend Nathan is a pastor of young adults, and without a doubt, nearly everybody he knows hates their jobs. The question “What am I called to?” is often followed by “It can’t be this!”

The fact that 70% of Americans are disengaged from their work should be cause for concern. But it should also cause us ask better questions – and seek better answers. History can help. Richard Baxter, a 17^th century Puritan pastor, answered just such questions about calling from his flock. But he didn’t answer them the way we would. To wrestle down some answers, he first outlined what can’t be a calling, and then gave some plain advice on how to choose a career.

What Can’t Be a Calling

1. Sinful or unlawful work can’t be a calling.

“Think not that a calling can be lawful, when the work of it is sin; nor that you, or your labor, or your gain in an unlawful calling shall be blest.”

This may seem obvious, that any form of institutionalized cheating, stealing or oppressing can’t be a response to God’s call. But it’s worth mentioning. What about industries that are legal but morally questionable? Gambling? For Coloradoans, selling pot? Tobacco? Or at what point have certain industries systematized greed – the accumulation of more – or consumerism – the desire not to have, but simply to purchase? However specific cultures answer these questions, when considering a calling, let’s try to avoid overt sin.

2. Just because a job is legal doesn’t mean it can be a calling.

“Think not that because a work is lawful, that therefore it is lawful to make a calling of it.”

Interestingly enough, Baxter illustrates this point by writing, “It is lawful to jest in time and measure, but not lawful to be a jester as a trade of life.” Well, I think I disagree about his view of comedians, but his point is well taken: just because there’s a market for a particular line of work doesn’t mean we should do it for a career. The question Baxter makes us ask is strange for modern ears: is this job honorable? More to be said about that below…

3. Don’t choose a job that drains your soul.

“It is not enough that the work of your calling be lawful, nor that it be necessary, but you must take special care also that it be safe, and not very dangerous to your souls.”

Baxter illustrates his point with beer sellers; he says their calling is “lawful and needful” yet depends on people drinking to excess to make significant profit. I live in Colorado, and I’m under 35, which means I’m more likely to agree with Benjamin Franklin most days: “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” But again, he’s got a point. Some industries have deep temptations embedded in their nature: high finance can be lured by greed, fashion by vanity, and politics, power. We shouldn’t necessarily avoid these lines of work, but we should ask, “Will the temptations in this job be more than I can handle?”

How To Choose a Career

1. Choose a career that contributes to the public good.

“The principal thing to be intended in the choice of a trade or calling for yourselves or children, is the service of God, and the public good, and therefore (other things being equal) that calling which most conduceth to the public good is to be preferred.”

Interesting first qualification, isn’t it? It’s not about your college major, your resume, your Meyers-Briggs, a personality profile, or even the hot job opportunities bubbling up on LinkedIn. Find a need, and meet it. Baxter is even willing to name names: pastors, teachers, layers, shepherds, graziers, ploughmen, clothiers, booksellers, tailors, and others employed in work “most necessary to mankind” are to be preferred. I think this list is rather narrow for folks living four hundred years later, but again, point taken. What, then, careers are to be avoided? “Lace-sellers, feather-makers, periwigmakers” and careers that are “a prison and constant calamity to be tied to spend one’s life in doing little good to others, though he should grow rich by it himself.” I take issue with his deprecation of lace-makers (especially those nice laces on doyles), but those dastardly periwigmakers – be rid of them!

But seriously, if you’re looking for a career, don’t first think about yourself or your personal dreams! Think about what the world needs and the good of your community. And most of all, think how you can best serve God, and so enjoy a life of great satisfaction employed in doing the greatest good you can with the time you’ve been given.

2. If two careers both contribute to the public good, pick spiritual benefit over cash bonuses.

“When two callings equally conduce to the public good, and one of them hath the advantage of riches, and the other more advantageous to your souls, the latter must be preferred, and next to the public good, the soul’s advantage must guide your choice.”

There’s nothing wrong with earning a good living, but at least first ask the question: which career choice has a better chance of restoring both body and soul in God’s kingdom? Different people will answer this differently, but ask deep, hard questions about the job before you: what does this do to your own soul? Others? And ultimately, which career can I do more good in?

3. Choose a career that won’t crush your Sabbath rest.

“If it be possible, choose a calling which so exercises the body as not to overwhelm you with cares and labors and deprive you of all leisure for the holy and noble employments of the mind, and which so exercises your mind as to allow you some exercise for the body also.”

You need to rest. You need to worship. You need to exercise. You may even need to read a book on a lawn chair with a cup of lemonade here and there. But certain careers by their very nature tend to crush Sabbath. Indeed, some professions make such outrageous claims of time and mental energy on their slaves (I mean, employees) that working 80,90 or 100 hours per week is normal. This just in: God did not design work to function like this! Six days work, one day rest. Choose a career where this rhythm can be observed – at a bare minimum.

I agree that at times jobs will make big demands on people. Fair enough. But if careers regularly run people into the ground, then we need to step back and ask ourselves: What really is the vision of a good life I’m pursuing? Some John Coltrane, walks by the river and a slow, home-cooked evening meal ought to be a part of such a vision.

Before accepting a job, ask yourself the question: What good is it for a man to gain the whole world but lose his very own soul?

4. It’s fine to make a decent salary; choose a job with a reasonable wage.

“It is lawful and meet to look at the commodity of your calling in the third place (that is, after the public good, and after your personal good of soul and bodily health).”

There’s no sense in getting paid well below market rates or claiming you’re more noble than others because you work for a nonprofit. It’s fine to make a profit, and it’s fine to choose a career where you can support your family and even righteous to have something to share with others. And if we believe the parable of the talents in any literal sense, then we ought to double our money by the time our master returns. Of course, if you make riches your chief goal, you’ve made it an idol. But if they’re #3 on the list or lower, you’re probably on the right track.

5. Ask a veteran in that field or company before making a final decision.

“Choose no calling (especially if it be of public consequence) without the advice of some judicious, faithful persons of that calling.”

Good, commonsense advice. Check the temperature of the water before jumping in by asking somebody who’s already in the pool.

So, if you’re looking to make a career change in 2014, take this list to heart as you choose how to spend your most precious resource: your time.

A Summary of Richard Baxter’s Advice on Choosing a Career

What Can’t Be a Calling

1. Sinful or unlawful work can’t be a calling.

2. Just because a job is legal doesn’t mean it can be a calling.

3. Don’t choose a job that drains your soul.

How To Choose a Career

1. Choose a career that contributes to the public good.

2. If two careers both contribute to the public good, pick spiritual benefit over cash bonuses.

3. Choose a career that won’t crush your Sabbath rest.

4. Yes, it’s fine to make a decent salary. Choose a job with a reasonable wage.

5. Ask a veteran in that field or company before making a final decision.

This post first appeared on the Denver Institute blog.

Politics

Immigration Video Series & Curriculum

October 28, 2013

Update: This last week, the small group curriculum for this immigration video series was released. This .pdf is a great resource to go along with videos, and is structured around facilitating a small group discussion. Feel free to use and share as needed. Here it is.

Today I travel to Washington D.C. My friend Michelle Warren, with the Evangelical Immigration Table, is flying several of us from Colorado to the capitol to meet with Congressman about immigration reform.

Because of budget battles, immigration reform is long overdue. The US hasn’t updated its immigration laws for almost a generation, and the situation has become dire. But the right solution has evaded many. Should there be a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants? How about immigrants should we admit on family visas, high skilled visas, low skilled visas? These are all foundational questions, but for me, the most important starting point is: What does my Christian faith have to say about immigrants and immigration?

Last Spring I helped to organize a conference on the topic of immigration, and we now have a set of 5 videos that were produced by both Phil Mildren at Denver Media House and the Evangelical Immigration Forum. In my opinion, they might be the best video introduction to the topic of immigration for anybody with honest questions. Who are immigrants? Why do so many come illegally? Aren’t they a drain on the economy? Doesn’t the Bible tell us to obey the laws of the land?

I’ve included videos that answer many of these questions, along with their descriptions. They’re perfect for discussion in a church small group or even with your family. The five titles are “Stepping Into the Story of an Immigrant”, “Migration as a Metaphor for the Christian Life: What Does the Bible Have to Say?” “Immigration as an Opportunity for the American Church; What does the American Church Need to Know?”, “Stephan Bauman, God’s Heart for the Vulnerable; 10 Reasons Why Immigration is Good” and “Answering Some Frequently Asked Questions About Immigration.” For the conference, we had top flight speakers, including Dr. Daniel Carroll, Professor of Old Testament at Denver Seminary, Stephan Bauman, CEO of World Relief, and Dr. Carlos Campo, former President of Regent University.

If you have time, watch one or two this week. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts.

(Side note: to some this will seem like an aside from my main topic on this blog: the integration of faith and work. But I suppose this depends how you look at it: millions of immigrants have exercised the deepest levels of faith on their journey to the US. Others are employers who are simply looking for enough hands to pick grapes, clean rooms, and cook dinners. Ironically enough, the current immigration crisis has been caused by a combination of demand for labor and a political system that hasn’t adjusted to current needs. So, is this an aside from conversations about the integration of faith and work? Well, not for most of my Latino friends.)

Listening to the stories of immigrants strengthens one’s ability to engage in the immigration conversation on a more personal level. This video segment is designed to explore a few of the millions of stories behind the issue of immigration getting beyond the strident and divisive tones of the national debate.

In this segment, Dr. Daniel Carroll R. encourages Christians to “let the Bible orient us so that we can capture the heart of the metaphor of being a migrant and as we do that, to capture the heart of what it means to be a Christian.” Highlighting the Old Testament stories of Abraham, Joseph, Ruth and Daniel to reveal God’s heart for the foreigner, Dr. Carroll helps listeners understand why people migrate and how they assimilate. He reminds Christians about their responsibility to care for the vulnerable, encourages them to start with scripture when approaching the immigration issue, refuse to oversimplify the discussion, and to pray that God would use the church to be a voice for compassion, truth, and order — for the good of the immigrant and for our country.

In this segment, Matthew Soerens of World Relief highlights ways in which Evangelicals in the United States can take a fresh, biblically grounded look at the immigration debate and engage with immigrants in their communities. As Christians we have responsibility to both love and provide for the widow, orphan, immigrant, and the poor. Citing research from Pew, personal experience, the Founding Fathers, and scripture, Matthew exhorts listeners to see immigrants as an opportunity and blessing — for our communities, our country, and for the Gospel.

In this segment, World Relief CEO Stephan Bauman shares ten reasons why Christians must welcome the stranger. Beginning with a reminder of God’s heart for the vulnerable, he encourages Christians to act on behalf of the less fortunate neighbor while touching on economic considerations, justice, American values, and God’s presence. Viewers are ultimately reminded of Jesus’ words that “whatever we do for the least of these you do for me.”

This video segment helps answer some of the most frequently asked questions surrounding immigration in our country today.

The videos in this series were recorded at the G92 Conference on April 26-27 2013, hosted by Front Range Christian School in Littleton, Colorado. G92 is a culture-shaping movement seeking to equip and inspire the next generation of Christian leaders for an effective, biblical response to immigration.

Technology Video

Interview with John Dyer

October 15, 2013

John Dyer is coming for the Faith & Technology Forum on Thursday! A couple weeks ago I did a brief Skype interview with John on his book From the Garden to the City: The Redeeming and Corrupting Power of Technology.

Even though I struggled to get the Skype recorder working (I apologize for the slow frame speed), John was gracious as we re-recorded the brief interview several times. Here are the questions I asked:

First, how would you define technology?

So, we shape our tools – our technology – but they also shape us. In one chapter, you discuss how different mediums of digital communication – like phone calls, Tweeting, blogs, or texting – actually shape our thinking. How does this work?

Many see that technology is not just a neutral tool. But on the other side, some say technology itself is a determining force and shapes culture almost in spite of human beings. What’s your view on this?

What can the Bible – the Christian story – contribute to our understanding of technology?

You’re a coder and web developer. You live and breathe digital technology. What kind of questions do you ask yourself to evaluate the effect of a particular technology – perhaps even one you’re designing – on human life?

I’m looking forward to meeting John in person on Thursday evening in Boulder. In addition to John’s presentation we’ll have an additional special presentation by Eric Swanson of Leadership Network and a panel discussion with Dave Carlson, CEO of Shopventory, Patrick Riley of Global Accelerator Network, and Will Forsythe, Pastor of All Souls Boulder. We look forward to discussing everything from how to take Sabbath rests from technology to whether or not Google really can solve death.

See you there. (If you don’t yet have tickets, you really should. They come with food, drink and a book – not to mention the opportunity to listen to some pretty interesting folks. You can buy them here.)

Politics

Political Polarization: Healing the Great Divide

October 10, 2013

Perhaps the most concerning matter of public life today is our political polarization. Right and left seem to be speaking almost in completely different languages, and our leaders have reached what seems like a perpetual impasse.

Exhibit A: Government Shutdown. For the first time in nearly 18 years, the US government has furloughed nearly 800,000 employees because it could not pass a budget for the next fiscal year. Neither side will negotiate. The Left has blamed the Right for not negotiating and trying to de-fund (or destroy) Obamacare as a part of a budget deal. The Right has blamed the Left for perpetual overspending and, now, for not being willing to negotiate. (Actually both sides heap condemnation on the other for an unwillingness to negotiate.) Gridlock has become such a way of life that shutting down basic government services has become preferable to compromise. And as I write, the greater concern by far is the coming battle over raising the debt ceiling. If the national debt ceiling is not raised, the US will default on its debt obligations for the first time in 225 years. Market watchers like Warren Buffet have said this would be equivalent to an economic “nuclear bomb.”

Exhibit B: Colorado Politics. Colorado has reflected national trends and is now also a national leader in polarized politics. Earlier this year Conservatives revolted when the Democratic-run Legislature passed several gun laws – to the degree that voters gathered signatures to have two senators (John Morse of Colorado Springs, and Angela Giron of Pueblo) recalled, a measure usually reserved for extreme abuses of power, not disagreeable policy decisions. A recent article in The Economist points out that since the 1990s, the Right has become even more Conservative, and because of less of a moderate middle, Colorado has voted in more Liberal congressman of late. And Liberals, who control both the House and the Senate, wasted no time in jamming through traditionally “liberal” laws that “allow gay civil unions, require more use of renewable energy, lower tuition fees for illegal immigrants, allow voters to register on polling day and abolish the death penalty.” Let’s toss in the legalization of marijuana to this list. The result? Six counties in conservative Northeast Colorado recently had ballot measures to secede from the state of Colorado.

And so political polarization grows – and the noise gets noisier. Media sources over time have aligned with either right or left, and even Christians tend to identify primarily with rigid political ideologies, casting doubt on the genuine nature of faith of those from another party.

My question is two fold: (1) How did we get here? (2) What do we do about it?

How did we get here?

Two weeks ago I was discussing this problem with my two friends Dave Strunk, a pastor at Cherry Creek Presbyterian Church in Englewood, Colorado, and Andrew Wolgemuth, a literary agent. Over a beer at Great Northern one afternoon (we meet every other week to discuss theological classics), Strunk said, in essence, the reason for our current impasse isn’t because of political division, but instead because everybody is a libertarian. That is, Coloradoans (and Americans in general) have become so highly individualistic, defending their own freedom at any costs, that compromise has become unthinkable because it violates their perceived personal rights.

Hugh Heclo, author of the masterful On Thinking Institutionally, put it like this: “Our moral polestar amounts to this central idea: the correct way to get on in life is to recognize that each of us has the right to live as he or she pleases so long as we do not interfere with the right of other people to do likewise.” Heclo argues that inherent in the American story is a defense of personal rights – and a “tolerance” to not interfere with others. The upshot of this ethos is that when other people “interfere” (have different political views), we cry injustice, call for liberty, and dig in our heels.

I recently dusted off my copy of Truth to Tell by Lesslie Newbigin. Newbigin goes back to foundations to see why our political polarization has come to such an impasse. At the Enlightenment, language of duty (the duty owed to God, neighbor, state) was scrapped in favor of the language of rights. What must be defended, and even the reason for government, are the inalienable rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The problem comes when must decide on which rights take priority. Newbigin writes,

“Both sides in the argument use the language of rights of the individual. On the one side there is the right of every individual to do what he wants with what he has lawfully earned. On the other side there is the right of every individual to have her needs met.”

And so the impasse becomes truly impassable. The Left defends the “right” to have needs met, and the Right defends the “right” keep what you earn without government intrusion. But the problem, as Newbigin explains, is that we have no way to adjudicate the difference between a “right” and a “need” apart from questions of purpose. “In a society which has no accepted public doctrine about the purpose for which all things and all persons exist,” Newbigin writes, “there is no basis for adjudicating between needs and wants.”

Because questions like, “For what purpose is a human being made?” were essentially stricken from public dialogue during the Enlightenment, it becomes almost impossible to agree on a shared vision for our political life. As the Christian story becomes less pervasive in our public discourse, society becomes comprised of millions of individuals, each with his or her own purpose (and history, culture, and religion), with little if any “duty” to either neighbor, community or country. Neighbor love become a good reason for community barbeques, but loses all authority when we consider how to deal with political opponents.

So, our political polarization is a result, at least in part, of elements of Western culture that have now reached their extremes. We’re left with the question: What do we do about it?

What do we do about it?

Let’s address this question by way of example. Let’s imagine two people who could not be more politically opposite: an environmentalist and an oil executive. One sees the fundamental issue as the health of the flora and fauna of the planet. The other sees providing affordable energy for our economy as preeminent. Green Peace and Exxon Mobil, for example, could not be further down opposing roads.

However, the biblical story has a vision for both a healthy environment and a flourishing human community, one that needs energy to survive. Actually, the Bible verses are side by side. On the one hand, humans are to care for creation by ruling “over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves in the ground” (Gen. 1:28). Hence, the proliferation of “creation care” ministries. Yet humans are also supposed to “be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” Filling the earth requires development of the social world – including sources of energy necessary for human flourishing. Thus, my friend Chris Horst can write an article for Christianity Today (to be published this Fall) about Christian oil executives serving God in their roles by providing energy for our economy.

The point is this: the church holds within herself a biblical vision of redemption that can bring Right and Left together. She sees the value of both working hard to earn your keep and providing for the needs of the poor. Or in the immigration debate, she sees the direct need for compassion for foreigners and immigrants, but she also sees the God-ordained role of the state to uphold laws and justice. The gospel, when properly understood, pushes against both Right and Left, but also can bring warring parties to the same table of brotherhood. And even more importantly, the gospel can help us decide on the proper purpose of both individuals and governments, which the prevailing quasi-religious attitude of “I-have-the-right-to-live-as-I-please-as-long-as-I-don’t-interfere-with-others” simply can’t answer.

The action point is this: in America, we need churches, pastors, and laity to provide communal places where Christians can come together and reorient the vision of Conservatives and Liberals around God’s purpose for human history. Whether these be small groups, forums, or conferences, these events can be a good starting point for opening up our ears again to listen to our political opponents. And they do need to be events – actually gatherings of human beings. We can’t do it with online articles, books, or podcasts alone. Different results happen when people gather around a single table. When we look an opponent in the eye, if we look hard enough we can generally see a glimmer of ourselves in them. We may even see a brother in Christ.

I believe healing of our deeply polarized political environment begins with the church convening Christians from both Right and Left to discuss not just the common good, but God’s ultimate good for human life – and then how that plays out in our various industries, whether that be politics, business, technology, law or economics. Proximate justice begins with Christians taking personal responsibility to set the plates, forks and knives at the table of fellowship amidst competing visions of the good. And in doing so, the church can gently show a divided political culture a better way for living together in peace.

Jeff Haanen

Education and Christian Faith

What would you ask Eugene Peterson about your work?

The Entrepreneur’s Dilemma

Vocation: The Holy Grail of Corporate America

A Light in the Darkness

How To Choose a Career: Advice From a Puritan Pastor

What Can’t Be a Calling

How To Choose a Career

A Summary of Richard Baxter’s Advice on Choosing a Career

Immigration Video Series & Curriculum

Interview with John Dyer

Political Polarization: Healing the Great Divide