John H Armstrong

New Blog Site Soon

Over the course of the next 24-72 hours a mentor/coach is finishing the design for my new blog site. It will be on a WordPress platform hosted by a different server than the one I have used for over seven years. Please check back in a few days and let me know what you think when this site is launched. I will be doing a series of blog posts on the extremely important new book, Bad Relgion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics, Ross Douthat (Free Press: New York, 2012) over the next several weeks. I really hope that you will read these posts and interact with me as you do. I believe this is one of the most important books for missional-ecumenists I have read. 

"To Boldly Go Where No Man Has Gone Before"

"Where no man has gone before" was originally made popular through its use in the title of most episodes of the original Star Trek television series. Every Trekkie knows it well. I am no Trekkie but even I have heard it and used it. The phrase refers to the mission of the original starship Enterprise. The complete introductory sequence, narrated by well-known actor William Shatner at the beginning of most episodes of Star Trek, said it this way:

Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before. 

I was reminded of this phrase last week. It made me take notice again that truly following Jesus, especially in this new century, a century that is taking us to new civilizations and to the exploration of strange new ideas, is to "boldly go where no man (or woman) has gone before." If we continue to live dull, bland lives that make an adventure out of missing the point we will end up missing out on what God intends for his people in the new global village that we call the post-modern world. I am just curious enough, and hopefully bold enough, to want to keep exploring what all this means, especially for a faithful church that dares to truly follow Jesus!

 

The Good Old Days That Never Were

It seems like for as long as I can remember I've heard people talk about the "good ole' days" of the past. Whatever is happening now is worse than the past and somewhere else, at some time in the past, days were so much better than right now. Christians are particularly prone to this nonsense. They act as if history did not happen, humans are not mortal and the church never made a mistake, at least a serious one. Protestants romanticize the sixteenth century and Catholics romanticize about the days before Vatican II. Almost everyone acts like the Middle Ages were entirely bereft of anything positive and after 1900 Western civilization began a downward high slide from which it cannot recover. 

All of this kind of nonsense reminds me of a great quote from St. Augustine: "If you believe that former times are better than today, it is because you are not living in those times." Amen. 

Burning Questions for Missional Christians

Christianity began as a tiny movement of Jews who believed that God had raised Jesus from the dead. They spread this message to Jews and Gentiles and planted churches across the Roman Empire in the first three centuries of the common era. There is abundant evidence that these churches were generally small and that most congregations numbered something like 30-70 people. Issues regarding how to develop and govern these churches arose over time. It seems apparent that there is no extant blueprint that has been passed on to us regarding how this should be done down through the centuries. Christianity seems incredibly adaptable to various cultures and for this reason it could spread into all cultures. 

What we do know is that in spite of many faults the church acquired it eventually provided the basis for a new era of learning, industry and civil order that arose from the impact of the church upon society. In the sixteenth century the Reformation not only divided the church in the West but it led to renewal in the Catholic Church. Eventually this resulted in a great rise in missionary activity from both Protestant and Catholic sources. By the twentieth century a worldwide exportation of products and ideas followed and this global expansion opened the door even wider for global missions. At the same time Europe's civilization began a long, slow slide toward secularism. There is an almost astonishing correlation between the decline of births with the decline of the church and its influence throughout Europe. The question remains what this will mean for North America. Will we follow this European pattern? There is growing evidence that we might follow Europe but there is considerable reason to think that America could follow a very different model. 

By 2050 Patrick Johnstone says that less than half of Europe will claim any adherence to Christianity. This leads Johnstone to conclude that there are "uncomfortable parallels between the situation in Europe today and the collapse of the Greco-Roman civilization of antiquity."

But here in America the situation does not entirely parallel that in Europe. Two centuries of Protestant immigration and numerical growth combined with periodic revivals have shaped a different kind of situation. Here church and state were never connected in the same way. The church in America was free to innovate and develop new ideas. (This is a double-edged sword I realize!) The result of these developments is a Christianity that has a huge variety in church life, teachings and worship styles. In the midst of this chaos some very good things have emerged at various times in our history. Cults have grown, for sure, but so have genuine Christian churches and movements that have given us both health and numerical growth. 

The rise of non-Christian immigration, in recent decades, and the gains of the non-religious (or "nones") in our religious demographics, makes things extremely problematic for the church going forward. (We are in a period of church decline, make no mistake about this fact.) The influence of secularism remains strong, especially in higher education and among the culturally elite. The problems these changes present will not go away anytime soon. But the separation of church and state makes for a unique opportunity for thoughtful Christians to emerge into new missional thought and practice in America. Let me explain.

Could a new kind of civilization, one not rooted in empire or in dependence upon religion linked with the state in any form, arise in the twenty-first century? Simply put, could a new kind of Christianity emerge that produces a more tolerant, less proud and more deeply caring expression of public faith? Could a vigorous, but less politically motivated, Christianity take the place of a church deeply engaged in culture wars and partisan, divisive bickering? 

I do not believe that we know the answer to these questions quite yet. There are signs that give me hope but there are signs that I find deeply troubling. This leads me to ask the question I've been asking for some years now:

"What will Christianity look like in North America when the impact the church once had upon the culture is gone and Christians must then learn how to live meaningfully in a setting where they do not get to directly determine the cultural outcomes of their society?"

How should Christians prepare for this future? 

I believe we need to train leaders who are genuine missional-ecumenists. These will be leaders who grasp the central importance of Jesus to all of life. Such missional faith is not privatized religion. It must be very public. But it is not public in the way we've known it in the past. It is not boisterous and in your face about its truth claims. What we need, especially in the face of religious pluralism, is a developed imagination produced by the Holy Spirit. This developed, Spirit-filled imagination, will guide is in knowing how to proceed in our "brave new world." Without this we will not thrive in being faithful to Christ's mission in the decades ahead of us. With it then who knows what kind of civilization might we become under God's grace? 

One thing I am sure about in asking these kinds of questions. We cannot go back. The America I knew as a child is gone. Political elections, revival campaigns, new church plants, and a myriad of other religious and social solutions, will not bring back that America. We cannot work ourselves out of this new diverse context. It is here to stay. The question is how the church will respond and what our role will be in a new American reality? 

The Problem with Nondiscrimination Laws and the Rights of Homosexuals

I hate discrimination. I believe that when it comes to barring people from public places civil rights laws are quite necessary. I also believe that discrimination against homosexuals, because of their sexual orientation or private practice, is wrong. We presently face a number of legal struggles about discrimination that will impact all of us in one way or another. Let me explain what I mean with an intriguing development out of Great Britain. 

Fifteen years ago Peter and Hazelmary Bull made headlines when some reporters saw their "stodgy guest policy" (Wall Street Journal, 3/16/12) in these words: "No double rooms for unmarried couples." Since 1986 the Bulls had been turning away unwed couples at their Cornish B & B. No one bothered much until very recently. They just considered the Bulls out of touch. But things have changed now and this change is happening all across the West. 

A British appeals court recently upheld a stiff fine against the Bulls for turning down two men who wanted a room in their B & B 2008. These two men were joined in a legal civil union. (Great Britain has accepted civil unions since 2005.)  The Bulls, who refer to themselves as "born again Christians," feel they should decline such guests. The charge against them is that they violated the 2007 Equality Act. They have now appealed to the U.K. Supreme Court and if they lose they will appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. (They are being represented by a very conservative Christian legal group.) Current British law exempts some from nondiscrimination laws, especially churches. But commercial guesthouses do not get such an exemption, thus the battle with the Bulls and their house. 

Here is the point. The Bulls are allowed to hold their convictions in private but they cannot practice them in regards to their B & B because it is a "service and public function."  The Bulls are seeking "reasonable accommodation or expansion" for enterprises such as their own business. Here is the problem. The equality law is constructed to allow religious liberty only within a religious organization. Anne Jolis, writing in the Wall Street Journal, adds, "That's true enough, though Britain's equality and nondiscrimination rules already have more loopholes than a coherent principle can bear. A case in point involves British Airways, a private business that has had the better luck enforcing its standards under Britain's patchwork of rights, responsibilities and opt-outs." 

A dispute with British Airways (BA) now makes its way to the European Court of Human Rights. In this case BA has a long-standing dress code that bars employees from wearing visible religious symbols. In 2006 a check-in attendant named Nadia Eweida refused to stop displaying her crucifix and then refused a job that would have placed her in a non-public place with BA. She was placed on unpaid leave for six months. Subsequently BA relaxed its policy in 2007. British courts rejected her claim and BA was not forced to pay her back wages. She is now arguing her case before the European court in Strasbourg. Her argument? The UK court failed to protect her religious rights to nondiscrimination in the workplace. The government's argument, in this case, is actually based on the fact that Christianity does not require a believer to wear a symbol of their faith. (To be honest about this, I have to agree with this interpretation!) Wearing such a sign does not constitute the "practice" of the Christian faith. She is thus engaging in behavior that is "inspired by belief" but not essential to her expression of Christian faith. The court also argued, and this is a more persuasive point, that a private company has no "positive obligations to ensure this right." Her rights were not violated since she was "free to resign and seek employment elsewhere." 

But here is the problem with the argument of the Bulls with regard to their B & B. Just as no one forces Christians who wear symbols to work for secular-sensitive airlines nothing should compel a same-sex couple to lodge at a B & B that seeks to run its business by their Christian principles. In the case of the Bulls the government's position, says the Wall Street Journal "comes down to the fact that no one forces Christians to open businesses." 

A Downing Street spokesman said a few weeks ago that if a European court finds against Ms. Eweida, then the government may look into new protections for religious workers against private standards such as dress codes. The Wall Street Journal concludes: "That might satisfy devout Britains for a while, as would a new carve-out for religious business owners such as the Bulls--at least until the next time anyone's convictions, mores, practices or habits conflict with anyone else's in the country. Meanwhile, these small victories will only further muddle companies' freedoms to dispose of their resources as they see fit--regardless of faith, sexual orientation, or ever-changing estimations of political expedience."

These same types of arguments are already playing themselves out in the legal and political culture of the U.S. If you think this is simply a matter of "equality" or "prejudice" then I believe you clearly fail to grasp the deep significance of the points made above. Does this rise to the level of refusing service to a black person in a hotel or restaurant in the 1960s? It could if you are really honest about it. Does a company have the right to make standards about how employees should dress when the public will engage with them? I think so. But does this mean that there can be no show of religion in such a place? What about Muslim female employees who wear the traditional head coverings? I would guess this would be allowed because it would be seen as part of the practice of Islam.

I, for one, am not profoundly alarmed by this debate. Thus I do not agree with Christians who see all of this as a form of persecution. But I also do not agree that all laws against discrimination are entirely equal. This seems to be the reason we are still working this out in public contexts. I hope Christians will keep a cooler temperament about these debates and contribute to the future by helping us end discrimination against homosexuals wherever possible without sacrificing our religious freedom in the process. The way forward is slippery. Many challenges will have to be faced legally. I pray that we will respond with civility and grace in how we engage in these struggles about the law. I do not believe my rights are under constant assault. I do not believe there is a vast conspiracy to deny me my faith or to stop my public practice of Christianity. I do believe the way I can express my faith is changing and it is only right that I observe this and respond where I can since mission must always be contextualized if it is done well. At the same time I am committed to the open practice of religious freedom. If religious freedom is only a private right then we have lost a vital freedom for all of us, including homosexuals, blacks, non-Christians, etc. This debate will not end soon. Let us pray for wisdom in how we respond. There will be plenty of heat from the far left and far right but Christians should look for better ways to show the love of Christ in public. 

The Rise of the "So Whats"

Several recent surveys reveal that an increasing number of Americans are not atheists or agnostics so much as they are people who simply don't care about religion or faith at all. Here are a few examples.

A 2011 Baylor University survey found that 44% spend no time seeking "eternal wisdom" and 19% said, "It's useless to search for meaning." 46% told a LifeWay Research (SBC) survey that they never wonder whether or not they will go to heaven. (I find what seems to be a majority of people, churched and unchurched, who assume some form of life after death but who have no interest in exploring what this means or why they believe it.) 28% told LifeWay, "It's not a major priority in my life to find my deeper purpose." And 18% scoffed at the idea that God had a purpose or plan for everyone. (Do you see why beginning a conversation with most young people by asserting, "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life" will not cut it?) The number of totally "secular" people who have no concern for knowing about God or a higher power is nearing 7%. I believe the much greater problem is beneath the surface of this still small number. Hemant Mehta, who blogs at "The Friendly Atheist," calls this rising number of people the "apatheists." 

Marian Edgar Budde, Episcopal bishop of Washington, D.C., calls these religiously apathetic folks "honest." A 27-year old said, "I would just like to see more people admit that don't believe. The only thing I'm pushy about is that I don't want to be pushed. I don't want to change others, and I don't want to debate my views." 

Christian writer and researcher David Kinnaman says most "So Whats" are like the statement made by the 27-woman I just quoted. Kinnaman says if you strip "the hipster factor" away then he thinks 7 in 10 young adults would say they don't see much influence of God or religion in their lives at all. Cathy Lynn Grossman says, "This trend may have been leaving subtle tracks for years."

I have written about the "Nones" the last few years. It seems that while the category of the "Nones" is growing by 0.5% per year the "So Whats" appear to be an even larger subset of that category. There are, in other words, layers within these layers. This is why the various attempts to say that we should be humanly optimistic about the future of most churches in America is misguided. It could be that as many as half of all young adults are "Nones" and/or "So Whats." The number is growing every day. Meanwhile few churches have a clue about how to live faithfully in a culture that is fast becoming a post-Christendom society in its understanding and practice. 

One thing I do know. If we are not authentic, whole and healthy in our faith (personally and corporately) then all the "attractional" programs that we can throw at this demographic group will do very little to bring them into the kingdom of God. These are not "baby-boomers" and will not fill mega-churches in the next twenty years unless something dramatic happens. Before long it might actually dawn on us that our "cool factor" stuff just doesn't work anymore. We might then actually go back to more ancient paradigms that are also clearly focused on the future, or to what might be rightly called an already/not yet kind of faith that is deeply biblical and profoundly confessional. This calls for missional-ecumenism, which few conservatives are willing to embrace so long as they keep depending on their human programs to attract young adults. 

Trends That Call Us to Understand Our Mission Differently

There is a continual danger that the church is driven by various trends. Evangelical churches are most susceptible to this danger. "Trendier than thou" is a real problem if our vision of discipleship is stunted and consumer oriented. Given the great desire to reach people with the good news we can easily adapt our methods and approaches in ways that are inconsistent with our message.

Having acknowledged this real problem to be trendy I retain a deep and growing concern that churches (in general) have very little idea about how much the shift in values and religious practices has impacted the mission field that we call the United States of America. There can be no serious doubt that the religious makeup of our population is shifting very rapidly. And there can be no serious doubt that most Christians understand very little about what these trends actually mean for the future of mission in America. One of the core values of a missional church is that the whole church will seek to incarnate the whole gospel in ways that serve the people who are their neighbors. The church does not do mission so much as the church IS mission. For this to happen we need to equip people to exegete culture. And this requires us to teach some basic principles of contextualization. I am not suggesting we need to teach academic courses on mission to the whole congregation, as I studied these issues in doing a degree in mission. But I am suggesting that we need to teach people who their neighbors really are and how they really live and think. We do this when people go to a far away land as missionaries but we forget that the same is increasingly needed in America. I was reminded of this by two recent Barna Research reports about changes in American religious views and practice.

In a November 3 report Barna noted that 15% of Americans say their experiences with religion have caused them to question God, a sentiment most common among 20-somethings, college grads, unmarried adults, non-Christians, and unchurched adults. Similarly, 16% of Americans have been hurt by experiences in churches. This perception is most common among women, Boomers, and divorced adults. This report does not surprise me since I've noticed this through my own ministry over the past five years. In a November 19 Barna report we learn that 1 in 9 young people who grow up with a Christian background loses their faith in Christianity. 4 in 10 become nomads and wander away from the institutional church. They still call themselves Christians but are far less active in church than they were during high school. Another 2 in 10 young Christians feel lost between the "church culture" and the society they feel called to influence. "I want to be a Christian without separating myself from the world around me" typifies this group. Only about 3 in 10 young people who grow up with a Christian background stay faithful to church and to faith throughout their transitions from the teen years through their twenties. Read that again. Only 3 in 10 young people who grow up in Christian homes stay faithful to the church through the transition years between their teens and twenties, thus our failure to truly disciple our own young people is very evident. Will churches consider these extremely important facts in their plans for ministry to teens and young adults?

Justice, the Kingdom of God and Reading the Bible

A recent article on the Christianity Today web site brought considerable surprise to many. The article revealed that a recent poll sponsored by LifeWay Research found that owning a Bible is quite different from reading it. Most polls, surveys, and studies that have examined the Bible's influence in America have looked at views of its inspiration and various methods of interpretation. Gallup, for example, has routinely asked Americans how literally the Bible should be taken. But almost no research has looked into what happens when people actually read the Bible. This new research, conducted by Baylor University, indicates that reading the Bible on one's own makes a real difference but the difference is one that some did not see coming.

First, frequent Bible reading does have some predictable effects. It increases opposition to abortion as well as to homosexual unions. It also boosts a belief that science helps reveal God's glory. It also diminishes hopes that science will eventually solve humanity's problems. But unlike some other religious practices, reading the Bible more often has some other (much less expected) effects. Christianity Today suggested that these effects are more akin to liberal political beliefs than conservative ones. They also noted that the research shows us that this is true even when you account for factors such as political beliefs, education level, income level, gender, race, and religious measures (like which religious tradition one affiliates with, and one's views of biblical literalism). You can read the whole story for yourself.

Frequent Bible reading influences one’s views about criminal justice, opposition to the death penalty, national security, the war on terrorism, the environment and a number of related (not so politically conservative) issues. And the way Bible reading influences how people think about these issues is what shocked some readers. The more someone reads the Bible, the more likely he or she is, for example, to believe science and religion are compatible. But some of the most interesting findings related to moral attitudes. "How important is it," the survey asked, "to actively seek social and economic justice in order to be a good person?" As you might expect, those with more liberal political leanings were more likely to say it's very or somewhat important. But those who read the Bible more often were more likely to agree. Indeed, they were almost 35 percent more likely to agree at each point used on Baylor University’s five-point scale. Christianity Today adds, “That may be bad news for Glenn Beck, who last year told believers to leave their churches if they hear ‘social justice’ language being used.” (I’ll say no more about Glenn Beck resisting the temptation to tell you what I really think about him!)

These results do not surprise me at all. I talk to younger Christians almost every day. I can tell you that they think for themselves and that they read their Bible for themselves. (There are dangers here, I acknowledge, since evangelicals read their Bible without concern for the larger church and the ancient faith!) But these Bible readers also ask great questions that most political conservatives either ignore or trash in the public diatribes of our day.

The reason I believe this is happening is that a new concern for justice is growing as Christians read the Bible more holistically. When open minded people really read the Bible, and do not simply listen to their politically conservative churches tell them how to think about every single issue, they find real surprises in the Scripture. And they are willing to think outside the box much more than my generation.

Clearly, one of the overwhelming concerns of the biblical text, and of Jesus' teaching in particular, is for social justice and the plight of the poor. A growing change in attitudes about this truth is also reflected in the growth of better missiology joined with real concerns about how the gospel addresses personal and systemic sin. When wealthy and middle-class Christians read the Bible with a conservative political perspective they miss whole elements of the gospel itself, reducing the good news to the question of how to get my soul saved and then get into heaven when I die. Apparently new Bible readers who actually bother to listen to the text see other concerns besides those of a politically conservative way of thinking.

In the end this comes back to the issue of discipleship. Put more particularly, are mission, personal discipleship and social justice (all three) intimately connected in the  Bible or are they separate and unequal paradigms? The relationship between these three is very clear when you read the Bible for all its worth and not repeat conservative political mantras. I would submit that even the terms liberal and conservative are rather meaningless if you read the Bible properly. I think the Spirit is up to something here. I am ready to embrace where I believe the Lord is leading us in understanding and applying the gospel of the kingdom. The gospel that I grew up with was racist, elitist and closed to corporate repentance in profound ways. I welcome this recovery of the gospel of the kingdom and await what God will now do with new leaders that I get the privilege of teaching and sharing with almost daily. I am doubly blest to have this joy. These are exciting times in which to live the good news of the kingdom. If you feel otherwise you will likely grow weary and succumb to one or more of the regnant theories of eschatology and culture that fosters pessimism.

Major Demographic Shifts Will Require a New Christianity in the Coming Decades

Serious scholars now claim that the biggest change in the history of Christianity is underway as the center of the Christian faith decidedly shifts to Africa, Latin America and Asia.

"The story of Christianity as a worldwide faith is being written before our eyes," said Dr. Dana Robert, of Boston University School of Theology, to the Global Christian Forum (GCF) in Manado, Indonesia, October 4-7. The gathering, which I was invited to attend at the eleventh hour but sadly could not do, brought together leaders from major church traditions, theological perspectives, and world communions. These included the Anglican Communion, the World Council of Churches, the World Evangelical Alliance, the Pentecostal World Fellowship, and the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity.

Peter Crossing, of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity, noted in Manado that in 1910 about 66 percent of the world's Christians lived in Europe; a century later it was only 26 percent. Crossing, a researcher for the Atlas of Global Christianity, said the overall percentage of Christians had remained fairly constant over the last century, but there had been a "dramatic change in the center of gravity of global Christianity." Crossing notes that one hundred years ago the center would have been near Madrid, but by 2010 it had shifted somewhere just south of Timbuktu in Mali. Though Christians in the northern hemisphere still dominate financially 60 percent of the world's Christians live in the southern hemisphere.

Dr. Sang-Bok David Kim of the World Evangelical Alliance told the GCF that huge changes in the church internationally meant "Christianity is no longer a 'white man's' religion. Christians are now everywhere." This is not a guess. It is a fact.

Dana Robert added that, "Contemporary Christians are focusing on mission for multiple purposes—both to recover tradition and to recover from tradition. Conversations about mission and witness have become an urgent agenda for declining mainline Christian. At the same time, adherents of new ministries often see their witness as a recovery of primitive Christianity that challenges the older denominations.”

Here is my problem. The center of the Christian faith is leaving the West and within a few generations the global church will look very, very different. I write about this in Your Church Is Too Small. I talk about this weekly. But few Western leaders understand it or show any willingness to face up to it. Why? Their “church is too small.” They think local and continue to refuse looking global. They think small paradigm shift and will not have the courage to give up the paradigm they trust in so deeply order to recover a biblical, missional paradigm rooted in pre-Christendom and the ancient church.

I do not want to throw out Western Christianity with all its great contributions to the global church. But I do want us to stop acting like we have the first and/or last word on the church and her mission from our culturally-colored Western perspective. Until we embrace the missional-ecumenical paradigm more fully I believe we will never wake up from our cozy slumber. In thirty years the reality of all this will have mugged us. The problem is that then it will be too late for most of what we could do correctly now.

Wes Granberg-Michaelson’s Faithful Missional-Ecumenism and the Reformed Church in America

For seventeen years Wes Granberg-Michaelson has served the Reformed Church of America (RCA) as general secretary. I not only count Wes as my friend but admire his leadership skills and the job he has done to make the RCA one of the few mainline denominations that remains focused on missional-ecumenism in a vital and Christ-centered way. One of the reasons I am a minister of Word and Sacrament in the RCA is because of leaders like Wes. I believe the vision he has pursued is one of the most biblically faithful in North America. It is not perfect. No leader casts a perfect vision for those he or she serves. But Wes has led with incredible faithfulness.

A few weeks ago Wes gave his last report to the General Synod. He stepped down following this annual gathering to pursue a new phase of mission in his life. When I asked Wes what this new phase would be the answer he offered, in short, was missional-ecumenism. I then asked him if we could find ways to work together in coming years. Time will tell how the Lord leads us both but I am praying that Wes will continue to be a leader in the global church. He has so much to give to other leaders and to the whole church, both of which he knows extensively from travel and friendships that he has made all over the world.

In his final address to the representatives of our church body Wes began with a look at progress related to Our Call, the Reformed Church's 10-year goal to start new churches, revitalize existing congregations, and become more multicultural and freed from racism. It is this very Call that attracted me into ministry in the Reformed Church. I weighed several church families when I concluded that I was no longer a Baptist. The RCA Call made my choice compelling to be honest.

"Our Call has prioritized what is most critical and is changing the RCA," Wes said. "We are seeing new fruitful and faithful ministries emerge. Over the last three years, official RCA new church starts are emerging at a faster rate than at any time in the history of the RCA -- in other words, since 1628."

Granberg-Michaelson highlighted some of the developments in the RCA since Our Call was adopted by General Synod in 2003:

• 185 RCA congregations have been planted and had New Congregation Plans approved.
• An additional 45 new congregations are underway.
• 55 percent of the new RCA churches planted over the past three years involve people of color, and several have been multiracial churches since their beginning.
• Several female church planters have emerged as part of the church planting movement.
• 77 pastors network groups nurture and support 478 RCA pastors.
• 220 church leaders have been trained as "coaches," people who come alongside pastors to encourage and support them.

He also offered a glimpse of the challenges he believes the RCA must recognize and to which the church must react:

• The deep alienation of young people from traditional religious institutions.
• Understanding the nature of the church in a time of rapid organizational change.
• The urgent need for proclaiming and living a whole gospel radically centered on following Jesus.

Granberg-Michaelson then posed a question to the church. "These three challenges can be summarized by one question--a question I'd like to leave with you as you seek to discover God's desired future: 'How do we develop a creative and transforming witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ in ways that can be seen and heard by those outside the doors of our congregations?'

"Answering that question will keep the RCA on a journey of deep change. That's where we need to be."

Granberg-Michaelson recognized a number of individuals and instances that have enriched and blessed him in his time as general secretary. He also emphasized that he is eagerly looking forward to the continued opportunities God has in store. "The end of an era is not the completion of a destiny," he said. "Every end is an opportunity for God to do a new thing.

"In the end, the purpose of all we do as a denomination, through our committees, commissions, classes, consistories, choirs, and callings; in workbooks and worship liturgies; in benefits programs and church loan funds; in seminaries and seminars--in all of this, we desire to make disciples of Jesus Christ.

"That's why we have to recover who Jesus is, and ask again and again, 'What do we do about Jesus?'

"So that is the question that you and I, and all in the Reformed Church in America, must continue to courageously answer. In so doing, we will become the vessels used by God's love to transform the world."

I cannot think of more fitting words for any church or denomination in 2011. “We have to recover who Jesus is, and ask again and again, ‘What do we do about Jesus?’” Amen Wes. Every church and church family ought to ask this question. Our mission is nothing less than transforming the world by God’s love!

And thank you Wes for serving so faithfully for seventeen years. The RCA is much stronger because of your leadership. You led with courage and deep thoughtfulness. You did not settle for filling an office, putting in your time. You gave yourself to something bigger than you could ever have imagined and Christ, I am persuaded, is pleased. May your successor follow in these steps and do even more by the grace of God.