Uncomfortable or distracted in prayer? You may be doing it right.

Photo by Andrew Neel on Unsplash

Often prayer is taught in a way that gives the impression that some have the gift of prayer and others don't. We are disappointed when we are distracted in prayer and so we give up the practice. We beat ourselves up when we are not at ease with "praying from our hearts" because we are told that praying from our hearts should come naturally.

It may be helpful to remember that within Christian spiritual practices being uncomfortable or distracted in prayer may indicate you are on a good track. 

When we are uncomfortable in prayer it is because we know prayer is a vulnerable act. And being vulnerable is often uncomfortable for us. As such, if you are uncomfortable with the practice of praying it may mean that you are finally abandoning the false facade and expressing vulnerability. 

Additionally, when we are distracted in prayer is means we have allowed something else to take center stage in our hearts and minds. As such, we have a chance to return to God as the center. This returning, also called repenting, is the very type of prayer that Jesus elevated in places such as Luke 18. Just as there is great rejoicing when one who is lost is found, so too there is great rejoicing when we return to God at the center or our prayer. 

So if you are uncomfortable or distracted in your prayer life, the good news is you may very well be doing it right. 

Methodists not "Positionists"

The other day I was in conversation with a member of the church I serve and he told me of a book that he was taught and memorized much of when he was younger, The Westminster Shorter Catechism. He went on to tell me that the first question and answer in this book is:

• Q. What is the chief end of man?
• A. Man's chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.

Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash

This was the foundation of his early Christian experience. It was also clear in our conversation that he is in a phase of this formation where he is deconstructing his faith and has more questions than ever before. This is a natural process for so many but the Church has not been very helpful at guiding pilgrims through the deconstruction (death) of their former understanding of faith in order to help usher reconstruction (resurrection). I tried my best to listen to him because he embodies the type of Christian that I desire to be - curious, open and humbling seeking. 

After learning about what he was taught was the chief end of man was, it dawned on me that perhaps this is a point of difference in the UMC that I have experienced. That is to say, the United Methodist tradition that I have experienced is one that is concerned less about the "ends" than it is concerned about the "means."

The UMC says that the sacraments of communion are "means of Grace." The UMC has three rules - 1) do no harm, 2) do good and 3) attend to the ordinances of God. That last rule is about upholding the practices that draw us closer to the Spirit of God such as worship, prayer, fasting, study, silence, etc. These three rules all point to a process, a means a way of living. These are not rules to think about but rules do live. These are not so much of positions as they are postures that give flexibility to the Christian to discern how to live these rules out. So within the Church we have conversations about what "doing good" looks like or take actions to repent in the ways we have done harm. Methodists were made fun of in the early days because of their insistence on the "methods" of practicing Christianity. The Methodists were not made fun of because of their positions but because they emphasized the methods/means/practice. 

There are some within our denomination that demand we all pick predetermined sides to the hot issues of the time. It is seen as "unfaithful" or "not a winning strategy" to be a voice that calls for incremental change. The Biblically informed Methodism that has shaped me is one that emphasizes the process (method) over the position. 

The way we are having conversation these days - blaming others, scapegoating victims, dismissing arguments, creating straw-men and false equivalences, not repenting of our own hypocrisy, etc. - is less Methodist and more reflective of the newest denomination I call Positionists. 

Uniting Methodists

Not long ago, a group of United Methodist leaders announced a movement called "Uniting Methodists." For those of you keeping score, yes, there are a number of caucuses, associations, networks, and movements within the UMC.

The Uniting Methodists have planned a gathering in November in Atlanta, Georgia. I plan to attend. 

You may think to yourself, "Why are you writing this on your blog? Why do I care if you go to some conference in November?" All good questions, but the only reason I share about the Uniting Methodists is that I have spoken with a number of people in my own ministry area who have not even heard of this new movement. So I share so that others may hear about it. 

I also share that I will be present in November so that if any readers of this blog are present, I would love to meet you and thank you for supporting this little blog and I want to hear what God is doing in and through your life. 

Church Leadership - From Committee Process to Leadership Positions

The Church often tells herself that she is counter-cultural. The reality is the Church is a cultural product and in influenced by the culture in many of the same ways other spheres are. For instance, the rise of the "big box" stores in culture, where one could get all they wanted in "one stop",  was also seen in the rise of the "mega church", where one can get all you want in "one stop." Or the rise of "Christian hip hop" comes after the hip hop movement is underway. There are moments when the Church is counter-cultural but the Church is more often a laggard to the cultural influences. 

Photo by Samuel Zeller on Unsplash

Since the early days of America, the United States government has relied upon a strong committee system to generate, build and adopt policy. Since the 1970's the government has made dramatic strides to move from a committee system and embrace more a party system. This is a long and nuanced history, but the essence is this: the power in the committee systems lie with the committee chairs whereas in a party system power lies with party leaders. Those in key leadership positions have not liked that there are committee chair persons who have great autonomy to "cut deals" and modify the agenda. Additionally, there was push for greater transparency in these committees and so the committee system has slowly been marginalized. 

The erosion of the committee system has contributed to a more polarized congress than ever before and it is now the small number of party leaders who wield the most power.

All of this relates to the Church because we are seeing now this play out in the life of the Church. While there is an ever growing push in culture to streamline decisions and consolidate power around positions, this is also making its way into the Church. 

Where was once a joke that Churches would have a meeting to decide if they were going to have a meeting, now Churches are making decisions to cut committees and move to "executive teams" or "governing boards". These teams/boards are very efficient and able to make decisions quicker than committees. This system also has a number of benefits that are favored in these times where so much of the church revolves around the pastor who is given even more power to "lead" the church. I am not knocking church leadership that moves away from the committee model; to each her own. What I want to offer up is the reminder that the Church is called to be a counter cultural voice, the place that values the still small voice and worships the God of all time not the god of efficiency.