"We confess with shame that we have often denied our calling and failed in our mission, by becoming conformed to the world or by withdrawing from it." -- The Lausanne Covenant, by the International Congress on World Evangelization, emphasis added.
We are all familiar with the passage of scripture that tells us to be "in the world, but not of it" as well as the one that says to "not be conformed to the world" but to be "transformed by the renewing of your mind". These are good teachings, and they should be considered with depth and intention. But I will be honest with you and say that I have a bad taste in my mouth for them. Not because of the message itself, but because of what people have done with it. You know that feeling of morning breath you have when you wake up from a good nights sleep? Well, you have to brush your teeth really good to get rid of it, then you're all clean and fresh. But this taste has not gone away from brushing. It still lingers.
I suppose I come from a tradition that seemed to emphasize the not being of the world part, much more than the being in it part. Sure, the church I grew up in was huge in mission work. They did trips, and planted churches. They gave lots of money. But I suppose it always felt safe to me--at an arms length. It was still somewhat withdrawn. Then, working in churches, it was even more severe. I worked for the vast majority of my career as a youth pastor in what I would consider very conservative, very traditional churches. I'm not talking about music style here. I'm talking about thought pattern. The expectation was for me, as the youth pastor, to design safe "alternative" environments for christian kids to get away from the world. This was to be their retreat from all the bad influences they were subjected to at school, on TV and pretty much everywhere else. Now, the idea of this isn't all bad. But why was I not equally expected to teach kids to be "in the world"? Why did the church not want their kids to take what they had experienced and share it with those who did not yet know? Why was what we called "outreach" focused only on "inviting" and never on "going" or "being"?
Why would it be more important for me to be safe than for me to hurt for my friends who were looking for what I was supposed to have?
I struggle with the message that we have communicated that my safety comes first. Then, when the coast is clear, I will invest in you. It makes me sad to think of how vehemently the church protects this.
May we be about the margins, the forgotten, the dangerous, and all those who are asking us to focus not on what they are doing, but what they are looking for.