I have a confession to make - I am one of those guys who critiques authors without reading their books. Now, Francis Chan, I haven't read his books. I've heard him in audio and visual form before and have read articles about him as well as an interview I think. I've also interacted with a few people that have really been challenged and touched by his writings.
I wasn't really interested in his books but a lot of my friends and people I know have and they all love the books. I get the sense that his books have these characteristics - to get people to be real and passionate and long for more from God - to do church more authentically and less like a machine - to be genuine and simple in one's approach to faith but still expect big things from God, to depend more radically on God than on man, etc...
I will sound arrogant but I've read books like that and many have been written in different forms for centuries in church history. In reading them, I was seeking the answer to the longing for more that these books embodied. The problem is that I've always been more interested in the "how" of this direction he's taking rather than with the "need" to do something more radical and passionate. But I'm saying this with the awareness that I haven't read the books and only heard him through audio and visual options, which may not be enough.
Recently, I watched two of his new nooma-like videos - they were really good but left me wanting more and also frustrated by a few things he said. I don't know if I would use them but I know that a lot of people like them, but I still don't get this guy. He's a bit of an enigma. A friend of mine who really likes him introduced himself to Chan at an event hosted by Chan in Chicago ( I wrote about that here and then introduce his exit from the pastorate along with other famous pastors - here ). It didn't go so well but didn't go so bad either. It's hard to get a lock on this guy.
The article which sparked this conversation off can be found on CNN's Belief Blog. He's making headlines in a lot place and it hasn't stopped. Apparently, the "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" pastor, Josh Harris, empathized with him for wanting to avoid the fame of pastoring, but didn't think that he or anyone else should leave because of that, instead just learn to roll with it and serve the church regardless. Harris had this to say in the article,
He said he understood Chan felt God was leading him in a new direction. But he hopes there won’t be an exodus of pastors from their pulpits. “There’s a tendency to idolize one person’s choices. We have to say, ‘you know what, there are a lot of ways to see what faithfulness [to God’s calling] looks like.’ Not every pastor of a big church should leave.”
I'm not sure that leaving a church is the worst thing in the world if that' what you want to do but Harris is coming from a place that probably understands more of a triumphal church that wants to turn back the "post-Christian" tide that America is experiencing while guys like myself and others don't mind dealing with a "post-Christian" America. It's a positive direction for those who want what Chan wants, something more than what we've cooked up.
On another not, I think what he's done to leave the church is unique and great but there are other pastors who have done the same thing and who have left even larger churches with a passion to do something different and have done just that. Instead of making it a big deal that they have left, but they just went and did something different and better - which is what they are known for now.
Hugh Halter and Matt Smay of Missio are two guys that I can think of among others that I have heard of doing the same thing. What they are doing now is way cooler than what they were doing when they left their big mega churches. The thing is that many have seen far ahead of what Chan has seen and already chosen to not be in the position he was in, in order to do something better. Richard Rohr's statement, "The best critique of the bad is the practice of the better" seems to resonate at this point. For Chan, it seems like he is in the stuck in the middle of these two ideas and hasn't landed yet. Well as long as he surfs this wave, many of us are wondering, when and where will he land and what will have to say to all of us who at this point don't know where he lands or stands yet. We'll see eventually, but while the rest of us wait to see what's next, for many, Chan is still the Man. Merry Christmas and Blessing on your New Year.
My first thought was: well of course you can leave and go sojourn in the East because you planted a mega church and have been receiving a high salary and can afford to not "work." But apparently, Chan's paycheck is pretty modest and he gives away all of his money from books to charities. I can respect that.
ReplyDeleteBut it is all very dramatic none-the-less, the fact that we are talking about it and haven't read his books or much less, don't attend the church that is affected by his choice. If anything, when he comes back, his career will have received a boost and cemented him in everyone's mind as "oh, the pastor who gave it all up..." You will definitely locked in future speaking engagements and of course, a book deal to tell us all what happened when you were gone.
:)
I believe Chan left because God asked him to.
ReplyDeleteAnd God told me you don't need a Francis Chan in your life to be a Francis Chan.