In their seminal book on organizational success, Built to Last, authors Jim Collins and Jerry Porras write of the importance of getting past the “tyranny of the or” and embracing the “genius of the and.” 

Their research into successful organizations found that those who thrived over long periods of time found a way to live with seemingly contradictory forces or ideas at the same time.

You can have change OR stability.

You can be conservative OR bold.

You can have low cost OR high quality.

You can have creative autonomy OR consistency and control.

You can invest for the future OR do well in the short term.

You can be idealistic (values-driven) OR pragmatic (profit-driven).

Their research found that instead of being oppressed by the “tyranny of the or,” highly visionary and effective companies liberated themselves with the “genius of the and.” In essence, they had the ability to embrace both extremes of a number of dimensions at the same time; instead of choosing between A or B, they figured out a way to have both A and B.

Most leaders are aware of “tyranny of the or” tensions. What is less discussed is that we must not only live with that tension, but let that tension drive us not to one extreme or the other, but to a “genius of the and.” In other words, let the tension drive us to a resolution that allows an embrace of both dynamics.

It’s not simply a need in business; it’s a need for the church.

Here are eight, in no particular order, where this process is a necessity:

1.         Relevant and Orthodox.

2.         Contemporary and Traditional.

3.         High-Tech and High-Touch.

4.         Multiple Locations and One Church.

5.         Topical and Expositional.

6.         Evangelism and Discipleship.

7.         Growth and Assimilation.

8.         Vision and Reality.

The importance of each of these cannot be underestimated. For example, let’s look at the first one on the list. We must be culturally relevant and remain doctrinally pure. We are trying to bring the message of Jesus to our world -- but not just to our world, but to our nation, in our city, in our time. This means that what we say and do must make sense to the person experiencing it. The apostle Paul had a deep commitment to this, once writing that he became "all things to all men so that by all possible means" he "might save some" (I Cor. 9:22). The message of the gospel is unchanging, and must remain so; the method of communicating that gospel must change according to the language, culture and background of the audience. 

If you fall into the "tyranny of the or" on this dynamic, the results are catastrophic. If you give yourself to cultural relevance at the expense of orthodoxy, then you fall into heresy. Further, you have nothing to offer the world it doesn’t already have. If you give yourself solely to doctrinal purity and hold cultural engagement in disdain, then you betray the missionary mandate inherent within the Great Commission.

So this isn’t simply the “genius of the and.”

It’s the necessity of it.

James Emery White

Sources

James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras, Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies.

Editor’s Note

James Emery White is the founding and senior pastor of Mecklenburg Community Church in Charlotte, NC, and the ranked adjunctive professor of theology and culture at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, which he also served as their fourth president.  His latest book is What They Didn’t Teach You in Seminary (Baker).  To enjoy a free subscription to the Church and Culture blog, log-on to www.churchandculture.org, where you can post your comments on this blog, view past blogs in our archive and read the latest church and culture news from around the world.  Follow Dr. White on twitter @JamesEmeryWhite.

Feedback

There’s a technological transformation coming that will revolutionize this century the way the telephone, electricity and automobiles altered the one before.

According to Mark Mills, a physicist and founder of the Digital Power Group who writes for the Forbes Intelligence column, and Julio Ottino, dean of the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Northwestern University, we sit “on the cusp of three grand technological transformations.” And what are those three?

Big data, smart manufacturing and the wireless revolution.

They’re right.

These are big.

Here’s a quick summary of their significance:

1.         Big Data. Processing power and data storage are not only virtually free, but becoming virtually unlimited. The iPhone alone has computing power that puts the 1970s-era IBM mainframe to shame. “The internet is evolving into the “cloud” – a network of thousands of data centers any one of which makes a 1990 supercomputer look antediluvian.

2.         Smart Manufacturing. In what is called the “first structural shift” since Henry Ford launched mass production, engineers will soon “design and build from the molecular level…even creating new materials.”  This era of “new materials” will explode when combined with 3-D printing (also known as direct-digital manufacturing). Imagine “literally ‘printing’ parts and devices using computational power, lasers and basic powdered metals and plastics.” Then one day, the Holy Grail: “'desktop' printing of entire final products from wheels to even washing machines.”

3.         Wireless Revolution. Soon, most humans on the planet will be connected wirelessly. “Never before have a billion people – soon billions more – been able to communicate, socialize and trade in real time.” As the authors of the article note, this introduces both rapid change (e.g., the Arab Spring), as well as great opportunity.

And great danger, if not stewarded with humility.

As I wrote in my book Serious Times, it was this same spirit that erected the infamous tower of Babel, and one could argue is leading to its rebuilding today. Only this time we are not building with bricks and mortar, but silicon chips and genetic engineering. We live in a technological age, and have embraced technological advance with abandon, creating what Neil Postman termed a “technopoly” where technology of every kind is cheerfully granted sovereignty. Or, as Jacques Ellul has written, at least the process of technique designed to serve our ends. 

Ironically, within the word “technology” itself lies the new philosophical mooring that marks our intent. The word is built from such Greek words as “technites” (craftsman) and “techne” (art, skill, trade), which speak to the idea of either the person who shapes or molds something, or to the task of shaping and molding itself.

But it is the Greek word “logos,” to which “technites” is joined, that makes our term “technology” so provocative. “Logos” is a reference within Greek thought to divine reason, or the organizing principle of the world. In John’s gospel “logos” was used to communicate to those familiar with the Greek worldview the idea of the divinity of Jesus.

Moderns have put together two words that the ancients would not have dared to combine, for the joining of the words intimates that mere humans can shape the very order of the world. Though technology itself may be neutral in its enterprise, there can be no doubt that within the word itself are the seeds for the presumption that would seek to cast God from His throne and assert humanity in His place as the conduit of divine power.

It reminds me of an interview I read celebrating the 25th anniversary of the first test-tube baby. Robert Edwards, who along with his partner, Patrick Steptoe, pioneered the procedure, graced the occasion with a rare but candid interview with The Times of London. “It was a fantastic achievement but it was about more than infertility,” said Edwards, then 77 and emeritus professor of human reproduction at Cambridge University. “I wanted to find out exactly who was in charge, whether it was God Himself or whether it was scientists in the laboratory.”

Smiling triumphantly at the reporter, he said, “It was us.”

James Emery White

Sources

“The Coming Tech-led Boom” by Mark P. Mills and Julio M. Ottino, The Wall Street Journal, January 30, 2012. Read online.

James Emery White, Serious Times (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press).

Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992).

Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society, translated from the French by John Wilkinson (New York: Vintage Books, 1964).

On the meaning of the words “techne” and “technites”, see the article on “Carpenter, Builder, Workman, Craftsman, Trade” by J.I. Packer in The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol. 1, Colin Brown, editor (Grand Rapids: Regency Reference Library/Zondervan, 1975/1986), p. 279.

Anjana Ahuja, “God Is Not In Charge, We Are,” T2-The Times, 24 July 2003, p. 6.

Editor’s Note

James Emery White is the founding and senior pastor of Mecklenburg Community Church in Charlotte, NC, and the ranked adjunctive professor of theology and culture at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, which he also served as their fourth president.  His latest book is What They Didn’t Teach You in Seminary (Baker).  To enjoy a free subscription to the Church and Culture blog, log-on to www.churchandculture.org, where you can post your comments on this blog, view past blogs in our archive and read the latest church and culture news from around the world.  Follow Dr. White on twitter @JamesEmeryWhite.

Feedback

I hate buying cars.

I hate how the sales staff waits like vultures out front, descending on you before you even get out of your car.

I hate how they push to get information about you – what you want to spend, are you going to trade anything in – all going into a plan to “work” you.

I hate how they steer you away from what you really want to what they are trying to “move.”

I hate how hard it is to get straight answers.

I hate how pushy they are to decide then and there, and won’t let you walk away without getting as much contact information as they can.

I hate haggling over a price, the back and forth, the mind games, the manipulation.

I hate having to bone up on the car’s actual price, being coy about whether I’m going to trade anything in, and getting my guard up about the “second” salesman who postures as a finance person but only wants to sell me more add-ons.

Did I mention I hate buying cars?

So I haven’t.  For a long time.  Like two cars with over 200,000 miles each long time.  But at some point, life – and mileage – catches up.  So I broke down and bought a car. 

Now get this:

For the first time in my life, I am actually looking forward to going back and, when needed, doing it again.

Why?
Because of CarMax.  (No, I don’t work for them, get kickbacks, have family involved, or own stock.)  Their slogan is simple: “The way car buying should be.” 

And they’re right.

They have changed my entire attitude toward buying cars, because they gave me an entirely different experience. 

I could skip the lot, go online, and select exactly what I wanted in a car – type, mileage, price, features.  Then a search engine would show me all the cars that fit my parameters. 

There was a “no-haggle” policy about the sticker price.  The idea was simple: they set what they felt was a reasonable and competitive price, but there were no negotiating games.

I could explore financing through the site, and if so desired, could have it completed online before I went.

The specific car I selected would be ready for me to test drive when I arrived on the lot, even if it meant getting there from 50 miles away.  No charge, and I could still walk away from it. 

There was no bait and switch when I arrived, or pressure to look at other cars.  Because of the online process, when I bought the car, they even had my tags ready.

So a reluctant, even hostile customer became a raging fan – and all it took was a different process.  Same transaction, same product, same goal, but a radically different experience.

It made me think about someone interested in exploring the Christian faith through a church.  Yes, like me with a car, there will be times even the most reluctant will find themselves walking through the doors of a church.

Easter and Christmas Eve. 

Birth of a baby. 

Marriage. 

Divorce.

A wayward teen. 

Illness. 

Lost job. 

Unplanned pregnancy. 

Miscarriage. 

Loss of a loved one.

But let’s face it.  They dread it.  Most people are open to God, but hate church. 

They hate having to dress up on a Sunday morning.

They hate having to listen to music that is either outdated, poorly performed, or just weird (what’s up with building an Ebeneezer?).

They hate feeling “hit on” for money, assaulted by ten-week sermon series titled “Tithe or Burn”, or forced to face a thermometer on the wall charting the latest drive.

They hate being recognized as a first-time visitor, made to stand out and feel more conspicuous than they already do, and then being forced to share contact information they aren’t ready to give.

They hate pushy, plastic “preaching” types that say the word “God” as if it has three syllables.

They hate being bored out of their skull for an hour or more.

They hate feeling judged and looked-down on for their lack of regular attendance.

They hate not knowing when to stand, when to sit, and what to recite.

They hate…

the experience.

But they don’t hate God.  Just like I didn’t hate new cars.  I actually wanted a new car, just like most people truly want God.  So maybe what we need in church isn’t a different “product,” as some mistakenly assume.  It’s not about watering things down, airbrushing out the tough parts on sin and repentance, or capitulating to cultural mores.

After all, I didn’t want a moped.

Maybe all we need is a new way of doing church. 

Of course, that would take doing something along the lines of what CarMax apparently did.  Namely, listening to the “customer” and finding out what it is they hate about the experience.  No, not letting surveys create a consumer-driven theology or anything else that would compromise the gospel.  But simply letting the feedback speak to the experience of attending, an experience that is often mired in practices and manners and methods that can create an alienating and off-putting experience.

Who knows? 

People might just drive away with a new life.

James Emery White

Editor’s Note

James Emery White is the founding and senior pastor of Mecklenburg Community Church in Charlotte, NC, and the ranked adjunctive professor of theology and culture at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, which he also served as their fourth president.  His latest book is What They Didn’t Teach You in Seminary (Baker).  To enjoy a free subscription to the Church and Culture blog, log-on to www.churchandculture.org, where you can post your comments on this blog, view past blogs in our archive and read the latest church and culture news from around the world.  Follow Dr. White on twitter @JamesEmeryWhite.

Feedback

Few topics incite discussion as much as effective discipleship.  Most of the time, the debate centers around the content of effective discipleship; what is it a Christian should be able to do, or know, or be?  Other times the discussion revolves around the method of discipleship, such as whether it should be a classroom experience or carry more of a mentoring dynamic.

In a recent address at The New York Times Schools for Tomorrow conference, former Harvard President Lawrence H. Summers offered a new dynamic to the conversation.

Namely, how a changing world is changing learning.

His premise was that despite a rapidly changing world, education has changed very little:

“Students take four courses a term, each meeting for about three hours a week, usually with a teacher standing in front of the room.  Students are evaluated on the basis of examination essays handwritten in blue books and relatively short research papers.  Instructors are organized into departments, most of which bear the same names they did when the grandparents of today’s students were undergraduates.  A vast majority of students still major in one or two disciplines centered on a particular department.”

But, wonders Summers, suppose the system was altered to reflect “the structure of society and what we now understand about how people learn?”

Here’s some of what Summers suggests would become manifest:

1.  Education would be more about how to process and use information and less about imparting it.

2.  Tasks would be carried out with far more collaboration.

3.  New technologies would profoundly alter the way knowledge is conveyed.

4.  Learning would become less passive, and more active.

5.  The educational experience would become more international.

All five of these points are worth digesting in light of the task of discipleship, for you cannot help but hear the ring of truth in each of them:

*There is little collaboration in the formation of disciples beyond mentoring and small groups, and much of that is not intentional, but serendipitous.

*Even something as rudimentary as electronic readers, which allow for constant revision along with the use of audio and visual effects, are seldom used in church’s discipleship efforts.

*Churches rarely allow for a variety of learning experiences when it comes to discipleship, but rather go for a programmatic design, which most of the time is passive in nature.  Seldom do we ask anyone to actually use the knowledge they are acquiring as part of the discipleship process.

*The church is both local and universal, and increasingly centered not in the West, but in the global South.  The way faith is often Americanized is not simply insular, but potentially heterodox, yet internationalizing our discipleship is hardly considered.

But it’s the first of Summers’ points that may be the most challenging.

Education would be more about how to process and use information and less about imparting it.

There has been a knowledge explosion with an aftershock of access.  Summers suggests that in a day when the entire Library of Congress will soon be accessible on a mobile device with search procedures, factual mastery will become less and less important.

He’s right.

But this means there will be an ever-widening chasm between wisdom and information.  Quentin Schultze writes that the torrent of information now at our disposal is often little more than “endless volleys of nonsense, folly and rumor masquerading as knowledge, wisdom, and even truth.”

Chuck Kelley, president of New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, recently noted that “Google has changed the relationship of people to information.  For the last 300 or 400 years, information has been collected on college, university and seminary campuses … You went to the collected information to learn. Today the information is available anywhere you want, just Google it."

This creates a new challenge for those engaged in Christian discipleship.  Rather than primarily dispensing information, we must spend an increasing amount of time helping people evaluate information.  It is as if we’ve dropped a library card onto the world, but removed the classroom that gives us the literacy to read its contents, much less the education needed to interpret its contents.

Yet there is also a danger if the church was ever tempted to form discipleship wholly along technological lines of learning.

Namely the danger of dependence.

In an article on what would happen if solar storms knocked out the internet, the Los Angeles Times techblog team mused that “remembering who directed a movie would be a major project.”  Their point is that we have become so accustomed to instant access to information through Wikipedia, IMDB and Google that a world without the Internet would leave us unable to answer the most basic of questions.

Yet with discipleship, knowledge is not simply that which is stored until needed, but often that which is practiced until habit.  As Dallas Willard has written throughout his works, you do the things Jesus did in order to live the life Jesus lived.

The difference between spiritual formation and formal education is a profound one.  The goal of Christian discipleship is never mere knowledge, but always becoming formed in Christ.  So while we can look up a verse with ease, that’s no substitute for the importance of hiding it away in our hearts.

But let’s return to Summers’ main point.

How we learn has changed, which means how we disciple – at least in part – must also change.

In other words, whether you like it or not, they’re going to google “God.”

We need to teach them how.

James Emery White

Sources

Lawrence H. Summers, What You (Really) Need to Know, The New York Times, January 20, 2012. Read online.

“What if solar storms knocked out the Internet?,” The Los Angeles Times, January 25, 2012. Read online.

Quentin J. Schultze, Habits of the High-Tech Heart (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002).

On Chuck Kelley’s comments, see “Theological ed. is “being redefined,” Gary D. Myers, Baptist Press. Read online.

The best introduction to the work of Dallas Willard in this area is The Spirit of the Disciplines.

Editor’s Note

James Emery White is the founding and senior pastor of Mecklenburg Community Church in Charlotte, NC, and the ranked adjunctive professor of theology and culture at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, which he also served as their fourth president.  His latest book is What They Didn’t Teach You in Seminary (Baker).  To enjoy a free subscription to the Church and Culture blog, log-on to www.churchandculture.org, where you can post your comments on this blog, view past blogs in our archive and read the latest church and culture news from around the world.  Follow Dr. White on twitter @JamesEmeryWhite.

Feedback