Justin Bieber and Sarah Palin have love child

Not really.

As you know, this title is an example of what is called "click-bait". A tag or headline that is so shocking that it "baits" you to click the link thus driving up traffic. Since the risk of missing the story is greater than the energy it costs to click the link and be duped, we click the link. 

Click bait is what many people use to attract attention on a noisy internet. It is difficult to be heard on the internet and thus using headlines like this or "ten ways to..." or "3 reasons that..." or "23 pictures of ..." generally are the types of headlines we see on the internet. It should be no shock that the most visited post in the history of this site is titled - 10 WEIRD THINGS KIDS DO AT COMMUNION I WISH MORE ADULTS WOULD DO

If you attend churches you will see a church form of click bait in two places - Church signs and sermon title.

I don't have to point out all the sites dedicated to church signs and the crazy stuff that is put up on these marquees. Just google it any you will find all sorts of slogans. From the cheesy (Sign broken, message inside) to the appalling (Christmas: Easier to spell than Hanukkah). The point is that the roads, like the internet, is noisy and you "need" a church sign that stands out and gets people's attention. You need click bait! I guess?

The other and perhaps more frustrating to me is the click bait sermon titles. The idea for some is to have a sermon title that people will remember. So you get sermon titles like "Wait Watchers" or "You Can't Have Your Kate and Edith too" or "You Can't Win if you Don't Begin". What I don't understand is that if someone is sitting in worship, they are choosing to listen to the preacher. They can leave at any point. We preachers don't need to "warm up the crowd" or "get a joke in early" as a way to "engage the masses". So preachers, let us remember that if people are in the pew, they are choosing to be there. Lets stop giving fluff and start giving substance.

Finally to the non-preacher types:

On behalf of the church I am sorry for click bait in the church. I am sorry that we treat people like drones who need us to come up with quirky, silly or lame titles of things just to encourage you to visit/listen. 

Finally, I present - Justin Bieber and Sarah Palin's love child

The Christian of the Future...

Recently I was reminded of the line from Karl Rahner who said, "The Christian of the future will be a mystic or he will not exist at all." In fact I made note of this line in a recent post. The more that I sit with this thought the more it stirs in me. 

Teresa of Avila 

While mystic means a number of things it is at least two things. First a mystic is one who has stronger God images and experiences that are personal (as opposed to theoretical) and intimate (as opposed to distant). These personal and intimate experiences and images with God lead to the second characteristic of the mystic: a mystic has more trust in the inward authority that is within each human being (as opposed to putting all trust in outward authorities).

We live in a time where God is not talked about as personal but as more of a "ideal projection" and we also live in a time when outer sources have more authority than inward sources. That is to say we live in a time when we don't trust someone saying, "I know this because it is in the very fiber of my being." Rather we live in a time where one has to prove what is known. (Which is why some religious people get frustrated when a study is published that validates a religious truth known for generations, such as meditation contributes to wholeness or simplicity leads to greater fulfillment.)

So may the rise of the age of mystics dawn soon because I do believe it is the way back to Jesus. 

Worship: Less Zoo, More Petting Zoo

The thing about the zoo is that when you go, the main attraction is behind walls or glass. The majestic tiger or the curious mongoose is something that you can observe at a distance. It is something that gives you the impression that you "know" the animals. A zoo is also a place that few people enter with a sense of "fear". Unless you are going to the zoo with Harry Potter, you will not find a rogue snake at a zoo roaming around. And since zoos are set up to be so distant, there is an elevated amount of energy put toward the zoo keepers. We are too distant to the animals so we talk with the zoo keepers who tell us what it is like to have direct encounters with the animals. We rely on a mediator to tell us about the animals. 

Things are different for a petting zoo. 

First of all, it is clear that you will have a close encounter with the main attraction of the petting zoo. There is no protective glass or barrier keeping the curious animals to come toward you. But perhaps more importantly, most people I have seen enter a petting zoo enter with at least a small amount of nervous energy because they are not sure exactly what can happen. Will a dove descend on them? Will a lamb push up against their leg? Will there be a snake that strikes a bit of fear in them? And since the animals are there in your lap, there is less interest in hearing about the experiences of the animal caretakers. It is clear that in a petting zoo that it is the animals that need the most attention. 

Worship needs to really be less like a zoo and perhaps more like a petting zoo. We ought to enter worship with a sense of energy, unsure of what will happen exactly, anticipating a close encounter with the mysteries of God (the main attraction). A place where we desire a direct encounter with God rather than primarily rely on hearing how a direct encounter with God might feel like.