The Scoop on Spencer Burke

As creator of The OOZE, Spencer Burke is usually the one pitching questions to some of today’s most prominent voices affecting the church in transition, from Shane Clayborne to Phyllis Tickle. But when Burke made a recent swing through Portland conducting interviews for THEOOZE.TV, he took time to answer some questions posed to him by Burnside contributors Sarah Thebarge and Karen Spears Zacharias. The following is a discussion that took place between the two writers in the days after their meeting with Spencer Burke:

Karen: So, Sarah, that was some power lunch, huh? Any first impressions?

Sarah: It was interesting to meet Spencer. I think he’s warm and energetic and personable, and obviously passionate about his work.  The conversation with him sparked a few questions…

1) What are the non-negotiable of the Christian faith?
2) What’s the point of emerging?
3) What’s at stake if we do/don’t emerge?
4) What is the gospel, according to the emerging church?
5) In 100 years, will we think the leaders of this movement are insane or genius?

Here’s my question for you, Karen.  If Spencer were a monotation, what word(s) would you choose to describe him?

Karen: Gosh, Sarah, I admit you had me stumped on that question. I suppose I should clarify what a monotation is for those who aren’t familiar with Spencer Burke. It’s a photo meditation. Spencer’s idea of contemplation in the information age. Instead of reading Oswald Chambers or Our Daily Bread, Spencer posts a photo and the viewer contemplates it and responds.

If a person were trying to capture Spencer Burke in a monotation, I think it would have to be a photo of a bicycle wheel. Tangents jut from the man’s brain like spokes from the wheel’s center. Those tangents can at times seem purely random but they are coming from a center deep inside of him. Is there any subject matter upon which he can’t converse?

I loved what he had to say about how we shouldn’t be surprised at the wrongdoings of others, the exploitations, the selfishness out of which we all act. Instead, he said, we ought to be celebrating every time somebody, who shouldn’t do something, does it. Like when Bono praised President Bush. “That’s beautiful and the wonder,” he said. “When we do the surprising thing.”

As a recovering crime beat reporter, I can be cynical about the horrific and shocking things that people do to each other. But maybe Spencer is right. Maybe we ought not be surprised when the child is murdered, or when the preacher solicits the prostitute. Maybe we all ought to take wonder in every moment of every day when somebody makes the right choice, the healthy choice, the choice that puts others before ourselves, the choice that honors God. How come we never marvel over the millions of times that’s done every single moment of every single day?

But, Sarah, what did you think of Spencer’s suggestion that we can use all things?

Sarah: If I remember correctly, the context of that statement was that he doesn’t think Christians should spend time trying to convince others to agree with them on details of politics or policies or outreach or worship.  He said, “Does Capitalism work? Use it.  Does Socialism work?  Use it.”

I agree with him to a point. I think it’s futile to spend energy trying to get unbelievers, or even believers, to agree with us on a lot of these details.  In the whole scheme of things, I think God’s concerned about bigger things.

But I do have some concerns if that philosophy is carried to an extreme.  Because the ends do not always justify the means.  There are some things that are always wrong no matter what good they are trying to accomplish.

And the other problem is that you have to have an “end” in mind before you know what means will best accomplish that goal. It seems that post-modernism and the Emergent Church have this in common: there are few (if any) absolutes. So how do you know what the “best” thing is for society or for the Church?  It’s hard (okay, impossible) to determine the best path to get to a destination you haven’t determined.

And now back to you, Karen.  What do you think of Spencer’s comment that he no longer believes in sin?

Karen: There was that nanosecond when he first said he didn’t believe in sin, that I thought I must not have heard him correctly.

Sin has lost favor with people. Not the actual act of sinning, that’s as popular as it’s ever been, but, honestly, Sarah, when’s the last time you heard a thoughtful discourse on sin? Seems like the only times I’ve heard it preached from the pulpit in the last 10 years is when it’s directed at homosexuals, or those seeking abortions, or those failing to tithe.

Semantically-speaking, I think, sin has become this generation’s f-word. By that I mean fugetaboutit — there are far more important things to worry about. Christians today are far more action-oriented. Who has time to waste contemplating their personal sins when there are hungry folks to feed, neglected kids to mentor, houses to build, wells to dig, elections to win?

Still.

There is that steady small voice within me that says much as we may not like it, sin is as relevant as ever, and maybe far more insidious than we recognize, mostly because we so often fail to recognize it in ourselves. Maybe that’s why I John 1:9 underscores our responsibility: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”

Forgiveness seems to be an ongoing process tied to a certain owning up to our persistent wrongdoing.

Spencer’s initial answer to the sin question threw me but his clarification of his remark made perfect sense. He told me a story about his boy. The two were at a store, shopping for a birthday gift for his son’s friend. Spencer’s boy loves all things trading cards, so his first impulse was to snatch a set of much-coveted cards off a shelf. Spencer didn’t say anything. He didn’t give the boy the stink-eye stare. Nothing like that. He just moved on down to another aisle, continued running his errand. But the boy stopped, walked back over to the trading card section and put them back. Then he grabbed a box of Legos. Explaining his actions to his father, he said, “I’d like the cards best but I think my friend would want these.”

The tears welled up in Spencer’s eyes as he shared what it meant as a father to watch a child struggle with that inner voice. The one that says, do the right thing. Don’t be selfish. Think of others first.

I think God’s eyes mist up like that whenever we choose to do the right thing. For Spencer, I think sin may be more of a problem of semantics than one of theology.

So, what about it, Sarah, what are the non-negotiables of the Christian faith?

Sarah: Karen, when I read your question, I thought about one of Spencer’s metaphors. He said the emerging church is trying to keep Christianity relevant, and if we don’t succeed, Christianity will become a relic to this generation.  He likened this to the music industry, who kept trying to sell CD’s when people in the computer age wanted to be able to download music online.  Sites like Napster succeeded because they quickly recognized what consumers wanted, and adapted their model to meet those expectations.

I think in a lot of areas, adaptation is a good goal.  I think the church can definitely be on the cutting edge when it comes to worship, technology, architecture and networking.  However, in keeping with the music metaphor, I think the church also needs to recognize what middle C is – in other words, we can change the delivery system, but we can’t change the core of the message.

The middle C of Christianity is that we are sinners in need of a Savior because there’s nothing we can do in our own strength to reconcile with God.  God in His mercy sent His son Jesus to die for us, allowing us to be forever reconciled to Him if we accept Jesus’ sacrifice on our behalf.

This is the heart of the Gospel.  This is why we have the Bible and church and evangelism in the first place.  If we lose sight of this truth, if we water it down, if we deny the reality of sin and the need for salvation, there’s no need for the emergent church – or any church at all, for that matter.  If nothing’s at stake, then none of this really matters.

If, however, we recognize that lost souls are at stake, then the issue of how we make our message relevant and accessible to this generation becomes critical.

Back to you, Karen.  What do you think about Spencer concluding that he and his family don’t need to attend church?

Karen: I’ll admit it unnerved me some. I suppose that’s a reflection more of my background. When I was growing up the church represented a physical as well as spiritually safe place for me to be. I’ve always been the kind of person who seeks out sanctuaries when I travel. I’m the person who reads the plaques below the stained glass to see whose life it represents. I love the musty smells, the polished wood, the worn out hymnals and the kneeling benches.

Spencer said we love church for all the right reasons, because it’s a place to study God’s word and to come together as social creatures.  But he maintains that church in the traditional sense is becoming passé. That as people form community online they do not need a building around the corner.

There’s truth to what Spencer is saying. Obviously, he’s found community beyond the confines and borders of the traditional church of which he was once a shepherd. I, too, have found such a community online, here at Burnside Writers and through years of blogging, Facebook and now with Twitter.

But as much as I appreciate the relationships I’ve been able to cultivate through an online presence, the truth is it does not replace church for me. When I’m on the road and away from home for long periods of time, I miss my church family, particularly my pastor’s preaching and the weekly care group and just worshipping with my husband or a good friend at my side.

For all the strengths of a cyber-community, it cannot replace the actual physical coming together fellowship for me. My husband is a teacher and a coach. We attend church with the same people with whom we attend Saturday basketball games. They know our children by name and we know theirs. No amount of fellowship online can replace those moments when the child of someone I attend church with crawls into my lap.

Spencer believes that the Internet has enabled the community of believers to come together in a more dynamic way. There’s no question that it’s a powerful tool. I’ve seen Christians raise phenomenal amounts of money online in a matter of hours to help build schools for impoverished children or to construct wells in third-world countries or to help the homeless. It’s awesome to see so many believers serving in this manner.

But I don’t think it has to be an either this or that choice. I think we can have our online community and our local church family. Each one can serve to strengthen us a Christians and equip us to serve in bold new ways.

I think brick-and-mortar churches are here to stay. At least I hope so, for the sake of all those people in need of a physical and spiritually safe place to be. I pray they find refuge in their neighborhood church the way I did as a troubled young girl, the way I continue to do.