The Entry of the King

Posted on March 21, 2016 by Fr. Peter

There is no doubt in my mind that the consistent message of Jesus was love and doing things for others. There is no doubt in my mind that this message was unconditional, and is required of all of us who say we follow Him. So great was his love for us that he chose to do something so great that it would eventually get him killed not for himself but us, all of us.

Today we begin the holiest week on the calendar of the Church. Today we have a celebration with a crowd whipped up into a frenzy that will soon turn ugly, and the cries of Hosanna will soon turn to shouts of Crucify him. Today we see the crowds coming out in large numbers to get a glimpse of the man they had only heard about, a man who, until now anyway, had been somewhat of a secret but is now taking his boldest step, entering the capital city not simply as just another pilgrim but as King.

Jesus and his followers had been in Jericho, only seventeen miles away less than a day journey. For Jesus his journey was coming to an end, his long three-year ministry would soon be over as the goal, Jerusalem, was at the end of this journey. Jerusalem, the place where all of this would come to an end.

The prophets had a regular custom of which they made us again and again. When words were of no effect, when people refused to take in and understand the spoken message, they resorted to some dramatic action which put their message into a picture which none could fail to see. There are many examples in the First Testament about such actions and it is a dramatic effect that Jesus has now planned for his entrance. He proposed to ride into the city in a way that would be an unmistakable claim to be the Messiah, God’s Anointed King. The only one who would ever be anointed by God to rule the people.

There are a few things to make note of about this entrance.

It was a carefully planned event. It was not sudden, and it was not an impulsive act. Jesus did not leave anything for the last minute. He had his arrangement with the owners of the colt so when one of his followers came to get it and said, “the Lord needs it,” it was a password that had been arranged long ago.

It was an act of glorious defiance and superlative courage. By this time in his ministry, there was a price on the head of Jesus. Jesus certainly would have known about this, in fact, his apostles argue with him about not going to Jerusalem for this very reason. Jesus did not avoid controversy and had angered the authorities against him. They were afraid of losing the comfortable positions they had created for themselves. It would have been very natural for Jesus not to go to Jerusalem at all, or that he should slip quietly in by some back entrance so he would not be seen. But he chose to enter the city in such a way as to focus the full limelight right on himself and to occupy the center stage.

Just think about this for a moment. Jesus had a price on his head and was sure of capture and death. He was considered an outlaw, a criminal and here he was deliberately riding into a city in a such a way that every eye was certain to be fixed upon him. Until this time he had always moved around somewhat unnoticed in fact he often told those who he helped not to tell anyone about it. When the crowds would grow too large, he would take his followers and move on to some other place, and he often went off alone. Now he is standing all of that on its end and taking this bold step. It is impossible to exaggerate the sheer courage of this action that Jesus was about to take.

This action that Jesus was taking was a deliberate claim to be a king. This would be understood not only by the Jewish folks in Jerusalem but also by the Roman Soldiers and leaders. This was a deliberate fulfillment of the prophecy in Zechariah:

Rejoice greatly, O daughter Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter Jerusalem! Lo, your king comes to you; triumphant and victorious is he, humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

But even in this action, Jesus was underlying the type of King that he was claiming the type of kingdom that he was ushering in. The donkey in Palestine was not the lowly beast that it is here in America. The donkey in Palestine was a noble beast. Only in wartime did the king ride a horse, the horse is a symbol for war. When the king came in peace, they came on a donkey. When one king was going to visit another king as they approached the gates of the city, they would do so on a donkey for if they came riding upon their horse that would have been a sign that war was about to take place.

So Jesus, choosing deliberately to enter the city riding on a donkey was a sign that he came as a king of love and as a king of peace. This action would be lost on most of those who would witness these events. So insecure were they that the very appearance of Jesus, this lowly itinerate preacher, riding into the city with cries of Hosanna and glory to the King, would blind them to the reality that he came in peace and love, not for war. He came not as the conquering military hero whom the mob expected and awaited, but he came with his message love and his message of peace and his message of hope. No doubt the crowd was angry, but this action of the simple carpenter turned preacher from Nazareth riding on a donkey soothed their minds and their hearts, well some of them anyway.

This action, this bold action of Jesus was one last appeal. In this action Jesus came with pleading and hands outstretched saying, “even now, will you not take me as your king?” Before the hatred of the crowd would engulf him, once again he confronted them with love’s invitation.

We stand here today at the gates of Jerusalem. We stand here today looking at Jesus coming in peace with his outstretched hands before us bidding us come. Will we open the gates of our hearts for him to enter in and bring love and peace and joy to our lives, or will we slam them shut and spit in his face and yell Crucify him! Open wide the gates of your hearts today and let the king of peace come in and make his dwelling place there. Open the gates of your hearts today and let the king of peace and love come and bring you refreshment from all of your pain and sorrow. Open wide the gates of your hearts today and let the king of Joy come and restore to you the joy of your life.

Blog

Why Palm Branches

Posted on March 18, 2016 by Fr. Peter

The last Sunday of the Season of Lent is called Passion/Palm Sunday. Traditionally the story of the passion of Christ and the events leading up to the crucifixion is read on this day. This practice, of reading the passion narrative, used to be done on the Saturday before Palm Sunday, but liturgical reform has placed these two events together. The reading of passion story, as well as the distribution and blessing of the Palms, sets the stage of the events of the coming week.

But why palms?

The palm is an ancient symbol of triumph and was often used at times of celebration. During the Jewish Festival of Sukkot, or the Feast of the Tabernacles, palms were one of the four species of plants, the other being magnificent or beautiful trees, thick leafy trees, and willows of the brook, were used as a blessing. This practice comes from the book of Leviticus:

On the first day, you shall take the fruit of majestic trees, branches of palm trees, boughs of leafy trees, and willows of the brook; and you shall rejoice before the Lord your God for seven days. Lev 23:40

In Greco-Roman Culture, palm branches were used as a symbol of triumph and after a victory the victors would be showered with palm branches and the adoring crowd would wave them as they paraded through the streets. In the religion of the Ancient Egyptians, palm branches would have been carried in a funeral procession as a sign of eternal life. The symbolism of both cultures would be represented on the streets outside of Jerusalem on that first Palm Sunday.

In the ancient world, there was the custom of covering the passageway for a person of honor. We see this symbolism today with the rolling out of the red carpet. Branches of trees would have been cut, and items of clothing would be laid on the street in front of a person of honor. In the Palm Sunday story, we see this played out. Jesus was coming to Jerusalem as a king and so would have been honored in such a fashion.

When the king was heading off to war, he would ride on his horse as the horse is a symbol of war. But upon his return, and the restoration of peace to his kingdom, he would have ridden on a donkey, the humble beast and the symbol of peace. Jesus came to Jerusalem not riding on a horse of war but a donkey of peace. Bu the fact that he was greeted with the palm branches, and the shouting of Hosanna, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, would have made both the Roman and the Jewish authorities very nervous.

Symbolism is imperative in the faith life of Christians and the symbolism of Palm Sunday, and the coming of Holy Week, should not be ignored or thrown off. The depth and richness of our faith come from these symbols, and we need to understand them and the part they play in our lives spiritually.

We stand in our churches on this Sunday holding the palm branches, the symbol of triumph but not a triumph of war but a triumph of peace the peace that passes all understanding.

O God, who in Jesus Christ triumphantly entered Jerusalem, heralding a week of pain and sorrow, be with us now as we follow the way of the cross. In these events of defeat and victory, you have sealed the closeness of death and resurrection, of humiliation and exaltation. We thank you for these branches that promise to become for us symbols of martyrdom and majesty. Bless them and us that this day may announce in our time that Christ has come and that Christ will come again. Amen! Come, Christ Jesus!

Blog

The Waiting Cross

Posted on March 16, 2016 by Fr. Peter

Then he took the twelve aside and said to them, “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written about the Son of Man by the prophets will be accomplished. For he will be handed over to the Gentiles; and he will be mocked and insulted and spat upon. After they have flogged him, they will kill him, and on the third day he will rise again.” But they understood nothing about all these things; in fact, what he said was hidden from them, and they did not grasp what was said. Luke 18:31-34

This passage is a little about courage. There are two distinct types of courage. There is the courage of the one who suddenly finds themselves in a situation of emergency or crisis and jumps in to do what needs to be done. There is also the courage of the one who sees a terrible situation in the future and knows no other way out of it, so they face it head on. There is no doubt in my mind which is the higher courage. Anyone can be courageous on the spur of the moment when faced with an emergency situation, but true heroism comes when one can see the danger but continues. This type of heroism takes supreme courage to face, and that is what we see Jesus doing in this passage from Luke’s Gospel.

I am sometimes dumbfounded as to why the Cross came as such a surprise to those who followed him. Time and time again Jesus tells them that the Cross is coming yet they cannot see it. We often miss what is right before our eyes because we are not capable of seeing what is right there in front of us. We are blinded by our prejudice and our surroundings, and we do not have an open enough mind to see clearly. Jesus disciples were obsessed with this sense of a conquering king, someone who was going to free them from their physical captors. Their ignorance of their Scripture and tradition blinded them to the fact that Jesus is a conquering king but not over some physical being but over the spiritual one of death.

There is a significant warning in all of this for all of us. The human mind has a way of listening to only what its wants to hear the way it wants to hear it. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. We have this tendency to believe that the unpleasant truth cannot be right, and that what we don’t want to happen will not happen simply because we wish it so. We must continually struggle against this desire to hear and see only what we want to hear and see.

Jesus never foretold of the Cross without telling of the resurrection. He knew what was coming for him. He knew of the shame and pain and humiliation that was coming in the next few days, but he was also sure of the glory that was to follow all of it. He knew what the malice of men could do, but he was also certain of what the power of God could do. It was with the knowledge of ultimate victory that Jesus faced the apparent defeat of the Cross. But he also knew that without that cross there would be no crown. Jesus knew what he was to face, but he faced it with courage because he knew it was not the end.

Blog

Evangelical Voters and Donald Trump

Posted on March 9, 2016 by Fr. Peter

Donald Trump Michael Tercha/Chicago Tribune/TNS via Getty Images

The rise of Donald Trump as a serious candidate for the presidency is curious enough but add in the fact that he appears to be playing well among Evangelical voters, and I have an even harder time trying to wrap my mind around his rise.

Mr. Trump is not what one thinks about when one thinks about Evangelicals. His business practices, support for casino gambling, objectification of women, he is divorced (twice), and he is a supporter of LGBTQ rights. He is not on the Evangelical side of any of these issues, yet they are turning out in droves to support him. Is it because he “speaks his mind?” Is it because they are angry with the establishment? Like many others, I have been trying to figure this all out.

Paul Matzko, a graduate student in American religious history at Penn State and he has recently posted an essay on his blog that offers up a rather concise explanation of what is happening. He is making the claim that the Evangelicals voting for Trump are “self-described” Evangelicals and not necessarily Church going Evangelicals. Although long and sometimes confusing, this is a great explanation of what Matzko is calling “Trumpangelicalism”

Here is a little snapshot of the essay.

It’s certainly true, as others have noted, that although Trump has won a plurality of evangelical voters in multiple states, a majority have opted for other candidates. And there’s a slight but significant negative correlation between religiosity and support for Trump. In short, Trump wins among evangelicals because he’s winning, period, but he under-performs with evangelicals compared to how well he does with non-evangelical voters. That said, I’m not sure we can just dismiss the fact that a third of evangelicals in, for example, South Carolina have voted for Trump. They certainly aren’t doing so because of their admiration for Trump’s business practices or the depth of his religious commitment.

However, when you dig a little deeper into the data, a telling pattern emerges. Trump does well among self-described evangelicals, but not nearly so well with evangelicals who attend church. I’m not the first to notice that pattern–J.D. Vance’s article sparked the thought for me–but since no one has yet visually illustrated the point, I thought I’d do so with these side-by-side maps.

Read the Rest Here

Blog

You Feed Them

Posted on March 9, 2016 by Fr. Peter

There are many miracle stories in the Scriptures that if we look at them, a little closer may not always be what they seem to be on the surface. The story of the feeding of the 5,000 (Luke 9:10-17) is the only miracle story that is in all four of the Gospels. A quick read leads one down the path that a miracle has occurred. Well, I think a miracle did in fact happen but not the one most people think happened. Let’s take a closer look.

On their return, the apostles told Jesus all they had done. He took them with him and withdrew privately to a city called Bethsaida. When the crowds found out about it, they followed him; and he welcomed them, and spoke to them about the kingdom of God, and healed those who needed to be cured.

The day was drawing to a close, and the twelve came to him and said, “Send the crowd away, so that they may go into the surrounding villages and countryside, to lodge and get provisions; for we are here in a deserted place.” But he said to them, “You give them something to eat.” They said, “We have no more than five loaves and two fish—unless we are to go and buy food for all these people.” For there were about five thousand men. And he said to his disciples, “Make them sit down in groups of about fifty each.” They did so and made them all sit-down. And taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven, and blessed and broke them, and gave them to the disciples to set before the crowd. And all ate and were filled. What was left over was gathered up, twelve baskets of broken pieces.

The story takes place after the Apostles have returned from their first mission. Jesus had sent them out, two by two, to minister to people in the area. They have now returned, and Jesus takes them off for a debriefing of what they had experienced on their journey. He needed, this time, to be alone with them, and he needed the time to be alone himself. His popularity was growing and time alone was becoming harder to come by. However, word got out where he was going to be, and so the people followed him and we are told that number was about 5,000 men. Keep in mind that this number did not include women so we were looking at more than say 10 to 12 thousand people.

The day was getting late, and they were miles from any town, and the Apostles were concerned that the people were going to starve if they were not sent on their way. Jesus tells his Apostles to feed them, and they reply that they do not have enough. Now the story tells us that they collected five loaves and fish, Jesus blessed it and gave it out, and there was enough to feed all present. So what happened?

Well, first off I will say that for a person of the 1st century to head off on any journey without provisions is unheard of. Sure we 21st-century folk might do that but not these people. They were used to traveling and knew what to bring. I suspect not only did they have food but they also had shelter. Let’s give them a little credit shall we.

So what about this miracle? Jesus tells them, “You give them something to eat.” The Apostles had food but obviously not enough to share with twelve thousand people, and the people had food but were a little uneasy about sharing with those around them. More than likely they had only brought enough for them, as had the Apostles, and were a little nervous about sharing with those around them, so they kept the food to themselves.

The Apostles took what they had and were willing to offer it to others and this act of sharing inspired others to do the same. So there was a miracle of sorts but not the miracle of producing food out of nothing but the miracle of changing people’s hearts so they would be willing to follow the example of the Apostles and share what they had with others. The food produced was not a supernatural production this was good old fashioned caring about others. In the end, there was more than enough because everyone helped out not just a few and no one was left hungry. The example of the story is we all have something to share with others, and we are required to share it with those who have less than we do.

Blog

Sometimes we Need to Change our Perspective

Posted on March 7, 2016 by Fr. Peter

Jesus entered Jericho and was passing through. A man was there by the name of Zacchaeus; he was a chief tax collector and was wealthy. He wanted to see who Jesus was, but because he was short he could not see over the crowd. So he ran ahead and climbed a sycamore-fig tree to see him, since Jesus was coming that way. Luke 19:1-4

Zacchaeus was not a nice guy. Tax collectors were not the most cherished of people in society and Zacchaeus was chief tax collector. But something stirred inside of him on that day when he heard Jesus was coming to town. Something touched his heart and he needed to leave his work and go and see this man he had heard so much about.

Zacchaeus arrived at the spot but he was late and he was at the back of the crowd. He needed to do something so he could see for Scripture tells us, “he was short” and he could not see over the crowd. He looked around and found a tree rising above the crowd at the side of the road. He ran to the tree and climbed up just as Jesus passed bay. The next verses of Luke’s Gospel reports that Jesus saw Zacchaeus, told him to come down, and invited himself to his house for dinner.

When Jesus went to the home of Zacchaeus the righteous in the community castigated him because he dared to enter the house of a sinner. No rabbi would have dared to do this but Jesus was different. During the meal this happened:

Zacchaeus stood up and said to the Lord, “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.” Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham.” Luke 19:8-9

This story is important to us in so many ways but we have to drill down a little to see the meaning. The crowd symbolizes the things that crowd us in. Zacchaeus, and us, are crowed in by a multitude of passions and worldly affairs that keep us from seeing Jesus not only in the world around us but in those around us.

It is pointed out in the story that Zacchaeus is short. Sometimes we can be short on faith and virtue and that blind us again to what is right in front of us. Zacchaeus must climb a tree in order to see Jesus and we must do the same as no one attached to earthly matters can hope to see Jesus. If we are held back by earthly cares then we cannot focus on the spiritual life. Zacchaeus took the effort to climb the tree as a sign that he was willing to do whatever it took to change his life. If we are willing to do as Zacchaeus has done then Jesus will walk with us as we work to make the change necessary.

In the end Zacchaeus repents of his past dealings with people and Jesus declares that salvation has come to him and his house. Jesus reached out to Zacchaeus, accepted him as he was where he was on his journey and pointed out a new way. In the end Zacchaeus not only pays back those he has cheated but goes a step further by helping the poor. His life has been transformed simply because he listened to the voice calling him to climb a tree.

So, let’s go climb some trees!

This essay originally appeared in the Bethany Beacon the newsletter of Bethany Congregational Church in Quincy, Massachusetts.

Blog

John Shelby Spong on Attonment

Posted on March 3, 2016 by Fr. Peter

I have begun a rather series study of the writings of Bishop John Shelby Spong. Bishop Spong’s weekly column continues to provide so very much wisdom. Recently Bishop Spong responded to a reader’s question about “atonement” and the nature of God. Bishop Spong is succinct, insightful, wise and inspirational in his response. If you don’t subscribe to his weekly column, you can find the details here

Question:

God is defined as an Almighty being. An Almighty being does not require atonement (for “sins”). Therefore if God requires atonement as the Bible says, he is imperfect and not Almighty. Does this make sense? In other words, philosophically, the need for atonement indicates a lack of something, which detracts from the perfection which God should have. I would appreciate your thoughts.

Answer: Dear Raymond,

I don’t think that elementary equations in logic are the way to do theology. So let me start my answer by looking at your givens. “God is defined as an Almighty being.” By whom and on what authority? The traditional idea of God present at the heart of Christianity certainly tends to express this, but is it accurate? Can God ever be defined by human beings? Are the limits of the human brain able to be transcended sufficiently so that the fullness and mystery of God can be embraced and articulated? I do not think so.

I consider the popular definition of God as “a being,” who lives in a realm that is external to this world and who is equipped with supernatural power, to be not only inadequate but idolatrous. That is the meaning of theism. If theism as the definition of God becomes inadequate, then the only alternative is atheism. If, however, theism is an inadequate or even inaccurate attempt to define God, then atheism is simply a conviction that the theistic definition, not God, but the theistic definition of God, is not a proper way to understand the holy. In that sense I am certainly not a theist, but I am not an atheist either. The fact that I reject the theistic definition of God does not mean that I reject the reality of the God experience.

Your second given assumes that atonement is the experience of bringing God and human life into a state of oneness, and that somehow this is the goal of religion in general and Christianity in particular. I think atonement theology is bankrupt in that it is built upon a definition of human life as sinful and fallen and then it proceeds to portray God as a rescuer and the savior of the fallen, sinful life.

When I look at the origins of human life, I do not see an original perfection broken by original sin and the subsequent need for divine intervention to save the sinner. I see rather evolving life that went from single cells to complex self-conscious human beings. If there was no original perfection, there was no fall from perfection and therefore no need for a savior and the whole system collapses.

I see God as a presence and a power that leads to expanded life, expanded love and expanded being, and even the experience of an expanded consciousness. Atonement is not the word to characterize this understanding of either God or life. So, rather than worrying about whether God can be understood in terms of atonement, I would prefer to remove atonement from the Christian vocabulary altogether. I hope these brief comments will serve to open up new possibilities in your theological thinking.

My best, John Shelby Spong

Blog

A Prayer for Our Country on Election Day

Posted on March 1, 2016 by Fr. Peter

Almighty God, who hast given us this good land for our heritage; We humbly beseech thee that we may always prove ourselves a people mindful of thy favor and glad to do thy will. Bless our land with honorable industry, sound learning, and pure manners. Save us from violence, discord, and confusion; from pride and arrogancy, and from every evil way. Defend our liberties, and fashion into one united people the multitudes brought hither out of many kindreds and tongues. Endue with the spirit of wisdom those to whom in thy Name we entrust the authority of government, that there may be justice and peace at home, and that, through obedience to thy law, we may show forth thy praise among the nations on earth. In the time of prosperity, fill our hearts with thankfulness, and in the day of trouble, suffer not our trust in thee to fail; all which we ask through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Book of Common Prayer, 1945

Blog

Spiritual Revival has Nothing to do with Politics

Posted on February 24, 2016 by Fr. Peter

“Two things urgently needed in ministers, if they would attempt great advances for the kingdom of Christ, are zeal and resolve. Their influence and power for impact are greater than we think. A man of ordinary abilities will accomplish more with zeal and resolve than a man ten times more gifted without zeal and resolve. . . . Men who are possessed by these qualities commonly carry the day in almost all affairs. Most of the great things that have been done in the world, the great revolutions that have been accomplished in the kingdoms and empires of the earth, have been primarily owing to zeal and resolve. The very appearance of an intensely engaged spirit, together with a fearless courage and unyielding resolve, in any person that has undertaken leadership in any human affair goes a long way toward accomplishing the intended outcome. . . . When people see a high degree of zeal and resolve in a person, it awes them and has a commanding influence upon them. . . . But while we are cold and heartless and only go on in a dull manner, in an old formal round, we will never accomplish anything great. Our efforts, when they display such coldness and irresolution, will not even make people think of yielding. . . . The appearance of such indifference and cowardice does, as it were, provoke opposition.”

Jonathan Edwards, “What must be done more directly to advance this work [of revival],” in Works(Edinburgh, 1979), I:424. Wording updated.

H/T The Gospel Coalition

Blog

Is the Church Dying?

Posted on February 17, 2016 by Fr. Peter

“The church is not dying, it is merely relocating to the streets” – Rev. Traci Blackmon

The question of whether or not the church is dying is an interesting one, and I would answer yes and no. I attended a meeting of clergy and laity where the question of the death of the church was posed to a student preparing for ordained ministry. The question was something like how are you going to prevent the church from dying. I reject the premise of the and would say that perhaps the church as we know it today is dying but the Church of Jesus Christ will survive long after we are dust.

The church, like any social organization, needs to remake itself with each generation. The church of today looks very different from the church that existed in my parent’s day. I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church and a generation ago the Sunday Mass was in Latin. There was a societal shift, and the Mass was allowed to be said in the language of the people. Some hold this was a bad change while it opened up the mystery of the church to untold thousands of people.

I know we do not like to think of it in these terms, but the church is losing her relevance in today’s world only because she refuses to move with the times. I am not saying, or perhaps in one way I am, that the church needs to change theology. With that said I would say that the essential truths of the Christian faith should never change, but theology is evolving as we learn more about the language and the culture of the times that these things were written in. I refuse to believe that God stopped talking after the canon of Scripture was written, and we have been left on our own all of these years.

Cultural shifts require a change. The generation that is coming of age today has been brought up to question everything. They are not satisfied with answers such as “we have always done it that way” or “it is faith you just have to believe it.” These are educated young men and women in search of an authentic faith with genuine people and if the church is not going to be that for them they will look elsewhere.

Communication has also changed. Yes, there was a time when the church believed that radio and TV are works of the Devil. I will admit seeing how some so-called “Christian” preachers use this media has me wondering the same thing. People today use social media and text as a way of communication. It is here to stay, and we have to learn how to use it to spread the Gospel.

I know the argument; the internet is full of crap. Sure that might be true but consider this. There is a story in the one of the Gospels about being the salt, and if the salt loses its saltiness, we will perish. In the ancient world, the fuel most commonly used for cooking was manure, that’s tight animal waste. Manure was a cheap source of fuel for cooking as well as heat, but it did not burn very efficiently. Somehow it was discovered that if salt were rubbed on the dry fuel, it would burn not only longer but hotter; salt made the crap better and more useful.

We are called to get our hands dirty and to work to make the world a better place. We are the salt, and we need to mix with the crap so that we burn brighter, and our light will shine.

So, is the church dying? No, the church is not dying it is transforming. We have to discover new ways to reach people, we have to take Jesus out of the building and into the streets, as the quote above suggests, to meet people where they are. There will always be a place for brick a mortar Christianity but the way we practice our ministry will have to change.