Confession: I'm currently a church hopper. My fiancee and I are looking for a local church that we both love where we can get plugged into a strong body of believers. So every Sunday we march to another church and try it on to see how it fits. One of the funny things that happens is that after (almost) every service, if we didn't like it, we can name someone who would.

And that's bringing me to this conclusion: I love the diversity of the church. I love that there's no one-size-fits-all church. I love that every church can cater to a different part of the Christian body.

That doesn't mean I like every church. In fact, I don't like most churches. But I like the fact that even if I don't want to go there, somebody else probably does. I like that we've got liturgy for those seeking tradition and theater churches for those seeking alternative worship. I like that we've got rock bands and choirs. I like that we've got fiery preachers, dry preachers, cheesy preachers and cool preachers. I even like that we've got different theological viewpoints.

I'm not saying that every church is good because it's different, and I'm certainly not saying that there aren't right and wrong ways of doing certain things. What I'm saying is that it's good for a church to have an identity and to know who it's reaching in the body of Christ and the world.

There's a great article in next month's issue of Ministry Today by Mark Batterson on leadership. Here's a quote: "There is the temptation to try to be all things to all people. But if you try to become what everyone wants you to be, you'll become somebody you don't want to be." "I think a lot of pastoral problems would be diffused if we acknowledged this simple fact: we need lots of different kinds of churches, because there are lots of different kinds of people. Our 'churchprint' ought to be as unique as our fingerprint."

What is God's identity for your church? What part of his body does he want you to reach?

INTERACT: If you like what I said, or if you think I'm an idiot, or if you want to add something, please leave a comment.

Drew Phoenix, pastor of St. John's United Methodist Church in Baltimore, was named Ann Gordon until last fall. That's because until then Phoenix was a woman. The pastor switched genders "in order to reflect my true gender identity and to honor my spiritual transformation and relationship with God," according to a quote from the Church Report's story. It's unclear exactly what's going on physically with Phoenix, but CBS's story says he has "received medical treatment to become a man."

St. John's voted to reappoint Phoenix as their pastor, and Bishop John R. Schol approved the decision last week. But Methodist clergy in the Baltimore area have called for the Judicial Council, kind of the Supreme Court for the denomination, to rule on it when they meet in October.

Other groups in Methodist circles are calling for a new ruling on transgender pastors by the General Conference, an international Methodist body, when they meet next year. Currently Methodist law bans sexually active gay pastors but doesn't say anything about the transgender issue.

This is going to be a tough issue to articulate, but I hope the Judicial Council and the General Conference step up to the plate and tackle this situation with a well-though out, balanced response explaining why there's no way a Christian church can accept a transgender pastor. Obviously it seems like that would be an obvious conclusion based on their stance on homosexuality, but this is a touchy topic. Hopefully they will give us something we all can reference.

INTERACT: How should the Methodist Church respond to this situation? What would you say?

The letter you are about to read may make you cheer--or it may sound foolish. In either case, we're offering you a chance to participate in interactive journalism: read the letter, post your most well-thought-out response on our blog and look for your name and response in print in a future issue of Ministry Today. Keep in mind, posts of 100 words or fewer will be more likely to be considered for publication. David Epps is the founding pastor of Christ the King Charismatic Episcopal Church in Sharpsburg, Ga. Without further chatter, here's his letter:

In Ministry Today’s story on the aftermath of the Ted Haggard scandal, (“What We Lost,” Jan./Feb.) Colorado sex therapist Doug Weiss recommended that pastors submit to annual polygraph tests to prove they are not in immorality. If that’s not the dumbest, most ill-conceived, hair-brained idea I’ve ever heard, then it has to rank somewhere near the very top.

Let me say this up front—I am a sinner. I wish I could tell you that I have overcome the “sins that so easily beset” me, but I have not. I did give up soft drinks a few years ago, and I don’t swear like I did when I was a young Marine, but in the really tough things that normal people struggle with, I am still in the fight.

Do I covet? Yes, once in a while. I don’t want another man’s wife, but there are a number of pastors whose buildings I lust after. Have I ever murdered? Not really, but if thoughts could kill, there would have been a few times.

Used the Lord’s name in vain? Did that. Dishonored parents? Did that, too. Have I loved God with all my mind, heart, soul, and strength? Sadly, no. Am I walking in unforgiveness? Not to my knowledge, but there were years when I did.

I have been in the presence of truly godly and holy people. I have been in the presence of those who pretend to be. I am somewhere in between. If I took a polygraph to prove to someone that I was without sin, then it would only prove what I, and those who know me well, already know—I need of mercy.

In my faith tradition, we do not use a polygraph to uncover hidden sin. What we do have is an ancient rite called “confession.” In the confessional, with the assurance of absolute confidentially, I am able to confront those dark areas in my life that I hide from others. In that place of safety, I am held accountable and given the counsel and direction that enables me to rise from my fallen place.

When the people in my congregation, or other priests and deacons, come to me in the confessional, they are not coming to a man with a polygraph ready to record and reveal their sins for the entire world to see. They come to a man who is a fellow struggler, to a person whose nature is also fallen, and to one who understands that they are sinners. You see, it takes one to know one.

And there in the hushed quietness of the moment, sometimes punctuated with tears and sobs, the two sinners seek a holy God and brokenly confess sins, receive help and rise from the wreckage of the moment to begin anew in this relationship with the One who is not counting our sins against us.

I cannot be the one to throw stones at the fallen pastor whose sins were so publicly made known. I cannot be the one to despise him or to judge him. I am too flawed, too fallible, too “human.” I pray that God will give him and his family the thing that I, myself, need most—mercy. And I will ask that those who find me flawed beyond their liking and approval simply pray for me, a sinner.

David Epps
Founding Pastor, Christ the King
Sharpsburg, Ga.

Throwing out another resource today. This one comes from Perry Noble's blog, the pastor of one of the fastest growing churches in the country, Newspring Church in Anderson, S.C. Noble has compiled 7 pieces of advice for preparing your "Sunday message" (or "sermon" if you come from my neck of the woods).

There's some really good advice in here that every pastor could get something out of, even if it's just a reminder. Plus it's short and sweet. It's split up into two posts. Read the first one here and the second one here.

Here's a brief rundown to give you an idea of what's in there:
1. Prepare yourself: If God isn't in you, He won't be in the message.
2. Listening to others: Listen to other pastors to get ideas.
3. Study: How much?
4. Keep it simple: Make sure the point is understood.
5. Listen to God: Allow God room to improvise.
6. Have others evaluate: Run it by a group for advice and feedback.
7. Be yourself: Don't put on pretenses.

INTERACT: Did any of Noble's points stand out to you? What has helped you prepare sermons or other messages?

A few weeks ago the Protestant world was shocked when Francis Beckwith, the president of the Evangelical Theological Society, converted to Catholicism. Naturally, he resigned his post with the ETS, which as I'm sure you can guess is a large association of Protestant theologians. Here is the Washington Post's full story. To read his account of how it went down and the (often harsh) reactions of hundreds of people, click here.

Beckwith is one of a number of prominent Protestants in recent years to convert to Catholicism. From presidential hopefuls (Sam Brownback) to theologians to pastors, many are leaving the world of evangelicalism to pursue the tradition of the Catholic and, surprisingly, the Eastern Orthodox Church. In the current issue of Ministry Today, we have a feature story (which you can read here) that looks at this trend and what it means for the Protestant church.

Beckwith cites his readings of the early church fathers and the Joint Declaration on Justification made in 1999 by Catholics and Protestants as helping him overcome some of his theological objections. But I thought something he said in the Post story got at the heart of his reasons:

"At the end of the day, the reason for the Reformation was the debate over justification. If that is no longer an issue, I have to be Catholic," Beckwith said. "It seems to me that if there is not a very strong reason to be Protestant, then the default position should be to belong to the historic church."

Obviously most of us think justification is still an issue, but what do you think about the second part of that statement? Is there an advantage to being unified to the historic church? Does the freedom of Protestantism help us or does it cause unnecessary divisions?

INTERACT: What do you think? How do you react when you hear about Protestants converting to Catholicism?

First I'd like to say that the thoughts and prayers of everyone at Strang and Ministry Today are with Jerry Falwell's family. We were in a meeting with Jack Hayford and Steve Strang yesterday when we found out, and we had a time of prayer for them.

Obviously the Internet is buzzing about this news, and the variety of reactions to Falwell's death is not surprising considering his strong opinions on many divisive issues. A quick blog search will--sadly--yield as many "we're glad he's gone" posts as respectful ones. But, as Todd Rhoades pointed out this morning, it's amazing how many people who sharply disagreed with Falwell liked him personally. Rhoades' post includes a list of reactions from famous people to the news, and the comments from Larry Flynt, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton all talk about how they had completely opposite opinions, but how they respected him as a person. Flynt (the publisher of Hustler) even goes so far as to call him a "good friend," which is shocking considering their messy Supreme Court battle.

It's interesting to see how personal contact influences us. When we only view or interact from a distance, such as over the Internet, it's much more tempting to associate people directly with their opinions and forget there's a person there. I'm positive that 100 percent of the bloggers out there stomping on Falwell's grave would have a much more respectful response if they could have had a conversation with him. It's strange that in a society with much more communication, we often get less human interaction.

It's much easier to love up close than from a distance. Whether we're interacting with friends or enemies, we can't underestimate the value of human contact and the role it plays in Christ's call to love our neighbors.

INTERACT: Share your thoughts on this or Jerry Falwell's life by commenting below.

Tim Schmoyer, a youth group leader with an excellent blog, posted a free (but small) e-book online last week with some extremely practical guidance for youth workers. It's basically a list of 130 tips for small church or new youth pastors who are looking for some guidance. While a lot of this is simple stuff, there's a lot of wisdom in here, and even veteran youth workers will find this a worthwhile resource. Plus it's free. Click here for the e-book.

Here are a few highlights:

• Admit failure. No one is perfect, so don't pretend like you are. Students will respect you more for it.
• Don't over-react about the problem of cliques. Instead, provide plenty of opportunities for everyone to interact and discover each other. Breaking up cliques is usually an exercise in futility and somewhat counter-productive.
• Spend more time focusing on people than on programs. Programs should be done within the context of relationships.
• Create an atmosphere of "belonging" by plastering your youth room and office walls with pictures of the students and your activities together.
• Include the Sr. Pastor as much as you can. Make him/her feel like they are welcomed to your group and give the kids a chance to meet him/her outside the pulpit.
  
  

INTERACT: Does anyone have tips that have helped with the youth ministry at your churches? Share them with everyone by commenting.

Mark Batterson, whose blog I recommend as daily reading, wrote a particularly powerful post this week about infighting in the church. Batterson asks what would happen if all of the energy we use fighting among ourselves was used for fighting the enemy. He talks about why one of his rules for blogging is to keep it positive, and as I read it, I realized that is one of the main reasons I look forward to reading this man's blog every day. It's refreshing, it's uplifting and it's discerning.

The internet lends itself to endless arguing and sniping of other people, but Christians need to remain above this. Often we (myself included) want to read or talk about the juiciest topic, but as Batterson reminds us, we need to keep Titus 3:9 in the front of our minds: But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

INTERACT: Do you ever find yourself defending or attacking others in the church for issues that aren't really that important? How do you balance the truth with grace?

The Assemblies of God in Australia (which includes Hillsong) was expected to vote last week to relax their rules regarding grounds for divorce (sorry, I scoured the Web to find the results of the vote, but with no luck). Currently the church only blesses divorce in cases of adultery, but if this vote passes, it would include serious physical abuse and abandonment as valid grounds for separation. The move is provoking some controversy in Australia.

This is a tricky issue. On the one hand, the Bible makes it abundantly clear that divorce is evil and re-marriage after divorce is adultery. In Matthew 19, Jesus mentions fornication as a possible exception to this rule, which is why most conservative denominations have that as their only valid grounds for divorce.

However, that hard line puts pastors in an awkward position when faced with a woman who is being violently abused by her husband or a person whose spouse left him or her years ago. AOG Australia said that often their pastors found themselves "violating policy to help people," which is what caused them to rethink the policy in the first place.

INTERACT: What do you think? Is the Biblical standard clear or is there room for debate here? Is this a matter of scriptural clarity or more of a forgiveness issue?