Of course we’re not igoring the people… we’re singing and preaching to them!
My friend Dan at “Some Church Stuff” wrote another thought-provoking post called “Search: Go To Church Ignore.”
His post was inspired by a search string that landed someone on his site: “go to church ignore.” In the post, Dan answers the question, “What can be ignored when we ‘go to church’?” Then, he follows it up with a question/answer of his own: “What do people usually ignore / not ignore when they ‘go to church’?”
Here are his answers:
Here’s a list of what I think is ok to ignore at church:
- Sermons
- Music
- Tithes/Offering
- People’s clothes/hair/jewelery
- The pastor’s coffee breath
- The beautiful decorations and flowers
- The Christian and American Flags
And probably what you shouldn’t ignore:
- The other people
Now here is what people usually don’t ignore:
- Sermons
- Music
- Tithes/Offering
- People’s clothes/hair/jewelery
- The pastor’s coffee breath
- The beautiful decorations and flowers
- The Christian and American Flags
And what they normally do ignore:
- The other people
Make sure you jump over to Dan’s post so that you don’t miss anything.
But, you know, in reality, most people would disagree that they ignore “the other people” when they “go to church.” In fact, don’t we do singing and preaching because of the other people?
But, that kinda misses the point. Doing things for an audience of “the other people” is not the same thing as listening to, learning from, caring about, and sharing life with “the other people.”
What do you think? What would happen among churches if we actually didn’t ignore “the other people”?
What books about the church have you enjoyed reading?
I’ve read many books about the church. I got something out of almost all of them that I’ve read. (Actually, I may have gotten something out of all of them, but I’m not certain… so I said “almost all.”)
I’ve read books that were written from a more organic/simple perspective, and I’ve read books that were written from a more institutional/organizational perspective. I’ve read books about the church from the perspective of many different denominations and philosophies and religious traditions. Again, I’ve learned something from them, and I’m glad that I’ve read widely when it comes to the church.
My friend Eric at “A Pilgrim’s Progress” gave us his list of “Top Ten Books About The Church” last week. This is his list (in alphabetical order):
Biblical Church
The Church: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
House Church: Simple, Strategic, Scriptural
Mere Churchianity
Pagan Christianity?
Reimagining Church
Total Church: A Radical Reshaping Around Gospel and Community
What is the Mission of the Church?
When the Church Was a Family
Your Church is Too Small: Why Unity in Christ’s Mission Is Vital to the Future of the Church
He also includes the following as “honorable mentions”:
Brothers, We Are Not Professionals
Finding Organic Church
Houses That Change the World
The Jesus Paradigm
The Normal Christian Church Life
Outgrowing the Ingrown Church
The Rabbit and the Elephant
I’ve read most of these books, and I agree that they are all good in their own way.
But, now, Eric is asking for our help. He’s asked, “What’s Your Favorite Book About the Church?”
In a comment on his post, I added the following to his list: Peterson’s Engaging With God, Banks’ Paul’s Idea of Community, and Girard’s Brethren, Hang Loose and Brethren, Hang Together. I also later agreed with other commenters that Bonhoeffer’s Life Together and some of Snyder’s books are very good. (Yeah, you knew that I couldn’t just offer one book, right?)
But, what books would you add to the lists above? What books about the church have you enjoyed reading? Which books have challenged your thinking (in a good way) even if you disagreed with the author?
Share some books here, then jump over to Eric’s post and share them with him as well.
Is it possible for children to be homeschooled and missional?
Scot at “The Jesus Creed” posted an interesting question/response in his post “Homeschooled and Missional? Absolutely!”
In the post, a reader named Helen Lee is responding to another blogger who suggests that homeschooling, by definition, is anti-missional. By the way, by the term “missional,” I’m talking about God’s mission of redeeming the world and how he works through us.
At one point, Helen makes the following statement:
First of all, homeschooling one’s children does not automatically result in an anti-missional lifestyle any more than sending one’s children to public schools guarantees a missional one. It doesn’t matter what type of school your children attend. The greatest influence on a child’s life that will determine how missional he or she becomes is whether or not that child’s parents are living a missional lifestyle themselves.
Last year, I wrote a post called “Raising missional homeschooled children.” That turned out to be a very popular post, even though all I did was link to another post on the subject – a post written by a friend of mind called “Missional Homeschooling.” Although I didn’t say too much in my post, I left the following comment on the original post:
The first and most important thing we realized is that we can’t raise missional children if we are not missional ourselves. Second, we took our children with us when we served others, whether it was across the street or across the world.
As disciplers of our children (hopefully, not the only disciplers, but disciplers none-the-less), the way that we (as parents) interact with others will affect how our children interact with others, both positively and negatively.
Do you want to raise missional homeschooled (or public schooled or private schooled) children? Then live a missional life yourself, following Jesus as he desires to use you to impact the world around you for his kingdom.
A church puzzle
Chuck at “Being Filled” has offered what I think is a great analogy in his post “Just One Piece of the Puzzle.”
Chuck got the idea from a lyric in a song. In his analogy, the whole church is a jigsaw puzzle, and each of us are pieces of that puzzle.
Based on this analogy, Chuck makes the following observations:
- Puzzle pieces do not get to choose where they are placed. They simply go where the assembler puts them.
- Puzzle pieces are only responsible for connecting with the few others placed directly around them.
- Puzzle pieces cannot see the big picture from their perspective. They must trust the assembler to place them properly.
- Should a puzzle piece try to correct another section of the puzzle, it would have to leave its own proper place to do so.
- A single piece out of place makes the puzzle incomplete.
Like I said, I think this is a good analogy and these are good observations. (Obviously, all analogies fall apart at some point.)
What do you think about Chuck’s analogy? What do you think about his observations? Does the analogy or any of the observations bring any certain Scripture passages to mind?
The weekly Sunday church meeting and spiritual gifts
David Fitch at “Reclaiming the Mission” has written a thought-provoking post called “Stop Organizing the Gifts Around the Sunday Morning Gathering (and Church Programming).”
He claims that sometime in the 70’s and then more in the 80’s, church organizations began using “spiritual gift profiles” in order to “connect” their people to different roles and functions within the organization and the events and meetings associated with the church organization.
Growing up in the 70’s and 80’s, I remember this. But, like most of our traditions, I thought this was a common practice long before I came along.
According to David, several “bad habits” were formed because of this practice, including this one:
a.) people started to see gifts as a personal orientation. Subtly the gifts became all about “me,” who I am, me being fulfilled, and finding out what my role is. This, I contend, undermines the functioning of the gifts and Christ’s authority in the gifts. I continue to think the first practice of the gifts is for each individual to learn to recognize and submit to the authority of Christ in the giftings as they function in a Body. Out of submitting one finds one’s own gifting and authority. Seeking one’s own self interest always undermines Christ’s work in us.
Like I said… quite thought-provoking… and definitely something that I’ve noticed among the church today. When a “spiritual gift” becomes all about “me” and not about others, then I think we’re missing the point.
What do you think?
Something is missing? Just add another program!
Over at “Church in a Circle,” there’s a great new post called “Doubling up at church – filling our week with extra programs because Sunday isn’t meeting our spiritual needs.”
The post examines something that I’ve noticed about the modern church. If something is missing in people’s spiritual growth, instead of changing current activities, the church organizations simply add another program. Eventually, every night of the week is filled with different programs, meetings, committees, etc.
Churches are doubling up on programs because meeting in rows isn’t meeting people’s core spiritual needs. We’re running Bible study groups on Wednesday nights (so people can engage directly with God’s Word in a group setting), social groups on Friday nights (so people can get to know each other better), and mission groups on Saturday afternoons (so people can find ways to apply God’s Word in real life) – all for the same people who attend on Sunday mornings. Why? Because the Sunday morning church service isn’t effectively connecting, engaging and empowering God people. We’re tying God’s people up in multiple meetings, taking them out of the world and using up all their free time, because the format we’re using for “church” isn’t allowing people to connect, learn or grow.
Could it be that so much is missing in people’s spiritual growth and maturity because of the way churches are meeting together? If so, then adding programs and activities will not change who the people think they are and what they think it means to be the church. This kind of thinking will always hinder their spiritual growth… regardless of how busy they become doing different activities and programs.
Accepting Jesus and everyone else at his table
A few months ago (maybe longer?) I “met” Jeph and Craig online through a mutual online friend. Recently, they rebooted their blog, now called “Throwing Bricks.” Craig recently published an excellent article called “Accepting a seat at the table.”
After talking briefly about the exclusivity of table fellowship in the first century (and today?), Craig reminds us that Jesus ate with both the Pharisees and other elites in society as well as with the sinners. He then carries this idea of a more open fellowship into the early church.
Finally, Craig ends the post with a challenge for the church today:
It’s strange but I often find Christians who are hesitant to fellowship with other followers of Christ who don’t share their particular set of doctrinal beliefs, political affiliations, worship preferences, social / economic status, race, age or perceived level of maturity. They are more concerned with being proved right than being with Jesus. It’s as though we are still abiding by the old rules of table fellowship. I have some old friends that border on fundamentalism and though we all believe in Jesus and strive to follow his teachings we remain distant due to certain interpretations of scripture. What gets me is that I have no problem calling them brother and sister but I’m not sure they would reciprocate that sentiment and it sucks. Jesus didn’t discriminate based on any of these factors but rather invited anyone to come. To respond to Jesus’ invitation and accept a seat at the table is to accept Jesus himself and everyone else at the table regardless of personal differences.
Of course, if we read 1 Corinthians 11 and James 2, we find that some of the early followers of Jesus had the same problem… although this problem was not accepted and perpetuated then like it is today.
The last part of that quote is key. It reminds me of something that Paul wrote: “Therefore, accept one another as Christ has accepted you, for the glory of God.” (Romans 15:7)
Are we following Jesus? If so, we will accept everyone who Jesus has accepted.
The source of the church’s view of leadership and hierarchy
Jon at “Jon’s Journey” has written a very thought-provoking post called “Church Hierarchical Leadership.”
In the post, Jon shares several graphs of organizational and hierarchical leadership, although I don’t think I’ve ever seen a church publish that first one… maybe so?
Anyway, after the graphs, he begins asking questions about how hierarchy entered the church. (Of course, some believe that Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles and NT authors taught a form of hierarchical leadership for the church. But, that’s for another discussion, I guess.)
At one point, Jon suggests that Platonic philosophy is the source of leadership hierarchies in the church:
For example people like Clement of Alexandria and Origen had also been students of Platonism which saw the whole of society separated into classes or levels, and that people were actually predestined to their level in society. They also thought in terms of dualism, where there was a need for priests and clergy to be mediators between regular laymen and God. The concept of priesthood of all believers was soon largely overlooked.
There is a lot more to it than this.
That’s an interesting theory. Of course, Ignatius claimed direct spiritual revelation for his understanding of the three-part hierarchy (bishop – presbyters – deacons), and he said that he was not taught this by any man. Interesting…
Anyway, I don’t know the answer to this question, but I think it’s a great question to raise.
Some Church Comics
My friend Dan at “Some Church Stuff” has started drawing some comics about the church. So far, he’s drawn three.
And, since Dan hasn’t named his new comic series yet, I’ve decided to give it a name: Some Church Comics.
The first two are called “Makes Sense” and “Money.” Hopefully, they’ll both make you think.
But, the one that I appreciate the most is the last one that he’s drawn and published (so far). It’s called “Caring.”
Please take the time to look at and read that comic (at least). From what I’ve heard from different people, that’s exactly the way many brothers and sisters in Christ feel about the arguments and discussions about the church.
So, while you’re talking about caring for people… are you actually caring for people?
Messiness is fine… as long as it’s my mess
Last week, Fred from “On the Journey” wrote a very good post called “We All Need Abishai.” (You’ll need to read his post to find out who Abishai is and why Fred mentioned him in the title.)
In the post, Fred talks about finding a community of brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ to gather with and to share his life with. It’s not the kind of community that he was looking for. As he says, “God led us to a community of faith in what some would call a traditional church.” He then describes a group that loves God and one another, caring for one another throughout the week, not just on Sundays.
Toward the end of his post, Fred makes this statement:
Jan and I gather with this church because there is first of all a love for Jesus that is evident. The other reason is the community that we have with the people. We have felt loved and accepted from the first day we visited. We gather together on Sunday, and at various times throughout the week. We realize that our relationships will get messy and difficult from time to time, but we hope in the Gospel to bring us through the mess and into deeper relationships.
Yes, we all know that relationships are messy. But, as I read Fred’s post, I realized something: I’m not opposed to messes, as long as I can control what kind of mess there. But, when the mess is out of my control or not the kind of mess that I approve of… Well, that’s a different story!
Real community in Christ happens when we put Jesus in control of everything… even the mess.