The church and loneliness
There is a very good, thought-provoking post at Communitas Collective called “The Loneliness of Church.” The author has noticed something important:
My family and I were part of a large church that had many activities and ministries. I jumped in the swirl and began to form relationships with others who were involved in the same things as me. We enjoyed each other, experienced intense spiritual moments together, spoke the same language, voiced the same longings. All the things that make up friendship. Except for one detail; our involvement was limited to a church building and a church ministry. Most of my church friends, probably 99 percent, had never been to my home nor I to theirs. The people I would pray with and cry with and have spiritual intimacy with did not know my children’s names or know that I am an avid rose gardener with over 20 rose bushes in my backyard.
It was like an illusion, the illusion of friendship and the illusion of community.
Yep. Busy-ness and projects can create the illusion of friendship and community. But, it could be just an illusion.
How can we tell? What happens when the project ends? What happens with the tasks are complete? Is there still a relationships and a desire (that is acted upon) to spend time together? No… then it was an illusion.
This illusion can cause the busiest, most engaged, most assimilated people within the church actually live a lonely life.
Relationships and Ministry
Three years ago, I wrote a post called “Relationships and Ministry.” I think this post goes well with my focus on edification this week. By the way, the young man in my story below did find a group of believers to spend more time with, and we also managed to maintain contact and fellowship with him. He moved out of state not too long ago, and we still keep up with him and see him from time to time.
——————————————
A young man who is a part of our fellowship recently told me that he was having trouble building relationships. He lives about 30 minutes away from others in our fellowship. Several of us suggested that he look for a group of believers who live closer to him.
Why would we do that? Do we want to break fellowship with him? Absolutely not! And, we are not breaking fellowship with him at all. Don’t we care about growing the church? Certainly! But, we recognize that we will not grow the church. Only Christ will grow the church. Why would we suggest that someone meet with other believers?
First, we recognize that the Christian life is designed by God to be lived in fellowship with other believers. This cannot happen for this young man if he only meets with his Christian brothers and sisters for a couple of hours on Sunday. This is not fellowship… this is attendance. There is a difference. We desire more for this young man and for all brothers and sisters in Christ. We desire to see all believers developing real relationships (maturing relationships) with other believers.
So, I saw this young man a couple of days ago. He has had a great time getting to know some Christian men who live near him. Besides spending time with them, he has also started ministering to his community with them. They are playing basketball at a local partk, getting to know some of the other young men there, and sharing Scripture with them.
What a joy to see real ministry (both to the church and to those outside the church) growing out of fellowship with other believers!
We’ve come a long way baby
Recently, I was talking with some brothers who are part of Messiah Baptist Church. If you didn’t know, I’m one of the elders (pastors, if you prefer) of this group of believers. We’ve been meeting together for several years now, and our meetings and our interactions today look much different than they did when we first started meeting together.
As we talked about this, I told the guys that it was exciting to see what had happened in the last few years. If someone had asked me then what I would want the church to “look like” today, I probably would have described some things that are happening now, and other things that are not happening now.
But, “back then”, I decided not to push my agenda, even if some wanted me to push – and as tempting as that was. Instead, I taught and modeled and served and let God do the work of changing people. I didn’t want this to be my church.
I told my brothers that I think God has done a better job of growing his church than I would have done growing my church.
One Bread and One Cup
Dave Black is writing about the Lord’s Supper again (Wednesday, December 30, 2009 at 3:50 pm):
I remain convinced, in an obscurantist sort of way of course (being the ultimate obscurantist), of the necessity of having one loaf of bread and one cup during the Lord’s Supper. If you will tolerate yet another reference to the sixteenth century Anabaptists, in 1541 Peter Riedemann wrote that the one loaf is formed by the grinding and mingling of many grains of wheat, and the wine exists only because many individual grapes have been crushed. “Thus, the meal … is a sign of the community of the body, in that each and every member declares himself to be of the one mind, heart and spirit of Christ.” The point is that, in the Lord’s Supper, individualism is given up for unity. Forgive me, but — isn’t that powerful?
Interestingly, churches often put emphases on the “Supper” that we can’t find in Scripture. For instance, can you find anything in Scripture that says it’s important for the bread in the Supper to be unleavened? What about only have “ordained” (whatever that means) people serve the “elements”?
No… but Scripture does say something about the one bread and one cup and the focus on unity, fellowship, and community.
Considering Mutuality – Implications for ‘Non-Leaders’
So far in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“), and explored the scriptural connection between mutuality and maturity for believers (“Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?“). Finally, in my previous post in this series, I discussed some of the implications of living mutually interdependent lives for leaders among the church (“Considering Mutuality – Implications for leaders”).
There are many, many among the church who desire to live mutually interdependent relationships with other believers, and who recognize the importance of these relationships for the maturity of the church. However, these people are not considered “leaders” among the church. They are not elders, or deacons, or pastors, or teachers, or whatever other titles the church may use to recognize leaders. What do these people do? Is it hopeless? Must they “leave their church” in order to find and nurture these kinds of mutually interdependent relationships?
The simple answers are: No, it is not hopeless, and no, they do not have to “leave their church” in order to live mutually with one another.
However, they many need to become leaders. What?!?!? Am I saying that people will need to become elders or pastors for their church in order to seek and see these mutual relationships? No. That’s not what I said.
Instead, I said that they may need to become leaders… meaning, they may need to lead others in forming mutually interdependent relationships. They may need to become the examples that others will need in order to recognize the importance of mutuality.
I get calls and emails from believers all the time. I meet with people for lunch. And, eventually, a question like this comes up: “But, how do I begin to form and live in this kind of relationship with others when our church and church leaders don’t seem interested? Should I leave my church?”
I have never suggested that someone “leave their church” for this reason. Instead, I encourage people to begin forming and living in relationships with those people who are already in their lives. They may know these people through church organizations, work, neighborhoods, etc. Eat together. Serve together. Get together. Play games together. Go to movies together. Help one another.
Invite your church leaders to your house and spend time with them outside of the “formal programs” of the church. Relate to them as brother and sister. Ask them about their problems and concerns and hopes and struggles etc.
In other words, if you want live mutually with others, then you may need to “lead” in this type of relationship. Share your life with others and provide opportunities for others to share their lives with you. And… be PATIENT! People do not naturally think mutually. You may need to listen to others for months, years, decades before they start listening to you. You may need to care for others for a long time before they start caring for you.
But, that’s okay… even though it is very difficult. The goal of mutuality and maturity in Christ is worth the hard work… and it IS hard work. In fact, once there is a group of people living mutually with one another, the hard work remains.
But, mutuality and maturity are worth the hard work. And, remember, you are never working along. In fact, you are never working at all… you are simply allowing the Holy Spirit to work through you doing the work that he already wants to do.
Considering Mutuality – Implications for leaders
So far in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“), and explored the scriptural connection between mutuality and maturity for believers (“Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?“).
In the last two posts of the series, I’m going to suggest some implications for both leaders and non-leaders respectively. By the way, when I use the term “leaders,” I’m talking about both those who have been recognized officially by the church as leaders (whatever their titles might be) and those who may not have been recognized officially but are nonetheless leading the church by their example of serving others.
There was a time (and perhaps this still happens today) when leaders were taught to distance themselves from others in the church. This practice stands opposed to the idea of mutuality found in Scripture. Today, leaders (including elders, pastors, even “the senior pastor”) must intentionally seek mutually interdependent relationships with others in the church.
These mutual relationships should include all aspects of life – thus, the term “mutual” – including teaching, admonishing, leading, etc. In other words, for a “leader” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be led. For a “teacher” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be taught. For a “shepherd/pastor” to live mutually with others, he or she must also be shepherded (if that’s a word).
Earlier, I said that leaders must be intentional about living in mutual relationships. Modern church culture automatically places a divide between “leaders” (especially those with official titles) and “non-leaders” – whether this divide is intentional or not. In order for leaders to live in mutual relationship with others, they must intentionally break through this divide, showing themselves to be interdependent with other believers, primarily by showing that they need the other believers in their own lives.
Why are these intentionally mutual relationships important for leaders? For their maturity and for the maturity of the church (i.e. all believers in the church). I’ve already demonstrated that mutual relationships are necessary if believers are to grow in maturity toward Christ.
Thus, when we read that elders are to be “able to teach,” we must not interpret that as “only elders are to teach.” Why? Because this dissuades mutuality and thus hinders maturity. The same could be said for any spiritual gifting or service. Also, if everything in the “worship service” (church meeting) seems to depend upon you, then you must work towards less dependency and more interdependency.
These are steps that only leaders can take in most cases. So many Christians have been taught that to question leaders (especially those with titles) is the same as questioning God. Leaders must show themselves to be humble, needy people who depend upon both God and other believers to help them mature in Christ. Those of us who are leaders among the church must lead the way by living mutually interdependent lives, for our own maturity, for the maturity of the church, and as an example to others.
Concerning Missions: ‘We must not see ourselves as individuals.’
This quote is from Dave Black’s blog this morning (Sunday, December 20, 9:38 a.m.):
Perhaps our churches need to reconsider why we do mission trips. Yes, as individuals we must be responsive to the needs around us. But the primary locus of God’s activity in the world today is the local church, not the denomination or the association or the seminary or the missionary organization. Here is a point I would like to make crystal clear: We must not see ourselves as individuals. Jesus came to build His church. As His Body we are to “have the same attitude and the same love, live in harmony, and keep one purpose in mind” (Phil. 2:2). We are to “live as good citizens of heaven who reflect the value of the Good News about Christ” (1:27). We are to “work hard together to spread the Good News,” just as Paul and Timothy had done (2:22).
‘We must not see ourselves as individuals.’ This is true in missions (the context of Dave Black’s quote), but it’s also so true for so many (all?) aspects of life as a follower of Jesus Christ. There is a huge difference between a church as a community or family and a church as a group of individuals.
The Body of Christ and Edification in Ephesians 4
I published the post “The Body of Christ and Edification (Ephesians 4:1-16)” about 3 years ago. I think it goes along well with this week’s theme of “mutuality.”
———————————————-
The Body of Christ and Edification (Ephesians 4:1-16)
Paul’s use of “edification†language is especially connected to the metaphor of the church as the body of Christ; and this is most noticeable in 1 Corinthians 12-14 and Ephesians 4:1-16.
In Ephesians 4:1-16, Paul encourages the believers in Ephesus “to walk worthy of the calling with which you were called†(Eph. 4:1) in response to his instructions in the preceding sections of his letter. According to Paul, the church demonstrates the worthiness of its walk through its unity; but not in a unity brought about by uniformity. Instead, “grace was given to each one of [them] according to the measure of Christ’s gift†(4:7). The purpose of these gifts, and of gifted people, is “to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ†(4:12-13). In this passage, “edification†(“buildingâ€) is associated with “equippingâ€, “serviceâ€, and “unityâ€, and measured by the “maturity†and “stature†of Christ himself. It is possible to understand equipping, service, and edification as the domain of those listed in 4:11 only. However, this “clergy/laity†distinction is contrary to Paul’s focus on unity in 4:1-6 and the responsibility of the entire body in 4:15-16.[1]
Paul continues by describing the opposite of being “built up†in 4:14 when he says that the believers should “no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.†Just as teaching and debating played an important role in the life of the church in Acts, teaching must continue to be important for the church. Through teaching and doctrine the church continues to edify itself and protect itself from various false teachings and cultural fads.
In the last two verses of this passage (4:15-16), Paul returns to the idea of “edification†and the growth of the body. The church grows when its head is Christ, every member is serving as gifted by the Spirit, and its motivation is love. Interestingly, Paul says the growth of the body is both from Christ and toward Christ. The teaching and doctrine that Paul encouraged in vs. 14 must center on the person and work of Christ. Furthermore, the work of growth is the responsibility of everyone in the body, which Paul reinforces by stating it in two different ways: “from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped†and “when each part is working properly.†As in the previous section, every member is responsible for his share (lit. “in measureâ€; c.f. 4:7, 13, 16) in the growth of the body. “Christians are mutually dependent on one another and they are collectively dependent on Jesus Christ for life and power. [They] meet together to benefit from the relationships and ministries [they] can share with one another.â€[2] The interdependence between believers is not for the sake of interdependence only, but for interdependence that leads to the growth of the body.[3]
Therefore, in Ephesians 4:1-16, Paul combines the metaphor of the church as the body of Christ with the language of edification to instruct the church how to grow as a group. The body metaphor intimates that every member of the group must grow; otherwise the organism becomes deformed.[4] This growth occurs when all believers work together for each other’s benefit. From the emphasis on each believer doing his part, it is apparent that there are no unnecessary members of the body, and that all members are responsible for the edification and growth of the body. “Paul’s primary focus in Ephesians 4 is not on the need for individuals to grow to maturity, but for individuals to learn to contribute to the life and development of the believing community as a whole.â€[5] Christ, the head of the body, will hold the believers responsible based upon each one’s ability-“measureâ€-which was provided by Christ himself (through the Spirit).
Notes:
[1] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 547-49.
[2] David Peterson, Engaging with God: A Biblical Theology of Worship (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992), 208.
[3] Andrew T. Lincoln, “The Theology of Ephesians,†New Testament Theology: The Theology of the Later Pauline Letters, ed. Andrew T. Lincoln and A.J.M. Wedderburn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 99.
[4] Wallace M. Alston, Jr., The Church of the Living God: A Reformed Perspective, (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), 39.
[5] Peterson, Engaging with God, 210.
Considering Mutuality – And Maturity?
In my previous posts in this series, I’ve introduced the topic of mutuality (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“), contrasted mutuality with both individualism and collectivism (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“), and demonstrated that the concept of mutuality is prevalent in the New Testament (“Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?“).
However, there is one more step that we need to take before we consider some implications for today. In my introduction, I suggested that mutuality – that is, interdependent relationships between followers of Jesus Christ – is necessary for maturity. In other words, my hypothesis is that Scripture teaches that in order for believers to grow in maturity toward Christ, those believers need mutually interdependent relationships.
One of the clearest scriptural presentations of the relationships between mutuality and maturity is found in Ephesians 4, especially verse 16:
Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Ephesians 4:15-16 ESV)
Notice that in this passage “growth” is both from Christ and into Christ. If we remove most of the modifying clauses, we get this: “We are to grow up into Christ from whom the body makes the body grow.”
Thus, the growth of the body is related to both the source of the growth (i.e. Christ) and the channel through which the growth occurs (i.e. the body). But, how does the “body make the body grow”?
Paul says this happens when the whole body (explicitly the “whole” body) is both joined together (again explicitly through two synonymous clauses) and each one (again explicit) does his or her part. Paul is pointing repeatedly toward mutually interdependent relationships – that is, relationships in which each part of the body depends on Christ and also depends on each other in such a way that if either Christ or one of the parts of the body were missing then growth would not occur.
But, what kind of growth is Paul talking about? In this passage, he only mentions “love,” but more than likely “love” stands as a placeholder for the fuller description that he gave earlier which included bothy unity of faith and knowledge of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 4:13). He explicitly calls this type of growth “mature manhood… the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.”
However, this is not the only passage in Scripture in which maturity is related to mutually interdependent relationships. In the book of Hebrews, the author often instructs his readers toward mutuality. Perhaps the most straightforwards passage is this one:
But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. (Hebrews 3:13 ESV)
or this one:
And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:24-25 ESV)
Notice that in each case above, the mutual exhortation is not for the purpose of mutuality. Instead, mutuality serves the further purpose of aiding maturity in Christ – either in a negative sense (“that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin”) or in a positive sense (“to love and good works”).
Similarly, the author of Hebrews provides a very strong call to mutual relationships and demonstrates its relationship to maturity in chapter 12:
Therefore lift your drooping hands and strengthen your weak knees, and make straight paths for your feet, so that what is lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed. Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord. See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; that no “root of bitterness” springs up and causes trouble, and by it many become defiled… (Hebrews 12:12-15 ESV)
While not as obvious in English translations, the commands in this passage are plural (“strengthen,” “make straight,” “strive”). Similarly, the participles (which carry imperatival force – i.e. they act like commands) are also plural (“See to it”). These plural commands are given so that the readers may grow in maturity, once again with both positive and negative implications of maturity (i.e. strengthening or lifting vs. no one fails to obtain).
While there are many more passages of Scripture that could be consulted, the passages above demonstrate that according to Scripture mutuality is not just a good thing, but instead mutually interdependent relationships are necessary for believers to mature in their faith, in their knowledge of Jesus Christ, and in the demonstration of love.
Considering Mutuality – Where in Scripture?
In my previous posts in this series, I introduced the topic of mutuality as “a reciprocal relation between interdependent entities†and suggested that mutuality between believers is related to maturity in Christ (“Considering Mutuality – Introduction“). Next, I described “individualism” and “collectivism” and suggested that “mutuality” stands apart from both (“Considering Mutuality – Individualism and Collectivism“).
In this post, I would like for us to consider where we find the concept of mutuality in Scripture. Unfortunately, because the data is so extensive, I will not be able to list all of the passages. Instead, I want to point out a few instances of mutuality in Scripture.
To begin with, the widespread use of the term “one another” in the New Testament points us toward the importance of mutuality. “One another” is the English translation of the Greek reciprocal pronoun ἀλλήλων (allÄ“lÅn). A reciprocal pronoun indicates that more than one person is involved in both carrying out an activity and in the results of the activity. Thus, when Scripture indicates that we should “love one another,” “teach one another,” “exhort one another,” “serve one another,” etc., these are mutual activities in which more than one person is involved in both the activity and the result.
Second, consider the use of the Greek preposition σÏν (sÅ«n), either as a standalone preposition or as a prepositional prefix to verbs. This pronoun is usually translated “with” or “together with.” An important usage of this preposition is found in Ephesians 2:
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ – by grace you have been saved – and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus… (Ephesians 2:4-6 ESV)
The highlight English terms are translations of Greek verbs with the σÏν (sÅ«n) prepositional prefix. We understand that we are not made alive, raised up, or seated along or on our own or by our own power, but these occur in mutual relation with Christ.
However, we find often find σÏν (sÅ«n) prefixed words indicating the same mutual relationship between believers. Consider just this one passage:
This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (Ephesians 3:6 ESV)
The highlighted words in the passage above are all single nouns prefixed with σÏν (sÅ«n) indicating a mutual relationship.
As a final example – although I could give many, many more – consider one of the primary forms of “teaching” between believers: the verb διαλÎγομαι (dialegomai). While it is often used in the interaction between believers (i.e. Acts 19:9; Acts 20:7; Acts 20:9), and is sometimes translated “reasoned,” “talked,” or even “preached,” the term indicates less of a one-to-many teaching method than a many-to-many teaching method. Thus, even in teaching we find mutual relationships between believers.
So, in these examples, I’m demonstrated that mutuality – that is, followers of Jesus Christ living in interdependent relationships with one another -Â is not only present in Scripture, but mutuality is widespread in the New Testament. Therefore, we should take mutuality seriously as a means of relating to one another.