Disconnected Church Connections – Of Speakers at Seminars, Conferences, and More
In a previous post, I explained that I was starting a new series on the topic of “disconnected connections.” (See my post “Disconnected Church Connections – Introduction.”) I’ve already discussed the “disconnected connections” that we make by reading books, articles, essays, and, yes, even blog posts and the “disconnected connections” that make online. (See my posts “Disconnected Church Connections – Of Authors and Similar Personalities” and “Disconnected Church Connections – Of Online Friends and Followers” respectively.)
What do I mean by “disconnected connections”? We can often feel “connected” to other Christians without face-to-face interactions. We often feel like we “know” people who we have never met. (As I explained in the introduction, I am not condemning disconnected connections. Instead, I’m cautioning that these types of relationships should be supplemental (and secondary) to real life, face-to-face interactions.
There’s another common source of “disconnected connections” among the church: speakers. Conference speakers. Seminar speakers. TV and radio personalities. People attend a conference or listen to a radio or TV broadcast – perhaps several times – and begin to think that they know the speaker. They don’t. They can’t. The speakers can provide information, but that’s all. And, as I’ve stated before, information is not the basis of growth and maturity in Jesus Christ.
Many people would agree with what I just said, and would caution against the overemphasis on conference, seminar, radio, and TV personalities. But, there’s another group of speakers who we need to think about as well.
Preachers.
Now, don’t misunderstand me… there are some preachers among traditional churches who share their lives with other people regularly – day in and day out. But, I think these are few and far between – not necessarily because of the preachers themselves, but because of the nature of the system they are part of. (I’m using the term “preacher” to refer to a person who speaks regularly – usually weekly at least – to a church audience.)
A few years ago, a young man who became a very close friend of mine explained his own experience with this. He had been part of a very popular church organization in our area. This church is known for some very good things, including their preacher. One day, my friend told me, this preacher was talking about loving others. He realized that he had no idea what the preacher meant by “love one another,” because he had never seen the preacher living it out. There was no “teaching through life” to accompany the “teaching by words.” (By the way, I’m sure this preacher shares his life with others, but he cannot share his life with everyone he speaks to every week.)
So, among the church, we often have “disconnected connections” with preachers, pastors, elders, whatever we call them. Then, we look to them as our primary leaders and teachers among the church. This is a problem. This is not the way that God works among the church. Instead, he works through the real life, face-to-face interactions between his children.
Of all of these “disconnected connections,” the shallow (sometimes nonexistent) relationship that we have with people who claim to be our leaders (and we accept their claim all too easily) is perhaps the most harmful to the health of the church.
—————————————
Series on “Disconnected Church Connections”
Disconnected Church Connections – Of Online Friends and Followers
In a previous post, I explained that I was starting a new series on the topic of “disconnected connections.” (See my post “Disconnected Church Connections – Introduction.”) I’ve already discussed the “disconnected connections” that we make by reading books, articles, essays, and, yes, even blog posts. (See my post “Disconnected Church Connections – Of Authors and Similar Personalities.”)
What do I mean by “disconnected connections”? We can often feel “connected” to other Christians without face-to-face interactions. We often feel like we “know” people who we have never met. (As I explained in the introduction, I am not condemning disconnected connections. Instead, I’m cautioning that these types of relationships should be supplemental (and secondary) to real life, face-to-face interactions.
In today’s cyber world, we are “interconnected” with people all over the world. We have Facebook friends, LinkedIn connections, and Twitter followers. After we read someone’s updates, statuses, and tweets day-after-day, week-after-week, month-after-month, and even year-after-year, it can seem that we actually know each other.
And, remember, I’m not condemning these kinds of online relationships. As you can tell from the links above, I participate in online relationships, and I’ve benefited greatly from them.
However, as is the case with authors, online relationships should be secondary to our face-to-face, real life relationships with our brothers and sisters in Christ. It’s primarily through these face-to-face relationships – not pixel-to-pixel relationships – that God works in our lives to help us grow in maturity in Jesus Christ.
Of course, like I said above, there are many benefits to our cyber connections – especially when it comes to understanding other Christians who are different from us and when it comes to seeing how God is working around the world. Often, these online relationships can even become face-to-face, real life relationships.
Four years ago, when I first joined the titterverse, I met a fellow tweeter named Art. A few weeks after that, we met face-to-face for the first time. Since then, we have coffee or lunch together a few times. Today, we work together, and see each other almost daily.
I’ve met other people online who I’ve also later had the pleasure of meeting face-to-face once, twice, or a few times. As great as online relationships may be, the interaction becomes even better and more discipline the more we spend time together in real life.
The best online interactions – in my opinion – are with those people who I already know in real life. In this way, cyber connections become an extension of our real life relationships instead of a replacement for real life relationships. (I think this is very similar to what we see in Scripture concerning letters. They were almost always written to people who the author already knew. Even when the author had never met the recipients, the letters were sent with someone who would then give that face-to-face interaction that is so important.)
So, yes, maintain and build those online disconnected connections. But, don’t allow those cyber interactions to take the place of real life, face-to-face interactions. It is through the latter kinds of relationships that we truly come to know one another and that we help one another grow and mature in Jesus Christ.
—————————————
Series on “Disconnected Church Connections”
Disconnected Church Connections – Of Authors and Similar Personalities
In a previous post, I explained that I was starting a new series on the topic of “disconnected connections.” (See my post “Disconnected Church Connections – Introduction.”)
What do I mean by “disconnected connections”? We can often feel “connected” to other Christians without face-to-face interactions. We often feel like we “know” people who we have never met. (As I explained in the introduction, I am not condemning disconnected connections. Instead, I’m cautioning that these types of relationships should be supplemental (and secondary) to real life, face-to-face interactions.
Of course, the existence “disconnected connections” is not a modern phenomenon. But, as we’ll see later, in recent years these long-distance, non-face-to-face relationships have become take primary place among many Christians when it comes to fellowship, disciples, and unity.
For example, it’s easy to feel a connection to an author, especially when reading several books by the same author. We begin to think that we actually know the person, while – in reality – we don’t. We only know the part of the person that is published – and, usually, it’s a highly edited and highly planned portion of that person.
That same kind of “disconnected connection” can be found in magazine articles and blogs… yes, blogs such as this one. Very few of my readers actually know me. And, while I try to be “real” on my blog, it’s impossible for anyone to truly know me by only reading my blog. (Of course, for those who actually know me, reading my blog can help them know me even more.)
While we can learn something from authors, books, articles, essays, and even blog posts (such as this one), this is not the kind of learning that we need (primarily) to grow in Christ. We (I and other authors) are sharing information. Even when we share examples, they are only information. You are not observing the example. You are not learning from the example. You are learning from our words… it’s a transfer of knowledge.
Can a transfer of knowledge be helpful? Of course it can. But, it is not the primary method that God uses to help us help one another grow and mature in Jesus Christ. Sharing information can be PART of that growth, but it must only be part. Example, observation, and sharing life are the most important (and often more missing) part of maturing together in Jesus Christ.
So, should we stop writing and reading? Of course not. Like I said, I’m not condemning these “disconnected connections.” But, it will be helpful to recognize that this is what we have. We have a disconnected connection. And, until we spend time with one another – or until we spend time with our favorite author(s) – that is all we will have.
The danger is seeing an author as our primary discipler. And, unfortunately, I’ve heard this too many time: “So-and-so has discipled me more through his/her books than anyone else.” This is a dangerous situation. If you find it true in your life, then I would highly caution you to recognize that this is not the way that God has designed us to help one another grow in Jesus Christ.
So, what do we do if this is the case? Look for people to share our lives with… and even share the books with… then we can interact face-to-face over the same subjects and help one another grow in Christ through real life connections.
—————————————
Series on “Disconnected Church Connections”
Disconnected Church Connections – Introduction
For the last several weeks, I’ve wanted to write a post about this topic. But, for some reason, it never came out right. So, I thought about it… and thought about it… and thought about it some more. And, now, I think I’m ready to write… but I’m not going to write a post; I’m going to write a series of posts.
So, what does “Disconnected Church Connections” mean? What exactly is this topic? What is this series going to be about?
Well, in today’s church, we often feel “connected” to other Christians without face-to-face interactions. We often feel like we “know” people who we have never met. (Of course, this isn’t a new thing, but I’ll get to that later.)
One of the reasons that I struggled so much in writing about this topic is that I did not want to come across as completely negative about this. Yes, I believe there are inherent dangers in this kind of disconnected connection. However, there are also some good things that can come from long distance (never met and never will meet) relationships.
So, please don’t read this series as a condemnation of disconnected connections. Instead, I hope you can read this article in the way that it was intended: a word of caution concerning these types of relationships, especially when these kind of relationships form the basis of someone’s fellowship in Christ.
Can we help and encourage and teach and admonish and train and comfort people we have never met and over long distances? Yes, of course we can. This happens all the time, and it is very beneficial when it happens. (And, in rare instances, “disconnected connections” are the only type of relationships that are available to people.)
But, I don’t think this is the way that God has designed us to interact with one another primarily. Instead, I think that fellowship, discipleship, community, etc. is best experienced in Christ when we are together – face-to-face.
Again, as you read through this series, and as you consider the descriptions and warnings that I offer, please understand that I’m not condemning “disconnected connections.” Instead, I’m only suggesting that these kinds of relationships are best as supplements to real, live face-to-face interactions with brothers and sisters in Christ.
I’ll try to state that clearly with each example, but I want to point it out up front as well.
So, what kind of relationships am I talking about? Well, you’ve probably figured out that I would include online/internet type relationships as “disconnected connections.” But, I would also include relationships such as television, video, radio, etc. as “disconnected connections.” And, I think that books and magazines are types of “disconnected connections.” Finally, conferences, seminars, and other speaking engagements are forms of “disconnected connections.”
Before I begin this series by looking at some of the examples above, what do you think about “disconnected connections” and our life and fellowship in Jesus Christ?
—————————————
Series on “Disconnected Church Connections”
You know how we lived among you…
Over the last couple of years, I’ve come to appreciate Paul’s two letters to the believers in Thessalonica: 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians. Why? Because even though Paul was only in Thessalonica for a few weeks (perhaps only 2-3 weeks), in those letters he was able to point them back to the way he and those with him lived among them as an example for them to emulate.
In fact, the title of this post comes from the NIV translation of the end of 1 Thessalonians 1:5 – “You know how we lived among you for your sake.” The ESV translates it like this: “You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.” [A literal translation would be something like this: “You know what manner [of men/people] we were among you for you.”
In other words, Paul is pointing the readers of his letter (in Thessalonica) back to the example that he and others set while they lived among them. A real, living example was very important for Paul and others in the New Testament.
I thought about this passage (and the importance of example) recently when I read a post by Christopher at “Life With Da Man CD” called “Take For Example…” (By the way, please take the time to read Christopher’s whole post. It’s well worth it, and I can’t do it justice in this short post.)
At one point, when thinking about Bible studies that he’s been part of, Christopher wrote this:
It reminded me of some Bible class experiences I had a long time ago. The nature of the studies required answering questions from a booklet covering 13 weeks of lessons on a given topic.
Some of the questions asked in the week’s lesson would nudge towards the students giving answers based on personal experiences. What would tend to happen at that point, is that people would give generic answers. Nothing specific, mostly seeking to insert some scriptures to reinforce familiar concepts. Little, if anything in the way of real life experiences.
Have you noticed this also? Is there a lack of teaching by example among the church today? If so, why do you think that is?
Can you think of time when someone taught you something about God (a spiritual lesson, I guess) by example? Have you ever learned something by observing someone’s life?
Deconstructing… to see the kingdom of God increase?
When it comes to the church – and especially when it comes to moving away from a more institutional/organizational approach to church and moving toward a more organic/simple approach to church – it seems that deconstruction is a necessary first step. As many have found, it can be a difficult and painful first step, but an important one all the same.
Two of my favorite bloggers have (or will) write about this kind of deconstruction…
Eric at “A Pilgrim’s Progress” recently completed his 10 part series and summarized it in a post called “Series Summary: Ten Church Structures That Hinder Disciple Making.” He introduces his summary like this:
Discipleship ought to be alive and well within the church. However, several time-honored church traditions act as roadblocks when it comes to discipleship. Many of these are so familiar that they are not questioned.
Similarly, Miguel at “God Directed Deviations” is just beginning a new series with a blog post called “I Don’t Want To Be That Guy Who’s Pegged As Anti-Church, But…” In this introductory post, he writes:
Anything that impedes The Gospel, detracts from Making Disciples, or moves in a direction that is Contra-Kingdom has got to be shattered. I do understand though, that the speed or manner by which any institution or system is shifted away from the actions or attitudes that cause those things will differ depending on context, culture, and willingness. Likewise, I understand that the time frame in which a local body becomes self-aware on those issues will vary.
I’ve been through this process – and in some ways, I’m still going through it and probably always will be going through it. The most difficult part is that relationships are often fractured because of differences (and growing differences) in the way people understand and live as the church.
I think this is probably caused by what Miguel refers to as the differences which depend “on context, culture, and willingness” and the “time frame” in which both a local body and individuals take these steps of change (or don’t take these steps of change).
If you’ve been following my blog over the last couple of weeks, you know that I’ve been writing about two related topics: “real relational unity” and “community hermeneutics.” Of course, this concept and process of “deconstruction” is strongly related to both unity and community hermeneutic/interpretation.
So, while thinking about deconstructing our church traditions, organizations, institutions, etc. in order to see the kingdom of God increase (the title of this post), a question kept running through my mind…
Knowing that people grow and change at different rates, how do we change structures that affect us as a group (when we are not at the same place as a group) without breaking those important relationships (i.e., maintaining unity)?
Replay: The “trajectory” of encouragement in Hebrews
Four years ago, I was working on an academic paper on the Book of Hebrews. I ended up presenting that paper in a regional theological conference. I also published pieces of the paper on my blog. One of those posts was called “Encouragement as trajectory in Hebrews.” The terms related to “encouragement” is very important in the book of Hebrews. In fact, the author calls his letter a “word of encouragement.” In the book, “encouragement” has both positive and negative “trajectories”…
———————————-
Encouragement as trajectory in Hebrews
In my study of “The theology of encouragement in Hebrews”, I’ve found it helpful to think of encouragement as trajectory. (For more information on this study, see my posts “Theology of Encouragement in Hebrews“, “Peterson on encouragement in Hebrews“, “Mutuality“, and “A reminder of our priesthood from Hebrews“.) When I speak of a “trajectory”, I am referring to the path followed by a moving object.
In the case of encouragement, the author of Hebrews exhorts his readers along a path. This path includes both a negative trajectory (away from something) and a positive trajectory (toward something). Both parts of this trajectory are important to the author.
The Negative Trajectory of Encouragement
In the book of Hebrews, the author often exhorts his readers to move away from some attitudes and activities. For example, he uses the language of “encouragement/exhortation” in chapter 3:
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)
In this case, the readers are pointed on a trajectory that takes them away from the deceitfulness which is caused by or composed of sin.
Similarly, in other passages, the author warns his readers to move away from neglecting their salvation (2:2-4), apostasy (6:4-6), forsaking to meet together (10:25), bitterness, sexual immorality, unholiness (12:15-16), failing to show hospitality, and loving money (13:1-6).
The Positive Trajectory of Encouragement
However, the author does not want his readers to simply move away from something (negative trajectory), he wants them to move toward something at the same time. Notice, for example, following the negative trajectory of 3:13 (see above), he gives his readers a positive trajectory in the next sentence:
For we share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. (Hebrews 3:14 ESV)
Even in these two sentences, it is clear that the author does not want his readers to simply move away from the deceitfulness of sin (negative trajectory), he also wants them to move toward firm confidence (positive trajectory).
He gives several examples of positive trajectories throughout the letter: entering rest (4:3), holding fast (4:14; 10:23), drawing near (4:16; 7:19; 10:22), going on to maturity (6:1), love and good works (10:24; 13:1), enduring (12:1), remembering others (10:24; 13:3, 7), and being content (13:5-6).
The author continuously uses examples of both negative trajectories and positive trajectories. He tells his readers to learn from these, and to follow the positive examples. I’ll examine some of those examples of encouragement later.
———————————-
I’ll add this question to my older post: How can we include both “negative” and “positive” trajectories when encouraging others in Jesus Christ?
Moving toward a community hermeneutic
In my last two posts (“Putting the ‘community’ in community hermeneutics” and “Some responses to ‘community hermeneutics’“), I argued that the church – as a whole, not just one or a small group – should work together to both interpret and apply Scripture, and I offered several answers to some of the “push back” responses that I often get when I talk about that kind of community hermeneutic. (Remember, “community hermeneutic” is simply the whole church interpreting Scripture together.)
But, let’s be honest, for the vast majority of Christians, this kind of community interpretation of Scripture is unfamiliar and often not allowed. For most follower of Jesus, the norm has been one person – or perhaps a small group of people – taking the responsibility to interpret and apply Scripture for the church.
So, how can these believers (assuming they have the desire) move toward a community hermeneutic?
First, we should recognize that among many churches, leaders control what happens when believers gather together. So, I’m going to answer this question in two parts: 1) What if someone desires to move toward community hermeneutics but the leaders do not? and 2) What if leaders desire to move toward a community hermeneutic?
What if someone desires to move toward community hermeneutics but the leaders do not?
Of course, this is the difficult position that many believers find themselves in. I always think it’s good to explain your desires (and the reasons) to the leaders. But, that doesn’t always result in a positive response. However, all is not lost. Begin spending time with believers who will study and discuss Scripture with you. If your church organization has decided to focus their energies on a sermon/homily type approach, then seek other opportunities to gather with your brothers and sisters in Christ for community interpretation. You do not always have to choose one or the other. Your example and growth may persuade others of the importance of community hermeneutics.
What if leaders desire to move toward a community hermeneutic?
Even if leaders among the church and some of the others among the church are ready for a community hermeneutic, there will be some among the church who are not ready. I would suggest several steps toward a community hermeneutic (without diving into the deep end right away).
1) Hold a study session outside of the normal gathering time, and share what some other people say about the passage when you teach/preach.
2) Invite either people from among the church to speak, either taking the entire teaching/preaching time or taking a small part of the preaching/teaching time. (When they speak, you sit down and listen.)
3) Have a time of discussion after the normal teaching/preaching time. Encourage questions and comments, and allow others to answer the questions or respond to the comments. Do not answer everything that’s asked or respond to every comment. (Otherwise, you will STILL be seen as THE person to interpret Scripture.) By the way, don’t be afraid of silence or times when no one speaks. It will take time for people to understand that they really can interpret Scripture and help others when they share.
What suggestions would have for people who are interested in community hermeneutics?
Some responses to “community hermeneutics”
In my last post, I explained that I think that “community hermeneutics” (i.e., the whole church interpreting and applying Scripture together) to be extremely important for the health and growth of the church. (See my post “Putting the ‘community’ in community hermeneutics.”) In fact, I think that when we do not practice community hermeneutics – when only one person or only a few people interpret Scripture on behalf of the church – then I believe the maturity and growth of the church is hindered.
Whenever I begin talking about community hermeneutics and discussing Scripture together with the church, there are a few responses I receive as “push back.” Here are a few:
But they are not theologically educated
Theological education can be good and beneficial. But, it is not the most important aspect of interpreting and applying Scripture. While the Bible school and seminary students can help the church understand Scripture, the engineering students and business students can help as well. So can the farmers, mechanics, carpenters, realtors, etc. Everyone who is a child of God can and should take part in interpreting and applying Scripture. The best thing that a theologically trained person can do is to help others among the church by sharing those interpretive tools with them.
What if someone makes a heretical statement?
We rarely hear heretical statements. However, let’s assume someone does say something heretical – truly heretical, not just against our pet doctrines. First, remember, that person has that belief whether he/she states it or not. If the person doesn’t state the heretical belief, then no one may ever know he/she has that wrong belief. Second, if someone states a heretical belief, that provides the perfect opportunity for the church (as a whole) to help that person come to understanding. This would never happen if the person is forced to remain quiet.
It will just become a time of everyone sharing their own opinions
It could, but only if there are no mature believers to keep everyone focused on Jesus. From what I’ve learned in the last few years, those who are mature among the church are not necessarily the ones who are always talking. Instead, they are the ones who know when to speak and to keep silent. When they speak, they often move the conversation / discussion / study in exactly the direction it needs to go.
A few people (who love to hear the sound of their own voice) will do all the talking
Again, that’s possible, but – again – only if the mature believers do not disciple those people. If we understand why we’re coming together – both to edify others AND to be edified by others – and if we truly care about what other people are saying, then we will all learn to listen more than we speak. Of course, there will always be those who struggle in this area. The time to help them is when we’re one-on-one… encouraging them in what they HEARD more than what they SAID.
There are other responses, of course. But, these are the responses that I hear most often.
Community hermeneutics and discussion when the church gathers can be a scary proposition to a group who is accustomed to a leader-controlled meeting and leader-interpreted message. But, overall, it’s much better for the church.
Putting the “community” in community hermeneutics
Over the last few years, I’ve written several posts on the topic of “community hermeneutics.” (For a few examples, see my posts “Toward Mutual Hermeneutics,” “Listening to One Another,” “The First Interpreters,” and “Those pesky Bereans.”) If you’ve never heard the term before, “community hermeneutics” refers to interpreting and applying Scripture together in community with one another.
If you pushed me into a corner… ok, even if you didn’t push me into a corner… I’d say that the lack of community hermeneutics is one of the reasons that the church is in the mess that it’s in today. Our reliance on certain people to interpret Scripture for us – not only to tell us what it means but to tell us how to apply it – is one of the causes (perhaps a main cause) of continued immaturity among the church.
My good friend Maël from “The Adventures of Maël & Cindy” has recently started a series on “community heremeutics” using the German term gemeindetheologie. His first post is called “GEMEINDETHEOLOGIE: Who & How? – An Introduction.”
At one point, Maël writes this:
As Thiselton claims: “All the major traditions of the Christian church formally define doctrine in communal terms, although the emphasis and nature of the community in question varies.” [Anthony C. Thiselton, The Hermeneutics of Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), xviii] For example, in the Catholic tradition, the hermeneutical community is embodied in the bishops that constitute the Magisterium, while in some Anabaptist traditions, the hermeneutical community is embodied by all the believers in the local congregation.
I think Maël makes a good point here (or actually, Thiselton makes a good point, and Maël expands on it). In almost all Christian groups, hermeneutics is a community task. The question is: who is included in that community who is allowed to interpret Scripture for others?
Instead of going into all the different options, I’d like to make a case for interpretation and application being the responsibility and privilege of all followers of Jesus Christ, not just a subset. Why do I think all Christians should (and must) be involved in hermeneutics?
1. Because all Christians are indwelled by the Holy Spirit who is the one who reveals and provides understanding.
Does that mean that we always listen to him and always respond properly and always interpret what God reveals (either through Scripture or through other means)? Of course not. And, that leads to the second reason…
2. Because all Christians need others to help them understand what the Spirit is revealing to them… all Christians… even the experts.
Add to this the fact that interpretation of Scripture is not usually about TELLING what it means as much as it is about SHOWING what it means. And, the “showing” happens best in community as well.
I’ve been part of a group who practices community hermeneutics (that includes the WHOLE community and not a subset of the community) for several years now. In years of schooling, I probably have more theological education than anyone else who is part of that community. But, because we interpret and apply Scripture together, I’m also able to learn from my brothers and sisters in Christ… even from my youngest brother or sister in Christ.
You may be part of a church organization that does not practice community hermeneutics. Perhaps your denomination or your local church leaders tell you what Scripture means and how you should apply it. May I suggest that you can still practice community hermeneutics? It’s true. Gather together with some friends and begin working through Scripture and through life together.
You’ll be surprised at the difference that it makes…