A Contest: LAST Reminder
Last week, in a post called “A Contest: Examples of Serving“, I announced a contest where the winner will receive a copy of John Perkins’ book Beyond Charity: The Call to Christian Community Development. Please read that post for details. Remember to submit your story about serving others before January 19, 2009. This means that you only have ONE more week to submit your story. This will be the last reminder.
A quick summary about church meetings
According to 1 Corinthians 14, the church comes together to edify one another – that is, to build themselves up toward maturity in Christ.
According to Hebrews 10:24-25, the church should consider how to provoke one another toward love and good works. This should especially happen when they meet together to encourage one another.
According to Ephesians 4:11-16, the church is built up when every believer works together with every other believer, with Jesus Christ alone taking the head position.
These passages seem fairly simple and straightforward to me. It has also become clear (at least to me) that the modern pattern of church meetings does not match what we see in these passages from Scripture.
If only one person teaches (preaches), even if that person has been trained and educated, and even if that person is the most talented and gifted and mature, and even if that person has been recognized (ordained) as a pastor/elder/bishop, and even if that teaching (preaching) is biblical and powerful and Spirit-led, that church will not be as healthy and will not grow in maturity as much as it would be if many people exercised their spiritual gifts during the church meeting.
Look at the summary passages above once more. Notice how often the writers of Scripture talk about “one another” during the meeting of the church – or even when the church is not meeting. In the modern church meeting, the “one anothers” are set aside – for many different reasons, I believe. And, I believe that none of those reasons are valid.
The best thing that could happen in the church is for pastors, preachers, teachers, elders, leaders, to sit down and listen to other people and be served by other people. We must move away from one-way service (the leader serving through his or her gifts) and move toward one-another service (every believer serving through each of their gifts).
The church is not built up (edified) when the people only hear God speak through me – even if I have something very valuable to say. The church is built up when we hear God speak through one another.
A Contest: Second Reminder
Last week, in a post called “A Contest: Examples of Serving“, I announced a contest where the winner will receive a copy of John Perkins’ book Beyond Charity: The Call to Christian Community Development. Please read that post for details. Remember to submit your story about serving others before January 19, 2009. This means that you have two more weeks to submit your story!
Guaranteed church building program
Last December, I wrote a post called “Guaranteed church building program“. Its not what you think. It is not a exegesis of the Book of Nehemiah. But, read it. Give it a try. The church will be built up… perhaps not in the way that you want, though.
———————————————-
Guaranteed church building program
I have been part of many church building programs. I’ve heard the book of Nehemiah preached as an example of a successful church building program. However, there is a church building program that I have rarely heard mentioned, and yet, this church building program is guaranteed! That’s right, this program is guaranteed to build the church without going into debt one penny.
I like to call this program “God’s Guaranteed Church Building Program”:
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)/blockquote>Did you catch that last phrase? By following this simple procedure, the church is guaranteed to “build itself up”! Isn’t that awesome! Isn’t that amazing! But, what is this procedure?
1. Put Christ in his proper position as the head of the church.
2. Allow, encourage, and expect all believers to serve one another.
3. Do not allow a single person or a small group of people (including leaders) to do everything.
4. Help each person to work properly among their brothers and sisters.That’s it – four easy steps to guaranteed church growth.
Yes, I know what you may be thinking: This is not the kind of church building program that I had in mind. I understand your problem. However, it does seem that this is the kind of church building program that God has in mind. Perhaps its time to change your mind.
Perhaps there are others among you – leaders especially – who may be thinking something like this: But, those other members of the church could never do what I do; they just don’t have the experience, the talent, the training, or the education. My suggestion: You’re doing the wrong things. According to this guaranteed church building program, the church will grow only when ALL parts of the church are doing their part, not when you are doing everything the best you can.
Then, there is another question that rises about this church building program: But, if I let other people do the work, they may not do it correctly. Again, you are absolutely correct. People are going to fail. That’s why God has provided mature brothers and sisters like yourself to help them learn from their mistakes and to grow toward maturity in Christ. Perhaps you can do everything better than others – that’s good. But, according to God, that’s not best. God’s solution is for everyone to work together.
There you have it: God’s guaranteed church building program. And, the best thing about this program is that you do not have to buy a book or attend a conference. You simply trust God to work through the people that he has brought together. You allow him to use you and others to teach, lead by example, and encourage others to work together. And God says that when we do this, the church will build itself up in love. Guaranteed.
Singing lies to God
When we get together with the church in our weekly meeting, someone leads us in singing several songs. Usually, this person changes from week to week.
If I’m scheduled to teach, I usually try to talk about some of the songs that we sang that morning. Why? So that the songs becomes more than an activity, but can actually be useful in building us up and helping us grow toward maturity:
Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. (Colossians 3:16 ESV)
One morning, we sang the hymn “I Surrender All” together:
All to Jesus I surrender
All to him I freely give
I will ever love and trust him
In his presence daily liveI surrender all
I surrender all
All to thee my blessed savior
I surrender all
As we were talking about the songs that morning, I was thinking about the idea of surrender and yielding our lives to God – about trusting him and him alone – about not leaning on my own understanding. But, one brother’s thoughts were elsewhere. He said that he was troubled by singing that song. I asked him why.
He said, “I don’t like lying to God, even when I’m singing. So, I sang, ‘I want to surrender all…'”
He’s right. We often sing things that are untrue. We often sing lies to God. Oh, we may WANT it to be true of us, but that doesn’t mean that it is true. Like this brother said, I think it is much better to be honest with God – and with ourselves – than to sing lies to God.
Do you think about the songs that you’re singing? Do you learn from one another when you’re singing with a group of believers? Do you allow others to admonish you when you’re singing?
I learned that day. And, I was admonished to think carefully about what I’m singing to God. I don’t want to sing lies to God.
A Contest: Examples of Serving
Last week, as I was cleaning up my stacks of books from the last semester, I found a copy of John Perkins’ Beyond Charity: The Call to Christian Community Development that I thought I had lost. I read this book again this year, and wrote about it several times. (I discuss different aspects of this book in my posts “The Gospel in message and mission“, “Beyond Charity – Introduction“, “Beyond Charity – Our Vision“, “Beyond Charity – Our Gospel“, “Lollipop Love?“, and “The poor do not need your money“.)
Instead of sticking this book on a shelf along with my other copy, I thought I would give this book away in a contest. Yes, you heard me correctly. I’m going to have a contest on my blog, and the winner will receive John Perkins’ book Beyond Charity: The Call to Christian Community Development free of charge. I will even ship it to you.
Now, here are the rules of the contest:
Email me (aknox@sebts.edu) an example of how you, your family, or you and a group of people served others. It could be a story of serving people within the church, or serving people outside the church. You are allowed to submit more than one entry. I may choose to publish some of these stories as “guest blogger” posts, so if you want to remain anonymous, let me know. If you want me to include a link to your blog or web site, let me know that as well. I will choose my favorite from among the submissions. (Yes, it will be completely subjective. But, hey, its my book.) Please email me your submissions BEFORE January 19, 2009. That gives you four weeks to submit your stories.
I will announce the winner – and include their story – in a post on Monday, January 19, 2009.
Hopefully, when I publish these stories, they will encourage others to serve the people around them. According to Paul, we were all created for good works that we should walk in them. Let’s start walking in those good works, and encourage others toward obedience and maturity with our stories.
I look forward to reading your stories!
Response to Frank Viola
On Monday, I posted a list of questions that I asked Frank Viola, along with his answers. Today, I want to respond to his answers (see my post “In Conversation with Frank Viola“).
First, I appreciate Frank’s detailed description about how he started writing about the church. Frank said that his investigation of things related to the church was triggered by his experience with a group of Christians that met in a home. This is extremely important, because some suggest that the idea of “organic church” is idealistic, that is, it doesn’t work in practice. Actually, the idea is very practical – and it does work – but, it doesn’t work in the same way that the traditional church structure works. I think this is why some people believe that an organic community of believers would never work. It does take a different way of thinking about church, leadership, service, teaching, relationship, and many other concepts.
My own investigation of things related to the church began in a different way, and we’ve only been experiencing organic community within the last few years. It is difficult to shift patterns of thought even within an organic group. Some have “left” our group because they perceive a lack of structure, or organization, or leadership, or vision, or whatever you want to call it. I’ve also heard from some of them that they are having a hard time developing real relationships in the traditional churches that they’ve started attending. Why? Like I’ve said before, traditional organizations and structures tend to hinder relationships.
This gets to the next point. I appreciate that Frank discussed the differences between “organic”, “house”, “missional”, “emerging” churches. Its good to think about the distinctions in those terms and to ensure that you’re using the terms correctly. I also appreciate this statement that Frank made: “Some house churches are organic, while others are not. And some organic churches use buildings.” (He made this statement in response to question #12, but it fits nicely here in this continuing conversation.) Like Frank has told me before, “organic” is not a matter of meeting location, but a matter of life within a group of believers.
I wish that Frank had responded a little more concerning the “difficulties” related to organic church life (that is, in question #3). While I believe that meeting without the structures and organizations found in the traditional, institutional church is scriptural, freeing, and beneficial, there are difficulties that accompany this type of organic community. As Frank said, “As I’ve said many times, organic church life is a wedding of glory and gore.” He suggested that churches can receive help from extra-local (apostolic?) workers. That is great when a worker is around, but what about in the every-day life of the community? What kinds of difficulties do those within organic communities face that those within institutional churches do not face? How should they deal with those difficulties?
I agree completely that the church is a family – a literal family. As Frank said, “That’s not ‘positional truth.’ It’s quite real.” There are huge implications for a community that sees itself as a literal family, and not as a figurative family. Of course, this is the type of relationship that the Spirit produces among believers. We can examine our relationships – are we living as family with one another – to recognize to what extent we are allowing the Spirit to move us and change us into a real family, or to what extent we are hindering the Spirit’s work among the community.
Finally, I want to respond to Frank’s discussion of the role of the “scholar” among the church. I agree. (Well, not with the part about them being tied up and their mouths wrapped in duct tape.) While Scripture helps us as believers, the life of the church does not come from Scripture or from history or from tradition. The life of the church comes from the shared, divine life that we have in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit. When scholars only offer knowledge, then that knowledge is “dead knowledge”, as Frank calls it. Or, as Paul said, “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.” There is much, much, much more to the life of the church than information about the Bible or about the first century world. And, as Frank said, education is not synonymous with spiritual growth or maturity.
Scholars, in this case, are like all believers. We all have to learn how to live with one another, learning from one another, teaching one another, edifying one another, growing in maturity with one another. No one – neither pastors, nor scholars, not even Greek professors – can stand alone. We are interdependent – both dependent upon one another and dependent upon the Spirit of God. I think that a scholar can be very valuable to the life of the church. Of course, I also think that every believer can be (and should be!) very valuable to the life of the church.
Now, as for the negative critique: 1) Frank is completely wrong about ice cream. While Oreo cookie ice cream is good, it is not even close to Moose Tracks! 2) A soft drink should always be referred to as a “coke”, regardless of the flavor. 3) Since Auburn is not playing (well, since they didn’t actually play all year long), I don’t care who wins the BCS Bowl Game between Florida and Oklahoma. While these are important differences, I think I can forgive Frank and accept him as a brother in Christ.
In Conversation with Frank Viola
Not long ago, I reviewed Frank Viola’s latest book Reimagining Church (see my post “Reimagining Church“). Before I finished the book, and before I wrote the review, Frank prompted me several times to finish it and review it. He also answered some questions that I had about the book. Finally, I asked if I could interview him, and he agreed. While I was not able to sit down and talk with Frank, I did send him some questions via email, to which he graciously responded. Here are my questions and his responses:
1. Why did you decide to start writing, and why the topic of the church?
From the human point of view, it was purely accidental. But God has chosen to breathe on it.
When I was in my 20s, I met with a group of Christians in a home without a pastor. It was largely an unintentional experiment for us. I describe it a spontaneous burst of organic church life. We wanted to know if it was possible for Jesus Christ to lead His church in our day just as he did in Century One – without a human head (pastor, minister, priest, etc.). We wanted to know if it was possible for every member to function under Christ’s Leadership in a meeting without someone leading, directing, or even facilitating. We wanted to know if a church could make decisions together without someone telling us what to do.
We came to these questions gradually. And in time, we discovered that all of these things were not only possible, but they were built into the very DNA of the body of Christ. To quote Major Ian Thomas, the church’s DNA is the “Divine Nature from Above.” Jesus Christ lives in the church. The church contains His life, His Divine nature. Therefore, if a group of Christians learn to live by Christ together, by His life, the DNA of the church will begin operating. We realized that this concept (and experience) was so foreign to most Christians (let alone to us) that we had an awfully hard time explaining it to those who had inquired about what we were doing and why.
In the late 90s, I began hosting a bulletin board discussion (the nascent prelude to the Internet). The subject was Rethinking the Practice of the Early Church. Bi-weekly, I would post an article on a different aspect of the church’s practice. For instance, one week I’d post a piece on the first-century church meeting. Another week I’d write about how the early Christians had the Lord’s Supper. Another week I’d discuss the leadership of the church. I was writing about my experience of the church as well as what I understood the New Testament to teach about it.
People read the articles and then responded. The response was amazing. It showed me that there was a real hunger for looking at the church in a fresh light and re-examining Scripture on the subject. Not long afterwards, people would ask me for copies of the articles. So I would staple them together and mail them out. At the same time, many people were asking me and the others in our fellowship why we didn’t have a building, a pastor, a liturgy, etc. (Some of these people looked at us as if we were from Planet 10 when they found out that we didn’t have these things.) As a result, a friend suggested that I put all the articles I had written for the bulletin board into a book. This way we could give copies to people who asked us what in the cat’s hair we were doing!
The idea of writing a book had never occurred to me before that point. And publishers never crossed my mind. When I investigated how much it would cost to print a book myself, I was shocked to find that one had to print at least 1,000 copies in order to get a decent rate. My immediate reaction was, “You’ve got to be kidding me. What am I going to do with 950 copies of this book?” You see, I could only envision 50 people wanting to read it.
Well, I was wrong. Within months, the books were gone due to popular demand. (Word of mouth is one mighty phenomenon.)
In 2001, a particular publisher showed interest in publishing my books, but I declined. Then in 2004, another publisher showed interest. After much prayer and council from others, I felt that it would be wiser to have a publisher publish my work rather than continuing to self-publish. The reason being that the message would get out to a much wider audience. That has proven to be the case.
2. What is your favorite flavor of ice cream?
Oreo cookie, hands down and walking out. I particularly like it in a shake, the kind that Denny’s makes. Those are hard to resist.
3. What are some of the difficulties involved in “organic church”?
Everybody’s normal until you get to know them (as the title of one book puts it). Organic church life involves close-knit community.
We humans are all deeply marred souls. We routinely underestimate the damage that the Fall has inflicted on us. For this reason, a shared life in Christ is difficult. But therein lies the genius of God. It’s in such an environment that living stones are chiseled, cut, and shaped so they can be “built together” to form the Lord’s house.
Open up the New Testament epistles and you will see all the problems that God’s people encounter when they live in organic church life. The beautiful thing is that contained within those epistles, we have the remedies for those problems. As I’ve said many times, organic church life is a wedding of glory and gore. It’s much easier to sit in a pew once or twice a week, listen to a sermon, and go home to live an individual Christian life. But God’s best and highest is never the easiest route to take.
At this point, let me say a few words about the term “organic church.” The word is in vogue today. Thus it’s being used (and co-opted) to describe a number of different types of churches, many of which are vastly different in structure, expression, and mission. I’ve spoken about this here. In my book “Reimagining Church,” I present a theology of organic church life (to borrow Len Sweet’s description of the book). That theology is rooted in the Triune God, His eternal purpose, the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, and it’s exemplified by my experience over the last twenty-one years.
Because “organic church” – along with “missional church,” “house church,” “emerging church,” and “simple church” – are being used in an assortment of different ways today (with some folks lumping them all together!), it’s created massive confusion among Christians who are interested in God’s mission for the body of Christ.
Let me give you one recent example. Dan Kimball recently wrote a piece where he challenged the missional church movement (for lack of a better term). In it, he lumped together missional churches and house churches. In the brief exchanges I’ve had with Dan, he lumps organic churches with house churches (which I do not).
Another author responded to Dan’s piece, and he lumped together missional churches with organic churches (as if they were the same) but drew a distinction between missional/organic churches and house churches. Yet another author responded and redefined missional church from the way that Kimball was using it, and expressed concern at how the word “missional” is being misused and redefined by different people. Add to that, some authors are saying that missional church, house church, organic church, and simple church are all the same thing.
Are you confused yet?
Throw the word “emerging church” in the mix and you’ve got popcorn.
I think it would be helpful, therefore, if those who write and speak on these subjects would first define these terms clearly so that readers will understand how they’re using them. And then proceed. The simple reason is that there’s no universal definition or understanding of any of these terms. So using them without definition often confuses more than clarifies.
4. Do you have a prediction or a favorite in the Bowl Championship Series football Game between Oklahoma and Florida?
As for a prediction, I haven’t the foggiest idea. As for a favorite, I’m going to say Florida lest my Gainesville neighbors roast me over a slow spit.
5. If the church meets in a more open and participatory way where every believer is given an opportunity to serve through their spiritual gifts, how should the church deal with people who always have something to say and people who never have something to say?
This is the classic problem of the under-functioners vs. the over-functioners. When a similar problem was surfacing in the church in Corinth, the believers had an extra-local worker with experience to give them some direction and instruction about this. See Paul’s instructions to them in 1 Corinthians 14.
The organic churches that I’m in fellowship with have the input of extra-local workers who have experience in meeting under the headship of Christ. These workers understand the necessary dynamics that go along with equipping the over-participators to push back a bit and the under-participators to function more. My friend Milt Rodriguez recently wrote an excellent article on this very subject. Your readers can check it out here: http://frankviola.wordpress.com/2008/10/01/guest-article-lions-set-free/
6. When you offer someone a soft drink at your house, do you ask them if they want a soda, a pop, or a Coke?
Well, we don’t have soft drinks at the house. But I grew up in New York, and we called it soda.
7. Scripture often describes the church in family language. Do you think the church is a literal family or a figurative family? What are the implications?
I take it as a spiritual reality. Christians aren’t joined by blood. We are instead joined by Divine life. As Peter says, we are “partakers of the Divine nature.” God has become our Father (literally), and all of His children have become our brethren and sistren. 🙂 That’s not “positional truth.” It’s quite real.
8. Do you prefer coffee or tea? How do you take it?
I love the smell of coffee, but I hate the taste. So if you were to hand me a cup of coffee, I would grab tons of creamer and sweeteners to kill the taste. I’ve always wished I could drink it black, but I just can’t.
I enjoy tea. The real stuff. A friend turned me on to organic teas and gave me a stainless steal strainer, a cast iron pot, and little cups that look like they came off the boat that Paul of Tarsus almost drowned in on his way to Rome. Drinking tea mixed with fellowship in Christ – there’s nothing quite like it. Ask my friend Alan Levine (props and shout-outs to Alan 🙂 )!
9. What role do you think the university/seminary and scholar should play in the church?
Scholars should be tied to a chair with duct tape wrapped around their mouths during open-participatory church meetings.
That’s a joke, folks. 🙂
You must understand, I live a world that’s outside of mainstream Christianity. We meet in a very organic way. What many folks would call “laymen” are our leaders.
I’ll give you a few examples from real life. The seminary-trained folks that I know who have come into a healthy experience of organic church life admitted their lack of experience and knowledge (experiential) of Jesus Christ when they have encountered the churches of this type.
Thus what they did for a number of months was detox. (The same is true for clergymen who come into such expressions of the church.) After a while of learning how to be a normal human being . . . a brother among other brothers and sisters (the folks I’m thinking of have all been men), they began to learn to use their giftings (usually teaching) to minister LIFE instead of dead knowledge. But that typically takes some time and a lot of un-learning.
For a context to the above, see Chapter 10 of my book Pagan Christianity where I discuss what I believe to be some of the shortcomings of the typical seminary education and model, and the kind of fruit it produces, both good and not so good.
Keep in mind that the early Christian church which shook the Roman Empire to its foundations was a “lay led” movement (to use our modern vernacular). Consider the education of the twelve men that Jesus trained as well. It’s a very different way of looking at things.Add to that, the people I’ve known in my life who knew the Lord the deepest were people who didn’t have a seminary education. The same is true for some of the greatest people in church history. Not that there’s anything wrong with a seminary education (to borrow from Jerry Seinfeld). But it’s largely overrated, I believe. One of the major flaws is that academic knowledge is often regarded as the equivalent of spiritual knowledge and experience.
10. What’s the last movie that you watched? Did you enjoy it? Why or why not?
The last film I saw is one of my favorites of all time. It’s called The Castle. It’s a first-class hoot. The comedy is brilliant. My favorite line from the film: “It’s the vibe of the thing.”
11. If you were to die tomorrow, what’s the one thing that you’d want your readers to take from your life and your books?
That the Lord Jesus Christ can be known deeply and profoundly, that He is alive enough to be the practical and functional Head of His own church (in local expression), that we can live by His indwelling life and express Him together in ways that most of us have never dreamed, and that God’s eternal purpose and grand mission is bound up with local Christian communities that express the headship of Jesus Christ in their cities. And that all of the above happens in community. It’s not an individual proposition or endeavor.
12. Can you tell my readers something about HouseChurchResource.org?
Yes, this is a site that offers many resources for people who are interested in organic church life. Note that organic church church and house church are not the same thing. Some house churches are organic, while others are not. And some organic churches use buildings. Nonetheless, those in the house church movement seem most interested in organic church life and most organic churches meet in homes for most of their gatherings, hence the name of the site.
Some of my friends created this site, and I understand that it generates enormous traffic. I believe it’s unique in that it offers the following:
- An ex-pastors’ page that is designed to help conflicted pastors leave the clergy and find life and employment outside of it.
- Testimonials of ex-pastors who left the clergy system and why.
- A form designed to connect those who are seeking organic church life.
- An opportunity to receive the help and input of extra-local workers who plant and equip organic churches.
- Free articles on body life, spiritual formation, and God’s mission.
- Free downloadable audios (which I understand is coming soon).
- A place to trade links with other similar sites.
- Information on upcoming events, conferences, and seminars.
- Useful books on God’s mission, spiritual formation, and organic church life.
- A free e-newsletter that goes out periodically with updates, etc.
Thank you, Frank, for allowing me to interview you! By the way, Frank blogs at “Reimagining Church: The Blog of Frank Viola“. I’ll post my response to Frank’s answers within a day or two.
Upcoming Interview with Frank Viola
A few months ago, I received a review copy of Frank Viola’s latest book Reimagining Church. I finally published my review of that book almost two weeks ago in a post called “Reimagining Church“.
While I was reading the book and working on the review, I talked with Frank a few times on Facebook. I was able to ask him a few questions about the book, and he explained some things that he said in more detail. He also told me about an upcoming book that should be very interesting.
In the course of those conversations, I asked Frank if I could interview him for my blog, and he agreed. So, I sent him some questions, which he answered and returned to me.
On Monday, I will post my “interview” of Frank Viola. I tried to ask questions that were slightly different than the ones he is normally asked. Some of the questions deal the nature of “organic church”, while others deal with practical issues surrounding church meetings. Finally, I ask a few questions that are unrelated to the topic of the church and his book so that we can get to know him better as a person and a brother in Christ.
I hope you enjoy our “conversation”. Either Wednesday or Thursday, I also plan to publish my responses to Frank’s answers. I hope this turns into a very encouraging and informative “dialog”.
More ready to submit than to impose
I recently read Lesslie Newbigin’s book The Household of God (Friendship Press, 1954). Kärkkäinen describes Newbigin’s ecclesiology as a “missionary ecclesiology” – “The new conciliar understanding of mission is based on the idea that the essential nature of the church is missionary, rather than mission being a task given to the church. (Velli-Matti Kärkkäinen, Introduction to Ecclesiology, Downers Grove: IVP, 2002, pg. 151).
However, Newbigin does not begin his book with mission. Instead, he begins with the essence or nature of the church:
We are to be speaking about the Church, and it is necessary at the outset to say that this means a society of human beings, which—so far as those still living in the flesh are concerned—is a visible community among the other human communities. The question, ‘What are its boundaries?,’ is part of the question we have to discuss, but just for that reason it is important to make clear that we are speaking of a society which has discernible boundaries. We are not speaking of an abstract noun, or of an invisible platonic idea… We are called to recognize and join ourselves to God’s visible congregation here on earth. This congregation is truly known only to faith, because it is constituted in and by the Holy Spirit. (19-20)
According to Newbigin, the Spirit plays an essential role in the constitution, nature, and task of the church. The Spirit primarily functions through his abiding presence:
The Holy Spirit is now [in contrast with what was described in the OT] no more an occasional visitant to a favored individual, but the abiding and indwelling principle of life in a fellowship. The supreme gift of the Spirit is not the spectacular power by which an individual may gain preeminence, but the humble and self-effacing love by which the body is built up and knit together. (115)
Finally, the Spirit also functions during the meeting of the church, not only through the gifts that he gives to those he indwells, but also – and primarily – through the manner of life of the believers who are meeting together:
In the building up of the common life of the body there will be need for the due operation of the principles both of order and of freedom. Where these clash with one another there will be room for honest difference of opinion, and there will need for a common seeking of the Spirit’s guidance. But the mark of the man in Christ will be that he is more eager to claim freedom for his brother than for himself, and more ready to submit himself to good order than to impose it on his brother. In any case the fundamental principle will always be the love which seeks not its own good, but the common good of the body. (116)
I believe this is one of the most best explanations of the work of the Spirit among the body of Christ while the church meets! When the church meets, if each individual – or any one particular individual – is seeking to exercise his or her own spiritual gifts without first considering and giving preference to other present, then this is a clear indication that there is a lack of “a common seeking of the Spirit’s guidance.”
It seems that the mark of the church today is that some people have freedom to exercise their gifts – and are even required to by the church – while others do not have that freedom. It also seems that very little “submission” is done when it comes to spiritual gifts. Certain people exercise their gifts and impose those gifts on others every time the church meets. Thus, some claim and even demand freedom for themselves, while imposing “order” on others at the same time. This is backwards!
In fact, I believe that the common, traditional way the church meets – one or a few people exercising their gifts week after week while the others watch or listen – is detrimental to the spiritual health of the church. In order for us to seek the “common good of the body” we (especially leaders – who are supposed to be mature) must submit to others and allow the Spirit to work through them – even if their “offering” is less than “excellent”.
Read and ponder this sentence from Newbigin one more time: “But the mark of the man in Christ will be that he is more eager to claim freedom for his brother than for himself, and more ready to submit himself to good order than to impose it on his brother.” May God change us – especially us leaders – so that we are more ready to submit to others than to impose ourselves on others!