Encourage visiting other churches? Are you crazy?
Last week, in response to my post “Toward a Bigger Church Contest Reminder” (and don’t forget about the contest!), my good friend Art from “Church Task Force” left the following comment:
What if you encouraged people to visit other churches close to them a few times a month? Purposes?
1. To build connections where weekday relationships might be built.
2. To bring needs from nearby churches back to the assembly, for prayer and for practical ministry considerations (how can we help our brothers and sisters in this…)
3. To set an example of finding and purposely seeking pathways of connection with other believers.
To be honest, until a few years ago, I would have thought this was the craziest thing I had ever heard! What?!?! Actually encourage people to visit other churches? But, they might decide to keep going to that other church, and that would be just awful!
Since that time, my understanding of the church has changed, my understanding of members has changed, my understanding of leadership has changed, and my understanding of unity has changed. And, guess what? This not only sounds like a good idea, it’s something that I do on a regular basis.
No, really, it’s true. I’m an elder/pastor of a church, and I encourage people to meet with other churches. (Crazy, right?)
Now, I think that Art’s 3 points above are great. I would only add a few things.
1. Don’t simply meet with the other church. Instead, plan to have lunch/dinner with someone in order to get to know them. By the way, if you don’t plan it (ahead of time if possible), then many times it won’t happen because people tend to scatter as soon as the “benediction” is prayed.
2. Don’t only make leader-to-leader relationships. Try to build relationships with others (and I’m going to ask about this later).
3. Don’t use this time as a bash session. If you want to talk about the other church, then find reasons to praise them, don’t criticize them.
Now… here’s the question that I have for my readers. If you were going to do this – if you were going to encourage people to meet with other churches – which churches do you think they should choose? What criteria would you use?
(If you want to make comment on this topic, or add to the suggestions/reasons/etc. please feel free to do so.)
Toward a Bigger Church Contest Reminder
Last week, in my post “New Contest: Toward a Bigger Church,” I introduced a new contest that I’m running on my blog.
The purpose of this contest is to answer the following question: How do we reach across the man-made boundaries that are currently keeping the church “small�
If you would like to take part in this contest, send me an email at aknox@sebts.edu explaining how you would reach across man-made boundaries in order demonstrate and maintain relational unity with other brothers and sisters in Christ. You can write about actual experiences that you’ve had, or you can write about suggestions to help the church move toward relational unity.
I will accept email contest entries through Monday, April 18, 2010. That gives you three weeks to write and send in your entry. The person who writes the winning entry will receive a free copy of Armstrong’s book Your Church is Too Small.
Continuing discussion on creeds and confessions
A couple of bloggers are continuing the discussion on creeds and confessions, and both have some great things to say:
Arthur at “the voice of one crying out in suburbia” with “Creeds and confessions: unifiers or dividers?” and “Unity on my terms.” (ok, so the last one probably isn’t a continuation of the discussion of creeds and confessions, but its a good post)
T. Freeman at “getting free” with “‘Jesus is Lord’ – The core, pt. 1“
Development of creeds and confessions
It seems that the earliest Christian creed was, “Jesus is Lord.” As time progressed, this profession became insufficient for one Christian to accept and recognize another as a brother or sister in Christ.
Supposedly, the next Christian creed was the Apostle’s Creed. This creed was eventually expanded by the Council of Nicaea into the Nicene Creed which focused primarily on the trinitarian nature of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This creed, as was the case of the statement “Jesus is Lord,” was considered necessary for one to be a Christian. In other words, if someone could not agree with the Nicene Creed, then that person was not considered a child of God… i.e., not a Christian.
Eventually, the Nicene creed was expanded slightly by the Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon. But, the creed remained a litmus test for Christianity. Thus, the creeds up to this point were used to divide Christians from nonChristians.
At some point, something changed. Perhaps it happened during the Reformation, perhaps slightly earlier, perhaps afterward. But, at some point, creeds and confessions were no longer developed in order to separate Christians from nonChristians. Instead, these new creeds and confessions began to separate Christians from one another.
For example, consider the Westminster Confession of Faith. This is a very famous and popular confession written in the 1640’s. But, there are few people (perhaps a few extremists) who would claim that disagreeing with parts of this confessions would indicate that a person is not a Christian. The same could be said of many, many confessions written since the Reformation.
So, what’s the purpose of these confessions? We’re no longer interested in differentiating between Christians and nonChristians. Now, we’re more interested in differentiating between one Christian and another. In other words, these confessions separate brothers and sisters in Christ from one another.
Of course, every creed and confession claims to be “biblical” and claims to use proper hermeneutics and claims to describe what all Christians should believe. But, they differ – just as we differ in our beliefs and understandings and practices.
But, are these differences reasons to separate from one another? Some are… some aren’t. Which ones? Can we tell the difference?
What benefits are gained from creeds and confessions? How do we maintain unity in spite of them?
New Contest: Toward a Bigger Church
A couple of weeks ago, I reviewed John H. Armstrong’s book Your Church is Too Small. Later that week, I wrote a post called “Taking steps toward relational unity.” For the last few years, I’ve been learning that the church is bigger than the “local church.” And, that “bigger church” should be noticeable and recognizable to the world. Our unity and our love for each other is our best apologetic.
So, how do we see the church as “bigger.” By a “bigger church,” I’m not talking about building a larger building or increasing the number of people that are meeting together. Instead, I’m talking about real, relational unity with brothers and sisters from different local churches and different denominations, showing the world that we truly are one in Christ.
How do we do that? How do we reach across the man-made boundaries that are currently keeping the church “small”? The purpose of this contest is to answer that question.
If you would like to take part in this contest, send me an email at aknox@sebts.edu explaining how you would reach across man-made boundaries in order demonstrate and maintain relational unity with other brothers and sisters in Christ. You can write about actual experiences that you’ve had, or you can write about suggestions to help the church move toward relational unity.
I will accept email contest entries through Monday, April 18, 2010. That gives you three weeks to write and send in your entry. The person who writes the winning entry will receive a free copy of Armstrong’s book Your Church is Too Small.
I will also publish contest entries on my blog. If you want your entry to be anonymous, please let me know. If you want me to link back to your blog or website, let me know that also.
Unity is too important to remain a concept. As brothers and sisters in Christ, we must maintain (and not hinder) the unity that we have in Jesus Christ. I hope this contest will be a way that we can encourage one another in that unity.
Quote 6 from Your Church is Too Small
This week (March 14-20, 2010), I’m taking part in a blog tour of John H. Armstrong’s new book Your Church is Too Small. Armstrong begins each chapter with quotes from various writers throughout church history. Each day this week, I’m going to highlight one of those quotes.
Sectarianism is seeking unity in uniformity rather than unity in diversity and expecting other Christians to comply fully with my views before I have genuine fellowship with them. -Rex Koivisto.
Corinthian Divisions
In 1 Corinthians, Paul exhorts the believers in Corinth to unity:
I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:10-13 ESV)
In this passage, Paul does not tell us exactly what the nature of the division is. We don’t know what caused the divisions. (Although, there may be some clues in the rest of the letter.)
Here’s the question. When the Corinthians claimed to follow Paul, Apollos, Cephas (Peter), or Christ, were they simply stating their preference for those people, or were they stating their preference for certain doctrinal distinctives represented by those people?
Quote 5 from Your Church is Too Small
This week (March 14-20, 2010), I’m taking part in a blog tour of John H. Armstrong’s new book Your Church is Too Small. Armstrong begins each chapter with quotes from various writers throughout church history. Each day this week, I’m going to highlight one of those quotes.
Only in Christ are all things in communion. He is the point of convergence of all hearts and beings and therefore the bridge and the shortest way from each to each. -Hans Urs von Balthasar
Taking steps toward relational unity
In two previous posts, I’ve discussed John H. Armstrong’s book Your Church is Too Small (see “Your Church is Too Small – a review” and “Real Unity – Is it possible?“). Armstrong argues that the unity for which Jesus prays in John 17:20-23 is relational unity, not only spiritual unity.
“Relational unity” is visible, palpable. It can be pointed out and experienced. It can also be quenched and grieved.
Few (if any) would argue that the church today rarely shows relational unity across denominations, theological systems, historical traditions, institutions, organization, or even “local churches”. We occasionally attempt to relate to those who are like us and who believe like us (although even this is difficult in today’s church where acquiescence to a set of beliefs has replaced true community).
Thus, the church today is splintered and fractured, and lives as an anti-apologetic to the good news of Jesus Christ.
For those of us who are grieved by this state of affairs, how do we take steps toward relational unity. First, we must realize that we cannot create the kind of unity for which Jesus prayed. God creates unity in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit. We can only maintain or quench this unity.
Second, we must realize that we cannot make the choice of maintaining unity for others. I cannot force you into relational unity with me. However, I can make the offer and be open to relational unity, whether you desire unity with me or not. I can love you and serve you, whether you accept me or not.
Finally, we must realize that relational unity cannot be organized or institutionalized. Now, don’t misunderstand me. Organizations and institutions can help or hinder relational unity, but neither organizations nor institutions can maintain relational unity.
“Relational unity” is relational (seems simple enough, doesn’t it). This means that relational unity is based on relationships between individuals and communities. What does this mean for us?
Let me give an example. Let’s assume that two of my neighbors are believers, and each of them are part of different denominations than myself. That makes three believers and three different denominations. If our denominations choose to interact with one another, that choice will not create relational unity between myself and my neighbors. If our denominations decide not to interact with one another, that decision will not destroy relational unity between myself and my neighbors.
So, what is it that creates or maintains relational unity between myself and my neighbors? God creates the unity, and we decide the maintain that unity in the way that we treat and interact with one another. If we decide to ignore one another, even though we say we are brothers/sisters and even though we live next door to one another, we will quench the work that God is attempting to do in our lives in creating and maintaining relational unity.
However, if we choose to spend time with one another (regardless of what our denominations decide), and if we choose to accept one another and treat one another as brothers/sisters, then we are working to maintain the unity that God has created in Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit.
This is the kind of unity for which Jesus prayed, and this is the kind of unity that Jesus said would demonstrate to the world that the Father sent him into the world.
Discipleship and Sectarianism
For the purpose of this post, I consider “sectarianism” the practice of separating from other believers (that is, people that we consider to be brothers and sisters in Christ) because of differences in beliefs other than differences concerning the gospel.
Our call to “make disciples” is to help one another follow Jesus Christ by living as citizens of the kingdom of God.
If a group (or individual) limits discipleship to their (or his/her) own group, background, denomination, tradition, organization, or even local church, then that group (or person) is not making disciples of Jesus Christ. Instead, that group is making converts to their (his/her) own group, background, denomination, etc. No group, background, denomination, etc. is equal to the kingdom of God.
Thus, sectarianism annuls discipleship.