Creative Commons: http://www.egyptmyway.com/photo/holy_family2_2.html
This post is part of Peter Pollock and Bridget Chumbley's Blog Carnival.
Is the Church about itself? Or is it about everybody else in the world outside it?
Or is it about something else entirely?
Those are probably the only three choices. You have to pick one of these:
- Church is about the people who show up. It's a social, community-oriented structure. All the rest is details. It's just about God's people learning to work together as a team and enjoy each other's company. God's new society is made up of potlucks and Bible studies, coffee hour and field trips.
- Church is about God. It's one or more people worshipping. Nothing else matters. Everything should be done with absolute dignity and solemnity, and there is no room for human sentiment or opinion of any kind whatsoever.
- Church is about reaching the world. The whole purpose of the Church is mission. Everything else should take second-seat to the task-at-hand. The "seeker-service" should be the norm. Mature Christians who are trying to grow can go to seminars if they want to.
The criticisms against each of these models are worth reviewing. If the Church is about people, have we so removed God from the equation of the potlucks and committee meetings that there's no room for God anymore, and no difference between the Church and a rather smug country club? On the other hand, if the Church is only about God, then aren't the people irrelevant? Can't we just stay home? God is God regardless, right? And on the third hand, if the Church is strictly about the mission to the world, then there is nothing in the Church for those of us who are already there.
We have a remarkable tendency to criticize those who disagree with us on this question. I admit, I struggle with this one. Once upon a time, I confess that I left a church because I began to fear it was too much about itself to legitimately be about God anymore. I may have judged that one too quickly and too harshly.
Because maybe the whole discussion isn't even necessary. Maybe it's all three. Can you separate God from the mission of God? If God's intentions are always realized, then His intentions *are* his character. Can you separate the mission of God from the servants He's empowered with the task of carrying out that mission? Can you imagine the community attempting to actualize that mission without taking part in worship?
The Church is a community of like-minded and mutually-supportive individuals in agreement on these general principles:
- There is a God.
- This God desires and deserves our devotion and affection.
- This God listens to what we have to present to Him.
- This God calls us to be involved in His plan to revitalize and perfect Creation.
That's all three models wrapped up into one single package.
Which of the three models have you been giving the least emphasis to?
How would the expression of your Faith improve if you cranked up your implementation of that model?
Logging you in...
Peter_P 91p · 799 weeks ago
I think I have begun to see that sometimes there needs to be a season where one is concentrated on more than the others, but rarely if ever to the exclusion of the others.
These seasons MUST end though and balance be restored at the right time.
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
It's a remarkably complex equation, of course. How do we live out "the fullness of the Faith" every day in personal and corporate piety when we ourselves are not infinite beings and are bringing an unprecedented, indeterminate, analog collection of distortions with us to the table?
After reading your comment, I'll twist your conclusion slightly and suggest that we're CONSTANTLY in the tension between balancing all three and having to account for the misconceptions AND immediate, legitimate, specific needs of ourselves and others.
One of the things I tell my high school Sunday School students at least once or twice or three times a year is "Christianity is messy."
This conversation with you is reminding me why.
Glynn · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
I absolutely know what you mean. But I wanna make sure that no one thinks that turns our mission into a spectator sport.
We're the active participants. If God wants us to be there and show up, it's because He has something for us to DO!
Lorrie · 799 weeks ago
Nick the Geek 85p · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Yeah, the mistake I made in earlier years was this: *worship* is the only part of Church that's really "about God," so if you're not focusing on that, then you're just a country club with weird symbols.
But what I see now is that all these aspects of churchliness revolve around God, so you're right.
Unless you're saying what I used to think, which is that worship is the only part that matters...which is precisely what I'm *not* trying to say today.
(On the other hand, the early, persecuted, underground Church sure figured out how to worship!)
Nick the Geek 85p · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Now let's go worship together, build the community, and be about our common task! :)
Jojo Agot 55p · 799 weeks ago
Wow, this is the most intellectually stimulating post I've read so far (I've only read at least 8 though, in no particular order). I have been mulling over these differences for years now and you are the first one to give names to this classification. In my mind, I always think of them as the fellowship church, worship church and evangelism (missions) church.
When I was still the senior pastor of our church, I often find myself wondering what would be the proper balance between the three (much like Peter's response above). My conclusion was that churches are basically called to specialize something without neglecting the others of course. If you're a pastor and you try hard to equally integrate the three kinds of churches in your congregation, you will be overworked and people would get frustrated with the inconsistencies.
I think this diversity is beautiful. Some churches are meant to produce worship albums (Hillsong Church Australia for example), others can major on world missions (Every Nation Ministries, Victory Christian Fellowship) and systematic discipleship (Castillano's church in Bogota Columbia), while some can do better with building communities (Rick Warren's church). While Rick Warren can have excellent singers in his church, I don't think they would want to be like Hillsong, and vice versa.
But of course we all need their specialties in our churches. It seems to me that God put them their to pioneer that field in the body of Christ and to set a testimony to the world the unity and diversity of the body of Christ.
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Keep reading through some of the other posts. I actually like the poetry ones. Poetry can say things around corners that intellect doesn't have the wheelbase to handle. :)
If anyone doesn't know what I'm talking about, click on the following line and pick some other posts to read on this same subject. Lotsa good stuff today!
http://www.bridgetchumbley.com/2009/12/church-blo...
Bridget · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Do we NEED to be about a particular mission, for example? Well, yes, of course. But let us be martially ready to mobilize when something happens that requires our readiness on short notice.
The military analogy is intentional, despite my general tendencies toward pacifism. The job is too important.
The reason I brought up mission in the post was because of my general criticism of "seeker services," since they actually alienate established Christians who are hungry to deepen their own maturity. "Is the worship service FOR the visitor?" was my question. But I realize once in a while that my criticism is a bit too harsh: at least the seeker-oriented megachurches are doing SOMETHING while I'm sitting on my proverbial butt wondering *what* to do. I need to cut them some slack instead of just cutting them off entirely.
But yes, Bridget, to your point. It's indeed as complex as human personalities and failures are diverse.
Thank you for your comment, and for your inspiration to do this in the first place! This post kinda rolled out quickly yesterday afternoon on a whim. I wouldn't have bothered without the influence of you and Peter.
Emily Gilly · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
I like that: "So often people just plant a church and give no thought to what kind of church it is."
My fear is that such churches are automatically the First Church of The Ego of the Guy Who Planted It and Gets His Name on the Sign by the Street.
"I'll let God worry about whether or not the people grow (as if I have any gifts that could help them...whatever), but HEY! Look! My picture is on the bulletin every week! Cool, no?"
No. Not cool.
nAncY · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Nancy, thank you for re-injecting the absolutely necessary sense of MYSTERY into this discussion.
I made a whole bunch of declarative statements. There's really no way that a series of statements can correctly and accurately describe Church, God, theology, or much of anything else that has a spiritual component to it.
I have a short fuse for people who think they have it all figured out. That's narrow-minded. It shows an unwillingness to admit that there's a whole lot more amazing, mind-blowing stuff left to find out.
You're right, we do not yet understand. And we need to understand that.
nAncY · 799 weeks ago
and here you ar being so wonderful about it all. you are very kind and i thank you for understanding and for being a friend when i was not doing to well at it.
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Thank you.
Russell Holloway · 799 weeks ago
Jeffrey Holton 67p · 799 weeks ago
Colossians 3:17: "...whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him."
Romans 12:2: "...offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship."
Well said, Mr. Holloway!
jskogerboe 35p · 789 weeks ago