(Warning: there may be some movie spoilers in this week’s post.)
This weekend was halloween. I decided that I would get involved by watching a scary movie, which is quite a thing for me, because I am a coward when it comes to those kind of movies. I am the guy in the cinema who is looking down into his pop corn, or doing that thing where you’re looking at the screen but not focusing your eyes, so you don’t have to look at the monsters about to the eat the little girl. For example, I recently went to watch a scary movie with friends and I found the one other guy who was as chicken as I was. We sat next to each other sharing my ipod for the frightening scenes. People chasing each other down dark hallways isn’t nearly as unnerving with a Black Eyed Peas soundtrack to it.
Fellow spineless movie goers should give it a go.
So I got into the spirit of this ‘pagan festival of all things freaky’ and went down to the video shop on the ground floor of my building and rented ‘Stigmata’.
Turns out it wasn’t actually that scary, but I did get some interesting stuff out of it.
The premise is that there are 3 Catholic priests who have been ordered to translate a scroll found with the Dead Sea manuscripts. It is written in Aramaic and as they continue to translate they are more and more convinced they have found a text written by Jesus Himself. After passing on the work to their superiors the whole project is suddenly shut down and the translators disbanded, mostly because of one passage.
In the text, Jesus is supposed to have written:
“The Kingdom of God is inside you, and all around you, not in mansions of wood and stone. Split a piece of wood… and I am there, lift a stone… and you will find me.”
The story goes on with one of these priests dying and ‘possessing’ a young woman in order to get this text, which the church is suppressing, out to the world. The idea is that Jesus never meant the church to become about buildings and institutions, but rather to be about the spreading of the Kingdom of God, this alternate reality Jesus came to announce. This threatens the church and causes a desperate scramble to cover this stuff up and ensure the survival of their institution.
There is one specific scene where a Russian priest, one of the original translators, is standing in a beautiful cathedral, ranting away to Gabriel Burnes’ character about how he doesn’t believe in the need for any of this any more, and he doesn’t need an institution to connect him with God. I forget the exact wording but I do remember being struck by the scene.
I know this is a fictitious story, but a few things struck me.
One is that I think this is something Jesus would have actually said. It seems to fit with His message and mode. He spoke about ‘breaking down the Temple and rebuilding it in three days’, which we know, from hindsight’s vantage point, was His way of saying that the Temple system was going to be destroyed and replaced by something which He would begin with His resurrection. But is this just about a new covenant? Or is there something more specific going on? Is He pointing to the fact that this old system of emphasizing buildings, rituals, structures and hierarchies was to be abolished and replaced by something very simple, started by a group of fishermen who would get people to meet in organic communities? Jesus never instructs them about ‘how to build a church’, ‘who to select as pastors or priests’, ‘how to have a service’, ‘how to form a committee’. Everything He taught them related to living life together and effecting the world with positive change by connecting it to God… without heavy religion. In fact every time He comes up against this heavy religion He seems to be tipping tables over, or making whips, or calling them some pretty rough names.
It seems Jesus wasn’t a fan of this stuff… and yet that’s exactly what we went on to build.
The second thought that hit me was that this notion is everywhere. Popular culture is awash with commentary on this disparity between what Jesus did, and what the church stands for in many instances.
I also watched ‘Angels and Demons’ this week; the new Dan Brown movie. Wasn’t that great a movie to be honest, but it also had some interesting elements. At the core of this story is a deranged cleric who is willing to go to great depths to protect what he sees as the ‘sanctity of the Catholic church’. Over and over again in the movie Langdon (who is the Atheist symbologist trying to unravel the recent spate of crimes) comes up against the rigorous religious rituals held for hundreds of year by the Catholic church, and it’s no accident that the writer and director keep putting them in front of you to represent a block to things like ‘justice’ and ‘human goodness’.
It seems that the stories we are telling in popular culture, when it comes to the church, are about a clutching need to control and suppress any opposition; a kind of desperate and insecure ‘circling of the wagons’.
Before the Protestants among you assume that’s good negative attention for the Catholic church who are so religious in your minds, do you really believe the rest of the world sees you any differently? Just go and watch movies like “As it is in Heaven”, “The Invention of Lying”, “Religulous”, “Jesus Camp” and “Saved”. Even stuff like the “Golden Compass” series makes a clear enemy of the religious institutions.
This is in sharp contrast to the early church who, according to Acts, “enjoyed the favour of all the people”. Not that ‘popularity’ is the goal, but it does speak volumes about our posture in the world, and the stories that are being told about us should be enough to get us asking the tough questions.
The third is the battle we have ahead of us; for all those who resonate with the need for a complete ecclesiastical overhaul. The resounding feeling I had coming away from these movies is one of trepidation, and a kind of preemptive weariness. I know we have so much to lose by giving up our structures and hierarchies, our institutions and our brands of ‘heavy religion’. I know that because I have been there. In fact it cost me my job at the end of the day. I can only imagine the fear for someone who has to support a family with their church salary. How could someone like that follow their conscience? Would it be wise? Would it even be right? Isn’t it better just to shut up and ride it out? And because so many have so much to lose from the questions I am asking in this blog, I know that resistance has been, and will continue to be fierce.
I don’t want to give up though. Not because I am persistently anti-church, quite the opposite. It’s because I am so pro-church that I want to see it become everything it should be; to drop the distractions that keep it from being the positive force it should be in the world. I don’t know how to do it yet, or what my role is, but this blog feels like a good place to start.
I want to live to see the day popular culture is telling redemptive, peace-bringing, grace-extending, and life-giving stories about the church, because that’s what they see in us.
(Thanks to those who posted last week. Was good to hear from you.)
12 responses so far ↓
marcus // 04/11/2009 at 08:08 |
It’s fascinating to see the culture’s interest in and response to the church and Christianity. i think Michael Horton has written a lot more on this. But i think it’s evident that a lot of society’s backlash against Christianity (while sadly often justified) stems from a rejection of any notion of truth. When you reject truth, then you reject any idea of authority. We want to be free to be our own masters, even our own saviours. The real trouble is that we as Christians have ourselves departed from the standard of truth.
Just one question related to this matter you bring up of authority and leadership. You wrote, “Jesus never instructs them about ‘how to build a church’, ‘who to select as pastors or priests’, ‘how to have a service’, ‘how to form a committee’.” This is true insofar as the Bible doesn’t record direct instruction from Jesus about how the church was to function organisationally. Yet the Bible *does* talk — extensively — about how the church is to function organisationally, and what the Pastoral Epistles, for example, have to say about that is of no less authority than Jesus’ own words. We need to be very careful not to be ‘red-letter Christians’ and set one part of Scripture against another. “All Scripture is God-breathed…”
i’m not at all suggesting that the contemporary church always measures up to these standards, but we must be clear that the Bible does set out standards for the church, its leaders, and its worship — and we must adopt those standards. Even in house churches, to which, for example, Titus 1 perhaps refers (see v. 11), Paul envisages leadership and provides standards and qualifications for whom to select as pastors.
What do you think?
Grace and peace.
rachael teo // 04/11/2009 at 15:58 |
hi there. i saw your link on brett’s facebook and was intrigued.. primarily because i too have been feeling this way about the church, and funnily enough, i’ve been telling friends that i’m in this eccelsiastes mode right now. the best thing is, i just started working part-time in church yesterday due to His call, even though everything in me is resisting it, but to no avail. Anyway, i just wanna say thank you for being brave. to speak out. i think this blog is GREAT and will continue to check in!
all the way from Singapore,
Rachael
Daniel // 04/11/2009 at 17:02 |
Hey Sean,
Thanks for the post, a great read. (Also found this through Bretts link).
Its always a breath of fresh air to hear someone who also doesn’t feel right about how things are.
Ever since I moved to SA the church culture seems to be so stemmed around the idea of the “church” being an institutional organisation, founded on procedures, clicks, and like minded attitudes…regardless of the denomination.
I’m sure you would run into this anywhere in the world, but for some reason it has stood out to me quite strongly since Ive moved here. Maybe I just wasn’t aware of it before.
I often wonder what happened to the “when two or more of you meet in my name” principle.
Whats interesting is I have a deep appreciation for ritual, tradition and the need for shepherding/authority, it certainly has a precious place in our heritage, and even looking at the life of Jesus these things had a role to play.
However, when the core foundations of a “church” becomes about “growth” and defining itself as “this is who we are…and you are not that, so you don’t fit here” I get angry, frustrated and shocked as it neglects the very nature of what Christ seems to suggest what all this is all about. Fellowship, community, worshiping a common God, the one true God, despite cultural, social, economic and even theological differences. Sounds a little like what heaven might be like?
Isn’t all this about about “Love God with All your Heart” and “Love your neighbor as yourself” ? Isn’t that what “church” should be all about?
@Marcus…if we interpret Jesus’ instructions on how to be in community and fellowship together on the basis that is there to help us found well run institutionally organized foundations called “Churches” then surely we have missed the mark?
I mean…isn’t that what churches have been trying to do for the last 2000 years? And look where we are?
People feel rejected, wars and crusades have been waged in the name of the church and people relate to churches as either something they hate or are so dedicated to their continuation and prosperity you wonder if they are serving the institution or the God they worship IN the institution.
I am not criticizing the churches or church goers as a whole (because I am one
), but this seems to be the prevalent perspective in the world around us.
Might it be better to interpret Jesus’ instructions as instructions he has given to us AS A PEOPLE (not necessarily as institutions or organizations) …that glorifies him most, and allows the kind of fellowship and community that he wants for us…and that is really best for us?
marcus // 04/11/2009 at 17:52 |
@Daniel
These are good points, Daniel. i agree with you that people do feel rejected — and sadly our ways of “doing church” have often contributed to that because we have not understood or practised the Bible’s teaching. i agree that things are not right, and i yearn for the day when Jesus’ Bride — the Church — will be ready, clothed with fine linen, bright and pure. (Rev 19)
But there are still issues of authority here. Jesus’ authority and the Bible’s authority, or ours — what are we going to accept as our standard and follow? Jesus said, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” (John 14:15) and, “If you keep My commandments you will abide in My love” (John 15:10). We love God by obeying Him, and we obey Him by obeying His Word in the Bible.
Regarding the interpretation of Jesus’ instructions (or Paul’s instructions — indeed, anything in the Bible): What God says is what really is best for us, and what glorifies Him the most is when we accept the instructions He has given as they are given. We need to take what the Bible says seriously, and not evade it if we don’t feel comfortable with it. When we add our own spin on things, thinking we know what is best for us, then we don’t glorify God, because we are not loving Him with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength: we’re saying that there is a piece of our mind which is wiser than He, and a piece of our heart that will not bend to His revealed will.
Lastly, the context for the oft-quoted “where two or three are gathered in My Name” is church discipline (Matthew 18:15-20), and Jesus is here speaking specifically of the God-ordained leadership that the organisational church is to exercise in His Name, as directed, over its members, to correct error in the church. It’s evident from the pericope that *more* than two or three people are here in view, but that is another issue.
Grace and peace
tim // 04/11/2009 at 17:53 |
Hey, i too came from Brett’s link. hehe. publicity for you!
i have friends who are anti-church buildings. and i was anti-church for a long time, but i realised that:
1. our call is to make disciples – so even if you start a “house church”, if you live like Jesus teaches us to live, pretty soon that house church will have 100s of members. Even Willow Creek started with only a handful of lovers-of-God.
2. we are called to serve and love the poor, sick, imprisoned, widowed, etc. the most effective way of doing this is through a close-knit community that work together. the more organised, the more effective in serving and loving those in need.
this, organization leads to ‘church’ as we know it.
BUT, alas, we are humans, and we are full of pride and we make horrible mistakes. This is why we get pastors who are power hungry, buildings that cater for comfort and not mission, people that love God for what He can give them instead of just seeking intimacy with Him…
People who are anti-church are almost always people that have been hurt by somebody in a church. And these anti-church theories are reactionary beliefs, not positive building beliefs.
re: church structure, Acts does lay out many forms of structure, even right up from where they appoint somebody to be in charge of feeding the widows.
Jesus turning tables was not angry about religion, he was angry that they were selling stuff in the Holy Temple and making a profit in God’s name.
Iv been reading a bit of James, and from his letter its pretty clear that there is a church structure similar to what we have nowadays.
And they struggled with it then too! read all the letters, man, churches were doing CRAZY things that the apostles had to continuously speak out against. haha.
we NEED people, like the anti-church people, to keep us all in line, BUT in a loving church building way
any thoughts?
LOVED YOUR POST! tempted to watch the movie now. haha.
Kelly // 04/11/2009 at 18:08 |
Some good points there. I think that we each have an idea of what a church should be – hopefully it is motivated by the Bible. There are so many different types of churches around and it would be a pity if they were all the same. Which in a way is an aspect I believe Jesus was warning us about – church shouldn’t be a formalised thing with rules and regulations and “how-to’s”; instead, it should be a community, a family of believers coming together to celebrate their life in God.
As for “sticking to the old ways” – do you think if you ran a business today the way they ran a business 2000 years ago, that that business would survive? No, of course not!
Also, I’m not so sure about the early church being enjoyed by all people. I’ll have to go examine that scripture (Where is it?) but from what I can pick up, the early church was heavily persecuted at times! Look, no matter how loving and kind and accepting the church is, there will always be someone opposing it. This is because our ideals are striking at the very heart of how they live. Even if we accept them unconditionally, we still believe in for example no sex before marriage – something that, in others’ minds, is unthinkable. Its difficult for them to accept the way we live, and difficult for them to accept that we are truly happy this way, and so in reaction, they strike out at us. Call it a psychological thing.
I knew from the first meeting I had with my current church, that it was the place I was supposed to be. It was overflowing with love and acceptance. Everything it did was aimed towards serving God and serving people (in the sense of loving God’s children and helping them where they needed it). I’ve since seen hundreds of people find acceptance in that church, people who elsewhere would be shunned, people who even in the world would be looked down upon. And I can’t even begin to describe what that type of atmosphere does for them. Being loved, for who they are, despite who they have become – it makes them blossom, bloom in Christ and they begin to display the same type of love to others. Yet still our church does receive its fair amount of criticism, from various sources. This is not because it is not following God, but because it IS following God – it is a mighty force in the advancement of the Kingdom of the Lord, and the evil one does not like that. So he will come against it, however he can.
My point is that there will probably always be criticism against the church, as a body and as individual churches. What I believe is important is: 1. Is the church following God? 2. Is the church living out the commandments of Christ? (Loving God, loving people) and 3. Are you in a church were you are comfortable with the basic principles on which the church is founded?
Joanne // 05/11/2009 at 04:29 |
Thinking Brett has a looot of facebook friends…
Not a long comment,but just thought id say that iv met a lot of ministers and missionaries who would challenge the church (and do,often) if they thought it wasnt being what Jesus intended,despite a threat to their family’s livelihood-my dad is one. There are some truly stellar people of God out there.
Also,theres a lot of anti-church stuff in the media,which is concerning,but at the end of the day,for most people,when they give the Christianity monster a chance,they find real people and a home,more than a church. Some churches aside,because i really have been to a couple who were only in the game to make money and put sum very unbiblical stuff forward,the places iv been to have been a beautiful experience because of the people.
Despite our human tendency to mess up,Jesus gets thru anyway. Just one of the things i love about the Reason wer all here.
Jacques // 05/11/2009 at 04:57 |
Hey Sean
I think it is true that churches fail!
I also think it is true that churches succeed…and by success I hold to the dual commandment mentioned over and over by people commenting on this post…Love God and Love Others as Yourself.
I think there is an inherent danger in looking back to the early church as the model on which we should base our church life. Not because things have changed…but rather because they haven’t.
There has never been a perfect church. The New Testament is full of evidence of the imperfections of the early church and the book or Revelation indicates that only 2 out of the 7 churches were approved by Jesus. This seems to indicated that there will always be more communities getting it wrong than getting it right.
Which brings me to my point for writing today…so what?!
What are we supposed to do about the fact that less than 30% of all Christian communities are shown to be hearing Jesus correctly and carrying out His mandate.
It’s quite simple really…but sometimes not so obvious. We’re supposed to Love God and Love others.
Nicky and I have been listening to a sermon series from the Vineyard Church of Ann Arbor:
http://www.annarborvineyard.org/media/sermon_music.cfm
The series is called Free to Love: How to Leave the Judging to the Judge (It’s the most recent series so it is closest to the top of the page)
and it is really beautiful and really eye (or heart) opening.
(here is a link to the first sermon: http://cdn4.libsyn.com/a2vineyard/september20_2009.mp3?nvb=20091105024147&nva=20091106025147&t=01a1e75fe2fe989feeecb )
It has really challenged me because without knowing it I have spent a lot of time judging others and have realised through this series that it’s not my job to do so. It is my job to Love and I seldom do a very good job of that besides.
Thought I’d share it with you and others on this blog since it might be something to consider as we all wrestle with this stuff about church and community. Feel free to let me know what you think if you get a chance to listen…would love to hear your thoughts.
Much Love in the Lord Jesus
Jacques
Sean Tucker // 05/11/2009 at 15:57 |
Ok, wow. Where to start?
I’m really grateful you all took the time to read and respond. To be honest I contemplated not responding because there is too much to say really, but I’ll clear up a few of things.
Everyone: I don’t think some of you have understood me and it may take more than one post to get what I’m trying to say so if you have more time I would encourage you to grab a coffee and journey back to read some more posts and get some context.
Marcus: Thanks for your comments bro. Always appreciate your persistent reminder that scripture should guide us above all else. I wrote a post on this recently called “Common Ground”. Check it out. I understand that the pastoral epistles do give some guidance about how to ‘do church’, but that is a far cry away from the kind of ‘church we do’ today. Most of the way we do stuff cannot be backed up with scripture. If you’re feeling brave I have just finished up a book called, “Pagan Christianity” by Viola and Barna speaking about how much of what we do in churches in nicked straight from pagan rituals and not from the pages of scripture at all. Grab yourself a copy and gird your loins:) Very challenging and enlightening. I hope I explain this position better over the coming weeks as I intend to spend a bit of time on it.
Rachael: Thanks for visiting. You’re welcome back anytime. Congrats on the new job. Hang in there and stay true to whatever God and scripture are telling. The trick is to live with the tension without snapping, always looking for a way forward:)
Daniel: Interesting you find SA church more ‘institutionally limiting’. I’m not originally from SA either and that has also been my experience. Wonder why that is? I also agree with you that I think it is simpler than we often make it. Are we loving God and others? Are these the most important things? Does our institution help or hinder this? If the latter, then something is wrong.
Tim: Thanks for the input. I would say that…
1. It’s very difficult to do real community in a large church. Real community happens in cells anyway. So maybe the way to think about church is small groups meeting in homes and getting together like they did in Acts2 in the Temple Courts. That way we don’t need to brand the services as one kind of church, but there is just the church in that city. This shift might take a lot of explaining, not sure this makes sense on it’s own if it just sounds like semantics.
2. I agree that close community should lead to serving the world, but you’ve ignored my question about ‘what happens when the institution hinders us from serving the world, by getting us caught up in heavy maintenance, instead of helping us?’
I don’t think it’s enough to say we’re humans and we make mistakes. The reason I write this is not because some people make mistakes, it’s not even about individuals really, it’s about a systemic problem that we need to deal with.
RE: church structure; I would argue that very little of what ACTS lays out is meant as church institutional structure, it was merely applying people with gifts to do specific work. Jesus fight was with the religious institution, over and over again. You’ve ignored the other two examples I gave. And in regards to the one that you focused on; how different do you think people making a profit changing money in the foyer of the Temple is to the exorbitant amounts of money churches spend on themselves and their buildings while the rest of the world goes hungry? I think Jesus is just as mad about this systemic injustice and wiling to speak out about it in no uncertain terms (check Matt 23). I don’t agree with your analysis of James either. If you’re feeling brave I would recommend the same book as I recommended to Marcus called “Pagan Christianity” which speaks about the biblical idea of church community and how much other stuff we’ve added to it. You’ll be very surprised.
Check out a recent post I put up about the modern role of pastor how out of whack that is with the scriptural idea of community. It’s called “Working Together”.
Kelly: Some obvious reservations I have to your comments start with the fact that you would liken church to a business right off the bat. I hope you haven’t heard me say that we should copy the way they didn’t church in the first century after Jesus. What I am saying is that as history has moved along, and we have piled institutional baggage onto the church (read the history), some of the good functioning of the church has been smothered. What I am suggesting is that we look again at that original good functioning and work out how to contextualize it today so that we can be the good stuff the church is meant to be… and that may mean giving up some of our toys!
The verse you are looking for with the “church enjoying the favour of all the people” is Acts 2:47, check it out. And, you’re right, the church was heavily persecuted, but by the authorities who couldn’t get them to worship Caesar. The average guy on the street could clearly see the ways in which the church was changes the world for better. I don’t think you get the same response from the guy on the street today.
I agree with you that we’re not out for agreement on all issues, but no one is suggesting that. I’m worried that with our emphasis on such moral issues comes a horrible elitism which separates us off from the rest of humanity. Check out a post I wrote a while ago called “Naughty”.
I’m really glad that you are happy in your church, as are many others, but for as many stories as you can give me, I can give you those of people who are crushed and ignored by the church. Who answers for these stories? I don’t think blaming individuals gets us anywhere because people all hurt each other, but we can at least ask ourselves where the church is missing it as a whole… and I think there is a lot to talk about if we’re honest. As I said to Tim, the issue is a systemic one, not a personal one. If you’re church doesn’t have any of the problems I’ve spoken about in this blog then I’m happy for you. My challenge to you is to make sure you aren’t viewing it all through the rose-tinted glasses of comfort because church is working for ‘you’ and ‘your group’, ask the question for the world because that’s how big our mission is.
Joanne: shot for the comment. I also know many courageous people willing to speak about this stuff, uncompromisingly, even from within the church. Thank God for them. Please read more of the stuff I’ve written because I’m not sure you get what I’m saying. I’m talking about the big changes, the brave changes that need to be made in the way we ‘do’ church. I have said so much more over the months so if you’re interested and want to know more, it’s all there. Maybe a good one to start with to give you an overview is a post I wrote called “Rhythms”. And yes, Brett does have a lot of Facebook friends:)
Jacques: Thanks for the link bro. I hope you don’t see me as one of those judgmental peeps. I’m not sure what else to do but speak this stuff out. The prophets in the OT had the same problem; they had seen things, heard from God, got a perspective on the way things were moving, and believed it was heading the wrong way. God compelled them to speak. I often feel the same, which is why I do this. I think Jesus’ rants (e.g. Matt 23) came from the same place. Same with the Reformers. I hope I stand in that tradition. I’m sure this lot were called ‘judgmental’ too. Just know my goal is a healthier, more effective global church who are introducing the world to God and dragging it towards the Kingdom.
Thanks all! Shot for the lively debate:) Please keep reading if you are finding this stuff useful, and feel free to pass on the link.
Much love.
tim // 05/11/2009 at 16:27 |
Heya,
I think we are on the same page mostly
I mean, I know some churches that are way out of line, mega churches, prosperity churches, etc. But, I think I would still say that Christians in those churches that are so inward focused, are still in a better position to serve the global church, and those in need in the community.
You are right about it being hard to have community in a large congregation. But, thats like saying its hard to make friends in a crowd. it is certainly easier to create community within a large congregation than it is to create community when you are in your little house church. I mean, community that can have a big impact on those that are in need, that God desperately loves.
Yes, larger congregations sometimes use God’s money unwisely, buying BMWs and stuff, but the fact is, a large congregation can give more to the larger community than a small house church. SO, instead of hating on the church that is abused, rather challenge the ones that are abusing it. Keep each other in line.
I do believe Jesus would be and is angry with some churches, but He would not suggest therefore to disband and have little house churches. Acts, Pauls letters, Revelations, they all reprimand churches that are doing these things, but they dont tell them to split up because of it.
I agree that in an ideal world there should only be one church in every city. But, hey, different strokes for different folks. some people are far more able to meet GOD and have relationship with him and church in my church than in a baptist church, and then, some people are not able to relate to GOD in the style that my church does, but find GOD through the baptist.
If segregation/denomination helps people to relate to GOD in their unique ways, dont you think we should just accept it? in the Helderberg, church leaders and youth leaders meet up across denominations quite often and we realise that we all love Jesus, just in different styles. I think this is ok, as long as through it we are all helping people to discover the magnificent Love of Jesus
Anti-church-goers and church-goers alike, we should always ask ourselves, am i doing my best to serve GOD or am i doing my best to make GOD work for me.
bottom line is, where ever we are, however we choose to worship, if we take Jesus’ teaching to heart, we are going to end up in large groups of believers, because thats what happens when you preach the good news.
love to all of you, im loving this debate! hehe. its one that i had in my own heart a couple of years ago when i was anti-church-going.
Kelly // 07/11/2009 at 02:32 |
Ok, wait. One thing first: I went back and reread the blog. This is what I think you’re saying: The church should not be about rules and regulations, about procedures, about “this is the way we do things”, but rather about the people, the community, the family that the church is made of. In a sense, the church is not built on past procedures and rules, but on the people it reaches. Is that correct?
As for your points re: my previous post, I’d prefer not to start a raging war here, so I’ll merely mention that I respectfully disagree on the business side.
With regards to “Naughty” – I couldn’t agree more
We’ve built a culture of accepting anyone who walks through our doors, no matter what they are involved in. We have, honestly now, all sorts of misfits in our bunch. We don’t bash them over the head with the “Biblical” word, or tell them what they are doing wrong. It’s amazing how much just loving, accepting and praying for them does.
Yes, I know many people have been hurt by churches – I was on leadership in my old church. It’s heartbreaking that it happens. Mainly because that’s the exact opposite of what God wanted people to feel in the church community.
However, on the flip side of the same coin, I’ve seen good Christians (and I’m talking about mature Christians in this regard) get extremely uptight over something someone in church said or did, be it purposefully or accidentally, that hurt them. Jesus also calls for forgiveness of others. All too often we as Christians are quick to jump to the “Oh but that church hurt me” defence. I know this because I’ve done it. I’ve done the “how dare he?” performance, stomping foot and all. But who am I to judge that person or that church for what he did to me?
Jacques // 07/11/2009 at 16:46 |
Hey Sean,
Thanks for the reply. No condemnation intended. Just really enjoying the sermon series and think it is a good one for all Christians to hear. It’s quite a fresh take on it (atleast for Nicky and I it was), he discusses the eating of the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as the root cause of our judging. Since this fruit gave us the ability to judge and that One of Jesus main issues throughout the gospels and throughout the New Testament is the need to give up the judging that came about through the eating of the fruit. He says it all a lot better than I can so give a listen if you have time.
He certainly talks about the need to discuss problems with each other and so I’m not saying we shouldn’t be speaking about this stuff, just that when we do we should always be careful to avoid the kind of judging that Jesus talks about. Especially for those of us involved in these kinds of discussing I think it is a relevant issue.
I hear your burden for the community of God my friend. May He continue to draw us to Himself and draw us to each other through His Love.
Peace and Love
Jacques