April 2004 Archives

A list from Bill Easum:

1. Concern for membership rather than discipleship
2. Concern for size rather than quality
3. Sin
4. Lack of spiritual direction from pastors (especially mainline)
5. Pastors who won't tell it like it is and hold problem people accountable
6. Sin
7. Too much emphasis on current theology rather than living missiology
8. Christianity becoming a way of life rather than a life and death movement
9. Bultmann and all that crowd
10. Sin, did I mention that already?
11. Removing salvation as the primary emphasis of Christianity
12. Putting Christianity on an equal plane with all other major religions
13. Sin
14. Affluence
15. The removal of the supernatural from the mainline tradition
16. Too much reliance on the emotional among some of the side line groups
17. Development of the institutional church in place of the missional or organic church
    

The solution to the problem lies in the undoing of at least the above and problem much more. I know this seems simplistic, but the good news is simple. We just make it either too difficult for people to understand and thus live it, or too simple for people to believe and thus live it.

Some good quotes found in the comments at DashHouse.com from my brother Arthur, including this one:

The Church has to face society and not turn its back on it. If you're facing away from someone and you're trying to talk to him, he can't hear you - you're mumbling; you're not interested. What you're saying is, "Come over here. It's better over here," as opposed to saying, "I'm going to come to you - I'm interested in you; how can I serve you?" The days of "tell me" are over. The days of "show me" are in. (Jim Stewert)

Alan Creech, via Next Wave:

The popular former definition of that word has been found severely lacking. Boss, Commander, CEO, Manager, Administrator, Sovereign - no, these won't do. They won't do because they aren't right. They are mistaken notions of what a pastor or elder or leader is designed to be in a faith community - and therefore, they go against the grain of Body life and cause it to be crippled. I have found it to be an "answer" that if we hold on to this philosophy of pastoral leadership, or continue in a system which holds this view inherently, we perpetuate the notion that only one or a very few people in a community are "ministers" and therefore, the idea in most that they are not. I mean to say that there IS leadership in the Body - there are still pastors and elders - but we cannot afford to be those things as we have been taught to be them. It's not about the pastor. It's about the whole Body of Jesus and the Life of God in the Holy Spirit living in and through us all.

Easter is central to what it means to be a dying church. If it wasn't for Easter, it would make no sense for a church to die to itself. All organizations live for their own survival. It makes complete sense to do so, as long as one doesn't believe in the resurrection.

Easter both embraces death and demolishes it. On Good Friday, we remember that death is something to be embraced; that the pathway to true life goes through death. Henri Nouwen said, "The resurrection is God's way of revealing to us that nothing that belongs to God will ever go to waste. What belongs to God will never get lost." A church that chooses to die to itself chooses the hard route (what is harder to choose than death?), but it also trusts God that there is life on the other side. The church that tries to hold on to life, forfeits life. The church that dies to itself, that stops living for its own survival, begins to experience true life.

Easter doesn't just embrace death. It also demolishes it at the same time. N.T. Wright says, "Death is the ultimate weapon of the tyrant; resurrection does not make a covenant with death, it overthrows it." We can choose to die, because we believe that Jesus specializes in bringing the dead to life again.

This is my first Easter since recognizing that the call to die to self applies to churches as well. I'm hearing the call to die once again. But I'm also looking forward to Sunday.

I just started reading Reclaiming God's Original Intent for the Church. Some good thoughts in the first chapter, which compares Haggai and Jeremiah. People listened to Haggai; his ministry was well-received; things got done. In contrast, Jeremiah was rejected and opposed, and had little to show for his ministry. The authors ask, "Can Jeremiah's ministry be a model of success?"

Is something wrong with smaller churches remaining small?

Is something incorrect if budgets don't significantly increase from year to year?

Is something improper if we're content with the facilities we currently own?

They continue:

If we're honest, we'll admit that much of the motivation that drives us to be "bigger and better" is what the Bible calls selfish ambition...

God called both Haggai and Jeremiah. Both remained faithful to God's calling, and both served the same Lord. Whether your ministry is more like Haggai's or Jeremiah's is really the choice of God. It's his calling.