Adjective Churches
This is a third major category of thing that brings division in church today.
Think about how often we tell about a church by describing it as a "black" church or "charismatic" church. If it is predominantly made up of a minority group we will label it that way. (Hispanic church, Korean church, etc.)
We also often reference a church by the average income level of those who attend. This can especially be seen in a small town or rural setting. Everyone knows where the "rich" church is located and where the "poor" church is located.
We also describe churches as "urban," "suburban," or "rural."
Obviously the previous are adjectives to the noun: church, but I think the problem arises when we hold more tightly to the adjective (descriptors) than we do the noun (church). For example, if we are a part of a "Hispanic" church and we may be prone to reject non-Hispanics in light of the fact they take away our identiy as a "Hispanic" church. We may reject rich people in favor of holding to our goal of being a "homeless/poor" mission church. We may reject people who could change our adjective. (Interesting topic of a possible future blog would be about rejecting people because they would change our noun... church.)
At our KY District Assembly last week the General Superintendent, Dr. Warrick, preached about claiming to be a Christian teacher. The problem, he said, was that we need to be a teaching Christian rather than a Christian teacher. Now, you could say that is all semantics, or you could recognize that the noun is different and the noun is the foundation the adjective rests upon. The noun is what is most important!
For the record, I think it is great to be a Cuban church, a redneck church, a holiness church, an upper-middle class church, or any other kind of church. The problem arises when we value our adjective (descriptor) over our noun (church). That brings division!
30 June 2008
20 June 2008
19 June 2008
A Divided Church #2
Worship Wars
This is the second major thing that divides many churches today. It is sadly ironic that those two words ('worship' and 'war') are in the same sentence describing one thing.
It is most often divided into two sides: (1) traditional and (2) contemporary.
Although to really spice it up you can divide into a number of other categories...
(3) liturgical
(4) emergent (they have their own style?)
I could go on, but I am trying to make a point. An individual's personal preference is just that... a preference. In other words there is no God ordained style. Or is there?
We accept a Pentecostal style along with a United Methodist style (they are pretty diverse) along with a Presbyterian style worship. Where do we draw the line with appropriate worship, if we draw it at all?
John 4 tells the story of Jesus' interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well. When Christ begins to deal with her about her sinful lifestyle she wants to change the subject to: worship wars!
John 4:19-20 "The woman said to him, 'Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.'" (ESV)
Her issue did not have so much to do with style as it did physical location, but it was still a "worship war" issue.
Choose sides! Do you like hymns or choruses? Do you like responsive readings or testimonies? Do you like bright, well lit sanctuaries or dark, mellow coffee houses?
We so quickly get off on the wrong issue. Jesus brought the Samaritan woman back to the real issue in John 4:21-24 "Jesus said to her, 'Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.'" (ESV)
The true worshipers of God will worship the Father in Spirit and Truth (not style or preference)!
This is the second major thing that divides many churches today. It is sadly ironic that those two words ('worship' and 'war') are in the same sentence describing one thing.
It is most often divided into two sides: (1) traditional and (2) contemporary.
Although to really spice it up you can divide into a number of other categories...
(3) liturgical
(4) emergent (they have their own style?)
I could go on, but I am trying to make a point. An individual's personal preference is just that... a preference. In other words there is no God ordained style. Or is there?
We accept a Pentecostal style along with a United Methodist style (they are pretty diverse) along with a Presbyterian style worship. Where do we draw the line with appropriate worship, if we draw it at all?
John 4 tells the story of Jesus' interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well. When Christ begins to deal with her about her sinful lifestyle she wants to change the subject to: worship wars!
John 4:19-20 "The woman said to him, 'Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, but you say that in Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship.'" (ESV)
Her issue did not have so much to do with style as it did physical location, but it was still a "worship war" issue.
Choose sides! Do you like hymns or choruses? Do you like responsive readings or testimonies? Do you like bright, well lit sanctuaries or dark, mellow coffee houses?
We so quickly get off on the wrong issue. Jesus brought the Samaritan woman back to the real issue in John 4:21-24 "Jesus said to her, 'Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.'" (ESV)
The true worshipers of God will worship the Father in Spirit and Truth (not style or preference)!
16 June 2008
The Emerger and the Road Crossing...
Not my own, but definitely worth adopting and modifying. For lack of time, I'll just give you a link to their list. (As always, I do not endorse the whole blog.)
Here is the list titled: Why did the Emergent Chicken Cross the Road?
Here is the list titled: Top Ten Reasons Why the Emerger Didn't Cross the Road?
.
Here is the list titled: Why did the Emergent Chicken Cross the Road?
Here is the list titled: Top Ten Reasons Why the Emerger Didn't Cross the Road?
.
10 June 2008
"Nazarenes Are Fanatics!"
There is a new couple that have recently started coming to our church. They didn't come because they saw the church name on a billboard, received a mailing, went to our slick website (we don't have one), saw an ad in the paper about our new seats with cup-holders (we don't have any), or saw the impressive architecture of the church building (it is impressive though). They came because someone in our church invited them.
Now, while the concept of individuals inviting other individuals to church is a relatively novel idea, that isn't what I'm blogging about today. I want to blog about what the husband told me after having been at church two or three Sundays.
He said that when he was younger his grandfather told him, without explanation that "Nazarenes are fanatics!" That had stuck with him throughout his life and now as his age, I would guess, approaches the late fifties he still remembered the words of his grandfather and remained a little suspicious about the "Nazarenes."
The individual from our church who invited him was persistent and he eventually came. What troubled me was that (my memory is a little hazy at this point) he either implied or said out-right that we were not fanatics so he would continue to come.
Fanaticism is valued in everything but our faith in Jesus Christ. You can be an environmental fanatic and live in a tree for three years and people will celebrate your bravery & convictions, but if you refuse to buy or sell on Sunday because of what God says in the ten commandments people think you are loony!
You can take your shirt off and paint yourself varying colors and scream like fire ants are in your pants and people talk about your 'spirit' and 'enthusiasm.' But if you refuse to slander and gossip about your co-worker or neighbor people will say you are self-righteous & judgemental.
You can immerse yourself in Hollywood and keep track of the 'stars,' read the tabloids, and watch every television show, movie, and/or documentary produced by the haven of sin called the entertainment industry. But if you decide your life might be more whole and holy by not having a satellite dish or cable running into your home you might just be treated like you have three eyes!
I am convinced that the devil doesn't care if you are religious as long as you aren't real. He doesn't care if you go to church as long as you don't take to heart what the preacher says. He doesn't care if you read your Bible as long as you don't live it out.
I believe Nazarenes need to get back to their fanaticism! I am a Nazarene that is a fanatic!
Now, while the concept of individuals inviting other individuals to church is a relatively novel idea, that isn't what I'm blogging about today. I want to blog about what the husband told me after having been at church two or three Sundays.
He said that when he was younger his grandfather told him, without explanation that "Nazarenes are fanatics!" That had stuck with him throughout his life and now as his age, I would guess, approaches the late fifties he still remembered the words of his grandfather and remained a little suspicious about the "Nazarenes."
The individual from our church who invited him was persistent and he eventually came. What troubled me was that (my memory is a little hazy at this point) he either implied or said out-right that we were not fanatics so he would continue to come.
Fanaticism is valued in everything but our faith in Jesus Christ. You can be an environmental fanatic and live in a tree for three years and people will celebrate your bravery & convictions, but if you refuse to buy or sell on Sunday because of what God says in the ten commandments people think you are loony!
You can take your shirt off and paint yourself varying colors and scream like fire ants are in your pants and people talk about your 'spirit' and 'enthusiasm.' But if you refuse to slander and gossip about your co-worker or neighbor people will say you are self-righteous & judgemental.
You can immerse yourself in Hollywood and keep track of the 'stars,' read the tabloids, and watch every television show, movie, and/or documentary produced by the haven of sin called the entertainment industry. But if you decide your life might be more whole and holy by not having a satellite dish or cable running into your home you might just be treated like you have three eyes!
I am convinced that the devil doesn't care if you are religious as long as you aren't real. He doesn't care if you go to church as long as you don't take to heart what the preacher says. He doesn't care if you read your Bible as long as you don't live it out.
I believe Nazarenes need to get back to their fanaticism! I am a Nazarene that is a fanatic!
05 June 2008
Post-Rapture E-Mails...
You need to read this article and sign-up! (There may be a hint of sarcasm in there.)
If you sign up, you won't have to witness to anybody here on earth, just wait until Jesus comes back and let the computer do it for you!
If you sign up, you won't have to witness to anybody here on earth, just wait until Jesus comes back and let the computer do it for you!
A Divided Church #1
Acts 2:1 "When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place." (ESV)
Allow me a moment of commentary on the verse. It seems there is a redundancy when the Bible says "they were all together in one place." If people are in one place, then they are obviously 'all together.' It would seem that something else is being said here. The KJV maybe says it better: "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place."
There was a unity of purpose in the upper room. Yes, there had been times when the disciples had argued about who was the greatest, but this time was not one of them. They were "on the same page" now!
That unity, I believe, was an essential ingredient in the Holy Spirit coming upon the believers. Allow me a series of posts on some of the things that bring division in the local church (as apposed to the universal church).
#1 Age
Why does the church always set up the youth against the older Christians?
Older folks so often attack youth as less than what they were. The youth are viewed as the problem of the church of today. They are accused of compromising, liberalizing, and just plain turning the church over to the devil.
For any older Christians who are reading, has it ever occurred to you that maybe it is your fault this is happening, if in fact all the accusations are true? I mean, you raised them or you raised their parents? You are not an innocent bystander, but an active participant in what the next generation will be like.
Since I am still fairly young, 27, I would like to argue that every generation has bad fruit, but it also has some good fruit. (I'd like to believe I am some good fruit!)
On the other side of the coin, young people so often attack the older Christians. They are spiritually dead, don't want change, refuse to do anything, don't know how to worship, along with other accusations are the words that encompass the finger pointing.
I wonder what the church of Jesus Christ did before 1980 when my generation began to come on the scene? When the older generation was a little younger how did it ever survive without our long hair, guitars, "Jesus tattoos," and 'Christian' rap? Poor folks never realized how upset God was that people wore ties to church, played the organ for worship, and actually preached from the Bible!? (Now we preach from movies.)
For any younger Christians that may be reading, has it ever occurred to you that some of the older Christians might be.... right? Maybe instead of ignorance, stubbornness, or legalism, that is wisdom speaking when they don't think we should open up a Starbucks in the foyer of the church!
Maybe my generation needs to realize that we are simply a link on a long chain called the church... our responsibility is to hold tight to the truth in our hour.
Some of the greatest lessons in life that I have learned have come from some of the oldest members of churches to which I have been a part. Sure, some older folks are "set in their ways" for the sake of ignorance, but certainly not all (or even most).
What if the young and old could come together and be the church? We might just have another Pentecost!
Allow me a moment of commentary on the verse. It seems there is a redundancy when the Bible says "they were all together in one place." If people are in one place, then they are obviously 'all together.' It would seem that something else is being said here. The KJV maybe says it better: "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place."
There was a unity of purpose in the upper room. Yes, there had been times when the disciples had argued about who was the greatest, but this time was not one of them. They were "on the same page" now!
That unity, I believe, was an essential ingredient in the Holy Spirit coming upon the believers. Allow me a series of posts on some of the things that bring division in the local church (as apposed to the universal church).
#1 Age
Why does the church always set up the youth against the older Christians?
Older folks so often attack youth as less than what they were. The youth are viewed as the problem of the church of today. They are accused of compromising, liberalizing, and just plain turning the church over to the devil.
For any older Christians who are reading, has it ever occurred to you that maybe it is your fault this is happening, if in fact all the accusations are true? I mean, you raised them or you raised their parents? You are not an innocent bystander, but an active participant in what the next generation will be like.
Since I am still fairly young, 27, I would like to argue that every generation has bad fruit, but it also has some good fruit. (I'd like to believe I am some good fruit!)
On the other side of the coin, young people so often attack the older Christians. They are spiritually dead, don't want change, refuse to do anything, don't know how to worship, along with other accusations are the words that encompass the finger pointing.
I wonder what the church of Jesus Christ did before 1980 when my generation began to come on the scene? When the older generation was a little younger how did it ever survive without our long hair, guitars, "Jesus tattoos," and 'Christian' rap? Poor folks never realized how upset God was that people wore ties to church, played the organ for worship, and actually preached from the Bible!? (Now we preach from movies.)
For any younger Christians that may be reading, has it ever occurred to you that some of the older Christians might be.... right? Maybe instead of ignorance, stubbornness, or legalism, that is wisdom speaking when they don't think we should open up a Starbucks in the foyer of the church!
Maybe my generation needs to realize that we are simply a link on a long chain called the church... our responsibility is to hold tight to the truth in our hour.
Some of the greatest lessons in life that I have learned have come from some of the oldest members of churches to which I have been a part. Sure, some older folks are "set in their ways" for the sake of ignorance, but certainly not all (or even most).
What if the young and old could come together and be the church? We might just have another Pentecost!
01 June 2008
I'm Pro-Denominational!
That's right, I'm all for them! That certainly isn't a popular stance right now, but mine none the less.
Keith Drury dealt with this in his blog with 7 advantages of a denomination. However, his has more to do with why a preacher might choose to be in a denomination. My reasoning has more to do with local churches (including the local pastor) and more general reasons why denominations are a positive thing for the church!
1) Accountability: A local church can get off track sometimes; pragmatically, theologically, and even morally. A denomination holds the local church & pastor accountable for how they do what they do (orthopraxy), what they believe (orthodoxy), and their moral integrity. This is positive thing although it can easily be trumped if an immoral or heretical pastor leaves the denomination he/she is a part of and starts his/her own non-denominational church!
2) Combined Resources: A local church is often hard pressed to support a full-time pastor, not to mention a missionary to go to the other side of the world. But if one local church joins with all the other churches in the denomination they can! (Christian education, printing Christian literature, etc could also be included here.)
3) Super-pastors welcome, but not necessary: While it can happen within denominations it seems that the idolization of pastors is less frequent. Yes it can happen to some degree, but it usually does not. Most of the famous pastor's names that you could come up with are probably non-denominational. Most "star pastors" are non-denominational, maybe because they prefer to be uninhibited or unaccountable to the larger church. Denominations have a tendency to care less about individual "star" pastors and more about the purpose of the church being fulfilled.
4) Unity: While the word denomination has to do with dividing, in reality the most divisive Christians are the "non-denominational" or "independent" churches. While I'm not a big fan of radical ecumenism (because of it's tendency to water down and push toward liberalism) I do believe in Christian unity. A non-denominational church is really a denomination of only one church.
Yes there are some negative aspects I suppose...
1) Organization requires administration: Some denominational leaders do nothing more than fulfilling administrative functions. (Although administration is listed as one of the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:28.)
2) Necessity of a human hierarchy is susceptible to infiltration of worldly & sinful ways of operating. By necessity there is a polity, even of an individual local church, but as that infrastructure grows and more administrative things are necessary so too can the susceptibility of corruption of that polity grow. If there is a polity, it will not be long before there will be a corrupt politician.
3) Nepotism. (Although it could be argued that it would be more rampant in a non-denominational church. Joel Olsteen replaced his father.)
4) There is sometimes a call to allegiance to the denomination rather than the Savior. So an attitude of exclusivity may develop (that is: no other denomination will make it to heaven).
Let me stray from the subject for a moment...
What is interesting about the non-denominational church in general is that some of the larger churches are forming denominations while maintaining their non-denominational title! It's not cool to be part of a denomination so they are re-labeling! For example lifechurch.tv calls it "networking" (a loose congregational style denomination using similar material) and "uniting" (almost a cult like adherence through video sermons from the "mother church").
They have re-packaged denominations in such a way that they are cool!
If you are going to a non-denominational church I would encourage you to ask the following questions to your pastor or pastoral staff:
1) Where did you come from? Was it a denomination? Why did you leave a denomination? Why are you part of a non-denominational church?
2) What are the beliefs/doctrine of the local church?
Denominations will come out of this fight in the end. They will weather the fad and "emerge" (I really hate to use that word) from the fray. Why? Because they have structure, stability, and stamina.
As for me, I'll be part of a denomination!
Keith Drury dealt with this in his blog with 7 advantages of a denomination. However, his has more to do with why a preacher might choose to be in a denomination. My reasoning has more to do with local churches (including the local pastor) and more general reasons why denominations are a positive thing for the church!
1) Accountability: A local church can get off track sometimes; pragmatically, theologically, and even morally. A denomination holds the local church & pastor accountable for how they do what they do (orthopraxy), what they believe (orthodoxy), and their moral integrity. This is positive thing although it can easily be trumped if an immoral or heretical pastor leaves the denomination he/she is a part of and starts his/her own non-denominational church!
2) Combined Resources: A local church is often hard pressed to support a full-time pastor, not to mention a missionary to go to the other side of the world. But if one local church joins with all the other churches in the denomination they can! (Christian education, printing Christian literature, etc could also be included here.)
3) Super-pastors welcome, but not necessary: While it can happen within denominations it seems that the idolization of pastors is less frequent. Yes it can happen to some degree, but it usually does not. Most of the famous pastor's names that you could come up with are probably non-denominational. Most "star pastors" are non-denominational, maybe because they prefer to be uninhibited or unaccountable to the larger church. Denominations have a tendency to care less about individual "star" pastors and more about the purpose of the church being fulfilled.
4) Unity: While the word denomination has to do with dividing, in reality the most divisive Christians are the "non-denominational" or "independent" churches. While I'm not a big fan of radical ecumenism (because of it's tendency to water down and push toward liberalism) I do believe in Christian unity. A non-denominational church is really a denomination of only one church.
Yes there are some negative aspects I suppose...
1) Organization requires administration: Some denominational leaders do nothing more than fulfilling administrative functions. (Although administration is listed as one of the spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:28.)
2) Necessity of a human hierarchy is susceptible to infiltration of worldly & sinful ways of operating. By necessity there is a polity, even of an individual local church, but as that infrastructure grows and more administrative things are necessary so too can the susceptibility of corruption of that polity grow. If there is a polity, it will not be long before there will be a corrupt politician.
3) Nepotism. (Although it could be argued that it would be more rampant in a non-denominational church. Joel Olsteen replaced his father.)
4) There is sometimes a call to allegiance to the denomination rather than the Savior. So an attitude of exclusivity may develop (that is: no other denomination will make it to heaven).
Let me stray from the subject for a moment...
What is interesting about the non-denominational church in general is that some of the larger churches are forming denominations while maintaining their non-denominational title! It's not cool to be part of a denomination so they are re-labeling! For example lifechurch.tv calls it "networking" (a loose congregational style denomination using similar material) and "uniting" (almost a cult like adherence through video sermons from the "mother church").
They have re-packaged denominations in such a way that they are cool!
If you are going to a non-denominational church I would encourage you to ask the following questions to your pastor or pastoral staff:
1) Where did you come from? Was it a denomination? Why did you leave a denomination? Why are you part of a non-denominational church?
2) What are the beliefs/doctrine of the local church?
Denominations will come out of this fight in the end. They will weather the fad and "emerge" (I really hate to use that word) from the fray. Why? Because they have structure, stability, and stamina.
As for me, I'll be part of a denomination!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
