If a follower of Jesus considers the ‘church in general’ to be ‘worldly’, shouldn’t they be able, then, to change many of Jesus’ sayings about the world and apply them to the ‘church in general’?
“You are the light of the church. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden”.
“Woe to the church for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes”!
“And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole church as a testimony to all (denominations?), and then the end will come”.
“For what does it profit a man to gain the whole church and forfeit his life”?
“He was in the church, and the church was made through him, yet the church did not know him”.
Likewise, could it be that as we are seeing such massive numbers of people leaving behind institutional Christianity, shedding their religion in search of real Life, that we might find more sincere and authentic ’saints’ in ‘the world‘ than we would, typically, in most church services?
I know that I’m making a bit of stretch in my second paragraph especially, but I don’t think that it is unreasonable to believe that this could, one day, become the reality unless something shifts dramatically in the way institutional Christianity, as well as other smaller Christian movements, believe and practice The Faith.
Just something to consider.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 26, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Jerald
Johnny,
“Institutional Christianity” is an interesting phrase to describe something that seems to be anathema to you. Brothers and sisters in Christ come together because of a common belief system and somehow that’s wrong? A group gathers together on Tuesday in someone’s home for what ever reason to worship together and they are suddenly “non-institutional” and so they are okay because they don’t call themselves “Tuesdaynighters”?
The early church didn’t have what’s called denominations but they did have pastors, elders, bishops, etc. who ‘ran’ the church and were the ones who would be called to account by the Lord.
Maybe massive numbers are leaving what you are calling the ‘institutional church’ because of an inadequate gospel that is being taught instead of truth and not because of any organizational founding.
Help me out with this, Johnny. I guess I’m just clueless when it comes to the modern concept of ‘the emerging church’ in America. So, how should we believe and practice The Faith? Where is the “institutional church” missing the mark?
November 28, 2009 at 3:39 am
brotherjohnny
Jerald,
This post has apparently rubbed you the wrong way.
Read it again…
I’m only making observations and asking questions.
To answer you in brief, I believe that the needed shift is for God’s people to learn how to follow Him.
Let’s dialogue more about this later.
Maybe in person even (?)
If not, we can do it here…
November 29, 2009 at 4:11 am
Jerald
Johnny, I’m really not rubbed the wrong way. You’re bringing up some valid points but my response, in my opinion, is no less valid.
Some of the things that you say in your blog indicate that your ‘take’ on what church is supposed to be is not the way it’s being done today in most church buildings on Sunday morning.
And my question is still: How should we practice our faith today? I realize that it can’t be like the 1st Century because our culture is entirely different here in the 21st Century. But aside from the cultural differences that 20 centuries make, what’s it supposed to look like, in your opinion?
I too am simply looking for answers – and I do value your opinion.
If I’ve gotten your meaning all wrong, then straighten me out.
By the way, pray for Pasture Scott. He’s been taken back to the hospital.
Blessings on you brother.
November 29, 2009 at 5:41 am
brotherjohnny
Looks like I wrote and posted the comment below around the same time that you posted the one above!
Yes, your points are valid and I believe that I responded to them all in the comment below…and you pose a wonderful question, one which I have been pondering for about three years now:
“How should we practice our faith today?”
This question is bigger than it looks because, while it encompasses the question of ‘meeting practice’ it also surpasses that concern as well asking what it means to practice ‘faith’ itself…within the culture that we find ourselves in.
Honestly, I think that the biggest differences that we have between today and two thousand years ago are technological in nature. In other words, I think that the things that were good and right back then are the same things that are good and right today, and the things that were sinful and wicked back then are still just as sinful and wicked.
There were, I believe, some things back then that had culturally limited meaning and importance which New Testament writers touched on (head coverings, eating foods offered to idols, etc..), and which can be interpreted in different ways today…
But generally speaking, I believe that the calling upon the Church of Jesus Christ is to recognize it’s position of being in the world while not being of the world and therefore living not “sub-culturally”, (only because that term–to me– sounds like a ‘lower’ way of living, even though that might not be the true meaning of the word) nor even necessarily “counter culturally”, because it’s not always about going ‘against’ the world (quite often it seems to be submitting to it, in fact–ala Jesus at the cross) but maybe the proper term would be “above-culturally”.
As you know, it’s all about coming under the reign of Christ; i.e. living the Highest Life.
It seems to me that, to some degree, this is going to vary in expression from one locale to the next (and even from one individual to the next), but whatever it looks like, it will be graced with the presence and power of the Spirit of God, and demonstrate the Character of Jesus.
I think that much can be gleaned from the testimony of the ‘common’ men and women of the church concerning this question.
Seems to me that when Paul encouraged the brothers and sisters to “seize the opportunity” to give testimony of the Living God before unbelievers, that he left it very much open ended with the only advice being ‘letting our speech be seasoned with grace…’, etc..
In other words, I think that he wanted us to use our God given imaginations, as we are led by the Spirit, to be creative and Christ honoring in how we represent Him.
It might reflect in our prayer life like this:
“Lord, how can I represent you to—-? I feel that you want to bless them through me…”
“Lord, how might I be a peacemaker in this situation…”
And then it is a matter of remaining open to His Living Word, and being faithful in following it out.
Now these are just a few simple suggestions that I have brought to ‘the table’ at this ‘meeting’ concerning this topic.
Can you imagine what it might be like if all (or even “more”) of the brothers and sisters were to offer up some insight, or some revelation or encouragement in a local body from time to time and how that might begin to shape what it looks like for a cooperate body to live out the faith of Christ in a given culture?
Ahh…
But it’s getting late.
I wish we were having this conversation on one of our porches or by a campfire or something……
November 29, 2009 at 5:49 am
brotherjohnny
…and I will pray…
November 28, 2009 at 3:53 am
brotherjohnny
…real quick. How many churches, do you think, practice what Paul says here?:
“…What then, brothers? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. Let all things be done for building up. If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret.
But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God.
Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.
If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent.For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.
……
Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?
If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.
So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But all things should be done decently and in order”.
Now, I’m not saying that every meeting is supposed to look just like this, but I am saying that this little passage of scripture somehow always gets swept under the rug by those who are doing things “by the book”.
November 29, 2009 at 4:23 am
brotherjohnny
Jerald, now that I’m back from Florida, I have a little time to reply to your comment in general and point for point.
Generally speaking, the post itself was a play off of the common gripe of so many Christian leaders gripes about the “worldly condition of the church today” coupled with the reality of such large numbers of people who are dropping out of traditional churches and , in many cases, in search of something more authentic.
And now, “point for point”:
Good call. If one were to read through any of my blogs over the years, they could easily come to the same conclusion. Whatever this monstrous “I.C.” creature is, it must be a real beast, eh?
The truth is that I have had to rethink what this term really means to me because I have loosened up on some of my personal ecclesiology.
In short, I think that it is safe to say that if the “I.C.” were like a department store, it could be comparable to “Wal-Mart” while something that I would call “more authentic” could be compared to, I dunno, maybe a flea market.
Wal-Mart is big, easy to find in ones locality, fairly predictable and serves lot’s of people. Even the leadership structure is similar in that you have the great big boss at the top with all of the ‘departmental’ bosses under them, etc…
It’s nature and feel is rather ‘industrial’, if you know what I mean.
A flea market, on the other hand, is a place that, while not typically as well organized, you can find all kinds of different and interesting things because, well, there all all kinds of different and interesting people ‘offering’. In fact, you could offer too if you are willing to prepare a bit.
Sure, there is lot’s of junk, but there are also lot’s of little (and sometimes larger) treasures as well.
In a flea market, there really isn’t much of a chain of command to follow, although there is usually someone around to help out in showing you the ‘ropes’ of the place if need be.
Now the average Joe (or Jane) could go to either one and probably find what they need for a good price (even though chances are you will find a better deal at the flea market), but I bet that the flea market doesn’t have any contracts or hidden deals with child labor camps, and since they don’t exactly have employees (although those who ‘work’ there can make a modest living), they can’t really mistreat them or make unreasonable demands upon them.
So, yeah, I would say that if someones church experience reminds them more of a Wal-Mart and less of a flea market, then that , to me, could mean that their church gathering might just fit in the “Institutional Christianity” bracket.
Metaphors, of course can only illustrate so much…
Well, first of all, I think that brothers and sisters can come together for any reason they feel led.
Bowling, dinner, movies, charity, chit-chat…and even “church”.
My beef is when a group of believers simply accept that even though their primary mode of operation and gathering cannot be found in the New Testament (as a primary mode of operation and gathering), and then continue to insist that it is somehow still “biblical” while never submitting themselves to the proof of the text (and in my experience the leading of the Spirit).
They rightfully say, “teaching is in the bible”, “pastors are in the bible”, “preaching is in the bible”, etc… and then they point to their teachers, pastors, preaching, etc… and say, “See? We are biblical!”…because they have all the right “ingredients”.
But they forget, somehow, that while they may have a correct list of ingredients, somehow their main course doesn’t look anything like the picture on the menu.
The more that I look at the menu, the less I have a taste for what is simply presented me at the table.
I see true freedom in the good book and that’s what I’m hungry for.
I get your point, Jerald, but I want to be sure that I’m getting mine across as well. It’s not about which night (or day) of the week a group of believers meet, it’s about a condition of the heart which has an effect on the operation of the gathering.
I could understand if I were advocating an unbiblical way of getting together and functioning and then someone calling me out on it, but the fact is that I am actually advocating a way in which the Apostle Paul encourages a church to operate.
“When you come together…”
IN THE NEW TESTAMENT YOU WILL NEVER FIND A PRESCRIPTION FOR OR A DESCRIPTION OF THE MODERN MAINSTREAM ORDER OF CHURCH SERVICE …NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU LOOK.
It’s just not there.
My question to you, brother, is why shouldn’t it be called into question?
Because it has been the tradition in which we were raised?
Because it has been the mainstream mode of operation for hundreds of years?
That’s not good enough for me.
Well, I think that the early church did have denominations, but they were in a state of infancy. Paul essentially called it out as ‘carnality’ in the first letter to the church in Corinth.
And yes, amen to the pastors, elders, etc.., that you mention.
They are who and what they are, and they have their proper place and function in the body, as does each member. But take just a moment and look back at I Cor. 14, and tell me what you see these big shots doing in the kind of meeting that Paul is talking about.
Let me know if you can identify them from the rest of the crowd.
Maybe “inadequate gospel” and “organizational founding” (as you put it) have more in common with one another than we might think.
Maybe the true Gospel of the Kingdom offers a kind of freedom to those under it’s reign that there really isn’t much need to micro manage the gathering of the Holy Ones of Christ, and maybe that has an effect on the way in which a gathering operates. In fact, maybe it has an effect on life in general.
My gripe isn’t simply about ‘form’,… it’s about the heart of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The ‘form’ of church meeting practice can be (although not always) an indicator of what kind of life we are living by (as is true of our human relationships, i.e; family, neighborly, work,etc…)
Like I’ve said at different times and places, there is something different about New River…
I see more freedom there than I ever have at in any other “traditional” setting anywhere.
Maybe Right Gospel and Right Operation do go hand in hand.
Hopefully this at least partially helps you to better understand where I am coming from Jerald. I don’t know much about ‘the emerging church’, myself, but I wouldn’t necessarily categorize it with the things I have been talking about here. If you want to know more about that movement, I would click the zoecarnate link over in my blogroll.
You think you have a hard time understanding where I’m coming from?
But seriously…if you are sincerely want to know my convictions on these matters, there you have ‘em.
I’m up for more understanding…
I’m up for more dialog and conversation on these issues, and I respect others for being wherever they are for whatever reasons they are there. That said, this is a place in which I express my thoughts on these issues, and in fact, I value the kind of feedback which you have to offer. I need it, and I need to be called out when I am ‘out of place’, so God bless you, Jerald, for being who you are and speaking your mind here as well.
Grace and Peace to you and Marie, truly, in the Lord Jesus Christ.