Dangerous Churchiology Statements
For some time I have struggled over terminology and how our words and/or statements send the wrong message, leading to a hindrance to the mission. Let's look at just a few of possible statement flaws!
For instance:
"I am a Church planter."
Consider this, man never plants Churches - God always does. To make this comment often implies that our number one priority is planting churches. Making disciples who make disciples is our number one priority. If we can get that right, God will birth His Church out of it. With the help of God, I begin disciple making movements. We make disciples -God plants or births churches. .
"The church or Church"
What does this mean to you? Does it mean location or does it mean the body of Christ? Because we often say let's go to church the world and many believers see church as something we go to on such a such a corner rather than a Christ community. Therefore we do not go to church we gather as the church in such and such a place. We must not go to gather -we must gather to go! The skinny is, you are the Church, we are the Church! (Capital "C"hurch)
"church programs"
Consider: Is this a one of those "tricks of the enemy"? Church programs are often predetermined ministries that leaders decide and insist must be filled with servants. I'm not suggesting that we do not have ministries for people to serve, I am merely suggesting that we should not have ministries without God given servants with God given passions to serve in them.
"we need more workers"
Consider: This phrase often implies we need more volunteers. We must pray for the Lord of the harvest to send us workers with passions to serve in the ministries that we engage. We must not just use volunteers to fill vacancies, we need God given people who are passionate about the ministry.
"the leadership has determined the ministries of our church -now you need to serve in them"
Consider: God determines the ministries and when and where (in & out). He gives the passion and gifts in us to advance His cause. Believers must be empowered and released to serve out of their passions in and outside the church. Christ followers often burn out because they are not empowered and released to serve in their passions. YOU ARE THE PROGRAM! Do leaders have the right to force Christ followers to serve in anything other than what God desires for them?
"We have written a new mission statement and vision for our church"
Consider: Jesus already gave us His mission for us! That mission is His Great Commission (a co-mission with God and us) to fulfill. The vision is never disconnected from God's Great Commission (Co-Mission) and the vision is the way we corporately and personally fulfill His mission which is already given.
"The Great Commission is only a part of the mission and vision"
The Great Commission must never be on the same level as worship, fellowship and other priorities. As we fulfill the Great Commission (viewed and followed with supremacy) all the priorities for the Church will flow out of our obedience to the Great Commission mandate. You cannot fulfill God redemptive plan without beginning with His predetermined missional mandate for all of us on the platform and in the pew.
"Only those with the gift of evangelism are expected to "make disciples"
Consider: The Mission (co-mission) is given for all of us to personally own. We must all be given to building relationship with the lost. Leading them to Jesus is the easy part and is one you cannot mess up.
"invite your friends to church"
Consider: Inviting people to church has enabled people from inviting people to Jesus. We should live in the world so that people can see Jesus in us, so that Jesus can work through us to redeem them. As they come to Christ they are enfolded into the family and discipled by those who show them the way to Jesus.
"Discipleship programs for new believers"
Often implies a class for new believers to learn "churchiology" instead of what it means to live as Christ followers. We make good "church members" and often not "good Christ followers".
"We must push for quick conversions"
Consider: What would happen if instead we (all church warmers) built relationships with the lost so that they could see in us what it means to become a Christ following disciple. Perhaps we would have more truly transformed converts who are sold out to Jesus if we let God lead it. Maybe those altar calls and cold calls are not really that effective in making disciples that stick! Not to say we should not seize the moments when people are ready to accept Christ, but, we should never get ahead of God. We often harvest when we have not planted, watered and cultivated the fruit. To rush it is like cracking open an egg before it has been incubated.
Can you think of anything I missed.? What have you to say about what I didn't miss?
9 Comments:
In an email response, Brian C wrote,
"Another term I find mis-leading is the Worship Service, implying worship is contrived on a certain day at a certain time led by a worship leader."
Thanks Brian! Great observation.
Feel free to post here also.
Bob,
How about "full time minister"? What believer is not supposed to be a full time minister?
By the way, great thoughts here. I'm looking forward to reading more.
-Alan
Welcome aboard, Alan!
You are sooo right. Thanks for the contribution here. It speaks volumes
I know you'll disagree, Bobert, but aren't we talking semantics in a lot of these? "Full time minister" for instance.
We understand that being a minister is what that person does for a job. And before you fire back with being a fulltime minister should be EACH Christian's job, yes, you're right...but that's not the context of the discussion.
Generally, when someone asks "what do you do for a living" and a pastor answers "I'm a full time minister" the conversation is about how that person earns the money they make to live by.
If someone asked me, "What do you do for a living" as a social ice breaker and I say "I'm a fulltime minister" that's absurd in the context because I'm an editor. But not only that, it would give them wrong information and when they find out what I really do, they'll think I lied to them and there goes our relationship. They're not looking for some smart butt Sunday School answer, they're looking for information. Some common ground on which we can begin talking and perhaps develop a relationship.
Same thing with "worship service." We understand that to mean the time each week that a church gathers together...it doesn't necessarily exclude other times of corporate and/or personal worship.
Language develops shortcuts over time to be more efficient. If every time you ordered a Big Mac you had to ask for "two all-beef patties with that special sauce you guys have, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions, ketchup, mustard -- oh and could you put that on a sesame seed bun, please? and an order of potatoes cut into lengths and deep fried in oil that hasn't been changed since Eisenhower was president then slathered with some salt" that would be inefficient.
To me, it feels like you're soapboxing here.
"Another term I find mis-leading is the Worship Service, implying worship is contrived on a certain day at a certain time led by a worship leader."
I personally don't like "worship service" either, but I do agree with what this gentleman means by it. In the OT, it was completely up to YHWH how and when (and under whom) Israel was to worship as a covenant people, and he set the festivals and sabbath.
The ritual participation of the new Covenant people in the early Church was universally understood as being on "the Lord's Day" (i.e. sunday). Not only this, but it was universally understood that this was the Apostolic practise.
Worship by your life everyday, but worship as a covenant communion on the day instituted by the Lord's Resurrection and the mandate of His holy Apostles. "Hold fast to the traditions which you were taught by us, whether by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess 2:15). This practise of Christians in the early Church is of Apostolic origin, and hence deserves our "holding fast" to it.
But, I must confess I agree with most of everything in the post ;)
Mike, Am I soap boxing or are you defending something that has led us to a distorted missional response? Is it even remotely possible for us to actually be misleading people in these phrases?
It feels like you are responding like you have blinders on.
By the way, a Big Mac has nothing to do with a missional response without the distorted meaning behind these phrases. A big mac will always be a big mac, it's required. But worship has evolved and many people attend worship and miss worship during the week. This is a big deal. If you worship everyday, you are a rare exception. If you will listen and look, you will see the negative kingdom impact of these statements. You might even see that they fuel us away from the mission.
I'm a minister and yet you are one also. Maybe you have a pastor with a congregation full of ministers. Let's not cop out of our ministry call by letting the "real" (sarcasm intended) minister do all the ministering. Let the pastor do the pastoring and let the ministers serve in their areas of passion.
You can't be serious! You must see what this post is trying to reveal.
It is certainly NOT soapboxing. Here you are, you've been gone for a while, a very long while, and I beat you up on your first return.
Welcome back, Mike. You are a true friend as always. I just hate the fact that you remain blinded by what is comfortable and in the box. How can you not see the distortion of these phrases leading us away from the mission. Doesn't that sadden you?
Was I good or what? Probably the what! I'm waiting for a return fire. I have body armor so you'll have to shoot my toes off.
You crack me up. You calling me Bobert has sarcasm and defensiveness written all over it. I'm all over you, brother! :)
I have called you Bobert since you started this blog, you dog. Don't try to rile me up. I'm on to you.
I do think I worship God everyday...whether I worship God well everyday or not is up for discussion. I even think you worship Him everyday, but with the same qualification.
I stand by my statement on semantics.
Oh, you're right...the Big Mac has nothing to do with it...other than to show another way language becomes more efficient over time and people know what you mean even when you say less than you actually mean. KnowhutImean, Vern?
I've not been "gone," just been waiting for something worth commenting on. Now how's THAT for riling you up?
OK, let me look at them individually. Some I agree are a problem, but not because they are "churchiology," but just because they're wrong:
(Planter) For instance:
"I am a Church planter."
Consider this, man never plants Churches - God always does.
(Mike) I can agree with this statement, but would have no problem if someone referred to him- or herself as a church planter because I know the context.
(Planter) "The church or Church"
(Mike) No problems here because the terms refer to two things. If I speak this, are you going to know which I'm referring to?
(Planter) "church programs"
(Mike) Don't like this one, but mostly because I don't like the institutional feel of "programs." I don't have much of a problem with church leaders determining the programs, UNLESS they don't allow other ministry to happen as well. Someone has to lead. The disciples had Jesus. If I have a Jesus-modeled leader, I can follow him. Not INSTEAD of Jesus, but it is human nature to create for ourselves physical leaders...I'm OK with that, it helps us get things done. But I do agree with Bobert's statement: (Planter) "we should not have ministries without God given servants with God given passions to serve in them."
(Planter) "we need more workers"
(Mike) Well, generally, sadly, this is true in the church, but I would prefer the phrase "we need more ministers" or some such. But I do agree with this statement from Bobert: "We must not just use volunteers to fill vacancies, we need God given people who are passionate about the ministry."
(Planter) "the leadership has determined the ministries of our church -now you need to serve in them"
(Mike) This is bogus and wrong-headed. Good church leadership enables people to serve out of the giftedness God has placed in them.
(Planter) "We have written a new mission statement and vision for our church"
(Mike) In general, I despise mission statements -- but that's just me. They do help some people, but I would stay away from them. I think we already have ours, don't you Bobert? Oh wait, of course you do, that's the horse you're always riding.
(Planter) "The Great Commission is only a part of the mission and vision"
(Mike) Bogus. I'm with you on this one Bobert, but I am not certain we are entirely on the same page when it comes to how that's implemented. I believe this is another area where God allows His children to serve within their giftedness. Therefore, helping people discover their giftedness is very important in my world.
(Planter) "Only those with the gift of evangelism are expected to "make disciples"
(Mike) I admit, I do not have a firm position on this one. In one sense, it agrees with my statement above about serving out of your God-given giftedness, but on the other hand if someone's eternal destiny is placed in my hands, even though I do not have the gift of evangelism, I sure want to be prepared to respond.
(Planter) "invite your friends to church"
(Mike) no problems with this. I want my friends to come to church. But I also agree with Bobert's statement: "We should live in the world so that people can see Jesus in us, so that Jesus can work through us to redeem them. As they come to Christ they are enfolded into the family and discipled by those who show them the way to Jesus."
(Planter) "Discipleship programs for new believers"
(Mike) Just because it CAN be done badly, doesn't mean there's no value in it. I believe in discipleship programs for new believers...mostly because I know what they did for my wife and I. But our classes did not teach "churchiology."
(Planter) "We must push for quick conversions"
(Mike) This is bogus. We must not push for anything, that's the Holy Spirit's job. Our job is relationship building.
Post a Comment
<< Home