Here's a piece from the WV ACT:S website written by York Morre, National Evangelist and US Invitational Director for InterVarsity and founder of the website, Tell the Story...
“I understand that these things are important but when the students I send to your conferences come back caring more for the environment or slavery or clean drinking water than the gospel and evangelism, I have a real problem!”
These were the frustrated words of a mega-church pastor as we shared lunch together after I had delivered evangelistic messages for his four services. The comment came as we were discussing the new face of evangelism and how addressing the gospel through the lens of justice has produced so much fruit in our ministry nationally. This pastor’s concerns or not rare, there is a growing frustration with conservative evangelicals regarding the direction of the church, particularly when it comes to social justice issues. Racial reconciliation, caring and loving the creation, AIDS, child prostitution, urban poverty, immigration-the list of issues and causes Christians are awakening to is long and growing and the pastor’s “problem” is a good one to have. The questions of why we should and how we should care about the injustices and needs of the world around us need to be answered. Embracing causes without critique just because we think God cares about them is not a good trend.
The short answer to why we should care about injustice is because God does, but the deeper question is why does he? Certainly, all causes aren’t equal-caring for animals is not equal to setting children free from the brick kilns of India. Does God care about animals? Proverbs 12:10 says, “The righteous know the needs of their animals, but the mercy of the wicked is cruel,” (NRSV). Certainly, God and His people do and should care for the creation. While finding passages that demonstrate God’s love for animals is a bit challenging (even in my ‘Green Bible’!), it is nearly impossible to miss God’s concern and passion for the poor, the oppressed, and for those despairing. There is a hierarchy of needs so to speak when it comes to things that we are to be about. The needs of peoples both physical and eschatological certainly are at the top of such a hierarchy but this is where the lines get fuzzy.
If a family of farmers on the Malaysian coast can no longer farm because of the effects of climate change and are thrust into abject poverty and are thus at a greater risk to be trafficked into forced labor by the powerful, it is difficult to untangle their temporal needs from their eternal needs. Additionally, we can see from this illustration how directly linked the issue of climate change is to poverty, oppression, and ultimately conversion. This may seem like a leap for many conservatives, but I don’t think it is an irrational one. Charles Finney said that one of the greatest obstacles to salvation was the blinding that comes from being worldly, or preoccupied with the overwhelming temporal needs of the world. Certainly, these Malaysian farmers need Jesus but they also need to be productive, own their own land, have access to the fruits of their labor, live free and enjoy the earth. These issues are not mutually exclusive and Jesus Christ is the answer to both sets of needs.
How we should care about issues is probably the main concern of my mega-church pastor friend. Certainly, it would be a calloused and out of touch Christian to hear of the needs and have no regard for the 13 year old African child who lives alone because both his parents have died of AIDS. Even if such a so-called Christian existed, she would keep such disregard private. Every day, however, we demonstrate our lack of love for God’s creation and the people of the world by the way we care or fail to care for the temporal needs of those around us and by doing so we allow Finney’s conception of worldliness to proliferate, blinding hundreds of millions to the great news of Christ. For the on-looker, the Church seems aloof, unconcerned about the real needs of people and this disillusions them to the person and message of Christ.
For those caught in the cycle of poverty, oppression, and despair, such lack of action and concern by the Church prevents them from hearing and seeing Christ and, according to Luke 10, is tantamount to being complicit in their victimization. We must care, but how? How do we stay committed to the gospel and avoid a new kind of liberation theology or spiritualized activism? Are we doomed to the same dichotomization that produced left and right, conservative and liberal? The answer is to never allow such a schism between gospel proclamation and Kingdom demonstration to appear practically in our lives and ministries. This may be easier said than done but it must be done and done right.
For instance, recently I spoke at a large Presbyterian church and was excited to see their commitment to recycling everything from light bulbs to Sunday morning brochures to bottles and cans. I asked my guide at the church about their program and she said, “We are so excited to help our people understand the importance of caring for God’s creation and it really helps us connect with other non-Christian organizations in our community!” This is the right attitude! Why does our care for the earth need to be separate from our concern for non-Christians? I think the concern for many, and legitimately so, is because so often one comes at the expense of the other or for many “evangelistically minded,” the care for an issue is really a cloaked mechanism to get a gospel presentation in with little or no real concern for the issue.
Both concerns are important to note but should not prevent us from creatively and sincerely committing do both-to proclaim Christ and demonstrate His Kingdom. We should never even try to conceive of providing clean drinking water or AIDS relief or freedom for slaves without also thinking about the eternal needs of those we are seeking to help. This is not to say that caring for the poor or the earth does not have intrinsic value that is worthy to be expressed even if people don’t “get saved”-this is what worries some. However, it is often short-sightedness, a lack of creativity, and a stunted theology that prevents us from bringing the two mandates-proclaiming Christ and demonstrating His Kingdom-to bear in our expression of Christian evangelization.
Back to my pastor friend. What I shared with him was that we stand to lose on both sides if we allow the old dichotomization to emerge in our generation’s expression of the faith. If we don’t care for the earth and for the peoples of the earth, we lose our legitimacy in the eyes of the watching world and will perpetuate spiritual blindness through our complicity of inaction. If we continue to evangelize without demonstrating God’s Kingdom power and love, we may win individuals souls for Christ for a season, but end up losing the battle for the hearts and minds of a generation. If we divorce our cause, whichever cause that may be, from the transformative power of the gospel, even at our best we will continue to perpetuate the spiritual damnation of the lost, God’s chief concern in sending Jesus to be our propitiation for sin. Human flourishing is God’s ultimate goal for us, eternal, abundant life and this starts with conversion.
We must be saved. We must proclaim Christ, calling women and men everywhere to repent but we do so through the lens of demonstrating God’s Kingdom power and love as Paul says in I Thes. 1:5, “…the gospel came to you not in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of persons we proved to be among you for your sake.”
Monday, November 30, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
A Big Draw for First-Time Guests: Ministry to the Poor
Some interesting research about what draws unchurched people to come to churches...
LifeWay Research recently published in their newsletter a new study about ministry to the poor. Obviously, the church should serve the poor and reach out to the hurting. What this study reveals is that churches remaining obedient to Christ’s example of serving the poor are also more likely to attract guests.
This research blurb comes from their findings:
Americans indicate that an active ministry to the poor is more likely to draw them to a church than knowing that it is made up of predominantly young families or their neighbors. That’s the finding of a recent survey by LifeWay Research that asked 1,600 American adults what factors would affect their decision to visit a church for the first time.
Thirty-four percent of Americans say that they would visit a church with an active ministry to the poor in their community while 31 percent indicate that they would visit a church where several families in their neighborhood regularly attend. Twenty-five percent say that they would visit a church made up predominantly of young families with children, and just 13 percent would visit a congregation made up predominantly of senior adults.
Ed Stetzer, church research guru and President of LifeWay Research, comments on the findings:
It appears that people are interested in what a church is doing to impact and transform its community. This seems to be an opportunity for churches and Christians to validate the gospel by showing the good news of Christ as they share it.
Even the unchurched in America know that Jesus came healing the sick and serving the poor so they are surprised to see Him represented by a church uninvolved in such activities. Churches would do well to be engaged with, and also to be known for, caring for the poor.
LifeWay Research recently published in their newsletter a new study about ministry to the poor. Obviously, the church should serve the poor and reach out to the hurting. What this study reveals is that churches remaining obedient to Christ’s example of serving the poor are also more likely to attract guests.
This research blurb comes from their findings:
Americans indicate that an active ministry to the poor is more likely to draw them to a church than knowing that it is made up of predominantly young families or their neighbors. That’s the finding of a recent survey by LifeWay Research that asked 1,600 American adults what factors would affect their decision to visit a church for the first time.
Thirty-four percent of Americans say that they would visit a church with an active ministry to the poor in their community while 31 percent indicate that they would visit a church where several families in their neighborhood regularly attend. Twenty-five percent say that they would visit a church made up predominantly of young families with children, and just 13 percent would visit a congregation made up predominantly of senior adults.
Ed Stetzer, church research guru and President of LifeWay Research, comments on the findings:
It appears that people are interested in what a church is doing to impact and transform its community. This seems to be an opportunity for churches and Christians to validate the gospel by showing the good news of Christ as they share it.
Even the unchurched in America know that Jesus came healing the sick and serving the poor so they are surprised to see Him represented by a church uninvolved in such activities. Churches would do well to be engaged with, and also to be known for, caring for the poor.
Monday, November 23, 2009
African Christianity and Politics
A strong piece of reflection from a Zambian ministry leader who we'll be spending time with this summer at Jubilee Centre in Ndola, Zambia...
Mark Noll is his book Turning Point states that David Livingstone’s, “lifetime activity in sub-Saharan Africa-as missionary, explorer, scientist, consultant to European governments, and antislave zealot-was guided by a firm belief that modern agriculture, energetic commerce and serious Christianity could together end the slave trade and ennoble African society.” Livingstone did not foresee any problem with the combination of imperial and Christian interests. However, the combination of colonial and Christian interest did create problems as the European began to use the missionaries’ to influence indigenous people to cede land to European companies. The land rights transfer to these companies included mining rights, game rights, governing rights, taxes and privileges of whatever sort connected with territory. This is why early missionaries are blamed for paving the way to colonial rule in Africa.
Today, Africa has not changed much. Instead of the combination of imperialism and missionaries’ interests, there is now the combination of Christian leaders and African political leaders interests. Africa is not short of credible Christian leaders who are engaging presidents of nations and leaders of local communities that our hope to overcome the ravages of HIV and AIDS and extreme poverty lies in “Christianity, Commerce and Industry.” However, a most serious difficulty for the Christian leaders in Africa is how to convince citizens that politicians who have biblical leadership qualities combined with skills are what will bring prosperity to the nation. Especially since the current structures of power in most African countries, and recruitment into them, seem destined to produce leaders for the country who enjoy less than honorable reputation of character-leaders who are uncommitted, practice tribal politics, and are corrupt and self-serving. In the later part of 19th Century the missionaries refused to represent Christ fearlessly and independently as to prophetically speak against the evils of colonialism. The missionary attitude was to visit the colonialists privately and have dialogue with them over a cup of coffee. This achieved little and it eventually led to a violent reaction by the colonized people of whom most were Christians and elders in the missionaries’ churches.
In the 21st Century the church in Africa has not generally lacked evangelists, pastors and teachers. No wonder the church is growing numerically fast. But prophets have been scarce in Africa. The situation in Africa today, as it was in the later part of 19th Century, requires prophetic power to address the sin of greed, selfishness, and corruption which is one of the causes of poverty, AIDS, war and oppression in Africa. With the growing Christian population and the combination of free market and democracy there is no reason why Africa should be bound in ethnic hatred and be failing to spread the benefits from its resources to the needy so that those who have much do not have too much and those who have little do not have too little (Exodus 16:16-18). The question is: are we preaching from the Bible with profound insights that our people identify with powerfully as seen in the example of the early church in Acts 2-4? May the church leaders not be blamed for paving way for selfish and evil political leaders.
Lawrence Temfwe
Mark Noll is his book Turning Point states that David Livingstone’s, “lifetime activity in sub-Saharan Africa-as missionary, explorer, scientist, consultant to European governments, and antislave zealot-was guided by a firm belief that modern agriculture, energetic commerce and serious Christianity could together end the slave trade and ennoble African society.” Livingstone did not foresee any problem with the combination of imperial and Christian interests. However, the combination of colonial and Christian interest did create problems as the European began to use the missionaries’ to influence indigenous people to cede land to European companies. The land rights transfer to these companies included mining rights, game rights, governing rights, taxes and privileges of whatever sort connected with territory. This is why early missionaries are blamed for paving the way to colonial rule in Africa.
Today, Africa has not changed much. Instead of the combination of imperialism and missionaries’ interests, there is now the combination of Christian leaders and African political leaders interests. Africa is not short of credible Christian leaders who are engaging presidents of nations and leaders of local communities that our hope to overcome the ravages of HIV and AIDS and extreme poverty lies in “Christianity, Commerce and Industry.” However, a most serious difficulty for the Christian leaders in Africa is how to convince citizens that politicians who have biblical leadership qualities combined with skills are what will bring prosperity to the nation. Especially since the current structures of power in most African countries, and recruitment into them, seem destined to produce leaders for the country who enjoy less than honorable reputation of character-leaders who are uncommitted, practice tribal politics, and are corrupt and self-serving. In the later part of 19th Century the missionaries refused to represent Christ fearlessly and independently as to prophetically speak against the evils of colonialism. The missionary attitude was to visit the colonialists privately and have dialogue with them over a cup of coffee. This achieved little and it eventually led to a violent reaction by the colonized people of whom most were Christians and elders in the missionaries’ churches.
In the 21st Century the church in Africa has not generally lacked evangelists, pastors and teachers. No wonder the church is growing numerically fast. But prophets have been scarce in Africa. The situation in Africa today, as it was in the later part of 19th Century, requires prophetic power to address the sin of greed, selfishness, and corruption which is one of the causes of poverty, AIDS, war and oppression in Africa. With the growing Christian population and the combination of free market and democracy there is no reason why Africa should be bound in ethnic hatred and be failing to spread the benefits from its resources to the needy so that those who have much do not have too much and those who have little do not have too little (Exodus 16:16-18). The question is: are we preaching from the Bible with profound insights that our people identify with powerfully as seen in the example of the early church in Acts 2-4? May the church leaders not be blamed for paving way for selfish and evil political leaders.
Lawrence Temfwe
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The Jesus Invitation by Philip Yancey
I loved this description of how Jesus engaged people in a very unique way...
We sometimes use the term "savior complex" to describe an unhealthy syndrome of obsession over solving others' problems. Ironically, the true Savior seemed remarkably free of such a complex. He had no compulsion to convert the entire world in his lifetime or to cure people who were not ready to be cured.
I never sense Jesus twisting a person's arm. Rather, he stated the consequences of a choice, then threw the decision back to the other party. For example, he once answered a wealthy man's question with uncompromising words, then let him walk away. Mark pointedly adds this comment about the man who rejected Jesus' advice, "Jesus looked at him and loved him."
In short, Jesus showed an incredible respect for human freedom. Those of us in ministry need the kind of "Savior complex" that Jesus demonstrated. As Elton Trueblood has observed, the major symbols of invitation that Jesus used had a severe, even offensive quality: the yoke of burden, the cup of suffering, the towel of servanthood. "Take up your cross and follow me," he said, in the least manipulative invitation that has ever been given.
We sometimes use the term "savior complex" to describe an unhealthy syndrome of obsession over solving others' problems. Ironically, the true Savior seemed remarkably free of such a complex. He had no compulsion to convert the entire world in his lifetime or to cure people who were not ready to be cured.
I never sense Jesus twisting a person's arm. Rather, he stated the consequences of a choice, then threw the decision back to the other party. For example, he once answered a wealthy man's question with uncompromising words, then let him walk away. Mark pointedly adds this comment about the man who rejected Jesus' advice, "Jesus looked at him and loved him."
In short, Jesus showed an incredible respect for human freedom. Those of us in ministry need the kind of "Savior complex" that Jesus demonstrated. As Elton Trueblood has observed, the major symbols of invitation that Jesus used had a severe, even offensive quality: the yoke of burden, the cup of suffering, the towel of servanthood. "Take up your cross and follow me," he said, in the least manipulative invitation that has ever been given.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Social Justice and Evangelism
A strong piece I pulled from the World Vision ACTS network, a group of college students on many different campuses seeking to proclaim and advocate for justice and the needs of people in our world today, that was written by Scott Bessenecker, Associate Director of InterVarsity Missions and author of “The New Friars”...like very much its balanced and strong perspective on an often divisive conversation...
It is probably a frightening oversimplification to claim that when the early Church emphasized Jesus' humanity she spawned great social programs and when she emphasized his deity produced great theology. Understanding and expressing the reality of these two natures existing in a single person inspired the historic schisms. To this day we quibble about the deified power of Christ to save and the incarnational power of Christ to serve, as if they were at odds with one another.
This tension between social justice and evangelism - or Christ as Man and Christ as God - is a bit like the tension between LOVE as verb (I love) and LOVE as noun (my love) - it works great both ways, it just depends on what you are trying to say. In fact the noun and verb can have a symbiotic relationship, "A lover loves." I become the noun, a lover, when I consistently engage the act of loving.
I am grieved when Christians feel like an invitation to accept Jesus is the only way to legitimize the protesting of evil or need to throw an altar call in when feeding the homeless, as if confronting evil or doing good were not enough. Jesus held up a Samaritan as the picture of what it meant to inherit eternal life by fulfilling the law of loving your neighbor (Lk 10) even though he had substantial theological issues with what Samaritans believed (Jn 4). Hating evil and loving justice do not need an evangelistic call in order to become valid. Those actions please Jesus all by themselves.
I am grieved when I meet Christians who have no problem protesting unfair wages for migrant farmers but have no desire to call people into a saving relationship with Jesus. How can we see the kingdom come without inviting others to acknowledge the King? Justice flows from a Judge and answering Jesus' question, "who do you say I am?" matters. A friend of mine, Doug Schaupp, observes that it is easier for him to take someone who is good at evangelism and turn them into a lover of justice than to take a socially active Christian and grow them into a good evangelist. That is sad to me.
Separating social justice and evangelism is like getting married and then not living together. Is it better to have the security of a marriage covenant and never see your spouse, or to live together with no real commitment or promise? I want both. Some of us may be more gifted at the prophetic confrontation of evil systems and structures and others at calling people to say yes to Jesus' invitation to trust him for salvation, but we must remain stoutly committed to both.
Jesus as God and Jesus as man, separating those things is heresy.
It is probably a frightening oversimplification to claim that when the early Church emphasized Jesus' humanity she spawned great social programs and when she emphasized his deity produced great theology. Understanding and expressing the reality of these two natures existing in a single person inspired the historic schisms. To this day we quibble about the deified power of Christ to save and the incarnational power of Christ to serve, as if they were at odds with one another.
This tension between social justice and evangelism - or Christ as Man and Christ as God - is a bit like the tension between LOVE as verb (I love) and LOVE as noun (my love) - it works great both ways, it just depends on what you are trying to say. In fact the noun and verb can have a symbiotic relationship, "A lover loves." I become the noun, a lover, when I consistently engage the act of loving.
I am grieved when Christians feel like an invitation to accept Jesus is the only way to legitimize the protesting of evil or need to throw an altar call in when feeding the homeless, as if confronting evil or doing good were not enough. Jesus held up a Samaritan as the picture of what it meant to inherit eternal life by fulfilling the law of loving your neighbor (Lk 10) even though he had substantial theological issues with what Samaritans believed (Jn 4). Hating evil and loving justice do not need an evangelistic call in order to become valid. Those actions please Jesus all by themselves.
I am grieved when I meet Christians who have no problem protesting unfair wages for migrant farmers but have no desire to call people into a saving relationship with Jesus. How can we see the kingdom come without inviting others to acknowledge the King? Justice flows from a Judge and answering Jesus' question, "who do you say I am?" matters. A friend of mine, Doug Schaupp, observes that it is easier for him to take someone who is good at evangelism and turn them into a lover of justice than to take a socially active Christian and grow them into a good evangelist. That is sad to me.
Separating social justice and evangelism is like getting married and then not living together. Is it better to have the security of a marriage covenant and never see your spouse, or to live together with no real commitment or promise? I want both. Some of us may be more gifted at the prophetic confrontation of evil systems and structures and others at calling people to say yes to Jesus' invitation to trust him for salvation, but we must remain stoutly committed to both.
Jesus as God and Jesus as man, separating those things is heresy.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Church: Love It, Don't Leave It
An interesting article from the Washington Post by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck, authors of the book Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion.
Here's what Bono, Oprah, and the guru speakers on PBS won't tell you: Jesus believed in organized religion and he founded an institution. Of course, Jesus had no patience for religious hacks and self-righteous wannabes, but he was still Jewish. And as Jew, he read the Holy Book, worshiped in the synagogue, and kept Torah. He did not start a movement of latte-drinking disciples who excelled in spiritual conversations. He founded the church (Matt. 16:18) and commissioned the apostles to proclaim the good news that Israel's Messiah had come and the sins of the world could be forgiven through his death on the cross (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:14-36).
For almost two millennia, it was axiomatic that Christians, like, actually went to church (or at least told other Christians they did). From Cyprian to Calvin it was believed that for those to whom God "is Father the church may also be Mother."
But increasingly Christians are trying to get more spiritual by getting less church. Take a spin through the religion section at your local bookstore. What you'll find there is revealing - there are "revolutionary" books for stay at home moms, teenagers, and Christian businessmen. There are lots of manifestos. And most of the books about church are about people leaving the church to "find God." There are lots of Kerouacian "journey" stories, and at least one book about the gospel according to Starbucks. It used to be you had to overthrow a country to be considered a revolutionary, and now, it seems, you just have to quit church and go pray in the woods.
We've been in the church our whole lives and are not blind to its failings. Churches can be boring, hypocritical, hurtful, and inept. The church is full of sinners. Which is kind of the point. Christians are worse than you think. Our Savior is better than you imagine.
But the church is not all about oppression and drudgery. Almost every church we know of visits old people, brings meals to new moms, supports disaster relief, and does something for the poor. We love the local church, in spite of its problems, because it's where we go to meet God. It's not a glorified social/country club you attend to be around people who talk and look just you do. It's a place to hear God's word spoken, taught and affirmed. It's a place to sing praises to God, and a place to serve others. It's a place to be challenged.
The church is more than plural for Christian. It is both organism and organization, a living thing comprised of a certain order, regular worship services, with doctrinal standards, institutional norms, and defined rituals. Without the institution of the church nurturing the flock and protecting the faith for two thousand years, there would be no Christianity. If Gen Xers (like us) and their friends want to be against something, start a revolution. If you want to conserve truth and grace for twenty centuries, plant a church.
We love the church because Christ loved the church. She is his bride--a harlot at times, but his bride nonetheless, being washed clean by the word of God (Eph. 5:25-26). If you are into Jesus, don't rail on his bride. Jesus died for the church, so don't be bothered by a little dying to self for the church's sake. If you keep in mind that everyone there is a sinner (including yourself) and that Jesus Christ is the point and not you, your dreams, or your kids, your church experience might not be as lame as you fear.
Perhaps Christians are leaving the church because it isn't tolerant and open-minded. But perhaps the church-leavers have their own intolerance too--intolerant of tradition, intolerant of authority, intolerant of imperfection except their own. Are you open-minded enough to give the church a chance--a chance for the church to be the church, not a coffee shop, not a mall, not a variety show, not Chuck E. Cheese, not a U2 concert, not a nature walk, but a wonderfully ordinary, blood-bought, Spirit-driven church with pastors, sermons, budgets, hymns, bad carpet and worse coffee?
The Church, because it is Christ's church, will outlive American Idol, the NFL, and all of our grandkids. We won't last, but the Church will. So when it comes to church, be like Jesus: love it, don't leave it. As Saint Calloway once prophesied to the Brothers of Blues, "Jake, you get wise, you get to church."
Here's what Bono, Oprah, and the guru speakers on PBS won't tell you: Jesus believed in organized religion and he founded an institution. Of course, Jesus had no patience for religious hacks and self-righteous wannabes, but he was still Jewish. And as Jew, he read the Holy Book, worshiped in the synagogue, and kept Torah. He did not start a movement of latte-drinking disciples who excelled in spiritual conversations. He founded the church (Matt. 16:18) and commissioned the apostles to proclaim the good news that Israel's Messiah had come and the sins of the world could be forgiven through his death on the cross (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:14-36).
For almost two millennia, it was axiomatic that Christians, like, actually went to church (or at least told other Christians they did). From Cyprian to Calvin it was believed that for those to whom God "is Father the church may also be Mother."
But increasingly Christians are trying to get more spiritual by getting less church. Take a spin through the religion section at your local bookstore. What you'll find there is revealing - there are "revolutionary" books for stay at home moms, teenagers, and Christian businessmen. There are lots of manifestos. And most of the books about church are about people leaving the church to "find God." There are lots of Kerouacian "journey" stories, and at least one book about the gospel according to Starbucks. It used to be you had to overthrow a country to be considered a revolutionary, and now, it seems, you just have to quit church and go pray in the woods.
We've been in the church our whole lives and are not blind to its failings. Churches can be boring, hypocritical, hurtful, and inept. The church is full of sinners. Which is kind of the point. Christians are worse than you think. Our Savior is better than you imagine.
But the church is not all about oppression and drudgery. Almost every church we know of visits old people, brings meals to new moms, supports disaster relief, and does something for the poor. We love the local church, in spite of its problems, because it's where we go to meet God. It's not a glorified social/country club you attend to be around people who talk and look just you do. It's a place to hear God's word spoken, taught and affirmed. It's a place to sing praises to God, and a place to serve others. It's a place to be challenged.
The church is more than plural for Christian. It is both organism and organization, a living thing comprised of a certain order, regular worship services, with doctrinal standards, institutional norms, and defined rituals. Without the institution of the church nurturing the flock and protecting the faith for two thousand years, there would be no Christianity. If Gen Xers (like us) and their friends want to be against something, start a revolution. If you want to conserve truth and grace for twenty centuries, plant a church.
We love the church because Christ loved the church. She is his bride--a harlot at times, but his bride nonetheless, being washed clean by the word of God (Eph. 5:25-26). If you are into Jesus, don't rail on his bride. Jesus died for the church, so don't be bothered by a little dying to self for the church's sake. If you keep in mind that everyone there is a sinner (including yourself) and that Jesus Christ is the point and not you, your dreams, or your kids, your church experience might not be as lame as you fear.
Perhaps Christians are leaving the church because it isn't tolerant and open-minded. But perhaps the church-leavers have their own intolerance too--intolerant of tradition, intolerant of authority, intolerant of imperfection except their own. Are you open-minded enough to give the church a chance--a chance for the church to be the church, not a coffee shop, not a mall, not a variety show, not Chuck E. Cheese, not a U2 concert, not a nature walk, but a wonderfully ordinary, blood-bought, Spirit-driven church with pastors, sermons, budgets, hymns, bad carpet and worse coffee?
The Church, because it is Christ's church, will outlive American Idol, the NFL, and all of our grandkids. We won't last, but the Church will. So when it comes to church, be like Jesus: love it, don't leave it. As Saint Calloway once prophesied to the Brothers of Blues, "Jake, you get wise, you get to church."
Friday, October 16, 2009
Looking at the World Upside Down by Philip Yancey
Some great words about the Counter-Cultural Kingdom Jesus Brought to All of Us and Invites Us to Bring to Our World...
Taking God's assignment seriously means that I must learn to look at the world upside down, as Jesus did. Instead of seeking out people who stroke my ego, I find those whose egos need stroking; instead of important people with resources who can do me favors, I find people with few resources; instead of the strong, I look for the weak; instead of the healthy, the sick. Is not this how God reconciles the world to himself? Did Jesus not insist that he came for the sinners and not the righteous, for the sick and not the healthy?
In India I have worshiped among leprosy patients. Most of the medical advances in the treatment of leprosy came about as a result of missionary doctors, who alone were willing to live among patients and risk exposure to study the dreaded disease. As a result, Christian churches thrive in most major leprosy centers.
In Myanmar, I have visited homes for AIDS orphans, where Christian volunteers try to replace parental affection the disease has stolen away. In Jean Vanier's center in Toronto, I have watched a scholarly priest lavish daily care on a middle-aged man so mentally handicapped that he could not speak a word. The most rousing church services I have attended took place in Chile and Peru, in the bowels of a federal prison. Among the lowly, the wretched, the downtrodden, the rejects, God's kingdom takes root.
Taking God's assignment seriously means that I must learn to look at the world upside down, as Jesus did. Instead of seeking out people who stroke my ego, I find those whose egos need stroking; instead of important people with resources who can do me favors, I find people with few resources; instead of the strong, I look for the weak; instead of the healthy, the sick. Is not this how God reconciles the world to himself? Did Jesus not insist that he came for the sinners and not the righteous, for the sick and not the healthy?
In India I have worshiped among leprosy patients. Most of the medical advances in the treatment of leprosy came about as a result of missionary doctors, who alone were willing to live among patients and risk exposure to study the dreaded disease. As a result, Christian churches thrive in most major leprosy centers.
In Myanmar, I have visited homes for AIDS orphans, where Christian volunteers try to replace parental affection the disease has stolen away. In Jean Vanier's center in Toronto, I have watched a scholarly priest lavish daily care on a middle-aged man so mentally handicapped that he could not speak a word. The most rousing church services I have attended took place in Chile and Peru, in the bowels of a federal prison. Among the lowly, the wretched, the downtrodden, the rejects, God's kingdom takes root.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)