NOTE: I have a PAGE on the right hand column called Church Series of Posts. I didn't realize how many posts I had been doing on the church. So if you are interested in seeing any of those previous posts, they are listed in order of posting, and with their title. -bkr-
*****************************
I love our church's mission statement. I should! I was part of the team that carefully, prayerfully crafted it.
Living Word is a grace filled community where the messiness of life, the message of hope, and the beauty of Jesus converge.
I think healthy churches are those that are up front about the human condition. Life is messy. Very messy. Messy people bring their messes to church and so churches are messy as well. When messy and messed up people do life together, the result is, well --- more mess.
And that doesn't surprise us.
It doesn't catch us off guard.
We don't pretend there is no mess (in us or around us).
We don't shame people for having messiness in their life.
We exist for messy people to find hope and a beautiful (and wild) Messiah Jesus.
Our leaders are pretty messy at times as well. And most people aren't surprised by that.
Notice, it is grace that makes it possible to own the mess, to deal with the mess, and when necessary, to live with unresolved mess.
I could never quite understand why a church presents itself as "mess free" and criticizes the world for being messy. The human condition is the same inside and outside the church (okay, I know that last statement begs for some theological discussion, which I'll avoid).
But I think the church should be the place where we are open, honest, authentic, vulnerable and optimistic about that condition. Because of GRACE.
I think that leaders will build healthier churches when we are honest and genuine about the mess. If we don't work with grace and honesty about our human condition, we will (almost inevitably) move into legalism and become contemporary Pharisees who are obsessed about the sin of others.
Brian "who is quite messy" Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
If there is a Virtue in a postmodern culture, it is the virtue of Tolerance. Tolerance means I do not judge what you do, I do not condemn what you do, I do not restrict what you do. Tolerance means i cannot not, and should not impose my beliefs or morality on you.
This is the starting point for a pretty important discussion.
So - where should the church be on this matter?
Do we agree and do the same thing?
Or do we act in a counter-cultural way and say, no, there are some things that are wrong and which we must not tolerate?
If we say, no, there are some things we should not tolerate. There are some standards we must not relax. There are some rules we must not ignore. There are some beliefs we must affirm. There are some things we must require?
Okay --- what are those things?
And how long is your list going to be?
What criteria will you use to decide what should be on the list?
And in case of disagreement, who is going to decide what belongs on the list?
Once the list is determined, what will be done to those who ignore the list and break the rules? In other words, once we have a list - does it really matter?
Some Christian groups have a very long and involved list.
Some other Christian groups have a very short list.
Did Jesus have a list?
Is the Sermon on the Mount a place to start?
To do any kind of meaningful life together, these questions must be answered. And we must make commitments to one another to act accordingly.
This is not an easy discussion.
And as a way of example . . .
Within the last year, our entire church staff team (about 45 people or so) went through a process of doing this very thing to guide how we would do life and ministry together. It was a nice collaborative process and we came up with nine guides. They have to do with collaboration, how we will communicate, handle conflict, life in grace and truth, practice integrity, show kindness, respect and trust, be life long learners, do spiritual formation and commit to excellence.
We decided that not everything is okay. We will not tolerate all things. We will take action to address the things that are not okay, if they happen. To be a healthy community, that group needs to be aware, intentional, strategic about the things that will and will not be tolerated.
It is a fact that we live in a cultural season where the lists are getting very short and offensive. So what does that mean for the church? Are we being culturally relevant and contextualized by accommodating this move, or are we moving into syncretism that has little to offer a world?
What are your thoughts?
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
I left a church when I was in my young adult years. I had been a Christian for about four years. I had attended that church during the summers when I was home from college for those four summers. But it felt old. Out of date. Behind the times. The sermons were boring expositions with little relevance for my life. There were very few people my age there. The folks were generally nice people, good people. They even liked me a lot. But I left the church to find something that would be a better fit. (Please pay attention to all the language I used to describe why I left that church.)
And I did find that church. It had all that I was looking for. Lots of people my age. A worship style that fit my generation. Preaching that was interesting and relevant. It was a new wineskins kind of church and exactly what I was looking for. I hooked up with that church and became very involved in it.
This is the very issue of the new generation, who are also looking for new forms of church that are being led by people roughly their own age and with whom they relate. I understand this generational "divide."
That was exactly where I was at in my journey. I don't think there was anything that anyone could have said that would have changed my mind.
This is a perennial issue for the church. The wineskins that are loved and a key part of one generation's journey of faith, are the shackles for the next generation, who want to figure out how to do thins fresh and in a way that is "contextualized" for their situation and their needs.
Bill Hybels and Rick Warren were virtually "kids" when they started their new thing. Well, they weren't quite kids, but just about. What they started was not just a new methodology, which it was, but also a generational dynamics of the next generation looking for a better, more "in touch" way to do things.
Today, Willow and Saddleback seem to be an old model for many young people. Cutting edge approaches don't stay that way forever.
We see this generational change in worship and the styles of music used in worship. We also see it in the illustrative content of sermons.
This divide does go quite a bit past mere methodology of styles. There is substantial theological differences as well.
Is it okay to leave a church because it feels old, dated, and not so in touch with you and your generation? My answer is - YES. It is okay.
Is it a good choice? My answer is - it DEPENDS on why and how you leave. But it can be a very good choice.
The struggle we are left with this… and i have no easy answers. Is generational age the "dividing wall" we can't overcome in Christ? I know it is hard. In one sense, this is just the old church growth methodology of the homogenous church growth principle. Churches that grow are those who tend to have a homogenous group. Like attracts like. We are repelled by those who are too different from us. And age issues, exacerbated by the modern - postmodern reality, seem like pretty strong dividers.
I wish they weren't. I think I have the ability to connect with and enjoy some different styles of different generations… but maybe I am fooling myself.
What are your thoughts on this?
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
My friend and lead pastor, Steve Almquist figured out a few things many years ago and he has managed to keep them the main thing.
For Steve and Living Word Community Church, GRACE is the first thing and the main thing (well, okay, Jesus is actually first, but Grace through Jesus is very high on a very short list).
Grace, unconditional acceptance by God, fresh starts, second chances, new beginnings, radical forgiveness… this is the pure air we must breathe if we are to be healthy. Legalism, self-righteousness, the Pharisaical way and other such things - these are toxins that poison the atmosphere of any religion. So Steve has worked to build a place where Grace is the air we breathe. Grace from God, grace from and to one another.
Oh, we fall short all the time, but when we do, we know we have fallen short of being "gracious" and "grace-full" so we know what we need to do.
Grace then makes two other things possible. Conversion and ongoing transformation. Saved by grace, changed by grace. And that grace will eventually lead me home, but not yet, not today. First it has a lot of work to do here and now). So, it is no surprise that we have seen a lot of beautiful conversion and amazing transformation at our church.
This conversion and transformation (by Grace) then makes two other things possible.
First: Authentic community, counter-cultural community, friendship together with Jesus, the company of friends of Jesus, doing life together, speaking truth in love, iron sharpening iron...
Second: Out of this (grace, conversion, transformation, community) comes sustainable missional service to the world in the name of Jesus. In other words, we extend grace to the world around us. In fact, our former Mission Statement had "extending grace to broken and searching people" as a core element.
I wonder if a lot of the toxicity in church, and the resulting damage to people, is because we don't have the Grace thing in place… and therefore, the authentic conversion and transformation process is not what it should be… and therefore, community is weak and mission is just about non-existent?
I also wonder if a lot of our theological/biblical debate is pretty much a sure thing to tear us apart, because we don't have the glue of grace to hold us together as we pursue truth in epistemic humility and not angry intellectual arrogance.
I think if we want to see reformed, renewed churches… GRACE is the place to start.
I finally think that if we want to see churches full of GRACE, it is pretty much, another sure thing, that those who lead those churches need a profound encounter with GRACE.
So, Grace to you, in all its magnificent fullness.
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
p.s. This last image has nothing to do with the post, just that I thought it was intriguing.
This is a very good book, but I think it's audience will mainly be for church or mission leaders who are interested in and already familiar with the names, the issues, and the positions swirling around the "debates" about the Traditional Church, Evangelical Church and Emergent Church.
I have one main criticism. I don't know if Third Way is the best language to use. Probably One More Way would have been better, just less dramatic.
I think there are more partners in this conversation than just the Traditional Church (which he doesn't really describe or define with a lot of clarity) and the Emergent Church (which he describes and defines very well). And he eliminates from the conversation, the Evangelical Church, except to occasionally make some general comments about parts of the Evangelical movement (which is a very broad and diverse movement).
I understand why he chooses not to include the Evangelical movement as a legitimate partner in the conversation. But that doesn't feel real good for those of us who are in that movement, appreciate it and want to do it better.
So in one sense, I felt a bit like an outsider, listening in to a conversation between two other voices. Since I was interested in that conversation, and in the two partners in conversation, I listened in.
However, with that said, this is a very good book. Here are a few things I really like about it.
He does a great job explaining the three main sub-groups within the Emergent Label. This is very helpful for the Emergent movement is far from monolithic. In fact, after reading Deep Church, I even wonder if the term Emergent is helpful, for it automatically lumps some very different people together who are quite far apart.
He does a nice job explaining classical orthodoxy or "mere Christianity" or the Great Tradition as vital for Deep Church. This is a key point and it grows with significance as he moves through the book.
He does an exemplary job charitably crafting a critique of both Traditional and Emergent approaches and charting out another way. I especially appreciate the warm, irenic, nuanced way he critiques the Revisionist Camp within the Emergent Movement (think McLaren, Tony Jones and Doug Pagitt). He refers to his "Reformed misgivings" about the Revisionist's theology. Whether he is right on all his critiques (and I think he is), he is certainly very right in the conversational, respectful way of engaging with that position.
And he does an adequate (and more than adequate) job on all seven chapters dealing with the primary issues: Truth, Evangelism, Gospel, Worship, Preaching, Ecclesiology/Church, and Culture. I say adequate, because each theme is so big that is difficult to cover it well in a single chapter. I think adequate is about the best one could do on these major themes in a single chapter. Especially in trying to chart/map out what the Third Way Forward looks like. (So these adequate chapters are well done!).
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
Before you read this post, you might want to watch this video of me sharing why I am doing this series of posts on the church.
Love Jesus, Hate Church: How to Survive in Church or Die Trying.
Steve McCranie
This book is both unhelpful and unhealthy.
There. I said it and broke the ice. I do not like writing critical reviews and assessments of books. There are so many good books to write about that I prefer to do that. And the writing of a book is such a labor of personal investment, that to criticize it seems an unloving thing to do.
Yet, an author puts their book on the market for response. The author wishes to influence people, engage people, and I am assuming, to launch conversations with her or his ideas.
This book is unhelpful and unhealthy. My challenge is to be a graceful critic about a book, in which there is barely a drop of grace to be found.
I am going to give some impressions and observations, not so much a carefully arranged critique. And this is a pretty long review and rebuttal.
This book is unhelpful and unhealthy for many reasons. For one, it is just so angry. In his own words:
I Hate Church and everything it has become today. I Hate Church with a raw, loathing vengeance, with unleashed rage, with every fiber in my being . . . sometimes it scares me. My rage. I didn't know I had the capacity to hate that much. But I do.
And then for 230 pages he tells you why he hates the church with the loathing, raging vengeance he has. Well, you don't have to read the book. I can tell you why in a few sentences.
First: He hates the church because it is full of people who are not even remotely like Jesus. They are petty, fallen, flawed, dysfunctional, self-centered, obnoxious, legalistic, (and 30 more such descriptive words) people.
Second: He hates the church because of the harm those kind of people have done to the name and cause of Christ in the world.
Third: He hates the church because of what those kind of people have done to him.
Steve McCranie is a pastor who is in deep pain because of how he has been treated. That pain has turned into an embittered rage, which he fully justifies and hardly shows any concern about (in part proof texting Ezekiel 3:14) against those who have hurt Christ and Steve McCranie.
Steve also grew up in a deeply dysfunctional Christian home. He doesn't give all the details, but it sounds all too familiar. A legalistic, fundamentalist church of some variety. And what is worse, he had a deeply dysfunctional father who seems to quality as a chief Pharisee. He sounds like he was a "bad man" who presented himself as a "good Christian."
Steve shares a painful story of sitting in the back of the car on the ride home after church and listening to his father criticize the pastor (it sounds like this was a weekly experience). Jab, jab, a cross, another jab, a hook, an uppercut of criticisms against the pastor. Steve was dismayed and confused, hurt and angry by this. AND THEN he turns around and writes a book that is in the same self-righteous spirit as his father's weekly diatribes. Like father, like son...
Steve shares a painful story of being in a restaurant and listening to two church ladies just being foolish, critical, judgment, self-righteous complainers/gossipers about church, in particular, about the choir. Out loud for everyone to hear. Steve is dismayed and confused, hurt and angry by this. AND THEN he turns around and writes about 230 pages of the same. The language of logs in one's own eye comes to mind.
That is unhelpful and unhealthy.
Steve has been a pastor, it sounds, for at least four different churches. It also sounds like they were unpleasant experiences. So Steve is a pastor who has been hurt by this churches. He hates those who have hurt him. He is scornful of those people. It is their fault. They are simply stupid, evil people who think they are Christians and who justify their stupidity and evil in the name of Jesus.
I understand this. I too have been in that situation. Working, serving, leading my heart out and having resistance and opposition, conflict and criticism at every point. I went through brownout to burnout and almost to drop out. I experienced the raging emotions of hurt and anger, disillusionment and bitterness. And I put the blame, as does Steve, on the system, on the church, on the people of the church, on everything but myself.
And here is where I must part company with Steve. For the failure was, above all, mine. I take responsibility for not being able to love enough, serve enough, forgive enough, sacrifice enough, suffer enough, persevere enough. My situation did turn around when Christ convicted me that all true change begins with leadership change that begins deep below the water line. That period lasted several years. I call it the wilderness experience. I learned a lot of painful lessons in my wilderness time, but I came through a changed person and a changed leader and one who was able to love the church. Steve has come through angry, full of justifiable hate, and overflowing with embittered rage!
And not once in his book did I hear even the slightest trace of self-awareness of personal culpability. Even if everyone else is 95% at fault, and he is only 5% to blame, it would still be nice to hear just a little self-awareness.
Today Steve says he pastors a small church. No kidding! I imagine it is going to stay pretty small. Because Steve is overflowing, Steve in imprinting, Steve is leaking, Steve is projecting what is in him (anger, rage, hatred, scorn, contempt) on those around him. And who wants to be around that stuff. I am sure that Steve is saying he is overflowing with passion for Jesus and love for Christ and holiness and obedience… He says that in his book. Yet his book mainly overflows and imprints with hate.
I am not a psychologist, but I have learned a few things about the heart over the years. You don't hold all that hatred inside, no matter how you rationalize and justify it with some Bible verses, and remain a healthy person. A healthy person did not write this book. An unhealthy pastor wrote this unhealthy book.
I have also learned that the ends do not justify the means. And that ENDS which are Good, Beautiful and True will never be reached by means that are wrong. The wrong means are the substance of this book. Steve uses the tools of fear, shame, guilt, condemnation, manipulation, sarcasm, cynicism, anger, and self-righteousness as his major way to create a Good, Beautiful and True church?1? No wonder his church is small and will remain small. No wonder his book is unhelpful and unhealthy.
I am also pretty sure that Julia Duin who has Quit Church, would not find the kind of church Steve McCranie pastors to be any kind of church she feels good about. Julia sees leaders like Steve as the problem. Steve sees followers like Julia as the problem.
I want to make an "unkind" suggestion. But I am doing this to make a point. What kind of church do you think we would have if we put all the critics and complainers and quitters and haters of the church together in one church? Would this be the New Kind of Church the world is looking for? I am willing to have them give a shot at this. Get them together in some churches, figure out how to do it and get back to us in about five years with what they have learned.
A long time ago I learned that anger breeds anger, self-righteousness does not breed beauty and joy, the spiritual of condemnation produces condemned and condemning Christians, shame and guilt do not bring about grace filled, lovers of Christ… you get the picture. The right ends will only be reached by the right means. And bad means only bring us to bad ends.
A few more observations. (By the way, I know these posts about the church are longer than my normal ones. If you are still reading, thanks for your kind perseverance on this.)
Love Jesus, Hate the Church! How sad.
To be honest, I think Steve should morph the title a bit.
Love Jesus, Hate any Followers of Jesus Who Do Not Meet My Standard/Expectation Which I Will Justify From the Bible.
I think Steve loves his idealized, romantic, utopian longings for what the church should be. He is in love with an image and that justifies his excuse not to love the real thing. It would be a little like someone saying,
"I love marriage as it is suppose to be. I love the idea of a great marriage. However, I hate the four women I have been married to. I despise them with every fiber of my being for how far short they fell of what they were suppose to be and what I wanted them to be. And for how they hurt me." Well, that is exactly what he does about the church. He loves an idealized idea and not the messy reality.
I wonder if Steve would only love a church that had just sheep and no goats. And just cooperative, non-smelly, always obedient sheep who loved the sound of his voice and followed him everywhere he took them. Hey, come to think of it, I'd like a few of those sheep around my too. But that isn't the real deal. Sheep stink. sheep leave messes behind. And when you get a lot of sheep together in one place, not to mention a few unwashed, unkempt, uncouth shepherds… well then you have reality.
I don't think Jesus calls us to love an ideal image. He calls us to love the real, messy, broken people known as the church, of which Steve, you the reader, and I are a part.
And finally, he offers one more tired, repetitive - Let's Get Back to the Book of Acts way, when they really did church… before we learned how to mess everything up with the machinery of religion. In the book of Acts, we find the newly formed church was already broken, in spite of all the really cool stuff going on. But it was far from perfect. And look a few years later in the New Testament as the apostles are writing to the just a few years old church, still very close to the days of its founder Jesus, and you get a picture of a church that is already really broken and messy (and which also had some very powerful, blessed things going on).
Alright… that's enough on this one. To report, the book is Unhelpful and Unhealthy. Don't read it. If Julia encouraged you to quit church (or at least sympathetically said you are justified in doing so), Steve is justifying you hating the church. Don't go there. It is a dangerous decision that will damage your soul.
Let's all fall on our knees and pray for the "bleeding mercy" of Christ (as C.S. Lewis described it in The Great Divorce) to pour on us from his cross where he died for the church Steve hates and Julia quits. And may we also pray for the same grace to have bleeding mercy on behalf of those who have hurt us. And finally pray for others to have bleeding mercy on us for our sins against them.
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
A friend of mine recently told me about the founder of an organization (I won't mention its name) that has been an outstanding para-church, missonal movement that has thousands of workers and has done an incredible amount of kingdom service in the world.
The founder looks at the organization of which he is still a part and says this.
"We began as a movement, we are becoming a monument!"
Powerful, sobering words. Let me amplify this just a bit.
The church starts out as an:
exciting MOVEMENT
and becomes an ORGANIZATION
which becomes an INSTITUTION
that eventually becomes a MONUMENT
and monuments turn out to be TOMBS.
This is just standard sociological understanding. It is the nature of movements to become organizations. And it is the nature of organizations to calcify and decay.
And this happens to the CHURCH.
All the Time!
Unless something is done.
That something which needs done is Renewal.
(1) Sometimes Renewal is New Wine being poured into existing structures/systems/ways (Wineskins). This is renewal that happens within the existing church system.
(2) Sometimes Renewal is New Wineskins being shaped which will hold New Wine. Sometimes the existing church system goes about the church always being reformed/renewed and cooperates with the process.
(3) Other times the system resists and reformers have to go outside the existing wineskins and start something brand new.
Think of the church movements that tried to work from within, but which had to go outside to start something new. Here are a few:
The Reformation launched by Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Anabaptists and others. They first tried to reform the existing systems of the day which resisted. So they had to go outside and start something new.
Puritanism was a renewal movement.
The Wesley brothers wanted renewal in the Anglican system of England... which resisted and actually retaliated... so they went outside and started a movement that became known as Methodism.
The Pentecostsal movement of the early 1900s is another.
The Charismatic movement of the 1960s-70s another.
The Jesus movement in that same time- another.
The proliferation of Para-Church Missional groups at the same time - another.
The Seeker movement of the 1980s-90s is one more.
AND...
The Emergent movement, which began in the 1990s and has gathered momentum in this new millennium, yet another.
I have been through the Jesus movement and some of its Charismatic expressions, the Para-church movement, the Seeker movement and now I am engaged with the Emergent movement. I have been a part of churches where this renewal was flowing within and I have been on the outside of the church, with new movements and their new wineskins.
Sometimes, those people who deeply love the church must go outside the existing church to craft a New Wineskin for the Church. And that is okay... and much grace and peace and wisdom be yours.
A word of caution... there are a lot of abortive wineskin startups. There are some cheap wineskins that don't last. There are some shoddy wineskins that can't begin to hold new wine. There are some flashy ones that look great, but which hold vinegar if not poison. And there are some old wineskins that are well crafted and which can hold new wine.
Phyllis Tickle helped us understand that every Great Emergence, not only started something new, but also unleashed renewal in the existing forms of the day. One of my favorite examples of this is the Counter-Reformation which was strongly shaped by the Jesuit order. It was a powerful renewal movement within the existing Catholic system of its day. At first I was baffled, but now I am amazed at how "evangelical" and "reformed" Ignatius was.
Here is my plea. The church is precious. The Spirit of God awesome and devious beyond our understanding. Christ is glorious and He loves His church. Let's find out how to be Level Five Leaders who do the both/and that Jim Collins talks about.
Let's be Evangelical and Emergent.
Let's be Reformed and Missional.
Let's be Ancient and Future.
Let's be Orthodox and Edgy.
Let's be Conservative and Prophetic.
Let's really be a new/old Kind of Christian.
Let's do something that is really outlandish, bold, creative, daring, and which goes far beyond our tired categories and criticisms.
Let's do something that begs for God to show up.
Let's live and lead and serve in such a way as to make the Cloud of Witnesses who have loved and even died for the Church and Kingdom proud to have us in their ranks.
But whatever you do - Don't Quit Church!
And that's all I have to say about that.... until tomorrow.
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
One of the very good books that should be read by everyone who loves the church, use to love the church, and who might one day love the church again is:
reJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church by Frost and Hirsch
Frost and Hirsch love the church. They also happen to be very critical of the church. They also happen to be incredibly astute and wise interpreters of what is going on and what is going wrong with the church.
Critiques that are offered in the spirit in which they write and with the wisdom and missional perspective they have are always needed.
Frost and Hirsch have the spirit of reformers, of renewers, of reJesus'ers.
I have many friends who have that same spirit flowing through them. I have that same stuff in me. When the spirit of reform flows strongly in your ecclesiological veins, you easily see the flaws and weaknesses and deficiencies of the church AND you desperately want this addressed.
Reformers are some of the prophets the church needs since the church should always be reforming itself. This was one of the "slogans" of the Reformation.
As Barth pointed out, ecclesia semper reformanda (the church always being reformed), divorced from the rest of the slogan, “according to the word of God,” identified the true church with modern progress – keeping up with the spirit of the age. I would add that the drive in Protestant bodies to conform the gospel to the spirit of the age has often invoked the Spirit apart from and even sometimes against the Word in its activity of “always reforming.” However, as Barth observes, “singing a new song” and “always being reformed” are only commendable goals if they are invitations to courageous and obedient faith rather than simply following the spirit of the age. It means that the church is alwaysbeing reformed, not reforming itself, submitting itself to the judgment of God’s Word and asking anew whether its confession and practice are in accord with Scripture. Only in this way is any church truly apostolic.
We should be "always reforming and always being reformed" according to the Scriptures. Whenever the church falls short of the picture described in the Bible, reform is needed. Let's be passionate about that reform.
Let's reform boldly but reform biblically. Back to the sources (hey, I think that as another rallying cry of the Reformation!)
Frost and Hirsch add a vital and CENTRAL idea to this reform/renewal movement in their book. All true reform and renewal begins with reJesus. Our deepest problem is Christological. We have distorted images of Jesus and these distorted images inevitably lead to ecclesial and missional flaws. Get the church right by getting Jesus right. Reform the church and renew the mission by a reJesusing.
This was really powerful for me in light of two things:
First, we just finished a series on Messy Stories From Mark where we looked at some very messy stories about Jesus. I found my theology and spirituality being challenged every week. Jesus is subversive and wild.
Second, I am working through the Spiritual Exercises of Ignatius and am in Week Two (Week is a metaphor for Phase) which is devoted to many reflections on stories from the Gospels. Lectio divina readings and imaginative engagements with these stories is provocative and altering of my comfort zones and cosy pictures of a tame Jesus.
And through teachings and conversations, this wild, subversive Messiah has been messing with a bunch of my friends at church.
*****************
Now, what do we do with the spirit of reform when the church that needs it, refuses reform? Well, I don't think we bail or quit easily. I do think we first pay attention to our own journey. Are we being reformed and renewed, becoming more loving, holy, godly, full of grace... ? If we are, then we are positioned to speak prophetically to the church Jesus loves. We may need to do this for a long time. And it is hard to be a prophet for even a week. They do tend to stone prophets... the longer you hang around being prophetic, the more likely this happens.
Jeremiah is known as the weeping prophet for a reason. He wept because his call to be a reformer went unheeded, except when it brought reprisals against him. He wept because he loved the people of Israel and they were unrepentant. He also wept because he had to pay a great price in his prophetic vocation. He suffered. He suffered a lot. He suffered for a long time.
Critics who don't love the church are going to bail and quit, complain and whine. Reformers who love the church are going to suffer and weep and prophesy and warn. And maybe... sometimes... rejoice in the morning. And maybe... sometimes... leave and be used by God for "new wineskin making." Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
In this post, I want to give some of the main categories for why people leave church. I won't do much by way of commentary on any of them, but in the days that follow, I'll look at some of these issues in a deeper way. These categories are not exhaustive. In fact, I've tried to narrow them down. There may be some important ones that I missed. Some of them may not be the best description. This is just my way to group the dozens and dozens of reasons why people leave a church and why some Quit Church altogether.
ONE: The church is toxic, abusive, deeply dysfunctional, controlling, authoritative... Get out of there fast.
TWO: Theological disagreements and differences. This is a wide category and I load into it other issues as well. Core values, political ideologies, philosophical approaches. In spiritual terms, this would be disagreements about the nature of the "wine" of the Gospel. Or if disagreement is too strong, personal preference is a good one.
THREE: Style and methodology issues of endless varieties. Whether it is preaching styles, worship styles, church growth strategies, church organizational ways, evangelism styles, etc. In biblical terms, this is often disagreements about preferred "wineskins." And boy do we have strong preferences. And that is okay. What we do about those preferences is another matter.
FOUR: Generational differences. At the least, these always involve the issues in number three - style and methodology. With our modern - postmodern divide that is upon us, they usually involved issues in number two as well - theology and values. I really understand this and sympathize with it as well.
FIVE: Institutional renewal is needed. Or to say it this way, renewal of the church that has become institutional is needed. What will that renewal look like? Even those who are "in house' and "in agreement" on theology and methodology in a particular church may realize that renewal is needed. The wine and wineskins need renewal, spiritual energy poured into them. And yet, sometimes the church that needs renewed, resists this renewal. (I'll talk about this one tomorrow.)
SIX: My needs aren't being met. Okay, pick one. Pick a half dozen. You have them. The church isn't doing enough about them. You leave to find a church that will. And if there is a sexier, edgier, cooler, bigger, smaller, church that will - you leave to find it.
SEVEN: What the church isn't doing. Sometimes we are satisfied with what the church is doing, but our dissatisfaction is about what the church is not doing that we believe it should be. I may like the preaching, I may like the singles group that I am a part of, but i am also passionate about social justice and radical service of the inner city poor, and my church isn't doing that. I want a church that is. So, the good stuff that I like, isn't enough. There is other good stuff that isn't taking place.
EIGHT: I am bored. Been there, done that, heard that idea, yup, heard that sermon before, done the small group thing, tried adult Sunday School, worked in the youth program, blah, blah, blah, blah... By the way, this is a real issue and it is very real for what I call "middle age Christianity." After you have followed Christ for about 20 years... it is hard for church to be fresh. I recently taught on this theme to a group of Christ followers, most of whom had been Christians for 20+ years. There were a lot of nodding heads. More on this one soon.
NINE: Personal life choices that I make that are bad. I am sleeping with my boyfriend. The pastor preached against this. I don't like that. I am out of here. (or) The pastor and elders told me I don't have grounds for divorce, but they don't understand, who are they to tell me what God's will is. I am out of here. (or) The church tells me I should tithe. I have no interest in doing that. I don't want to feel guilty. I don't like the pressure. I am out of here. (or) I don't want to forgive that person who hurt me... I don't want to serve... I don't want to... and I do want to do what I want to do. I need a church that is more tolerant of my lifestyle choices. And when the church isn't tolerant and willing to pretend that you are justified in your bad choices... people easily leave. I could tell you endless stories of people who left the church and behind it was a wrecked life due to their bad choices for which they were unrepentant.
TEN: Our culture's relentless pressure that is shaping us into people who are not easily capable of deep, covenantal commitments. We are the quintessential customers and consumers. Add in to that the personal narcissism that we are encouraged to have and live out of... and that makes covenantal commitment pretty hard. Not to mention sacrificial service on behalf of others. Not to mention patience, forbearance, forgiveness and a whole lot more necessary stuff for doing community and life together.
**********
There are probably some other MAJOR categories, but this is what I came up with. Some of these are good, some are bad and some are just ugly. Often, there are multiple reasons involved for leaving a church. I'll try to navigate some of these in the days to come.
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
This blogsite is devoted to providing daily reflections on leadership, spirituality, church, mission and culture. Every now and then I throw in a few theological reflections as well. For me, all these topics weave together.
I do think the church needs outstanding leadership as we make our way through these "in-between" times... as we move from modernity to post-modernity, from Christendom to post-Christendom. The church is HUGELY affected by all that is going on.
So for about ten days now, a lot of posts have been reflections about the church. There are some more to come. I hope these posts inspire personal reflection and conversations, and even more, that they help you move into a deeper commitment to and love for the church. -bkr-
******************************************
I need to make a distinction in this post which I should have made in the post I did that was launched out of Quitting Church.
It is one thing to Quit Church and quite another to quit a church. I am very critical of Quitting Church. I understand "leaving" (let's use the nicer word) a particular church. I think it should always be a serious matter for a person to leave a church for another one. This should be a thoughtful, discerning process where integrity and love, conversation and prayer guide the way.
I have numerous friends who have left a church after a long process where they did exactly what I described in the previous sentence. I believe they honored the church, Christ and their own integrity in how they proceeded in this matter. They had legitimate reasons for leaving a church and they did so in a healthy way. They left one church and went to another. There are hundreds of people at our church, who are there, having left another church. For so many of them, it was not an easy choice and one that delayed for a long time.
I also know people (unfortunately their numbers outweigh the other category) whose reasons were "suspect" and whose process was unhealthy and irresponsible. And therefore - the Outcome was bad. And so many of them didn't just quit a church... they Quit Church... and they are now nowhere, except on the golf course and in a Starbucks or in a living room and calling their experience - church.
By the way, I have some of my very best spiritual conversations and mentoring, etc. in coffee shops. They are awesome times... but they aren't church!
Tomorrow, I am going to give a list of reasons (some good, some bad and some ugly) why people leave church, and then begin to comment on those reasons in the days that follow.
Joshua Harris has written a book - Stop Dating the Church: Fall in Love With the Family of God. I haven't read his book (yet). I am just borrowing his metaphor for moment. And borrowing the biblical idea of covenant.
What if the relationship of an individual with a local church is akin to that of covenantal marriage? (Or should be covenantal marriage!) Using that image/idea, here are a few thoughts. Perhaps I push the metaphor too far... but on the other hand, maybe it is some food for thought.
And I think it helps us understand why the pain levels are so high as we navigate our relationship with the church. ONE: A lot of people just date the church. Is that good or bad? Is dating a good thing? If so, how long should one date? What is dating? What does dating imply about commitment?
TWO: There are serial daters who don't have much interest in any particular church, they just like dating.
We call them church shoppers and church hoppers.
THREE: There are some people who no longer date. Bad experiences. Blind dates... Bummer dates... Burned once or burned too many times and just won't do it. As painful as loneliness is, it is not as bad as the pain of a bad relationship.
FOUR: There are some people who decide to "live together" with a particular church. They move in, they commit (to a degree), but they do so with reservations, with conditions, and with an escape route easy to take.
Should it surprise us at all that this popular approach to relationships in general is also transferred to how many people choose to relate with a church?
FIVE: There are a lot of people who date a church, live together with a church and who even take the plunge of covenantal commitment with a church, mainly so they can have their needs met.
Again, this shouldn't surprise us. Think about the realm of interpersonal relationships. Why does anyone date? Is it because their main thought is - I want to give of myself to someone... I want to meet their needs...? I want to live my life in the service of them becoming all God wants them to become. Of course not. We date because we are needy, we want our needs met... and when the other person does not meet our needs - we end the dating relationship. Our fundamental question is not: Who needs me to give to them? Who needs me to meet their needs?Our fundamental question is - who can meet my needs? The same dynamic is at work in our relationship with the church.
Just like with a personal relationship, when it comes to the church, we all have our lists of required qualities the "other/the church" must have for us to be interested.
Some of us are very picky... I'm not saying that is good or bad... But we are very picky... I wonder how often we think of the other person being just as picky about us?
SIX: There are some people who unwisely, prematurely take the plunge of covenantal commitment. And it is the wrong fit, the wrong person, they are the wrong person, they are part of the "not fit" for one another. First impressions. Strong needs. Impulsive decisions. Romantic, idealized, distorted images. Not understanding the nature of the covenantal commitment. Not counting the cost. Not realizing that "marriage" is not a picnic by any means. It happens a lot.
Just like in dating, it is easy to do two things. First, to give wrong impressions, or distorted impressions to the other. We can all "clean up our act" for a season to impress and win the other person. Second, to naively overlook obvious flaws (even danger signals) and think - this will change later.
So now - we have made a less than desirable choice? What to do.....
SEVEN: Bad marriages. Or weak, uninspiring ones that are stalled, stuck, in a holding pattern, disappointing. Sometimes they last a long time in this condition. Sometimes a relationship with a church is exactly like being in a weak or bad marriage. And there is a host of reasons why weak/bad marriages develop. You show up, you are there, but just going through the motions. Sometimes we work hard at bad marriages and they don't change. Other times, we don't work too hard at them. (See the follow up in point nine.)
EIGHT: Abusive relationships. They happen. They are horrible. Immediate and courageous action is needed to end it. And then loving, restoring, healing work is needed for the one who has been abused. Whether in a personal relationship or a church - make strong, decisive actions to get out of an abusive relationship.
NINE: Separation! In an interpersonal relationship, it is easy to see when this happens. One person moves out. When this is applied to a church relationship, it looks a little like this. You begin to show up intermittently. And then stop showing up at all. Why bother? You have checked out. You just haven't made it fully official. You start going out to explore other options. You may or may not take some serious steps to try and work on the relationship. More often then not (when it comes to the church) we don't take serious steps to work on things (we don't go for church relationship counseling). We just try to muster up our energy to hang in their longer, to endure and hope it will change. It rarely does.
TEN: Divorce. In a marriage relationship, divorce is an official, legal, cross a line decision that is recognized by everyone involved. Divorces are often messy, usually painful, rarely satisfying in their conditions, and which have lingering consequences for everyone. The kids are always affected. The larger Family and Friends are torn and sad. Which side do we listen to? Who do we believe? What do we do now?
Using this image/metaphor, here is the twist for a church. In too many situations, the divorce happens secretly. No word is given, the person just disappears. There is no closure. Later it is discovered that so and so is dating someone else. And boy does that ever feel bad.
ELEVEN: Remarriage... or not... It is not uncommon to find people who have been married three or four times. In the world of marriage, here is what the statistics tell us. A second marriage is more likely to end in divorce than was the first one. The third marriage even more so. Is there any parallel with the church?
*************************************
I did this extended metaphor "bit" because leaving a church is usually painful and that pain is similar to leaving a personal relationship. There is a fair similarity to the marriage relationship. This may give us another window to think about the issue of leaving a church and why we feel the way we feel.
Tomorrow - my list of Main Reasons why people leave a church and why some Quit Church. Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
Here is an idea from Brian Newman that made a lot of sense to me. Brian has worked in a variety of roles within the church (Lead Pastor in Amsterdam, Executive Pastor in Denver) and for many long years in a missional capacity to plant churches and train leaders of churches. So he has wrestled with church issues from a variety of roles. Thanks for your good thoughts Brian. -bkr-
*****************************
I'm thankful for the conversation Brian Rice has instigated about the Church and people exiting (see Quitting Church which Brian has well reviewed). I made a comment to Brian's review on the LCI blogsite and here are some further reflections.
It’s an “open secret” that people are leaving the
institutional Church in droves. Books are published on the topic, people blog
about it frequently. It is not unusual for a Christian to be in a conversation
and say, “When I was part of that church…”
But what about the “stay-ers,” those who choose to stick
with their local congregation through thick and thin? How does one stay well?
It’s one thing to stay in a church and complain about it from the inside. It’s
another to stay in that congregation and to be an active participant and
contributor. The latter takes great humility and a heart surrendered to God.
The former takes … well, I won’t get into that rant!
The church I have served for the past three years has gone
through a very difficult split, and then a further splinting. I have seen many
people leave the church, and a minority stay. In commending that “faithful
remnant,” I have observed some qualities in them that has encouraged my heart
and challenged me to continue to be part of this messy body of Christ.
These stay-ers SERVE.In
general they have served for many years in a variety of ways. They serve God
and His Kingdom first and foremost. Show me a person who is actively serving in
a church and I would bet they will hang in there through thick and thin.
These stay-ers are OTHERS ORIENTED.People who positively contribute are more concerned
with the welfare of others than themselves. This is a HUGE attitude and mindset
issue. People who are “consumer Christians,” those who go to a church for the
sermon, the music, the children’s or youth programs ask the question, “What
will I get out of this church?” Contributors ask, “What can I give to others?”
These stay-ers want the church to GROW.That is, contributors have a concern for their own
personal growth as well as the maturity of the congregation. Those who leave
tend be on the “remedial track” for maturity because they do not journey for
the longer term with the same community who could challenge them. Those who
stay have a much greater opportunity to mature in the context of long-standing
relationships.
These stay-ers are ultimately POSITIVE.Contributors believe the local church serves an
important function in the Kingdom of God as well as in society at large. The
local church is not perfect, in fact it is awfully messy at times. And yet it
is the conveyor of grace and truth and hope. It is a “bride” waiting for the
bridegroom. It is a body with different parts serving together.
I believe the greatest challenge is to remain in a local
church and go through the paradigm shift from critic to contributor. So, are
you a stay-er? If so, hopefully you will have the fortitude to be a contributor
to what God is doing through your local church.
For a better church, you are going to need better followers of Jesus. And while I do not want to ignore the fact of community, we need to turn the gaze inward first, before we start to put the blame on how others are inadequate.
I've been on a bit of rant and rave lately, thinking about the critics who love to complain and put the blame everywhere but on themselves. In a post a few days ago (What is Wrong With the Church: Dear Sirs...) I mentioned that this is bad psychology, spirituality, theology, etc. Here are the insights of a few others on this issue:
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end, each of us must work for our own improvement and at the same time, share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. Marie Curie
I like this word from Marie Curie quite a bit. If you don't like something you are a part of, then get to work to make it better… but first, make sure you are becoming a better person yourself. If that (you becoming a better person) doesn't happen, it is doubtful that you will be able to make a better world (or church, or team, or mission, or organization).
Huxley, in the same vein, had this to say: I wanted to change the world. But I have found that the only thing one can be sure of changing is oneself.
And for every one who has worked very hard to change your "self" you know how hard it was/is just to change your self... Now, think about trying to change an entire organization of "selves!" That is a whole lot harder.
And how about this thought from Erich Fromm. Man’s main task in life is to give birth to himself. I don't think I go quite as far as to say this is THE main task in life, but it sure does rank pretty high and deserves a spot on the short list.
Neither Curie, Huxley or Fromm are talking about a narcissistic self-centered preoccupation with one's self that ignores community. They are describing the Brute Fact - that if any external, organizational change is to happen, it is launched from within, by changed individuals.
My friend Brian Newman talks about the need to move from Critic to Contributor. I think a huge part of that process is the journey of self-awareness and personal development of one's inner world.
Brian K. Rice
Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
My friend Tim Adour got the leadership bug a bunch of years ago. When I say he got the bug, I mean two things. He got the bug to grow as far as he could as a leader. And then he got the bug to develop others for leadership. So, here is Tim, the senior pastor of a large Assembly of God church in the Bronx, and he gives some of his very best time doing leadership development.
Tim recently made a comment on FACEBOOK about one of his evening training programs (on appreciative inquiry - good stuff) and I asked Tim if he would tell the readers of this site a little about the training programs he runs for leaders at his church.
-bkr-
***********************
Question: What do you do when you have dozens of quality
local church leaders who have a passion for their area of ministry, have been
leading that ministry for years, want to see that ministry prosper, but are not
sure how to get where they know they want to go?
Answer: Train them.
Recently I heard someone say, “The church is one of the few
organizations that give people leadership positions, but do not train them
properly.I would suggest this is
a true statement.Certainly, the
church is full of loving, dedicated and sacrificial people; however, these
qualities, by themselves, do not make a leader.
I would further suggest that local church senior leadership
enable an atmosphere that tolerates non-trained leadership roles.Due to our own lack of training,
failure to recognize the need for training or an overloaded schedule we do not
provide instruction that would enhance the overall ministry of the local
church.
Before I say anything further, let me admit my past guilt in
this regard.In my case, I didn’t
see the value in investment in other leaders, or myself for that matter;
therefore, I was content with filling positions, not developing skilled
leaders.I thank God He put people
in my life that helped me overcome such a notion.
Over the past few years there is a 3-pronged approach I’ve
followed in training local church leadership.1) Personal Leadership.2) Leadership Development. 3) Good to Great.
Personal Leadership
The idea behind this class is we cannot lead anyone until we
have first learned to lead ourselves.In my opinion, the first place to start in self-leadership is personal
holiness.Too many of God’s people
live under the philosophy of “Situational Holiness.”Situational Ethics bases right and wrong on what is
happening at the moment.Situational Holiness picks and chooses what biblical principles I’ll
follow based on convenience.Obviously, this leads to an undisciplined life of holiness before
God.Therefore, we spend several
weeks reading and discussing Jerry Bridges’ book, The Pursuit of Holiness.It is one of the most practical books
on holiness I have read.
Leadership Development
This course continues the self-evaluation theme of Personal
Leadership, but addresses specific aspects of leadership.We begin with the subject, Permission
to Fail.God is not looking for
perfection, just commitment.We
then move into a lengthy discussion of Brian Rice’s Four Mindsets of a
Leader.We will spend 2, maybe 3
weeks reviewing this material.Finally, we move into the practical realities of Dream big, Plan well,
Work hard and Leave the rest in God’s hands.
Good to Great
The previous 2 courses are geared for just about anyone.Those in leadership or those who are
thinking about leadership will glean from the above 2 programs.Good to Great is much more intense and
is for those serious about becoming great leaders.Of course, we use Jim Collins’ book, Good to Great.However, we filter this book through
scripture.We begin the course with
a discussion about “All truth is God’s truth.”We then methodically go through Collins’ book and discuss
all the principles that can be validated by scripture.Believe it or not, most of the book
presents godly principles.It is
quite an experience.
Tim Adour Church of the Revelation Bronx, New York
Many years ago a London newspaper ran a series of essays that addressed the question of what is wrong with the world. They invited well known journalists and authors to submit essays which the paper would run in its series.
G.K. Chesterton submitted the shortest essay. It is reprinted in full for you to read.
Dear Sirs:
I am.
Sincerely;
G. K. Chesterton
hmmm....
I wonder if the church today would be well served if its critics had a healthy dose of Chestertonian humility? For very few of them are responding with an answer like his to the question:
What is Wrong With the Church Today?
Instead, their answers point to everything but themselves. The problems are always external to them. Out there in the others, in the system, in the situation!!! In this tactical approach and missing the key ingredient, they fall into bad spirituality, questionable emotional intelligence, weak psychology, terrible theology and then the inevitable miss on ecclesiology.
Here are a few thoughts that are congruent with Chesterton's "essay." I use these to launch leaders (and hopefully critics) into a deeper self-assessment, discernment, discovery (Awareness). For these things are true in the life of every critic and Christian love and humility requires that we address these inner realities well.
Who can discern his (or her) errors? Forgive my hidden faults. Psalm 19:12
If things go wrong in this world (or in the church) this is because something is wrong with the individual, because something is wrong with me. Therefore, if I am sensible, I shall put myself right first. For this I need a knowledge of the innermost foundations of my being... The true leaders of mankind are always those who are capable of self-reflection. Jung
If our goal is to so reshape our organizations (and our churches) that they will survive and flourish in the new century, our most immediate need is to shape ourselves. C. Michael Thompson Our lives are mostly a constant evasion of ourselves. T.S. Elliot
Nothing is so difficult as not deceiving oneself. Wittgenstein
We labor unceasingly to preserve an imaginary existence and neglect the real. Pascal.
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind . . . Jeremiah 17:9,10
So I ask and answer . . .
What is wrong with my church (which I inadequately love)?
Dear Sirs:
I am,
Regrettably, Brian Rice
This is not the final answer, but it must be the starting point in the conversation. At least it must be for anyone who wants to make a meaningful contribution.
I'll return to this theme of the church in a few days. Tomorrow, "A Brief History of Spirituality..."
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
Why We Love the Church: In Praise of Institutions and Organized Religion by Kevin DeYoung and Ted Kluck
I liked their book. Not everything in it, but a lot of it. I also part ways with them on some major things. What I really liked is their willingness to love what Christ loves and to write honestly about the Church. Not just write about its flaws (which there are many) but about its beauty, goodness and accomplishments (which are substantial).
They engage in reflection (and theologizing) about the church. Good stuff, vigorous ideas and stated in very accessible language. They "got me" thinking.
Why I Love the Church Why I Love My Church (most of the time) Why My Church Loves Me (most of the time) Here are some of my thoughts and they are not listed in order of importance.
I love my church because . . . they let me be a part of it. They encourage me to hang out there. They like me. They want me. In other words, there are a lot of gracious people there who are willing to overlook my faults and idiosyncrasies and failures and sins.
I love my church because . . . there are some incredible people that are a part of it. There are stories being lived out in front of me that take my breath away. I hear story after story about journeys that I think - someone should write a book about that person. These stories are stories of the powerful working of God and about their "mostly" cooperative responses to that work. These are stories about people who are desperately lost and broken apart from God and their stories are about new life, dreams, hope and a whole lot more.
I love my church because . . . it isn't afraid to try new stuff. Okay, here is a personal bias. I am HUGELY wired for change. One of my greatest passions is growth and development. And my church is a growing, developing, morphing, "becoming" group of people. And for the most part, most of the time, most of the people are mostly okay with change. That is kind of incredible.
I love my church because . . . it is all about grace. It is simply in the DNA of the church. It is the bottom line. It is the foundation. It is atmosphere and ethos. It is the guiding principle. It is the litmus test. It is the clarion call. It is the Inner Voice of the organization. It is part of the charism of its founder. It is... i am running out of ideas, but you get the point. If there is another group of wilder misfits and a motlier crew, all who are being united and transformed by grace -- my hat (that I don't wear) is off to you). (And by the way, I don't carry the bag either.)
I love my church because . . . it is passionate about important stuff. Stuff meaning: Jesus. Mission. Discipleship. Service. Kids. Teenagers. Hurting people. Leadership. Spirituality. Beauty. Generosity. Truth. The Bible. Culture. Evangelism. Transformation. Our City. Racial Reconciliation. Oh yes - and being the Body of Christ. And my church is doing a lot of these things well. Not perfectly. Not by a long shot. But pretty well. Oh yes, sometimes we really mess up and fall really short. Three steps forward and two back. Or is two forward and three back? Anyway . . . We are managing to keep the main thing the main thing... mainly.
I love my church because . . . I have great friends there. We do life together. We grow together. We have iron sharpening iron conversations. We serve together. We follow Jesus together. We forgive one another. We get to do all the "one another" stuff in the New Testament. (Hmmm, I don't have one of those buttons on me at the time either.)
I love my church because . . . it connects me with people really different from me with a ton of people that I would otherwise NEVER hang out with, see, get to know, come to appreciate, learn to respect, have the opportunity to extend grace to (and have some given right back to me), argue with, pray with, and learn how to be the body of Christ.
And one more for this post. I love my church because . . . Jesus is all over the place and making everything else possible.
Why do you love your church?
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
This is a long post with a more substantial reflection on the church, than what I normally do on this blogsite. There are a few times when this post begins to take on the quality of one of my Rant and Rave posts. No apologies. I am passionate about the church.
I also thought about doing a "re-write" to tone some stuff down. It is not my intention to hurt anyone. But I do want to speak strongly in the midst of a conversation where I experience the critics speaking very strongly.
Let me run a few questions by you.
MARRIAGE Why is marriage in trouble in the USA today? Why are people quitting marriage in such large numbers?
HEALTH CARE What is wrong with the health care system? What can we do about it...what should we do about it?
GOVERNMENT Why are so many people so cynical and pessimistic about the government? Why are so many people just giving up on expecting true change from great political leadership? How can we change their viewpoint to they are excited once again about the government? Or should we just bail and sit on the sidelines and gripe and complain?
For the three issues mentioned above - here are a few more questions. How simple or how complex do you think those issues are? How simple or how complex do you think the perspectives, answers, proposed solutions will be?
I think the issues are extremely complex and the answers are just as complex.
THE CHURCH... Why are the Faithful Leaving? What Can We Do About It?
These are the two big questions Julia Duin raises and answers. I am not satisfied with her assessment or her answers.
What follows is a pretty strong criticism of Duin's highly critical book.
Of her ten chapters, eight of them are focused on specific issues: Church is irrelevant, it is not providing community, it is not culturally engaged, singles are not welcome or helped, teaching is weak, the pastor is the problem, women don't have a true voice, and the Spirit of God is not showing up. In these eight chapters, you can find another 40 or so complaints listed. (And I agree with many of our criticisms about the church. They are true for some churches at some times.)
Also, please understand that Julia Duin is one who has quit the church. For Duin, the "leavers" are blameless "with very few exceptions." (pp. 177). I am sure she includes herself as one of the blameless. She has left the church and it is the church's fault. The church is just not meeting the needs of people or her own needs. That language recurs over and over through her book.
I grew a little weary of this whining about "my needs aren't being met." I also grew a little skeptical about the "not my fault" mentality that was looking for the herd of "leave takers" to confirm her choice.
I almost despaired thinking about how to write a post(s) in response to the endless specifics with which I disagree. Then the next day I read a book by two authors who (in essence) did a far better job than I could do (although there are definitely things they say which I think are inadequate or misguided). The book is Why We Love the Church. I'll have a few comments about that in another post.
Here is why I don't value Duin's contribution.
She quit, she complains, and she assesses blame as wholly elsewhere and on the other! I have been in enough counseling situations, enough church conflict situations, enough messy leadership scenarios to know -- there is always more than one side to the story... and that one person, one party, one position NEVER has all the blame. A little more self-awareness and humility on Duin's part would have been nice.
If you quit and bail -- you lose the right to criticize on what you've quit. Sorry, that is just the way it is. On anything.
If you want to criticize, then hang in there. Do the hard work of love. Okay, so you've been hurt. WHO HASN"T BEEN HURT? You've been disappointed and let down! Join the club called humanity.
You think you can do church better. Than do it. Do it for about ten years and then tell us how you did it. But along the way, here is what I think you will find. You aren't going to do a very good job at it. You will hurt people. You'll disappoint them. You'll let them down. You won't meet their needs. And they will criticize you at every step. And they will QUIT on you. They will take their leave of you and they will put all the blame on you.
Please stop with the banal answers of - be more relevant. Be more loving. Have more community. Have better teaching. Do a better job of leading. As if we don't know this already. As if thousands of us are not trying to do these very things. As if we haven't learned a few things along the way. And as if there are not multiple ways forward.
Oh yes... one more thing. Please give up on the naive idea that the "House Church" is the answer. Lots of us know it isn't. It is just as hard as any other "form" or "method" or "style" of church. Here is what we are going to see in about 5 years. Books titled:
Why I Quit My House Church: My Needs Weren't Being Met.
Disillusioned with the House Church: Memoirs of a Post-Emergent Pagan.
Help for Those Hurt by Dysfunctional House Church Leaders
If You Thought Big Church Was Bad... Why I Left the House Church Movement
The house church already has problems with mission, teaching, community, and leadership.
Imagine this scenario. Thousands of untrained leaders. Not trained in understanding the Bible. Not trained in teaching or facilitating. Not trained in processing relational conflict. Not trained in leadership. Not trained in missional outreach. Not trained in the spiritual disciplines. Not trained in much at all. And now they are a "new kind of leader for a new kind of church." Where do I sign up? (Sarcasm intended.)
Oh wait. We've already had that situation. It was/is known as the small group movement.
Today the small group movement just got a lot sexier and edgier by taking the name "House Church." Wonderful! But a poorly led, poorly taught, poorly nurtured, poorly missional group is going to be a mess whether you call it a small group, a House Church, or Revolutionary Cell, or Christian Coven (sorry, more sarcasm playing around with those who play around with the idea of Pagan Christianity) or whatever you decide to name it.
And this is only going to get worse, not better. I can share some personal anecdotes of my own on this as well. Some from years ago and some from last month. I've heard plenty of anecdotes from people who have left a house church which they described as deeply dysfunctional, bad leadership, lousy teaching, ingrown, not missional, etc. Hmmm. That sounds familiar. I guess human nature erupts in small groups as well as large ones.
By the way, for the record, I have no problems with House Church as one more method, way, strategy for doing church in our time. I do have a problem with utopian views about the house church. I do have a problem thinking it is THE way to do church.
*****************
Okay, there are real issues in the church. Lots of them. There are real problems. These issues and problems are very complex. We mess up a lot. We fall terribly short so often. There are many, many nuances in every issue. There are always multiple reasons for every problem. There are always about as many perspectives on an issue-problem as there are people involved.
And we need to do something about the problems.
Here is what I am left with.
Jesus loved the church. I am pretty sure that Jesus still loves the church. Jesus has not Quit on the church. I am also pretty sure that Jesus wants us to love the church also. Jesus, because he doesn't quit on the church and because he sacrificially loves the church, has the right to criticize and rebuke his church (for an illustration of this read Revelation 2 and 3). I'd like to suggest that we be about the imitation of Christ on this. That means, do not Quit, Bail, Leave, Flee, or Abandon... If it gets that bad, then you have the opportunity to practice loving your enemy. Go for it and see what God does in you even if he does little around you. (Note: In a later post, I'll address the fact that renewal of broken systems sometimes means going outside the system and starting something new.)
The New Testament church was a very messy affair. All you have to do is read Paul's letters and you see that it has always been this way. For Paul, the church was worth fighting for, praying for, suffering for, dying for. And he did. He loved the church as did his Savior. Paul was always committed to the imitation of Christ.
I have been tempted more than once to quit, to bail, to throw in the towel. I've been hurt too. I've been misunderstood, taken advantage of, criticized, not appreciated, not had my needs met...
And in all of this, Jesus brings me back to the great goal and outcome of our faith, which has never ceased to be...
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and spirit. And love your neighbor as yourself. Some of those neighbors are church people.
Love one another. By this, all people will know you are my followers. I am pretty sure that no exegetical gymnastics is going to be able to translate the word love as Quit on one another.
Love is patient and kind... love always hopes and always perseveres. (i.e. Love does not Quit.)
Love doesn't quit and complain from the sidelines. Love engages, love suffers, love sacrifices, love redeems...
So I've stayed the course, prayed for grace and healing. Recognized my own sin and shortcomings as well those of the "other." I've become a little more humble along the way. A bit more grateful. And certainly more dependent on mercy and forgiveness. (And still grumbled way too much... but tried to do it under my breath.)
The church that Jesus died for is not a church we want to Quit on.
And finally... (to mercifully end this way to long post on a semi-humorous note)
. . . here is one creative, marketing appeal for church...
The only problem is, when you join it, it may begin to... Sorry... had to get that one in.
Brian "a very great sinner who needs the Church" Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
Last week I have had some "spirited" discussions with some friends about the church and its relevance (and image and attractiveness) to the culture around us.
Why do people come to church?
Why don't people come to church?
Why do they come but not come back?
Why do they come for a time, but then leave?
We did not come to any sort of consensus on our answers.
In the 1970s and 1980s, evangelicals (and the conservative church in general) had a good thing going. The ranks were swelling as people left the historic mainline denominations, which for the most part saw continued decline through last century and which has continued into this new one.
But as the first decade of the new millennium draws to an end, all is not well with conservative Christianity and its churches, whether evangelical, fundamentalist, pentecostal or charismatic.
We know people are leaving the church. We know church attendance among conservative churches is dropping.
Whereas a Gallup Poll said that in 2006, 43% of Americans attended church (129 million), other studies show a much smaller percentage, more in the range of 18-20%.
We know that 10% of the churches in America have about 50% of all church attendance.
And we know that while many of these churches are quite large and have a good Front Door, there is also a considerable Back Door. There are a lot of people leaving conservative churches.
George Barna has been a leader in speaking and writing about this trend. (How good he is, is another matter!)
David Kinnaman spoke clearly about this issue in his recent book - Unchristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks ABout Christianity...and Why it Matters.
Dan Kimball wrote about the emerging (and postmodern) generation and why they are not attracted to our church - They LIke Jesus But Not the Church.
The emergent authors in general, rightly I might add, have this issue on the front burner of the conversation.
Julia Duin, a religion editor of The Washington Times, has weighed in on the issue in her book:
Quitting Church: Why the Faithful are Fleeing and What To Do About It.
I am going to weigh in on her perspective which I think is deeply flawed in many ways: shallow in its interpretation, naive in its solutions, and sad in its tenor.
I do not doubt (for the most part) the statistics of what is going on. Nor do I deny the anecdotes which she provides as illustrations of the statistics. Nor am I insensitive to her personal, painful experience. What I do find problematic is her assessment of why, and her answers are almost insulting for those who are still working and struggling in the church which they love. Here is where I am pretty post-modern. There are not "brute facts" on this matter. There are only interpreted facts. I think her interpretation is flawed and biased in a number of ways.
Her book is an example of how complex this issue is and how thoughtful we must be if we are to move forward.
So over the next several days, I'll have some of my reflections on this issue.
I look forward to hearing from anyone who wants to weigh in on this issue.
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
How many advertisements do you think you are exposed to every day? The New York Times reports that every day, every American is exposed to 3,500 "desire producing advertisements."
We live in a culture that seeks to stimulate our desire to have things we didn't know we needed or wanted. The world of advertising/marketing strives to stimulate your desire to buy, by stirring up our unhappiness and inciting dissatisfaction when we realize we don't have something.
And of course, tied with every product is the promise of enjoyment and happiness (when you own that product or experience).
Hand in hand with this cultural way, is an economic system of buying now what you can't afford through the use of credit cards and delayed payment. We delay payment so we do not have to delay gratification. This comes with an inflated cost due to compound interest and an eventual burden of debt that makes us unhappy which then fuels our need to buy something else to cheer us up.
Jethani says, "Although lack of self-control has always plagued humanity, for the first time i history an economic system has been created that relies on it."
Consumption is a way of life.
After 9/11, we were encouraged not to let the terrorists win. They would win if we changed our spending, shopping habits. President Bush proclaimed to the terrorists that Americans would continue to "fly and buy."
In our current economic crisis, the last thing the powers that be (i.e. principalities of business and government) want us to do is cut back on our spending. Our economy needs jump-started with a new wave of spending. (Excuse me - isn't that what got us in this bind in the first place?!?)
Remember, from yesterday, that I said it is not that being a consumer/customer is wrong. What is wrong is the way we are now engaging in those activities.
And the world of faith and church has not been immune.
Here is what every Christian leader knows (or should know:
(1) Whether we like it or not, the person sitting in the pew is a customer/consumer and they expect the church (or para-church, or whatever) to provide what it is they are looking for.
(2) We know that if we do not provide it, there are others who will. And as in most things, you can take your "spiritual business" elsewhere.
(3) We also know you want and expect the latest and the best. We know the customer is naturally a critic.
(4) And if we are really good at all this, we figure out how to "brand" our product so it is even more recognizable, marketable and profitable.
Our strategies may vary widely.
We may decide that we don't care what you think you want. We will give you what we think you need.
We may decide that we must work very hard to change you as the customer/consumer so that you come to want, what we are providing.
Or we may just give in and cater to things the way they are and give you want you want.
There may be other options, but these are the ones that come to mind right now.
What I believe is that this reality is true for the church of modernity and post-modernity. It is true for the evangelical church and the emerging church.
Rob Bell knows exactly what his customers want. So does Brian McLaren. So does Bill Hybels and Rick Warren and Andy Stanley and Joyce Meyers and John Maxwell and Benny Hinn . . . And so do the people who market their products! You can also bet that each of those individuals gets regular reports on how well their products sell... how large the numbers of customers are at their events..
Every individual I mentioned, even though they each have strong personal convictions about what is right and true, also know their audiences have expectations and wants. And they design their offering to provide what is wanted. Then the world of Christian marketing and merchandizing kicks in to both promote and deliver that product, not to mention, make a profit off of it.
At what point do we lose our soul to the machine of Christian commerce?
Hmmm.... this is starting to sound like a Rant and Rave, and I try to do those only occasionally.
As you can tell, I don't pretend to have good answers to this. I'm just glad if I can be one of those spreading a little more awareness of the situation/problem.
Hey, this is one issue I would love to hear some of your thoughts.
Is the church becoming too consumerist? Are Christians becoming just like the culture around us? How are you doing on these things?
Brian K. Rice Leadership ConneXtions International www.lci.typepad.com
One thing I have always appreciated at Living Word is the large numbers of children we have and the programs we have for them. Children are a priority for us and in recent strategic thinking, we are making some major new initiatives for our children.
Well, change one word and you have the right title. Yes They'll Know We Are Christians By Our Love!
Maybe that is part of the problem! We aren't loving one another deeply enough, strongly enough, consistently enough, unconditionally enough . . .
David Naugle says of love:
It is the mark of the Christian.
If Christians sported a tattoo, then love would be it.
It is the distinguishing mark of our faith.
It is the final apologetic that is needed.
It is the validity of the Gospel.
Naugle used a long quote describing the early Christian church in the 2nd century. These words were not written by a Christian author, but by a secular authority about the Christians [The Apology of Aristides.]
They walk in all humility and kindness, and falsehood is not found among them, and they love one another. They despise not the widow and grieve not the orphan.
He that has distributes liberally to him who has not. If they see a stranger, they bring him under their roof and rejoice over him, as [if he] were their own brother, for they call themselves brethern, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit and in God; but when one of their poor passes away from the world, and any one of them see him, then he provides for his burial according to his ability, and if they hear that any of their number is imprisoned or oppressed for the name of their Messiah, all of them provide for his needs, and if it is possible that he may be delivered, they deliver him.
And if there is among them a man that is poor and needy, and they have not an abundance of necessaries, they fast two or three days that they may supply the needy with their necessary food.
It was a book by J.I. Packer, Quest for Godliness, where I first encountered these words that have now been repeated endlessly by others who share the assessment:
North American Christianity is 3000 miles wide and 1/2 inch deep.For our international readers, continental United States is about 3000 miles wide.
To say it in a more contextualized way, North American Christianity is 4800 kilometers wide and one centimer deep!
But what exactly does this mean? Well, the Barna research group gives some concrete data to this. You may not agree with their definition of substantially deep personal faith (I for one think it is lacking in some significant ways) but it is a way to launch this conversation.
The Barna research defines a biblical worldview that is substantially deep as consisting of the following beliefs:
Jesus lived a sinless life.
God is the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and He still rules it today.
Salvation is free gift from God and it cannot be earned.
Satan is real.
A Christian has a personal responsibiity to share her / his faith with others.
The Bible is accurate in all the principles it teaches.
Unchanging moral truth exists.
Such moral truth is defined by the Bible
Now, out of the 95 million Americans between the ages of 18-41, about 65 million say they have made a commitment to Christ that is still important to them. Yet, only 3 million of that 65 million embrace the eight beliefs listed above.
And, of the 73 million Christian adults over the age of 41 who say they have made a commitment to Christ that is still important, only 9% of them believe the worldview mentioned above.
This is the superficial faith in the United States that Packer says is 1/2 inch deep.
By the way, post-modernity is not to blame for this. PoMo has only been around for a handful of years. The issue is that we are now reaping and seeing the consequences of how faith was preached and practiced in modernity through the last half of the 20th century.
Evangelicals, charismatics, pentecostals, fundamentalists - all of them/us - 3000 miles wide and 1/2 inch deep.
I think it is safe to say one thing: What the conservative North American church has done for the last fifty years HAS NOT WORKED to shape in its adherents the life of maturity and substance.
Remember the definition of insanity. Doing the same thing you have done in the past and thinking you will get different results..
It's way past time to throw open the door to lots of creative, innovative, paradigm-busting possibilities for how we follow Christ and do church and see where the wind of the Spirit blows.
Colorado Springs, Wheaton Illinois - WE HAVE A PROBLEM?
Rene Padilla is an evangelist/author/missiologist from Argentina. He has lived and ministered in both Latin and North American contexts. Padilla had this to say about the North American Church:
"Far from being a factor for the transformation of society, it has become merely another reflection of society and (what is worse) another instrument that society uses to condition people to its materialistic values." (Mission Between the Times)
This is also one of the critiques of the emergent church about the mainstream evangelical church. Instead of confronting our culture with another way (that of Jesus), Christianity has been co-opted by both the mainstream evangelical and even more by the Prosperity Movement to legitize our culture of materialism.
Although maybe this month of December Christmas shopping is not the "opportune" time to offer Padilla's insights.
Kathleen Powers Erickson: At Eternity's Gate: The Spiritual Vision of Vincent Van Gogh Every year I like to read biographies. I am getting a few different kinds for early 2010. This is one of the best on van Gogh and I am looking forward to it. I love the art of van Gogh and his spiritual journey, illuminated through his art is a treat. I will be using this along with: Van Gogh: The Complete Paintings, published by Taschen.
Paul Johnson: Churchill Hot off the presses and quite short (by comparison with many works on Churchill). Johnson is a writer with a magisterial sense of modern history. Churchill is one of the towering leaders of modernity. And this short book is a great introduction to a great man.
Paul Mariani: Thirty Days: On Retreat with the Exercises of St. Ignatius (Compass) I read a few books each month about the Jesuits. This book in in the Memoirs genre and is Mariani's description of his 30 Day Spiritual Exercises retreat. Well written. Insightful, vulnerable. It is always of great interest for me to read of the experiences of others who have done the Exercises.
Trans-Siberian Orchestra: The Lost Christmas Eve I have created my Playlist of TSO music. I love these guys, heavy metal, rock ballad, neo-classical shredding... all about Christmas and you have the unique sound of TSO.
George Bellas: Venomous Fingers My first CD by this artist. He is a shredder.
I am also listening to two other CDs that won't come up in a search by this engine. Here they are:
Steve Morse Band. Out Standing in Their Field
Johnny Hilland Band. Loud and Proud
Both are great guitarists.
Craig Chaquico: Acoustic Planet I don't have all his albums, but I have most of them which spawn quite a few years. He is an outstanding acoustic, jazz, guitarist. Melodic, light, breezy, dancing... these words describe his style. I have had a Chaquico Playlist on my iPod for the last few weeks and have listened to it many times.
David Crowder Band: Church Music Just bought it. Loaded it on the iPod and haven't had time to listen to it yet. My friend Gordon says it is great.
Relient K: Forget and Not Slow Down Just bought it for my son Matt. I listened to it first. I like it. A bit rockier. I'll give it another listen or two in the next few days.
