Rambunctious.
Frenetic.
Spirited.
As a group, we are, for the most part, introverts. Some of us, break that pattern, but, for the most part, we are people who think before we speak and are thoughtful in the things we say.
Our gatherings, even the moments we are taking the bread and cup, are interactive. Anyone may speak. Yet, while many different people do talk, the tone of our gatherings is calm and very, very orderly.
Usually.
But, not today.
We follow the 1 Corinthians 14:26 pattern and encourage everyone to come with a hymn and, as a general rule, at least two, three or more of us suggest a song or two.
Today, I felt led to suggest that we sing Holy, Holy, Holy and I asked if I could read Revelation 4, upon which the song is based, before we sang the song.
The Scripture reading and the singing of the hymn took over the day.
What happened afterward certainly felt led by the Spirit to me and resulted in the singing of "Worthy, You are Worthy" and "Thou Art Worthy" and the reading of John 1:1-14 and a discussion of the nature of God, existing as Father, Son and Holy Spirit and a discussion of John's vision in Revelation 4.
And, the whole tone matched the scene described in Revelation 4, vivid, chaotic and reverential. Raucous.
And, I kept up with it and participated in it.
But, by the end, I was worn out!
Just a few notes:
The truths that occupied our attention were deep, centered on what's often called the doctrine of the Trinity.
The progress seemed to me to be extremely Spirit-led. The shifts in direction were frequent and usually not initiated (humanity speaking) by me, not humanly rational, yet they all immediately made sense and edified us.
The taking of the bread and cup felt very spiritual to me and, I think, to everyone.
Even though no one prepares anything for our gatherings, the depth of the truths we encounter are far deeper than when we did the pastor, laity thing.
And, the emphasis is always on faith that produces obedience.
A blessed day.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Friday, September 25, 2015
Gathering: 9-24-15
This is the Thursday night group which, in my opinion, is, by far, the most advanced among the three groups that compose our small community of gatherings.
In this group, the taking of the Lord's Supper is nearly always an intense experience. (And, it was again yesterday as the guy whose family hosts the gathering took us through James 2 and part of Isaiah 64 asking us to reflect on living out works that demonstrate genuine faith in the Lord while we also understand that, as Isaiah described, our righteousness can be as filthy rags to the Lord.)
In this group, there is a laser focus on fulfilling the New Testament purpose of gathering to "spur each other on to love and good works."
And, normally, there is a spirit in which it is understood that, because of the incarnation and of the cross, there is no act of obedience or sacrifice that the Lord can ask of us that can be too great. But, in the past two gatherings, I believe we have hit a bit of a snag as far as that degree of commitment is concerned.
We are working on Francis Chan's call, in chapter 8 of CRAZY LOVE, to be obsessed by Jesus and to live a life obsessed by a desire to obey His most difficult teachings--particularly those in the Sermon on the Mount and demonstrated in Acts 2:42-27.
I think, actually, that it is not that we lack the commitment. Rather, it is that we are struggling to understand how that works out in a practical way as we live in the world and, especially, in community together. The angst surrounding this struggle was so great last evening that we couldn't actually focus on what we came together to discuss.
I must say, as I did in my KATE BURKHOLDER post entered yesterday, that this is the sort of struggle I long to be engaged in. I am pleased to be in a group that has this struggle, yet I am hoping that, in the end, we work through it in a Christlike way.
------------------------------
I will add this note: Beyond the community of gatherings that I participate in, I see few self-identified Christians who are in the midst of this struggle. And, my prophetic heart weeps for all the people who don't know this struggle or the overcoming of it.
In this group, the taking of the Lord's Supper is nearly always an intense experience. (And, it was again yesterday as the guy whose family hosts the gathering took us through James 2 and part of Isaiah 64 asking us to reflect on living out works that demonstrate genuine faith in the Lord while we also understand that, as Isaiah described, our righteousness can be as filthy rags to the Lord.)
In this group, there is a laser focus on fulfilling the New Testament purpose of gathering to "spur each other on to love and good works."
And, normally, there is a spirit in which it is understood that, because of the incarnation and of the cross, there is no act of obedience or sacrifice that the Lord can ask of us that can be too great. But, in the past two gatherings, I believe we have hit a bit of a snag as far as that degree of commitment is concerned.
We are working on Francis Chan's call, in chapter 8 of CRAZY LOVE, to be obsessed by Jesus and to live a life obsessed by a desire to obey His most difficult teachings--particularly those in the Sermon on the Mount and demonstrated in Acts 2:42-27.
I think, actually, that it is not that we lack the commitment. Rather, it is that we are struggling to understand how that works out in a practical way as we live in the world and, especially, in community together. The angst surrounding this struggle was so great last evening that we couldn't actually focus on what we came together to discuss.
I must say, as I did in my KATE BURKHOLDER post entered yesterday, that this is the sort of struggle I long to be engaged in. I am pleased to be in a group that has this struggle, yet I am hoping that, in the end, we work through it in a Christlike way.
------------------------------
I will add this note: Beyond the community of gatherings that I participate in, I see few self-identified Christians who are in the midst of this struggle. And, my prophetic heart weeps for all the people who don't know this struggle or the overcoming of it.
Thursday, September 24, 2015
Linda Castillo's KATE BURKHOLDER Novels
Since I strained my eyes permanently doing all the reading I did when I was pursuing my degree in Church History, I only use my eyes to read serious stuff. And, I do read a decent amount of the serious.
However, in addition to the serious, I am a huge fan of popular fiction.
It was more than 20 years ago that I checked my first audio book out of the library. I did it hoping to find an enjoyable way to pass the time when I had to travel alone from Findlay back home to Lancaster County. And, it worked. Amazingly well!
My first book was Dick Francis', DECIDER, which was on the bestseller list at the time.
In recent years, I read-via-audio about 20 bestselling novels per year. I have a list of authors I go to as soon as a new book by them is released on audio. Among them,
Michael Connelly, author of the Harry Bosch series and, more recently, my favorites, the Lincoln Lawyer series,
David Baldacci, probably best known for his King and Maxwell books, though he's not done one of those in a while,
Lee Child, who writes the Jack Reacher novels,
Harlan Coben, the author of my once-favorite, Myron Bolitar novel. (Novels featuring Myron eventually fizzled and got pretty lousy by the end.)
John Grisham, whose stuff I either love or can't stomach these days,
And, since I became avid with this sort of entertainment,
Three of my favorites have passed on to the big library in the sky:
Dick Francis, whose DECIDER convinced me that this sort of entertainment is for me,
Robert B. Parker, who literally died sitting at his desk typing the Spenser novel, SILENT NIGHT but who also wrote the Jesse Stone series, which I enjoyed. Spenser was a TV series back in the, I don't know, 80s? 90s?. All of the Stone novels written by Parker were made into movies starring Tom Selleck, and,
Vince Flynn, who died only at the age of 47 of cancer. He was the author of the Mitch Rapp series.
There are other authors I enjoy, including Randy Singer who writes so-called Christian fiction novels of the legal thriller genre and who I've heard called the "Christian John Grisham," though sometimes he's better.
Because I go through so many novels, in the past few years I've had to search for new authors to put on my list and I've had some success. I like Tess Gerritsen, creator of the Rizzoli and Isles characters and Lisa Gardner whose police woman, DD Warren, is okay.
Most recently, I tried out a Linda Castillo novel featuring her main character, Kate Burkholder.
----------------------------
At this point, let me be clear: I'm not recommending the Burkholder novels to anyone. I've knocked off three of them so far. All of them involved murders. The author creates very vivid descriptions of the murder victims. One of the novels I "read" involved the murder of a large family and there was much more gore than I appreciate. The most recent book involved the death of a man whose corpse was discovered 30 after his death who appeared to have been injured in a fight and died by being eaten alive by pigs.
Kate Burkholder is the police chief in a small town in Holmes County, Ohio. (If you know of Holmes County, you can guess where this is going.) Kate is thirtysomething, unmarried and shacking up with a guy who is also in the law enforcement field. She is not Miss Marple nor Jessica Fletcher.
She is moral in a twenty first century way. She's an honest cop. In the last novel, she got knocked up and was determined to keep the baby, even when her beau initially reacted very negatively to the news that he was about to father a child with her.
-------------------------------
Here's what I love about these novels:
They are set in Amish country in Ohio and each of the cases brings the reader into contact with Amish characters, with Amish culture and with the religion of the everyday Amish man, woman and child.
The author is clearly very familiar with the Amish. Kate, the main character, was born and raised Amish but has left the faith. Kate speaks Pennsylvania Dutch and often converses with the Amish in their tongue in short passages that the author publishes in Pennsylvania Dutch and then translates into English.
As someone who lives among the Amish in Pennsylvania, I see Castillo's depiction of the Amish nonromanticized, realistic and neutral. In fact, while the Amish are generally victims of crime in the books, in one I've finished Amish committed the crime and engaged in a conspiracy and, in the end, one of them ended being murdered by another Amish person in a way that is plausible in any piece of popular fiction.
------------------------------------
Most fascinating to me is Castillo's references to the Amish "ordnung," or the set of rules that the Amish live by and are at the center of their culture.
Castillo's Holmes County Amish are, as I know them to be here in Pennsylvania, deeply convinced that Christianity is a way of living that impacts the totality of life, not merely what a person does on Sunday morning.
While there are customs and traditions that make the Amish distinctive, the New Testament Gospels form the core of their understanding of what it means to be a Christian. And, while the sense of community is strong among the Amish, Amish community doesn't exist for its own sake. Community exists with the ordnung--the rules for living--at its center.
How refreshing. How Jesus-focused!
I am not interested in riding around in a buggy and wearing one of those hats. I don't want to attend a gathering in which to speak English is forbidden. I don't want a way of life in which the way I trim my beard is considered to be an act of righteousness or a sin.
On the other hand, I've had more than enough of a religious culture centered on the survival of my denomination or of my region or my local congregation. I long to live among others for whom following the teachings of Jesus entails more than attending the Sunday morning show and, perhaps optionally, joining a small group.
In many ways, I'd take what the Amish have over the lowest-common-denominator evangelicalism that the leadership in my own tradition settles for. There has to be more to the life of the Jesus follower than that!
Much, much more.
-------------------------------
Interestingly, in the founding days of my own group, its founder, John Winebrenner, published something not too different than an ordnung. He created a 27 point description of the faith and PRACTICE of the Church of God.
Very interestingly, in those days issues of belief and the way of life those beliefs engendered were understood to be intimately and inseparably connected. One of them could not exist without interdependence on the other.
I long to live in community, not with a group of churchgoers, but with people who share a Jesus-focused understanding of what we all think and how we all must live.
And, it feels to me as if no one I know in my "faith tradition," beyond the small community of gatherings I participate in, seems to share that desire.
However, in addition to the serious, I am a huge fan of popular fiction.
It was more than 20 years ago that I checked my first audio book out of the library. I did it hoping to find an enjoyable way to pass the time when I had to travel alone from Findlay back home to Lancaster County. And, it worked. Amazingly well!
My first book was Dick Francis', DECIDER, which was on the bestseller list at the time.
In recent years, I read-via-audio about 20 bestselling novels per year. I have a list of authors I go to as soon as a new book by them is released on audio. Among them,
Michael Connelly, author of the Harry Bosch series and, more recently, my favorites, the Lincoln Lawyer series,
David Baldacci, probably best known for his King and Maxwell books, though he's not done one of those in a while,
Lee Child, who writes the Jack Reacher novels,
Harlan Coben, the author of my once-favorite, Myron Bolitar novel. (Novels featuring Myron eventually fizzled and got pretty lousy by the end.)
John Grisham, whose stuff I either love or can't stomach these days,
And, since I became avid with this sort of entertainment,
Three of my favorites have passed on to the big library in the sky:
Dick Francis, whose DECIDER convinced me that this sort of entertainment is for me,
Robert B. Parker, who literally died sitting at his desk typing the Spenser novel, SILENT NIGHT but who also wrote the Jesse Stone series, which I enjoyed. Spenser was a TV series back in the, I don't know, 80s? 90s?. All of the Stone novels written by Parker were made into movies starring Tom Selleck, and,
Vince Flynn, who died only at the age of 47 of cancer. He was the author of the Mitch Rapp series.
There are other authors I enjoy, including Randy Singer who writes so-called Christian fiction novels of the legal thriller genre and who I've heard called the "Christian John Grisham," though sometimes he's better.
Because I go through so many novels, in the past few years I've had to search for new authors to put on my list and I've had some success. I like Tess Gerritsen, creator of the Rizzoli and Isles characters and Lisa Gardner whose police woman, DD Warren, is okay.
Most recently, I tried out a Linda Castillo novel featuring her main character, Kate Burkholder.
----------------------------
At this point, let me be clear: I'm not recommending the Burkholder novels to anyone. I've knocked off three of them so far. All of them involved murders. The author creates very vivid descriptions of the murder victims. One of the novels I "read" involved the murder of a large family and there was much more gore than I appreciate. The most recent book involved the death of a man whose corpse was discovered 30 after his death who appeared to have been injured in a fight and died by being eaten alive by pigs.
Kate Burkholder is the police chief in a small town in Holmes County, Ohio. (If you know of Holmes County, you can guess where this is going.) Kate is thirtysomething, unmarried and shacking up with a guy who is also in the law enforcement field. She is not Miss Marple nor Jessica Fletcher.
She is moral in a twenty first century way. She's an honest cop. In the last novel, she got knocked up and was determined to keep the baby, even when her beau initially reacted very negatively to the news that he was about to father a child with her.
-------------------------------
Here's what I love about these novels:
They are set in Amish country in Ohio and each of the cases brings the reader into contact with Amish characters, with Amish culture and with the religion of the everyday Amish man, woman and child.
The author is clearly very familiar with the Amish. Kate, the main character, was born and raised Amish but has left the faith. Kate speaks Pennsylvania Dutch and often converses with the Amish in their tongue in short passages that the author publishes in Pennsylvania Dutch and then translates into English.
As someone who lives among the Amish in Pennsylvania, I see Castillo's depiction of the Amish nonromanticized, realistic and neutral. In fact, while the Amish are generally victims of crime in the books, in one I've finished Amish committed the crime and engaged in a conspiracy and, in the end, one of them ended being murdered by another Amish person in a way that is plausible in any piece of popular fiction.
------------------------------------
Most fascinating to me is Castillo's references to the Amish "ordnung," or the set of rules that the Amish live by and are at the center of their culture.
Castillo's Holmes County Amish are, as I know them to be here in Pennsylvania, deeply convinced that Christianity is a way of living that impacts the totality of life, not merely what a person does on Sunday morning.
While there are customs and traditions that make the Amish distinctive, the New Testament Gospels form the core of their understanding of what it means to be a Christian. And, while the sense of community is strong among the Amish, Amish community doesn't exist for its own sake. Community exists with the ordnung--the rules for living--at its center.
How refreshing. How Jesus-focused!
I am not interested in riding around in a buggy and wearing one of those hats. I don't want to attend a gathering in which to speak English is forbidden. I don't want a way of life in which the way I trim my beard is considered to be an act of righteousness or a sin.
On the other hand, I've had more than enough of a religious culture centered on the survival of my denomination or of my region or my local congregation. I long to live among others for whom following the teachings of Jesus entails more than attending the Sunday morning show and, perhaps optionally, joining a small group.
In many ways, I'd take what the Amish have over the lowest-common-denominator evangelicalism that the leadership in my own tradition settles for. There has to be more to the life of the Jesus follower than that!
Much, much more.
-------------------------------
Interestingly, in the founding days of my own group, its founder, John Winebrenner, published something not too different than an ordnung. He created a 27 point description of the faith and PRACTICE of the Church of God.
Very interestingly, in those days issues of belief and the way of life those beliefs engendered were understood to be intimately and inseparably connected. One of them could not exist without interdependence on the other.
I long to live in community, not with a group of churchgoers, but with people who share a Jesus-focused understanding of what we all think and how we all must live.
And, it feels to me as if no one I know in my "faith tradition," beyond the small community of gatherings I participate in, seems to share that desire.
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Gathering: 9-20-15
Our tradition when we gather seems to be to function without the constraint of any established pattern in doing things.
There was a time, when we first permitted ourselves to diverge from Christendom traditions, that we were hyper aware of everything we did and when and how we did it.
It struck me today that we were very much at ease with how our gathering progressed, even though what we did was at odds with what is traditional.
As we started out, I asked for permission to lead the taking of the bread and cup. I also asked if we could reserve one of the songs we had agreed to sing for the time we took the bread and cup. Evelyn suggested we do that first. Her suggestion pleased everyone and so we did that and it felt right, for me anyway, doing it.
The talking of the bread and cup ended up involving a time of interaction and, based on insights offered, I felt led to suggest that we take the cup first, then the bread. Again, that seemed right.
There was a lot of discussion today about how we live lives of righteousness and mercy in specific struggles we are having.
Meal time was a blessing. Much of the conversation was rooted in the story, in the Word, of what happened in the events surrounding the cross.
Bennie clogged the toilet again, bless his heart.
--------------
One note about last week. Evie told me last week that one of the women told her that, on the previous Sunday when we didn't meet, she cried because she wouldn't be able to see Maggie, our dog. I don't call Mags the world's best church greeter for nothing.
I say this to make the point, which I now too often take for granted, that there really is something very special that takes place when God's people gather in the home of one of the gatherers.
Shepherds yearn to nurture community. Yet, my guess is that the community we experience in our group is far more intimate than what anyone who reads this blog experiences. And, as we know, I don't have a shepherdy bone in my body.
There was a time, when we first permitted ourselves to diverge from Christendom traditions, that we were hyper aware of everything we did and when and how we did it.
It struck me today that we were very much at ease with how our gathering progressed, even though what we did was at odds with what is traditional.
As we started out, I asked for permission to lead the taking of the bread and cup. I also asked if we could reserve one of the songs we had agreed to sing for the time we took the bread and cup. Evelyn suggested we do that first. Her suggestion pleased everyone and so we did that and it felt right, for me anyway, doing it.
The talking of the bread and cup ended up involving a time of interaction and, based on insights offered, I felt led to suggest that we take the cup first, then the bread. Again, that seemed right.
There was a lot of discussion today about how we live lives of righteousness and mercy in specific struggles we are having.
Meal time was a blessing. Much of the conversation was rooted in the story, in the Word, of what happened in the events surrounding the cross.
Bennie clogged the toilet again, bless his heart.
--------------
One note about last week. Evie told me last week that one of the women told her that, on the previous Sunday when we didn't meet, she cried because she wouldn't be able to see Maggie, our dog. I don't call Mags the world's best church greeter for nothing.
I say this to make the point, which I now too often take for granted, that there really is something very special that takes place when God's people gather in the home of one of the gatherers.
Shepherds yearn to nurture community. Yet, my guess is that the community we experience in our group is far more intimate than what anyone who reads this blog experiences. And, as we know, I don't have a shepherdy bone in my body.
Friday, September 18, 2015
Mom and Dad: 9-17-15
We didn't join the Gathering last night.
Instead, my brother and his wife and Evie and I had a meeting with a social worker employed by the independent living community where my parents live.
Mom and dad are in a setting that provides "progressive care," which means that they are guaranteed to be placed in what we used to call assisted living and, ultimately, what used to be called the nursing home when their condition warrants.
Nevertheless, my dad is fiercely independent and would clearly not thrive in a setting in which he has less independence than he has now.
We asked for the meeting because our goal is to keep mom and dad in their independent living setting for as long as possible.
The social worker was very encouraging. She noted that, by definition, independent living, doesn't include many services and she explained what those services are and she described the private agencies that we could contact to offer assistance to mom and dad at a cost that far less than the next level of care provided by the retirement community. She assured us that she would work with us to keep mom and dad in the independent setting as long as it is safe for them and for others. (They already started one fire in their unit.)
The meeting itself was rather encouraging. However, when we met with mom and dad afterward to fill them in on some very simple things that we can do initially, they were resistant.
It is stressful and heartbreaking to try, together, to assure them of the best life we can provide for them and, then, to have our judgment distrusted.
I understand that it is difficult to be in the passive position they are in and what it must feel like for them to understand that their faculties are failing forever and that, at best, the quality of their lives will have to diminish. And, I don't really expect more from them. Nevertheless, this is very difficult.
So, we bagged the Gathering. What we are confident of is that when we gather again the others in the group will be a great source of encouragement, due to the intimate sense of community we share.
We benefit from the group even when we don't gather.
Instead, my brother and his wife and Evie and I had a meeting with a social worker employed by the independent living community where my parents live.
Mom and dad are in a setting that provides "progressive care," which means that they are guaranteed to be placed in what we used to call assisted living and, ultimately, what used to be called the nursing home when their condition warrants.
Nevertheless, my dad is fiercely independent and would clearly not thrive in a setting in which he has less independence than he has now.
We asked for the meeting because our goal is to keep mom and dad in their independent living setting for as long as possible.
The social worker was very encouraging. She noted that, by definition, independent living, doesn't include many services and she explained what those services are and she described the private agencies that we could contact to offer assistance to mom and dad at a cost that far less than the next level of care provided by the retirement community. She assured us that she would work with us to keep mom and dad in the independent setting as long as it is safe for them and for others. (They already started one fire in their unit.)
The meeting itself was rather encouraging. However, when we met with mom and dad afterward to fill them in on some very simple things that we can do initially, they were resistant.
It is stressful and heartbreaking to try, together, to assure them of the best life we can provide for them and, then, to have our judgment distrusted.
I understand that it is difficult to be in the passive position they are in and what it must feel like for them to understand that their faculties are failing forever and that, at best, the quality of their lives will have to diminish. And, I don't really expect more from them. Nevertheless, this is very difficult.
So, we bagged the Gathering. What we are confident of is that when we gather again the others in the group will be a great source of encouragement, due to the intimate sense of community we share.
We benefit from the group even when we don't gather.
Thursday, September 17, 2015
A "Ninevite" Revival
I am fascinated, yet also perplexed, by calls from CGGC mountaintoppers for change in our churches.
Lance has talked about the need for repentance several times in his eNews articles. And, in the last issue of The CHURCH ADVOCATE, he referenced the need for change several times.
A few days ago, the people of the ERC, at least those who read the mailings that come from ERC staff, read what I consider to be an important article from Dave Williams to which I responded and said, among other things,
In my note to Dave I highlighted this passage from his article:
I have some thoughts about this rising tidal wave of calls for change in the CGGC:
1. I am blessed by Dave's insight that godly change comes from awareness of sin and of repentance of sin that is the fruit of humility and brokenness. What Dave has written, is, to my knowledge, new from mountaintoppers. To this point, as my pastor friend noted in the blog I entered the other day, self-styled CGGC leaders normally think of change in terms of our churches' implementation of a Conference's new endeavor or program. What my friend, and now Dave, say is that we need to begin with a change of heart.
While Lance may also think that, I don't read that in what he has written, at least when he writes about change itself.
2. Dave, in my opinion, hits on an essential biblical truth that was core to the heart of the ministry of the Church of God in Winebrenner's generation: Conversion of sinners (Winebrenner) or thriving in the life of the disciple (Dave) has its root in humility and brokenness.
Paul says that it is godly grief that produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret.
Hence, from his early days, Winebrenner employed the mourners' bench.
Our Shepherd Mafia has always defied this core truth in favor of mellow relationships and the conviction that there can be spiritual gain without pain. There is no biblical foundation for the shepherds' conviction.
I applaud Dave for his courage in defying the Shepherd Mafia in praising awareness of sin, repentance and humility and brokenness.
3. Having said that, I also note that I think that our leaders are being typically tone deaf in the way they are calling for change. They are calling for change as if the call for change is something new in the CGGC. The truth is, however, that the Shepherd Mafia is always calling for change. Every year, often more than once in a year, there is a new fad coming down from the mountaintops calling for change! "Hear the Call." "Transformational Church." "Missional Leadership" "Natural Church Development." "Spiritual Gifts." "35,000 by 2000." As Seinfeld said, "Yada yada yada."
A core characteristic of our brand is, indeed, Faddism, as the last sentence demonstrates.
Our leaders are tone deaf because they seem to be unaware that our people have been hearing calls for change continually for decades and, based on the failure of each and every new initiative that comes down from the mountaintops, our people are now too cynical to hear those calls. Many, in fact, resent them.
-----------------------------
4. Finally, and to the point suggested by this post's title, I am convinced that the only way there will be change in the CGGC is if the leadership culture changes first--and dramatically.
When I praised Dave, I said this:
I say this with a considerable degree of prophetic confidence.
Our people have heard calls for change bellowed into their ears so many times and for so many years that they are deaf to them. Lance can call attention to the statistics and beg for change but his call will fall on deaf ears. Dave, for all his insight, can point out the importance of awareness of sin and repentance and of humility and brokenness, but our people will be unmoved.
The problem is with the mountaintop. And the solution will be there as well.
I'm serious.
It is they who will have to repent first. They will have to do it from the heart. They will have to do it publically and openly in tears. They will have to confess sin--sin which they do not yet acknowledge. They will have to confess it to the Lord and, then, to the body.
Then they will have to live repentance.
Then, and only then, will they be able to ask the body to change.
This is the pattern of what happened in the Book of Jonah. It would be a Ninevite revival.
We must repent. From the top down.
Lance has talked about the need for repentance several times in his eNews articles. And, in the last issue of The CHURCH ADVOCATE, he referenced the need for change several times.
A few days ago, the people of the ERC, at least those who read the mailings that come from ERC staff, read what I consider to be an important article from Dave Williams to which I responded and said, among other things,
...it may concern you to know that I see many hopeful signs in what you have written. It may also concern you to know that, from my point of view, your are moving toward values and principles I stand for and am attempting to put into action in my own setting.Dave hasn't replied to my note yet and I sincerely hope he's not cowering in the corner of a darkened room at the mere thought that I see him as moving toward the values and principles I stand for.
In my note to Dave I highlighted this passage from his article:
Thriving churches honestly seek out how they have sinned against God individually and corporately then repent of those sins. They have a humbleness and brokenness—we can’t do this alone. Anything good will come only by the grace of God and through the power of His Holy Spirit.I don't actually agree with this because I see, in it, the sin of Ecclesiolatry (which is one of the Characteristics of the CGGC Brand) but I would agree if Dave had used the word, disciples or saints, or if he had mentioned followers of Jesus, for example:
Thriving disciples/saints/followers of Jesus honestly seek out how they have sinned against God individually and corporately then repent of those sins. They have a humbleness and brokenness—we can’t do this alone. Anything good will come only by the grace of God and through the power of His Holy Spirit."-------------------------------
I have some thoughts about this rising tidal wave of calls for change in the CGGC:
1. I am blessed by Dave's insight that godly change comes from awareness of sin and of repentance of sin that is the fruit of humility and brokenness. What Dave has written, is, to my knowledge, new from mountaintoppers. To this point, as my pastor friend noted in the blog I entered the other day, self-styled CGGC leaders normally think of change in terms of our churches' implementation of a Conference's new endeavor or program. What my friend, and now Dave, say is that we need to begin with a change of heart.
While Lance may also think that, I don't read that in what he has written, at least when he writes about change itself.
2. Dave, in my opinion, hits on an essential biblical truth that was core to the heart of the ministry of the Church of God in Winebrenner's generation: Conversion of sinners (Winebrenner) or thriving in the life of the disciple (Dave) has its root in humility and brokenness.
Paul says that it is godly grief that produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret.
Hence, from his early days, Winebrenner employed the mourners' bench.
Our Shepherd Mafia has always defied this core truth in favor of mellow relationships and the conviction that there can be spiritual gain without pain. There is no biblical foundation for the shepherds' conviction.
I applaud Dave for his courage in defying the Shepherd Mafia in praising awareness of sin, repentance and humility and brokenness.
3. Having said that, I also note that I think that our leaders are being typically tone deaf in the way they are calling for change. They are calling for change as if the call for change is something new in the CGGC. The truth is, however, that the Shepherd Mafia is always calling for change. Every year, often more than once in a year, there is a new fad coming down from the mountaintops calling for change! "Hear the Call." "Transformational Church." "Missional Leadership" "Natural Church Development." "Spiritual Gifts." "35,000 by 2000." As Seinfeld said, "Yada yada yada."
A core characteristic of our brand is, indeed, Faddism, as the last sentence demonstrates.
Our leaders are tone deaf because they seem to be unaware that our people have been hearing calls for change continually for decades and, based on the failure of each and every new initiative that comes down from the mountaintops, our people are now too cynical to hear those calls. Many, in fact, resent them.
-----------------------------
4. Finally, and to the point suggested by this post's title, I am convinced that the only way there will be change in the CGGC is if the leadership culture changes first--and dramatically.
When I praised Dave, I said this:
----------------------------------As I understand CGGC history, our congregations are what they are today because their Conference and General Conference leadership has led them to be what they have become.For years now,...the Spirit has been telling me that any revival that may take place among us will be the sort of revival described in the Book of Jonah where the leader, the King, openly repented and turned from sin, putting on sackcloth and led all of the people--even the animals of Nineveh--in a way of living that way a cry for God's mercy...I am certain, in the Spirit, that no revival will take place in the CGGC until people leading our General Conference and our Regions do, before the entire body, what you are saying thriving churches do. That, I believe, is the only way the CGGC will, as you say, thrive.You and others in positions similar to you will have to display the openness and brokenness you describe and you will have to do it transparently before our people. You will have to do a 21st century version of putting on sackcloth.People in our congregations won't humble themselves until they see that the people asking them for humility are willing to practice humility themselves.
I say this with a considerable degree of prophetic confidence.
Our people have heard calls for change bellowed into their ears so many times and for so many years that they are deaf to them. Lance can call attention to the statistics and beg for change but his call will fall on deaf ears. Dave, for all his insight, can point out the importance of awareness of sin and repentance and of humility and brokenness, but our people will be unmoved.
The problem is with the mountaintop. And the solution will be there as well.
I'm serious.
...our congregations are what they are today because their Conference and General Conference leadership has led them to be what they have become.The Shepherd Mafia created our debacle and decline.
It is they who will have to repent first. They will have to do it from the heart. They will have to do it publically and openly in tears. They will have to confess sin--sin which they do not yet acknowledge. They will have to confess it to the Lord and, then, to the body.
Then they will have to live repentance.
Then, and only then, will they be able to ask the body to change.
This is the pattern of what happened in the Book of Jonah. It would be a Ninevite revival.
We must repent. From the top down.
Monday, September 14, 2015
A CGGC Pastor Comments on How CGGCers Define Disciple Making
Gang,
I received this response to my blog on disciple making in the CGGC. It is from a pastor, someone who has been a part of the CGGC for many years. I give no other clues to his identity, other than he's a he.
The comments are slightly edited to assure anonymity.
---------------------------
I've never understood the term 'better disciple." In my way of thinking you are either a disciple or not.
I believe a disciple is essentially a learner, one who invests time, energy, and maybe some other resources, to read, study, and understand Jesus teachings. But I think many people want to stop there, happy with the accumulation of knowledge, so they would be great on the Biblical category on Jeopardy. But a true disciple, or perhaps the CoG's 'better disciple", is one who takes that knowledge of Jesus teaching and teaches others, who in turn, as disciples teach others, and so on. We grow by teaching others about the Kingdom.
But also in teaching others about Jesus teaching, we have to [understand that] another part of discipleship is serving, because Jesus main mission was as a servant. And serving not just ourselves or our immediate church family but expanding beyond the walls of the church. That is a radical change for many of our 60, 70, 80 year olds who still hold sway (because of money) in many of our churches. We have older white churches in communities that are increasingly non-white, and they are not comfortable changing to meet the community. It's Ok when the community comes to the church building, but a hard sell to get the church to go to the community.
And I agree with you that church to many of our people is either the building or the Sunday morning show. Leadership seems to think it's about programs and new endeavors, but it is really about heart change of our people: Realizing what Jesus actually meant about disciples and...making an honest evaluation of ourselves to see if we really are disciples.
I'm probably rambling too much. I hope this makes some sense.
----------------------------
Note the comment: "Leadership seems to think it's about programs and new endeavors, but it is really about heart change of our people."
Can we all agree that this guy has nailed the reality that CGGC leadership has it all wrong!?
The CGGC is declining and the rate of the decline is increasing. When will we understand that the sort of long-term problem we are facing is not a problem with the people in our pews. It is a problem with our leadership culture.
We may have new people sitting on the mountaintop, in some cases, than we did a year ago at this time. The crucial issue, however, is this: Do we have a change in leadership?
I'm watching to see if there is any significant change in leadership values in the CGGC. So far, I'm only seeing minor tweaking at best. I'm seeing, on the level of the big picture, more of the same. The same leadership value system that has been fashioning our decline for decades.
In my opinion, the guy who wrote this is most correct in calling for "heart change." I would add though, that the hearts that must change first are the hearts beating from the mountaintops.
I received this response to my blog on disciple making in the CGGC. It is from a pastor, someone who has been a part of the CGGC for many years. I give no other clues to his identity, other than he's a he.
The comments are slightly edited to assure anonymity.
---------------------------
I've never understood the term 'better disciple." In my way of thinking you are either a disciple or not.
I believe a disciple is essentially a learner, one who invests time, energy, and maybe some other resources, to read, study, and understand Jesus teachings. But I think many people want to stop there, happy with the accumulation of knowledge, so they would be great on the Biblical category on Jeopardy. But a true disciple, or perhaps the CoG's 'better disciple", is one who takes that knowledge of Jesus teaching and teaches others, who in turn, as disciples teach others, and so on. We grow by teaching others about the Kingdom.
But also in teaching others about Jesus teaching, we have to [understand that] another part of discipleship is serving, because Jesus main mission was as a servant. And serving not just ourselves or our immediate church family but expanding beyond the walls of the church. That is a radical change for many of our 60, 70, 80 year olds who still hold sway (because of money) in many of our churches. We have older white churches in communities that are increasingly non-white, and they are not comfortable changing to meet the community. It's Ok when the community comes to the church building, but a hard sell to get the church to go to the community.
And I agree with you that church to many of our people is either the building or the Sunday morning show. Leadership seems to think it's about programs and new endeavors, but it is really about heart change of our people: Realizing what Jesus actually meant about disciples and...making an honest evaluation of ourselves to see if we really are disciples.
I'm probably rambling too much. I hope this makes some sense.
----------------------------
Note the comment: "Leadership seems to think it's about programs and new endeavors, but it is really about heart change of our people."
Can we all agree that this guy has nailed the reality that CGGC leadership has it all wrong!?
The CGGC is declining and the rate of the decline is increasing. When will we understand that the sort of long-term problem we are facing is not a problem with the people in our pews. It is a problem with our leadership culture.
We may have new people sitting on the mountaintop, in some cases, than we did a year ago at this time. The crucial issue, however, is this: Do we have a change in leadership?
I'm watching to see if there is any significant change in leadership values in the CGGC. So far, I'm only seeing minor tweaking at best. I'm seeing, on the level of the big picture, more of the same. The same leadership value system that has been fashioning our decline for decades.
In my opinion, the guy who wrote this is most correct in calling for "heart change." I would add though, that the hearts that must change first are the hearts beating from the mountaintops.
Sunday, September 13, 2015
Gathering 9-13-15
Two things struck me about today's gathering.
First, there is something very special about gatherings that take place in our home. If you meet in a church building, you absolutely can't possibly experience it.
I've mentioned that we have some intellectually challenged people whom we pick up from an assisted living facility in our area and bring to our house.
The most seriously challenged of them showed up today telling us that his brother-in-law just passed away from a massive heart attack.
Our friend, I've called him Benny in the past, is heartbroken. This brother-in-law took very good care of Benny. Benny lives in the home at the state's expense and really owns nothing. He has never held a job. His brother-in-law was very generous. Benny talked today about the gifts of chips and soft drink that he enjoyed from the kindness of his relative/friend. These things matter tons to Benny.
Benny was clearly in deep despair. He walked in the door, sat down on our couch and, immediately, our Golden Retriever, Maggie (the greatest church greeter in the world), jumped up and snuggled down beside him.
There are some aspects to gathering in a home that, very simply, can't be duplicated in any church facility.
There are potentials for fellowship, for life in community, that are unique to a house gathering. This is only one example.
The second thing that struck me today is the theme that emerged in the Spirit. That theme often surfaces organically from our understanding of the reason we come together: i.e., to provoke each other to love and good deeds.
The words of the songs we sang led us to discussion of these Scriptures:
Matthew 7:24f,
James 2:14f,
Eph. 2:8-10,
Heb. 11, and
John 14:15,
and the truth that genuine faith in God produces fruit in obedience to His Word.
Taking of the bread and cup focused on Jesus teaching that to love Him is to keep His commandments.
As always, the meal was tasty and fellowship around the table was sweet.
First, there is something very special about gatherings that take place in our home. If you meet in a church building, you absolutely can't possibly experience it.
I've mentioned that we have some intellectually challenged people whom we pick up from an assisted living facility in our area and bring to our house.
The most seriously challenged of them showed up today telling us that his brother-in-law just passed away from a massive heart attack.
Our friend, I've called him Benny in the past, is heartbroken. This brother-in-law took very good care of Benny. Benny lives in the home at the state's expense and really owns nothing. He has never held a job. His brother-in-law was very generous. Benny talked today about the gifts of chips and soft drink that he enjoyed from the kindness of his relative/friend. These things matter tons to Benny.
Benny was clearly in deep despair. He walked in the door, sat down on our couch and, immediately, our Golden Retriever, Maggie (the greatest church greeter in the world), jumped up and snuggled down beside him.
There are some aspects to gathering in a home that, very simply, can't be duplicated in any church facility.
There are potentials for fellowship, for life in community, that are unique to a house gathering. This is only one example.
The second thing that struck me today is the theme that emerged in the Spirit. That theme often surfaces organically from our understanding of the reason we come together: i.e., to provoke each other to love and good deeds.
The words of the songs we sang led us to discussion of these Scriptures:
Matthew 7:24f,
James 2:14f,
Eph. 2:8-10,
Heb. 11, and
John 14:15,
and the truth that genuine faith in God produces fruit in obedience to His Word.
Taking of the bread and cup focused on Jesus teaching that to love Him is to keep His commandments.
As always, the meal was tasty and fellowship around the table was sweet.
Friday, September 11, 2015
Gathering: 9-10-15
We met in the gathering that does the most, by far, to spur us on to love and good works.
We are working through Francis Chan's CRAZY LOVE. At this point, it would be more accurate to say that we are struggling with it.
We are still in chapter 8, which is about being "obsessed" with living out the teachings of Jesus.
We have already had that desire, so what Chan writes in the book and what he says in the video is very important to us. And, very challenging.
It was this chapter that inspired us to offer to loan most of the money that the group has saved to people who are well known to us not to pay back money they have been loaned.
I freely agreed to join the others in making that decision but, for reasons I hope to address at a later time, I didn't entirely agree with it.
This week, Chan challenged us to live out Jesus' most radical teachings as individuals. And, we struggled to know how, in practice, actually to do that.
What's more, I believe it is fair to say that we also struggled to be sure that our repentance is so complete and our faith is strong enough to do it.
This gathering did not feel good. It was convicting.
The Greek word translated "spur on" doesn't have a pleasant connotation.
What we did last night was not pleasant but it was biblical--and spiritual.
We are working through Francis Chan's CRAZY LOVE. At this point, it would be more accurate to say that we are struggling with it.
We are still in chapter 8, which is about being "obsessed" with living out the teachings of Jesus.
We have already had that desire, so what Chan writes in the book and what he says in the video is very important to us. And, very challenging.
It was this chapter that inspired us to offer to loan most of the money that the group has saved to people who are well known to us not to pay back money they have been loaned.
I freely agreed to join the others in making that decision but, for reasons I hope to address at a later time, I didn't entirely agree with it.
This week, Chan challenged us to live out Jesus' most radical teachings as individuals. And, we struggled to know how, in practice, actually to do that.
What's more, I believe it is fair to say that we also struggled to be sure that our repentance is so complete and our faith is strong enough to do it.
This gathering did not feel good. It was convicting.
The Greek word translated "spur on" doesn't have a pleasant connotation.
What we did last night was not pleasant but it was biblical--and spiritual.
Pastoral Care Worker
Yesterday my Pastoral Care Worker took me out to lunch.
In the ERC, each district is served by a person, who is paid by the Conference, to provide, well, care, for pastors pastoring in that district.
I actually was the first PCW in this district and was replaced, obviously quite a few years ago, by my late friend Wayne Boyer.
Anyway, the current PCW, has been trying to set up a lunch meeting with me for some time. Yesterday we were able to meet.
This guy is someone who has been a friend to me for quite a few years and, even with that, I had not been certain that he would keep me on his list of pastors after the ERC Ad Council voted to recall my ordination.
As you know, I consider their action to be illegitimate and have refused to surrender my ordination. But, I didn't know how my PCW would deal with the ongoing issue. After all, he is paid by the ERC to do the job.
We had, for me, a very nice meeting.
I wondered if he would bring up the fact that I was asked to surrender my ordination. And, he did.
We spoke at length about the issue. He listened carefully to what I had to say about what I think and how I feel. He filled me in on things he has done about it since he read about it here.
I repeated to him that no one from the Conference was in communication with me about these issues up to the point that I received the registered letter and that no one from the Conference has reached out to me since then.
And, more on the point of the ongoing conflict, told him that I still absolutely refuse to surrender my ordination until it is recalled by the Conference in session.
Surprisingly, he didn't challenge me on that point.
Actually, it might be accurate to say that he encouraged me on that point.
We did speak about what I am going to do about defending myself since I believe that I am not guilty of anything the Standing Committee has accused me of.
I told him that I still don't know but that I have seven months until next Conference.
There was some more that we talked about regarding the ordination issue, but I probably put more in this post than is wise....
In the ERC, each district is served by a person, who is paid by the Conference, to provide, well, care, for pastors pastoring in that district.
I actually was the first PCW in this district and was replaced, obviously quite a few years ago, by my late friend Wayne Boyer.
Anyway, the current PCW, has been trying to set up a lunch meeting with me for some time. Yesterday we were able to meet.
This guy is someone who has been a friend to me for quite a few years and, even with that, I had not been certain that he would keep me on his list of pastors after the ERC Ad Council voted to recall my ordination.
As you know, I consider their action to be illegitimate and have refused to surrender my ordination. But, I didn't know how my PCW would deal with the ongoing issue. After all, he is paid by the ERC to do the job.
We had, for me, a very nice meeting.
I wondered if he would bring up the fact that I was asked to surrender my ordination. And, he did.
We spoke at length about the issue. He listened carefully to what I had to say about what I think and how I feel. He filled me in on things he has done about it since he read about it here.
I repeated to him that no one from the Conference was in communication with me about these issues up to the point that I received the registered letter and that no one from the Conference has reached out to me since then.
And, more on the point of the ongoing conflict, told him that I still absolutely refuse to surrender my ordination until it is recalled by the Conference in session.
Surprisingly, he didn't challenge me on that point.
Actually, it might be accurate to say that he encouraged me on that point.
We did speak about what I am going to do about defending myself since I believe that I am not guilty of anything the Standing Committee has accused me of.
I told him that I still don't know but that I have seven months until next Conference.
There was some more that we talked about regarding the ordination issue, but I probably put more in this post than is wise....
Thursday, September 10, 2015
How the CGGC Defines Discipleship?
Please understand that this entire blog post is a question.
What follows is my understanding, as someone who has a history in the Churches of God and who attended his first East Pennsylvania Conference Session in 1976, of the way the mainstream of the CGGC defines discipleship.
The question(s) that undergird this entire post is/are: Do you agree with my understanding? If not, in what way(s) do you think am I wrong?
[Responses on and off the blog and welcome and invited.]
-----------------------------------
There has been and continues to be conviction, in the CGGC universe, that we are in what is now an alarming decline [read Lance's eNewses and his articles in The CHURCH ADVOCATE] and that our body must begin yesterday to make disciples.
While there is agreement about making disciples, I don't remember reading or hearing anything substantial recently, from any mountaintop, about what we are making when we make a disciple.
Now, there is a very clear definition, in the CGGC, that serves as the core of how we define disciple making. The problems with that definition are, first, that it was being composed more than 20 years ago, when Lance was a seminary student and Brent Sleasman was attending the University of Findlay and, second, that the pursuit of that definition, in my opinion, is what had produced the exponential spiritual and numerical decline the CGGC is experiencing.
The current, 20-year-old core definition, is packed within the, uh well, last CGGC mega program:
There is one other important component of today's definition of a CGGC disciple that has been added much more recently, only two years ago, in fact.
According to that recent tweaking of the definition, a person can be a disciple in the CGGC without regard to belief in even the most essential Christian truth.
After General Conference in 2013 we assert of We Believe, based on our highest earthly authority,
--------------------------------
I'm a geezer. I've been around in the CGGC for a long time.
What I have described is what I believe we think we have as our goal when we talk about making disciples. Please tell me, how you think I'm wrong. I only ask that you base your opinion in some CGGC authority.
Thanks.
What follows is my understanding, as someone who has a history in the Churches of God and who attended his first East Pennsylvania Conference Session in 1976, of the way the mainstream of the CGGC defines discipleship.
The question(s) that undergird this entire post is/are: Do you agree with my understanding? If not, in what way(s) do you think am I wrong?
[Responses on and off the blog and welcome and invited.]
-----------------------------------
There has been and continues to be conviction, in the CGGC universe, that we are in what is now an alarming decline [read Lance's eNewses and his articles in The CHURCH ADVOCATE] and that our body must begin yesterday to make disciples.
While there is agreement about making disciples, I don't remember reading or hearing anything substantial recently, from any mountaintop, about what we are making when we make a disciple.
Now, there is a very clear definition, in the CGGC, that serves as the core of how we define disciple making. The problems with that definition are, first, that it was being composed more than 20 years ago, when Lance was a seminary student and Brent Sleasman was attending the University of Findlay and, second, that the pursuit of that definition, in my opinion, is what had produced the exponential spiritual and numerical decline the CGGC is experiencing.
The current, 20-year-old core definition, is packed within the, uh well, last CGGC mega program:
MORE AND BETTER DISCIPLES--35,000 by 2000: 35,000 in worship by 2000While I get the sense that the current batch of younger mountaintoppers regard 35,000 by 2000 be be folly and a colossal failure, two things are true of our current batch of self-styled leaders:
- None of them, even Lance, has disavowed, or rejected, it, and
- No one, apart from people like me, has even suggested an alternate understanding of what a disciple is.
A disciple is anyone who contributes, in the CGGC, to the average annual worship attendance in a congregation and, by extension, the entire denomination. Or, a disciple is anyone who attends a CGGC Sunday morning show, even one time in a year.
A "better disciple," I'm guessing, is anyone who participates in a local church's ministry at any level beyond attending at least one show. Therefore, someone who signs up to be an usher would be a better disciple as would someone who volunteers for the nursery or who bakes a cake for a youth retreat. Of course, a better disciple would also be someone who serves on the Church Administrative Council or teaches a Sunday School class or who participates on a worship team.That, as far as I can tell, is the essence of the core of the current operating definition of a disciple in the CGGC, and it has been the definition since the early 1990s.
There is one other important component of today's definition of a CGGC disciple that has been added much more recently, only two years ago, in fact.
According to that recent tweaking of the definition, a person can be a disciple in the CGGC without regard to belief in even the most essential Christian truth.
After General Conference in 2013 we assert of We Believe, based on our highest earthly authority,
From its formation, the Churches of God stressed the importance of unity in essentials, liberty in non-essentials, and charity in all things. The Church seeks to uphold biblical truth while respecting personal freedom. As such We Believe is not intended as the final word on the faith and practice of the Churches of God. Only God’s Word can do that and one day this current edition will likely be revised. Nor is it intended as a litmus test for fellowship or a proscription for ministry as there is diversity of thought and practice across the body on several items discussed herein. It needs to be remembered that this document is a “centered set” delineating the mainstream of the Churches of God and not a “bounded set” prescribing what is required of all.Therefore, no point of Christian teaching of belief can be a "litmus test for fellowship or a proscription for ministry" to define a CGGC disciple because we tolerate "diversity of thought and practice across the body."
--------------------------------
I'm a geezer. I've been around in the CGGC for a long time.
What I have described is what I believe we think we have as our goal when we talk about making disciples. Please tell me, how you think I'm wrong. I only ask that you base your opinion in some CGGC authority.
Thanks.
Sunday, September 6, 2015
Gathering 9-6-15
There was no gathering in our home today. The taking of today off was planned long in advance by our Sunday group.
I've done commentary on the whys and wherefores of not gathering in the past. Again, we see no reason, based on what the Bible teaches or models, to think that gathering itself is regarded by the Lord as an act of righteousness, so we feel no pressure to gather so long as we don't neglect gathering. Gathering, in the New Testament, we believe, serves to promote acts of righteousness, or, love and good works.
I will add that hosting takes a toll on us, as rewarding as it ultimately is, perhaps due to the fact that we are both introverts.
Today is a much-anticipated day off for us.
I've done commentary on the whys and wherefores of not gathering in the past. Again, we see no reason, based on what the Bible teaches or models, to think that gathering itself is regarded by the Lord as an act of righteousness, so we feel no pressure to gather so long as we don't neglect gathering. Gathering, in the New Testament, we believe, serves to promote acts of righteousness, or, love and good works.
I will add that hosting takes a toll on us, as rewarding as it ultimately is, perhaps due to the fact that we are both introverts.
Today is a much-anticipated day off for us.
Friday, September 4, 2015
Gathering: 9-3-15?
I know that there are several notes that I play over and over again in my Gathering posts. One of them is that one or both of us is either sick or tired or both. Evie has a very bad late summer cold. So we didn't attend the gathering last night, which is in a house that also functions as a state licensed day care center. We didn't want to bring germs into the environment.
Another note I play over and over again in these posts is that a core purpose of our gatherings is to spur each other on to love and good works.
After I clicked publish on my "Defile" post yesterday, it struck me that this issue of spurring is one that is at stake in what the CGGC gets wrong.
Every time we meet, I have in mind that true faith bears fruit in what a believer actually does (see Hebrews 11). So, we are always preparing each other to go one by one into the world making disciples out of sinners.
But, across most of Western Christianity, most people are gathered to consume religious products and services.
As a result, the Great Commission is defiled even during the so called worship service.
How we gathering will have to change if we repent.
Another note I play over and over again in these posts is that a core purpose of our gatherings is to spur each other on to love and good works.
After I clicked publish on my "Defile" post yesterday, it struck me that this issue of spurring is one that is at stake in what the CGGC gets wrong.
Every time we meet, I have in mind that true faith bears fruit in what a believer actually does (see Hebrews 11). So, we are always preparing each other to go one by one into the world making disciples out of sinners.
But, across most of Western Christianity, most people are gathered to consume religious products and services.
As a result, the Great Commission is defiled even during the so called worship service.
How we gathering will have to change if we repent.
Thursday, September 3, 2015
Two Ways the CGGC is Defiling the Great Commission
Please understand that there are two emotions I regularly feel when I encounter what I believe the Spirit is telling me is well-intentioned unrighteousness among American/Western Evangelicals, particularly among my those whom I love in the CGGC. The emotions are:
In the past, normally I felt anger but, more and more, recently it is sorrow that I feel.
I memorized Matthew 28:18-20 many years ago and, over the years, I have meditated on it many times.
When I think of what those I love in the CGGC have done in response to the Great Commission, I am both furious and heartbroken.
These days, two realities break my heart.
First, in the CGGC, we abuse Jesus' admonition that we "make disciples" (NIV) by twisting His desire and do all we can to have new churches. Until the past few years, we tried, with many failures, to plant churches. We don't do that so much these days. We have too few people who are not shepherds. Now we talk not so much about church planting but also acquiring, through adoption, new churches, i.e., we try to convince established churches to accept the CGGC brand.
Try finding that in the Great Commission.
The truth is that Jesus doesn't ask us to be concerned about starting or adding to the number of churches. He sends us, one by one, into the world to disciple individual sinners.
We pervert Jesus' simple commission in a way that, in the end, satisfies our shepherd mafia but, in truth, entirely distorts what Jesus sent His followers into the world to do.
Second, we abuse Jesus' admonition that we "make disciples" by focusing on reaching communities, not individual sinners. This passion for community transformation appears to be the coming fad in the CGGC. Others have been at this task for some time. We are now becoming serious about jumping on that bandwagon. Recently, it was presented as being the "Best Church FOR and WITH Community."
But, Jesus doesn't send churches into the world, he sends disciples. And, He doesn't send them to transform communities. He sends His people to make disciples out of people who were lost in sin.
Show me a New Testament church adopting a part of its community.
----------------------------------------------------------
Trust me, because every time I've made this prediction about the CGGC in the past, real world life has proved me right (think Transformational Church, Hear the Call): This community transformation fad will be a flash in the pan--if it even achieves that status.
Earlier today, I was texting with a coworker with whom I engaged several other coworkers in a discussion of the meaning of faith and repentance and the meaning of baptism and I said, of myself,
Much of my criticism of the CGGC is similar to the wrath K heaped on the Danish Lutheran Church in the days that another hero of mine, John Winebrenner, was talking "the New Testament plan."
I look real, individual people in the eye and speak directly into their ears about what faith in Christ really is, what holiness (though I never use the word) is and, time after time, about the truth and authority of the Word of God.
Am I living out the Great Commission? I won't say that I am. I will only say that I take the Great Commission seriously and am attempting to live it.
But, I will say that this new churches thing and community transformation stuff is off track, as far as the Great Commission is concerned. Jesus called you and me as individuals to go into the world in His authority to make disciples of individuals who have not repented and do not believe in the Gospel.
If you want justification to work on community transformation, read the Old, not the New Testament. If you want to increase the number of your churches, check out the ministry of the church in the Middle Ages, not in the New Testament.
We must repent.
- Anger, and
- Sorrow.
In the past, normally I felt anger but, more and more, recently it is sorrow that I feel.
I memorized Matthew 28:18-20 many years ago and, over the years, I have meditated on it many times.
When I think of what those I love in the CGGC have done in response to the Great Commission, I am both furious and heartbroken.
These days, two realities break my heart.
First, in the CGGC, we abuse Jesus' admonition that we "make disciples" (NIV) by twisting His desire and do all we can to have new churches. Until the past few years, we tried, with many failures, to plant churches. We don't do that so much these days. We have too few people who are not shepherds. Now we talk not so much about church planting but also acquiring, through adoption, new churches, i.e., we try to convince established churches to accept the CGGC brand.
Try finding that in the Great Commission.
The truth is that Jesus doesn't ask us to be concerned about starting or adding to the number of churches. He sends us, one by one, into the world to disciple individual sinners.
We pervert Jesus' simple commission in a way that, in the end, satisfies our shepherd mafia but, in truth, entirely distorts what Jesus sent His followers into the world to do.
Second, we abuse Jesus' admonition that we "make disciples" by focusing on reaching communities, not individual sinners. This passion for community transformation appears to be the coming fad in the CGGC. Others have been at this task for some time. We are now becoming serious about jumping on that bandwagon. Recently, it was presented as being the "Best Church FOR and WITH Community."
But, Jesus doesn't send churches into the world, he sends disciples. And, He doesn't send them to transform communities. He sends His people to make disciples out of people who were lost in sin.
Show me a New Testament church adopting a part of its community.
----------------------------------------------------------
Trust me, because every time I've made this prediction about the CGGC in the past, real world life has proved me right (think Transformational Church, Hear the Call): This community transformation fad will be a flash in the pan--if it even achieves that status.
Earlier today, I was texting with a coworker with whom I engaged several other coworkers in a discussion of the meaning of faith and repentance and the meaning of baptism and I said, of myself,
I'm the grammar Nazi [a nickname given to me by some of them] who quotes Kierkegaard to cashiers and baggers.And, I do.
Much of my criticism of the CGGC is similar to the wrath K heaped on the Danish Lutheran Church in the days that another hero of mine, John Winebrenner, was talking "the New Testament plan."
I look real, individual people in the eye and speak directly into their ears about what faith in Christ really is, what holiness (though I never use the word) is and, time after time, about the truth and authority of the Word of God.
Am I living out the Great Commission? I won't say that I am. I will only say that I take the Great Commission seriously and am attempting to live it.
But, I will say that this new churches thing and community transformation stuff is off track, as far as the Great Commission is concerned. Jesus called you and me as individuals to go into the world in His authority to make disciples of individuals who have not repented and do not believe in the Gospel.
If you want justification to work on community transformation, read the Old, not the New Testament. If you want to increase the number of your churches, check out the ministry of the church in the Middle Ages, not in the New Testament.
We must repent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)