- the Region's Sexual Misconduct Policy,
- the differences between Organic/Simple/House Churches and the typical Evangelical Christendom congregation that is the norm in the CGGC and
- the so-called "metrics" included in the latest CGGC "Scorecard," AKA Statistical Report, (most of which are not actually metrics because metrics are quantitative measures and most of what the CGGC tries to assess are issues of quality--i.e., attributes that can not be counted).
I admitted, and not happily or joyfully, that we are not doing well--in two ways.
First, we are not doing well in terms of the values touted by CGGC and ERC leaders which we reject. But, of course, that is to be expected and that doesn't bother me at all.
For instance, our worship attendance is not increasing, though we never, ever count the number who attend our version of the Sunday morning show. We dedicated no infants last year and would have spurned any request to do so because to do so would absolutely violate the CGGC's Mission Statement's claim that our gathering is based on "the New Testament plan" and because to do so would violate the new We Believe's assertion that the Bible is our "only" "rule."
Second, what does irk me, hurt and concern me, however, is that we are also not doing well in terms of what we do believe in and value. To use language that drove the conversation on Brian Miller's blog, we are not turning out to be externally focused.
Far from it, in fact. In fact, we appear to be increasingly internally focused--at least as a group.
It stuns me and befuddles me that what I was certain would make us externally-focused hasn't done that at all.
I still embrace a goodly portion of what I was taught in the Missional Leadership Initiative and in what is asserted in missional literature. Because of that, I began by redefining righteousness in our gathering.
I abandoned, intentionally and verbally, the CGGC's conventional wisdom that I have describe in my Characteristics of the CGGC Brand as "False, Flock-Based Righteousness" in favor of biblical teachings from three sources:
- The "Sermon on the Mount,"
- Jesus' teaching about the Day of Judgment in His sheep and goats prophecy in Matthew 25, and
- James' definition of "religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless" in James 1:27.
Up to that point, I had towed the CGGC line.
I had actually once promoted growth in numbers at the Sunday morning show as a sign of a legitimate growth in righteousness. I once encouraged people, for instance, to invite others to "church" on Sunday. I once defined success by increasing participation in small group involvement, e. g., the size of the Youth Group or Women's Fellowship or a midweek Bible Study...
...but then, I repented of all of that thinking and I turned away from it.
The time came when I began to teach that many people who are preparing for the Day by doing those things will be counted among those stunned to hear Jesus say to them, "away from me you evildoers."
There were two responses to that abrupt and radical change in teaching.
1. Many people at Faith rejected the new teaching. They wanted to believe that the Lord is really glorified by church attendance and that small group attendance is fruit of sanctification. In time, those people vamoosed.
2. Others, a smaller number, were convinced by the simple arguments for the new teaching from the Gospels and from James.
You might very well be amazed by the lives that some of the people who remain at Faith are living: Lives lived straight from the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5-7 and from Matthew 25 and from the Epistle of James. These are people who add verse 10 when they cite Ephesians 2:8 and 9.
They are people of Micah 6:8 who act justly and love mercy and walk humbly with their God. They live radical lives of repentance which bear fruit, not in flock-based faux righteousness but in the righteousness Jesus taught and lived.
However, here's the shocking truth about those same people:
If anything, they are more inward-focused as a group than they were when they were people who lived the values embodied in the CGGC Statistical Report.
They have busted to pieces my personal missional myth.
I believed that if they grew in personal righteousness that, as a result of that act of conversion they would, naturally, become people of the so-called Great Commission.
Very simply, they have not.
They do meet to encourage the others among us to grow in lives of mercy, grace, love and forgiveness. They confront each other over sin and help each other understand what the life lived and taught by Jesus looks like...
...but they actually resist bringing others into the koinonia they share.
They are as a group, more internally-focused than ever, though, oddly, as individuals, they are very kingdom-oriented.
Why?
I can't say for certain.
I'm playing with the idea that they have become what my own APEST equipping (which is extremely prophetic) produces.
Prophets lead repentance and preach righteousness--and that's what we do. We are unbalanced in the way shepherd-dominated, parish priest, pastor led congregations are. The specific abuses are different in the end, but they are abuses nonetheless.
I have hoped, for some time, that a genuinely apostolic person would take interest in us. But, if the Lord has called any to us, s/he has declined His leading.
At any rate, we are at a bit of an impasse. We've gotten to where our journey has led but not to the place we hoped to be.
Interestingly, we have asked the appropriate renewal people in the ERC and CGGC for assistance only to be told that they have nothing available that will assist us.
I am at a loss.
Gang,
ReplyDeleteSince I entered this post, I have received, via email, two extremely thoughtful, constructive and edifying responses to what I have written. Both are from regular readers of this blog who are members of the CGGC, um, clergy. (Interestingly, neither is from anyone in the CGGC who is tasked with leading congregational or pastoral renewal, either at the CG or ERC level.)
Both responses have been extremely thought provoking to me. I have not yet replied to them because I have not thought them through well enough as of this moment.
Both responses offer insight, apart from my APEST idea, as to how Faith has gotten to the place it is and not to the place I'd hoped it would arrive. Both insights are truly edifying to me. And, I am thankful beyond words for them.
On the other hand, the fact that they were communicated by email, and not on the blog, saddens me.
I plan, in the near future, to copy both emails on to the blog--with edits that will assure the anonymity of the authors--so that the remainder of the readership of this blog can, at least, observe, if not participate in the edification I am receiving.
I invite further efforts to edify the ministry at Faith.
Blessings,
bill
Not having experienced your community, I do have a couple of thoughts / questions...
ReplyDeleteSo, you're saying that people are living missionally and caring / serving other people outside of the fellowship, but they don't particularly want to invite them to be a part of it?
I've read that a dynamic often happens in 'small groups' within larger traditional churches. They get comfortable with each other, build trust, etc and don't want to split off or particular invite new people.
I'm wondering - thinking out loud - if people there also know that your gatherings are so different from what people are used to that they wonder if a 'guest' would be uncomfortable.
What about an additional gathering, that would be somewhat intended to be missionally oriented - a place of exploration for those questioning / wondering about the Jesus way? Maybe that's too close to attractional or seeker for you still.
At the end of the day, I think trying to explore with the people who are a part of your body 'why' the current attitudes might be would be a helpful exercise.
Bill,
ReplyDeleteVery nicely written post. Very astute discovery. Very vulnerable approach. Very poor response from renewal people. I can certainly relate, but I have no answers whatsoever. Hang in there, brother.
Dan
Gang,
ReplyDeleteI will be entering dialog comments in between Dan M's thoughts/questions. Dan's will appear in italics.
Not having experienced your community, I do have a couple of thoughts / questions...
So, you're saying that people are living missionally and caring / serving other people outside of the fellowship, but they don't particularly want to invite them to be a part of it?
I'll go so far as to say that they are not inviting others. The issue of "want" is jumbled. Our theology of church is far different than that of the typical Christendomalist. We think of the gathering as being only for people who profess repentance and not for seekers. Therefore, there are many we probably wouldn't invite. Having said that, however, since I wrote my post a family asked to be able to attend one of our gatherings and there was serious reservation about allowing it and the decision has not been made TO allow it.
I've read that a dynamic often happens in 'small groups' within larger traditional churches. They get comfortable with each other, build trust, etc and don't want to split off or particular invite new people.
That is an issue. I think, though, that while we theoretically eschew consumerism, consuming is seductive and some of our people still practice it unconsciously.
I should say also that, while our people are internally focused they are also, generally, conflicted about it whereas the typical CGGCer acts as if s/he is entitled to consume.
I'm wondering - thinking out loud - if people there also know that your gatherings are so different from what people are used to that they wonder if a 'guest' would be uncomfortable.
At the moment, we have two gatherings. One is on Sunday morning. What you describe is, I believe, applicable to the Sunday gathering because outsiders would have a traditional expectation of what goes on on
Sunday.
What about an additional gathering, that would be somewhat intended to be missionally oriented - a place of exploration for those questioning / wondering about the Jesus way? Maybe that's too close to attractional or seeker for you still.
Long answer short: Yes. It is too attractional, though I hope we address that issue in other forums.
At the end of the day, I think trying to explore with the people who are a part of your body 'why' the current attitudes might be would be a helpful exercise.
This is the struggle that generated my post.
So there is 'outreach' - serving people in the community in various ways. Then there is the gathering of those deeply committed.
DeleteWhat is the other gathering you mentioned?
What is the path that you are expecting for people who are encountered and interested in hearing learning more about Jesus to pursue that?
The fact that you wouldn't allow someone who was interested (assuming the request was sincere) to attend your primary gathering baffles and honestly troubles me.
Having not thought it through very long, my reaction is that your desire to have a 'New Testament Church' while not wanting others to be there has totally violated 1 Corinthians 14:22-25. I'd be very interested in your response to this.
Same deal. Dan in italics.
DeleteSo there is 'outreach' - serving people in the community in various ways. Then there is the gathering of those deeply committed.
What you call outreach would probably be better described among us as being obedient discipleship. The life of the disciple is one focused on obedience to the commands, "Love your neighbor as yourself" and "Love one another...as I have loved you." The life of the individual disciple is extremely externally focused but, as this is working itself out here for the moment, it is certainly not outreach--a notion which might imply that the core unit of the Kingdom is the congregation, not the disciple.
What is the other gathering you mentioned?
Currently we have two gatherings. One is on Sunday at the same time as the old attractional Christendom promoting "worship service." The other is a group that meets in a home during a week night and takes a stab at doing 1 Corinthians 14:26.
What is the path that you are expecting for people who are encountered and interested in hearing learning more about Jesus to pursue that?
What I do is a lot of intense personal conversation about the Word coupled with testimony about my faith and my life of obedience and, when prompted, commentary on what is wrong with traditional American Christianity compared with the biblical model. (This is something that always seems to come up--eventually.)
The fact that you wouldn't allow someone who was interested (assuming the request was sincere) to attend your primary gathering baffles and honestly troubles me.
Me too, brother. I was furious.
And, you shepherds who are reading this would have been surprised and impressed with the degree of tolerance I displayed when the conversation took the direction it did. I bit my tongue. I thought I might have to take a trip to the ER afterward, though.
To be fair to the whole group, there is some history with the family who made the request and I think there was concern about the risk of allowing these people into the intense intimacy that those of us who meet (in the house church) share. Also, the guy who was most hesitant attended the next Sunday and, during prayer time, prayed an anguished prayer for wisdom in knowing how to ultimately respond.
One final note on this point, since the invitation was not immediately extended, Evelyn and I decided to "launch" a new house gathering at our home including, among others, the family who asked to attend. That gathering commences next Wednesday, We're excited by the opportunity.
Having not thought it through very long, my reaction is that your desire to have a 'New Testament Church' while not wanting others to be there has totally violated 1 Corinthians 14:22-25. I'd be very interested in your response to this.
I'd love to discuss those four verses with you--as well as the verses that follow. Apparently, we don't read them the same way but I must say that, for me, those verses bear further study. However, remember that this entire thread is a discussion of my disappointment that Faith has not ended up where I expected it to. I am not defending much of what we are doing now.
And, I am seeking to define my own repentance in this issue.
In dialog with Dan H.:
ReplyDeleteBill,
Very nicely written post. Very astute discovery. Very vulnerable approach.
Thanks on all counts.
Very poor response from renewal people. I can certainly relate,
I know you can relate. I suspect that others can relate as well. The lack of even an attempted response from the renewal/Transformation wing of leadership identifies, I think, what is essential to CGGC DNA. All is well in the CGGC. There are no struggles. No quandaries. No one feels pain. Because we talk mission, we successfully achieve mission. That is the CGGC truth that I experience and I believe it is what you have experienced in the past year.
but I have no answers whatsoever. Hang in there, brother.
That we don't have answers is the point. You be sure to hang in there yourself. The Kingdom is far too important for us not to.
Dan
Phil Wilson's Response to the BUSTED Thread
ReplyDeleteBill
Your comments hit home for about every church in the US not just the CGGC. All are looking for the "answer." Of the things which you described that are being done by you and the fellowship you are with are good. Your question seems to be: what is missing? You seem to have rejected the way of the Pharisee - which we both seem to think is alive & well in the CGGC. But your comments imply a swing to the opposite end, I may have misunderstood you there.
Your fellow believers seem to have adopted a monastic type of faith from the way you have described this.
If I may I would like to offer that there is an option that is totally different. It does have elements of both but the focus is in the "oneness" with Jesus. It is more than being compassionate and merciful & generous like Jesus. It is actually living in the spirit. As every believer is a priest before our God they can & should be hearing continually from the Holy Spirit. Every disciple of Jesus is commanded, not requested, to heal the sick (not pray for them) cause the blind to see the lame to walk to raise the dead and cast out demons.
If you and the fellowship are not learning and applying this command of Jesus then you are same as every other church where the focus is on the carnal & not the spiritual.
You also said you don't count numbers attending - fine. But are you in so doing neglecting the parables of the sower & of the 3 men given talents? God is a God of increase not decrease. His expectation is that numbers increase.
Yes I agree that God expects disciples and does not want pew sitters. There is an emptiness in people that can only be filled by a supernatural God and having a great doctrine won't do it. We have had some leave because these are "hard sayings" but they are true. I am waiting with expectation for the dead to rise figuratively & actually.
I do appreciate you Bill & follow your "rants" and comments. It is my desire that these comments bring you hope.
Phil Wilson
--------------------------
As always from Phil, this is awesome and heavy stuff that is worthy of thought and response. I am thinking and will respond as my schedule allows.
Thanks, Phil.
Part 1:
DeletePhil in italics.
Bill
Your comments hit home for about every church in the US not just the CGGC. All are looking for the "answer."
I'm not certain that ALL are. Many, even in the CGGC, seem content to believe that have the answer.
Of the things which you described that are being done by you and the fellowship you are with are good. Your question seems to be: what is missing? You seem to have rejected the way of the Pharisee - which we both seem to think is alive & well in the CGGC.
Indeed we do. With a lot of evidence to support our thought.
But your comments imply a swing to the opposite end, I may have misunderstood you there.
I think you are essentially correct. Repentance and turning from sin are, based on the teachings of the prophets and John, Jesus and the apostles, extreme acts. I myself have entirely rejected the way of Christendom. Others among us here have done so to varying degrees. But, on the level of the group as a whole, what we do is very different from what Christendomites do.
Your fellow believers seem to have adopted a monastic type of faith from the way you have described this.
This, I think, is a very apt metaphor for where we are at the moment, especially as it is revealed by the decision not immediately embrace the people who asked to join in the house church.
Better even than monastic, though, may be that, at the moment, we resemble the Amish who are all around us here. We are motivated to practice righteousness and to correctly define it but we are less motivated and less practiced in, well, evangelism. We are pretty closed off on the level of the church--though, as individuals, we live in the world, among the people of the world, to a far greater extent than we see other CGGC in congregations.
Part 2:
DeleteIf I may I would like to offer that there is an option that is totally different. It does have elements of both but the focus is in the "oneness" with Jesus. It is more than being compassionate and merciful & generous like Jesus. It is actually living in the spirit.
It is interesting that you should mention this. Our house gathering recently spent many months working carefully through Francis Chan's book, Forgotten God, which is about the Holy Spirit. The most quoted verse in our house gatherings is Galatians 5:16? which urges the disciple to walk by the Spirit so that we will not gratify the desires of the flesh.
The reality that we are very focused on, as you say, living in the Spirit and we constantly seek common understanding on how to do that.
Do we do it well? I don't think any of us would say that we do.
As every believer is a priest before our God they can & should be hearing continually from the Holy Spirit.
Amen!
Every disciple of Jesus is commanded, not requested, to heal the sick (not pray for them) cause the blind to see the lame to walk to raise the dead and cast out demons.
We are not certain that we see that in the Word.
Do you recall that Paul asks a series of seven rhetorical questions in ! Cor. 12:29-30, two of which are, "Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing?" In Greek, the answer to all seven question is clear, though this is hard to translate into English. The answer is no.
Having isolated that one difference in understanding, we do agree that living in the Spirit is essential to the life of the disciple.
If you and the fellowship are not learning and applying this command of Jesus then you are same as every other church where the focus is on the carnal & not the spiritual.
You also said you don't count numbers attending - fine. But are you in so doing neglecting the parables of the sower & of the 3 men given talents? God is a God of increase not decrease. His expectation is that numbers increase.
We spend a lot of time in Matthew 25--hence the Parable of the Talents. And, while I'm certain that our understanding is incomplete, we see the growth mentioned referring to fruit of the Spirit more than in head count. Recall Jesus' joy in the ministry of the Church in Philadelphia which had not increased in number but had in faithfulness.
Yes I agree that God expects disciples and does not want pew sitters. There is an emptiness in people that can only be filled by a supernatural God and having a great doctrine won't do it.
This is one of the most disastrous mistakes of current CGGC leadership which thinks it accomplished something other than disaster through the latest We Believe.
We have had some leave because these are "hard sayings" but they are true. I am waiting with expectation for the dead to rise figuratively & actually.
I do appreciate you Bill & follow your "rants" and comments. It is my desire that these comments bring you hope.
Phil Wilson
They do, my brother.
And, please understand that the context of all that I write is the godly sorrow that leads to repentance, as I seek His will for my life and for the ministry of the group(s) with which I gather.
Monastery or Country Club
ReplyDeleteYou may recall that Phil Wilson offered this take on the nature of the gathering of disciples known as Faith Community Church of God:
"Your fellow believers seem to have adopted a monastic type of faith from the way you have described this."
In an off-the-blog dialog, a member of the CGGC hierarchy who occupies a position so far up on the pyramid that, shall we say, the air is extremely thin, made this tentative assessment of Faith:
"Your statement in a response that people have to be invited to the group troubles me greatly. The way I understand that statement means the Faith community has become more Country Clubish than any of the other churches."
I responded to Phil that there is some truth to his take. I, however, reject the notion that we are more Country Clubish than any of the other (CGGC) churches.
I've been to a country club. My best childhood friend, who is now a patent lawyer, married a ears nose and throat surgeon. I was in the wedding and the reception was at the bride's family's country club. What an experience!
Based on that one experience, a country club is a place where members attend to have their whims served slavishly by employees whose role is to allow members to be in luxury and to have their every care honored as if it is Holy Writ.
No doubt, my rare-aired CGGC friend sees a lot of that sort of thing as he travels from place to place in his part of the CGGC universe. In fact, what he describes is the natural product of what the CGGC culture has been building for generations.
But, it is not what has become of Faith.
Let me be clear: I am not defending what we are. In fact, disappointment over what we are is the reason I wrote the post that began this dialog. Having said that, I must admit to being a little defensive and even angry by the suggestion that we have merely become the worst country club in the denomination.
Emotions are curious things and I can't say why exactly I am furious by this take on Faith, though it probably has something to do with my anger over leadership's abuse of CGGC pew-sitters which has turned many of our congregations into places where Christianity is defined as consumption of religious products and services and the country club culture, naturally, exists.
The form of dysfunction we manifest is not the typical CGGC dysfunction!
One other difference: At Faith, we are not content being what we are. Many country clubish CGGC congregations, however, seem to feel entitled to be what they are and become angry when someone tries to get them to change. We do want to change and are not happy being what we are.
I know that this post possesses more than a little raw emotion but I firmly believe that the process of repentance always begins with, as Paul dubs it, godly sorrow.
Gang,
DeleteI figured that this thread had gone as far as it was going to go until I received from a member of the, uh, CGGC clergy the following spiritual, informed and insightful response to my Monastery or Country Club post.
I think this is good stuff. I am taking it to heart. Take a look.
I'm mulling this over and will reply as my, um, bivocational schedule permits.
Also, I'm preserving this person's anonymity to keep his/her identity a mystery, as best I can, to the made men of the CGGC Shepherd Mafia.
----------------------------
Bill,
A few thoughts here and a few questions...
1. As to your point about thinking you would get one result, but instead got another -- First, can we really ever know for sure how a group dynamic is going to go. Second, I am reminded that I am a seed-sower, not an end of the process developer. In other words, I sow, and God produces the fruit. You know this of course. But I think we all struggle with this in many areas of life, including the church because we all believe we can control outcomes. We can't! Only processes.
2. Another thought is, perhaps God is not done with your people in terms of how what you have done to shape them. We know from sociological studies that smaller groups do tend to develop an inward attitude and often try to keep the group closed. I would encourage you to talk to them about this, but it sounds like you already have.
3. We don't know what the Holy Spirit has in mind for you and your people. This is definitely new territory in the ERC and CGGC. Perhaps you are all right where the Spirit wants you for now. Perhaps He is building cohesiveness and doing some "team building" prior to you all heading out to grow the group or do evangelism. I think Jesus modeled this with his disciples as well. Point here is, we may need to be patient and watch what the Spirit is not only doing, but will do in the future.
4. Have you looked into how other house churches started and what was happening at the stage you are currently at? I have no idea, but I would think there is research or data on this somewhere.
Those are some of my raw thoughts and questions in response to your post.
Blessings,
Gang,
DeleteSince I posted the comments above I received permission from my friend and brother Jack Guyler to acknowledge that he wrote the reply. Jack in italics.
1. As to your point about thinking you would get one result, but instead got another -- First, can we really ever know for sure how a group dynamic is going to go. Second, I am reminded that I am a seed-sower, not an end of the process developer. In other words, I sow, and God produces the fruit. You know this of course. But I think we all struggle with this in many areas of life, including the church because we all believe we can control outcomes. We can't! Only processes.
We can't know how a group will move forward. And, yes, I always knew I'm a seed-sower. I did have expectations, as I imagine we all do. I want to join God in the work He is already doing [EXPERIENCING GOD]. I am taking stock now and attempting to understand in a better way what He is doing and what my role is in joining Him.
2. Another thought is, perhaps God is not done with your people in terms of how what you have done to shape them. We know from sociological studies that smaller groups do tend to develop an inward attitude and often try to keep the group closed. I would encourage you to talk to them about this, but it sounds like you already have.
I agree that He is not finished. There has been godly sorrow in recent house group meetings over the initial hesitation to invite the other family. This is what leads to repentance. (2 Cor 7:10)
It is true that smaller groups do turn inward. And, I'm beginning to think that that also happened in the New Testament. I don't think the apostles grew the number of participants in individual gatherings. I think I see them growing the number of gatherings.
3. We don't know what the Holy Spirit has in mind for you and your people. This is definitely new territory in the ERC and CGGC ....
This is a good point. As Phil Wilson seemed to point out, one thing that is grossly lacking in the CGGC is a walk in the Spirit. [This is inevitable for a group that is so proudly institutionalized.]
4. Have you looked into how other house churches started and what was happening at the stage you are currently at? I have no idea, but I would think there is research or data on this somewhere.
As you pointed out, we have no fellowship in the CGGC. Our efforts to do this in community in the CGGC have been spurned by both ERC and CGGC leadership. We have read simple/organic church literature. That is somewhat helpful.
What our "Internally Focused" "House" Gathering Plans for Tonight
ReplyDeleteI have discussed my deep despair over Faith's "House Church's" inward focus which is so intense that it even failed to welcome a couple that asked if it could join in the gathering.
Now I will illustrate a way that that gathering is a far different sort of bird than most CGGC Christendomite leaders and members could fathom.
Consider what it on tap for tonight, Thursday August 7, and be aware that every participant in our gathering is absolutely stoked about our "order of worship."
Evelyn and I will drive to a local low-end assisted living facility to pick up an elderly guy who sometimes attends our Sunday gathering and drive him to the nearest Subway Restaurant to meet the other participants in the gathering. He will be our guest of honor for the best that Subway can provide.
He will be invited to join in the meal we share. He will be our human focus. We will ask about the highs and lows of his life and we will pray for him.
After the meal, we will take him back to the facility and all drive to a nursing home about 15 miles up the road to visit with a former attender of the Sunday Show who is suffering from end stage liver disease and is unable to leave her facility. We will stay with her until visiting hours close.
----------------------------
Among all the options available, it is easiest to call the group with which we meet on Thursdays a 'house church.' But, really, it is not really that.
We often do meet in a home but what we plan for this evening is a regular part of our meeting schedule. While we don't always meet in a home, we would never, ever think about meeting in what most would call a "church."
Core to what we believe is this: The church is present any time two or three are gathered in the Name of Jesus.
We are, indeed, internally focused, tragically so. But, at least, we are nomadic so that the location of the internal focus is constantly moving.
How our "Internally Focused" "House" Gathering Meeting Turned Out
ReplyDeleteOne of the major differences between what we do and what we did when we were consumer-oriented and seeker-sensitive is that we no long need our meetings to be fun or enjoyable or nice or pleasant. In fact, it might be a bad thing if those were the feelings when all was said and done.
It was at the apex of His ministry that Jesus considered the people who surrounded Him and cried out, "Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing."
In Romans 14, Paul says that the essence of life in the Kingdom of God is "righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit."
There is a profound joy in the Holy Spirit that is detached from good feeling on a human level.
Jesus taught that the people who receive mercy are the people who are merciful.
And, this week's "house" gathering that never made it to a house was about mercy.
Neither of the people we focused on in this gathering is nice or likable. Neither is a person who has many friends, if they have any friends at all. In fact, they both are avoided by normal people.
The man comes from a large family that essentially pretends his existence away. The woman sees the members of her family, at most, a few times during the course of a year.
While all of us in the gathering were stoked to do what we did last night, I doubt that any of us expected to have fun in what we did. Speaking for myself, the evening was not fun.
Did I have joy? Absolutely. But fun? Absolutely not.
We have a saying at Faith that actions do not convey grace or mercy unless they "sting" for the person practicing them.
We were stung last night.
We found the joy of the Lord--which is our strength--in doing so.
It was, eternal things considered, a good night.
Gang,
ReplyDeleteI have received permission from Dave Williams to copy, into this thread, comments he sent to me a while back.
Dave is the only person who holds a staff position at the General Conference or Regional Conference level who still is willing to enter into dialog with me. As far as I can tell, my dust has been shaken off of the feet of all the others. I am thankful for Dave thoughtful interaction. Our exchanges are, as you might expect, lively and pointed.
I appreciate Dave's transparency and honesty. His willingness to incarnate CGGC leadership into my ministry is an immense blessing to me and it has often refined me.
(As you will see, Dave is the person who suggested that Faith has become more "country clubish" and other churches.)
Thanks, Dave, for everything.
(Dave's comments are included below in italics.) I will reply to them later.
------------------------------
I agreed with Dan’s statement about groups aging and closing. That is typical.
Also you said since the group is prophetic in nature it is in essence reaping what it has sown. I think that assessment is correct.
Also factor in that the world we live in does not like to be corrected. It does not like to have its faults pointed out therefore people will not have a natural affinity to joining such a group.
Your statement in a response that people have to be invited to the group troubles me greatly. The way I understand that statement means the Faith community has become more Country Clubish than any of the other churches. Maybe I missed something, but that’s what how I understood your statement. If that is the case you have found the answer to why people are not inviting others to participate in the journey.
Dave in italics.
DeleteI agreed with Dan’s statement about groups aging and closing. That is typical.
The difficult thing for me is that Faith is NOT typical. We never had many aged people. In fact, Evelyn and I have always been among the oldest in the group.
I don't know what this means but among those who remain are people who are late boomers and early busters. Millennials don't seem interested in what we do nor do really old people.
Also you said since the group is prophetic in nature it is in essence reaping what it has sown. I think that assessment is correct.
This is certainly true and it is also frustrating to me. In practice, the CGGC--and especially the ERC--has rejected APEST. In practice, since I began to embrace my own APEST calling, the CGGC's response seems to have been to allow me to do that but demand that I be a prophetic clergyman. This is an oxymoron.
As a result, we have no one in any of the other APEST giftings doing the Ephesians 4:12 thing and preparing our saints for works of service.
I know that there is some resentment in what follows but it is my truth: We are reaping what ERC and CGGC leadership has sown.
I have reached out numerous times to Findlay and Harrisburg for cooperation and have always been told that there are no programs available that address our issues. Clearly, there is also no interest in addressing our issues.
Also factor in that the world we live in does not like to be corrected. It does not like to have its faults pointed out therefore people will not have a natural affinity to joining such a group.
The world has never liked having faults pointed out. Read the books of the prophets.
Your statement in a response that people have to be invited to the group troubles me greatly. The way I understand that statement means the Faith community has become more Country Clubish than any of the other churches. Maybe I missed something, but that’s what how I understood your statement. If that is the case you have found the answer to why people are not inviting others to participate in the journey.
[Dave and I have been talking this through.]
For now, I'll say that it seems to be in the nature of a house gathering that people are reticent to show up without asking for an invitation--at least in our culture. Also, in our house gathering, the host family seems to have--or at least had--a sense that they have a say in determining who is permitted to enter their home. This has surprised me but I believe that I also understand it.
Evelyn and I are in the process of launching a gathering in our own home. In our case, we are much more open to being open about who comes through our door.
And, as I have been saying, the group that was hesitant to invite that couple has been genuinely remorseful about its initial response and is working through repentance.
Having said that, reading the New Testament, I don't see early believers being open about who attended their gatherings. I see no evidence at all in the Word of early disciples focusing on getting people to become attenders of gatherings of followers of the Way. What I do see is that those gatherings were for those who had repented and believed the gospel.
We are still working on this, though.
An Anecdote from our Last House Gathering Meeting
ReplyDeleteLast night was the regularly scheduled evening that we didn't meet at the house that hosts our group but picked up the old guy who lives in a nearby low-end assisted living facility to take him out for his choice off of the Subway menu and then visited, in a nursing home, a very unlikable woman who used to attend our Sunday morning show.
The old guy [call him Ken] is very limited intellectually and emotionally. When he cast eyes on one of the women in our group he shouted, inside Subway, "You're getting fat!"
Needless to say, she was mortified and needed to be fortified with may hugs.
Later, our visit to the nursing home to see [call her] Laura went remarkably well. She even consented to going to a house meeting in our home on a future Sunday that will be attended by her estranged husband.
What a miracle!
Ahhhh! Live among "the least of these."