iChurch

The other night I had one of those painful conversations pastors engage in from time to time. It began with the words, “I want you to know I am leaving Village.”  It’s almost inevitable these conversations occur. Things change. People change. And sometimes, there are very good reasons people transition to another church community. Their career may take them to another city. The church may have drifted off into heresy, or intentionally stopped preaching the Word of God. Or there is a leader in the church, and he is engaged in immoral behavior, and the church has intentionally determined to not confront him. Perhaps the church has decided to leave its essential mission to reach lost people, love one another, worship God, or disciple the saints to become radical followers of Jesus.

But I fear that in recent years, the tendency to move is for other reasons—reasons that are less substantive, reasons explained by the age we live in. What I find is that people tend to leave because their needs are not being met; the other church has a better youth ministry; I’m not sure I want to invest in the cost that will be required to stay here; the music there is closer to our tastes; I find more people my age; this church, like every existing church, is going to one day die anyway.

Some time ago, I read an article that has parked itself in the back of my mind—one of those you say to yourself—“I will come back to this again.”  Skye Jethani wrote it in Leadership, entitled iChurch:All We Like Sheep. In it, he recounted a similar conversation and the things he processed. In effect, he asked, “Have we become so co-opted by our consumer oriented age, that we treat our church like a place we shop?”  Have we come to a place where we want church to be like our iPods—a place of personalized choices. Do we come and consume until we find something better down the street to meet our needs?

Sometimes I feel like our church is just one more brand out there. And I wonder if we have moved from a Christianity that was about relinquishing our desires, submitting to a community, learning to accept the blemishes and love those God has called us to love—to a Christianity that is all about meeting my needs, providing choices, and leaving if change does not happen on my timeline.

Before some of you line up to take issue with me, let me underscore that all of us bear some blame. It begins with pastors who all too often leave their churches for something more attractive. As Eugene Peterson once put it, too many pastors have a tendency to commit ecclesiastical pornography, lusting over the airbrushed congregational brochures, and using “the Lord called me” language to get there. It certainly hasn’t helped that pastors are also very quick to receive those who have gotten disgruntled down the street, without ever asking—could it be God wants you to remain, and work this through for the sake of the body?  If this is merely about preference, should you really be here?  Have you considered the hours and resources a body has invested in your lives?  At one point will you leave us?

Certainly leaders have also aggravated the situation by acting as “religious baristas” (Jethani’s words), supplying spiritual goods for people to choose from based upon their preferences. When I and my worship leader attended a church some years ago, to view its video ministry, we could not help thinking—this is consumer Christianity at its worst. Prefer an organ?  Come to this setting—we’ll even supply the pews. Want something that appeals to boomers—we’ve got bagels in the other building. Want rock?  Try out this venue, where we have created a nightclub atmosphere sure to attract those your age.

So we, pastors, leaders, have our failings as well. And maybe it started with holding to a rather lame ecclesiology, forgetting what God called the church to be in the first place. We may have failed to say the obvious, that much of consumerism is incongruent with a Christian community, unrelated to life devoted to following in the steps of Jesus. Maybe we failed to make it clear that churches don’t have to die. That an existing church, with some of its wrinkles and brown spots can be the emerging church of tomorrow if we are willing to invest our energies and passions to get it there, taking advantage of its structures and history. Maybe we failed to say that we both value and need the next generation, and missed underscoring that the next generation needs those of us who have been down the road a bit. We have been through the dark night of the soul and experienced God on the other side. We have faced certain losses, including lost dreams. We have seen what pride can do to ruin success, been shaped by both helpful and abusive voices, and gained a certain wisdom in the process.

The irony is that I find a younger generation sick of a consumerism that has reduced everything down to our narcissistic desires. But I find they are no less prone than any other generation to move when their needs are not met. Unless my experience is different, I find that a younger generation is no more inclined to join a church than a boomer generation, when in reality, the point of joining is to enter a covenant. A covenant that says, for better or worse, this is the body God has placed me in, and I will love the people and submit myself to those God has called to lead, and I will unleash my gifts, and I will sit at the table with everyone else and lead the church forward. And if things are not where they should be, I will stay at it until they are, or until God shows me differently.

Comments

[Trisha]

Pastor John,

Thanks for this post. I'm surprised no one else has commented on it. You've said what needs to be said, and you've said it well.

As we look for a new church here in Atlanta, I will think about what you have said. I want to find a home church that we can be committed to, to make that covenant with. I'm not looking for a church that caters to my every need, instead I'd like a church that challenges me to continue to grow in my relationship to Christ, to have unity among believers, and to care about the world.

[Dave]

As long as church is considered "a place" rather than as "a people," it will continue to be treated like any other consumer product.

[mike mcmullin]

Excellent post! I wholeheartedly agree...but...I have a couple of questions.

1 - Is it possible to rescue churches in Western culture from consumerism?

I want it to happen but I'm just not sure if you can get all of the bones out of that fish.

2 - Is it possible for the Church (our buildings, sermons, music, ministry) to be without some sort of "style"? That will inevitably alienate some and leaving others searching for a "flavor" that fits them?

Doesn't contextual, incarnational ministry mean that we must be somewhat relevant (I hate that I just used a buzzword) to whatever context we find ourselves in? And won't that express itself in some style (traditional, emerging, latino, asian, urban, suburban, rural, etc)?

Again, I totally agree with your post but I'm wondering if this is place where the ideal and real just won't be meet.

[Randy Ehle]

Thanks for making us think, John. Late the other night I was reading Ephesians, and 3:10 jumped out at me. Paul is in mid-sentence here, but he says something powerful: "so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places."

Somehow, the church will be used by God to make known his wisdom to the heavenly rulers. I'm not sure how that might happen, but as I discussed it with Carl Laney tonight, it seemed that one of the things that needs to happen in churches is that we need to get a fuller view of who God is. I think - I'm not sure, but I think - that if I understand God better, I am more likely to realize the folly of focusing on my own needs and desires...and thus less likely to seek a church that will meet those needs and desires.

[pilgrim]

Since I am a midwestern Am ha-Eretz hayseed, could someone answer a question I have? What is the difference between being, from the Word of God's standpoint, "a Christian" and what seems to be called today, "a radical follower of Jesus"?

Everywhere I look I see this term. Is it a higher state of "disciple" or something?

"While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there. A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods." They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean." (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.)" Acts 16:17-21

[Sh’lomo Bar-Mitzvah]

As an unqualified am ha-aretz as well as an Illinois hayseed and untutored moron talmid of Y'shua ha-Mashiach Bar-Yosef, I can easily explain you, my brother, what is a "radical follower" of Jesus, even though the truth of this has escaped the brains of the enlightened goyim.

Radical, of course, comes from "radix" or "root" as we say in English. This means a man who is ruggedly rooted in the Torah of Ha-Shem (may He be blessed for ever!).

Follower, of course, is easily seen to be a reference to the brass rings that top the candlesticks. As the wax is converted to light, the follower closely shleps behind it, right behind the light, as it is written in the book of Tehillim (Psalms), that the Torah of Ha-Shem is a light unto my feet. In this way, there is no pause between the light and the follower, which goes down as the wax burns, following the Light of Torah, even to the nethermost parts of the earth. That is, the follower allows nothing to come between himself and the light, and also is not worried that he appears (to others) to be going lower and lower.

Jesus, well, I think these goyim mean Y'shua ha-Mashiach Bar-Yosef, don't you, my brothers? And what can we say of Him who is the Holy One and the King (of kings of kings) of Israel, who makes His home in the midst of the praises of Israel, who wraps Himself up in dark cloud and rides on the wings of the storm, who forgives our sins and carries our burdens and took them with Him when He gave Himself up to be hanged on the Tree, where He proved by His death, descent to She‘ol and His rising on the third day that He is, He was, and He is to come? Ask Adam our first forefather who it is that he followed out of the darkness of the pit, and why, and where He led him. Ask Eliyahu whither he went in the whirlwind, and in whose presence he lives.

Excuse me, I am just an untutored am ha-aretz as you are, my brother who asks the unanswered question, how different is the "radical follower of Jesus" from the "Christian" as the scripture describes the talmidim of Y'shua. You and I, we are not worthy to be answered for asking such questions, the better to hear the words of Y'shua ha-Mashiach ha-Rabbenu, the better to hear His words. He is the Shepherd of Israel (blessed be He!) and His sheep know His voice.

Emet!

[pilgrim]

My question above is an honest one, and I appreciate the perspective of Sh'lomo, but really, why is all this talking needed? It feels like the time spent in these last two generations has been used all on just one long theological discussion with no end in sight. The age in which we live in has produced the most arrogant and boastful people that have probably ever existed, myself especially included. We want to talk as if our faith is radical, but yet, all we do is talk about it. When one can say, like an earlier saint said at their execution, "Oh Lord, if only I could come back 100 more times, and each time die for you again....", then maybe they can speak that they are radical followers of Christ. Yet I'm sure that to the very saint who said that, those claims would've never crossed their mind. They simply believed in Christ and His resurrection and the future resurrection so much, that this was all that was real and genuine to them.

If Pastors, Priests and other types of church leaders feel simply like "spiritual baristas", they probably are in the wrong "business". When leaders like Jethani say this, it doesn't give me much confidence in their leadership. It already sounds like defeat. Unlike the way the current age has projected the position of a Pastor, the true position is non-glorious, low and should not be sought after in the manner that it has! The Pastor is the least, the servant of all he is entrusted with. The leaders should not dance on the backs of the bruised, but should let others stand on them so that they might reach up to the true shepherd and overseer of our souls. The Good Shepherd is coming quickly, let's not become idle nor drowsy with lengthy conversations, but hold to the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus.

[kristin]

what is a church, but made up of a group of people. all of which are individually given different attributes by God. so if I was to take a mathmatical approach to what does a church look like. If one group of people get together (call them group A) they will mesh differently then a different group (call them group B ) because they are all different. hence the songs, the programs, what is chosen for discusion groups will be different BUT because we all share the same BIBLE they would all fit in the same grid. So then how to decide what group to be in. maybe we should all go to the church closest to our house, there by having a chance to bring neighbors to church easier, get togethers with believers over dinner...

so then this originally question posed by pastor John leads me to another one, how to choose the first church you go to. because if "church hopping" is bad how does one get a home church. What are some good things to be looking for in a church? and if issues in a church aren't an ok reason to leave a church then they shouldn't stop you from joining one either. so then my argument is just go the nearest church.

[Confused]

Pastor John, As I struggle with this very question its difficult to get past the frustrations of trying over and over and over again to be involved -- so how does one decide? From your blog it sounds like Sunday School programs, couples groups, youth groups, childrens programs, style of music worship, oppurtunities for ministry do not matter. I doubt that is truly what you meant but could you clarify? If those things dont matter why are we a Baptist church then? Like the earlier commenter why not just pick the church next door (assuming its not heretical)? I have tried now for years to be a part of things, to assist with change, to be a part of change, to volunteer my God given talents but its not happened or accepted with any regularity. I have offerred to help, to be apart of things and either I have been ignored or trivilized. I have discussed this with other leaders in the church. I have prayed that God would change things or would change my heart. All to no availe. I agree simply throwing in the towel because its hard is one thing -- but at some point how does one decide to move on? Or in your opinion do we just continue too "tough" it out? I am excited for the church's vision, but I fear that my family is shriveling away on the side...

[Bud]

John

It seems to me that, as current-day Christians, we continue to struggle with this age-old question of "What is the Church?" This, inevitably leads us into the "form" or "format" of the church. I guess that struggle goes all the way back to the first century. It always leads me to the matter of "What difference does it make?" Aren't we to gather to worship and prepare ourselves for the week to come? Obviously, this is oversimplistic. Yet I often wonder if the enemy doesn't take great delight in all of our machinations around form and format, sometimes, I suspect, to the detriment of our true purposes. And yet I realize that, to many, the form or format becomes the basis for which they do or do not attend church. Somehow, I know that God knows all of this and must just long for our fellowship with him. To me, the only answer is to pray, to trust him, and to move forward with the wisdom that he provides. Reckognizing that any specific church will never meet the needs of all, but seeking to make those radical connections, of which you so often speak, as primary, without getting confused by the "voices" of the few.

[Michele]

John,

Thanks for saying some things that I have felt needed to be said for a long time. I understand that people need to look for a church where they feel "at home", but once you have found it and committed yourself to it, I believe it is just that.... a commitment. When we enter in to a marriage vow or a vow with the LORD it is not just for as long as we feel like it or as long as things are going well. It is until death parts us in the case of a marriage and for all eternity with the LORD. I used to think my parents were crazy to stick with a church that didn't have a lot to offer in the way of "programs", didn't have an amazing building and an attendance that was on the decline. Now as an adult, I look back and see their commitment and I admire them and the example of commitment they passed on to me. I have learned from them and want to set the same example for my kids. Too many people are walking around looking for the perfect church that meets all their needs. They aren't going to find it. Something will change, somebody will dissapoint us. We need to be asking ourselves "How does God want me to serve in this body?" We need to get invested, if we don't, it's pretty easy to move on. It's not supposed to be all about me. We are all a part of ONE body. It's hard to be commited through thick and thin, but I think it'll be worth it!!

[pilgrim]

"Confused",

I'm sure Pastor Johnson has already spoken with you, but since your situation is similar to mine, I’d like to share a bit. Perhaps it will help you in some way.

First, I haven't been back to Village since last December, nor have I attended any other church. My reason for leaving Village was pretty simple. I was told that if I wasn't for the direction the church was heading, I should find somewhere else to worship. What started all of this was when I began to be led by the Spirit to act in faith. I wanted to go to downtown Portland and witness by reading the Word of God publicly. Not preaching, not handing out tracts, just simply reading what is already written Truth. I first consulted with the leadership of Village to get their blessing. I faced opposition, though, from a leader who was directly over me. They thought that it wouldn't work, that it would be irrelevant in our culture today and expressly stated that "everyone" (everyone else included in that group that I was a part of) would not get involved or help. I did it anyways, joining equally with my brother-in-Christ, Romanós, who is Greek Orthodox, to follow Christ in this effort. Since then we have been able to witness and testify to a number of people personally and also by just sowing the Word which never returns to the Lord void. He gives the increase and we never know what impact we have when the Word of God is heard by a passer-by. Most recently, on two separate occasions, we have helped two homeless brothers, both orphans and young widowers. They are believers who had fallen out of the flock unobserved, who hadn't been taken care of thoroughly by the churches. To date, one of them has been blessed with a job and is now working to better his situation. The other we sent back to his home in Denver, where the rest of his family is.

The local congregations should be setup to do the above for the members. This is the work of the church; this should be each church’s vision. The church should be a place where the individuals, who are not paid staff or clergy, but who are called none-the-less, can have the support and means to carry out the way the Spirit is leading them. This DOES NOT mean everyone is working alone, or that each is trying to bring about their own self ambitions. Those who have the same gifts and who are being led the same way will find their place with each other. The leadership should only be there to somewhat facilitate, to lead in matters beyond what is possible for the majority of people who work full time, to encourage and to continue to build up the flock so that they can continue in this work. The work of the church is not inward, but outward. Christ is the head, and everyone is put in their correct position when the Holy Spirit is directing the members.

You really have just two choices. Either you can wait around, wait for the church to move or use you, or you can just start doing what you feel the Holy Spirit is directing you to do. If the church tries to restrain it, really they are just working against the Spirit. If the church system limits the leading of the Spirit of Truth, then the institution is really just trying to fulfill its own goals, not those of Christ. If they tell you to leave, as in my case, then the Lord will not hold you accountable for leaving. You are just following their leadership and doing what you are told. Judgment will fall on them for such an action.

“Confused”, do whatever you know is the right thing, according to your conscience. You know that family comes first always. If you cannot lead or give proper time to your family (unless the situation is out of your control) then you will not be able to do the work of Christ effectively. Everyone’s duty is to their family first, if they are the leader of the household. If all the church wants you for is to use you as a coppertop for their own means, then you will end up just being a drained, dead battery.

The leaders should pay attention to these things, not try to shut the ears and blind the eyes of others who speak up. Everyone has a voice, especially if the Holy Spirit is speaking through them! Not just an elect few. Confusion, a lot of the time, comes from the top down. Christendom, over the last 1700 years, has always confused the simple message of Jesus Christ. This isn’t just the complaints of a few; these are signs that something is definitely wrong. When I first started attending Village, things were different. I believe foreign things have entered; things not of Christ. I also believe that each church should have the same goal. But if the churches are to have different visions, and if those visions are of God, then the visions will succeed no matter what, just as the leaders of Israel said of Christ. If something or someone is of God, no one will be able to stop it or them.

[Douglas]

Pilgrim -

"First, I haven't been back to Village since last December, nor have I attended any other church."

"And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near." (Heb 10:24-25)

Is the Spirit really leading you to not be in fellowship with any local body? It seems to me that if there is a "spirit" leading you in this way, it is certainly not the Spirit of Jesus.

[Romanós]

Douglas,

You have simply skipped over Pilgrim's comments without addressing any of them. Instead, you've taken a pot shot at him, using a Bible verse. Is that how to use the Word of God?

Pilgrim may not be attending any "church" right now, as he admits, but that has nothing to do with the verse you quoted. Why not? Because what passes for "church" nowadays has little or no resemblance to the meetings of the brethren in the first few generations. Those meetings that the apostle is saying not to neglect are precisely the meetings that Pilgrim does participate in. They don't happen in the context of "church" as you conceive it, but they are in fact the Church, because Jesus is there, and we know it, and where Jesus is, there is the Church.

"Do not keep judging according to appearances; let your judgment be according to what is right." (John 7:24)

If I were you, I should be cautious about saying such things as, "if there is a 'spirit' leading you in this way, it is certainly not the Spirit of Jesus."

"The disciple is not superior to his teacher, nor the slave to his master. It is enough for the disciple that he should grow to be like his teacher, and the slave like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, what will they not say of his household?" (Matthew 10:25)

I personally know Pilgrim, and I can say that he is growing to be more and more like his master, in his words as well as his deeds. He is not one of those who "preferring their own pleasure to God… keep up the outward appearance of religion but… have rejected the inner power of it." (2 Timothy 3:4-5)

As for your jibe against Pilgrim, here's a word for you:

"It is not for you to condemn someone else's servant: whether he stands or falls it is his own master's business; he will stand, you may be sure, because the Lord has power to make him stand." (Romans 14:4)

Be careful, brother!

[pilgrim]

Douglas-

Thank you for quoting the Holy Scriptures, brother!

If you read above, I never said that I would NEVER attend an organized congregation again nor did I renounce Christ or my duties to the brethren; I just said I hadn’t attended since my struggle at Village. I have been willing to reconcile, but that takes the willingness of both parties. It seems others would rather not at this time. It is always easier to ignore the issue.

Also, one must always look first at the context of various passages. The historical situation in Hebrews involved Jewish believers who were considering abandoning Messiah to revert back to Judaism to escape the persecution they were facing. After the persecution subsided, they thought that they could go back to Messiah and somehow erase what they did. This was not the case, as the writer put it in chapter 6. To realign with the Jews and Judaism of that generation was realignment with those who rejected Jesus; they would be back under the Judgment of 70 AD that was soon to come upon Jerusalem, which Christ prophesied would happen to the generation that rejected Him. It would be like the future saints taking the mark of the beast, if that where possible, to try and escape the persecution of the beast, thinking that they would still be protected from the divine Judgments that fall on those who will have mark., mainly the Judgments in Rev. 14:9-12 , Rev. 16:2. In the same way, those who thought they could escape back then would, though, I assume still spiritually saved, now be susceptible to physical judgment and no long protected from the Judgment which was to come through Rome and Titus, which scattered the Jewish people to all other nations.

Grace and peace.