A Letter to the Vision-Driven Church, Part I

‘I know your deeds, and your love and faith and service and perseverance, and that your deeds of late are greater than at first. But I have this against you, that you tolerate...       Revelation 2:19-20a  NASB

In his message to the church at Thyatira, Jesus pinpoints trouble in a church that seemed to know where it was going. Look at his description: notable deeds, love and faith, service, perseverance, and a trajectory in mission that resulted in latter deeds being greater than former ones. I think any of us looking at that description would say, "What a great church, now that's the way to do it!." Particularly, in today's business and marketing laden approach to church planting, church management and growth, those qualities would seem to be the core of producing the right kind of success.

Now please don't misunderstand what I'm saying, those were great characteristics. This church was relational, it was engaged and moving, they were focused. They knew what they were trying to accomplish, and they were getting after it. But as important as these considerations are, what cannot be overlooked is that they were not allowed by Christ to be substituted for proper teaching and upright behavior.

The message to Thyatira that perhaps today's church needs to clearly hear is that passe things like doctrine and discipline really do matter, at least to God. I fear that under the current church-growth regimens so widely practiced by congregations swallowing up whole the population of church-goers, discipline never rises past the level of showing the door to anyone who doesn't quite buy the leader's vision. Doctrine isn't anything more than the joyous knowledge that as long as you fit the profile the church is trying to attract and submit to that leader's vision, God loves you.

It is not enough to have a vision that drives your church. It is not enough to know one's mission and to dedicatedly pursue it. Even if one is successful in that aspect of church life, Christ may find significant and disastrous fault with such a church. Church discipline is a key aspect of church life as Christ would have it. False prophets, false teaching, immoral practices all have to be addressed via discipline. Talk about turning today's wisdom on its head--vision, evidently, is not a suitable vector for close-mindedness in church according to Christ, but doctrine is.

All This Talk About Vision

God speaks to people about what he will have them do. Today. He hasn't changed.

The experience of such would be called a vision, even if it wasn't something optically perceived. It seems funny to me, but everyone in the church world is all about vision these days, even if they are blatant cessationists (thanks for nothing Peter Drucker).

When a man or woman of God has an ambition or dream, ostensibly inspired by God in some way, they labor to put together all the pieces necessary to accomplish it. He or she puts up a target, and then pushes and pulls, moves and shakes, and out comes...

...a calf. These may (and I only say that by concession) not be our golden gods, but at the very least, they are our bronze serpents. The truth is that they are our Ishmaels.

The church world has so thoroughly embraced the strategic management techniques used in the world, that though the product resulting from this kind of vision may be accurately consumer-driven, it is about as far away from the model described in the manual as sand castles are from real ones. Since this kind of vision is the product of human imagination, in what way can it be said to be a vision from God? For that matter, would God even bother to give us a vision if the thing we were endeavoring to accomplish could be achieved by human ingenuity in the normal course of affairs? The results of these managerial efforts never produce Isaacs, and can never measure up to the model in the heavens.

When God does grant a vision to a person, it is not like he places an order with that person, or is commanding that one to accomplish the thing shown. The vision is a demonstration or a display, really a sneak preview, of what is coming to pass. He doesn't give us visions for us to figure out how to make it so, he gives us visions of what is he is bringing forth. Generally, they are beyond any possibility of us making them so anyhow, and they only come about by the most unusual and bizarre of circumstances.

Our efforts to produce the vision from God instead produce hardship. They result in Ishmaels which strive against all men. They result in the trashing of those who can't "keep up," the disdain of those less perceiving, and the exploitation of the blood-bought as if they were mere raw materials. They produce pride and division, and leave heritages of animosity. To hell with such visions!

By contrast, God's efforts to fulfill the vision he shared produce the joy of the Lord. They result in Isaacs, which are pleasant in their surprise, gentle to all, and demonstrate the peaceable fruits of righteousness. They do not trash, belittle, or otherwise relegate to trophy cases the blood-bought and beloved of God. They produce laughter and praise, and leave the sweet savor of heaven behind.

Perhaps it has something of a biblical precedent, all this talk of vision: it leaves a sour taste in my mouth!

What Church Should Be Like

To those of you who may be wondering how what I've been sharing on 1 Corinthians 14 can be implemented in today's church, I'm going to sketch out some clear action points, but first I need to tackle a couple of things that are NOT putting this scripture into practice.

Creating little pigeon-hole jobs or "helpful" little tasks to which the broadest swath of the congregation possible may be recruited to is not putting this passage into practice. That everyone should be active in the body in some way is a biblical concept, but where in the scriptures does it say that the pastor is the one who speaks, conceives the vision for the church, directs everyone else's action and everyone else just helps him or her?

Acts of service cast as helping the preacher (or for more sophisticated congregations, helping the ministry) is not only unscriptural, they're pathetic. 

Most of the attempts I'm familiar with by churches to involve people in ministry actually fall into that variety of thing, basically, top down, "make 'em feel a buy in," "keep 'em busy so they don't cause trouble" manipulations. Is that what the body of Christ is supposed to be about? Why not just pat the good folks on the head, melodiously intone, "good dog," and tell them to be happy handing everyone who walks in a flier about the Great Church Yard Sale.

Plugging people into such jobs by means of giftedness testing is not putting this passage into practice either. I can't even find a whiff in the scriptures to support the practice. It's worldly, developed from psychobabble and secular human resource management. It treats the church as just another organization of people, subject to the same psychosocial manipulation such groupings are, rather than treating it as the Spirit-indwelt body of Christ that it is.

Spiritual giftedness has nothing to do with what you like or dislike, what tasks you're good or bad at, or anything about your track record. It's giftedness from the Spirit, not you! If Christians have no inkling of their spiritual giftedness, it's because they haven't asked God to clarify it, or are insisting upon being something God isn't making them. It does help to be baptized in the Holy Spirit, but if one does what one senses to do in his or her closest moments with Christ, that one will discover what gift he or she is to the body with ease.

Try things while yielded in your heart and mind to God— you'll find your giftings just fine!

Now to those action points I promised...
 

When we come together, i.e. meet as a church, everyone should be able to participate, vocally as well as in cooperative action. Some may have special areas of service; ushering, sound room, nursery, instrumental music, etc., but everyone has the potential and should have the possibility of participating vocally. If our meetings are too large to make that realistic, maybe our meetings are too large. If that is the case, we have to ask ourselves whether it is better to divide and be scriptural in practice, or to cherish egotism and convenience and be too large to act scripturally?

If our meetings are too structured to make this possible, we've bowed down at the idol of order rather than at the feet of Jesus. Believers are not served well by asking nothing of them, allowing little for them to experience or offer, or by encouraging superstition among them by giving them the mere salve of religion. That only allows their hearts to wander, it can't get them where God wants them to be. Flocks belong to God, and the gift of the Holy Spirit that he has supplied to the body must always take precedence over the tastes or conveniences of the undershepherd.

When we come together, anyone, maybe even at anytime, could be inspired by the Holy Spirit to open up his or her mouth and share.

That offering may take the form of a spiritual song (in known or unknown language), it may be something prophetic that instructs, or uncovers, it may be an utterance in a language unknown to the speaker (and anyone else for that matter), or it may be an interpretation of something brought forward in an unknown language. The key point is that in presiding over our gatherings, elders should anticipate that any and every one, not just the preacher, could be used of God to vocally bring forth a message from God for the benefit of all.

People and preachers worry about disorder, and I understand that, but how is enforced silence more spiritual than chaotic participation? Quenching the Spirit, despising prophecy, and limiting anointing are not appropriate responses to the messiness of the Spirit's promptings within the body. Leaders need hearts more like Moses! To lead meetings in a biblical fashion will require some extra effort from elders: they'll need to test everything, they'll need to correct some things, they'll need to simply overlook others and adjust.

Order does not require that everything be planned neatly and tied up in a bow. That probably won't make good television, but really, since when is television "ministry" about anything other than bringing in some outside donations? It likely won't do much for convenience either, but a believer overly concerned about convenience probably isn't really a believer anyhow. Our approach to our meetings should be to be as accommodating and inviting as possible to the Spirit's inspiration throughout the body.

Church meetings are for the body's expression, not just the preacher's. They should be conducted so the body gets to experience and express the Holy Spirit, not so they can watch the preacher do so. This may be a radical concept to you, but read the manual, it's absolutely scriptural. The Bible does not tell us to eagerly quench the Spirit out of fear or for the sake of order, but to eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially prophecy. God hasn't left it up to us to do in church whatever we like, we have instructions from him which tell us what church should be like.

Is your church obeying them?

Addendum: Check out Dr. D's post on John Wimber.

"May I Take Your Order?"

... all things should be done decently and in order.  1 Corinthians 14:40 (ESV)

Today, I align the cross hairs of my hermeneutic scope squarely on the congregation-squelching, Spirit-emasculating, glory-blocking concept of order. Not order as the word itself would mean, but all that which man puts in place in the name of order which only serves to quench the Holy Spirit. That kind of thing is thought good in many quarters, while that which would yield to the Spirit's spontaneous inspiration is called indecent. 

Are we that afraid to follow the Word and let the Spirit direct us?

What was the Apostle Paul calling for in this verse? Orders of Service? Lectionaries, liturgies, and canons? Does it serve as the excuse for minister-orchestrated meetings, for sergeants-at-arms to enforce adherence, or emcees to keep the show moving? I don't think so! Considering that he's spent all of Chapter 14 establishing that a congregational meeting is about participation, not observation, and that more spontaneous than prepared.

Paul attempted to teach a middle road between cacophonous chaos and church mouse quiet. He was promoting the fullest possibility of participation in ministry, without having the loudest or the strongest take over to everyone else's detriment. In other words, our services should be arranged (κατὰ τάξιν), i.e. so ordered, with full participation in view. Participation should be offered in good form (εὐσχημόνως), so decently. Ordered for participation done decently, that's what the Apostle was trying to convey.

Paul was not telling us to substitute the direction of our meetings by the presiding officer for the leading of the Holy Spirit in the congregation.

I'm beginning to wonder whether or not the former is what we're most comfortable with. God in charge means mystery, uncertainty-- the possibilities that our hearts will be laid bare with no place to hide except in the love of Christ. If the Spirit is in charge things might get emotional, might not stay on agenda. We might not get out in time to get a table at our favorite restaurant! 

When the Holy Spirit moves in our meetings and "takes" our order, unlike that favorite restaurant, he's not about to serve our appetites. Rather, he's about to impress his order instead of ours. When he does, his intention is to spontaneously express his manifold grace to the body through the body. So when the Spirit says, "May I take your order?" The correct answer is always, "yes, please do."

The List of Spiritual Gifts

It's time for the list. This, of course, represents only my cobbling together of what the Word says about the subject. One could see it somewhat differently and still be correct. Hopefully, this will help you see things from the broadest perspective, while giving you the detail necessary to grasp what each gift is.

THE SPEAKERS

Apostle: one sent by God to a people to establish the church among them. There is an administrative (supervisory) aspect to this gift, but it not directly associated with hierarchical office (as with the Mormons)-- its authority is confined to its function. (1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11)

Evangelist: one who announces the good news to the public (which hasn't heard it yet). It's not foundational (like the apostle or teacher), because it's tasked with making people believers, not making believers into a church. (Ephesians 4:11)

Prophet: one who proclaims and interprets what God is saying to the church. The prophet speaks to strengthen, encourage and comfort God's people. This gift is not about prognostication, nor has it anything to do with hierarchical office. (Romans 12:6-8, 1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11)

Exhorter: one who speaks to urge others on in matters pertaining to God. I really see this as a subset of the prophetic gift, but can see someone being an exhorter without being a prophet. (Romans 12:6-8)

Linguist: one who speaks and interprets tongues in public. No, you will not see it listed this way in the scriptures, this is my synthesis of what is said about it there. Not everyone who speaks in tongues in public will be a linguist, but those who are linguists will be interpreters. This (as in the case of the exhorter) is a subset of the prophetic gift, but it is possible to be a linguist without being a prophet or a prophet without being a linguist (I Corinthians 12:28)

Pastor: one who tends the flock of God. This gift has both administrative (supervisory) and speaking (teaching) aspects. Whereas the apostle establishes the church, the pastor maintains it. That is not an institutional task, but an interpersonal one-- it's about the sheep not the sheepcote. This gift is directly associated with the supervisory church office (elder/bishop) which is as close as the Bible gets to validating anything hierarchical in the church. The pastor is always a teacher and a leader, but it is possible to have teachers or leaders who are not pastors. (Romans 12:6-8 [leader], 1 Corinthians 12:28 [teacher/governor], Ephesians 4:11)

Teacher: one who instructs the church in the commands of God and how to apply them to daily life. This is a subset of the pastoral gift, but it is possible to be a teacher without being a pastor. (Romans 12:6-8, 1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11)

THE SERVERS

Server: one who attends to things that need to be done (similar to a Deacon). Everyone in the body serves in some capacity, but this gift does it in inspired, focused fashion. This is not necessarily the same as the office of Deacon, that is supervisory, this is functional, but I would think the office of Deacon would often be filled by those who are gifted as servers. By way of interest, Philip, the evangelist was a notable example of one who served in the office of Deacon, but was gifted as other than a server. (Romans 12:6-8)

Giver: one who shares his or her substance with the church. Some folk are appointed by God to be channels of blessing to the rest of the church. Everyone gives, but the gifted do so in ways enabled only by God. That, however, does not equate with being rich! (Romans 12:6-8)

Sympathizer: one who alleviates the suffering of others in the church. This is a mercy ministry. Everyone in the family of God is expected to show mercy to the family of God, sympathizers do so at an exemplary, Spirit-inspired level. (Romans 12:6-8)

Miracle Worker: one who exerts supernatural power. Everyone in the body of Christ can move in the supernatural, this gift does so on a marked, consistent basis without any necessary connection to preaching. (1 Corinthians 12:28)

Healer: one who heals the sick. Everyone in the body of Christ can pray for the sick, anyone in the body can be used by God to bring a miraculous healing to someone who is sick, but the healer ministers this wonder on a consistent basis without any necessary connection to preaching. (1 Corinthians 12:28)

Helper: one who addresses the petitions of the needy. Everyone in the body should respond to the needs of their brothers and sisters, but some are enabled to do so in a particularly dedicated fashion. This may seem a replication of the gift of giver, but I think it involves more than substance and sustenance. Though this ministration is part of the duties entailed in the office of Deacon (as with the server), the gift is functional whereas the office is supervisory. Possessing this gift doesn't mean one will hold that office (1 Corinthians 12:28)

Leader: one who steers and superintends the church. The offices of Elder (overall oversight) and Deacon (service supervision) are the actual supervisory positions in a church, but their biblical descriptions do not necessarily specify what gifts one must possess in order to serve in them. In its formative stages, a church will be supervised by its apostle; thereafter, it may be supervised by some other gift acting in the office of Elder. The qualifications for that office specify functionally that an elder be instructive, but that is not quite the same as saying the elder must be gifted as a teacher. I could see the possibility of someone being gifted as a leader, capable of passing on effective instruction, but not gifted as a teacher, or any other speaking gift for that matter. What that implies in regards to the concept of church leadership vested in a plurality of elders I'll leave to you. (Romans 12:6-8 [governs], I Corinthians 12:28 [administration])

******************************************

One could debate the way I condensed this number and these particular gifts from the stew of the three passages we have been discussing. Since all of the lists are representative and none is exhaustive, the possibility exists that there could be gifts that are not found in any of these lists. I don't think that's true, but I can't prove it. Someone could see the cross-referencing differently than I have as well. Regardless, what we all should be able to agree to is that God intends each of us to express the gift he's placed within us, and whatever your gift, God has given you the manifestation of the Holy Spirit for the benefit of all. I hope this series helps you express both.

The Audience of Worship

Who is the intended audience of the "worship" segments of congregational meetings?

If the answer is the visitor or newcomer, those segments are designed, like everything else in such churches, to appeal to the next one in the door. That one must be prospected, projected and then specifically, strategically prepared for and enticed. It's a marketing thing, often a niche marketing thing, but is it a worship thing?

If the answer is the folk sitting in the congregation, those segments are designed, often very responsively, to retain those returning through the door. The wants, wishes, even grumbling, of those will guide, forestall or derail any attempt to change the status quo. It's an appeasing, people-pleasing thing, but is it a worship thing?

If the answer is people, regardless of the considerations above, the goal of those fronting "worship" time will be to thrill, or at least to satisfy, the cash paying audience in the seats. The likelihood is that those leaders will be inordinately attended to by both the audience and the church "promoters" who enlist them, everyone together "stoking the star-maker machinery behind the popular song." It's a pop concert or stage show thing, but is it worship?

An innocent misstep a sincere worship leader can make is tugboating-- attempting to lead the folk into the port of "presence." However, playing David to the congregation's Saul is not a New Testament paradigm. The folk in the seats are not faithless fakes who have no God inside them and so have to be pushed from without. They are a living temple, a habitation of the Holy Spirit. The worship team doesn't have to "take them into the throne room," they're already there! 

The issue in corporate worship is the congregation's recognition and acknowledgement of God with them, in them, and their appropriate response to him. With all of this in mind, then, who is the audience of worship?

None other than God himself, and God and no one else. When someone says, "worship was great today!" he or she is utterly deluded if they had the worship team's performance in mind. However, if they had the congregation's participation and God's manifest presence in mind, they'd be keenly insightful. When worship is truly worship, the church is the orchestra, the Spirit is the maestro, and God is the audience.

Worship: Arson or Spontaneous Combustion

Worship.

The source of conflict in the modern church disproportional to the amount inspired by the Holy Spirit about it in the New Testament.

Among the more charismatic of us, it can take on a mystical, superstitious, or even shamanistic flavor if it's seen as the means of conjuring up the presence of God. Among the less charismatic, it is just part of the package of techniques employed to appeal to this generation of potential pew sitters. In way too many churches it's nothing more than a crowd-warming preliminary to the supposedly more important art of the preacher. In the more liturgical among us it has no separate identity at all, everything that happens is part of the "worship service."

What do we actually know from scripture about the practice of worship in the church? We know Jesus and the disciples sang a hymn after the Lord's supper. We know that songs in tongues and in understood languages were part of the corporate worship at Corinth and, presumably, elsewhere. We know worship was participative, consisting of individual and corporate expression simultaneously. 

And... [insert drum roll] we know that there was no recognized gift of worship leading. We do have that wonderful instance where the curtain to the heavenlies is pulled back to reveal that loud, boisterous worship is part of the milieu of the throne room of God. Beyond all this, we really know very little, but that's not nothing. Honestly, our practices in contemporary worship are more informed by the Old Testament and our present culture than they are by the New Testament— is that really an issue?

Just for the sake of clarity, let me propose a definition of worship:

Worship is those acts, both inward and outward, that focus attention specifically on God and thereby distill within the soul an awareness of his presence and that arouse reverence and adoration toward him and elicit surrender to him.

If we combine that definition with the New Testament understanding of what it means to be born again, it seems to me that worship teams (bands, leaders, choirs, combos, or whatever) should never be considered the sources, igniters or elicitors of worship. We already bear the presence of God within us, so why would we need to be "inspired" to experience it? If someone requires such an inspiration, it would raise questions regarding whether or not they were truly born again!

If we are depending on the skill of a worship leader to get us into the "presence of the Lord," worship is not what's happening-- emotional manipulation is.

What happens in worship gatherings today often resembles rock concerts and stage shows more than it does the throne room of God. It is a cheer-led spectacle of star power, a clamor of flesh and self-indulgence. Nonetheless, please, don't take this as a critique on the type or style of music being used. That is inconsequential. The problem exists whether country, classical, or pop music is being used,

At best, worship leaders are nothing more than accompanists, a utilitarian backdrop to what's happening among the folk, between the folk and God. Therein lies the problem with much of what is supposedly worship today— is something happening between the folk and God? We can't make people know God, love him, or express true worship to him. It has to come from them because of what God has done in them. Choreographing a Kumbaya moment is for summer camp, not the church of Jesus Christ!

Worship ought to be more like spontaneous combustion than arson. 

Sadly, there's getting to be fewer and fewer who understand the difference.

Church As Family

The word says that God sets the lonely in families. Families are a mark of his compassion and grace. Of all his inventions for the benefit of humanity, in my my mind, none beats the family. In America, however, we suffer a debilitating disease, which infects the broader West as well-- family has lost it's cachet and is not valued as highly as it once was. We have actually become anti-family in many ways, and our disease is wasting our society.

That situation is not limited to our families of birth but applies to our families of rebirth as well.

There seems to me to be a panic among religious prognosticators in the West concerning the future of Church. They read the tea leaves and blare their trumpets, "if something isn't done soon, we'll lose the next generation!" So, much discussion has ensued about the proper paradigm for the church in our day. What can be done to make the church relevant, resilient, and resurgent in the generations coming of age?

If God never said anything about the subject, our brainstorming might be appropriate, but he has spoken in his Word and we should at least have a clue. No model is offered there for church other than that of family. In any age, in any culture, church is meant to be seen as the family of God. Believers are brothers and sisters in the Lord, we all share one heavenly Father, and are instructed to love each other in a familial manner. If church is an institution, the institution it is has to be is the family.

The paradigm that works to produce the body God desires is the Church As Family. Fan clubs for religious superstars, social service agencies aiming to treat societal ills, social clubs giving members a place to belong, playgrounds, spas, mass entertainment venues, or religious businesses opening branches everywhere possible in an effort to dominate the market are not models taught by Jesus or described by the Word. Even if one found organizational success in adopting these unscriptural modalities, that would not equate to divine endorsement.

To be honest, I don't know why we even think in terms of trying to satisfy some element of population that isn't satisfied with a biblical paradigm. If those not satisfied don't drop their self-indulgent notions and submit to Christ as Lord and the Word as the rule of faith and conduct, do they even belong in the church? Church is the family of God, anyone not an actual brother or sister is merely a visitor. Some accommodation may be made for a visitor, but who turns their ongoing family-life upside down because a visitor drops in?

Some might say, "do it for evangelism," however, most evangelism doesn't occur within the confines of church services. Besides, evangelism is not presenting something other than Christ crucified and risen, nor calling for something less than repentance and faith concerning him. Believing in Christ and yielding to his Lordship is how we become part of the family. The unrepentant, the unyielding, those not surrendered, and the self-serving are not saved whether they're in church or out, accommodating them can only mean not accommodating Christ.  

Christianity isn't a popularity contest and following Christ isn't going to win anyone friends amongst those that don't follow Christ. The truth is what sets people free, and seeing brothers and sisters love one another is what makes the world know we're actually followers of Christ. If we actually want to build on the foundation Paul laid, then church has to be family. Anything else is wood, hay and stubble good for nothing but smoke and flame.

A Philosophy of Ministry

My mother is going through some health difficulties at the moment. It looked like cancer for a while, but that has now been eliminated as a cause. That leaves us with a bit of a mystery as far as diagnosis goes, but I'm trusting that God heard the prayers lifted up for her and cursed that thing. During this difficulty, I have become acutely aware of what a blessing family is. My three sisters, my brothers-in-law, nephews and nieces and my wife have all rallied as we've circled the wagons and prepared for a fight. How would we manage without each other at a time like this?

As a pastor, my philosophy of ministry has always seen the church not as an organization, not as an institution, but as family. We are brothers and sisters, we have one Father, and one dynamite big brother. We are not co-consumers or clientele of a religious supermarket, we're not lemmings following a spiritual guru, we're not activists pursuing a cause, nor even a social club of Jesus aficionados. Those viewpoints of the church are held by some either overtly or tacitly, and always end up reflected, practically, in the way they "do church." The problem with those ideas is not that they are necessarily intrinsically evil, but that they are not scriptural and therefore cannot produce church life that is reflective of the scripture.

There are problems with my viewpoint, especially in regard to marketing and corporate nimbleness. If one has a desire to do this church thing "big time" my viewpoint is a disaster; nonetheless, I'll stick with it. Christ has not called me to "win the world," or to "take my city," or to "launch a movement." I don't see one single scriptural reason to believe he would call anyone to such grandiose visions-- human ego will have to get the credit for that! He has adopted me into his family, to love my brothers and sisters and to be loved by them, like we were blood. And by word and deed, to persuade others to join this family of love.

Giving breath to that reality is what church life is about. If that idea doesn't appeal to you, the next time your life is in desperate turmoil, call a church shopper, who probably won't know you from Adam, and see how likely she is to lay down her life for a fellow shopper. Would you go to bat for another Wal-mart shopper just because she's a Wal-mart patron too? Probably not, who would? But to lay down your life for an eternal sister that Christ, whom you love, laid down his life for, that I'm betting you probably would be willing to do, because family beats business or institution any day.

Christianity Is Selling Death

I've grown tired of both the church shoppers and the church marketers of our day. When I hear someone ask, "What does your church have to offer me or my family?" it's about all I can do to not have my head explode. It's not like it's anything new, Jesus had to put up with the same kind of self-centeredness, but that doesn't make it easier to take. Church is not a supermarket.

What consumer benefits a church might offer has nothing at all to do with whether or not it is the place God desires a believer to be in order to grow and serve. God has a divine appointment for each of us, and finding it should be our goal. Then, with patience and grace, serving God and our brothers and sisters there should be our occupation until (and only if) God appoints us some place else.

We certainly have no right to treat our brothers and sisters as disposable and divorce ourselves from their fellowship because we've decided we can get a better deal somewhere else. God is the one who has made us parts of the body and he alone gets to appoint us to our place in the body. What business does any church leader have, then, of dangling a carrot, trying to coax a believer to make a decision about where they belong on a basis other than God's appointment? 

And evangelism is not soliciting suitors like Tamar enticed Judah. We can't initially camouflage the message of repentance and surrender only to unveil the truth of  obedience and sacrifice later. Can it be any wonder that when it's time to pay the piper, such converts are as a fickle and disloyal as the rest of our hedonistic, consumer-driven society. If we tickle the flesh to get folk in, we'll get nothing but a giggle from them when they're called upon to stand up and be counted for Christ.

The gospel is good news and every biblically legitimate means needs to be employed to get it to everyone, but the often unspoken stark truth about its message is that embracing it means buying into your own death. The old-fashioned notion of fire and brimstone is unpopular these days because it's just not marketable. I don't care for it myself, it doesn't reflect biblical preaching in my mind, but the biblical message isn't any more palatable. The message Jesus preached to potential followers: "deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow me."

I'm dumbfounded amidst a church world that doesn't understand it's own message. I mean, really, how can such a thing as church marketing even exist? It's not just oxymoronic, it's plain moronic too! No, it's even worse, it's faithless, and it's ruining the heritage of God. Let the self-centered consumers and ravenous church hawkers beware, you will reap what you sow. 

So, we can build cathedrals of wood, hay and stubble, selling emptiness to the empty-headed and empty-hearted, but if we want to do what Jesus did, then we must come to terms with this: Christianity is actually selling death.

Keep Your Appointment from God

"Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts.." (I Corinthians 12:27-31a ESV)

The ordinals used in this passage can be taken as an order of rank of importance or authority, or as a description of the timing of expression. The mention of "greater" (Koine: meizona) in the last verse could be seen as requiring the ordinals used before to be interpreted as ranking importance or greatness, but for me, the "thens" (Koine: epeita) seal the deal. The force of ἔπειτα is "thereafter" or even "only then." Very clearly, the thens impose the idea of sequence, or timing, into the list.

Since, then, this roster of gifts puts them into sequence, the issue being addressed is their development and extension, not their comparative value. Paul is trying to help eager Corinthians understand not only the what, but also the how and when of ministry gifts. Notice that in the sequence of erupting gifts, the miraculous sorts arise throughout-- near the beginning, in the middle and at the end as well. It seems the biblical pattern for chuch growth embraces the miraculous from start to finish. 

Paul, in effect, said that the body starts with the ministry of an apostle. As the body grows, up rises prophets. As it continues to grow, then up rises teachers. As it continues expanding then all kind of gifts arise. Being an apostle is no more about being in authority than being outside in spring is about being a dandelion. And being a cessationist is nothing but a surefire way to miss half of what God would like the body to grow into.

We have been concentrating on leadership gifts in this series of posts, but this passage doesn't restrict it's scope to leadership as does Ephesians 4. Leadership is part of the body, but so too are the led. Each of us is part, each of us is gifted, not just leaders, to serve the body and the gifts by which we do so are assigned, or appointed, by God. Just as a finger on your body wouldn't do any good attached to your elbow, so also God has the prerogative of appointing us to the spot he knows we belong.

I must admit, I've grown tired of both the church shoppers and the church marketers of our day. What consumer benefits a church might offer a "shopper" has nothing at all to do with divine appointment. Neither does a carrot dangled on a line by a "marketer" have any place in God's assignments. Such shoppers and marketers don't have the slightest clue about what church actually is!

But if you do, then grow where God sprouts you, stay unless God moves you. Embrace your giftings, and rise into however God is causing you to function and do so for the benefit of the body. There are folk in the church world, leaders and followers alike, who are clueless and in total disharmony with what God is trying to do in his body. Don't let them get you down, do what you know is right from the Word. 

God has made an appointment for you and he expects you to keep it!

Your Gift Makes Room for You

The discussion started here concerning church leadership gifts continues... 

If an apostle is the founding leadership gift of a church in an area or in a culture, as I have purported in an earlier post, we could well say that the fledgling church is pastored by an apostle. To be technically accurate, that leader is and should be called an apostle, but he would also be acting as the pastor of that start-up congregation. It seems to me most places today would just call him "pastor."

We could make a case that once a congregation is established it would be more correct to call the leader of that church an elder or bishop, but then Acts 20 indicates that the terms bishop, elder, and pastor are largely interchangeable. Can an apostle even be designated a pastor-- wouldn't that be a confusion of terms since both apostle and pastor are listed in Ephesians 4? It may seem so at first glance, but a few verses (2 John 1:1; 3 John 1:1; Galatians 1:19; & Acts 21:8) make me think otherwise.

If one takes the Apostle John to be the author of all the Johannine epistles (as I do) and understands James, the brother of Jesus, to be the first Bishop of the Church in Jerusalem, as many do, a biblical case for seeing any of the five-fold leadership gifts as capable of exercising the presiding office begins to emerge. The long and short of it: the office of elder or bishop does not describe the gift that is expressed by the individual occupying it.

Sometimes the elder/bishop will be an apostle (as in the formative stages of the church in a culture or geographic area), sometimes a prophet, or an evangelist, or even a pastor/teacher. I think the same kind of thing is true for the diaconate.

For leadership in the church, it's the function of preparing God's people for works of service so that the body of Christ may be built up rather than the type of gift leading that matters. Any of the five-fold gifts is capable of leading that preparation. It will be the case that some folk in any given church will be gifted in similar ways to the church leader, but that will not automatically qualify them to be church leaders. Church leaders are gifted and full of the Holy Spirit, tested in service, of good reputation with all, and good managers of their own families among other things.

In any church some will be more gifted than others, and if some folks are given to their gifts (i.e. "full-time"), it follows that some folks will not be. But whatever the situation is with any person's gifts we can be assured of this: when a tempered individual has been gifted in the ways leaders are gifted, his gift will make room for him.

What Are Apostles?

This post continues the discussion about church leadership, particularly the ministry gifts associated with it. The focus in this article is how those gifts come into expression, at least ideally, over the lifespan of a church. Within a culture or a geographical area the church is born with the ministry of an apostle and then grows toward maturity. As it does so other leadership gifts arise and carry things forward through church maturation.

An apostle is one called by God to establish the church where it had not been established before. The pattern for this ministry was set by the twelve Apostles of Christ, who defined by words and deeds what an apostle is and would do in the time after them. The only real distinguishment between the twelve and the apostles who followed is that the twelve were hand-picked eyewitnesses of Christ's resurrection and the revelatory source for what Jesus said and did, whereas the apostles who followed were not. The apostles who followed rely upon the witness of the twelve but cannot add to it.

Much is made of apostolic authority today, whether focused on the twelve or the latter variety, but I see no record in the scriptures that apostolic authority was ever derived from anything other than anointing, ethos, consensus, and ultimately persuasion. That kind of authority is acknowledged by those under it, but cannot be claimed hierarchically, dictatorially, or oppressively. An apostle who insists upon that kind of authority would be establishing a cult not the church.

I think it self-evident that an apostle would be a generalist in terms of gifted skills. He is the church when he starts. All that needs to be inspired is going to have to be inspired through him, hence he will be a jack of all trades. Then, through preaching, teaching, and signs and wonders, others will be added to him birthing a growing church. As it grows, believers will mature and others will step into specific aspects of gifting for which the apostle was a generalist.

So, as the body grows prophets will arise, as will teachers, and all manner of other utilitarian gifts as Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 12:28 (or perhaps as implied by the listing in Ephesians 4:11). The ordinals used in the Corinthian passage are not a reflection of rank or authority, but of the order in which ministry gifts arise in the extension of the body as it grows. Apostles begin things that are then carried forward by others; therefore, for a mature church to "look backward" toward reestablishing an "apostle" is regression, twisted logic and just bad practice.

Leadership Gifts in the Church

Let's talk about he subject of church leadership, in particular, about the gifts associated with it and how they come into expression over the life of a church. Despite the relative clarity of the scriptures about the subject, there seems to be a lot of fog surrounding it, so I'll add my two cents over my next couple of posts and hopefully not add any dry ice to the bucket.

Today, almost everyone exercising church leadership is called a pastor, as if the responsiblity and authority of church leadership (bishop/elder) tracked congruently and exclusively with the gift of pastor/teacher. That is unfortunate because I think it clouds the scripture and confounds our practice. I don't see that as what was ocurring in the biblical church, nor is it what is suggested in Ephesians 4.

In that passage we are told that leadership could come from any of four (or five depending on your take on the passage) gifts or, perhaps, even a combination of those four/five gifts. All four are are the subjects of the leadership action which prepares God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up. Properly applied, this passage means a church could be led (bishop/elder) by an apostle, or a prophet, or an evangelist, or a pastor/teacher. T

That is, in fact, what happens in practice, regardless of whether or not our theology describes it that way.

Although we call them pastor if they lead a church, their true gift is going to make itself known in the execution of their duties. A church "pastored" by an evangelist is likely to stress the invitational message reaching the unbelieving. A church "pastored" by a prophet is likely to stress the revelatory message. A church "pastored" by an apostle is likely to stress getting the church planted. A church "pastored" by a pastor/teacher is likely to stress discipleship. I think that actually explains the imbalance we often see in a church's ministry.

Our response to one-sided church emphases is sometimes to criticize, i.e. "the pastor is too focused on ______ ministry." However, I think churches need to understand the nature of church leadership as I've sketched it out here and patiently work with their leaders to get gifts expressed that their pastors do not operate in. If pastors and church folk work together, I think balance in ministry can be achieved. I do not believe that diversity in leadership gifts is meant to produce handicapped churches, as it often seems to, but instead full-bodied expressions of the manifold grace of God.

A Shepherd's Heart

I have five children, thanks to college graduation, they're all at home again, at least for a little while. One of the elders in my church has six kids. He told me something years ago that has always stuck in my memory, and that now can be verified by my own experience: there is a sense of peace and satisfaction that comes when all of them are in bed at the end of the day; safe, sound, and snoring. Until then, there's always a bit of tension or concern, at least enough to keep rest at bay. When one or more are gone, you can remember them in prayer, but it's not quite the same as seeing them zonked out under the covers!

As a pastor, I "worry" about my people. I believe I should be at least a big brother to them, but the truth is, I feel like a father in so many ways. I want to protect them from the predations of wolves. I want to teach them the family business and see them step forward into responsibility and productivity. I enjoy hearing them tell me about their lives, how things went when they tried something, what they've noticed, what they learned, or what God said to them. I like being there in the seasons of life with them, watching them go through their paces.

There is a certain movement afoot today that resents that kind of patriarchal thinking-- that a pastor would consider the folk of the congregation "his," or that he would feel fatherly about them. That's so old school! It seems to me, those of that ilk do not want a pastor but a host.

There's also a school of thought out there that's very pragmatic about organizational behavior and the "business" of church. Those of that ilk would see my feelings as a detriment to growth and an inhibitor to leadership. Some sheep, in that kind of view, don't need to be there if they're not part of the demographic the church entrepreneur is trying to recruit or if they're not in tune with his vision. Leadership is about making tough decisions and not getting bogged down in a singular problem is a ticket to progress. Keep the train rolling at all costs! Pastors that buy into this kind of thinking end up as a CEO.

I have a different dream.

Jesus said to his Father, in the midst of his high priestly prayer, "None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled." Jesus could bear to let a nonbeliever go, but if one was a believer, he couldn't bear to lose any. I don't know how to follow another example but his. So with fatherly concern, I'll rest much easier when twilight closes on the day's labor and I see all the children that have been in my charge under the cover of Jesus' arms in glory. 

In the meantime, may God grant me neither keen business sense nor savvy marketing skills but simply a shepherd's heart.

Interactive Spookiness

Call... what is it?

Let me tell you some stories, autobiographical ones, so no names will have to be changed to protect the innocent. God talks to people. Not just the folks in the Bible, but folk like you and me. God has talked to me.

As I was finalizing suicide plans my junior year at Penn State, something strange and unexpected occurred: I heard/sensed a communication inside my mind. "But you haven't given Jesus Christ a shot at your life yet." Stricken, my suicide plans stopped in their tracks, and I began to plan a change in direction. Not knowing what else to do, I called my mom who had "gone religious" about six months before, and asked her if I could join her church.

A couple of weeks later I marched down the aisle of that Southern Baptist church and publicly confessed Jesus as my Lord, the next Sunday I was baptized. About a week after getting saved, the most unusual event that has ever occurred in my life happened. It sounds crazy, but believe it or not, Jesus showed up in my bedroom as I was praying. I'm convinced he was really there. His presence was so real, powerful, and scary that I jumped on the bed and buried my head under the pillow for fear I would see God and die.

I was lost in the experience, overwhelmed, but I did get one rational question out to the Lord, "How will I know you, how will I know what you want?" He said, "by the Book, you will know me by the Book." That experience is why I believe in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible to this day. Later, when I was in Bible college, doctrine was taught that undergirded it, but that's not why I believe it beyond a shadow of doubt-- that experience is. I became a voracious reader of the Word!

I was at North Central Bible College in the cold climes of Minneapolis. My wife and I had dropped our careers, packed up our belongings, and went sight unseen to Minnesota to pursue the call of God on our lives. We had fasted and prayed, sought counsel, and then proceeded to do the exceptionally stupid. We relocated 1100 miles from home, without jobs, with very little money, to an apartment we'd never seen in a city we'd never been to, all in the dead of winter.

One night the following spring while walking home from an evening class, the weight of that stupidity finally dropped upon me. I called out to God while walking in an alleyway home, "Am I really called, or did I make a big mistake?" I had been so fixated by prior experiences, so determined to fulfill the call, I don't think I was ever willing to honestly face that alternative. God's voice spoke to me, "you are called to the ministry of message. I will send you to the hard and broken places." I finished my preparation at Bible college and have been following that call ever since. 

In February of 1994, I was interceding for my congregation in the auditorium of our facility. I was distracted by my own sense of frustration but was trying to lay hold of God. Suddenly, I was seeing things. Only my wife, and an old pastor friend, know the details of what I saw, it's something I've kept to myself and pondered in my heart. Yet that vision is what has kept me where I am these many years. I have thought about going elsewhere a time or two, but have never been released by God to another vision.

It seems a silly thing rationally; "how?" "no way!" are the responses of human logic, but here I am because God speaks to people. He spoke to me. There have been other instances in my life of his voice invading the spaces of my heart and mind-- directing my course, cluing me in on miracles about to happen, telling me the secrets of some one's heart, comforting me in the journey, telling me what to say.

I am so glad that it's not all an academic exercise of literary criticism and philosophy. I'm absolutely relieved that it's not a mathematical equation I've been left to figure out. I'm so grateful that it's not an entrepreneurial experiment to see what scares up some traffic. God speaks today to human beings, to the likes of me! So here I am, satisfied and at peace, doing what I do, mundane in so many respects but all in the midst of interactive spookiness.

Why Go to Church?

Why should believers go to church? There are a lot of excuses one could give for blowing it off, such as:

• Church folk are nothing but hypocrites
• Their idea of worship is not my idea
• All they do is ask for money
• It's too irrelevant, too loud, too impersonal, too ________...
• I am not genuinely needed, wanted and won't be missed
• I've got better things to do
• When else can I shop or do my household chores?

There are some reasons, which traditionally have been offered, as to why we should go:

• to maintain social cohesion
• because of necessary, clerically performed rituals within the context of structured liturgies
• to derive a benefit from what is offered there
• because it's the "right" thing to do.

I submit that none of the suggested excuses for not going, nor most of the traditional reasons cited for doing so are valid. They are mere rationalizations without any spiritual merit.

The scriptures tell us that together we are the body of Christ, and the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit. So we gather as the church because:

• We are connected with unseen bonds 
• We acknowledge the truth of how God sees us (as one in Christ) 
• We need the gifts of others and we need to be the vector of gifts for others
• The Bible tells us to do so.

If someone is so disillusioned with church that he or she doesn't want to go anymore, that one should do some serious soul searching. Has he or she been going for the right reasons in the first place? Has that one given his or herself fully to being a benefit to the church rather than deriving a benefit from it? Does that person believe that God changed his mind about this whole issue?

If someone is not motivated enough, or too occupied or distracted with discretionary things to go to church, he or she needs to change. Church exists because God selflessly loved us enough to do something about our lostness. Christ has called us to himself and to each other for all eternity. If we're not grasping that and are capable of treating church like we treat the choice of which grocer to use, we don't understand Jesus--not his plans for us, not what he calls us to, and not what he's making us to be.

Perhaps we don't truly believe in Jesus at all! 

I am a pastor committed to church, but I have also been a lay person going to church reluctantly. I know what it's like to go to church hoping for inspiration only to find frustration. I know what it's like having a bad week and wanting to hibernate, or what it's like to have an option that seems better to the flesh. I even know what it's like to feel as if you've disappeared into the background of an impersonal institution and that it's of no use anyway.

I also know that the trying of our faith brings forth a peaceable fruit. In life on this side of eternity nothing is perfect. Church is not, church people are not, and pastors are anything but. Despite all that brokenness, perseverance in church attendance is God's will for us. When we faithfully commit to it, despite the drama and flaws, we become a blessing to others and blessing comes back to us.

Blessing in the midst of brokenness... that sounds exactly like something that's of Christ should look like on this side of eternity.