I Died in Your Arms Tonight

Cheesy eighties song references are a good way to introduce a supernatural experience of the cross, right? That doesn’t cheapen it at all, right?

My wife and I went to the organic church conference in Orlando, led by Frank Viola, Alan Hirsch, Gary Welter and Milt Roderiguez. For the first time in my life, the cross made sense. Christ made his Way through death. That doesn’t mean we don’t have to die. On the contrary, it means we must die, we must be crucified along with our Lord.

So on the drive back my wife fell asleep, and I was meditating on a brief vision I’d had of Christ’s cross. I was on a golden road, and ahead of me was a golden gate set in a white stone wall. On the road, through the gate, on a short hill was the cross.

I was also considering the vastness of the sky, and how it surrounded us on all sides. It struck me as a fine reminder of its Creator. While I was thinking about this, the vision of the cross re-appeared in my mind. This time, just as I considered how the sky encompassed me, I considered my surroundings in the vision.

Behind me now was Christ, urging me forward. He walked me to his cross, which became an altar like the one Abraham almost sacrificed Isaac on. He laid me down, and before I really knew what to expect he drove a knife into my heart.

In my own body – while driving no less – I felt my spirit recede from my extremities, up through my ribs, past my heart, until it left my head and closed around the back of my eyes. My physical body continued, and I had control of it, but at a distance. My body was quite empty.

I thanked God for such a blessed experience, glad and scared all at once. But I knew I was safe. Slowly, like water seeping through a sponge, my spirit returned. Except now it wore my body like clothing, rather than being truly attached. I felt that way throughout the night. The sensation faded after sleep, but the memory remained.

Being separated from my body – my flesh, mind you – was overwhelmingly refreshing. For that brief time, my spirit was cleansed through death. After my spirit had returned, I saw the vision again, except now the cross was behind me and Jesus was ahead of me. We continued on the road together.

I was going to write something completely different, some nagging detail about the veracity of organic and institutional church, but realized how ultimately petty it was. Christ has shown himself to me that I might always remember him and be faithful. What more should I worry about?

What Is Worship For?

The obvious answer – worship is for worshiping God! – is not my answer. Not exactly, anyway. I think the real trouble is we’ve misappropriated the word “worship” to apply to regular church gatherings, of which worship was only part. I’ll keep using “worship” to refer to church gatherings because it’s familiar language, so please just bear that in mind while you read.

I believe there are three distinct kinds of worship we can find in the New Testament. Unfortunately, I find only one – or at best two – in modern churches. We have a lot to learn from our past.

Regular Meetings

We have to start at the regular weekly gathering of the early church, particularly because the other two won’t make sense without this foundation. 1 Corinthians 11-12 give some specific images of these gatherings. They’re small, intimate, and most noted for their participatory nature. Everyone is involved through their gifts to make the concept of a unified Body of Christ a legitimate reality.

The central purpose is expressing Christ as his Body. The main event is the Lord’s Supper, which for them is a genuine feast. Everyone comes together to share the meal equally. The meetings are also marked by a mutual sharing of spiritual gifts. All the believers are gifted, and all are exhorted to use their gifts in the meeting, as led by the Spirit. Paul is clear this shouldn’t be chaos – Christ guides the church in its meeting with unity, as one guides their own body. Sometimes the early churches messed it up, but were always encouraged to continually seek to be more faithful.

This kind of meeting is absent from modern churches, and I mean entirely. There are ways to use one’s spiritual gifts in various ministries, but not in any communal setting like this. If a brother or sister is gifted for teaching, they can either teach a class or (if they’re either clergy or in a particularly open church) preach a sermon. Other gifts, like prophecy or tongues, in these settings would be disruptive.

Preaching

The second kind of worship we can talk about is marked by preaching sermons, large crowds, a mix of believers and non-believers, and (if it’s successful) baptisms. This is most familiar to us, because it looks almost exactly like a modern worship service.

The central purpose here is evangelism. We can see the marked absense of spiritual gifts and sharing. There is generally one preacher talking to a large crowd. While it isn’t described as such, I can easily see other brothers and sisters leading songs or prayers for the group. It’s also likely brothers and sisters were mingling in the crowd, talking one-on-one with non-believers or new converts, praying with them, baptizing them, and connecting them with a local church.

While we see leader-to-audience services with a focus on teaching the gospel, there’s usually a greater expectation that members attend than newcomers. Not that visitors aren’t welcome, but they’re only part of the puzzle. Members going deep in faith – however that happens at each church – are expected to get their primary spiritual experience from what is intended as a sort of newcomer’s seminar.

Church Planting

The last kind of worship gathering is when an apostle is planting a church. The church isn’t ready to be led exclusively by the Spirit, so an apostle mentors them – usually for a handful of months – in functioning properly. The work is never truly completed, as the epistles show us, because the apostle continues communication and coaching in Body life. However, a point always comes when a church is mature enough to function independently, without constant supervision.

The central purpose here is discipleship. Newly converted Christians are guided into the full experience of Christ’s church through his Spirit. They find their gifts, learn to express them in an orderly, Spirit-led way, and comprehend living Christ as a group instead of as an individual. They are also taught in how to live all of their lives in Christ, how to serve the poor, and how to spread the faith and make more disciples.

This kind of meeting happens in some modern churches, but not all. In the ones it happens in, one or more facets are still missing. It’s usually done as a small group ministry, but may be a bible study, outreach or service mission, or membership class. Small group ministry is most akin, and most effective, as a small group can practically function as an early house church. The trouble is, there’s never a separation from apostolic leadership. The church is never allowed to truly mature and grow up; they’re trapped as spiritual children, or perhaps even teenagers.

The Full Measure of Christ

We’ve lost focus on why we do the things we do, what the purpose is. All three kinds of gatherings are vital to the whole church, but church leadership needs to reclaim the apostolic traditions of evangelism and planting. We also need to acknowledge each other’s spiritual gifts, and create space for their proper use.

Spiritual matters don’t come naturally to our sinful flesh, which is why it takes time to learn. Since the apostolic traditions are so lost among most of our churches, it will be a messy process.

I don’t want to discourage anyone reading this, especially those part of an institutional church. I believe we are a long way off, but rather than condemn I want to help shed light on the Way of Christ. We Christians have a long and famous history of making mistakes. Rather than fall prey to guilt, instead we must affix fresh eyes on Christ. His Spirit is a guide to us, guiding us ever closer. There are small steps you can take at your own church now to pursue Body life. Seek them out always, and pray in the Spirit constantly.

What the Church Needs

I hear frequently statements that begin “The church needs…” Some of the more common endings are:

• Young people
• Young families
• A particular ministry or program
• More volunteers
• More money

There’s only one thing declining churches need: Jesus.

Some might be quick to argue their church has Jesus, or is faithful, or feels the Spirit moving, or whatever. The thing is, the above “needs” betray different priorities. Through many, many conversations I’ve had about what the church needs, Jesus never comes up. He’s just plain not mentioned. His absence is profound.

If you’re in a declining church and struggling with what your church needs, listen for Jesus’ name. Seek him. Ask others about him. Thriving church life is a side-effect of the overflowing abundant life of Christ.

All the church needs is Jesus. The rest of that stuff follows, because everyone else needs Jesus, too. They’ll show up, volunteer and contribute their hearts and souls, but only for Jesus.

Surrender

The gospel doesn’t really make sense until we give up. Our efforts, thoughts, plans, and actions are all ultimately futile.

I have a really hard time with this, as I’m sure others do. I’ve been in control of my life for more or less all of it, and – at the time – thought I was doing pretty well. These days it’s really sinking in that I can’t do all the worthwhile things I want to do for my God until I surrender.

The gospel says Jesus reconciles us to God as adopted children, and Jesus sends his Spirit to cleanse and guide us. It’s a striking picture of love to me, to be adopted. As children our place is one of growth and learning, learning from and obeying our Father who loves us. It’s hard to swallow that level of humility.

Maybe that’s why Jesus called God Abba - effectively “Daddy” – to show us how childlike we need to be.

But What Do Clergy Do?

I’m leaving my job as a church secretary.  My pastor impressed me with his directness asking why I was leaving.  We had a great conversation and touched on a number of big issues for me, albeit lightly.  I mentioned my desire for a church without a clergy-laity distinction.  His reply was interesting:

I don’t know how [an all-laity-led church] would work.  If I go to a doctor I want to know he’s been to medical school – that he’s a professional.

The statement on the face of it is perfectly sensible – you’d never trust a doctor who just had a good feeling about medicine (although some people even do that).  Medicine is a highly technical field, as well as a very relational one.  We know why a doctor needs training, because they do something that requires it.

But what do clergy do? I’m from a Presbyterian background – about as mainline Protestant as you can get. There is exactly one thing only an ordained clergy-person is allowed to do and no one else: administer the sacraments.  Any elder can preach.  A layperson can be appointed moderator of the session (the board). Anyone can do caregiving like hospital visits. Laity can even perform weddings!  (Reformed sacraments only include communion and baptism.)

Seriously, why bother with clergy? The only decent argument I’ve heard is to maintain good teaching, ensured by seminary training. First, we have to admit there’s wild divergence in theology among pastors even within the same denomination.

That aside though, Christ has sent his Spirit to qualify us for our callings through its gifts. The bible hammers home the downfall of placing trust in human doctrine, so powerfully evidenced by the Pharisees and Sadducees.  They added to or took away from God’s law (respectively), to the demise of their faith. I see no compelling evidence to deny that we’ve done it all over again.

Clergy don’t do anything that can’t be done by any other Christian. Seminary is no substitute – or even suppliment - to the gifts of the Spirit. It just muddies the waters.

Not All Traditions Are Created Equal

The pastor at my church started a class I’m very fond of, talking about making bridges from our faith to the indigenous culture.  A topic we got on was how folks of my generation (I was born in ‘81) view institutionalism as irrelevant at best (and evil at worst).

After some discussion, I pointed out how most of my ilk decide not to put up with it, and get their spiritual community with their friends wherever (which roughly states my recent leanings).  My pastor pointed out how undisciplined community tends to go nowhere and fizzles out.  I completely agree.

However, I believe institutional churches are rooted in human-made traditions, which ultimately came from paganism.  This is not bad on its own.  However, these traditions (such as property, clergy and ritual) encourage a passive lay body of pew-warmers, who have little depth of faith.

I’m not a fan of abolishing tradition, however.  I think we’ve just clung to the wrong one.  My pastor is completely right saying undisciplined house churches are lousy.  The first-century house churches weren’t just strung out on their own though, they were backed by the apostolic tradition.  This is something we’ve lost, and which the institutional church demands too much control to revive.

Heirarchical office structures, theological education and professional experience do not leave room for apostles.  The better structure is an extremely flat one, with one massive layer of house churches tied together by a mesh of traveling apostolic workers.  Apostles are who keep house churches from running amok, maintain discipline, plant sound teaching and encourage the faithful in hard times.  They also stay largely absent, which means the “laity” (a term which should be abolished) have no choice but to function actively as the Spirit of Christ intends.

Why Grow?

A large majority of search traffic that comes here finds my How to Grow Your Church post.  I love that there’s so much interest in looking outside the church instead of in.  If you came here by such a search I’d really like to know: why do you want your church to grow?

The question may sound stupid on the face, so I’ll explain.  I believe there’s two broad “camps” to possible answers – wanting your church to grow for your church’s sake, or wanting it to grow for the strangers’ sakes.  Inside each of those are countless other answers.

For your church’s sake: What will your church gain?  What will it miss out on without growth?  How does this reflect the mission of Jesus Christ in the gospels?  What are the reasons a stranger might share your vision of your church?

For the strangers’ sakes: What will strangers gain?  What will they miss out on without your church?  How does this reflect the mission of Jesus Christ in the gospels?  What are the reasons a stranger might come, and reasons they might stay?

It’s my humble belief that those in the first camp – for the church’s sake – will find all those questions hard to answer.  The reason is, Christ regularly tore down institutionalism in favor of horizontal organization – groups of equals with direct access to God.  His heart constantly went to the stranger, the “lost sheep.”  Parables often highlight the greater compassion for those on the fringe.

It’s easy to get caught up in growing a church for the sake of Christianity instead of the sake of Christ.  Attendance is down, volunteers are slim, committees are populated by the same handful of overworked people and the median age is rising.  That doesn’t mean you shift the burden of your church’s welfare onto newcomers.  Change your outreach mission to sharing your experience of Jesus Christ, help people find their Spirit-given callings, and don’t ask for anything in return.  I’d bet you anything you’ll grow as a side-effect.

But I Don’t Want to Grow! Part 3: Pray

Prayer is perhaps the single most important factor in a Christian’s relationship with God.  When else do you have direct, two-way access to the Holy of Holies?  Unfortunately, in most churches prayer is left up to the professionals!

In worship my church uses the common practice of prayer requests – members write down something they’d like prayed for and hand them in for the pastor to do the praying.  Prayer by congregants is by reading something the pastor wrote, or done silently amidst a larger pastoral prayer.  At congregational meals the pastor always says the blessing (even when the pastor can’t stay to eat!).  At all meetings (staff, committee, board…) the pastor opens and closes with prayer.

You see the pattern.  We give up our God-given, Christ-given privilage of prayer to a de facto priesthood of clergypeople.  New Testament churches knew nothing of singular spiritual leadership; everyone in the church was a priest!  Everyone had the privilege and duty to pray, preach, prophecy, edify, admonish and teach.

So should our churches overturn clergy, and instead worship as a group led by the Spirit?  Well, yes actually!  But that’s a big step, and there are smaller places to start.

All members should be taught and encouraged to pray out loud for their fellow brothers and sisters, and for strangers.  Laypeople should be invited to pray in place of the pastor during worship, and especially at functions like meals or meetings.  Everyone should have a chance to pray in small group gatherings.  In my own group, we close each meeting by going around the circle in prayer, so everyone prays at least once.

Harder to train for is praying with strangers.  If someone shares a burden with you, it is your duty as a Christian to ask to pray with them on the spot.  Hold their hand or touch their shoulder (unless they shy away), pray no more than three or four sentences’ worth (less than a minute), and always pray in Jesus’ name.  Teach others in your small group to do so, as well.  It’s extremely intimidating, but easily the most rewarding.  I’ve tried to make a habit of it, and I can testify it is the most powerful gift you can give a hurting person.

At any rate, pray!  Pray all the time.  Pray your thanks, pray your fears, pray your hopes, pray your needs.  And listen!  Prayer is two-way.  Share your prayer experience with others, and encourage them in their own prayers.  Staying close to God makes spiritual stagnation impossible, and where there’s spiritual growth powerful change will happen.

Homosexuality and Ministry

(I try to keep posts short. This is a drastic exception. Just a warning.)

I’m currently a member of a PC(USA) congregation, and our denomination (among others) is struggling with whether to allow homosexuals to be ordained or not. Ordination doesn’t just mean ministers, but also elders and deacons (spiritual leaders and managers, respectively).

There’s a deeper struggle over whether homosexuality is sinful or not. Beneath that, there’s a struggle over how to interpret the bible in general. The ordination issue is a symptom of what is possibly the biggest issue for any Christian church.

For many, either homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed ordination because homosexuality is sinful, or they should because it isn’t. I believe homosexuals should be allowed into all areas of ministry, but I also believe homosexuality is a sin. How does that work?

Sin?

Modern science has almost unquestionably proven homosexuality is a genetic disposition from birth. How could it be sin? After creation and the fall (and just after the story of Cain and Abel), Genesis 5 opens with these three verses:

This is the list of descendants of Adam. When God created humankind, he made them in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them “Humankind” when they were created. When Adam had lived on hundred thirty years, he became the father of a son in his likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth.

I believe the repetition of God creating humankind in his likeness just before Adam becomes “the father of a son in his likeness” is intentional. It establishes that we are not children of God as Adam and Eve originally were, but are instead children of Adam and Eve – children of the fallen creation. From our conception we bear the tarnished image of God as Adam did – imperfect, marred, tainted.

Some argue that the bible does not directly address homosexuality, through convoluted arguments of misplaced contextuality and mistranslations. I believe these arguments are made out of bias, not authentic research. The most telling place for Christians is in Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 1 verses 26-27:

For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

I’m not fond of the harshness of those words, but they spell things out plainly. Paul interprets the scriptures as condemning all homosexual behavior, and reinforces the provisions as still applicable to Christians.

It is not my place to convict a gay person of sin. That is the work of the Spirit. There are plenty of people, homo- and heterosexual, who do not believe homosexuality is sinful. I have no intent to fight them on the issue. I just want to be clear on my opinions. I’m more than happy to talk about my views, and to learn from others about their views. I’ve been wrong before, and it’s bound to happen again sometime.

(Un)Repentance

Everyone is a sinner. A common line drawn over homosexuality is one of repentance (or lack thereof). A practicing homosexual is willfully sinning instead of repenting. A gay person could be ordained if only they weren’t practicing gay sex. Unrepentant sinners should not be ordained as leaders in any capacity, so the argument goes.

This sounds reasonable on the face of it, and is what I believed for some time. Unfortunately, I was convicted by one of Jesus’ sayings on adultery (Matthew 5:27-28):

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

It isn’t directly connected, but I believe a fair interpretation is a person is a sinner because of what’s inside, not the actions they take. A gay person refraining from sex does not make a heterosexual, and in my opinion does not erase the sin. If anything, it may compound the issue with feelings of repression and guilt, which are not healthy.

The Shame of it All

The side in favor of gay ordination points out the unhealthy feelings of guilt and shame brought on by accusing homosexuals of sin they feel no control over. They also point out how exclusionary it is barring ordination to people who feel called by the Spirit to ministry, how much doubt and turmoil it casts on a gay person’s faith.

This troubled me for some time, especially the idea that homosexuals felt genuinely called to ministry, and also felt shunned by the church for denying their service. If unrepentant sin should exclude a person from ministry, how could the Spirit call them without convicting them of their sin? Once again, I found answers in scripture, specifically Acts 10:44-48. This is just after God instructs Peter to preach to some Gentiles, despite Peter’s prior understanding that the Good News was only for Jews:

While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised [Jewish] believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.

The issue at stake was somewhat different, in that being a Gentile isn’t a sin. This is why I don’t think arguments originally used for ordaining women apply, since being a woman also isn’t a sin. However, this is not what convicts Peter. Instead, he sees the Holy Spirit poured out on the Gentiles and is compelled to baptize them immediately. Here lies my originaly dilemma, and why I changed my views. The Spirit has been poured out on homosexuals – who can deny them use of the gifts of the Spirit?

Standards

There’s a list in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians that outlines a few standards for believers. Specifically, the list is of those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says:

Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers – none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.

Sodomites is also translated as homosexuals, but that’s not what grabs me. It’s just mixed in the middle of this laundry-list of sinners. The greedy, drunkards, revilers… who hasn’t seen these problems in the church? Revilers could well refer to people who cast out homosexuals from ordination! However, Paul goes on in verse 11:

And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

The only ones who sanctify and justify are Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Maybe God doesn’t need a person’s life or calling to work in a tidy, linear fashion. Maybe he’s happy to call someone to ministry, and through that service convict them of their sin. Who are we to stand in the way of the Spirit?

What we can do is hold our leaders accountable to regular spiritual discipline, constantly seeking God and growing closer to Christ. My small group is studying Jesus’ parables. I’ve already written about the prodigal son, but last night we read the parable of the vinegrower. Here it is, John 15:1-5:

I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinegrower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.

Stay close to Christ, and the rest comes through him. That’s what God wants more than anything.

Small Groups, or How I Learned to Love the Hype

Churches everywhere are doing small groups, with varying success. What is the point? Boiled down enough, anything a church does must have a straight-line connection to the “Great Commission” (Matthew 28:19-20):

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.

I suspect a lot of churches start small groups (under various monikers) to build deeper relationships, and to engage people mid-week beyond Sunday morning. After all, it’s hard to make friends in a crowd of a few hundred (or thousand) people. These are terrible reasons for a church to do anything.

Small groups must be about discipleship. My church is spiritually dead. The only times you will hear Jesus’ sweet name is Sunday morning, or maybe during the prayer over the mid-week dinner. Maybe. Therefore the single best thing my church could do is engage in spiritual conversation, to make it part of our daily life. To just plain get used to talking about our faith, because so far we’ve bought into the secular myth that faith is a private affair.

Small groups will not make our church grow. Good! Growing a congregation isn’t in those two verses above. Spiritually mature people, however, will be able to make more disciples. Small groups won’t create maturity; they’re only step one. After this comes hands-on mission and faith-sharing, authentic worship of a God we walk with daily, and (I believe) a re-anointing of the Holy Spirit to plant a vision of God’s kingdom for us to pursue.

What piece of God’s kingdom are you building? What’s it look like? Who’s it for?