The Problem With Blogging...
I've been having an interesting conversation today with an anonymous commenter on this post below. You need to go read the entire comment thread to get the whole context, but here is part of my latest response that I think has some interesting application:
"See, this is the problem with blogs, the internet, and the whole “emerging conversation” that I don’t really subscribe to anyway (I also don’t subscribe to much of what is known as the “house church movement” either, although our churches do meet in homes). You can never see what goes on behind the scenes in the lives of these people. When I make any critique about the state of the church, I try to keep it as general and impersonal as possible because of this fact. But generalizations are always imperfect because they never capture the individual stories. So in reality, these critiques (at least from my perspective) are really only good for myself and our community. And by the way, that is the nature of blogging after all. This is our process, our internal struggle with understanding how to follow Jesus in a new world."
"See, this is the problem with blogs, the internet, and the whole “emerging conversation” that I don’t really subscribe to anyway (I also don’t subscribe to much of what is known as the “house church movement” either, although our churches do meet in homes). You can never see what goes on behind the scenes in the lives of these people. When I make any critique about the state of the church, I try to keep it as general and impersonal as possible because of this fact. But generalizations are always imperfect because they never capture the individual stories. So in reality, these critiques (at least from my perspective) are really only good for myself and our community. And by the way, that is the nature of blogging after all. This is our process, our internal struggle with understanding how to follow Jesus in a new world."
posted by Mike Bishop at 10:16 PM
53 Comments:
Well, the sentiment is interesting here... however... this same argument could be used for ANY aspect of our lives... how do we REALLY know that the pastor preaching isn't having an affair? How do we REALLY know if the person leading worship doesn't get drunk sometimes? I guess for me, I always go back to David... the guy screwed up and his personal life would raise eyebrows...
He also was totally sold out for God and the one who knew that best was God Himself...
Nuff said.
"...the emerging conversation” that I don’t really subscribe to anyway (I also don’t subscribe to much of what is known as the “house church movement” either, although our churches do meet in homes"
In a word...WOW...You never cease to amaze me Mike....but this post takes the proverbial cake! Do you see what you are doing?
You, perhaps unconciously, make yourself unimpeachable: you aren’t part of the House Church Gang, but you meet in a House Church. You distinguish yourself from the “emerging conversation” – yet this is your preferred neighborhood! So you dish out all these indictments against established Christendom then you run and hide behind your curiously undefined platform – how convenient!
Question: What are you standing for? It’s the easy way out for you to say that you “don’t really subscribe to the emergent conversation or the house church movement” – because you know now that their arguments are vulnerable – and it seems that you don’t want to be.
Still Anonymous For Now
Anonymous,
"You, perhaps unconciously, make yourself unimpeachable..."
Since you remain anonymous, doesn't that make you unimpeachable yourself? I don't know your name, your story, or why you are bothering to make comments on my blog. What am I standing for? I'm standing for the people I've been in community with the past 5 years who are laying their lives on the line for the kingdom. We are not a "movement", we are just people, friends.
Sorry to disappoint, but my agenda is pretty simple: I stick up for my friends.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
"Sorry to disappoint, but my agenda is pretty simple: I stick up for my friends."
solid.
Anonymous,
I fail to see the reason for your anger and vitriol. Are you afraid that these small bands of believers are harming the large mega churches? The temple priests once thought the same of Christ whom we follow. or do you fear for the reputation of Christ? The Scripture tells the the very “Gates of Hell” will not prevail against the Church. You seem to be very personal in attacking Mike.
In addition, I notice a reference to only denominations as the Church, but is not our very body the temple of God. I learned in a denominational church (which I am grateful to in many ways) that the people are the Church, those who follow Christ are the Body.
When I pastored a small country church in Louisiana, I went to all the denominational meetings a prescribed by our leaders. The larger churches were not just given voting privileges (as is right in man’s eyes), but were generally given more recognition, and control of proceedings. The workshops focused on how to bring people into the building, not on how to go out in the community and make a difference in the lives of the people now (again a common problem in the New Testament temple). To say that the evangelical church as a whole does not emphasize numbers would be to deceive yourself. In one of the responses to Mike’s blog even you measured his “success” as a believer by asking him about “fishing for men”, how he was doing that etc. In my upbringing, that was always a phrase for evangelism and number growing. As that country church pastor, I felt tremendous pressure to run programs and skim the surface of spiritual things in order to grow the membership. Sad but true. The local mega church pastor in the town, 15 minutes away and a good friend of mine, was drawn into a belief that God proves He is moving in your Church if your church is Growing in numbers. Although he did not follow this exclusively, it was part of the belief system.
This is my experience in most evangelical churches, as I grew up in them and served in them for 33 years.
Mike and I still have friends that are in the ministry at both large and small churches. These men and women have welcomed our fellowship as additions to the larger body for the most part and I fail to see any place that Mike’s critique’s were less than gracious and inwardly focused as well as outwardly so.
I also don’t see the need to categorize what we are doing here, emerging/house church. God simply desires hearts aflame does He not?
Mike,
Let me ask this:
What do you have against the established church?
Do you think what you're doing will produce more Christ-like disciples than the bigger churches you were a part of?
How are you reaching out to those around you in contrast to "those" churches?
&
What books can I read besides the "Missional" one you suggested so as to get a better understanding about this whole "Emergent" deal?
I let you know who I am, eventually.
"What do you have against the established church?"
That almost sounds like I have a vendetta against other churches. I don't. Again, as I said in an eariler comment, my critiques are given in hopes of sparking genuine change within myself, our church, and friends that are part of similar churches. Anyone who happens to read this blog with a differing perspective or philosophy is welcome to ask questions and disagree, but understand that I am not blogging for their sake. Originally, I started this blog as a way for our local church to have another forum for conversation. Others joined the conversation later on. But this is not a "bully pulpit" for Mike to tell other churches or people how to run their lives.
"Do you think what you're doing will produce more Christ-like disciples than the bigger churches you were a part of?"
The short answer is that in our specific context (South Florida, 2006), my hope is that it will. Not because I'm competing with other churches or don't think they can make disciples, I am just hoping that the work we have done to create an environment where discipleship is the natural outcome of everything we do will actually produce those results. You have to understand, however, that in our church we are not anticipating immediate or even rapid results. Inviting people into discipleship takes time...after all, they are agreeing to have their life turned upside down. So in some ways, comparing the work we're doing to larger, established churches is apples and oranges. It might be helpful to think of our church as doing classic "missionary work," just to a Western, postmodern culture.
How are you reaching out to those around you in contrast to "those" churches?
Generally, we have abandoned large evangelistic programs. Not because all those are bad, but just to reinforce the idea that we are all missionaries in every aspect of our lives. We have found that in our context, you might be able to get someone to come to church through an evangelistic program, or even get someone to say the sinner's prayer, but it is difficult to see that person move into discipleship. So we're thankful for churches who do large outreaches, we just want to stay focused on the simple, small, personal relationship thing. Plus, many of us either own our own businesses or work for small companies so it's difficult to find the time to organize something really big.
What books can I read besides the "Missional" one you suggested so as to get a better understanding about this whole "Emergent" deal?
I haven't read any books specifically about the emerging church, however, I hear that "Emerging Churches, Creating Community in Postmodern Cultures" by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan Bolger is a great place to start.
Mike B. wrote: "I fail to see the reason for your anger and vitriol. Are you afraid that these small bands of believers are harming the large mega churches? The temple priests once thought the same of Christ whom we follow. or do you fear for the reputation of Christ?"
Anger? Vitriol? How can you possibly conclude that? Just so you know…I am smiling and at peace with my inner self as I write these emails.
Afraid? No, actually the applicable sensation is not fear but actually more like a mild antipathy – a sort of nagging aversion to house groups that have zero accountability to anyone and call that community.
And, oh yeah…I really fear for the mega church – keeps me awake all night staring at the cobwebs on my dusty popcorn ceiling. Small bands of believers vs. the Mega Church!? Who’s the good guy here I wonder?
So, let’s see, small bands of believers IN the Mega Church aren’t really believers? Is that your implication - that you guys are for real because you light 25 dollar cream colored Aveda candles, sing cumbaya, sip Chai Lattes, and quote Brian McLaren in dimly lit living rooms and they’re not because they meet in between a couple of partitions at the back of Fellowship Hall and use bible study booklets from Willow Creek and Saddleback. Who are you kidding?
Temple priests? Christ? Oh, oh…now where do you suppose I fit in this story? Not looking’ too good for me. Let me guess…I’m willing to bet that I am not the guy with the blue eyes, blond hair, and the purple robe… And what a handy word picture that is! Nice one! That works well for you! (I think this might be what you guys mean by Narrative Theology.) Now that deserves an Emmy. But, there’s a word for that sort of analogical pretentiousness – I’ll think of it in a minute. Oh yeah….ludicrous.
Don’t flatter yourself so much. I’m not Caiphas and you certainly aren’t Christ.
(Now…question…is Mike B. the same as Mike? ‘Cause Mike was kinda nice compared to Mike B.)
Anonymous,
You may be at peace and not angry, but your sarcasm is not getting you anywhere in this discussion. I'd appreciate if we could stick to conversation that you would be willing to have with me if you were in my home, or me in your home. Admittidly, not every forum or blog on the the internet is like that, but that's what I aim for on this blog.
Also, you seem to be more interested in picking out what you don't like about what we are saying rather than conversing about what might seem agreeable to you, or at least something that you'd like more clarification about. Again, I am not trying to change anyone's mind on this blog, but if someone has a legitimate question, I'm more than happy to answer it. The questions you asked me two comments ago were excellent and I'd like to hear your thoughts on my response.
Mike that other anonymous is my alter ego.
Anonymous, you are getting around to some good questions and pointing out potential (and at times actual) weaknesses of, for the sake of this discussion, house churches & "emergents". However, the tone in your comments is over the line (by anyone's standards of Christianity, mega micro or otherwise) Your rebuke/admonishment of us is welcome but you need to come at this a little differently. Would you be willing to show your comments to whoever it is at your church that you consider yourself accountable to? I'm sure that you would say that you would be so back it up. Cut and paste them in to an email then send them to the leadership at your church(however that looks where you are)and have them email Mike. Let's take this conversation to the point where it can actually benefit the WHOLE church. In the meantime I urge my friend Mike to put this conversation on hold until which time you identify yourself.
Anonomous comments with unkind accusations remind me of rioters, etc. with masks over their faces. Anonymity seems to give people "courage" to do and say things they wouldn't say otherwise.
http://www.jimmyakin.org/2006/02/the_muslim_brot.html
Doug
Alright - I am "this Alan" - but I have no idea who YOU are. Neither does anyone else around here. And to act as if how you are conducting this inquisition is all smiles and peace (just because you say that) is nonsense. If anyone, whether they knew Mike or not, even if they had never heard of the "emerging church," if they have a mind, would look at this objectively and see your "tone" as rude and attacking. What we're asking you to do is cut it out. You're being rude!
Now, by me saying that you're a rude jerk, does that mean that I'm defending everything that is associated with the emerging church, Emergent (different thing), etc.? NO. I wouldn't do that. I think some of it is crap myself, so there you go. I'm sure Mike does too. Many of the things we might criticize are coming from ground we've walked on, lives we've lived, and many many people we've known and know both in and out of certain ecclesiastical circles. You can try to break that down all you want by asking for 14 cited examples and trying to provide your own for how fine everything is, but it just doesn't work like that - sorry.
This whole business is not nearly all about comparing empirical data collections. Think! It's about coming to deeply thought out conclusions. It's about following logical trails and owning where you end up. It's not simply about what works - i.e., how many people are showing up as "evidence" of whatever that's evidence of. It's not even about what some big-shot leader's motives are. I have no doubt that most, something on the order of 99%, of all their motives are pure. I'm sure they believe in what they're doing or they wouldn't be doing it. We can be convinced of many things that will, in fact, retard or even actively harm the spiritual development of many people.
So, do I have it all figured out? I doubt that too. I have often thought that I have, but end up changing my tune when I hear something different in the music. I do think I have some things figured out though - not just me - not just the emerging whatever - but me as part of the universal Church and not simply on my own as some allegedly unaccountable lone ranger. Nobody I know who have churches like ours acts, thinks or lives this way. I'm sure some do, but you'd have to visit another set of blogs to get that crew.
I'm going to stop now because I'm a little pissed. I think what I've said is coherant though. I trust it will make sense. I also challenge YOU to come out from behind your mask or shut it off.
Bish - I think the way you are handling these anonymous comments is a beautiful example of what a very rich soul you are ...
I beleive the great Text to say that being Anonymous is good when in prayer, or giving gifts...
Strange packaging, this one ...
Alan calls me a rude jerk and in the same breath asks me to be civil? Sort of confirms my preconceived notions of "emergents" - this is at the core of what I find wrong with your faction.
"Do as I say, not as I do."
You lost me.
When you are pressed, the truth is revealed. At the core of your so-called "conversation" is an immature rebellion against authority. You guys aren't about "conversing."
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
FWIW, anonymous … I can see why you had such a strong reaction to the original comment which started all of this. I too saw it in the same light as you did. But I don’t know this guy, Alan, and he certainly doesn’t speak for me and/or a lot of folks who are out there doing this stuff.
So while you have every right to look at what god might be doing in an expression of faith that is much different than yours and say ‘not for me’ I don’t know that it’s necessarily the wisest approach to react to an isolated comment from some guy on a blog and group everyone in to a ‘faction.’
Taking shots as “church as we know it” is like fishing with dynamite. To my regret at times, I’ve done it and caught many fish … And, yes, you can offer equally valid critiques against the housechurch ‘thing’ to which many are running in reaction against the impersonal nature of consumer-based faith which dominates the churched landscape.
But I think the first step in understanding any of this (together) is agreeing that there is very little direction given in the NT as to how god’s people can and should gather. With that being axiomatic … we have a wide open space in front of us to explore kingdom life in which god is equally pleased as we gather, teach, worship and share life together.
I can only speak for myself, but when I hear of groups of people being intentional about following Jesus (in whatever form that gathering may take) I just tend to be glad for them and hopeful of how they will experience the kingdom together. When I hear of people standing back from ‘church as we know it’ and saying …. “I wonder what it could/would look like if we weren’t married to any structure (house or mega church) and simply let our structure mirror our mission” I tend to get excited about how that might turn out.
Churched folks reacting against more organic expressions of kingdom life (emerging, organic, missional … whaetever) – though not surprising … always reminds me of people (usually evangelicals) picketing movies that they’ve never seen. I mean, everyone’s entitled to an opinion for sure … but wouldn’t you want to at least have an informed opinion to go along with your surly disposition towards Mike and Amber’s decision to pursue kingdom life this way? Wouldn’t it make sense to experience something first hand before simply being so dismissive?
I don’t think this is about “sides” as it may appear right now to you. I hope that you discover that.
If not, then peace along the way, brother.
(I hate to name names, but I disagree with the tone and content of Anonymous' comments.)
If I understand you correctly, Mike, you're wanting to stir up healthy dialogue that leads people into a more authentic and robust following of Jesus. I'm just a lightweight blogger, but I like where you're moving the conversation.
I planted and pastored a vineyard church in Downers Grove, IL for the past six years. We wrestled with the same questions, important questions: what does it mean to be the church? what is the gospel? how will others be drawn into life within the kingdom? And I think many would agree that when you're taking a longer, deeper view of things, you have to also deal with: how will we define success?
Intrestingly, I've heard pastors of large churches say that the "best times" they remember were the early days, in a living room, with an acoustic guitar, vision being birthed among friends and of course...no A/C.
Regarding success, maybe we need to ask questions like: Is God's presence experienced when we're together? Are people becoming more like Jesus? Is authentic community happening? Are people actively living the gospel and living for the sake of the world?
The things of God transcend categories like "emerging church," "housechurch movement," "mega-church," big church vs. small church. The kingdom is seeping into all these communities of faith. Let's listen, learn and love.
Okay, group huge.
Thanks for your words Greg. I appreciate your calm spirit. (and Mike's for that matter - I agree with Beth that he has demonstrated a "rich soul" throughout the exchange)
I am not against Mike's decision, or anyone else's to explore new ways - or "more organic expressions of Kingdom life." This is not at all what churns me. The things I cry foul about are the attempts by the "emergents" to seek validation through the invalidation of more traditional streams. Harsh pronouncements such as the projection of pessimistic ulterior motives on megachurch pastors – just because they are successful, and the assumption that their success is not attributable to God’s sovereign decision, as well as the sort of subliminal yet pervasive insinuation of superiority I find on many “emergent” blogs. It’s a kind of spiritual elitism.
P.S. While I agree with Mike that I have been sarcastic – I don’t believe that I’ve been angry or vitriolic.
Thanks for your words Greg. I appreciate your calm spirit. (and Mike's for that matter - I agree with Beth that he has demonstrated a "rich soul" throughout the exchange)
I am not against Mike's decision, or anyone else's to explore new ways - or "more organic expressions of Kingdom life." This is not at all what churns me. The things I cry foul about are the attempts by the "emergents" to seek validation through the invalidation of more traditional streams. Harsh pronouncements such as the projection of pessimistic ulterior motives on megachurch pastors – just because they are successful, and the assumption that their success is not attributable to God’s sovereign decision, as well as the sort of subliminal yet pervasive insinuation of superiority I find on many “emergent” blogs. It’s a kind of spiritual elitism.
P.S. While I agree with Mike that I have been sarcastic – I don’t believe that I’ve been angry or vitriolic.
Mike, this is looking to be a waist time I would assume. No one is convincing the other... Maybe you should let it slide.
Anonymous, dude, chill out. You've said that we are the critical, negative types, but I sure would think the opposite based on your tone... Not that it will matter to you that I say so.
That said, if you are ever in San Diego. Please look me up. I'd love to talk with you over a cup of coffee.
Mike, this is looking to be a waist time I would assume. No one is convincing the other... Maybe you should let it slide.
Anonymous, dude, chill out. You've said that we are the critical, negative types, but I sure would think the opposite based on your tone... Not that it will matter to you that I say so.
That said, if you are ever in San Diego. Please look me up. I'd love to talk with you over a cup of coffee.
Okay, that last post was being typed while a few others were being posted... everyone seems to have mellowed out a bit. So, my apologies. I still want that cup of coffee some time if you're in SD, A.
I am not "emergent" per se, although, I do appreciate the questions that are being discussed; too, I appreciate that people are trying to, to the best of their ability, live out the convictions of Christ. I am not "mega," although I desire to help as many as possible know Jesus more; too, I appreciate that they are, to the best of their ability, trying to live out what God is calling them to. I could keep going and say good things about most ways of living out church; like Paul I'm (at least try to be) excited Christ is being preached at Saddleback, house churches, Willow Creek, cell-groups, Open Door (Minnesota), Vintage Church, The Catholic church too. Any place that majors on the majors is a great place to know more of him.
Of course there will always be things I disagree with, but I have (for the most part!) stopped seeing things as I'm right and you're wrong (unless it is a major issue--outside of the Apostle's creed?) and admit "I see things imperfectly as in a poor mirror." So, since I am only able to "see in part," I know that we are all only attempting to do our best; and all of us imperfectly. In every (Apostle’s creed church) there are great things happening and things that need improvement.
I think we all love Jesus and his church. I think we would all agree that we want church to reflect the values of Christ and the early church as best as possible. I think we all agree that there are many ways in which these values can be lived out: Mega, seeker, house, cell, etc (and no matter the “model” there is no guarantee that it will be done with Christ-like motives as a Mega church can be genuine and a house church disengenuine). Therefore, there are many ways to do this.
There are models that I see as being better and others as not so better; but who am I? I am only one person; one body part. I may be more naturally predisposed to reach a certain group of people whereas “anonymous” has been gifted to reach people who need another (orthodox) perspective of church. Although I may think “the way we do it” is better, I would gladly send people who don’t naturally fit our church to “anonymous’” church, knowing he/she would do her/his best to disciple them in Christ; albeit differently than me. Although I am not a foot, I know I need them to get along.
That's it for me. Sorry if I screwed up the conversation.
Wow, I go out of the office for a site visit today and now there's 27 comments on this post. Thanks everyone for your input.
George, I want to affirm what you said about my aim for this blog. Over the past few years, I've grown very tired of much of the conversation I read on other blogs / forums related to the emerging church or just church in general. A perfect example of this is Christianity Today's blog, Out of Ur. The way people behave in the comments section is simply embarrassing. Taking sides would be putting it mildly.
A few months ago I wrote a post "Changing the Conversation" after reading a particularly heated discussion on Out of Ur. My point was that we need to recapture the sense of shared journey and purpose that once dominated blogs and forums related to the emerging church. It seems like anyone does now is attack or defend their turf, and frankly, it's a waste of time. I'd have to agree with anonymous on this point - I hate the "spiritual elitism" as well.
George is asking the right questions: Is God's presence experienced when we're together? Are people becoming more like Jesus? Is authentic community happening? Are people actively living the gospel and living for the sake of the world? That's why I named my url 5 years ago "What is Church?" Because someone (Todd Hunter) took the time to encourage me to keep asking questions and work out the implications with a small community of friends by the light of the Holy Spirit. My hope is that in a small way this blog can do the same for others.
Anonymous asked about accountability earlier. I've experienced more true accountability (the encouragement to stay focused on Jesus and not get sidetracked by other gods) in the last five years than the previous 20 of being a Christian. I believe that accountability has been possible because my friends on this journey have not lost our sense of shared purpose. We have not been obsessed with building our own kingdoms (which leads to lack of accountability), but have stayed focused on God's. I dig that about my friends and aim to keep it that way.
good conversation even if it was a little heated at times. the one thing i'd like to point out is that there is no "emergent" them or "traditional" or "mega" us. certainly there are shared ideas or values, but even those can vary. i for one am not a big fan of mclaren and have some issues with the sloppy theology of others. knowing bish & alan personally i can attest to their motives and character. they, like myself, are simply following personal convictions about what forms & expressions are the best means to making disciples out of themselves and the other people choosing to journey with them.
Hi Tom...this is the angry, vitriolic anonymous guy again. Btw…is this what happens on these emerging church forums when someone expresses any sort of passionate disagreement with the “status quo?” They get relegated to the "quite-possibly-a-waste-of-time-angry traditionalist pile?”
I understand...there is a “journey.” We are all on the journey of sanctification - growing in Christ - but...being on a journey does not preclude the mandate of the Great Commission. Being on a journey does not excuse anyone from “getting results” while on the journey. When we stand before Jesus one day, He will ask for an accounting. Matthew 25 specifically refers to the multiplication of talents as opposed to the burial and stagnation of the same. Jesus uses numbers and the “stewards” don’t rejoin His rebuke of their non-productivity with come backs like “two, five, ten? Listen Jesus, you got this all wrong - this was never about the numbers it was about the journey!”
While Western “emergents” are wrestling in this self-absorbed quest to “find themselves” and get the wineskin right – Third World Christians are winning souls for the Kingdom. Furthermore, this sort of “emergent-don’t-bother-me-I’m-on-a-journey” dialog is pointless or at best non-germane in, for instance, Latin America. This “conversation”, it seems, is almost exclusively, a North American phenomenon – and, more specifically, a peculiarity of a very select demographic consisting of dissatisfied, college educated, white, upper class Americans who live in the more liberal metropolitan areas of the country. Isn’t that pretty much the demographic that populate your blogs?
(I lived in South America for almost a decade and helped plant a church in a large metropolitan area. I was also able to attend churches – large and small in 5 different countries.)
comparing third world countries with the western world is like comparing an orange with a screwdriver. we are so removed from every aspect of their life that, of course, we are going to look very different in comparison. do we get caught up in side issues? you bet. are there wonderful, miraculous things happening in these post-colonial and poor countries? thank god, yes. are their numbers increasing exponentially? heck yeah, but i'm not so sure "they" are counting as much as "we" are.
in a sense, this discussion has become about the generalized-perceived doings of one style opposed to another (mega vs. mini or home or emergent or whatever) are these the only two valid options? of course not. i'm sure some orthodox or catholic voices would bring up some good questions in this discussion also. the catholic church is VERY concerned about numbers right now.
there is nothing inherantly wrong with mega-churches, but i get lost in them and i am a "seasoned" church-goer. i love the idea of small church plants and house churches and see them as very valid in a emerging (uh-oh i just dropped a tag) culture that does not look to established churches for any kind spiritual guidance, in my over-generalized opinion.
Tom...also..please understand me...I do not doubt the sincerity, character, or God forbid, motives of Mike and Amber. Their responses have been loving, non-combative, and patient. I will make the effort to be more like them going forward.
Brett...you are right, we are removed from every aspect of their life - but that goes to my point - what are the distinguishing aspects and differences that we are removed from? First and foremost, they are poorer materially - so it's mainly about our relative wealth right?
So, I wonder, if we were poorer, would we be spending so much time looking at our differences - the particular way that we "do" church?
I agree with anonymous' comment that respect (and the mutuality of loving one another) should be the tenor of these sorts of conversations. for myself, i really appreciate a lot on both sides...at least now i do. you see, i was heavily biased against megachurches because i was part of one several years ago and i saw the leadership's subtle exchange of the bottomline values of Jesus for that of the corporate business world, which are vastly and fundamentally different. now, that's not to say business = evil...yet it is to say that business has a foundationally different bottomline than this thing Jesus called His ekklesia. i was confronted with my hurt from the former church and realized my growing prejudice in a recent class with the Vineyard Leadership Institute. Rich Nathan taught on Church Growth, and i have to say i really liked it. i liked that Rich pointed out that he didn't create this monster-sized church (although a small church when compared to some in Africa and Asia), but God did this to him and so in his prayer life he has followed the time-proven Jewish method of the prayer of complaint: you did this to me, how to we fix such-and-such problem? what i really valued was that Rich was sincere enough to be unapologetic for being in a place that God created. i see there are good things about megachurches. i also see the value in critiqueing the large church (as long as it's constructive and done in mutuality) because we learn and grow and fresh expressions of Jesus' ekklesia idea get expressed. as one who has followed the conversation of what is happening down in West Palm with Mike, T and those with them, i think they are a major source of blessing...as in they are being blessed and blessing others. i don't know about Mike's 'bookability and reputation', but because of this blog mike's reputation is even stronger. back to the original question pose by Mike: why aren't we risking everything to proclaim the gospel that Jesus preached? from my perspective i see small but significant movement towards that, but we are still emerging from what Willard said which in effect points to re-designing systems to get better results...anmd that kind of tinkering is exactly what industrial engineer-types are good at....
blessings to you all
steven
Hi anonymous. Not that I am speaking for Tom or Jason, but we frequently get ranters on our blogs who really want to just harass us and not really enter into a discussion as you apparently do. You are not a waste of time, and as I was praying for you the other night I felt like this discussion is very important for you in a way deeper than you might think. As I was praying for you I got a picture of a large mature strong tree that had many branches and was offering much shade but on one side a limb had been ripped off, (I gather from a storm) and the tree had a wound that needed to be taken care of. I am not sure, if this is for you, and if it is not than trash it, but God really wants to bring you into another level of growth for your particular ministry, and an old wound needs to be healed in order for your “tree” to balance out. Ordinarily, I would have emailed you privately about this but since we have no personal email for you, I will leave this here. As you can see, most people who read our blog are part of our family. It just looks different than most.
I wanted to talk a little bit about numbers. How exciting that you planted a church in Latin America. What a treasure. If I were to go to LA, the first thing I would do before anything else, would be to really live in that culture and see what it was all about. To assume that the way I had been trained to do things in another context would work anywhere else would be silly. As a missionary, I would get into the community and into people’s lives and then listen for what God was doing and start there. That may be a difference in style and personality. “Inward vs. Outward etc.” That is what Mike and I are doing. We see ourselves as missionaries who live in a postmodern context. Very educated, white middle class 2-income work too hard and have no relationship context. No one knows how to be friends or truly honest about their stuff here. Actually, they may hide even further in a front door church setting because you can. Trust us, we have a huge church in our area, that literally sucks the life out of every other church in the area. People leave small faithful churches because the environment is “better” at the bigger place. Local pastors of small churches here feel tired and unable to compete. They find themselves trying to just do smaller versions of the bigger version and they just can not compete. That makes me sad. Are we all not a part of this call as the body of Christ? It isn’t the big church fault or the little guy’s fault. The culture we live in, or the water we swim in says bigger is better and somehow the body of Christ has started to advertise themselves in order to draw more numbers. I truly believe that no one has even stopped to think it all the way through so they keep tweaking their front end so that more people will like what is going on and stay put. There is no evil malice in it and I think that most church staffs see nothing wrong with this. Our thought was, if we just offered people another thing to come and do, but no way to address the real issues than we are doing them no good. It is very slow work and we get tired. We ask if we are doing the right thing.
So you ask about growth as a sign of talents growing and I wanted to leave you with the story of Hudson Taylor. (Our youngest sons names sake) He was called to China. A culture he knew nothing of. He spent his entire life not seeing much fruit, and then right before he died he saw one person come into the kingdom and through that an entire network of simple faith comminutes emerged in China. He gave up his life, his reputation and his paycheck to be faithful and respectful to the people of China. He dressed and ate like them. He probably laughed and played with them. He continued to teach and speak with them. It just took consistent effort over a long period of time for his work to show fruit, although his effort all along was valid. Mike and I won’t even attempt to compare ourselves to Hudson Taylor’s life work, but we do know that what we are doing now will bear fruit in time. Our children and the next generation will bring it to a deeper level. Yes there are many gaps. Don’t you see them even in the work you do? It takes time, thoughtful wondering and exploration with the Father to see them, address them and work toward correcting them. Please pray for us as we faithfully try to narrow the gap.
Amber...thank you for taking the risk to share that word. Honestly, your post brought tears to my eyes - and cut straight to my heart. In the words of the Samaritan Woman – “I perceive that you are a prophet.
That "branch" or limb was a trauma that I suffered over 25 years ago. I came to faith in Jesus at UCLA in 1977, and I quickly discovered that I would not fit into the wealthy established churches in the vicinity of the campus. After searching around, I settled on a house church movement group. It consisted, at the time, of about 7 or 8 house churches that met in homes throughout LA County. On Sunday night, we would all gather together for a joint "rally." Anyway, after a few months joining, I was asked by the lead pastor of this group to drop out (I was a pre-med student) and assist them in a new plant that was just starting.
“Compelled” is a probably a better word...when I requested more time to consider the call, this "pastor" railed at me telling me that I had made school and idol and that it was more important to me than my walk with the Lord. I gave in - but I was not entirely reluctant - there was part of me that wanted to do this. Needless to say my parents were furious at my decision, and 27 years later are still questioning my judgment. (sometimes I do too)
Fast forward...this "movement" grows dramatically to over 30 house churches in the next 3 years. We now had 1800 in the Sunday rallies - that was a huge number for an inner city work in the late 70's - at the time the only "mega-churches" were Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa and probably Grace Community Church in Panorama City.
Fuller Seminary students would come to our meetings and marvel at what we had accomplished - an inter-racial - inner city house church movement that was growing phenomenally. The success, however, went straight to the head of the lead pastor (who incidentally was named in the first printing of C.P. Wagner's book - "Your Spiritual Gifts Can Help Your Church Grow" as a one of 5 or 6 international leaders with a modern day N.T gift of apostle - later editions of this book do not include him).
The situation deteriorated and this pastor melted down morally and ethically. In the summer of 1981, after repeatedly confronting this leader concerning his abusive behavior, we were, astonishingly, excommunicated from this church!
By August of that year, I was in a sort of state of shock – mad at God for letting me be part of this mess, and wondering if I would ever get involved in a church again. More later. It gets a lot worse.
BTW…the church we planted in South America started in our home – about 20 of us…today they meet in a school.
Just a little bit of clarification from Amber's comment. Since I just got done recently reading a Hudson Taylor biography, he did see more results than one person right before his death, but most of the expansion into the rural areas of China that he dreamed of didn't happen until late in his life.
I guess I see the post-Christian West as becoming a similar kind of mission field. We now have African, Asian, and South American missionaries moving to the United States to advance the kingdom over here. I think that's wonderful and shows how vibrant the church is in other parts of the world. However, the work will be slow in the West. For us, as people who feel called to stay in the US for now, we recognize that our mission will have to be played out over a long time, maybe a lifetime.
It is for that reason that I think the conversation at hand (how do we follow Jesus in a post-Christian culture and organize ourselves as the church to join God in his mission) is a vital one. Sure, it can denigrate into abstractions and never lead to actual kingdom work, but any conversation can stay abstract. That's why I'm always interested in folks who are really working this stuff out in community, even if it's not glamorous or brings immediate results.
Just read your comment, Anonymous. Thanks for sharing that part of your story. A person in our church had a similar situation happen in a house church a few years ago, although not that dramatic. That's one of the reasons I haven't bought into all that is known as the house church movement. Egos have the tendency to rear their head no matter what your model is.
Anyway, I just want to encourage you in your process and definitely respond to the part of Amber's word about healing this wound. Who knows, maybe this conversation will be part of that healing? I hope you're in a situation where you have some local people that you can trust and allow them to minister to you. Know that from our (speaking for Amber and myself) point of view, this is precisely why we keep moving the conversation back to Jesus, being transformed by him, and joining him in what he's doing. We want to be a healing community, both locally and online.
Much peace to you.
anonymous,
thanks for sharing your part of the story... just reading your comments and seeing your heart i feel like i know you so much more throughout this discussion.
like amber, i too feel this can be an opportunity for you to move beyond preconceptions and labels.
bless you, if your ever in VT please stop in i would love to hear some o'skool vineyard stories.
cheers
-the kecks
Thanks for sharing your story anonymous. You have a lot of wisdom and experience that we can all benefit from. Your questions and comments have helped me to think more seriously about what is church(?). It's been fun hearing your heart through this "steel sharpening steel" process. If you ever come to Santa Cruz we can go surfing together.
Thanks for sharing your story anonymous. You have a lot of wisdom and experience that we can all benefit from. Your questions and comments have helped me to think more seriously about what is church(?). It's been fun hearing your heart through this "steel sharpening steel" process. If you ever come to Santa Cruz we can go surfing together.
Okay guys...
I can't reveal my identity now...
I am scared that you guys will make trouble for me after the things I posted.
I am sorry
I should never have said what I said
I should never have even started posting anonymously...
There are two of us posting anonymously on this thread. All but two of the anonymous postings have been mine. Just wanted to say that the anonymous posting at 11:42 PM on June 9 was not from me. (just prior to this one)
I am the true "anonymous"...the bitter, vitriolic, and angry one...to the confusion generated by the false anonymous, going forward I will post as "basilio" - which happens to be my Catholic bastism name.
which anonymous was the o'skool vineyard guy?
and why would anyone want to make trouble for you?...
no way! we want to support you.
I think there are at least three anonymous posters...
If i told you why I thought it would cause problems, then you would know who I am...
Mike there are problems here...as soon as I announced that I would pose as "Basilio" someone jumped in and posted a fake message in my name (using Basilio).
The 4:18 PM post is not from me...
the 10:00 pm post is not from me!
anonymous--just get it over with.
why the gay Christian deal?
Oh, I get it. It's supposed to be funny.
It's good to know that EVEN though Hockey Season is over (for me, cuz I am an Avalanche fan) I can STILL find a good fight when I need to...
Perhaps it's time to let a sleeping dog lie... I have no idea what that phrase means, but I've always wanted to use it...
Sounds good to me Dan. Consider this comment thread closed (although I can't do figure out how to do that officially in blogger).
You bring up a GREAT point... how DO we bloggers actually "close" a blog thread??? Okay, there's money to be made here... let's figure out an "end of blog thread" program and the SELL it!! Dang, now you got my creative gears clanking about...
OK guys, who's payin up - here you go...
at the bottom of each post in your "edit posts" section - click the post you want to close the comments on - "edit" - at the bottom of the comment typing window there is an arrow and a linked text saying "Post and comment options" - click that - box drops down - you can select the option "No" where it says "new comments allowed on this post" - then hit Publish there it's closed. People can see the previous comments but make no more.
So, like, my check is in the mail right?? Peace.
Alan is a blogger nerd
<< Home