Last week I agreed to help out a brick and mortar church. I said yes to the request to serve as their supply pastor. What this means is that I will fill the pulpit for them for a while until they can secure a permanent pastor. Hopefully this helps illustrate that I do not indeed have any disdain for the brick and mortar church. This church is full of wonderful people who are serving God and living in relationship with him the best they can in the best way they know how. I am more than happy to help for a while.
It certainly throws a small wrench into our current plans, especially as they concern our gathering with another family. It may turn out to be a constructive wrench as we are forced to abandon even the idea of a Sunday morning gathering. I don't know how long this arrangement will last. I'm just happy to help the folks of Bethel Wesleyan Church out and continue to move my own family forward.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
To Build or Not To Build
Ben Witherington, NT scholar extradornaire, has posted an excellent review on George Barna's and Frank Viola's new book Pagan Christianity. Sorry for the multiple links in that last sentence - they're all worth following. I've not read the book yet myself, but I gather its gist is that the way we do church nowadays is more a result of institutional bureacracy trying to preserve itself more than fulfilling what Christianity is supposed to be about. It sounds like the perfect followup to Barna's previous book Revolution, where he makes a very strong argument against meeting in brick and mortar churches each week when the more effective manner in today's social climate would be house churches. Please note that I said "strong argument" not "effective" or "convincing".
(NOTE: Since my post this morning, BW3 has posted another entry on Ch 2. I have no idea if he will do this for every chapter in the book. My comments from here on only deal with his analysis of Ch 1)
If I had all day to write and you had all day to read, I would quote from Dr. Witherington's post extensively and add my hearty "Amen!" to his critique. I'll trust you will take the time to read his comments. I'll just say that I concur wholeheartedly with Dr. BW3's statements regarding ordained ministry, the necessity of sacred space and time, the mystery of the divine, and his criticisms of shoddy and insufficient scholarship used to bolster convenient claims.
My agreement with Dr. BW3 may seem baffling to friends and family who are closely watching my current endeavors with a worried eye or to those who are watching from a distance because this might turn out to be an interesting sideshow. At times, I can come off very anti-establishment or anti-institutional. I recently had a long discussion with someone about how frustrated I had become with my own denominational home, The Wesleyan Church, and its policies, bureacracy, and institution in general. I even hinted at leaving. I stand by all my criticisms and frustrations, but I ain't going nowhere yet.
So what's going on here? Why is someone who has pledged to leave the brick and mortar church behind, at least for a while, disagreeing with what should be such a welcome work like Pagan Christianity and the philosophy which undergirds much of the house church movement? Dr.BW3's post has created the perfect opportunity for me to clarify exactly what is going on the mind of Matt Guthrie and the path he's taking his family down.
Let me begin by affirming the Church. The Church is the bride of Christ. For all her problems, she is an institution established by God himself. Though she has problems and insufficiencies now, one day Christ will return and present her to his father as the perfect bride. I am not about to go about bashing Christ's bride. I may not like the way she cooks and cleans, but I gotta love her.
Keeping in line with Dr.BW3's comments on church buildings, let me explain why no brick and mortar church for me at this time. A church building is a tool. It is very important tool because it provides a place to gather for worship. This hopefully allows for the building and strengthening of the bonds of community as well as providing a place for other acts of ministry. The problem with buildings is that sometimes instead of becoming a tool, it becomes the controlling factor in a church's life, the church's identity itself. "Community" does not seem to exist outside its four walls. Ministry is not taken into the world - the world must come to it. Maintenance of the building becomes a major budget item, taking away from other ministry funds.
Do not read anything I am not saying. I am by no means implying that ALL churches fall into this trap. What I am saying is that a church building is not the ONLY and best tool. Tapping into my idealistic, purist, and yes, even my anti-establishment tendencies, my desire is to broaden the collection in the church's tool box. I dream of a network of home churches that experience community in the sense of doing life together on a daily basis. I dream of a network that understands the need for sacred space and time, even in the home, and longs for the mystery of a divine encounter in its worship. I dream of a network that because of its unique place in the social fabric of today's society is able to reach people a brick and mortar church could never reach. I dream of a network where the people live out their faith in daily incarnational ministry to the world immediately around it and abroad.
Right now this is all a dream. It's a long way from being fulfilled. But it's worth pursuing. It's something I'm excited about building.
(NOTE: Since my post this morning, BW3 has posted another entry on Ch 2. I have no idea if he will do this for every chapter in the book. My comments from here on only deal with his analysis of Ch 1)
If I had all day to write and you had all day to read, I would quote from Dr. Witherington's post extensively and add my hearty "Amen!" to his critique. I'll trust you will take the time to read his comments. I'll just say that I concur wholeheartedly with Dr. BW3's statements regarding ordained ministry, the necessity of sacred space and time, the mystery of the divine, and his criticisms of shoddy and insufficient scholarship used to bolster convenient claims.
My agreement with Dr. BW3 may seem baffling to friends and family who are closely watching my current endeavors with a worried eye or to those who are watching from a distance because this might turn out to be an interesting sideshow. At times, I can come off very anti-establishment or anti-institutional. I recently had a long discussion with someone about how frustrated I had become with my own denominational home, The Wesleyan Church, and its policies, bureacracy, and institution in general. I even hinted at leaving. I stand by all my criticisms and frustrations, but I ain't going nowhere yet.
So what's going on here? Why is someone who has pledged to leave the brick and mortar church behind, at least for a while, disagreeing with what should be such a welcome work like Pagan Christianity and the philosophy which undergirds much of the house church movement? Dr.BW3's post has created the perfect opportunity for me to clarify exactly what is going on the mind of Matt Guthrie and the path he's taking his family down.
Let me begin by affirming the Church. The Church is the bride of Christ. For all her problems, she is an institution established by God himself. Though she has problems and insufficiencies now, one day Christ will return and present her to his father as the perfect bride. I am not about to go about bashing Christ's bride. I may not like the way she cooks and cleans, but I gotta love her.
Keeping in line with Dr.BW3's comments on church buildings, let me explain why no brick and mortar church for me at this time. A church building is a tool. It is very important tool because it provides a place to gather for worship. This hopefully allows for the building and strengthening of the bonds of community as well as providing a place for other acts of ministry. The problem with buildings is that sometimes instead of becoming a tool, it becomes the controlling factor in a church's life, the church's identity itself. "Community" does not seem to exist outside its four walls. Ministry is not taken into the world - the world must come to it. Maintenance of the building becomes a major budget item, taking away from other ministry funds.
Do not read anything I am not saying. I am by no means implying that ALL churches fall into this trap. What I am saying is that a church building is not the ONLY and best tool. Tapping into my idealistic, purist, and yes, even my anti-establishment tendencies, my desire is to broaden the collection in the church's tool box. I dream of a network of home churches that experience community in the sense of doing life together on a daily basis. I dream of a network that understands the need for sacred space and time, even in the home, and longs for the mystery of a divine encounter in its worship. I dream of a network that because of its unique place in the social fabric of today's society is able to reach people a brick and mortar church could never reach. I dream of a network where the people live out their faith in daily incarnational ministry to the world immediately around it and abroad.
Right now this is all a dream. It's a long way from being fulfilled. But it's worth pursuing. It's something I'm excited about building.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
