Today, we had a leaders’ retreat at Highland to further explore the implications of being a missional outpost. I was there as much as possible, shuffling between three basketball games and the retreat.
Two Highland guys, Mark Love and Chris Flanders, led most of the discussion time. Both have lots of insight and experience.
One thing Mark said really resonated. He said that as a church makes this move, those who are there for “goods and services” are likely to leave. But, he said, that is “addition by subtraction.”
It’s never easy to lose people. And we should never take pride in seeing people leave.
But, honestly, churches must not be held hostage by a few people who don’t like the direction that the leadership has discerned it must follow. Even if they’ve been there a long time. Even if they’re well known and well respected. Even if they give a lot.
Too much is at stake. One of the pastoral blessings a church must learn is the blessing that’s offered — in genuine love — to those who are leaving.
Usually addition comes from addition. Sometimes it comes from subtraction.
That was very well said! I wish I had the credibility to say that from time to time. But being a 25 year old…with only 5 years experience in ministry, I am not too often looked at as the guy with wisdom.
Your quote, “churches must not be held hostage by a few people…” Is the exact word for word quote i’ve been telling myself for a couple of years now.
Thanks for your honesty and candor. Good luck and God’s richest blessings on you, your family, and your ministry!
A wonderful post Mike. How many churches have been destroyed because they were held hostage…..
As one studies and grows, sometimes you know it’s time to go yourself to a church body that is growing in the Lord’s direction too. Thank God some churches are just stating what growth in the scriptures is all about. We get too comfortable and don’t study as we should and then it is like being in a time warp. Can be very uncomfortable when you love the people and they are just stagnant.
I like the quote that I first heard from Wayne Kilpatrick–long time preacher at the Homewood church in Birmingham: “The church is a place where everybody has their say, but nobody has their way.”
I’ve been at the Melbourne church for 21 years and in the early days there were some rough seas. Several individuals saw it as their responsibility to analyze my soundness and to occasionally send questionnaires to me and to the leadership demanding that I answer to their satisfaction all these questions. Interestingly enough, one of the questions was: “Do you know Rubel Shelly and how much time do you spend with him?”
Little did they know that as a student of Rubel’s at Freed-Hardeman in the 1970’s I learned the power of truth and how God’s truth will stand in the face of any inquisition.
I really have to compliment our leaders from those days who stood for the health of the church and did not give in to these naysayers.
They help me keep my sanity. However, the people that I called in those days were people like Wayne who had been through the ringer a few times and yet remained faithful. Unfortunately, many in my generation did not sick it out because they were harangued and “held hostage.”
I have been thanful more than once that God took me out from under the micoscope of the Bible Belt and brought me to a place like Melbourne where grace met me and carried me through.
Peace.
Why would they leave? What does “this move” mean?
“This move” varies from church to church. But it is generally (as I’m referring to it) the attempts of leaders to follow the promptings of God in living as an authentic community of faith for the sake of the world.
By the way, don’t read too much into the post. This isn’t referring to every person that leaves a church. Some leave because they think it’s unbiblical. Some leave because they believe the leadership is ungodly. Some leave because they feel called into the missional impulses of another place.
Why is it that those who come to ‘do church’ or come for the ‘goods and services’ cannot see how they are not only boxing God, but are denying others in the church the blessings of growing in the spiritual gifts and talents God desires to lavish? Sadly, so sadly, they are also denying themselves to move ahead in their journey the Lord so desires they take with him. They are either risk averse, wary of change and adventure, or spiritually manipulative. Each of these traits needs to be dealt with differently.
If we were to truly disciple each other, and encourage and affirm each other’s growth and evolving directions towards our spiritual home, then the natural course would be for the church’s personality to also take on a new and, one would hope, exhilarating direction or design in God’s grand scheme of things.
Should there be those within the Body who cannot envision or grasp God’s plan for their individual growth, and who fail to see how that connects them to the remarkable chain of events in the metamorphosis of fellowship, then they are the one’s with the ‘issues’. It is their free will and adult decision to go elsewhere. The guilt trips they lay at the door of other’s who genuinely seek after God’s leadership in their life have no business paralysing spiritual progress.
Of course, in a town like Abilene, there are so many churches du jour to choose from if one wishes to switch allegiance for the sake of self-medicating on the status quo. Those who are skilled in the art of spiritual blackmail don’t mind sidetracking and wasting a group’s or leadership’s time and energy. It’s therefore essential for the spiritual leaders of the church in transition to pray for and diligently practice the spiritual art of discernment.
None of us in ministry pray for a poison chalice. But it is part and parcel of the road we are sometimes diverted onto.
Tagging on to your last comment, Mike:
‘Some leave because they feel called into the missional impulses of another place.’
Usually these followers have a higher view and calling towards ‘goods and services’, don’t they?
Also, when I write of the traits that need to be dealt with differently, love is at the centre of each. Sometimes, finding the right way to apply the love is the challenge that takes incredible strength, wisdom, and maturity.
No more “goods and services”, does that mean we no longer need to pass the trays?
I’m sorry that was a stupid question. All you have to do is look at the title of this post and it is obvious.
Speaking from first hand experience…I just think you do have to be careful about how we deal with those who do leave and how we speak of them. I am afraid you’ve touched on a bit of a touchy subject for me. So..don’t think I am mad or bitter…I just know that when my Mom chose to leave, it was if she had never been in that fold. She had been an intregal part of the fellowship and teachings of the children there and yet when she left…no calls. She is not mad about it at all…she’s about the Lord’s work and understands that there are differences. I just feel like maybe there needs to be some discussion on how do you treat those who decide to leave. Maybe just a visit to say you are important and you meant something to this family and you will be missed. Its okay then just to say that you wish her well and see this as a difference of opinion. She, a widow, would have cherished such a visit.
God bless all the leaders in their decisions and planning. I have to say it was tough for me to attend church for awhile and the next sunday I almost got out of my seat and walked to the front and leaned into the microphone and asked if anyone knows or feels sad that my mom was not there. Many have asked about her and told me to tell her hello..and I just want to say, “Why don’t you call her?” My mother loves God and loves her family and bears no resentment.
Its a tough one…
Mike,
“…the attempts of leaders to follow the promptings of God in living as an authentic community of faith for the sake of the world.”
Being a former member (because we moved) I am very interested in what this means from a practical standpoint. What does Highland not do or what will Highland stop doing?
Why do you think people will leave because of the quote above?
Oh..Mike…I hope that my post doesn’t come across angry..because really I’m not…Its just input…I don’t have a PhD but I thought I would throw my 2 cents in..
Mike,
Sorry should have all thoughts in one comment but oh well.
What are “goods and services?”
Is an example a good children’s ministry with an organized curriculum as opposed to an children’s ministry which chooses to incorporate the childen into all aspects of the community of faith (even though it’s messy and unorganized).
Highland is so much further along (imho) than most churches that try to change direction or even make a course correction. The leadership has made some tough decisions in the past, which have prepared the way to continue towards the path of being a missional outpost. It is “just like Highland” to join God in His work in the community and the world!
Hoh Boy! As the saying goes, been there, done that.
When God goes about pruning one of His congregations it can be a real time of challenge and a time of healing from the pruning shears for those that remain, as well as for those that choose to leave [what will be their conversations be about Highland after departing, I wonder?]
Prayer, Prayer and more Prayer for Highland, the Elders, the ministers and staff and all members, as well as their extended families that may be affected by these changes. But if these changes are what I think they will be, they will be glorifying to God and truly salvation to those lost we hope to reach.
But how do we know that “they” aren’t right. That the direction that we want to go is what God wants. That old ways aren’t best??????
Mark Love wrote an in-depth article entitled “Making the Missional Move.” It will shed some light on what being a missional church is all about and the implications of being such a church.
http://www.saltandlightresources.com/articles/love_missional.html
Check it out!
Leland-
I’ll try to answer - though Mike can come along later and explain it better than I can.
“Goods and services” is a shorthand way of referring to an approach to “doing church” that tries to cater to the wants and desires of its own members. It is also sometimes called “consumer church.”
Under this approach, everything is about making the church experience more desirable and “enjoyable” for the members: fine-tuned worship, nice facilities, convenient access, lots of fun youth events, comfortable bible classes where people can feel affirmed in their lifestyle and beliefs, etc. Decisions about all these things are focused on the experience of the church member. This approach has been wildly successful in generating large attendance from middle and upper middle class (which, when you think about it - is a great place to find discerning consumers of goods and services), and generating a nice stream of income for a church.
On one level, the problem is this: the “goods and sevices”/”consumer” approach ultimately implodes on itself. I’m not qualified to talk about all the reasons it happens, but I do know it tends to burn out the church ministers and other leadership very quickly because everything becomes about keeping the troops happy so they don’t jump ship and go somewhere else. Everyone competes for the attendance and contribution dollar in a “church market.”
On a spiritual level, the problem is worse: everything becomes inwardly focused, with very little money or attention being devoted to ministry to the community/world. Church begins to look more like a social club and less like the embodiment of Jesus’ ministry.
To reject this approach and focus on mission rather than making people happy with their church experience is dangerous. Some of the “consumers” will leave, dissatisfied with their experience. Budgets and attendance may shrink. Yet, ironically, in 21st century culture this sort-of “death” to a “goods and services” approach may be the very thing that churches need to do to ultimately thrive. Kathy suggested a pruning metaphor in a prior post - I think that it is really appropriate.
That, anyway, is my perspective on what “goods and services” Christianity is about and why rejecting it is risky/dangerous. I’m a Highland member, but not an elder or leader in the church, so my opinions may not necessarily represent the views of Mike, the Highland leadership, blah, blah blah… (i.e., its just one guy’s view).
A better headline for today’s article might be “my way or the highway”. All the other comments lose their real meaning until someone, or group of someones, explains what they really want to accomplish in the changes being made.
Pardon me for making this comparison, but it simply sounds like a revised version of the Church of Christ organization. How far removed is this ‘todays’ philosophy from that claimed 100 yrs ago? We know we have it right and most don’t — so without any further discussion or feelings toward the remnants of yesteryear –THIS IS HOW IT IS GOING TO BE.
I believe a good portion of people who are regular church attenders are there to get lift and be fed. Does that make them people who are “goods and services” people? Maybe and maybe not. There seems to be a real tension between what Sunday morning assembly should be and who it’s really for. (OK, hopefully it’s really about and for GOD, but you know what I mean!) It seems there are SO many unanswered questions when words like “missional” and “seeker friendly” are tossed around. It appears to be an easy topic to discuss and get on board with, but what would it really look like when it comes down to details such as what and how to preach? Children’s ministry? Youth activities? How to do Bible classes? To be honest, it wears me out just to think about.
Beverly, I COMPLETELY agree with you! I think it is imperative to follow up on people who have left for whatever reason. Someone else commented that maybe a person who leaves is “right”. Interesting points to remember.
There are many questions in my mind when it comes to a missional church and how that would look. Maybe there is a happy medium somewhere between being held hostage by a few members who are disgruntled and making changes (for the sake of being more like Christ) in ways that the members can understand and be brought on board with.
Follow Jesus and let people choose what they will. Jesus once asked the disciples if they would leave when many others had left. Their answer, “To whom shall we go?”
If they choose to worship somewhere else it is consumer church. If they choose to follow someone other than Jesus it is apostasy.
It sounds a little cultish to me. What gives anyone the right to judge the motives of other Christians as to whether they are “consumers” or not?
Several weeks ago I went to the West Campus of Second Baptist Church in Katy (they have five campuses in the Houston area). It was the end of their fisical year, so Ed Young gave the yearly report as required by law. From a financial perspective, it was amazing what they accomplished. Their budget is about $50 mill a year. However, what was the most important to them was changed lives.
Last year they baptized over 3100 folks. Ed interviewed about 12 of those who were converted at the West Campus. What was amazing is that these were unchurched, never churched, seekers, lost, or whatever the current term is. There were former gang members, Buddist, alchoholics, drug attics, and a teenager whose mom was an alchoholic and was converted by a friend at camp. Yes, they had their share of children of faithful Christians.
I’m not sure if you would consider Second even seeker sensitive. It is a place that is big enough to lose yourself and allow God to work on your heart through worship (including the Word). Ed gives an invitation every Sunday. Everyone is bowed and sitting while people stand up and walk the aisle.
I guess in most “missional church manuals” or “emergent church seminars,” Second would be written off as a Mega church that probably has lost touch with the current culture and even has too many Republicans. However, for those 3100 who came to Jesus, the thousands around the world because of the missionaries they support, and the thousands in the past many years, I don’t think they care.
Another aspect of this discussion are those that after years of trying to make suggestions and trying to get a church to move toward being more open and willing to reach out, finally have to leave, or otherwise live in a spiritual desert. In other words the leadership at our church was holding us hostage. After countless meetings, discussions, and debates, we finally moved on after 15 years with this group. For us, this has meant driving 45 minutes to find a body that however you decide to define it is missional to the core. In some ways this was like a divorce for us, and we still worry about how it has affected our kids, leaving the “family” they had grown up with. But, at the end of the day, we feel that in our hearts our family is now in the right place to grow spiritually. Tough decisions all around, but just thought it would add to the discussion to think of the other side of this.
I have no reason to kiss up to anyone…
But Mike, this is why I admire you (from afar). You’re the head minister of a church and you’re not “threatened” by possibilities of the church getting smaller.
That says a lot to me.
In my experience, “addition by subtraction” is code for “don’t go away mad, just go away” or “like it or lump it.”
I am admittedly looking at this from the outside so I do not have all of the details, but if I read the above posts correctly, and I think I can read reasonably well, it sounds like Highland is not really changing from a supplier of consumer, it is simply changing the consumers it desires to supply and is content to show the others the door with a hearty “good riddance.” If that is not correct then I think Mike and the others posting above should carefully consider what they are really trying to say. In any event, I think the leadership at Highland should carefully consider Paul’s admonition in 1 Cor 12:22 that the members of the body that seem weak are “indispenable.” I also think they should consider that Jesus himself said that the mark of his people is not how missional or evangelistic they are but how they love one another. John 13:34-35.
One program is as good as the next to me. It is where our heart is that matters. God does not look at the appearance of people he looks at our hearts. As long as our hearts are right then we are ok even if we have the wrong name on the outside. I do believe that names are important, they help us see what is on the inside but if we do not have the right name we need not be intimidated by those who do. I would like to think our elders here at highland are being lead by hearts for God and therefore are thinking more selflessly. But if there hearts are not right then it will not matter.
Many people left after hearing the hard teachings of Jesus. The problem is, we are not Jesus.
While agree with the sense of what you’re saying, I’m also pained at how readily some choose to disassociate themselves from the body of Christ in a place, as if losing a hand or a foot or an ear is a simple, painless thing (and as if, after a foot has cut himself off, he can be so easily, painlessly joined to a new Body without any pain or scarring). And often their reasons are because the other parts of the Body don’t understand them, don’t believe/think like they do, aren’t a foot or a hand or an ear like they are. What Mike says, ultimately, is right: feet and hands and ears shouldn’t hold the rest of the Body hostage…but, goodness, shouldn’t folks consider and take more gut-wrenchingly seriously the implications of leaving before they amputate or dissembowel the Body of Christ?
scott..it grieved my mom…it broke her heart…she is not one to take things lightly…
I appreciate the comments today because there is passion… not just agreement… but passion and struggle. To re-frame it a bit; What if God isn’t looking at our suburban or neighborhood congregations from the same perspective we are? What if He sees a Kingdom that is advancing and is pleased when His children live and thrive and grow and serve in His Kingdom? A Kingdom that crosses city boundaries, state boundaries, national boundaries and political/economic boundariess. I am slowly beginning to see our congregations as part of this Kingdom and that is giving me some freedom to bless those who come into my corner of the Kingdom and bless those who leave for another corner of the Kingdom (and I have struggled with many friends leaving my corner lately). But I reserve my mourning for those who leave the Kingdom completely… not my friends who have merely changed addresses inside the Kingdom.
As for “missional”… I see this as another way of saying: Are we on the advancing edge of the Kingdom in the world or are we instead retreating, seeking comfort? From my limited but honest review of scripture I see the Church as being part of God’s advancing Kingdom front in the world. Changing from being in a “peace-time” mentality where I can be fat and happy to being a disciple in the battle (excuse my war analogies but they seem appropriate) has been difficult, but God has been merciful to me. This is completely changing my view of what Church really is. So, there are a few thoughts and limited illustrations, please proceed to add to, elaborate or challenge. Thanks Mike for this important post.
Well said, Russ.
What I want…
What we need…
When will we learn it’s not about us, or what we want, or even what we need. It’s about His glory…His love for people. We are ‘clay jars’ meant to do His will on this earth until His kingdom reigns forever.
If we’re going to church for any other purpose than to worship God and to live as a community commited to each other and to the needs of our neighbors then we are there to glorify us.
This is a world that needs God’s love, and Jesus left the Spirit to empower us, so let’s stop worrying about what we need and start worrying about what others need.
We are partners with God…
His story continues…
Where will this all lead in ten years when today’s “missional” fad becomes the next “goods and services?”
Ten to fifteen years ago it was all about the consumer/felt needs model. What next?
Will we get to read about all those members who want to do things the missional way leaving? Will it be addition by subtraction then?
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
We have so much trouble being “one”. When others don’t agree with us, it is so easy to see their faults and pick apart their reasoning. When I placed membership at Highland some 25 years ago, I placed my soul, to some extent, in the keeping of the elders. That is something I don’t take lightly, and I pray that they don’t, either. I do not always agree with everything that happens at Highland or any other church I have been a part of, but that does not mean that I will take my toys and go somewhere else. I can’t imagine Paul saying to the church at Corinth,
“If the church is headed a direction you don’t like, go somewhere else.” nor do I imagine he would say ” When you feel like a minority of the church is holding you back, just go on without them. They’ll find a church home somewhere else.”
Instead, Paul scolded them for not recognizing that the church members were part of the body of Christ. Weak ones, strong ones, presentable and not so presentable. They were to be “one”, not divided.
Being “one” isn’t about being the same, it is about fellowship and peaceful disagreement under the rule of God. We think of Jesus as being perfect on this earth, and yet he did not agree with God on every item, all the time. (Not my will, Father, but yours, not what I want, but what you want.) What Jesus did show us was an obedience to the rule of God, even in disagreement. In nearly the same moment, he prayed for us to be one as he and the Father were one. When I study that situation, I am convinced that we are called to treat our brothers and sisters who disagree with us (whether “us” is a majority OR a minority) as Jesus taught us to treat everyone on the Sermon on the Mount: Turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, forgive, forgive, forgive. Show as much compassion to those who disagree with us as Jesus does. Are we really compassionate to those who don’t see things as we do?
What a gift it would be to know the mind of God on every issue, and just do the right thing, every time. We could always rest assured that we were actually taking just the right path. If the early church would have had that gift, there would have been no need for the epistles or the warnings in Revelation. We just don’t have that luxury. God is leaving it up to us (collectively - elders, leaders, plain ol’ church folk, dissenters, everyone) to fellowship and disagree under his rule. Even our corporate three hours a week is a spot for bickering. It should be such a small part of our “one-ness”, but we usually disagree most on how we do it. How does Jesus view that?
Can we disagree and still be one?
so..calvin..are you saying that my Mom “took her toys and left”..You know her better than that..Its so easy to make blanket statements about what we feel is right..Its so much more complex..and that is how we are to love each other..
Something on a gut level tells me this is very wrong… My spidy-sense is saying look deeper there’s trouble… only problem is I don’t have anything to support the feeling… The statement, “It’s never easy to lose people. And we should never take pride in seeing people leave.” seems empty and trite.
Wish I could articulate an argument with some meat on it… Really I just hope that if what you say is true, that I would have the wisdom to see it, and the insight to live it out in a “love God, love Other’s” honoring way.
Anyway, thanks for sparking a bit of healthy conflict in me.
J
Truth is, Mark Love’s right.
If Highland makes the “missional move,” people are going to leave. They’ll leave because church as they knew it will be over. It’s going to get messy and unpredictable. Church will be perceived less as “event” and more as “family.” Highland members will stop viewing a piece of property as “where ministry happens” and begin to see neighborhoods, parks, supermarkets, Kiwanis Club meetings, homeless tent cities, and schools as the mission fields. Ministry and missions will return to the hands of “ordinary church folks” instead of remaining the job of professional ministers. In other words, the church will “grow and build itself up in love, as each part does its work,” as Paul wrote to the Ephesians. A 76-year-old church will begin to move out to the margins, where the people Jesus cares for most reside. Worship will be less about tight cues on a snazzy new video or the perfect praise team, and more about “all day every day.” Discipleship will no longer be easy, but it will be rewarding and exciting.
Yes, many so-called Christians won’t go for the above description of the Christ-life, so they’ll leave Highland. And that will be OK, so long as Highland is not deterred from its resolve to follow Christ out of the church building and into the messy, broken world for which He gave his life.
I’m honestly doubtful about most churches that start throwing around “missional” language, because usually it means adding another program or hiring an “outreach minister.” It’s gotta be deeper than something we do, but must be a re-defining of “who we are.” It’s all about identity.
I really like this article as a description of the truly “missional” church.
Missional? Or should I say Commissional? “Go and make disciples…” charges me with the verb, “GO”! It pains me when I realize I have allowed sheet rock walls and padded pews to contain God’s working in my life for so long.
Scripture says that God has left for us a deposit of the the Holy Spirit. A deposit of what? A deposit is a portion, to some degree, of the real thing! If we agree to this fact, than God has left for us some glimpse of what life ever after should be. Not in fullness (no eye has seen, no ear has heard…) but some portion! For too long Christians today, like the Isrealites long ago, have limited God and got ahead of Him. I believe its time to take hold of what God has promised this side of the grave!
It’s time to GO! and follow Him. For just like He led the Isrealites across the Red Sea and through the Jordan on to Jericho, He still leads and He still calls us to claim the land for Him. We have an inheritance! For He has gone ahead and prepared a way and its time for Christians to get behind His mercy, His grace and His majesty. It’s time to GO!
“…where the people Jesus cares for most reside…”
Because obviously Jesus plays favorites.
“Worship will be less about tight cues on a snazzy new video or the perfect praise team…”
Many folks would argue worship never should have been about those things in the first place, ever…but then they were probably part of a previous “addition by subtraction.”
To Beverly-
You mistake what I would not do to represent the convictions of everyone. I don’t have nearly enough wisdom for that call. I make that call for me, because of my past. But there should be a real earthquake in our hearts when people feel compelled to leave. Something that shakes us down to the core and asks us if we are being compassionate enough. I grew up in a small church — the only one in town. Some things happened, the elders made some mistakes, and some people never came back to church. They didn’t just go somewhere else. I can’t tell you what started it on a public blog, but I can tell you it divided the church. The whole thing left an impression on me that will never go away.
And I assure you that I do love your mom, and my heart breaks that she is not still at Highland, and I have told her that more than once. One other thing….I can’t even describe to you how good it makes me feel to visit and see her and have her hug me, because her soul smells of Jesus.
Thanks Calvin…and she appreciates every hug..
It is rough when someone leaves..all this research is being done on how to move forward but I don’t hear much talk on going after the sheep that leave and embracing them and well, at least tell them they will be missed…and how does the flock grieve the loss..We were so open and had so much to talk about the very process..we had focus groups and speakers..but its like noone addressed the hurt many of us were feeling because some of our brothers and sisters weren’t there beside us worshipping with us. It just seemed like noone wanted to talk about it…I went to the elders and talked to them about it soon after..many were crying..many stood up and hugged me when I walked out..one said that he had been convicted..I didn’t tell my Mom anything, as she would be embarrassed, but I knew she would be deluged with calls the next day…Calvin, not one call…
So..maybe there is some more research to be done..
I love my God..I love my Elders..I love my church and I love my small group…
This is just my opinion…
I have stayed and I am glad I did..
Oh well..have I said too much..probably..
By the way, my Mother would be very embarrassed if she knew that I had said all this..hahha..bless her heart…
In regards to my previous post: When I say GO!, I am speaking more about God’s advancement on the territory of my heart as much as advancement of a physical land.
Because obviously Jesus plays favorites.
OK, OK, J.P…you got me. But you’d have to admit that if there’s preferential language in the Bible, it is in reference to the poor. The gist of what I am trying to say is that in the upside-down kingdom, the rich are to learn from the poor, because they are “honored” or “blessed” (Mt. 5:3-10). Unfortunately, however, our churches often go with the world on this one, preferring those who could pay off our building with one check to the poor, single mother with eight kids.
I read some of your stuff on your blog, and I agree with your assessment of the “missional language” in some churches. It makes me uncomfortable, too, mostly because it usually means adding another program or spending more money. This mentality defeats the point, I think, of recovering our identity as a missional people, sent into the world for the sake of the world. Any “missional move” must be rooted in identity, not simply program addition. So I share your sentiments here…I certainly hope this conversation doesn’t turn into the “next best thing.” I am fighting against “next best thing”/program mentality tooth-and-nail.
I thought this article really summed up for me “the point” of this conversation, that the community of believers is to be centrifugal (moving out from the center) rather than centripetal (directed toward the center). Check it out if you get a chance.
Because obviously Jesus plays favorites.
OK, OK, J.P…you got me. But you’d have to admit that if there’s preferential language in the Bible, it is in reference to the poor. The gist of what I am trying to say is that in the upside-down kingdom, the rich are to learn from the poor, because they are “honored” or “blessed” (Mt. 5:3-10). Unfortunately, however, our churches often go with the world on this one, preferring those who could pay off our building with one check to the poor, single mother with eight kids.
I read some of your stuff on your blog, and I agree with your assessment of the “missional language” in some churches. It makes me uncomfortable, too, mostly because it usually means adding another program or spending more money. This mentality defeats the point, I think, of recovering our identity as a missional people, sent into the world for the sake of the world. Any “missional move” must be rooted in identity, not simply program addition. So I share your sentiments here…I certainly hope this conversation doesn’t turn into the “next best thing.” I am fighting against “next best thing”/program mentality tooth-and-nail.
I thought this article really summed up for me “the point” of this conversation, that the community of believers is to be centrifugal (moving out from the center) rather than centripetal (directed toward the center).
What a timely discussion for this furriner (Amarillo)…
…Why people leave is awfully complicated. Sometimes it’s not the changes being made that flip the trigger; sometimes it’s the way the changes are made. And sometimes the way changes are made gives people insight as to where leadership is getting its inspiration to change, which has systemic implications; if changes are made out of fear, or big-business sensibilities, or trendiness, or “what the rest of the *successful* churches are doing,” or cosmetics, that certainly reflects on motivation and maturity. Some of these fine Christian people finally say, “I’ve had enough, even after 25 years of pulling loads around here.”
BTW, there’s nothing inherently wrong about wishing to be fed when we assemble. I study on my own, and I read as widely as my priorities permit, and still I sometimes end up being tremendously nourished by an unexpectedly well conceived lesson in Bible class or from the pulpit. I desire that. Is that too much to ask of ourselves and our leadership?
I mean, the choice to graze or not to graze is my own. But perhaps it’s good to be led to fresh pastures now and again.
Sheepishly,
qb
Steve, Steve, Steve…I hardly know where to begin. I hope you’re only being candid, because you feel the dialogue here is very open. Otherwise, this is some of the most condescending stuff I’ve read.
“If Highland makes the ‘missional move,’ people are going to leave. They’ll leave because church as they knew it will be over. It’s going to get messy and unpredictable. Church will be perceived less as ‘event’ and more as ‘family.’ Highland members will stop viewing a piece of property as ‘where ministry happens’ and begin to see neighborhoods, parks, supermarkets, Kiwanis Club meetings, homeless tent cities, and schools as the mission fields.”
Assuming you know what’s going on inside the heads of others is the beginning of a giant downfall. I don’t attend a church that is missional (at least as the label is used here), but I sure don’t view church as an “event”. I firmly believe that 99% (maybe 95% where Mike preaches) of ministry occurs anywhere BUT our building. Our church doesn’t need to be turned on its ear to believe that.
“Ministry and missions will return to the hands of ‘ordinary church folks’ instead of remaining the job of professional ministers. In other words, the church will ‘grow and build itself up in love, as each part does its work,’ as Paul wrote to the Ephesians.”
I would bet Mike has preached that message on more than one occasion. The fact that enough people aren’t pulling their weight doesn’t mean you simply cut them loose. What happens five years from now when half of the new “missional” converts aren’t pulling their weight?
“A 76-year-old church will begin to move out to the margins, where the people Jesus cares for most reside.”
I don’t know if you understand this, but you’ve just diminished 76 years in the history of a good church. Maybe I shouldn’t take it personally, since I’ve never been to Highland, but I would imagine they do a lot of good in Abilene.
“Worship will be less about tight cues on a snazzy new video or the perfect praise team, and more about ‘all day every day.’”
I would bet that every member who decides to leave Highland would agree with you on that. I will remind you though, that all of those things were done to attract those outside the church in the first place.
“Discipleship will no longer be easy, but it will be rewarding and exciting.”
If it’s easy, you’re not doing it right. It can be rewarding, but that shouldn’t be the motive. If I want exciting, I’ll buy a motorcycle. And it sure sounds like you’re saying that those who aren’t enlightened enough to follow the missional approach aren’t doing it right.
“Yes, many so-called Christians won’t go for the above description of the Christ-life, so they’ll leave Highland.”
But, this one is the kicker. Now those who don’t find the missional pattern (again, as defined in this topic) to be the only way, they are not even real Christians. They’re “so-called Christians”. Who do you think you are?
Regardless of whether this is the best or worst thing for a church to do, there are real people involved. Are there times when it’s better for people to part ways than to live in conflict? Sure there are. But to sit there thinking that those poor people just don’t have the insight that you have is simply arrogant. The disease of thinking your way is the only way is alive and well on BOTH sides of this issue, not just the traditional one.
John,
As a fallen human being, I am generally an arrogant person. I constantly battle against this ungodly pride and am praying for deliverance. Praise be to God that his grace covers over our fallenness and compells us to transformation. That said, my words certainly were not meant to be condescending, but merely a reflection of where God has been taking me (and many others) ecclesiologically and missionally.
I don’t believe, however, that anything I wrote is inconsistent with the findings of many who have studied contemporary churches and faith in North America. That’s where we get the term “nominal Christian” — “by name only.” Nominal Christians do view church as event rather than family, and this is supported by the findings of George Barna, among others. Is Highland full of nominal Christians? I don’t know. But I do know that many times, we must re-examine our forms in order to rediscover our function. Let me speak autobiographically: I can talk about “being church” and “incarnational ministry” all day long, but I still fall back into the mindset of a “Sunday-Wednesday” Christian so easily. I don’t think I’m all alone on this one. (in fact, I think Christians all over America — especially younger generations — are crying out for release from this bondage of “Churchianity”…)
As for taking seriously the Ephesians 4 exhortation to allow “each part to do its work,” I again think this is a situation where churches can talk out of both sides of their mouths. On one side, they are saying that “we are all ministers and every person must use his or her gift.” On the other side, we have professionals who do are hired to do evangelism (outreach minister) or fulfill any number of additional roles, all but cancelling out the former statement. What’s more, the shear size of most churches today does not lend itself to even the recognization of church members’ gifts, let alone their utilization. Most folks are lost in the fray, and the structures of many churches create this separation between “those who minister” and “those who are ministered to,” whether this is their intention or not. (please hear me saying that churches DO have leadership, but I see N.T. leadership functioning in very different ways than what we have now)
My comment on the “76-year-old church” is not meant in any way to diminish the ways in which God has used Highland over that time period. I love the Highland church. I work for one of her elders. I pray for Highland. One of the things that has set Highland apart for the last 76 years has been the willingness of its leaders to hear God’s voice and obey His calling for the congregation, even when it is not the culturally popular thing to do. The “missional” conversation is another example of this, and I want to see the leadership move in the direction they see God moving them, regardless of whether or not it looks exactly like what they’ve had for 76 years. I am arguing that this “missional move” not merely be program addition or “the next best thing,” but seriously examine the identity of Christ’s church as a missional people.
OK, OK, I get worked up about this stuff, and I probably should have left out the “so-called Christians” part. I apologize. All I’m getting at with that comment is that the North American church has grossly undershot what it means to be a disciple of Jesus. Discipleship has become easy. Someone called this “cheap grace.” We tell people that their lives will begin to make sense and cohere if they trust Jesus, when in reality Jesus should completely wreck their lives. If we really took Christ’s words and life seriously, we wouldn’t have nearly as many who claim the name of Christian. For a good description of this phenomenon, check out Shane Claiborne’s great book, The Irresistible Revolution: Living as an Ordinary Radical. Claiborne grew up in the church in Western Tennessee, but said he didn’t truly experience conversion or discover Christianity until he immersed himself in the slums of Calcutta and cared for lepers in India. Claiborne is a much-needed prophet to the church today.
Again, as a broken human being, my arrogance is often apparent. I apologize for this arrogance, and can only say that I am praying for deliverance. I apologize if my words came off as such, but I cannot apologize for my desire to see the church restored to truly follow Christ into the world. Like Tony Campolo has said, many of us have largely missed the point.
Steve,
I don’t necessarily disagree with the move to become more missional (which I think is bad terminology, but we’re stuck with it). My problem is that there seems to be a common thread in the more progressive end of thinking that comes across as, “You poor misguided soul, you’ve done church wrong for so many years. Let me lead you toward the light. If you’re unwilling to move in this direction, you can go find a new church.” Change is very necessary, but should be handled very carefully (and preferably without words like ecclesiologically). I have lived in several communities where a church has undergone a major personality and mission change. Each of them handled it poorly, and there were a lot of hard feelings for a long time. Some of that is unavoidable, but a good bit of it could be avoided by more understanding and better explanation of reasoning.
John - Wow. I couldn’t agree more. This “move” must be made carefully, but it must be made. Too much talk, I fear, slows or stops movement and obedience. Sorry for the “ecclesiologically” reference…too much grad school, I guess.
Blessings.
Steve, my friend,
Your passion is absolutely inspiring to me, and I’m terribly proud of you.
And I won’t mention that I was your 9th grade Bible teacher and high school chaplain, either, because that would look like I was trying to take partial credit for who you’re turning out to be. So I won’t do that.
Anyway, I love that you “get worked up about this stuff.” Thanks for challenging my thinking.
Matt — Thanks. I’m not sure if it would be credit or blame you’d be taking… 9th grade Bible rocked, by the way. I’ll never forget Scotty Douglas’ “slumbering flatulation…”
John — I think we’re on the same page now. I agree that change must be conducted delicately, but it must be conducted. We must not fear it, and we must be willing to move forward as God directs (even when some do not share that vision). Thanks for this engaging dialogue, man.
Wow…after reading this post, I think I can kind of de-code some of the language being mysteriously tossed around at my big-”progressive”-southern c-of-c for the last year or so…
We’ve heard “missional” — and that we’ll be different, and many won’t be comfortable — but much of the new church-speak is unintelligible to those of us who don’t attend the right conferences/seminars. Is this language common at Willow Creek and Zoe functions? (The people speaking this new “phraseology” have those groups in common…)
Coded language IS a cult characteristic…and those of us who haven’t read “the right” books or attended “the right” conferences, are left to wonder whether our “family” wants us to leave, or is just indifferent to our staying….
“Go with God” is code for “Here’s your hat. What’s your hurry?”
Yes, God’s greater good is of utmost importance…but if the hairs on my head are numbered, surely He cares about me as an individual, too.
Shouldn’t His church?
CB, I’m inclined to share your gut-level wonderings (”whether our family wants us to leave, or is just indifferent to our staying”). The whole notion of “addition by subtraction” seems tainted by an elitist point of view unless it is applied to the situations to which Jesus applied it:
1. In the matter of church discipline (Matthew 18)
2. In the matter of choosing whether to serve Jesus or not (Luke 14)
We are clearly shown that these weighty matters justify the separation of believers: even if it’s painful, it must be done. But in the matter of choosing what our strategy is going to be? That seems to be a stretch, a nod to efficiency, a desire not to be held back by “those recalcitrants,” a form of pin-your-ears-back urgency that neither the Gospels nor the Epistles seems to convey to us.
In musing over this whole idea, the thought occurred to me that no shepherd in Jesus’ mold would be content simply to let some sheep wander off to God-knows-where (Luke 15) without some bona fide effort to reach them, communicate with them, listen to their hearts. “Addition by subtraction” is euphemistic language for, “we’re probably better off without you anyway.”
Of course, no shepherd has standing to prohibit someone from moving on if that is his/her conviction and intention. But simply to let him/her go without challenging his/her decision with a pastoral heart just seems contrary to the spirit of John 10:1ff, Luke 15 etc.
qb
Not to prolongue this discussion beyond reason, and not even sure if this fits, but I notice something about Jesus that might be disturbing to those who resist the thought of losing people because of strategy. As far as we can tell from scripture, Jesus didn’t chase down those who did not continue their walk with him. As fas as we can tell, he never spent any time asking people what they thought of him, his mission, his strategy…he just did it and allowed people to make their own decision in regards to continung discipleship.
I wonder what would happen if an eldership/ministry staff spent a year teaching a congregtion about God’s call to care for the poor and disadvantaged, then after that year, they told the church that they are going to sell the church property and tend to the poor by creating shelters, job readyness courses, food pantries, etc. I fear that many in that congregation would choose to find another, more conventional expression of their faith at that point. Would the eldership be wrong to make that move?
Steve…are these people saying they are “not continuing their walk with them?”..I think its a disagreement on interpretation of the Bible not on whether they have decided not to walk with Him..
The lost sheep story comes to mind…
I have a giant antique painting in my dining room of Jesus holding the lost lamb…I cherish that depiction of Jesus..
Steve Sr. said: “…they told the church that they are going to sell the church property and tend to the poor by creating shelters, job readyness courses, food pantries, etc.”
Whoa. I might actually…JOIN a church club if they did something like that.
Luogo interessante, buon disegno, lo gradisco, signore! =)
Luogo interessante, buon disegno, lo gradisco, signore! =)
Google is the best search engine