Church
Our pastor Brian Howard posted this article Escape From Consumer Church by Bob Hyatt. I enjoyed reading it and while it was not revolutionary it was insightful and I hope it will be an encouragement to all of you as well.
Our pastor Brian Howard posted this article Escape From Consumer Church by Bob Hyatt. I enjoyed reading it and while it was not revolutionary it was insightful and I hope it will be an encouragement to all of you as well.
September 11th, 2006 at 9:02 am
Very good. I emailed it to my mom- she doesn’t understand why Randy and I do not go to church and, although Randy has his own reasons, I am completely turned off of church because most churches (if not every church around here) is one of the “consumer” churches Hyatt talks about. It’s all about the program. I am generalizing a lot of churches here, I know, and no, I haven’t been to every church in Ventura. But I can read the huge printed signs hanging off the rooves of the churches as I drive by in my car that are advertising the latest and greatest in bible studies, singles groups, kids programs, etc… It turns me off. It makes me think that the churches are desparate and want to suck people in. Christ brings people to him by being in us as Christians in our everyday life- we don’t need billboards and a program to do that.
September 11th, 2006 at 10:23 am
Yes, it was a very good article. My reflection on why many churches in our day have turned towards a consumeristic approach is because that’s what a lot of people in the society are really looking for, unfortunately.
At our church, we’ve heard several stories recently about people leaving because they aren’t “satisfied” with what we’re “offering” them, however you want to say that. As far as I understand it, the church is a community, which is designed for everyone to bring offerings that bless each other and those outside in a welcoming manner, not a place that we come to receive something from (although that will happen as a by-product).
We actually get a lot of flack and jokes about insisting on calling it a “community” rather than a “church”, but we do it to try to hammer home the point that what we are a part of is / should be more accurately described by the former term (”community”), rather than the latter (”church”), since the unfortunate public perception of the term “church” has become what is described in this article.
It seems to me that a lot of people are just looking for somewhere they can go once a week and sit and consume. That mentality / desire runs the gamut from looking for big, spectacular programs / presentations to people just wanting to simply go and sit quietly, sing some songs and hear someone preach at/to them, do Bible studies, etc. I think both extremes are just as lifeless. Regardless of how much flare (or lack thereof) a message is presented with, if it isn’t challenging us to go beyond how we are living now, then what is the point?
Part of the purpose of gathering as a community is to encourage and push each other towards the challenges of actually living the gospel. In isolation, we will naturally shy away from this kind of discomforting pressure, because our human nature wants to avoid it. But together we can call each other towards better things, and we can work together (with Christ AND each other) to accomplish things that we could never do by ourselves.
If people are looking for the same old Bible studies, etc. that they’ve been going to all their lives, (with perhaps a fancier presentation style as described in this article, or just a more basic approach), I must ask the question “why”? For what purpose? How many times do we need to read about how to live before we say that it’s time to actually start living that way?
Don’t get me wrong, I think that these kinds of studies can be very valuable, but if they are not done in the context of actually changing the way we live our lives, then what’s the point? Maybe this did happen and it just wasn’t recorded, but I don’t see Jesus leading the disciples and others through a book-by-book study of the old testament scriptures that were available to them at that time. Of course, he quoted them frequently, but it was always in the context of talking to them about very specific issues and messages that were applicable to how they lived their lives, and often very user-unfriendly challenges calling for drastic change.
When people actually say things like “stop talking about the poor so much” (although Jesus talked about them constantly), “stop talking about global issues so much”, “it’s uncomfortable to deal with some of the things we talk about”, etc., it’s just kind of unbelievable to me.
I think the only real answer to that kind of complaint is just to say (which we actually have said in church on several occasions) that there are plenty of churches around that don’t broach those kinds of subjects, if that’s what you’re looking for, but for those of us who believe with strong conviction that God calls us to live with each other in ways that encourage each other to follow the leading and example of Christ, we must do it, regardless of whatever difficult and challenging places that may take us.
September 11th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
IMHO, I think it’s the people / community’s fault for making the church a consumer church. And the people that don’t go to a ‘community’ or a ‘church’ don’t like the idea of freeing their pet God from the tight but yet fluffy box they have God so comfortably wrapped in.
People build the church, fill the church and they should make the church. It seems everyone just stops after they’ve built and plopped their asses down.
My perception of a church has a pastor that manages and controls. And my view of a community revolves around everyone as they walk together in Christian life; learning through each others faults, observations and learning as a collective group.
This ‘community’ that I speak of would have a guide or a lead which should not be confused with a ‘decider’ or responsible party. It’s the communities responsibility to keep the whole in check and make sure they stay accurate and relative.
Might sound like I’m talking a lot about the B and our current state of affairs but that’s not entirely true. The B may not be that perfect community I speak of. I have a lot to ponder and pray about. But complaints about ‘church’ / ‘community’ / ‘gathering’ or ‘whatever’ is only the sitters fault and/or the person’s own wanting to be free to know their opinion is ultimate, making their life easier and fluffier so they can live with their own assessments, learning and understandings.
I’d like to conclude by saying again, I have a lot to think about and pray for. So my spirit may change my mind (above) at any time, hopefully to something more loving. :)
September 11th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
I lost that close after “about.”, but you might as well just keep it.
September 11th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
“I tell our people: We are not going to meet your needs. Your needs will get met, but by the people sitting beside you, not standing in front of you.”
That was the most challenging comment for me in the whole article. I really have to make the effort at church to step outside of myself and get to know people enough that I know what there needs are so I can make an effort to meet those needs. I was talking to a friend about loveing people intentionally and sincerly and through that I was convicted by 2 Timothy 3:16-17 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete thouroughly equipped for every good work.” Because I am not filling my life with the Bible I’m not “thouroughly equipped” to reach out to the people around me. I notice my whole thought pattern changing as I fill myself with the things of God.
September 11th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
He could have just said this and it would have been enough for me…
“Here’s what I want you to hear in this article. If you consider yourself a follower of Christ- you need to know this. The church is not here for you. You are here for the church, your community, and your community, the church is here for the world. Jesus did not die to make you into a sanctified consumer. He died to bring you alive to God and to a desperately needy world.
And if you really believe that, it’s going to change everything- both the way that you do church and the way that you live every moment of your life from here on out.”
September 11th, 2006 at 7:05 pm
I posted this on Jared’s blog then came over here and read all these great thoughts and realized maybe it would be good to join the conversation here:
Given the number of people I’ve recently heard complain about “not getting fed,†there are many, who need to read and absorb those words. What really grabbed me was, “I tell our people: We are not going to meet your needs. Your needs will get met, but by the people sitting beside you, not standing in front of you.†I often wonder why there are such expectations of our pastor to be everything for everyone. So many hurt feelings and bruised egos because there was no invitation from him, no phone call from him, no position appointed, etc. And I’m always thinking, what about the other 100 people in the community? Maybe one of them would like to be your friend. Maybe one of them needs a friend. Sadly, it seems that only by being stripped of our buildings, our roles and our people, will we be forced to really see the other, receive the other, trust the other, welcome the other. (Given a chance, I always snip)
September 11th, 2006 at 8:28 pm
Great thoughts, Michel; I agree.
Regarding the expectations, I think that unfortunately, no matter how much we talk about being different, living in community, etc. there will always be expectations that people have about how things should work, etc., which are based on the fact that we are a “churchâ€, and people have various ideas of how “church†is supposed to operate.
This isn’t necessarily even a problem, as long as we’re (1) willing to learn and grow together, (2) never valuing those preconceptions over opportunities to evolve and grow, and (3) committed be up front about talking to each other when things seem to be going differently than they should from our points of view. If we, instead, just harbor those feelings of disappointment (or whatever), it will eventually come out in ways that end up being negative.
I share in your optimism about the process of healing, and look forward to seeing that happen. Whatever form that will take is something that I look forward to exploring, as we begin the process of resurrection / re-evolving together. I imagine it will be quite different than what we’ve known in the past, and hopefully we will apply the lessons learned from the experiences (good and bad) that we’ve all been through.
September 11th, 2006 at 10:02 pm
Our pastor’s sermon this past week was concerning this idea of what the church should look like. I recommend listening to it if you have the time. Just search for Cornerstone Simi. Right now they have the audio podcast up, but I’m pretty sure they will have a video podcast as well. If you decide to listen to it, I would advise watching the video if you can, because of some images that he uses at the end of the sermon, when he talks about how our love for each other and our view of each other as more important than ourselves should spill over into our concern for and our actions concerning the poor.
He came back this week after being gone for a couple months, seeking God’s plan for his life and for the church. One of the main things that he saw our church specifically lacking was the love that was present in the early church. He created an image of a person walking into a church, who’s only knowledge of what a church looks like comes from reading about the church in Acts. What would that person expect to see? He probably wouldn’t expect to see what he would see in most churches in America.
In his sermon he also referenced The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, which was a letter written by an early church father that was intended to prove Christianity. The way Mathetes did this was to point to the church. He pointed to the love that the believers had for each other as proof that what they believed was truth. Unfortuanately, that would not be a very powerful argument in the present time. In fact, the present church is probably used more in the case against Christianity.
I don’t even think I can imagine how much would change if every church in America began living like the early church.
September 11th, 2006 at 10:07 pm
You can also go to http://www.cornerstonesimi.com to listen to it. Click on media, and select the 9/10/06 sermon. If it’s not up yet, it will be there soon.
September 12th, 2006 at 6:26 am
It’s amazing how hungry we tryly are for the real experience of Church, but how easily we follow after the counterfit. Humans love to create their own little controlable systems. I’ve caught myself doing it over the years even though my dad preached relationship over religion to his dying day. But the bottom line for spreading the Gospel, as we have been commissioned to do, is: “all men will know you are My disciples by your love, one for another.” If that’s not the primary goal of our gathering we’re definitely off track.
Fantastic article Kristen! Great sermon Nick! Wise words Jared! (and all you others)
September 13th, 2006 at 1:58 pm
I like what everyone is saying.
Seems like God is moving in this area. Hopefully I can follow Him.
September 14th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
Since a few of you seem to be talking about specific situations that I don’t full understand I thought this list also posted by our pastor might be of interest.
When should a person leave a church?
1. Because the church is no longer faithful to God’s Word.
2. Because the church is teaching erroneous doctrine.
3. Because the church is practicing a philosophy of ministry that is seriously in contradiction to what God”s Word teaches.
4. Because the church is majoring on what may be consider as minor, secondary issues.
5. Because the church is overlooking obvious and flagrant ungodliness on the part of the leaders or congregation.
6. Because you are being called to fulfill a ministry somewhere else that no one else is fulfilling.
Point being that church commitment should be taken seriously.
September 14th, 2006 at 7:52 pm
I’d like to email that to a few people. That’s pretty good.
September 15th, 2006 at 2:47 pm
It (that list) can be good and it can be misunderstood as well. I totally understand the point behind it, and agree with it for the most part, but there are also parts that I think could be easy to get confused about.
The primary one is the use of the phrase “the church” in the first five points. I believe so much in the fact that “the church” (in a local group sense) IS the community that it is comprised of, that any statements about “the church” should be referring to the people that make it up (not just the ones that teach up front, etc.).
If any parts of “the church” are failing in one of those first 5 points, it’s the responsibility of the rest of “the church” to approach them about it and resolve it, in love.
Number 4 is a little ambiguous as well, since the opinion of what constitutes a “major” vs. “minor” issue varies so greatly among people who all are solidly committed to God. Even in Jesus’s day, most of the religious leaders viewed him in a negative light, because he didn’t hold some things in as high regard as they did, and went about living and sharing His life in ways they did not approve of. If he came today, I suspect the reaction of many “churches” would be similar.
*NOTE: not trying to start an argument here, since (like I said) I understand and agree with most of the underlying points here, just trying to add additional context to be considered.
September 15th, 2006 at 5:03 pm
I think these statements refer to the leadership of the church for the most part, and I don’t think that that goes against the idea of the church as the community of believers that it is comprised of. I agree that the phrase “the church” should refer to that community of believers, but there are also leadership roles within a church that are clearly defined in the Bible. I also agree with your statement about how the church should respond if it is failing in any of those 5 points, especially if it is the leadership that is leading the church towards fulfilling any of those. However, if, for example, the leadership is teaching erroneous doctrine, and will not change, then I think the only thing you can do is leave the church.
As far as the majors and minors, I think it is pretty well accepted that the majors are things that are essential to salvation, and the minors are things that are not, and I think that most Christian churches agree on the things that are essential to salvation, since those things are very well defined in the Bible. It is views on the minor issues that vary greatly from church to church.
September 15th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
I agree with what your saying about the church being a community and I guess I wouldn’t have even read those without that thought in mind. I do think its clear that there is church leadership who is responsible for the health of the community. (1Peter 5:1-4) With that said it is the responsibility of christian brothers and sisters to hold each other accountable whether they are in leadership or not (Matt 18 & 2Thess 3)which means you shouldn’t leave a church without seeking all avenues of repair and reconciliation.
On #4 I think the religious leaders of Jesus’ day is a perfect example of majoring on the minor and can be used as a good example for us to learn from. Plus they wouldn’t have been considered part of the church in the sense that we are talking. Another example is Paul’s writings to the Corinthian church about there right to eat meat from idols, which they were focusing on, when they should have been focusing on how it a affects there brothers and sisters around them (liberties in Christ). So if a body of believers is faithful to point #1, majoring on minor should be easily recognized. I can see however that what you were saying could apply to certain theological debates that are not really important to the essentials of our faith.
September 15th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
oops! I didn’t see Nicks response but I also agree with what he said.
September 18th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Yes, I’d agree on the majoring on minors thing too, it’s just that I think that can be difficult to define, and if someone is looking down that list for an excuse to bail out on a church, they will probably pick out number four and come up with some reason why it applies in their situation.
For example, of course the most essential things that we need to share common ground on are those that relate to “salvation”, but even that can be expanded on greatly. Some might say that the “salvation” message is just the basics of what a person has to believe / confess, etc. to be “saved”, but others (like me) would say that “salvation” is a large process that begins with those things but is offered to us for a purpose which will take longer than the whole length of our lives to live out.
It’s just one of those things that people can sometimes interpret however they want to suit their own desires. To me, I think that things that may seem like “minors” (like what are you going to do and how are you going to live now that you’ve decided to follow Jesus) are inseparable from the “major” point of the decision to do so.
I think that even the “majors” can be a misunderstood point if the focus is on a checklist of steps to get to heaven (or whatever one’s concept of being “saved” is, if it doesn’t involve every ongoing aspect one’s life). I think Jesus talks plenty of times (like in Matt. 7:21-23, Matt. 25, etc.) about people who believe that they are following him but are not living in ways that reflect that claim. I can see that in the greater western church culture that we are in danger of that type of thing when we talk about “salvation” in the sense of walking people through a formula and having them sign a card or pray a prayer “repeat after me” style, if you know what I mean.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s hard for me to isolate a “major” like salvation, since I think that everything else stems from it. I can see the point behind the original inclusion in the list though, which is probably that nothing should be placed at an equal level to leading people to/towards God.
September 19th, 2006 at 9:24 am
Yeah I see your point. I guess if they are committed seriously I would hope it wouldn’t be easy for them (because of convictions) to pick #4 out and make something up. I also agree that majors can be focused on in an unbiblical manner but then that would make it fall under other numbers in the list. Anyway I doesn’t really matter its just a list with some good points. I just think that people leave churches for casual, unimportant reasons and don’t consider the affect there actions will have on the community they are leaving.