Shaun Groves
Preface: I was born in 1973 to a couple of Baptists. I’ve never been to the first century, or a synagogue in any century. Nor have I been Jewish or middle eastern. All I know about church in the first century comes from a stack of books, old documents, the lifelong research of some modern smart guys and a vivid imagination. Oh, and I have some biases, bunches of them actually. So I’m not to be trusted when I tell you stuff about it.
I’m fairly certain the early church (before about 300 AD) understood the central message of Jesus differently than we modern protestants tend to (I know there are exceptions, there always are.) What is this central message of Jesus? Mark chapter one says that Jesus preached the Good News everywhere He went, which is this: The time has come, the kingdom of heaven has arrived. Repent.
Kingdom of heaven:
Kingdom of heaven today means a place we go when we die. In the early church, the smart guys say, it meant the present and future reign of God – everything broken is fixed, God’s will is done on earth right now by us.
Repent:
Repentance today means being sorry for sins committed and deciding not to do them any more. In the early church, the smart guys say, repentance meant transferring allegiance from Caesar and self to King Jesus, from Rome to Heaven, and acting like it – a total change in the direction of loyalty resulting in a changed life.
Am I wrong to suggest that the central message of Jesus is the thing that’s supposed to be central to us Christians – we’re “little Christs” after all – and therefore also central to gatherings of Christians called “church?” Two churches that understand the central message of Christ differently will differ in a lot of ways – they’re built on different foundations, leaning in different directions as a result. Am I right here?
Membership:
Membership today means agreeing to be counted by a church’s pastors and denomination. In the early church, the smart guys say, membership wasn’t a concept. You didn’t become a member; you became a Christian.
Christian:
A Christian today (In protestant America, in general) is a person who admits she is a sinner, believes Jesus died for her sins and confesses that Jesus is the payment for that sin. In the early church, the smart guys say, a Christian was a person who was catechized (learned about the teachings of Christianity) for about two years (some less, some more) and then stood before a congregation and took part in a ceremony in which they pledged their allegiance to King Jesus and then spat in the face of Satan/at the ground.
Spitting:
Spitting today is not allowed in church…unless you’re playing softball. In the early church, the smart guys say, spitting was a declaration of war. Christians spat in the face of Satan/at the ground to enter the war on Satan and all forms of evil in their own lives and all around them using every resource they had.
The central message of Jesus, the good reason He came to earth and did all He did and left behind the Church (all us Christians) and churches (Christian gatherings of some sort we can’t yet agree on here), was to defeat evil and replace it with His rule right now. My theory is that our understanding of this central message determines to a great degree what we believe church/Church is. Is that true for you?
How good is your church (defined by you however you want for now) at putting into practice the central message of Jesus? Is it central to your church? Am I right to suggest that this central message is foundational to why we go to church (or don’t) and how we are the Church?
I wonder if I’ve put the whats before the whys when thinking about church. In the comments of the last two posts you guys did the same thing. We’ve provided stellar well-intentioned lists of things church should do and offer here over the last two days: music, community, service opportunities, accountability, leadership, mentors, giving, a hedge against heretics, teaching etc. What I don’t naturally start with when I describe church (in whatever form) is WHY it exists. Seems backward to me. I’m trying now to start with the good reason it exists and work from there to find a good reason for me going or not going or both. To me the Good News, this central message of Jesus, seems like the clearest why we’re given, the best reason, I can find for church (in any form). What do you think? Is there a better one? If you asked your pastor or yourself why church exists, what would the answer be?
Brant says:
Absolutely agree, and thanks for bringing it up. The movement, the body of Christ, is to bring the Kingdom to earth as it is in Heaven.
Jesus did things to demonstrate the breaking through of the Kingdom, and told us to do the same. So far as I can tell, that’s the church He envisioned, and it’s Good News to the world when the church is just that.
Zach says:
I think this is a great post. We need to have the correct interpretation of the kingdom of heaven and repentance. You are right.
But, what I’m thinking about is membership. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the way that I have seen church membership work. And I don’t think spitting is allowed because we have church buildings and we don’t want to get spit on the floors. I haven’t heard this about spitting before, but it’d be cool if we were to start it again.
I can honestly say that I wouldn’t want to be at a church that I felt did not base itself upon the central message of Christ, so I completely agree with everything else you’ve said.
Shaun Groves says:
How have you seen church membership work, Zach? Maybe we haven’t seen the same thing. What is the purpose of membership in your church? Why become a member of your church? What does it mean, do, change?
I’m a member of a church I no longer attend. I haven’t “moved my letter” to the church I now attend. Membership is meaningless at either church. Though both have tried to remedy that, a step in a great direction. Until it means something I’m not bothering with it. I can live and think as if I’m truly a member of the church I attend, whether its leaders think about membership the way I do or not. Make sense?
Shawn Bashor says:
I’m a member at my church and Brant makes me pay him (what he calls dues) every month.
Chestertonian Rambler says:
Well said.
I was born a lot later than you, and have had less time to study these things (and perhaps have spent less time than I should.) But what you do say rings true.
Of course, the problem (and the reason catechesim takes time) is that all these concepts are terribly complex and confusing. Also, one could argue that Christians would consider themselves “members” of the Church at Eccleiastes as well as “members” of the Body of Christ–hence the fact that the Elders of the Church at Epphesus are in charge of congregational discipline for the Church at Epphesus.
Mainly, all this scares me. Always has. It means that maybe “grace” isn’t what I always thought it was, and if that’s true my life is built on a lie. It means “faith” and “works” can’t be put in their little boxes; the former clearly labeled “already rec’d” and the latter labeled “optional, but severely important.” Most of all, it means if I try to figure this out on my own (even reading all the guys you read and more), I will quite literally go mad.
Which is why I need to be catchesized–and not just supported by a like-minded group of friends. In other words, I need a (local, little-c) church.
angie says:
Shuan,
I was wondering if you think your ‘soft rock star’ occupation might perhaps cloud some of your views?
Shaun Groves says:
Yes. In what ways do you think, angie?
thecachinnator says:
It’s worth noting that the idea of ushering in the advent of the Kingdom on Earth was a wildly popular theme of late 19th – early 20th Century liberal Protestantism. They interpreted scripture to believe that it was our responsibility to create the Kingdom of God here. “Every day in every way…” they used to believe that humanity was on an inevitable march towards God. That theology ultimately crumbled in the wake of WWI and WWII. In the face of Naziism and global combat it became a bit difficult to argue that we were getting closer to being the Kingdom of God.
But that doesn’t mean that they got it all wrong. I think you got it right to call it the “present and future” reign of God. It should also be described as both literal and ephemeral. True, God’s will is done by us on Earth right now, but not for the sake of creating the Kingdom. That is not within our ability. We live and do God’s will to be a part of the Kingdom which exists right now.
Great stuff, Shaun.
Zach says:
Shaun,
First off, you definitely make sense. Even I (because I am at school) attend a different church and only attend my home church once a month, and I am greatly involved in the church here, where I am not even a member. You’re right, I can be very involved and not be a member.
But, at my home church, members are the ones attending the business meetings, and voting on things, electing deacons… I cannot explain this in detail as I am young and have not had much part in that, but that makes membership important and it is why someone would become a member. Is this different from what you have seen?
Paul says:
The best reasons for me are:
Community:
To quote my church’s core values, “Life transformation happens best in small groups.” Proverbs says it’s a process like “iron sharpen[ing] iron”. I say that I need everyone in each group I’m a part of and they need me. If I’m not there, I’m short-changing them and vice-versa, not b/c each of us is brilliant or anything, but b/c we all have different perspectives that illuminate a given subject.
Service:
Who is doing your job in the church if you’re missing? You’re called to do certain things. If you don’t no one will (not the way you’d do it). The Apostle Paul said we’re all important; there’s no appendix in the body of Christ.
Giving:
Where are you giving your tithe? To be sure, we’re free from the constraints of the law, but I’d say that there’s value in being someone who’s generous like God.
Evangelism:
If you’ve never done evangelism in a team setting, you’re missing a lot. The value of a team is that it’s often better than the sum of it’s parts. We can do evangelism alone, but there’s something to the team approach that helps with those you want to love to faith. Sometimes a different perspective is all it takes.
Paul
Just Matt says:
Dang man! You keep bringing it everyday… If you keep this up, my blog (shameless plug – http://www.backporchconfessions.com) is going to become ‘Shlog – The Deuce’ due to the amount of links back here…
angie says:
Well, Shaun, I would think you might see a kind of ‘darker’ side to church life i.e. Favortism.
You know let’s get Shaun to join our church so we can say we’re so hip and trendy that a ‘soft rock star’ goes here. He even sang backup for Smitty one time and has the award to prove it!
Or the time on your tour when the pastor wouldn’t let you speak about compassion, even though he has signed a contract saying he would. My bet would be most of his congregation didn’t know that happened.
Those are just a couple of things that pop into mind. What were you thinking?
Ben Davy says:
I have a similar experience to Zach in terms of church membership. I grew up in a non-denom church (which I was once prideful of, and scoffed at denominations and membership). I now go to a PCA church and am a member there. It was something I thought through a great deal, as I grew up scoffing at the notion growing up for some of the reasons you mentioned. For me it comes down to relationship and church discipline. I’m committing in a deep way to cast my lot with this group of followers of Christ in the midst of all our hypocrisy, imperfections in understanding and living out the Gospel, and through all the difficult times. As a friend recently shared at church when taking membership vows, “if my friends leave, the pastor changes, and we go through dry times, these are not reasons for me to leave the church.” Yes, I’m bound to the universal Church, but I need a more tangible commitment to grab a hold of. It’s not a commitment to the degree of marriage, but I can’t just walk away if I don’t feel like being with these people anymore. I’ve committed to grow with them. I need them and they need me.
I also commit to place myself under the guidance and authority of the elders. I need to be a in church that will lovingly enact church discipline if I need it. It is for my good to bring me to repentance and show me the hardness that has developed in my heart. If I don’t make a commitment of membership and take that seriously, chances are if I have become hard of heart and they try to lovingly bring me back to walking in repentance, I will likely just walk away to another church that won’t ask questions or tell me what I want to hear and offer me the sacraments (namely, communion) I should be denied until I demonstrate heartfelt repentance. This is a safeguard for me that I will never live without again, the more I’ve gotten to know my own heart. I really need it.
This is briefly my experience with church membership in my church. I know my leadership and it has NOTHING to do with numbers being added to the church roles. I have seen the grief and heart sorrow when they have lovingly enacted church discipline. They haven’t done it lightly or capriciously; it’s very sad to see the Judas-like hardness of heart with which some people have walked away from the church. I pray their hearts that they don’t end up in the same empty place as Judas’.
There is lots more to say about church membership, but from a former scoffer at the notion, I now see such beauty and necessity of it, when walked out in this manner.
Kyle says:
I just wanted to say that this whole discussion (the past three posts and threads) feels really healthy and Good. Thanks Shaun.
Zach says:
Thanks, Ben. I think you have explained it very well. I really like how you put the part about church discipline, and calling it a safeguard. Thanks for sharing.
Jen says:
Shaun,
I have read the last 3 posts and find all the comments very interesting. I was glad you brought it up, because this helps us clarify in our own minds and have a ready defense for “why” we as believers do anything. I forwarded your posts to a few friends to get thoughts assuming there would be many different responses. Those who commented were marked with defense. I have been surprised by those who commented to me in a very judgemental way, making note that you need to watch what kind of witness you are being with these posts. Now, my friends are great people who love God, but I was definitely surprised at how they responded- feeling as though they had’nt read what I read.
Anyway, Thank you for your thoughts and your gracious response to the posted comments.
Shaun Groves says:
Thanks, Jen.
I’ve received a couple kind e-mails as well, warning me gently about leading other Christians away from going to church. But I go to a church. I must see some value in doing so. I haven’t said – if you take all three posts together – that going or not going to a building called church is right or wrong. What I’m trying to do, and obviously not well, is get us thinking about the reason we do either. WHY do we go or not go to church? Is there a good reason we make this choice?
I know you understand this, Jen – or seem to. But thanks for the chance to clarify what I’m doing here once again.
Thanks for reading.
Annie says:
Wow. Reading these posts and comments is a lot to swallow, but good stuff.
I think any reasons I could give that explain why I drive my kids to the same church building every Sunday have already been said by someone… I will say that nobody has offered solid Biblical commandments to do it; nor has anyone presented a convincing reason not to (in my opinion).
I am part of a wonderful congregation. A mini-version of Kat’s church, it seems. There is a lot I’d like to say about our ministry, but to keep my comment short enough that it actually gets read, I’ll just mention our membership. To be a “member,” one must read our core beliefs and sign, saying that you share those beliefs. That’s it. No special perks or privileges for doing it, but it’s our way of ensuring that we are all on the same page in the most important ways. It binds us together in unity and motive. And it works beautifully.
Blessings to all!
Shaun Groves says:
Annie, I’m going to push you a little, but I swear I mean no harm. I hope the push pushes something great out of you – if you’d share it. Here comes the push…
I don’t think signing that core belief statement means squat to most who do it. I don’t think your pastor calls people on it when they violate a core belief. I think it’s meaningless.
Whew. You alright? Any bruises?
OK, then. What do you say? You agree or disagree? How come?
Feel free to push me too. I don’t break. I cry a little but I’m artsy – it’s to be expected. I’ll heal.
annie says:
Easy there! I’m ok.
Shaun, I can’t say what the belief statement means to others, but I can say that I took it very seriously (as I do anything I sign). And I don’t know why anybody would sign it if they disagreed with it, when there are no tangible benefits to doing it.
As a kid in previous churches, I recall “membership classes” and certificates and such. Like you had to earn a membership by memorizing certain verses or reading through the books of the Bible that were required… I always thought that was intimidating and sort of elitist (if I’m using that word correctly). And I recall my parents attending evening business meetings that the whole congregation was invited to for the informational part; then the MEMBERS ONLY part came, and everyone else had to leave the room. It just didn’t ever sit right with me, even as a kid.
I think my current pastor’s idea simplifies “membership” and puts us all at the same level. Nothing to be EARNED. And if a person reads through the beliefs and disagrees with any of them, well, maybe they want to try another congregation out for size. Since the belief statements come straight out of God’s Word, they will never change or go away.
(How’d I do?)
Zach says:
Well, I think a membership class that is simply a time to sit and discuss with the leaders of the church what it means to become a member would be fine. And members only meetings would probably have the ability to change how the church does things, so you can’t just let anybody in and vote on things like that.
I haven’t been to very many churches at all, and I have not seen membership as you describe it, Annie.. so.. How does a church function in this way (meetings and deciding if something needs to change) without this idea of membership? Is it just determined solely by the leadership? I am just curious about this.
Shaun Groves says:
You did great! But I disagree. Well, we may differ. Does that sound nice?
A friend of mine recently slept with a woman who isn’t his wife. Sad. And I’m capable of the same thing. I don’t want that to happen to me or anybody else. You don’t either right?
Now, at your church, let’s say, you signed a piece of paper that said you believed marriage was sacred, a bond between a man and woman. That’s bible stuff right? And you believed it when you signed it. You believed you believed it anyway.
Ok, let’s see if you do.
Let’s say you were in my friend’s Sunday school class six months ago. His kid was in your kid’s Sunday school class. His wife was in a women’s bible study with you too, or used to be until she had to quit to put in some extra hours at the office.
When she quit the bible study what’d you do? Did you ask her why she was having to work longer hours? Did you gently remind her that she already has a 4,000 square foot home and two ably running cars and doesn’t NEED the promotion? What’d you, a person who believes what you signed, DO about what you signed?
When she started showing up to Sunday school alone, what did you do? Did you stick your nose in her business with tremendous gentleness and ask where her husband was? Did you sense something was going wrong in their marriage and interject a word of concern, offer to listen if she needed to talk? Did you ask your husband to go see my friend, take him out for a beer and let my friend know about his own marriage problems and how you guys got through them – ARE getting through them? Did you pray? Did you listen? Did you say hard stuff like “You’re being selfish and you’re headed for a divorce if you don’t stop it.” Did you show up with movie tickets and a gift certificate to a nice restaurant one day and demand that they go out on a date while you and yours watched their kids? Did you offer to watch their kids one night every week so they could be alone together? How about prepaying for some counseling once you knew how bad things were and knew they’d be open to going but just didn’t know where to start?
What’d you do?
It’s one thing to sign something saying we believe in stuff, like marriage, for example. It’s another thing to believe it enough to be weird, to be downright intrusive and even pushy, and always kind and empathetic, to give up time and money and energy in an effort to LIVE what we sign. My assertion, annie, is that membership that ACTS on what it signs is rare – for me too.
Here’s a question I ask myself these days. When a marriage in my community dissolves do I think “I failed” or do I only think “they failed?”
When we think it’s partially our fault – because it is – when people in our church make mistakes or get duped by the American dream etc, then I believe membership means something. Right now, for me, I don’t think it does. How about for you? Do you live like you believe what you wrote?
Push.
katie larson says:
membership at my church is pretty serious..they call it a covenant (fancy churchy soundy word – i know) and basically you are saying that you will participate in the life of the church, spiritual growth and all that stuff – that you will have family and personal devotions/fellowship in a smaller group setting (my church loves small groups)….actually, I know quite a few people who haven’t become members ‘cause they know that they can’t keep that commitment…they just want to show up only on Sundays to hear the sermon. Now the thing is, maybe this kind of covenant is just as pointless because there is certainly no police making sure that you keep the covenant. there are no laid out clear disciplines if you don’t keep the covenant. There are not too many “perks” of being members either—i guess the only one I can think of is voting in the stuff that gets voted on…to me, the value of this covenant, when I took it, was that I was committing myself to this body of believers and they were going to be important to me. It was me being committed to this particular fellowship – the first one I’ve ever made the choice to be committed to. It is not legalistic at all (oh shOOT I have to go to small group or I will break my church membership covenant!) at all, but it helped to solidify in my mind that I was going to be an active member of this body and that was important to me.
katie larson says:
wow, shaun I really liked what you just wrote… hm. we must have been typing at the same time
wierd. I think you are hitting on something really important there
Scott says:
“Shaun Groves said:
Thanks, Jen.
I’ve received a couple kind e-mails as well, warning me gently about leading other Christians away from going to church.”
Don’t you think there is a time and place where you SHOULD lead Christians away from going to a specific church or type of church? We are warned that there are false teachers. I think that far too many preachers are just that. There seem to be far too many churches who have given up on the idea of repentance and preach Santa god (i.e. false god of our own making).
Certain protestant churches preach John’s baptism, but neglect Christ’s. Is it not true that Christ died to save us from our sins? Why then do so many churches preach that we MUST continue in sin; that no matter how hard we try, we can’t overcome sin. I actually heard the term “Carnal Christians” in a church recently. It was used to describe people who are slaves to their sin. Duh? I thought being born again meant that we are dead to sin and the devil has lost his dominion over us. There is a book called “Sinning Saints” that I’ve been reading. It’s quite interesting regarding this subject.
Here is a question:
Would Jesus instruct us to do something impossible?
If so, he is cruel and not God.
If not, what do you make of “Go and sin no more” or “be perfect” or any of the other commands to eliminate sin from our lives???
If “be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”, means that you can and should quit sinning…..what then can we say about a preacher who teaches that everyone will continue to sin? Is that the type of church that would give people just enough religion to make them comfortable on the trip to hell?
These discussions make me think of the doctrinal discussions that were common in the early church. That’s great! Should they circumcise or should they jazzercise? I don’t think the questions have ever gone away, but I think the people asking them and earnestly seeking have lost the forum in which to ask in the modern typical church…..
Here we are knocking and seeking….. Praise God!
Shaun Groves says:
Scott, great comment, but a bit off topic. Maybe this should be a thread you start on the Board. Go for it.
My short answer, to some of this regarding whether Christians sin and what it means to be “dead” to sin is this: Paul, in Romans 7 lamented his own present tense battle with sin. He, the apostle Paul, said he sinned. Not in the past, but right then, he had a hard time doing the right thing – though he wanted to.
I agree we have the ability as Christians to decide not to sin, but we still have the ability not to as well. We’re torn. I have an old desire Paul calls the “flesh” and a new desire we could call the “mind of Christ” or a new “heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36). I have both. I’m schizophrenic now that I’m a Christian. In many ways this makes life harder not easier for me. I know what is right, I want what is right but something is “at work” in my body: sin, Paul calls it. I have the power to do right, but I’m not forced to exercise it.
This isn’t to say that sin is to be taken lightly though. We’re to “grieve” it, “flee” from it, “confess” it. But it’s not going away until we die. We “aim” for perfection, Paul said. But Paul didn’t attain it on earth.
So, NO, I wouldn’t tell someone to avoid a church that teaches Christians they aren’t perfected yet.
Forever His Clay says:
I can’t wait to see where you are going with this one.
I have been thinking a lot lately about the past. Things are so different from how they were hundreds of years ago. People really lived what they believed in. Picked up Foxe’s Book of Martyrs the other day. I want fire, I want passion, I want faith so strong that I could withstand my head being lopped off, or stand being drawn and quartered, or burned at the stake. I wish, I only hope that if I were ever faced with something like that, that I would glorify God.
Stephen @ Rebelling Against Indifference says:
During a discussion tonight with some friends about the importance of accountability, of holding each other responsible for our actions, I mentioned this quote from Larry Crabb that my pastor used in a sermon recently: “The greatest lie believed today is that someone can know God without being known by someone else”.
Annie says:
Shaun, I’m not exactly clear on how we disagree/differ… but here are a few more thoughts I had.
The paper I signed isn’t the Bible, obviously. In that light, I can see your point about it being meaningless for some people. When “push” comes to shove, God’s Word trumps all, anyway. And God’s Word is where we find His instructions for life (e.g., responding to failed marriages).
I wouldn’t have a problem at all, sticking my gentle nose into a sister’s business, after some serious prayer about HOW. In fact, I am very much a peace-maker, and I truly grieve others’ failed marriages. I know this was just an example, but I thought I’d address it.
I suppose signing my pastor’s belief statement could be more of a symbolic exercise than anything? Maybe it means more to some than others? I don’t know; I can’t read minds. But I do know that the intent is, as I said before, to unify us in purpose and motive. It keeps our focus on Truth, hopefully preventing the infiltration of human/worldly doctrines that disguise themselves as truth – oh boy have I seen this before.
Zach, my church was merely a home Bible study group just six years ago. With over 300 people now, we do have a leadership team. To be honest, I haven’t taken the initiative to really understand how all of the decision-making is organized – to my fault. I guess I should know that, but I haven’t really emersed myself in the business aspects. Being such a young church, there haven’t been a lot of major changes or decisions yet anyway, so perhaps the organizational processes will need to evolve as we grow…
And maybe the concept of Membership will become more relevant, too.
Dave Haupert says:
What confuses me most about this series of posts is that I believe both you (Shaun) and Brant (and others) are part of what the modern world loosely calls a home church. That is, it’s church, based out of the home for a more intimate and close experience, and with much less overhead. To me it’s no less church than the one I go to on Sundays, but just a different type of one with a different method for celebrating God’s glory and power.
But the fact that we’re having this discussion then is that perhaps you are having people tell you that it’s not a church, or something making you doubt that it’s a church. I have a good friend that used to have a home church that met at his house, for several years. The problem they had was that people moved away and the group did not maintain enough people over time to sustain it. In the end, he came to our church and got involved there. He always had a heart for a more intimate worship of God, a more personal one than a public/corporate one, and I really agreed and admired that in him.
The point is, he never once considered his home church anything but a church, even though they didn’t have a pastor, a worship leader, etc. And I really don’t think you guys should be struggling with this either. Whether it’s because you’re being told you’re not really a church, or you’re trying to show other people that your way is better, neither seem like great motives to me to spend so much time discussing this!
All my best!
Shaun Groves says:
Annie, I thought we differed in that you seemed to be saying signing the beliefs statement bound you to your church community and I think acting on it does. Good to know we don’t differ at all on this point.
Shaun Groves says:
I’m not in a home church. I am at a church of about 200 that meets in a school, has a paid staff of two, a secretary, a food pantry, Sunday school and other institutional type things like that.
Brant would have to explain in his own words what he’s part of and whether he considers it or calls it a church. I certainly consider what he has a church. And it’s really a lot like the church I go to. It has leaders, though they aren’t paid. It has a regular meeting place and time, though it doesn’t have a sign out front that says “church” on it. It has programs, in that there are planned events like a car race or a cook out. It has music and prayer and food and welcomes all ages and all people. It does not have print marketing and a web site – unless you consider his blog and the other members’ blogs websites.
From what little I know, it’s pretty similar to a very small church no matter what it’s called.
Sorry for the confusion about my own church situation. Hope that clears it up a little.
Zach says:
Thanks, Annie. And because your church is young like that, it makes perfect sense. My church is pretty old (older than the city I live in) so I really have no idea what was going on 150 years ago when they were starting. We’re coming from a bit different perspectives!
Thanks again.
Shawn Bashor says:
Dave-
I will try and answer what we (brant, myself, about 40 others) do from my perspective of the group. I started hanging out with this group of people a year ago and it has more than doubled in size. We have zero over head as Shaun said we “have leaders,” we kind of don’t unless you count everyone being used to minister to each other at certain times and places for different reasons. Nobody is paid, everyone brings something to the table, litterally and figuratively.
We do in fact meet every Sunday, unlike what Shaun had mentioned it isn’t always the same location. We used to joke abouthaving different “campuses” ie other peoples homes. It is a group of believers who have ended up here by a number of different methods. Some of us are very disenchanted by 501c3 “church” because of circumstances that happened in churches we attended. I myself recognize I do not have a very fair or healthy view of organized church so I will limit my personal opinions here.
We get together usually one other day a week for “common meal,” another reason to hangout, laugh, eat and just see each other like a family. Only a couple are from here, so this really is all the family some of us have here, like myself. We also hangout in smaller groups or one on one throughout the week on a weekly basis. A good example is me and one of the guys are going to a Ben Harper concert tonight, it will give him and I time to hangout and talk.
The problem with us is not shrinkage, it is growth, the problem with growth is you lose the very intimacy we have and trying to “bud” into another group and keep the relationships we have or welcoming in new relationships is difficult at best.
Hope that may give a little insight from my perspective of what “we do.”
Shaun Groves says:
Sorry, Shawn. Same location in that it’s a house every week. Sorry. Bad typing on my part. I was in a hurry – heading out the door to buy Halloween stuff.
Shawn, also, curious what happens when there’s 80 of you? I know there’s no plan for when that happens – at least Brant’s blogged before that there’s no plan for that.
What if, hypothetically, someone in your unchurch (a word I think I heard Brant use once to describe your group) is uber-rich and says, “Hey I have this warehouse I’m not using. I could sell it or we could use it to meet in. It’ll hold all 80 of us and then some.” What then? It’s not costing you guys anything. It’s just a building.
I used to say when speaking on certain poverty related topics that I didn’t think Jesus would drive a luxury car today. Then Brody, brilliantly, pointed out to me that it may not be having the car that’s the issue for me, it’s whether or not Jesus would pay the full $60,000 for it knowing 30,000 kids die every day from poverty related causes. It’s what could be done instead that bugs me about Christians spending money on status symbols – me included. (Ask me why I bought the amp I did. Ouch.)
So, is it the building or the expense? Is it paying leaders or having leaders? Is it the actual stuff of church, the flowcharts, the teaching time, the structures etc, or what you pay (literally and figuratively) to have them? Is the stuff we associate with “organized church” inherently bad or is the price tag (literal and figuratively) that makes it feel that way to us sometimes? Or is it something else?
Seriously, wanting to understand. Because I’m not sure myself what all it is that rubs me weird about organized church. Maybe it’s what rubs you wrong. Let’s see.
And thanks for the more detailed description of what it is you guys do. Yours coupled with Brant’s gives me a good picture and it’s a great one.
Shawn Bashor says:
“If the group ever gets too big?”
That is when “budding” happens. Aterm used as the group has done it once, a good while before I became involved. I think when that time comes it will be natural and God will supply the way it is to happen.
Well if you would like to know what rubs me wrong with the church it is a few things. A few things that some could argue could be changed and I agree. Here goes a list.
1) We are supposed to be a family. My experience is the Church is a family on Sunday (or anytime you have a service).
2) I have a hard time believing the only people in a congregation (say of 500) that have Spiritual Gifts are the payed staff members( I think that covers bases). A business model church does not design a service (which atleast it is appropriately named) to let the Holy Spirit freely work. I know if you are a staunch Calvinist this is easily argued against because the Spirit would do what He willed. So why not involved the whole “congregation” and let them use their Spiritual Gifts without a background check and “spiritual gifts test/survey.” If you wanna argue the background check then you obvioulsy do not know the people you go to church with, which only supports my point.
3)Be real…Life sucks sometimes and it is okay to let those around you know life sucks. In church we would put on these smiles and pretend everything was honky dory. This happen with my “perfect church family” who’s true identity was a work-a-holic mother and an extremely abusive father and kids who were just waiting to get as far away as they could. To be real to the point where I can say to someone “you know what dude, I really screwed up, I…” is a hard thing to do, it takes trust which you cannot build in a public building once a week.
4) I don’t care what you say, you don’t need a million dollar sound system, when you deny people who are willing to be missionaries and live in mud huts monthly support. I have seen this in every church I have ever been in and it pisses me off. It is litterally double dipping on their guilt to tithe, then we are going to have this person talk about “how you need to give more to them, because we spent to much of your money on our new sound system, but I sure sound wonderful from here don’t I? Praise the Lord…”
5)While we are on money, the only people I believe who should be paid are people truely furthering the Kingdom of God. I don’t believe a “pastor” who sits in an office behind a closed door all week to teach a message I can here any preach is furthering the Kingdom, in fact it is distracting us and making us lazy not to read the Bible ourselves. So why not spend out money on organizations(like compassion) or on missionaries willing to do work that the majority of us are not willing to do?
6) Sorry if I sound really angry, I am not, in fact I love the Church so much I am willing to try and help make a change for the better.
Shawn Bashor says:
Oh and to answer the building question you proposed. Do something more useful with it, like put a crisis pregnancy center in it, or a volunteer counciling center, or neighborhood rec center. The list goes on and on and on what can better be done with a building.
Cali Amy says:
I’ve been attending a cell church for the past year and a half and it was a great experience. In fact, in looking for another church now, I want a church close to the cell church model. For a lot of the same reasons Shawn mentioned about being able to be close and be real. Our cells met every week and once a month we’d have a “church service” (of course we called it a celebration) I think that both are actually really valuable. I became very close to those in my cell, but it was always good to share a potluck meal and meet with the other cells as well. And we also had social activities, weekly prayer meetings, etc.
The only thing that technically makes a cell church different from a church with small groups is that the idea behind a cell church is that growth happens through cells and relationships as opposed to at a Sunday service. The celebration is for edification not to attract new members to the church. I found this and still find this very appealing. A lot of people don’t really understand the distinction, though.
As far as a pastor sitting behind closed doors until preaching a Sunday sermon, though, I’ve never known a pastor like that. At all the churches I’ve been a part of, the pastor has a broad range of responsibilities. Not only does he preach the sermon, but he also visits the sick, leads Bible study, disciples and mentors members of the church, etc. Quite honestly, these duties are similar to what missionaries do once they’ve made contacts and started church planting. I still hold that a pastor can be paid and that he is furthering kingdom work. I do have a question though, do Compassion employees raise their own support? I don’t really understand how giving to them or giving a love offering to Shaun so he can tell others about Compassion is different. Many pastors I know don’t make any excess money and some don’t have health insurance. It’s not like they’re rolling in the riches! Please keep in mind, however, my most extensive experience is with small churches.
I absolutely agree that more than the people on staff have spirtual gifts. I despise spiritual gifts surveys and tests. I think a church staff should be kept as small as possible and that ideally you’ll have volunteers to handle most of the work of the church. I think there’s a lot broken with the church, but I don’t think everything is broken.
I think things have gotten worse recently though. I read Brant’s blog at times and he finds some of the most horrifying stuff. There are definite serious problems going on. Anyway, I’m done.
Ben Davy says:
The difficult thing about these conversations is that there are a lot of assumptions that have to be made about people, churches and beliefs because we aren’t face to face and able to flesh them out. It is also easy to set up a straw man that we then rip apart. As I read the comments, I find myself doing this. I have see what these event churches do, those fundamentalists churches say, or that organic-cell-house-meeting-thingies think, and the list of groupings and assumptions goes on. I think, analyze and observe a lot, so there is probably a good measure of truth in what I’m thinking and assuming, but can I make air-tight cases? I’m prone to think I can. I really love my church in a way I’ve never loved another church and see a ton of good in it; I also see a lot of short comings. But I’ve bound myself to them.
It also strikes me that these discussions are somewhat the luxury (and challenge) of living in the time and place we do. I don’t think the early church or much of the world that I’ve seen is afforded that luxury (and challenge). They just do it or they don’t survive. They had their challenges, we have ours. Not that their unity is perfect or automatic (I’ve still seen great struggles regarding church and how it looks in places like India and Mexico), but sometimes their circumstances clarify or simplify things.
George says:
Hey Shaun,
I am really happy for everyones sake that you are trying to do such a thorough job of figuring this out as opposed to knee jerk reactions.
I’m curious about the dating of the information that you are getting some of your ideas (membership, spitting, ect.).
The thing is it is clear from the book of Acts that the requirement to join the Church was claiming to put your faith in Jesus and getting baptized. There was no such thing as a two year or two second catechism as a requirement. It was simply taken on faith that you meant it when you were baptized, despite the fact that the Apostles all knew not everyone was genuine. You were let in and allowed to remain until your conduct proved your confession inadequate. How can anyone dare to hold people to a higher standard than this?
It is also VERY important to note that if the Churches which were founded directly by the Apostles (who did grasp the truth correctly or at least most correctly)and their associates were a mess and got off track then there is little faith to be put into the idea that people hundreds of years later are any closer in practice to what the Apostles (or Jesus through them) intended that we are thousands of years later.
The “early” church is simply not early enough to be trusted and if we want to be like the original church, we can stop trying. We’re full of immoral behavior, bad theology, and man made practices already. Just like them.
jlfla says:
As I pastor I take offense when you say that all we do is sit in an office and get sermons ready that you can hear anyone preach.
I spend 12+ hours a day helping people and do most of my sermon work at home. Counciling people, going and bailing church goers out jail, helping people get into drug rehab, taking phone calls from people who are hurting, seeing widows whose husbands just died, visiting a dieing person in the hospital, marriage counseling for a couple in their 20’s, making sure our thanksgiving basket program has enough funding so we can feed the 500 people who count on us every thanksgiving, praying for and with people who are questioning God…going out with our evangelism team and telling people about God.
I work longer hours and take less vacations then anyone in any other profession I know….I’m not trying to be self-righteous, but I’m saying that a pastor’s job is not a simple as listening to some podcasts, reading and book and taking notes. And my job dosent end at 5:00PM. Do you think that after all that it’s not fair to say I am not worthy of being on payroll…
again I’m not trying to sing my own praises but I think you should look at more than just a few churches before you can say such things
jfla says:
Shawn
As I pastor I take offense when you say that all we do is sit in an office and get sermons ready that you can hear anyone preach.
I spend 12+ hours a day helping people and do most of my sermon work at home. Counciling people, going and bailing church goers out jail, helping people get into drug rehab, taking phone calls from people who are hurting, seeing widows whose husbands just died, visiting a dieing person in the hospital, marriage counseling for a couple in their 20’s, making sure our thanksgiving basket program has enough funding so we can feed the 500 people who count on us every thanksgiving, praying for and with people who are questioning God…going out with our evangelism team and telling people about God.
I work longer hours and take less vacations then anyone in any other profession I know….I’m not trying to be self-righteous, but I’m saying that a pastor’s job is not a simple as listening to some podcasts, reading and book and taking notes. And my job dosent end at 5:00PM. Do you think that after all that it’s not fair to say I am not worthy of being on payroll…
again I’m not trying to sing my own praises but I think you should look at more than just a few churches before you can say such things
Zach says:
Thanks for sharing, pastor. I think we needed a look from your point of view on this.
Shawn Bashor says:
Sorry my personal opinions offend you jfla.
MamasBoy says:
Interesting conversation regarding the concept of membership. I had written something on this a few days ago and it got lost, so here’s my second try.
Going back to Shaun’s comment about the early Christians just becoming Christians and not taking on a further membership status, this was true very early on in the NT period, but they also only had one recognizable group of Christians in each city (putting aside the I am of Paul, I am of Appollos (sp?) controversy for a moment). Paul could write to the church in Corinth and expect that what he wrote would be communicated to all the Christians in Corinth. That is not the case today, and that (in my opinion) is where a concept of membership is meaningful. If I am a member of a group of Christians (denomination/church group/whatever you want to call it), then communication will be happening between various parts of the body that share that same membership. There are other reasons, but that’s a start.
Second, it seems to me that by the time a long period of catechesis was required before reception into the church that there were other groups that claimed to be Christian, but weren’t. The gnostics were some of the most famous (e.g., daVinci Code), but the Marcionites were also founded before 150 AD. Marcion and his followers claimed that the god of the OT was different than the God of the NT and made several other heretical claims while claiming that they were Christian. In that sense, I think that membership quickly became an important part of the early church, too, as Christians tried to distinguish themselves from other groups claiming the same name. How they constructed their ideas of membership is a discussion for another day. The point is that very early on groups arose that challenged and stretched the definition of Christian beyond what any Protestant/Orthodox/Catholic Christian would accept today.
How do we live out our membership and make it more than just signing a piece of paper? That’s an important question to address, because otherwise membership can be more problematic than useful. However, I do think there is a place for the concept of membership in our era with the Biblical example of it making communication more practical and effective.
MB