Today’s Open Mic question is presented by Chaplain Mike.
I read a message by Rick Warren on Christian Post today about belonging to the church. It got me thinking about the nature of the relationship that exists between evangelicals and the church.
Let’s talk about it.
Warren’s thesis is: “When we’re called to follow Christ; we’re also called to belong to the Body of Christ.”
After affirming that the Church is Christ’s spiritual body on earth, God’s instrument in the world, he identifies one of the biggest hurdles pastors face today: it is hard to convince people who attend church to commit themselves to the church family and become members.
Warren blames this on “today’s culture of independent individualism.” As a result, we have many “spiritual orphans who move from one church to another without any identity, accountability or commitment.”
Pastor Warren then gives several biblical reasons why we should commit and become members of the local church:
- Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers
- A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation
- A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle
- The Body of Christ needs every one of us
He concludes with this exhortation:
We must remind those who fill our buildings each Sunday that joining the membership of a local church is the natural next step once they become a child of God. You become a Christian by committing yourself to Christ, but you become a church member by committing yourself to a specific group of believers. The first decision brings salvation; the second brings fellowship.
Here are some questions this approach raises for me:
- It seems, right from the start, that Warren is conceding the point that one can belong to Christ without being a member of the church. Membership in the church is a second “step” in the Christian life—important but ultimately a matter of choice on the part of the individual Christian. Is this disjunction between belonging to Christ and being a member of the church biblically and theologically sound?
- To what extent is “independent individualism” not just a cultural problem, but also an outgrowth of the kind of gospel we preach and the kind of churches we create in evangelicalism?
- Couldn’t one logically conclude from this approach that, in the final analysis, for evangelicals the church, though important, is ultimately optional?
The mic is open. As always, please keep the conversation civil and on point.
The Internet Monk Archives 
I get this strong aroma that Jeremy’s One True Church (all others being Hellbound Apostates) contains only one member. I believe IMonk once mentioned an “A.W.Pink” who ended up taking the same road.
LikeLike
… Do you write well?
Yes. And I joined the Catholic Church for its respect for and patronage of the Arts. And the Lost Genre Guild to get away from the Conventional Christian Mentality re writing. Especially fiction in my chosen genre.
I do NOT want to write the next Left Behind. I want to write Classic SF that could have gone head-to-head against Poul Anderson and Beam Piper in the pages of vintage Analog.
To Tim, there is nothing wrong with going to church to meet other singles. But if that is the ONLY reason that you do, then I would question your motives. I’ve run across way too many men that went only for that reason.
I’ve run into way too many people in general that went to any gathering — from church to SF cons to Furry Fandom — for that reason.
LikeLike
Internet Monk periodically did postings on this very subject. So does Christian Monist, and there are doubtless others, like “KIssed Dating Goodbye, Kissed Marriage Goodbye”.
All I know from experience is that Christian (TM) Dating Services are a complete crock and waste and the LAST girl you want to meet is one of those larval Church Ladies who already has a boyrfriend named Jesus.
And all I can say is to quote IMonk the first time this subject came around, when some preacher went off on “Salvation Through Marriage” and “Singleness is SIN”:
“Some of the things I’ve encountered in the Christian Courtship Movement would not be out of place in Medieval Islam.”
LikeLike
I also see the same factionalism, heresy, immorality, class and ethnic division and separatism, spiritual abuse and authoritarianism, patriarchalism and spousal abuse, selfishness, etc., in the descriptions of the churches and Christians in the Scriptures as I see in today’s churches.
Which makes all those claims to Get Back To The New Testament Church (the Christian equivalent of Islam’s Salafi movement) a joke. You really want to go back to the New Testament Church (or Year One of the Hegira), with all its historically-recorded problems and screwups?
LikeLike
“You can choose your friends. You can’t choose your relatives.”
— President Jimmy Carter during “Billygate”
LikeLike
Until Christ becomes only a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of the Republican Party.
(Or the Democrat party, in the Mainstreams that Evangelicals love to hate.)
And when that Party falls out of favor, Christ gets taken along for the fall.
LikeLike
Probably not. There’s probably an optimum size for this. The dying churches my writing partner pastors are too small (one is less than a dozen, all well over 60), and a big-box Megachurch is too large.
My guess for optimum size would be the “troop-size limit”, apparently hardwired into human brains by family and tribal organization — a dozen or so intimates (family) within a total group-identity size of 100-150 (tribe). (This is also the reason in the Army, a squad is less than a dozen and a company averages around 100-150. Also the reason for the Wiccan proverb why there are only 13 to a coven, max — more than that and two factions coalesce until the resulting instability splits the coven into two.)
LikeLike
I’ve often heard the general lament of church membership. And yet, although I’ve been very active and committend to my local churches over the years, very few of them would accept me for membership, due to my stances on baptism and the roles of women in the church. Both of which are considered non-salvific issues, and are within the realm of othodoxy. I do have a kind of “independent individualism”, not in that I’m trying to make a go of it on my own, but because I look closely at the issues, come to my own conclusions, and don’t just tow the party line. It’s a shame that because of that, I am denied an official voice in my local church community.
LikeLike
Jeremy,
Given that you describe the requirements of the Catholic Church for its members (in local parishes) as “frankly very criminal,” I am curious– have you done any research on what the Church understands herself to be, and why she has the particular ecclesiology that she does?
I am asking, for two reasons: 1. to get some clarity on, and better understanding of, your comment for myself, and 2. because of the fact that *if* a person thinks that the Catholic Church understands herself as just one Christian denomination among many (I don’t know if you do think that), that person will, by definition, not understand the Church’s requirements for Catholics.
LikeLike
I believe I have seen a number of variations on this theme. What I have seen is that there is a substantive difference in churches, in how they are joined, in what they require of people who would join them, and in what the particular church requires of them as members.
Some churches assume you must be “asked” to join. Your regular presence in the pew and your donation not withstanding, the onus is on them to ask you. Do you agree with their positions? Do they want you in that congregation? Once they figure that out, they’ll let you know but until then you won’t have to make a decision.
Some churches assume that people who come in and return with great regularity desire membership, and they also assume you will ask for that opportunity. That puts the onus on you.
Having left evangelical Pentecostalism for Roman Catholicism I can speak for the latter. The Church, as represented by the local parish, will permit you to join under the assumption that you are a Catholic. You’ll fill out a form that indicates the parishes by city and state where you received the sacraments: baptism, confession, first communion, confirmation, and if you are married, where that happened.
If you are not a Catholic but are interested, you’ll be invited to join a program with the intent of understanding what the Church holds and teaches. At the conclusion of that program you’ll have a choice: do you or do you not want to join the Church?
The Church has a commandment that requires the Catholic to participate in the holy sacrifice on Sundays and holy days of obligation (about 56 hours a year) as a minimal requirement. It pulls the Catholic to remember by participation what the Lord did to purchase their salvation. Failure to partipate without a good reason (illness, a child’s illness) is a deadly sin. One is required to put God first.
That contrasted with my life as a charismatic. We were there for praise and worship and teaching, but we were not there to participate in a rite of our redemption. If you missed, there was no particular onus on you. Participation was not mandatory. The love of God might as easily be expressed hiking a forest as participating in the Sunday service. I suspect that this was due to limited authority which might be the reason for a completely separate thread.
My fiancee, who was baptised as a Lutheran and whose parents were active Presbyterian lay missionaries, was practicing at Crossroads Bible Church, a fundmentalist, anti-Catholic church. When we arrived at the point where we knew we wanted to marry, she agreed to help me raise our children as Catholics. During marriage prep, she discovered that what she thought she knew about Catholicism was rubbish and later, by her own volition, she was received into the Church.
Her baptism by the Lutheran Church was valid (water and the trinitarian formula), however her confirmation was not recognized. She made a good confession, received holy communion, and was confirmed. She is Catholic.
Why are we in a particular parish? The love of God for us. Our love in response. Those rites that bring us back to the Person Who is responsible for our salvation. The opportunity to display the love of neighbor.
If mere sociability combined with a philanthropic thrust was the issue. the local Elks would suffice.
One must discover why one is part of a particular congregation, or perhaps why one is not.
LikeLike
Membership to a local body is not a requirement but attending is. I have two ways of looking at this situation: 1. If you plan on staying in an area for an extended period of time membership is a way to foster a healthy relationship with your community and the local leaderships rules and ideas.
2. if you have a migrating lifestyle then membership is not a very efficient idea.
Most Christian gatherings that I am familiar with only allow members to serve in leadership positions.
I feel that membership is steadily becoming a dividing factor that will lead to another denomination if we continue to encourage unmediated debates about it. Personally it is a nonissue that resolves itself organically as one becomes stable in God and life in Christ. Membership can easily move from nonexistant to full compliance if left to the individual to decide if and when it will happen.
One interesting thing I have seen is that a lot of Evangelical Christians attend services outside of their living communities. If this were not such a everpresent factor I wonder if this conversation would even happen.
LikeLike
JoanieD,
So true – it never ceases to amaze me how I can feel such a strong connection worshiping with people I don’t even know! One of the many great mysteries of faith!
LikeLike
Nicely said.
Greg R
LikeLike
Yeeaayyy…..someone else posted on this theme. I’ve been both busy and sometimes just too lazy to weigh in. One of Warren’s blind spots, I think, is that wherever he reads “church” in the NT, he substitutes “local church fellowship”. The question is, can the NT understanding of “church” be captured MERELY by that description, that package. I’m not arguing here for lone ranger christianity, but the fellowshipping, and gathering of HIS believers does not seem to be constrained by ONLY the local church.
As to “building spiritual muscle”, is that happening at a more noticable level in mega-churches than , say, missions grioups, or groups that do urban ministry ?? If I were REALLY interested in spiritual muscle, would I want to make a bee line to Rick’s mega-church, and why ??
Pastors that want to bang on this drum need to do , and present, a more complete theology of what they are talking about, and deal with some of the nuances of the discussion. Including the nuance of why there are so many Jesus lovers who say ^&%*^*%* the church…….. are these folks all selfish individualists ?? Doubtful.
Anyway, Michael Creel, thanks for letting me tag along.
Pax,
Greg R
LikeLike
Those four reasons Warren gives for becoming a member are strike me as rather fishy, but I Warren is right that it is hard for pastors to convince people who attend church to become member, but not for the reason he gives. At least it isn’t the proximate reason, and the root causes he cites are doubtful; I strongly suspect they relate to the theology.. Without defining membership and it’s variations throughout the flavors of Christianity today,here are two reasons people don’t “become members”
People don’t become members because…
1. …they think they won’t be called on to do significant, creative, results-based work.
2. … they attend church to feel good, and responsibility doesn’t fit that model so well.
LikeLike
“For me the important thing is that we find a community of believers, whether that happens within the church building or not, where we can grow together in our relationship with God and encourage each other in the faith.”
Amy, all I can say is that if you keep seeking, you will eventually find. But be careful what you seek — or, like me, you might find yourself as an informal, untitled, unsalaried leader of a ragtag group of wounded and somewhat confused religious refugees without any of the props, supports, or resources of institutional church. I’m not trying to discourage you, but I must say that existing as a church body based on loving relationships (rather than organizational structure or established programs and traditions) can be a lot more difficult and messy than one might at first envision. You really have to open your life to these people, even the parts you don’t want anyone to see, and you have to involve yourself in the messed-up muck of their lives, as well. And it’s a constant fight, in which relational problems between friends or within a single marriage can threaten the continued existence of the entire church body. And if you imagine that people (even in a small, intimate group) will always self-motivate to grow in their relationships with God and each other, you are in for a big surprise. But if it holds together in Christ, it will eventually become a true church family — not just in word or theory, but in the grit and grime of day-to-day reality. And, for me, that has been worth all the headache and heartache.
LikeLike
“To what extent is “independent individualism†not just a cultural problem, but also an outgrowth of the kind of gospel we preach and the kind of churches we create in evangelicalism?”
I think that’s a very important question — and a matter over which many churches and church institutions would do well to engage in a little honest self-examination. When churches take the pose that they are the only or best move of the Spirit to be found in a 50-mile radius — or when they practice jealous possessiveness or strict exclusivity regarding their members — or when they take a competitive or even antagonistic stance toward other expressions of Christ’s body in their community — then one could easily say that such churches are actually modeling “independent individualism” on the corporate level.
I could be wrong, but I am of the opinion that an atmosphere of trust and freedom and open communication (where Christ’s yoke is kept easy and His burden light) is a lot more likely to produce truly dedicated members than the policies of isolation, competition, coercion, manipulation, or heavy-handed micro-management of every little thing.
LikeLike
Godspeed on your journey, Geoff. I believe there is a move of the Spirit going on to restore elements of unity to the denominationally dismembered Body of Christ — and I don’t think that means herding everyone under the same institutional umbrella or into the same style of church. What I think He is starting to restore is a sense of being part of the same universal church across boundaries of denomination, style, and preference. — a collective condition of mind and heart where we truly recognize each other as brothers and sisters in Christ and can meet in the middle enough to serve, worship, and pray together, no matter how you mix us up. And I hope that little, mixed home gatherings like yours will serve as the first foundations of a bridge over which entire denominations may some day discover a deeper level of fellowship and cooporation with each other.
LikeLike
Without sarcasm… Church membership usually comes down to one thing – money and your giving of it. Just like Warren’s Purpose Driven Life culminates in a chapter about money.
LikeLike
MAGNIFICENT
and absolutely true.
LikeLike
The message of the NT is “Don’t go it alone”. Yes; fellowship is THE vital aspect of that. But it is in the context of the gift of community that Papa God brings us into. It is not something we can manufacture (let alone manage) on our own. This by no means that those who participate in such structures are wrong or not getting “the real deal”. Conversation like that only leads to further division. But so equally dos the verbiage cause division that Warren uses. It seems to favor the institution and the system.
Those are poor substitutes for the relational living that Jesus desires to bring; First and foremost with Himself, and then with others within the gift of community that He leads us into.
LikeLike
Perhaps it would be best to first define what “church” is. In the NT, the word “church” is always used to refer to the body of Christ, which is comprised of His followers. As followers of Jesus, we do not “do” church or “go to church”. We are His church. Religion and “The Matrix” have conspired together to make it that only by going to a sanctioned, organized structure that is managed by official clergy counts as the real thing. The passage of “not forsaking the assembly” is twisted to mean that we are only “safe” when our butts are in a pew and that we are “submitted”. That is far from the case.
I am sure that fellowship and accountability exist in the Kingdom, but I know they look far different than what humankind has put forth in the ICOR (Institutional Church Organized Religion) framework.
Not that true ekklesia cannot be found in such structures. I believe it can be. But I also believe it can be found in other forms as well.
LikeLike
As I was reading some of the comments the thought came to me that relates to the post on the “R” rated Bible. I think that probably many if not most of the characters in the OT would not have made it into the membership roles of many churches. They still messed up too much and didn’t always live according to the rules and regulations.
I have been a member of a church (total of 4) my entire life. Speaking from the inside I am frustrated with the masks so many people feel they must wear to become members and stay members, or to even attend a church. Where is the realness, the vulnerability, the authenticity? If church is a group of people coming together, putting on pious faces and/or hiding their deep pain in order to be accepted, why would anyone want that? I have more spiritual connections with my friends I see several times a week at the local McDonald’s than I do most times on Sunday mornings. More accountability and authenicity and spiritual growth takes place there than at the local church where we go and sit for an hour all facing forward with very little interaction. Being part of the Body of Christ means doing life together. Can I say I have that kind of relationship with local church members. My husband and I have made some inroads into this community church where everyone seems to be related to everyone else, but it has taken effort on our parts and has not been something the local church has promoted. I know I sound, and probably am, jaded over my church experiences. I’ve experienced abuse and have felt the church had no answers and even closed its eyes when faced with my victimization. For me the important thing is that we find a community of believers, whether that happens within the church building or not, where we can grow together in our relationship with God and encourage each other in the faith. Why must it be limited to Sunday mornings within the walls of a building with a steeple on the top and stained glass windows?
LikeLike
I’m still a little dumbfounded that this came from Warren because I completely resonate to your second suggestion that evangelicalism (of which Warren is a poster child) absolutely creates the “independent individualism” that makes it so hard for people to commit to church “membership.” Evangelical churches-especially the mega variety-have long lured away people from smaller churches by their ability to produce large scale entertainment with minimal participation required of the individual in either worship or the work of the congregation. People leave our smaller communities of faith where we are truly able, though imperfectly, to support each other as the Body of Christ, to attend (not join) large churches where they can walk in, worship well(ie. be observers to a well-orchestrated service), feel good about themselves and their church attendance and not have to actually connect interpersonally on a deeper level with any of the sinners who attend with them. People choose this because much is given them (at least they’re given what they want) and nothing much is required in return. I guess I’m glad Warren is addressing it (akin to the Willow Creek admission) but I don’t know what else he expected.
LikeLike
How can the Christian perform all those “one another” verbs outside of a congregation? How can one receive those verbs outside of a congregation? How can elders/bishops/pastors fulfill thier shepharding responsibilities without knowing the sheep in their folds?
LikeLike
I hope this isn’t too off topic, but as someone who has worked extensively with Rev. Warren’s church as an NPO employee, I have to say this–with the number of exclusions that pastors like Warren place, it’s a wonder any of us are welcomed at any church. The rules and restrictions that Saddleback, and the thousands upon thousands of other churches who follow suit, hoping for similar mega church status and wealth, pretty much disqualify anyone I know or have ever known from being a member. The church’s focus on behaving in some “perfect” Christian manner as a requirement for membership strikes me as absurd and ultimately harmful.
LikeLike
Here’s the thing for me: I read the type of language in Rev. Warren’s article and immediately have a whole host of “Warning! Warning! Marketing Language; Salesman Ahead!” red flags automatically go up in my head, completely independent of the actual subject of the article. When I try to get past the red flags and figure out what is actually being said, my mind keeps slipping off of big concept words and never finding any place solid to land.
I see lots of marketing technique:
– big concept words that tend to cause people to fill in lots of their own past experience and emotion, but are never really defined: community, membership, church, spiritual muscle, family, commitment, individualism
– implication that you will be missing out on something if you don’t join in
– implication that only stupid or backward people would question or want to dig further into the big concept words
– implication that you are guilty of hurting others – even failing God – by not going along or by questioning
– complete absence of any of the gritty, difficult reality behind these words that the Bible itself is not shy about discussing, and anyone who has put heart and soul into a church for any length of time knows intimately
By comparison, I think of iMonk’s series from Nov. 2008 (click on Archives, then Nov. 2008) about Unresolved Tensions in Evangelicalism … especially the essay on Disillusionment with Christian Community. https://internetmonk.com/archive/the-unresolved-tensions-of-evangelicalism-part-3-christian-community
I worked for many years for a company that developed large software products. “Vaporware,” was, unfortunately, just part of the funding game … the marketing people doing their job of spinning a tale full of the Big Beautiful Alluring (Vague) Idea while the developers writhed in agony on the back row, knowing it wasn’t that easy, and feeling their vacation evaporate into unachievable deadlines. Most of the time, a compromise between reality and Beautiful Idea worked out acceptably enough, in the end. But, sometimes, we just plain backed an irrecoverably wrong horse. And the reaction of the higher ups was, for a while, inevitably, to deny that we could have taken the wrong path, to emphasize ever harder the Big Beautiful (Vague) Idea, to blame customer lack of vision, to blame employee inadequacy. But sometimes there is nothing to be done but grieve over the loss of the Big Beautiful Idea and say “Whoops! This didn’t work out. Nothing to do but learn from our mistakes, backtrack, and start again where we think the ground is solid.”
Somehow this article gives me the same vibes …. too much Big Beautiful (Vague) Idea being pushed, with complete lack of gritty reality details, even though there has been more than enough time and experience for the gritty reality to be known. Reminds me very much of the Willow Creek “Whoops! We aren’t ending up with the maturity we thought we would” admission from a year or two ago. Except that this article – and much similar rhetoric I hear on similar subjects at my own church – is still at the stage of pushing the Big Beautiful (Vague) Idea ever harder, and hasn’t gotten to the “Whoops! Maybe the path we took is the direct cause of the results we are getting” rethinking yet.
Additionally, when thinking about the big concepts invoked in this article, I am completely burned out and unconvinced on the whole framework of being a product or a customer or a productive employee or a marketer. So that is where the analogy of “how to correct vaporware and keep your company alive” completely fails. And that is where the marketing language of the article loses me before it ever really begins.
LikeLike
Ancient Light,
I agree 100% with you. I am in your same age bracket and have had the identical experiences. I will admit that my poetry was encouraged at one church. (and I learned that the pastor would choose the mildest for me to read, so I selected some that I thought were a bit more pointed.)
To Tim, there is nothing wrong with going to church to meet other singles. But if that is the ONLY reason that you do, then I would question your motives. I’ve run across way too many men that went only for that reason.
LikeLike
Yeah, but evangelicalism has been completely schizophrenic on this issue for decades. I can remember my dad, a very conservative missionary, telling me sternly to make sure I met my future wife, whoever that might be, in church. At the same time, I can’t count the number of pastors and youth pastors who admonished us young men and women against showing up to any church function looking for a date or a mate. It’s a wonder my head didn’t explode. BTW, I met my wife at a work BBQ, over a beer. We are both Christians and still happily married 22+ years later. But so many evangelicals still love their little (and utterly without scriptural basis) formulas and rules.
LikeLike
I did not leave them as a Body of Christ. I left their “membership” requirements. Just because I do not believe a certain doctrine that is a second order reality, I should not have been shunned.
This is where I see it act like a country club. I do not beleive exactly as they do, I am not cosidered a brother… sad.
LikeLike
It seems to me that at least some critical questions relevant in this debate should precede all others. “Why do we go to church at all?” Without answering myself, I’d like to simply offer some further points to think about. Where is the Gospel heard? Where does God receive Glory from His people. Why is the church likened to a body? Why do we have Sacraments? Why wouldn’t we want to be with those who are our brothers and sisters, our new family? I wonder if the whole purpose of “church” has become so lost by lectures, pointers, 7 step self improvement programs, legalism and outward piety contests that God simply doesn’t show up! Without Him I would quickly lose interest too. But I go because I’m a sinner who never tires of hearing of God’s extravagant Grace. As Peter expressed, “to who shall we go Lord? You have the words of eternal life”. I hear those words in Word and Sacrament!
LikeLike
Amen.
LikeLike
“- not really; I am at an age now where many of the young male Christians I knew in my 20s and 30s are admitting they “went there to meet girlsâ€.”
There is nothing wrong with that. The bible says it is a sin to marry an unbeliever, so going to church to meet girls is a good thing.
LikeLike
Is the question “Is church optional,” or is the question joining the church and becoming a member? We could discuss and debate the second question at length. Church is not optional; Heb 10:25 is enough to stand on for this point. The first church congregation at Jerusalem in Acts, Paul taking up a collection for that church; sheep need a shepherd. Nearly all of Paul’s letters are written to churches (Collosians, Ephesians, Galatians, Corinthians). Seven churches are addressed in Revelation. A Christian should be a part of a local church; membership may be up for discussion, but I can’t see that attendence is. Where would the accountability be?
LikeLike
I grew up in independent, fundamentalist Baptist churches, so my answer my be just a little flavored by what they tried to instill in me forever. I will endevor to stay close to scripture.
Heb 10:25 comes first to mind; let us not give up meeting together (NIV), not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together (KJV), but exhorting each other all the more as the day approaches. It appears that some Christians had already given up coming together as a group, and the author of Heb exhorts believers to stick together. In all the writings of Paul, he certainly believes in a local assembly of Christians supporting a full time pastor. He spends a lot of time and energy training Timothy, and among other instructions is about how and when to exclude members; this only makes sense in light of keeping a membership roll.
If a Christian attends a church on a very regular basis, gives to the church (or tithes), supports the local pastor and missions of the church, then is membership a requirement? I think scripture definately supports the idea; it would be easier from a Biblical standpoint to argue yes than to conclude its simply an option. You wouldn’t ordain a non-member as a deacon or select him as a trustee; obviously some people must be members. In the Baptist tradition I’m a part of, new believers follow their profession of faith with baptism, and it’s this act of baptism that makes them members of that congregation.
LikeLike
But YOU left THEM. Why does it shock you that they thought of you as an outsider?
LikeLike
Dude!
LikeLike
I’m definitely with Denise, and reject Peet’s cynicism in points 3 and 4. The community of my church, especially our men’s Sunday School, has definitely sharpened my steel. And yes, sitting in that pew has taught me a lot over the years, including watching people faithfully serve in some capacity, being the pinkie of the body of Christ. A lot of the hymns are uplifting, some are just plain difficult, but it’s part of being a community. Sometimes you don’t like your relatives, but they’re family. Sometimes you don’t like the hymn, but it’s part of the service.
LikeLike
Yes. Thanks for that. I concur.
LikeLike
Do you teach well?
Oh.
Well, it’s too bad you have the wrong sexual organs. You’re not allowed behind the pulpit or to teach the congregation.
Maybe you can teach the little kids before the boys become “men” and aren’t allowed to have a “woman” teach them.
LikeLike
It seems to me that a good question (and an ironic one, since we’re responding to what Rick Warren has said) is: “What is the purpose of the church?” For the sake of argument, I’m going to use the definition of “church” that equates it with a local congregation, rather than the Church Universal or whatever. I think one major purpose is to administer the sacraments. There are some parts of the faith that simply can’t be adequately practiced without a local congregation. But if there’s no appreciation of the sacraments (e.g. in much of evangelicalism), this point falls apart. Another is to provide a community in which spiritual formation can occur and spiritual disciplines can be practiced. Again, this is something that evangelicalism tends to ignore. Another purpose is to pass on the teachings of the Church (e.g. traditions, history, doctrines, etc.). Again, evangelicalism tends to be distrustful of this and thinks that all answers to everything can be found in Scripture alone (of course, this isn’t really true as the huge industry of evangelical publishing shows, but it’s the claim made).
I guess what i’m saying is that due to the watered-down ecclesiology, theology, etc. of modern Evangelicalism, the local church becomes much less relevant. You really can’t effectively be a Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian, Lutheran, etc. without the local church. But it’s no problem being a nondenominational evangelical without it.
Don’t get me wrong, I understand the concept of being “in the Evangelical Wilderness” where you don’t have a home. But it’s hard to see that as being the ideal. It’s more of an occasional tragic necessity. I know that when I don’t have other Christians around to keep me grounded, I tend to get a bit off balance. And when I don’t have a place to practice the sacraments, etc., it’s a very dark time.
LikeLike
Denise Fath wrote at 5:15 pm, “I do a lot of studying and praying on my own, but I know sometimes it’s just nice to worship with other people.”
Yes, I agree, Denise. I don’t often get to go to weekend Mass, but I went today and while reciting the Creed and the Our Father with the people gathered, I decided to really listen to the people as they prayed and their words washed over me and through me. Their prayers and their faith help to sustain me and I hope that mine hope to sustain them. I hardly know any of the people (maybe 20 of them by name) but I like knowing they are there and I like knowing that they are in the world, living out their faith and hopefully bringing the love of God to the world.
LikeLike
A lot of the Old Testament saints DID NOT belong to congregations. Neither Elijah nor Ruth nor Ezekiel nor Jonah were shown as belonging particularly to a “corporate” body. Nor was John the Baptist from the New Testament. Further, the degree of submission and, frankly, frightening brainwashing that one has to undergo to truly be beneficial to a strong community of followers would be fundamentally unethical to DEMAND out of anyone. To do so is to completely disregard the dignity of human beings, and the fact that Catholics would knowingly do so I find frankly very criminal. The fact that Christ even reccomends the severing of relations in Luke 14 does not make your case well for you. Maybe you need to accept that not every human being has been made, BY GOD, of the same nature and that many churches frankly don’t deserve a membership, and in fact deserve the destruction that Christ foretold them in Matthew 7, and happens in this world on a regular basis whether you like it or not, which I think is far more indicative of what God believes then anything you can tell me.
LikeLike
Amen
LikeLike
Interesting discussion… I found this site via SoC to Points North, an excellent blog by someone who is unchurched – not by choice.
At 50+, as a single woman, I can address all of Pastor Warren’s points from direct personal experience:
1. Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers –
– not really; I am at an age now where many of the young male Christians I knew in my 20s and 30s are admitting they “went there to meet girls”. I kind of thought so, back then. Was I “doing it to meet boys”? No, and that’s probably why I didn’t meet any 😉
These days many people at churches I (sporadically) attend seem to be there primarily for the entertainment value…
2. A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation
– see 1. Not if it’s primarily a dating site / social club / entertainment venue. That tends to increase the sense of isolation, for those who are there for other reasons.
3. A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle
– sadly, I haven’t seen this. See below.
4. The Body of Christ needs every one of us
– ironic, this one. In the few churches I’ve attended that really seemed to be about Christ, there was a distinct ‘turfiness’, very strong competitive undertones.
… Do you sing well? Um, we already have a lead soprano, no thanks. [ah but I never said I wanted the lead – I don’t, actually, I just want to sing.] [Well, she thinks you do, and she was here first, so that’s that.]
… Do you write well? Um, we’re already sponsoring a resident poet. Oh, you’re not a poet? We already have an editor, thanks. [ah but I don’t need to be a sponsored resident anything, I just want to write.] [Well, they think you want to take their places, and they were here first, so that’s that.]
Do you teach well? Oh good, you can take the 1-year-and-under Sunday nursery, all day Sunday every Sunday. [ah but I’m single and childless and babysitting babies is not exactly my strong point, besides I’d like to actually hear the sermons, that’s kind of why I came here, after all.] [What’s wrong with you? Ain’t you a woman?]
‘Needed’ for the genuine talents and skills I actually possessed? No.
Welcomed for them? Sheol and Gehenna, no!
“Used” for whatever nobody else wants to do, if I sit still long enough for someone to corner me? Mmm hmm, mmm hmm, now THERE’s an idea…
Sorry. I report from my experience, not from my hopes and dreams, which were altogether different than this.
LikeLike
As an American, I’m free from any responsibility to any community. Why would I possibly put myself in a situation where I was under the authority of a pastor or charged with any accountability for other people? Where is the profit in that, if you don’t mind me asking?
Church membership is nothing but a step in the slippery slide to socialism. We must have a free market in all areas of society, and that includes religious.
How else will churches learn to create the right consumer-driven programs if not by seeing their revenues increase or decrease based on their market-driven offerings? They need to think more like health insurance companies and get focused on the bottom line, not some nebulous communistic idea of the common good of a community.
PERSONAL salvation, people. Once you’re saved, you’re free to choose a church — or not — just as you would choose a country club or subdivision, with a hard look at the benefits vs. the cost.
OK, sarcasm off.
LikeLike
Evangelicals I have known, at least the ones that I have always been part of/around here in Bible Belt Kansas, have always been “led” by feelings or crave personal mystical experiences from God. So it is amazing how many must leave their current church because God is “leading” them to go somewhere else. Laymen decide that they are being “led” to start their own churches in storefronts. etc. That is why we have 500+ churches in town.
Many of my friends go to church just to hear the teaching. They follow the best teacher as they, surprisingly, bounce from church to church. Or they like the music. They do not care about the people at all.
I admit that I am going to a church where I like the pastor but, after being there awhile, I found that I don’t really like the people either. Many are way too conservative and a little goofy.
So this who thing leads to consumerism and consumption. Then all the local churches, mega or not, have to appeal to consumers, get the best music, dumb down the message, and provide the ever important kids programs. Or the churches compete with other consumables, like child care, school, or ever-growing playgrounds that rival McDonalds PlayPlace. One local church even has a bowling alley in the basement!
I have a friend that plays guitar in rotating worship bands, from church to church. If he is not playing this week, he goes somewhere else to play. And no one questions him. They let him play as the itinerant guitarist.
LikeLike
One aspect of this discussion that I haven’t seen fully addressed (and if you have addressed it, and I missed you, I’m terribly sorry!) is what exactly constitutes the Church? Is it a building with Sunday School classrooms, a Sanctuary, a nursery, etc? Or is it the body of believers, who may choose to gather in any manner they choose?
I personally think Church has nothing to do with a building, or a 9 30 worship time, or barbeque potlucks on Wednesday night. And since I believe that Church is the body of believers that exists across state and national boundaries, then I don’t believe Church is optional, because you join the Church upon your conversion. I do think that it is important to gather together with believers, but I agree with some of the people who have posted already in that I don’t think we have to listen to someone preach to us in order to be spiritually fulfilled.
I have a very inquisitive mind, and I don’t do well with sitting and listening to someone speak AT me for an hour- even in school I ask tons of questions and engage in a conversation with the professor. I personally don’t go to “Church”, but I do gather together with some other believers that I am very close to, and we all study the Bible together, eat together, sing songs of praise together, and just enjoy each others’ fellowship. What would Rick Warren say to me?
LikeLike
RonP, your thoughts about being a “visiting ambassador” is quite interesting to me. When it really comes down to it I love my group of people and do consider them my church. However, I also enjoy and see the value the more institutional church as well. I guess, for me, I am acknowledging that not everyone fits the institutional church just the same as not everyone fits the house church. There is room and need for both. As for me, I fit somewhere in the middle! We all attend different churches (various denominations) and yet we learn and experience God partly by seeing how others relate to God via their lens of experience. I truly benefit from learning about how others experience God. It’s a great journey and one that I am really enjoying at this stage of life.
LikeLike
Well said Eric.
LikeLike
“When one looks at ALL (yes, and “all†means “all†in this case) the NT passages on membership, it is clear that 1) nowhere are we told to BECOME members of a church, because 2) all the passages assume we ALREADY ARE members.â€
This IS the fundemental assumption in the whole doctrine of membership. Miss this one, and everything else goes awry. Well said.
LikeLike
Denise, I really like your first paragraph. You put very nicely. Gathering together a Body of believers was not an option to early Christians.
LikeLike
Very true. All of those things are the same, with the sole exception of the fact that Church leadership in the Scriptures weren’t willing, nor did they see it as a luxury, to be able to tolerate it like too many of today’s leaders do. Sad really. The church could be so much more powerful if leaders and members alike weren’t hell bent on fighting the work of the Gospel.
LikeLike
My point was that if churches should be driven by a family-like environment, does a big-box model accomplish this, which requires volume to reach that low per-capita cost?
LikeLike
I question whether he does have a high view of the church, Matthew. I think the evangelical theology he is setting forth here views the church as important, but ultimately optional. Membership in the local church is viewed as something helpful to my individual spiritual walk, and, oh yeah, you can help others too. But his approach reveals an theology that says church is not in the final analysis essential. I can’t imagine a Christian in the NT having to be persuaded to “join a church” after believing in Christ. The two can’t be separated.
LikeLike
Miguel,
Let me share how the differences between the universal Church and the individual one works out, at least to this Catholic.
I can go, worship and take Communion at any Catholic church in the world, without question. Sometimes, I need to go to another one, for a change or a need. (A lot of the parish churches where I have been can use some extra reverance and awe).
BUT, I cannot minister there, nor am I there long enough to make friends. Both are needed and it is a balance.
LikeLike
No, church membership is not a required thing.
I always wondered why the “community” in “living in community” had to be defined as “those with whom we attend church”. This would have been the same thing when where you lived was where you went to church, certainly in the earlier church and in later times before commuting became so…popular.
I find myself now commuting to a church that is one with which I would not otherwise choose to be affiliated (save that one with whom I affiliate myself does choose this church, if you follow 😉 ), and so have found and made–and been given–my community elsewhere. Christians who don’t attend my church, one or two who do, one or two over the Internet…
Everyone knows that not everyone who attends church is Christian.
“The church” does not equate to one church any more than it equates to a denomination or a school of thought. And I’ve certainly seen *church*-centered people–perhaps they weren’t self-centered, per se, but woe unto those who are not a part of Club Christianity. Some churches promote and feed this attitude, intentionally or not.
“Spiritual muscle”–what is this? I’m not sure. To be certain, as others have pointed out, life outside of the church building provides plenty of opportunity for the practice of spiritual discipline(s).
And as the church (universal) is the body of Christ, and it is not restricted to a particular building, we are all serving the body, whether inside or outside of the building of a church.
I’m not leaving my spouse, and my spouse isn’t leaving that particular church. C’est la vie: Life is more complicated, sometimes, than we would wish it to be.
LikeLike
Hmmm.
In addition to the above rosy-hued (IMO) reading of the texts, I also see the same factionalism, heresy, immorality, class and ethnic division and separatism, spiritual abuse and authoritarianism, patriarchalism and spousal abuse, selfishness, etc., in the descriptions of the churches and Christians in the Scriptures as I see in today’s churches.
🙂
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose….
LikeLike
There are all kinds of great theological discussions to be had on this topic.
I am going to swing to something a little more simple, however. A lot of the reasons people give for not attending church (including by me at some points in the past), ultimately strike me as wrong-headed. Ultimately, most Americans wind up saying that church “isn’t for them,” or that they “can’t find a church that fits them,” or “can’t find a church they agree with,” or “don’t trust pastors.” All these comments make sense if you are asking what church can do for you or if they “match” you. However, they make almost no sense if you are looking for a way to serve, a place to take sacraments (which are really not possible in isolation), a place to look for the mystery of God among an imperfect community of people being redeemed.
The church isn’t about us — we’re supposed to be about the church.
LikeLike
There is a lot of truth to what you write. It’s an especially sad, but true, point you make with the first.
But don’t you think there’s something to be said for the idea that a community of believers can help strengthen our own faith? That a community can help us grow and become closer to Jesus and learn more about what we believe and why?
I do a lot of studying and praying on my own, but I know sometimes it’s just nice to worship with other people (especially other people my age!). And there’s just some intangible in my friendships with other believers that isn’t there with my non-Christian friends.
So while you are right to point out some flaws in Warren’s argument, I wonder if you discount his idea a little too much. God bless!
LikeLike
Hopefully a Catholic perspective will be ok too! =)
Joining a Church and attending is important because it’s where you receive the Sacraments (Baptism and the Eucharist are the two which I believe we share with many of our Lutheran friends). Early Christians risked their lives to attend a Mass and receive the Eucharist, and would not have considered themselves part of “God’s spiritual family, the church” unless they were a member of one of the branches of the Church.
Though there is a lot of confusion about this – the Catholic Church does NOT teach that no one outside of the Church will get to Heaven. But she strongly believes that the Church helps believers get there through the sacraments and her guidelines about living out the Christian virtues. So I would say it’s not so much that there is a to-do list for God – it’s more like joining a church should help us live the type of lives God wants us to. God bless!
LikeLike
I do not agree with Rick most of the time. Infact I find him borderline dangerous.
But – I agree with him here.
A high view of the local church is a must!
LikeLike
It’s hard to imagine the early Christians considering joining a church optional! Churches were formed all over (Jerusalem, Corinth, Alexandria, Rome, Ephesus, Smyrna, etc.) and no one in the first few centuries after Jesus would have considered themselves Christians without being a member of one of them.
I get why some don’t want to become a member of any church, and I’m sure there are some Christians that don’t belong to a church who are more devout than some church-goers. But just because no church is perfect doesn’t mean it’s any less necessary to join one.
LikeLike
Oh, in case you’re interested, you can read my series on re-thinking church membership here:
http://fromthepew.blogspot.com/search/label/RTCM30
LikeLike
Chaplain Mike,
Your analysis of the article is right on, and your questions are quite relevant. By no means is Warren the only one who looks at membership this way; it is rampant throughout evangelicalism. This two-tiered approach to the body of Christ actually creates and perpetuates the very problem it is designed to solve. It allows for individualism while at the same time condemning it.
I have studied this idea of membership for over a decade now (and have an ongoing blog series, up to 32 parts so far), and have personally experienced the sad results.
When one looks at ALL (yes, and “all” means “all” in this case) the NT passages on membership, it is clear that 1) nowhere are we told to BECOME members of a church, because 2) all the passages assume we ALREADY ARE members. So the membership idea actually categorizes people who are already biblical members of churches and labels them as non-members. This is tragic. It is an artificial division in the body created by those who hold to this idea, and the blame is placed on the people who unwittingly are given the label “non-member.”
1 Corinthians 12:13 makes it clear that it is the Spirit that baptizes us into the body, and 1 Corinthians 12:18 makes it clear that it is God that places the members in the body, and not man that does so. The unintended consequences of a man-made “formal memberhip” are many, too numerous to list here. And as these two passages show, what could be more “formal” than an act of God in placing the members in the church? I think it’s time for us to recognize God’s providence in membership and recognize all baptized Christians who assemble with us as already members. Let us treat them this way instead of holding them under suspicion because they haven’t signed some form somewhere.
LikeLike
I believe that Christians are called to be in association with each other, just as it says in Hebrews 10 – “Do not forsake the assembling of yourselves together…” But I also believe that Rick Warren has an agenda. His whole “Purpose-Driven Church/Purpose-Driven Life” teaching is designed to enable pastors to build up their own personal religious empires, full of hypnotized pliable followers.
In a “Warrenite” church structure, the pastor (or staff or elders) are responsible for the work of “maintenance” (deciding the direction of the church, administering the finances, choosing who is assigned to a ministry), while the congregation is reduced to the work of “ministry” (as in, serving the church and the agenda or goals of the pastor/elders/staff). The congregation is taught that it is not their place to ask how money is spent or how decisions are made or how the elders or pastor are chosen.
This is a recipe for abuse, pure and simple. It leads to domineering pastors running around with unchecked power, who frequently use that power to do harm to their congregations. It also leads to financial mismanagement. Witness the case of Roddy Clyde, a former associate of Rick Warren, who’s now wearing an orange jumpsuit because he embezzled $500,000 from his church.
After some (extremely) negative experiences at churches whose leaders were accountable to no one, I must say that to American evangelical pastors that if you all want people to become committed members of your churches, you had better wise up. Quit the empire games. Stop trying to grow megachurches. Stop trying to fleece your flocks. I’m not impressed with most of you.
LikeLike
ty Isaac, an intriguing source that resonates with me.
LikeLike
Excellent thoughts and refreshing, but this is going to take commitment. Perhaps that is the point.
LikeLike
The kind of expectation we sometimes create is that there is a “right for us” church, out there somewhere. This may go with that “finding God’s will” trap that there’s one perfect and right “God’s will for our personal life” that we have to decode for spiritual success.
Independent anything is the unsurprising result of living life as a quest for something perfect, where finding it becomes the prerequisite for making a commitment. Marriage. Family. Friendship. Church. We’re talking about relationships, here. Don’t waste your life seeking a fairy tale; get started making those relationships happen.
LikeLike
I think your problem is in the “in church” phrase.
I think we would agree that the “one anothers” are most powerful when they involve real struggle and emotion — relationship, not just when they are token (“I’ll be praying for you”) gestures for those we see once a week in the pew. Fortunately, my everyday life includes significant relationships with people “in church,” some of whom I disagree with regularly. Who should know you better but get under your skin more deeply than those you share your life with? If you don’t have that kind of relationship with people “in church,” then your church experience has been (what shall I say?) superficial, tragic, stunted. You haven’t seen in color yet. Church is far bigger than church meeting. Press on! Make (or just be if you have to) a real friend.
LikeLike
Jaz –
The same situation exists in North-central Florida. We are looking and looking for a church. There is a longing deep within me that yearns for that connection with the brethren, but I cannot satisfy it at the expense of sound teaching from the pulpit. I am agog at the dearth of truth from the ministers who hold positions of leadership. We will still keep looking and praying about it.
This whole discussion is great. If I could meet periodically with all of the posters on this site, I know it would be the best church ever! Oh, wait, that is what I do now -in a way, as I listen to the discussion and learn and grow.
Related to this very issue and the struggles many of us deal with, a man told me once, “I’m not into churchology.”
Blessings!
LikeLike
I forgot one thing:
Tithing is for Jews living in the land of Israel under the Levitical priesthood under the old covenant.
🙂
(Despite the smiley, this is the truth, not a joke.)
LikeLike
Prayer, contemplation, studying scripture, reading books by christian thinkers, seeking discussions with other Christians, sharing my faith, sharing my testimony, reaching out to those who feel alienated – none of that is optional for me. I desire Christ at the center of everything I do.
Church membership? After recent experiences I will be very cautious about joining another church. This is because I take commitment seriously, like marriage.
I pray about this issue a lot. Am I supposed to start a home-based group for others who feel alienated by our local churches? Am I supposed to keep visiting other churches seeking that one that seems right? The answer I seem to get is this is a time for my own emotional healing. So I am happy to visit various churches, but will not rush into commitment.
If I had stayed with the church I joined, my resentments would have steadily grown. This would have impacted my prayer life, negatively, pulled me away from prayer. As it is, because I do not attend a church regularly, I feel all the more strongly that I should spend time in prayer and study. Although I desire to find a church home, I will not place church above Christ.
LikeLike
“Salvation is not found outside the church, one cannot be saved apart from the church, and one cannot maintain one’s salvation without regularly partaking of the church’s sacraments/mysteries and services.”
Well said, EricW. The sacraments are the same worldwide and have been practiced for thousands of years. At Mass, I find a sense of belonging and purpose that transcends any particular parish in any given time and place.
And we need to be in worship within his body of believers, because as St. Paul rightly points out, no one part of the body can say to another, “I have no need of you.”
I’ve had disagreements and personality conflicts with priests in the past, but the priest is not the “big show” in a Catholic church (or he shouldn’t be). The emphasis is on the sacraments, with priests being fungible, as it were. The sacraments, and the beliefs about them, remain constant over time.
What I hear over and over again from my evangelical brothers and sisters is that it’s really the pastor/teacher/worship leader who sets the tone in their churches, not a set of beliefs that all can agree upon.
I’m not saying this is universal and I’m not saying it might not happen in a Catholic parish. But it seems to me that when sacraments are seen as essential to inner sanctification and spiritual growth, you have people eager to worship in church.
LikeLike
“I still believe that membership in a local church is very important… so important in fact that going to a sub par church because it’s a church isn’t a very good option. I haven’t been able to find a church that is anywhere near as loving, supportive, and inclusive as the Gospel centered church community I see described in Scripture, and for me, my spiritual life is far too important to entrust to half-hearted attempts at community and shoddy leadership. I don’t think it’s optional, but I don’t think that necessarily means that you go just to go.”
Well said.
LikeLike
Also, just as important to any of the above, the Sacrament of Eucharist, or the Lord’s Supper is where we come together to remember and celebrate the mystery of Christ’s suffering, death, and resurrection. As we do this properly, it becomes “communion” with Christ and the Body of Christ, with friends, family, brothers and sisters in Christ. We come to the table “together” and not as a single individual standing alone. We need to recover the sanctity and mystery of this sacrament.
LikeLike
I love points 1-3, esp. point 1:
“Belonging to a church family in NO WAY identifies us as believers. There are plenty of church members who belong for social, political, or economic reasons having nothing to do with a commitment to Christ.”
I see so much of the belonging for social and political reasons. The church has become a place for moral, conservative, middle class individuals to associate with other like-minded (and like-dressed) individuals. . .
LikeLike
I can only speak from my own experience, but I have to say it doesn’t jive with Warren’s picture, or some of the apparent assumptions in his statements. It strikes me that he’s speaking very much from the inside and quite institutionally about a faith that is not limited by institutional boundaries.
Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers
It’s one of the many things that identifies our status to others, but certainly not the only one, or even the most important one (“They’ll know we are Christians by our membership affiliation”?). Our identity is changed by encountering Jesus, which may happen and continue happening in a wide variety of settings.
A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation
It can, and it should, but it certainly doesn’t always. Often it moves people into an isolated group or clique or way of life when it should move us corporately and individually into a hurting and dying world.
A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle
Few evangelical churches do this. It has been and continues to be a major challenge for my wife and I to find a church with a depth of spiritual teaching and maturity that will stretch us to grow. There’s a lot of passion and heart, but little maturity or depth.
The Body of Christ needs every one of us
Absolutely. But the body of Christ is larger than any local congregation, and while belonging to a particular church might help, I don’t think it’s honest to suggest that this is the only way believers can be a part of the body of Christ, or even the universally best way.
Having said all that, I’m still in favor of joining a local church and we are headed that direction. The problem is that Warren’s approach, or at least the part extracted here, seems to (ironically) put all the responsibility on the individual seeker and none on the local church. If most evangelical churches really did the things that Warren suggests, I think we’d see a lot more people signing up.
LikeLike
People who are treated nicely at a church will stay at that church. People stop going to church because they get abused and mistreated there. So the answer is simple, if churches want more members, they need to be nicer. If you can’t find a church that treats you well, then you shouldn’t go to church.
LikeLike
Just read through the responses.
I have to say there is a lot of independent individualism?
Wjat do you see? Maybe this is good?
LikeLike
Warrens points:
1. Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers
2. A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation
3. A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle
4. The Body of Christ needs every one of us
A few undeveloped thoughts come to mind:
1. The sacrament of baptism marks one as a genuine believer, not membership in a local church. Baptism properly administered should be preceded by a course of teaching and pastoral counseling. Infant baptism is confirmed through the same basic process when a person comes of age. Much more could be said for preparation of infant baptism if your church practices it, with parents given instruction and counseling. Otherwise it should not be administered.
The Sacrament of Baptism is the mark and testimony to the world of one’s standing with Christ. This happens in the church, in the company of believers, and should rarely be a private ceremony.
2. His point in #2 may or may not be the case. Some of the most isolated individuals I have known have been members of and attended local churches. In my opinion many mega churches simply enhance individual isolation. Some preaching is so directed to individuals that I fail to see how it encourages commonality.
3. I’m not sure what “spiritual muscle” means. I guess Warren has it, because he was asked to pray for Obama. In true fellowship with other believers we will find, learn, and grow in the gifts and fruits of the Spirit. I know too many bullies with muscle.
4. More like everyone of us needs the Body of Christ.
Like I said, these are just partially developed thoughts.
LikeLike
I am a member of my church. It is the first church I have ever had formal membership in. In a way, it was sort of like the difference between dating and marriage. Whereas before I was free to leave if things went poorly, now I am responsible to do my best to fix them with what power I have. Previously, I came and went with little ceremony, but now I am pursued. I have submitted myself to having my decisions and attitudes challenged by my brethren.
It really is a two way relationship, too! When I was healthy, there was another member who was too ill to attend. I never met her, as I was physically unable to visit, but my prayers for her were updated every week with the latest update from the pulpit for years. Now I am bedridden and have been for many months, unable to attend, but the receiver of countless prayers, calls, visits, letters, cards, and offers of help. I am on the minds of my church family even in my isolation. New people I have not met know my name, my latest challenges, and send encouragement. I have been humbled by the support I’ve received, and can truly say my church is more than a series of meetings.
I realize not every evangelical congregation is like that. Some are more about programs than people, or too big to be personal. But if you find a great community of Jesus loving folk who act as the Church in a practical way, don’t hesitate too long to forge a deep, accountable relationship with them.
LikeLike
For the first, I think it depends on what you mean by “church,” but generally I don’t think being a Christian and being part of the church can be separated. Almost no one converts without associations with other Christians, so “church” is already happening at the time of conversion. Assuming that there is a baptism of the new Christian, how on earth is that not done without a community. (No, I don’t believe in baptismal regeneration.)
I guess I can’t follow the line of reasoning because a conversion and such is not possible without being, at the very least, exposed to a community of Christians. I don’t think Church is optional then. It is an inevitable part of conversion. It happens.
I think it is also ironic that Rick Warren is criticizing the culture of individualism. More than one person I know criticized “purpose driven [individual] life” as bit to individualistic.
LikeLike
Steve,
I think most who still go to church think they perfectly understand the motives behind Christians who no longer do. Trust me – you don’t. To truly understand, I think you need listen to the non-church Christians perspective.
The collaborators behind the book “The Shack” are non-church Christians. They are both former pastors and offer an interesting angle on this issue. This is their website’s byline: “An ever expanding conversation of those speaking outside the box of organized religion.”
http://thegodjourney.com/
Acclaimed Christian author and researcher George Barna also offers an interesting perspective.
Here’s one of his recent blog post:
Championing the Christ-without-church Movement http://www.georgebarna.com/2010/02/championing-the-christ-without-church-movement/
LikeLike
Quote:”Reader says:
February 15, 2010 at 8:36 am
Oy!
Tithing is for Jews living in the land of Israel under the old covenant.
Reply :
Hear! Hear!
LikeLike
Question 1: One cannot be a Christian and not a member of the “Invisible” Church since the “invisible” Church is the body of Christ. However, a Christian can be a member of a visible Church. Also, there will those who are member of the visible Church but not member of the “invisible” Church.
We are commanded by the writer of the letter to the Hebrews, that we are to gather together and there is an problem of Christians rejecting the gathering of the saints.
Question 2: This is not an issue of our day but an issue that we are affected with due to the Fall. In the book of Judges, we read that everyone did what they thought was right in their own eyes. We, by nature, don’t like to be told what to believe or what to do. We tend to reject accountability to others, especially to pastors and to the Assembly of Believers.
Question 3: I’m not sure of this question.
One thing that I noted is that many people are more concerned about what a local church does (activities) than what the church believes, teaches and confesses (doctrine). If a local church has “great” activities but bad doctrine, then that church may not be part of the body of Christ.
As yourself this question: What does my Church believe and it’s doctrine independent of the pastor?
LikeLike
Ditto. My home life and workplace provide far more opportunities and challenges to do this than the church meeting(s).
LikeLike
I notice the point made in a couple posts that church is how we live out the love one another command. I don’t see that. I expect (and some of the other posts seem to support this) that most people have far, far more opportunities to live out that command in their everyday lives than in church.
LikeLike
I’ve been a Christian for almost 20 years. Since 2004 God has been slowly showing me what grace is and I slowly began to realize that most churches don’t preach it (none it seems in my area – South Florida). So to make a short story long, my husband and I stopped going to church a year ago. We just got fed up with all the guilt and manipulation and lack of grace being taught at church.
What is a Christian to do when they can’t find a church that preaches the Gospel?
We are saved by grace not by following the law. I believe going to church is part of following the law just like loving others, having self-control, not lying, stealing, or committing adultery is also part of the law. So to those who believe that you can’t be a Christian without going to church I must quote Paul:
“I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Gal 2:21
God knows my heart and that I long for community. Until I find one, if I find one, I find comfort in his grace. Is this cheap grace? Heck Yeah! To quote Steve Brown: “If it wasn’t cheap I couldn’t afford it”.
LikeLike
“1. Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers”-Well, it identifies us as people who identify themselves as believers.
” 2. A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation”-Absolutely. God didn’t create us to be Lone-Ranger Christians. And those who stay outside of the church, and remain isolated, tend to become spiritually weird, and doctrinally unsound. Furthermore, being part of the church puts us in the best location to minister to other believers, and to unbelievers. Come to think of it, couldn’t points 2-4 of this little thing have been condensed into one point?
” 3. A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle”
” 4. The Body of Christ needs every one of us”
LikeLike
Can’t comment on evangelicalism as I’m not one, but for a few quick comments off the top of my head:
I don’t think that Warren is “conceding the point that one can belong to Christ without being a member of the church”, I think he’s trying to get at it that yes, mere physical attendance involved in belonging to a church does not mean that you are saved – only faith in Christ achieves that – but that a saving faith is not something that happens in a vacuum.
Probably this is TMI on my spiritual state, but I’ve been physically absent from my parish church in the past years and this has me definitely going backward. It’s true: on your own, you don’t stand still. You recede.
LikeLike
Why is it that a non-member that attends the same church you do, but is part of The Body of Christ, cannot lead anyone else within the community he or she attends?
Here is one of many real life examples I can share with you. Maybe this will help shed the light I what I am trying to convey.
I attended a non-denominational church for over 10 years where I was a member.
I took a 2-year discipleship class there, and then taught the class as a leader for another 2 years. I was asked to lead my ABF (adult bible fellowship) class when the leader of that class was moving into a different role (a class size of over 50 couples). I also taught prison inmates with a group from the church I attended at a local prison for over 5 years on Thursday nights.
Here is my dilemma and why I struggle with church membership as a necessity, and why I think it is divisive.
As I was a member, everyone there was ok with me teaching, loving, helping, and volunteering in many different roles. After a year of personal prayer and a lot of scripture reading I decided to leave the church I was attending and start meeting in a home with other believers in Christ. I thought about the whole membership thing and decided I did not need to be a member there anymore. So I dropped my membership. I guess I could have kept my membership there and just not attend…which many people do.
I still had many friends and fellow believers I still talked to and met with afterwards (since we are all in the same family of God). Even though I left gathering with them on a regular basis after 10 years (even though I met with them in other places at other times outside the facility), by dropping the membership, it was like I was an immediate outsider. I was no longer one of “themâ€.
Even though I am the same person, and I still love Christ as my Lord and savior, I could no longer go into the prison with the same group to teach the prisoners along side my fellow believers any more.
This is where I ask why? Am I not to represent Christ wherever I go regardless of where a “membership†lies? I feel we are all members in Him and Him alone … not set by any human rules or by-laws. This is why I feel a “membership†promotes divisiveness. All of the sudden I was looked at as a pagan or an outsider or an unbeliever and not able to serve with the same people I served with for over 10 years. Was I different? No, I was the same person. Was it because I had a few doctrinal differences?, which should not matter. We can have doctrinal differences and still be in The Body. (i.e. old earth, young earth, mode of baptism, Calvin or Armenian, ect.). Is it because I had a different opinion on how to gather as a church body? I think not. I do not think gathering as a group inside a church building is wrong, but I do think shunning another believer because he or she has a slight doctrinal difference on certain matters is wrong. To me these are second order realities. The first order reality is that of Christ Himself, this is where we all agree (birth, death, and resurrection) to where we are all members of His Church not our church.
LikeLike
If the theory is that only members of local churches are members of the body of Christ then why is it that members of one institutional church may not be qualified to become members of another institutional church?
If all churches are members of the body of Christ then why don’t they all have the same membership requirements?
In fact let’s take my case which is typical for many legitimate Christians. Because of one statement in their doctrinal requirements I am not qualified to be a member in their local church in which I attend regularly and serve. And yet, though I believe in Christ and though I minister to and love my fellow Christians, and I am seen as a legitimate Christian by other Christians, yet according to what you are saying (that it is necessary) is that I am not a part of the family of God, I am not part of the body of Christ, because I am not a member of an institutional church.
In fact if I were to follow this instruction I would have to break fellowship with those of the church I gather with and wander around trying to find a church in which I am qualified to become an institutional member.
As I see it, membership (which is not discussed in the bible at all) is a stumbling block to the practice of Christian love. And in fact I find that church membership is in fact largely inconsequential. In Christ’s Church I don’t see myself serving any less effectively as a non-member of a local church. We are all in one in Christ’s church)
Furthermore is it not more unifying to identify ourselves not as members of local institutional churches with their particular denominational differences, but rather to identify ourselves simply as “Christiansâ€, there being but one church of which we are all members?
LikeLike
“Is Church Optional?” may not be an appropriate question to ask. Feeling obliged to go to church doesn’t seem to be a very good reason to go to church. It doesn’t seem to be sustainable in the long run for a church to exist only because its members feel they are obliged to do church.
Presumably Jesus and his disciples got together regularly because they shared a common mission – to live out the kingdom of God here on earth. It is a mission that entailed caring for each other out of love, as well as caring for the weak, the poor, and outcast. Presumably a similar mission led the early Christians to continue meeting each other regularly after Jesus’ death and resurrection.
Somewhere along the passage of time, the sense of mission may have weakened, replaced in part by a sense of obligation. Doing church out of a sense of obligation seems to be a poor substitute for doing church out of a sense of mission.
In most human endeavours, we tend to be more effective when working as a community than when working individually. If we share Jesus’ prayer for God’s kingdom to be present here on earth, we are likely to be more successful if we work together than if we work individually.
LikeLike
Oy!
Tithing is for Jews living in the land of Israel under the old covenant.
LikeLike
Re: ISTM … you’re correct.
LikeLike
I was 30 years old when I came to the knowledge of Christ through taking my daughters to Sunday school, coming to Christ, Himself, in my living room. Other than a 5 year span where I attached myself to an inner city work, still visiting the home church on weekends, I tithed and served that original assembly for three decades, watching it eventually evolve into something that resembles TV evangelism, at which point I walked away and have now sat on the back pew of another assembly for 8 years without taking membership, still occasionally dropping in at the old location. Two of my daughters yet attend there, my grandchildren have known it all their life, it is yet what I would call a “good” church, I just can’t see tithing what has become “a family institution” with a “vision” that seems focused on building bigger barns. At the same time, my present position with the new congregation has not yet captured much of anything from me other than the tenth; and even that sometimes finds it way into helping others. My view of the Church, as an institution: “It’s God’s obstacle course. Survive twenty years and you’re ready for heaven.” I find it to be as big a mission field as what they refer to as “the world”. Christ remains my anchorline in both arenas…..
LikeLike
Excellent points, Eric.
(It took me a while to figure out what “ISTM” means…It SeemsTo Me…correct?
LikeLike
“1.Belonging to a church family identifies us as genuine believers”
Really? I imagine there are some who belong who are not believers. Likewise, I don’t recall that standard from Scripture.
“2.A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation”
That statement sound somewhat too inward focused. If you are already having relationships with other Christians, living a missional life, and are impacting others, then you are not being isolated.
“3.A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle”
Possibly, but as one mega-church pastor honestly said, small groups do a better job of that than the Sunday gathering- and you can do that without belonging to a church. Likewise, with technology, you can get plenty of spiritual teachings throughout the week on your ipod, radio, or computer.
“4.The Body of Christ needs every one of us”
But as others have mentioned, does this necessarily mean belonging to a certain institution/organization?
I am not trying to downplay the value of church, but are we overlooking the bigger picture? I also am not anti-Rick Warren. I could skip some things he has said, but he does share some good thoughts as well (ie. the recent Catalyst podcast invterview with him).
LikeLike
Geoff, my church situaton is similar to yours — except that, for me, the small group of Christian friends gathering mid-week in our homes is what I consider my church, minus any “official” membership or regular attendance of more formal, institutional church services. It’s been a struggle over the past several years without any of the supports or props of institutional structure, but it has been an adventure and an experiment in Christian community that is much more relational and family-like than anything I have experienced within the bounds of institutional Christianity. And I am thoroughly convinced that things like extensive organizational structure, a professionally trained hierarchal clergy, or an institutional pedigree running back for centuries are not necessary for a group of believers to legitimately be and function as the Body of Christ.
So, Geoff, if you view this little midweek gathering of friends as your primary spiritual family, then maybe that little gathering is your true church — and when you attend and tithe into that larger church, you’re really doing so as a visiting ambassador of your true church family. At least that’s one way to look at it.
LikeLike
Aren’t there people in the bible who experienced periods of isolation in which community and church was not an option at all, but this was a beneficial part of their life? I do think community and church attendance is a means to the kind of community we have with all believers, but I also would cringe at the idea that all ministry flows necessarily through the physical church that one attends without acknowledging the many other aspects of life, and that is often absent in this thinking.
LikeLike
Thank you for this topic. Like so many people, I’ve been neck deep in this issue for a number of years, first as an aspiring pastor hoping to be part of the solution, and most recently as a statistic being confronted with the problem. I would love to say that there is an easy answer, but as many people know, there isn’t. It’s an ugly problem that produces ugly emotions and ugly stains on the church all around.
I like all four of Warren’s points on what should occur as a contributing member of a local church, but from a purely practical standpoint, I would take a strong exception to the last three.
2. A church family moves us out of self-centered isolation
After 20 years as a Christian spread across 2 main church communities in the same city, a stint in a CB seminary, and involvement in a number of camp and conference staffs, my experience is that while this is something that should happen… it rarely does. Try and try and try again, and all I ever ended up with is a deeper and more solid feeling that in the hard times in my life, I was nothing but alone.
3. A church family helps us develop spiritual muscle & 4. The Body of Christ needs every one of us
You can’t be an active part of discipleship in a local congregation when a) that local congregation isn’t willing to disciple you in and towards the vision that God has for you and b) that local congregation is willing to use every bit of the gifting, skills, abilities, and passions that God has given you. “Spiritual muscle” is an interesting way to put it because what’s needed is work on the part of the participant, appropriate resistance (the kind that allows for healthy and non-destructive movement while working individual or groups of muscles together), and adequate rest and recovery. In my experience, the push for “church involvement” has led to a lot of work from the participant, a very destructive resistance by the church and it’s leadership, and no tie allowed for rest, recovery, reflection, and when needed, restoration and healing.
As far as “independent individualism” is concerned, I haven’t looked at the perspective of the gospel that is preached to make an educated comment on that perspective (though my guess is that there is definitely some cause and effect there as well), but I do see some leadership from the church itself in that arena. I can appreciate a local church’s feeling that denominational ties, with whatever theological and methodological baggage you inherit from those you are asked to submit to. But my problem is this… don’t ask me to unconditionally trust, submit to, and faithfully follow your leadership when your not willing to do the same. When your willing to submit to someone else’s authority, even when it’s not convenient or it requires you to do some things you may not want to do… then when your asking me to do the same “for my own good”, then I will know that your coming from a place of experience and not a place of want and demand.
I still believe that membership in a local church is very important… so important in fact that going to a sub par church because it’s a church isn’t a very good option. I haven’t been able to find a church that is anywhere near as loving, supportive, and inclusive as the Gospel centered church community I see described in Scripture, and for me, my spiritual life is far too important to entrust to half-hearted attempts at community and shoddy leadership. I don’t think it’s optional, but I don’t think that necessarily means that you go just to go.
LikeLike
Bingo … I hear you, I do attend church quite regularly in my community. but I cannot and will not sign on the dotted line. I would be forced to compromise my faith walk
LikeLike
1. Belonging to a church family in NO WAY identifies us as believers. There are plenty of church members who belong for social, political, or economic reasons having nothing to do with a commitment to Christ.
2. A church family is only one of a thousand ways we move out of self-centered isolation.
3. Church does not develop ‘spiritual muscle.’ it develops mutual fan clubs and encourages an echo chamber effect. you want spiritual muscle,? the fact that life is suffering will bring it to you.
4. Yes, the Body of Christ needs us all, but not necessarily in a pew on Sunday morning, singing the same songs we’ve heard each week for 10 years, and listening to sermons targeted at a 5th grade education.
I cannot stand Rick Warren. He specializes in simple solutions, absent nuance. Or thought. He is a cliche vendor, the king of the bullet points. and in the simplistic configurations, we lose the real difficulty of living a Christian life. It’s as if he never read Ecclesiastes, or Kirkegaard. Must be nice….
LikeLike
The million dollar question for Warren is: do we need the enormous overhead of a mega-church to accomplish this?
Thise is an interesting question proposed by dumb ox. It does presuppose that mega-churches cost more per-member to run than smaller churches. My own experiences have led me to believe that smaller churches are more costly to run per capita than larger churches, but I haven’t seen any data yet, to determine it dumb ox’s presupposition is correct or is mine.
So we don’t sidetrack this post, I will see if I can take a look at this question, along with some numbers for verification in a future post. For all I know, dumb ox may be correct.
LikeLike
Though I think Rick Warren has several views which I strongly disagree with, I believe his statement raises an interesting question. Do I believe that one has to regularly be part of the life of the church in order to stay justified before God? No. Do I believe that regularly participating in the life of the church demonstrates that one has been justified before God? Yes.
LikeLike
What a coincidence. This question crossed my mind tonight while re-reading C.S. Lewis’ spiritual autobiography of sorts entitled, “The Pilgrim’s Regress”. In this allegorical account of his own journey to faith, he describes the only way across the Grand Canyon (the chasm caused by the fall) was to be carried across by “Mother Kirk”. Throughout this story is the protagonist’s longing for a distant island which held the fulfillments of his longings. Lewis so beautifully places the puzzle pieces together, of the individual search for truth and fulfillment and the role the church plays in this search. It is probably similar to the realization that Augustine reached, when he found the church as the answer to skepticism.
I think there is a need for balance. Before Luther, the personal relationship with God was replaced by submission to church authority. Pietism took this too far, resulting in the enlightenment’s emphasis on autonomy and the “inner light”, leading Orestes Brownson to accuse protestantism of being transcendentalism by another name. Now, pragmatism has turned religion into a consumer product serving selfish wants with little or no concern for a personal relationship with God apart from how it aids in flipping rental properties.
Saint John probably said it best, that we cannot claim to love God if we have no love for each other (I John 4:20). The church is a meeting of believers who are committed to each other out of love, not law or heteronomy. The million dollar question for Warren is: do we need the enormous overhead of a mega-church to accomplish this?
LikeLike
I think that Jesus came to save his bride, The Church. I think western thinking has twisted the thought process to say that he came to save you, the sinner.. Not to say that Jesus doesn’t save sinners, just to say that he saves sinners for the purpose of building his Church. God’s goal is bigger than you or I.
I believe there are 50 or 60 things that we are supposed to do to “one another” according the the new testament. We can’t do those things if we are in community together. If we love Him we will obey His commands.
So I think that those who think they are saved outside the church, while they may not be wrong, should probably be doing some serious introspection and prayer to make sure.
LikeLike
I don’t buy Warren’s picture of the non-member. Nor do I believe what he writes about the benefits of membership. I’ve been a non-member in many churches, and involved in community in most of them. The only thing that changes when you become a member is that your church has to pay the denomination apportionments for you, and you become eligible to serve on committees. Both of these being bad things in my opinion, I will probably never join a church again.
LikeLike
It feels to me like there might be a question to ask here. In particular: “What do you mean by membership?”
In my own case, I regularly attend services with one specific congregation. I am trying to build connections and put down roots there. I am making an effort to contribute to the community. I consider it to be my church and I consider myself to be a part of the community there.
But I have not taken the formal step of having my membership transfered from my previous church. I just don’t see the point in that, and a church that insisted on such a formal and bureaucratic step would not appeal to me in the slightest.
Making a big deal about the paperwork of membership is not welcoming and it feels like it puts the cart before the horse in a sense…First welcome me into your community and offer me a real place in it. Fuss with the paperwork later.
So I think to ask these questions about membership you first have to decide what you mean. Are we talking about having your name included on some official list of members somewhere? Or are we talking about making connections with the community?
LikeLike
I guess it comes down to what church is. Is it only when a group of people gather in a large building or is it also when two or three gather in a home. The need for belonging, in my opinion has little to do with formality, and all to do with relationships. I attend a larger church on Saturday nights, tithe my income to that church, but find a group of like minded people from various churches and backgrounds to be our community. We meet mid week over dinner and learn God’s word through the lens of our own experiences.
A formal membership in a church doesn’t really mean you are committed to that church. It seems more in word than deed. I love my Saturday church, yet I don’t have a sense of family/relationship there. Those needs are met with a few freinds and their freinds.
It almost seems like we are looking for a splinter in someone elses’ eye when we have a plank in our own. We really need to get past a system of church that is not relevant to many people. Stop blaming individualism on people for when they just can’t relate to your method of church.
LikeLike
Some questions to ask yourself:
1. What is the church, and where is the church?
2. What do Christians believe, and why do they believe these things?
3. What do Christians do, and why do they do these things?
LikeLike
Is this an evangelical thing or a protestant thing? It seems to me that if you want to put aside your own theological differences with a church and submit to the view of the leadership for the sake of unity, the Catholic church will be happy to have you.
But if you don’t – if you think some views are wrong, either pragmatically awful or theological perversions* and you do not want to submit to them – then we have the problem of needing to find a church, recognizing that individual churches are man-made institutions, and that men are no angels. And that’s not an evangelical problem, its a protestant problem.
Want accountability? There’s accountability in the Gulag, if you like that.
As far as the optional nature of the man-made institution known as church, my own view is that it is *in theory* optional. People sometimes ask why they need to go to church when they can think about God on their own. I often think to myself, “Yes, you can. Do you?” With no fellowship, its hard. A “good” church for me is one that helps me think about God more the rest of the week than I otherwise would.. I get the same type of benefit from this blog.
I agree with the post above that says people do not commit because they might find something better. I disagree that this is necessarily a bad thing, though it could be, depending on what exactly the individual is looking for. Same thing with picking a mate: no one is perfect, so you shouldn’t expect your mate to be. But everyone is entitled to figure out what exactly their own dealbreakers and must-haves are, because you are signing on to spend the rest of your life with this person. Church membership isn’t that permanent (for starters, you can move to another city), but I think something similar applies.
*I am deliberately using very strong language without any particular issue in mind. Fill in the blanks with whatever pushes your buttons.
LikeLike
ISTM that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches have a consistent soteriological-ecclesiological doctrine when it comes to being a Christian and belonging to a church – i.e., they’re one and the same. Salvation is not found outside the church, one cannot be saved apart from the church, and one cannot maintain one’s salvation without regularly partaking of the church’s sacraments/mysteries and services. Baptism by the church regenerates and forgives sins and joins one to Christ and the church. The Eucharist administered by the church’s priest imparts grace and further unifies one with Christ and the church and each other, as all partake from the one loaf.
(I’m not arguing for the rightness of the Orthodox or Catholic Church, just stating some things.)
By placing the locus of salvation in the individual and his/her relationship with Christ (whether real or supposed – i.e., can one really be in Christ without being joined to His body, the church?), one could argue that the need for the church for most Evangelical Protestants becomes optional or questionable. It’s for “fellowship,” not for salvation. By eliminating the sacramental nature of baptism and communion, for most practical purposes making them optional, too, the idea of the necessity of the church or of meeting together becomes even less apparent.
I think this is especially so in the non/anti-Charismatic churches, since there is no ministry during the meeting by the body to each other in the spiritual gifts, with members offering prophecies, tongues, prayers for healing, words of wisdom and knowledge, etc., to manifest the presence and power of the Lord in and among and by the assembled members, and to build up (edify) the body and its members.
Instead, services are basically a band performance followed by a college lecture (or one-man performance), following a strict time schedule so the next service (a repeat of the first one) can start on time as soon as everyone gets out of the parking lot and the next stream of cars/people enters.
Is it surprising that most Evangelical Protestant churches have “sanctuaries” that look and are arranged like auditoriums?
Anyway, just some thoughts from one who’s been in all these types of churches. Fire away.
LikeLike
My wife and I are facing this very question of membership. We have been attending a church for about half a year now. We make every effort to attend every Sunday, and now we are doing more activities. But membership, whew, that is commitment.
There are two problems:
* The biggest is there are now thousands of Christian denominations that believe all sorts of variations on the Gospel. I’ve heard hundreds of different interpretations. How can do we know we’ve picked the right one?
* The second problem is we bought into the modern individualistic attitude, to our own detriment. It takes humility to get out of the mindset that we are smarter and more special than everyone else, and therefore OK to not be “part of the crowd”. It’s Monty Python. We know it’s wrong, but is there nonetheless.
I do think the modern problem is at least correlated with the Protestant belief in Sola Scriptura and the individual interpretation (Maybe this is just Solo Scriptura, if you think there’s a difference).
LikeLike
It seems to me Warren splits a hair that cannot be split creating a division between being a Christ follower and belonging to the body of Christ. The suggestion that the latter is an option or a secondary activity is not theologically sound. I wish there had been a discussion about the difference between belonging to the larger corporate body of believers, and the necessity of participating as a vital member of a local church (for sound theological reasons). That said, I believe the spirit of his message is that believers ought to be participating in a local church for their own and their church’s spiritual and material benefits. Unfortunately, the biblical reasons #s 2 and 3 that were given just aren’t all that compelling. Don’t we too often see a lack of growth in spiritual maturity and the persistence of self-isolation among long-time church members just as with non-members? The notion of spiritual orphans (better stated as nomads, rather than orphans–after all, the problem is not that they don’t have fellowship with the Father) going from church to church without identity, accountability or commitment is I agree an outgrowth of the teaching of evangelicalism and the churches it creates. I think for believers that have abandoned their denominations for the evangelical church, becoming a member is too much a vestige of the denomination. Joining a church is what their parents used to do back in the day. For brand new Christ followers who were unchurched previously, it seems the idea of church membership is too alien and may feel cultish even. It’s easy to understand the thought process: “Commiting to Christ is one thing, but now I have to commit to a group of people I barely know yet? And, I get to make regular tithes to keep the church operating and keep the Pastor/Spokesperson employed? If membership is not required as this message does seem to imply and there’s an out, then I’m going to take it…”
LikeLike
The deeper my walk with Jesus becomes, the less I find I have in common with people in a corporate church setting. I agree with his statements about the (potential) power of church membership, but I am sad to say that in all my searching and church-hopping, I have yet to find the kind of community that promises to foster much more than giving me an ear-full and a sore bottom every week.
LikeLike
It’s interesting that Warren refers to the local church as a family. My experience with Warren’s brand of church is that they do not resemble families in many ways. Also, although I basically agree with each of his four points, I have a problem with him framing them as “reasons to join the church”. It makes church out to be just another tool in our spiritual toolbox to help us live better individual christian lives. Church is not essentially a means to a personal end.
LikeLike
I think the second point about independent individualism being possibly connected to the gospel we preach is a good one. We preach in some sense a stripped down gospel which is all about the bare minimum “decision” one has to make in order to move from the unconverted to the converted list. So long as you pray the sinner’s prayer, you’re in the clear and nothing else matters. To get people to come in and pray that prayer in *our* church, we push a consumer oriented church experience where choosing a church is no different than choosing a restaurant and where loyalty is contingent simply on how good that church or restaurant continues to please us. I know many Catholics will argue that this is all a natural result of a Protestant “mindset” and to a certain extent, I think they have a valid point though it’s much too sweeping a generalization. It’s primarily in my view a result of a culture of exaltation of self (both inside and outside the church) and a “what is the bare minimum I have to do to be saved” sort of gospel.
LikeLike
Very insightful questions. In my own personal confessional identity crisis (Baptist at the moment though) I have a frustratingly vague ecclesiology myself. As a low-church protestant, I admire how the more high church traditions seem to have a more natural and less manipulative way of assimilating converts into membership. I think evangelicals need to realize how much we have to learn from older traditions in that regard. However, and correct me if I’m wrong here because my study of this has not really gone too deep, do you think there is a difference between being a member in the universal worldwide church as a spiritual family and being a member of a particular local branch of an ecclesiological institution that is ultimately a man made tradition? I could see that if there was only ONE church then the lines could become a little blurred. But the theology I was taught in Baptist school said that being saved automatically makes you a part of God’s spiritual family, the church. The reason this doesn’t settle too well with me is that while it leaves it up to the individual to engage themselves in the Christian tradition of their choosing, it strongly implies that now they HAVE to. Or else. You were freely saved by grace and now here is your to-do list for God. Get busy or else you’re not a real Christian. I’d really love to hear a Lutheran or Anglican perspective on this.
LikeLike
I would agree with your analysis at the end. A lot of the falling out I had with Evangelicalism is that it seemed hard to find a congregation that was tight knit. I had one when I lived in VA because the pastor’s thought was anchored in a pre-enlightenment sense of community. The only other place I have been able to find that mentality is the Catholic Church, hence my move to Catholicism. Here in the south it is more evangelical but so heavy on the community aspect.
LikeLike
I recommend a look at the series Joseph Hellerman is doing on his blog these days: http://hellerman.wordpress.com/. He is providing a summary of his book, entitled “When the Church Was a Family.” His series addresses the very issue of individualism and community.
LikeLike
Chaplain Mike: What Pastor Warren describes as “today’s culture of independent individualism” is a reality in the community where I live. There is such a widespread embrace of a “Jesus and me” mentality, that people do not see the connection between Christian discipleship and church membership. The constant for many is the private relationship they have with Christ (which I do not doubt or devalue); the variable is the matter of church membership. People seem to want to leave their options open. They do not commit, it seems to me, because they might find something better. It doesn’t seem to compute with them that an important part of spiritual formation is working out the issues involved in being a committed part of particular expression of the body of Christ (a local church). So, they go from one church or Bible study group to another, looking for what will meet their needs, never suspecting, in my opinion, that God may meet needs of which they’re not aware in an ongoing set of relationships made up of people in covenant with one another.
Someone has said that, when God set out to resolve the sin problem (in his covenant with Abraham), he set in motion the existence of a community of faith (ancient Israel and then the church). This resolution of the problem provides a window on to the nature of the problem: alienation from God and from others. What needs fixing can only be “fixed” in a covenantal community. God is not only about saving individual souls, it seems, but also about restoring what was destroyed in the Fall (which, from the blameshifting that went on between Adam and Eve, seems to be healthy and functional relationships).
LikeLike
Answers: No, yes, and yes. The evangelical eschewing of denominations has lead to exactly the sort of rugged individualism that Warren now finds working against his “denomination.” Why join a church — you can “read” the Bible on your own? All too lacking is an understanding of the corporate nature of Salvation to the Church — the Body of Christ, and of God’s dealing with “peoples” and “nations” — not solely an individual. Then too, the very approach taken to convert someone to evangelical Christianity — just say you believe and you will be “saved” i.e, go to a heavenly reward is core in too many cases. It’s all about you — and it’s real simple and easy — and it’s all about how you end up — cheap grace, to borrow from Deitrich Boenhoefer. Good post, Mike. Good observation.
LikeLike