institutional church?

[jriccitelli]

You come into conversations with such a big axe to grind that you don't REALLY listen to what people are saying’ (Matt)

It is was the rest of your post that defined what you were REALLY saying. I did not base my answer solely on your statement ‘I would have no problem doing that regularly’.

If you had not added the list of why you don’ts: I would have believed you would have no problem doing that regularly. But if you believe: ‘Sunday morning is the place where religious minded people go / or Sunday morning is the place where we recruit true Christians to the church / or Bruce Cavey’s model is good / or that ‘programs’ and ‘programming’ are what we need / or that sermons can have ‘conversations’ built into them / or that ‘free to ask questions’ is actually ‘conversation and fellowship’.

Well, one by one your don’ts destroyed my original hope that you could eventually achieve an actual fellowship with conversation, until it disappeared completely. Sorry about that. I’m willing to put my faith back into your statement, but with reservations.

[mattrose]

Haha

Again, it seems to me like we both have a similar goal in mind. We'd both like to see the church consist of a large group of believers in a given locale meeting together for mutual edification with every member participating, especially in the area of their giftedness. I know we could quibble with words here or there, but is that not essentially what you'd like to see?

If so, our difference of opinion, it seems to me, is more about strategy than destination.

[jriccitelli]

God Bless you and Amen, that is a peacemaker right there!

I am interested in both the theological principles and the practical principles of this, but the dynamics of teaching, and how best to get His message through and into us, and at the same time be in fellowship and one with one another, is my greatest concern, and where we would certainly seem to agree , and I agree the 'details' are not always simple, quibbling is good, and yes my goal seems to be essentially what you'd like to see.

[Jason]

I've been known to criticize the institutional church on occasion, so perhaps I'll weigh in. What grates my conscience is anything in the Christian community that reeks of insincerity, from the use of homologous language to cut-and-paste systems of ministry. As if we have no better option than to mimic the daft cues of society. Forgive me, but the body of Christ doesn't need to copycat dead systems, even if those systems have proven effective with secular corporations (or even high-growth megachurches).

As Shane Claiborne likes to say, "Christians used to make people curious, but folks are less and less curious nowadays." I fear this is because we have become too much like the world, both in our manner of relating to one another and in the systems of organization we implement. I won't go into my own horror stories with the institutional church, since we all have them. But I continue to ask the question "why?" Why are these stories so common?

The lack of love and charity toward one another is the most serious blight on the body of Christ, and this might even be a product of the way churches have been structured. Maybe I'm wrong, but sincere fellowship with a living body shouldn't be this hard, right?

[TheEditor]

Hi Matt,

Many functions of a small group are made difficult or untenable when tried in a larger setting. The small group that may have an issue with sin in a member, could deal collectively in a loving fashion with someone that is in need of help. The small group would already be aware of issues and the one struggling would be able to open up more easily in a small setting.

This section (and many of your thoughts) speaks against a large church organization that doesn't include emphasis on small groups. The organization could, simply, help the small group network out whenever necessary in a variety of ways.

This is true, it could. To the extent that these 'smaller independent classes' were merely facilitated in their efforts, all would be fine. However, to the extent that these smaller classes "appealed" to the "larger body" (leadership) to rule on matters in their small independent classes, then to that extent they have mimicked papal tendencies. If they have autonomy and do not have to yield to an "office" (especially the innumerable unscriptural offices that litter the Christian landscape), then they do have Christian liberty and freedom.

Regards, Brenden.

[dwight92070]

Hi,this is for jriccitelli primarily, but of course, all may read: My brother, I respectfully think that you have a problem with authority in general, and specifically, God-given authority. Jesus said: "But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your teacher, and you are all brothers." and "Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ." Matthew 23:8,and 10 And yet Ephesians 4:11 tells us: "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers. Acts 13:1 says: "Now there were at Antioch, in the church that was there, prophets and teachers ..." 1 Corinthians 12:28 says: "And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers ... Hebrews 5:12 tells us: "For though by this time you ought to be teachers ..."

So, the Bible itself does the very thing that Jesus tells us not to do, i.e. to call someone (Rabbi) or teacher. I think the answer to this apparent contradiction is, as is often the case in Christianity, that it is a matter of the heart. If a pastor or teacher has the attitude, "I am the teacher here and I will display some of my knowledge, so that everyone will be impressed and respect me." compared to, "Jesus, You are the real teacher here, and I want to serve my brothers and sisters by giving them spiritual food. (Luke 12:42) Please use me to bring glory to You, so that your people will be impressed with You and respect You."

Now THAT is the person I would want to teach me.

The same principle is true with the word "leader". Hebrews tells us: "Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over your souls as those who will give an account." Hebrews 13:17 2 Thessalonians 5:12-13 says: "But we request of you brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work..." Acts 20:28: "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood."

Corruption happens in the church when a brother or sister gets in the flesh, i.e. sins. When a leader or teacher in the body of Christ is arrogant and self-righteous, there is corruption. But when a brother or sister rejects or speaks negatively about a true leader or a true teacher in the body of Christ, then that brother or that sister is also causing corruption and strife. When a leader or teacher in the body of Christ (or even nonleaders and nonteachers) gets in the flesh with a wrong attitude, they too often don't handle the word of truth accurately. (2 Timothy 2:15) Sin begets error and corruption in the body.

[jriccitelli]

Hello Dwight, I enjoyed your OP on 'Church buildings' (and your notes on the Trinity thread, welcome).
Before I write this, or more, please remember all I believe being Christian, being a disciple, and making disciples, really needs to look like is: being together, sharing with each other, reading, talking, praying, communing, and learning together, about God, with God, and with each other. Everything else, is something else.

“And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common…” yet what this became within a century, even during Paul’s time, soon was just a memory, but we were warned. The Church was supposed to be made of believers and disciples, but when it became institutionalized, this faded into oblivion (disciples that is), whoever walked in the door then was a ‘Christian’. Then you have people in the ‘Church’ who do not know the Lord. Church is then reduced to their level, and so it goes.

Leadership can be as simple as one person in two or three, or a few among hundreds, or even one among millions. The good points and bad points are the same in all cases. Since all I am trying to see happen on a practical level, is have a place for believers and their guests to meet, share and to get to know one another around God and His Word, it would seem this would be happening. And this seems simple enough, you would think.

You would think I would be happy with my own bible study group, which I am. But my heart is not just for me, or only for the people I know in my group, but for the whole Church and those outside. This is what the real discussion is about, yet I am told over and over to just find a nice church, and be content, and don't bother the leaders, ok.

I have discovered that ‘Christians’ in general do not take meeting together for bible study and fellowship, as very important, or profitable. Why is this? I have discovered that most all Christians believe going to a building and listening to a liturgy or a sermon is going to ‘church’. And even to the extent that not doing so, is wrong, unbiblical, even something that only ungodly sinners would consider. I personally have been told to repent for just ‘questioning the idea’ of how scripturally productive ‘sitting in a pew and calling it church’ is. Where does this hard line of thinking come from? Well, if you listen closely you realize there is a message built into the structure of the meeting itself. From the rows of chairs, and one pulpit up front, week after week, year after year, the same message is repeated “we teach you, and we are the authorities”. The separation between the ‘leaders’ and the congregation is taught and re-enforced every week, century after century, until we die. This was not to be among us, we are disciples, not laity. Sure they tell you to go 'out there' and tell someone about Jesus, but don't do it here in my building, that's your leaders job. Well, is this actually correct?

Even in a small group of two, or three, or ten, sometimes, more often than not, one person will talk nonstop without considering, or maybe just asking another person what they might feel or think. No matter the size of the group this dynamic prevails. I am not against lectures, they have their place, but being a Christian and gathering together does not mean you ‘must’ spend your morning every Sunday sitting and listening to one man tell you something. This dynamic happens even in the smallest groups, and some seem to encourage it. Why, because they are ‘taught’ that special people get a special anointing, this means the laity should be quiet and believe every word the anointed ones tell you. We are taught this is what Christianity is like, and 'what people in the pews have to say is not as important as what this anointed ‘leader’ has to say and think'. We are taught this, by whom? Not by God. God said they shall all know me, even from the least of them, not just the greatest.

'For even if I boast somewhat further about our authority, which the Lord gave for building you up and not for destroying you, I will not be put to shame, 9 for I do not wish to seem as if I would terrify you by my letters' (2Cor 10)
All I would like to see, as a bible teacher, and someone who really cares about people (i hate having to defend my sincerity like this), is to see Christians grow in faith, love and unity with one another. Yet what is said to be 'love and unity with one another' is seldom actually practiced in institutional church. In fact when we suggest this may be the case, just try to discuss the topic with paid leadership, we are labeled by the clergy as devils. This is really either odd, or telling.
'... Our Lord Jesus Christ who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him. 11 Therefore encourage one another and build up one another, just as you also are doing' (1Thes 5:1)
'Have you been thinking all along that we have been defending ourselves to you? We have been speaking in the sight of God as those in Christ; and everything we do, dear friends, is for your strengthening' (2Cor 12:9)
All I want for people is to be strengthened in their faith, knowledgeable, in unity, and in love and relationship with each other and God. We cannot know this if we are not communicating in a conversation with one another. A man in a pulpit cannot know what people in the rows are doing or thinking, or model this on a practical level. The real experience: friends. Note Paul calls them friends, I think he 'really was' their friend. Note they built up 'one another' this was not the special job of 'clergy'.

[dwight92070]

Earlier this week, I had a teaching on my mind, and believed that God wanted me to present that at our homechurch. So I called our pastor and asked him if I could give that teaching. He said that he would look forward to it and that I could do that today. So I did. It was referring to Matthew 9:35-38 where Jesus saw the crowds and thought that they were like sheep without a shepherd. I saw that even thought they had many needs, being distressed and dispirited, that Jesus focused on their main need: they needed a shepherd, which is synonomous with a pastor in the New Testament. The unsaved among them needed to be brought to the True Shepherd, Jesus, and the saved among them, who already had Jesus, needed to be shepherded as well by an earthly shepherd or pastor, since Jesus gave us spiritual leaders for that very purpose, as is outlined in Ephesians 4:11-13. Of course there are other gifted leaders: apostles, prophets, evangelists, and teachers, but for today's message, I focused on the gift of being a pastor. I noted that Jesus possessed all 5 of these offices, and yet it is interesting that He did not think to Himself: These people are like sheep without an apostle or sheep without a prophet, or sheep without an evangelist, or sheep without a teacher. He focused in on the one office that the people needed at that time, a shepherd or a pastor. Of course the other 4 gifts are important and should be utilized in the body, but for now their need was for a pastor to shepherd them. Also, we know that Jesus did not say: I am the good apostle, or I am the good prophet, or I am the good evangelist, or I am the good teacher, but He did say that He was the good shepherd. Shepherding was so important to Him that He commanded Peter to "Shepherd My sheep" just shortly before He returned to heaven. Notice He did not specifically tell the other disciples to do that at that time. He was their shepherd and He was leaving them physically, so He appointed Peter to shepherd the other ten. Paul also stressed the importance of shepherding the flock in Acts 20:28, where He said, "Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood." Paul was also diligent to have Timothy and Titus appoint elders so the churches would be cared for.
I also brought out the sad fact that many Christians do not get connected to or mentored by a pastor, even though they may have gone to church for many years. There are probably many reasons, but I brought out 3. First, ignorance - they don't see the importance of it, or worse yet, even the pastor doesn't see the importance of shepherding his people. Second, Church structure - Many traditional churches have too many people for the pastor(s) to shepherd every person. This why Jesus shepherding 12 men was the ideal model. By the way, a home church generally fits that model perfectly. Third, rebellion - some Christians don't like the idea of spiritual authority and don't want to submit to it.
A true and sincere shepherd will never forget that He too is a sheep and that Jesus is his shepherd. We can benefit from watching or listening to spiritual leaders on TV or online but they cannot shepherd us. Can someone pastor you, if you don't know them and they don't know you? No. We are called to be part of the solution in this world. If we don't allow spiritual leaders to shepherd us, then we cannot effectively help others and bear fruit.

[jriccitelli]

If you have more than ten believers, and still not one of you can teach or organize a simple meeting, then this group does not know what they are doing in the first place . If a body of believers can't generate a least one loving considerate and wise person for every ten or twelve, then you should 'continue praying and learning together' till you do (if you end up with everyone being loving considerate and wise, that would be even better). The problem is people are conditioned to think they need some 'personality' or professional to do the leading for them. If believers talk and pray together long enough, God will gift that group. In fact the talking and communing together is all God really wants for the group anyways. If you are doing 'that' you are fulfilling the 2 greatest commandments and the great commission anyways, why do you need a professional if that is what you are doing?

I don't see any need for paid spiritual leadership. If a body is not producing wise disciples naturally by discipling, you simply are not discipling, that's the problem, and that's the solution. That's all there is to it. I am fully in favor of hiring paid secretaries, bookkeepers, children’s schoolteachers, cooks, landscapers, custodians, handymen, etc. I would even encourage paid professional counselors, but these positions should not ever be given voting, leadership or doctrinal authority over anyone, as that immediately allows the opportunity for misuse. Spiritual leadership should never be paid, it would be nice if men and the position were pure, but the effect of the office never seem to help 'either' party, and leadership actually creates the division, just by the existence of the position.

(I posted the above in a thread on the Organic Church movement FB page just today: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1616196 ... tif_t=like

[dwight92070]

First Corinthians 9:11 and 14
First Timothy 5:17-18