December 08, 2009
You're Invited
In promoting his new book Grow Your Church from the Outside In, George Barna states that it’s unethical to steal people from other congregations. Personally, I’m not sure we can actually steal members from one another, but if we could, would it really be unethical? I think Mr. Barna’s comment smacks of applying political correctness to the body of Christ, in other words, if you invite those of a different denomination to you church you are labeled unethical. I don’t think so. The disciples of John the Baptist weren’t thinking ethics when they went to ask Jesus, “…Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?” (Lk 7:22b ESV)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----I agree with you entirely. The whole concept of being able to steal anything necessarily involves the concept of possession as well. Neither does a church possess those who gather there to worship and fellowship, although it maintains a membership role as if it does. Nor do those gathering there possess the church, although they write their names on a membership role and vote the church’s directions as if they do. It is the Lord Who is the Head of the church collectively, and each church individually. He possesses the church and churches by possessing each one who gathers. Therefore, how could there be a stealing if someone invited one of the Lord’s to gather in a different place of the Lord’s to worship and fellowship with others of the Lord’s?
-----In fact, I believe the spiritual health of the church would be better served if His people in the community commonly mixed and mingled for worship and fellowship. I think this would quickly dissolve the distinctions of “your church” “my church”. Then “your church doctrine” “my church doctrine” might be the next layer of humanity to melt from His body. Maybe following that would be the sloughing of the attitudes towards “your church property” and “my church property”.
-----And I think that is the point at which churches are firmly nailed to their worldly possessiveness. Things and stuff demand human ownership. The most efficient use of common property is made when someone directs its use, and the best care of it is taken when someone feels some sense of possessing it. Then it follows that the second point at which churches are tightly bolted to worldliness is in the direction of the properties’ use for the support of the doctrines and ideologies of those controlling and caring for it.
-----The first point is somewhat excusable, because the nature of physical property begs for ownership. But I believe the second point is less excusable, if not outright inexcusable. Paul focuses upon the error of erecting and maintaining doctrinal differences in the first four chapters and the eighth chapter of I Corinthians and the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters of Romans. The Holy Spirit agreed at the first church counsel as recorded in Acts 15. Although Paul cautions Timothy and Titus to carefully teach the doctrine as it was handed to them, and John III and Jude exhort us to contend against false teaching, none call for anyone to zero in on some bull’s eye of impeccably perfect doctrine and commit all our efforts and property towards it. But this is what churches do.
-----Instead, the unity of the body is in love, faith, peace, and joy, which must cross the blurry boundaries of doctrinal subtleties, denominations, and churches. And if there were more sense of using church property for maintaining these than for maintaining doctrine and works, there would be less sense of possessing the saints. Then Mr. Barna would be writing about fellowshipping with all the churches rather than stealing one another.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment