Up Orthodoxy Wordly Influence Wordly Influence Part2 Wordly Influence Part 3

In the World's Image part 2 Written by Rob Devens Page: | 1 | 2 | 3 | I realize that what I am suggesting is counter-intuitive. If we think of the history of the world we think of a list of accomplishments: the building of the pyramids, Alexander the Great's conquest of the world, the defeat of the Nazis in World War II, etc. When we think of people who have succeeded in our own culture we think of people like Bill Gates (Microsoft), Sam Walton (Wal-Mart) and Julia Roberts (almost 30 films and an Oscar for best actress). When we think of churches that have succeeded Willow Creek and Saddleback Community Church come to mind. We think of these churches because they have accomplished great things: gathered huge congregations, built immense facilities, and wielded great influence. But the true nature of things cannot always be understood intuitively. I was a physics major in college. One of my professors worked on the Stanford Linear Accelerator. A linear accelerator is a two-mile long shed with equipment inside to accelerate electrons so that they travel close to the speed of light. Scientists then crash these electrons into other particles to see what happens. My professor told us that when they were first trying to use the accelerator they couldn't get the electrons to complete the two-mile course. When they finally figured out what was wrong it was a simple reason: when the electrons approached the speed of light they grew too big to go through the machine! Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 predicts that when things go faster they get bigger but this idea was so foreign to what these scientists intuitively "knew" that they hadn't even considered it as a possibility. Everything that the scientists intuitively knew about the universe told them that matter stays the same size no matter how fast it goes. Everything that we intuitively know about the spiritual universe tells us that the main reason God created the church was to have it accomplish some great and worthy kingdom task. Both these assumptions fit well with what we "know" about the way the world is but both may be wrong. If the assumption about the church were false--if we really had emphasized "doing" at the expense of "being"--then there would be some predictable results. The accomplishment of the goal would have become more important than individuals, and people would be mainly valued for what they could contribute. Consequently, the congregation would be continually asked to sacrifice for the cause and there would be a constant demand for excellence in ministry. So much so that ordinary people in the congregation would feel they had little to offer and would often feel de-valued and used. Leaders and other faithful workers would experience high levels of stress because they would have been convinced that it was their responsibility to accomplish a task that God had not given them. Consequently there would be increased incidence of pastor and leader burnout. When I look around I do see these results--and not just in the churches that have dysfunctional senior pastors or church boards. Many in ministry feel the effects and see the damage in the lives of people around them. But because they have not been able to determine the real nature of the problem they often think that something must be wrong with them or with the other people experiencing distress--maybe they are just not cut out for ministry. In some sense, we expect the above results--they are considered "normal"--in the world. The world runs on achievement and production. Employers unashamedly demand success. People are compensated for what they can accomplish. Fame and fortune come to those who accomplish great things. People who are ill equipped to contribute to production often have a hard time making a living and they are certainly not valued by our mercenary society. But this is exactly where the church should be counter-cultural. Instead it has been pushed into the world's mold. We have embraced its values. We model our churches after its successful corporations. We seek out its leaders to ask them how we should run our churches. We have bought lock stock and barrel the notion that the purpose of the church is to accomplish some great task--to do something instead of to be something. Incidentally, that is the main reason that "leadership" is so valued right now. We demand that churches accomplish things and leaders are people who can get a group to do something. Someone might ask, "But how can it be that the church isn't called to some great task. Isn't the Bible full of commands to do things? What about the Great Commission?" Yes, it is true that there are a number of things that we as Christians are called to do. But the problem is that we have assumed that any directive given to an individual is automatically expanded to be the responsibility of the corporate church. And we don't have the liberty to do that. The difference between corporate responsibility and individual responsibility may sound like a subtle distinction but it is an important one. There are many scriptures where this can be seen but for the moment let us consider just a single example. Many believe that one of the essential purposes for the church is expressed in Ephesians 4:12, "to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up." If you believe that this expresses the purpose of the church you must believe then that it is the responsibility of the church to carry out this task. NEXT PAGE... Page: | 1 | 2 | 3 |