TK Chapter 12 :: Tip It Over

"The pyramid structure was an appropriate form when a large portion of the culture valued and looked for a good church to go to - when leaders

 were respected by the culture and when people assumed you to go

 church to find God.  The form fit the function.  But when the culture is no longer looking for a church to go to, isn’t that interested in church music,

 sermons or programs, when they don’t innately value or trust church leaders, the functions of the church must be adjusted.  And thus the form must adjust in kind." (p108)

Are the people in our culture today looking for a good church?  Do they believe that to find God, they have to go to church?  From my experience with those who don't attend church, I hear things like "I don't have to go to church to meet God" and "Church doesn't really help me connect with God."  Those statements do tend to show that something is different with this culture than with that of my grandparents.  

I'm not sure that the deconstruction of the "image of the church" is such a bad thing, either.  In just about any given community, 80% of the people do not attend church on a given Sunday morning.  That's a lot of people.  In my city, that's more than 53,000 people.  Obviously the form is not working for these people.

Halter proposes a new structure, he calls "The Missional Diagram."  If we are going to begin to reach into this culture that is drifting away from the church, but often looking for God, we would do well to consider his ideas.

Here is a short description of the diagram - Missional People are those of us who have considered the calling of a relationship with Jesus and surrendered to that way of life.  We have clear beliefs and practices, and God is forming something new in us.  We are committed to penetrating the culture we live.  Sojourners are those who have not yet surrendered to the same relational way of life, but are interested in things of the Kingdom of God.  They are often dabbling in the community expressions of the missional people because they are appealing.  Pew Sitters are those who call themselves Christians and maybe even attend church on a regular basis, but they are not on mission - they are not out and penetrating their communities, living as Jesus would live in the midst of our culture.  It is interesting to note that sometimes "sojourners" are more missionally committed than pew-sitters.  They serve more, give more, love more.

My questions right now center around how to incorporate Sojourners into the life of our church - and I'm not primarily referring to the Sunday gatherings.  How do we invite Sojourners to our Tables?  How do we "come alongside" them in the journey of life?  Are there certain "convictions" that I might need to put down in order to live with those who don't know Jesus?  Do I continue to create the security bubble for my family, or do I trust that God will work all things together for good in our experiences with those who live outside our value system?  If 80% of my neighbors do not go to church on Sundays, how can I step into that world with them?  Should I?

"The dotted line around the Sojourner oval is very important.  Unlike the missional people, Sojourners can come and go as they like.  They can sin, cuss, swear at their kids, yell at the ref, spend their money on useless endeavors, vote any way they want, chew tobacco, and hold any sexual orientation they like, all without judgment or pressure."

This is what we mean by inclusive Christian community. (p116)

Chapter 7 :: The 1,700-Year Wedgie

Well, after getting a bit off-track at the end of last week, I hope to refocus our attention on the book. In so doing, maybe we can clarify the journey we are on just a little. The discussion was good on Sundays, but not what I had hoped. By the way, I had a great Sunday with my church yesterday. We worshiped, we played, we celebrated dads and it was encouraging. So, for those of you who might be worried that I'm not experiencing anything good in my Sunday expressions of the church, that just is not the case.

Now for today...The 1,700-Year Wedgie. Just reading the chapter title brought back memories of 7th grade sleep-overs at friends houses! Once I got passed my juvenile tendencies, I settled in for a great 7-page chapter. Here is the first part that grabbed my attention:

"When we call for the ancient way of church to return, we are calling for a return to this revolutionary position, outside the center of the dominant culture." (p51)

Right now, I am sitting at "The Chick" (Chick-fil-a), writing and I am listening to music that at one time was reserved for the privacy of one's own heart and maybe a youth campfire service. As I look around, no one is bowing, no one is lifting their hands, no one is clapping, no one is singing (out-loud). The Chick just might be the most popular fast-food restaurant in our area. There are always people here. That being said, "worship music" plays on the stereo and people hardly even notice. I love The Chick and I hope they keep playing the music, but to me it is an example of how the church has lost it's revolutionary position.

"The ancient church influenced the world not by lightening up their values or by veiling them, but by living them out in plain view of the culture around them. Their lives exposed and challenged the present value system with new Kingdom values." (p51-52)

I see this as achievable for the Church today. I do not want to go back to primitive dwellings, no electricity, no cars, no this no that. I have said before that I love our modern amenities. However, there is a place in the culture that the ancient church occupied that I want to get back to. Don't misunderstand our push for ancient church as a push for method - it's about mission!

Halter then moves into 3 specific cases where Kingdom values replaced current values...and can again!

1. The Value of Sacrificial Community (Acts 2:44) - operating like a spiritual co-op, where people had their needs met within the community
2. The Value of Confrontation (Acts 5:1-11) - because incarnational practices are relational, confrontation is much more direct and affective.
3. The Value of Inclusive Community (Acts 11:1-18) - God was getting Peter ready to change how Peter viewed people, especially the "nonbelieving Gentiles." The Good News was there for everyone - man, woman, young, old, slave, free, Jew and Gentile.

It's easy for us to get caught up in conversations about Sunday morning - nice conversations, by the way - but ultimately we all have to ask ourselves serious questions about our experience, no matter what flavor. In the early church, nobody repainted the picture to make it more attractive - in fact, a case could be made that Jesus often made His Way less appealing to those with whom he shared. "God's strategy of challenging valueless values with Kingdom values was the way the church grew in respect and in numbers." (p54)

These three specific values are increasingly difficult in the sterile environment of large group gatherings, but not so in smaller groups of relationally connected people. Yes, we can all come together and pool resources and gather 1000 backpacks at school, but the impact of a small group pooling their resources to support a family in the group whose husband has lost his job, is not only revolutionary to the one being served, but to the rest of the group as well. Sure, the speaker at a large gathering can "confront" everyone in the room with the words he says, but personal confrontation from people we trust and who know us goes a lot further for both the confronted and the one confronting. We can have services that involve people in large room of different colors and maybe different versions of the same belief, but in the smaller group context we can have people of any, all or no faith sitting in a room discussing their views of everything from Tiger Woods to the early apostles, and it's good.

This chapter gave me further clarity in the reason we are sailing in uncharted waters as a small church plant. We refuse to settle for good things, when better things might just be around the corner. As others have stated recently, different does not always equal better, but when the goal is to see people relationally connected to God and to their neighbors, different methods must be explored, lest we just repeat the same patterns of ineffectiveness as our predecessors. I for one, want more and I know there is more out there.