Mark Main at The Untried has written two posts about “Assumptions”, reflecting on the flak he has taken in his departure from institutional church, and the assumptions those in his circle have made about his faith and his motives. The list was actually surprising to me, how many things have been said about him and his family–everything from how he’s a heretic to how he’s leading his own children away from God.
I honestly haven’t taken nearly the same amount of hits that Mark has. I think that might be because I really began this journey simultaneously with coming to a new town. However, I have received enough pot-shots that I can relate to and understand what he’s going through. I have been treated with suspicion and hostility by other church leaders (without ever really being told why). I’ve had relationships begin with the question, “So what do you do?” and end with the answer, “I’m a house church pastor.” I’ve had a long-time pastor friend quiz me on the basic tenets of faith to make sure I hadn’t backslidden. And I’ve gotten wind that there is at least one visitor to this blog who apparently thinks I’m going to hell. (Anyone who knows me has laughed out loud at that idea.) So, yeah…I can relate.
So the question in my mind is…why? Why would this simple act of withdrawal from an institution create so many assumptions, so much speculation, so much fear, and so much judgment?
There are no doubt lots of reasons, on many different levels. Sometimes the mistreatment comes from simple fear, because so many people trust in the church institutions that someone leaving it becomes a testimony of its inherent weakness. Sometimes this can create fear, suspicion, and even hostility that even the perpretrator cannot explain. They just don’t like it. And there can be a lot of other factors involved.
But on a theological level (sorry, Jim), I think it boils down to the fact that over the centuries we church folks have confused shape with substance.
Here’s what I mean. The church as we know it has been shaped a certain way for a very long time. So long, in fact, that most adherents to our faith have never stopped to consider how much of what we do is really mandated (or NOT mandated) by the Scripture. Some of my readers will recall my previous references to principle versus method–that there are principles in Scripture that shouldn’t be compromised, and there are methods we use to carry out those principles. Principles don’t change; methods can, and should change. That’s kind of what I’m talking about here. The things in Scripture that define our faith, and who/what the church is and should be–these are the substance (principles) of our faith. Our shape, however, is more about method. Our shape as an organism called “the church” is influenced and informed by the principles and substance of Scripture, but honestly, it’s also informed by our traditions and our cultural context. If you’ve never read the provocative book Pagan Christianity?, you’d be surprised by how much of our shape as the church was influenced by Greco-Roman culture rather than Scripture itself.
And you know something? That’s not a bad thing in and of itself. I think we should be shaped somewhat by our culture, although we should not compromise the substance of our faith in the process. That’s how we live in an appropriate tension between cultural relevance and being “not of the world.” The problem arises when we confuse shape for substance, and start living like they are somehow one and the same. When that happens, one of two things can result: we either become so much like the world around us that our faith has no impact on the world; or we become so ingrown with our traditions and allow our “shape” to harden, so we become irrelevant to the world, and again, our faith has no impact.
Can you see that in some ways, both things have happened with the church?
My own experience with likeminded people (and indeed, the motive of my own heart) is that the shape of the church needs to be questioned–not the substance. The current shape of the church, IMHO, is not working anymore–either for ourselves or in our impact on the world. When that happens, we need to start deconstructing and reconstructing–to begin to reclaim the pure substance of Christ-following from the traditions we have taken for granted. Tradition itself is not bad, but when we make a god out of it, it can actually get in the way of intimacy with Jesus. And when our structures seem to cause more hurt to our people the closer they get to the “inner circle”, it’s honestly time to re-think them.
I believe that those like Mark who are leaving the instituitions behind are not abandoning the substance of their faith (so the heresy accusation is simply ridiculous). What they are looking for is a better shape for our faith–something that will help make the substance of faith come alive in them again. It’s messy sometimes, and rattles a lot of cages, and causes a lot of inappropriate assumptions; but I think it’s a step toward Jesus, not away from Him.
Wayward Son
Musician. Composer. Recovering perfectionist. Minister-in-transition. Lover of puns. Hijacker of rock song references. Questioner of the status quo.
I'm not really a rebel. Just a sincere Christ-follower with a thirst for significance that gets me into trouble. My quest has taken me over the fence of institutional Christianity. Here are some of my random thoughts along the way. Read along, join in the conversation. Just be nice.
View all posts by Wayward Son →
Jeff, couldn’t agree more. One thing that frustrates me from “within” the walls of the institution is when people don’t realize it isn’t working. We think it’s working because we on the inside had a good meeting or saw a few new faces at our “outreach” (picnic in the church parking lot). What we fail to see is all of those folks outside the walls who want NOTHING to do with what we are offering – they just want JESUS but don’t know where or how to find him. Drives me to tears sometimes, it does.
Jeff,
Excellent post! I, too, couldn’t agree more with everything mentioned here, my friend. Keep up the wonderful posts. I enjoy them and hear the Holy Spirit through you. Neat to see what He is showing you, and many others of our brothers and sisters.
I especially loved what you said here: “I believe that those like Mark who are leaving the instituitions behind are not abandoning the substance of their faith…What they are looking for is a better shape for our faith–something that will help make the substance of faith come alive in them again.”
Amen!
Blessings,
~Amy 🙂
http://amyiswalkinginthespirit.blogspot.com
I really resonate with what you and Mark write Jeff. Yet I do wonder where we would be without the Catholic and Protestant versions of church.
Missional guy Dan Kimball writes this in his Christianity Today piece titled Missional Misgivings:
“Another outspoken advocate of the house church model sees it as more missional and congruent with the early church. But his church has the same problem. After fifteen years it hasn’t multiplied. It’s a wonderful community that serves the homeless, but there’s no evidence of non-Christians beginning to follow Jesus. In the same city several megachurches are seeing conversions and disciples matured.”
Evangelism and discipleship of new believers seems to be a concern.. not sure that it is a valid one though. I’d appreciate your thoughts here or in another post on your experiences with evangelism and discipleship.
Steve,
I can relate to what you’re saying. I see a lot of patting ourselves on the back, or hand-picking certain statistics to tell ourselves we’re doing a good job (and sometimes we are)…but many are not really taking an honest look at the statistics that are less flattering.
Amy,
Thanks for stopping by, and for the encouragement.
KB,
It might be worth writing its own post…let me chew on that awhile…but for now, I wonder if we’re barking up the wrong tree entirely by measuring the effectiveness of a certain congregation and the format they use by the actual number of converts/disciples that are coming in. There are simply too many variables that affect that issue (location, cultural environment, even tactics that might inflate our numbers). Don’t misunderstand me, this is a crucial issue, and one that the church at large is still falling short in. And I do believe that more organic forms may have more potential to make disciples in our day, simply because of the way the more traditional forms are now viewed by our culture. But I think perhaps focusing too much on the actual numbers of converts not only over-simplifies the issues, but also steers us back toward a marketing approach to our faith–an approach we usually take without thinking, and one that many of us are now trying to shed.
For me, my approach these days is just to model Christ as much as I can in my life, to try and share His love in tangible ways, and share my faith when opportunity arises, and leave the results of that to God.
You’ve got me thinking, though… 🙂
Thanks Jeff. I think that most Christians would probably agree with you on this..
“For me, my approach these days is just to model Christ as much as I can in my life, to try and share His love in tangible ways, and share my faith when opportunity arises, and leave the results of that to God.”
..I guess my thinking from Kimball’s article is more about the bigger picture than about personal conduct.
GReat post.
I feel it is really a lack of biblical understanding. Most of us who have left the IC have done so to grow closer to GOD. We seek golden uplit lands where we can live out our faith.
Sadly those in the IC do not see the wonder of community in other forms that are outside of the building.
Jeff,
I’m honored to know you are reading my blog. I agree with what you are saying. As I ended my second post on assumptions I made a statement that I think is very true.
I think the things people say to me are more about them than they are about me. I really believe it is their own fear and/or insecurity talking. To admit that what I am doing is acceptable means that they have have to admit to themselves that all the rules and legalisms they have been living by for so long are not necessary. That isn’t an easy thing to do. Most of the time people simply aren’t willing to do it. I know that firsthand.
Mark