the Good Question

But I'm particularly annoyed by "First" churches. Really? You were first? Are you in competition with the other churches?: "Ha! We got here first! Nah nah nah nah nah nah!" Or, "We've been here the longest! That proves something!" All it proves is age and that we've made the Kingdom into a competitive sport. Oh, how darling! Who really cares who was first? ...Other than the people who wish they were, or those poorly misinformed folks who think "First" is a denomination and actually means something. (I've come across several of those.)

:)

Really, back hundreds of years ago, who's idea was it to call their community of believing friends by a name?

I imagine it probably started with place names. "The church* in Troas" may have eventually become "The Church of Troas" and when, because of the hardness of their hearts, people tore away, they didn't want to call themselves "The Other Church of Troas" (because that sounds tacky), so they decided on "The Harmony Church of Troas", because, they felt, that's what best described their vision: harmony. And... well, you can easily imagine where it led from there. Here we are now!

Understand me, here: I'm not trying to be critical in a cynical way, rather I think it is pretty funny. I'm chuckling.

But to be a bit more serious: I am a little mad about it. Just what the heck are we thinking? It totally wrecks the beauty and purity of what the Body of Christ is supposed to be! It makes a lively, relationally-oriented community made up of people who believe God out to be an organizationally-oriented religious club, location, or event. It makes a family into a team. And when you "join" a team "of faith," the faith becomes a game and you can't help but feel better about yourself because you are on what you perceive to be the winning team. Competition with other teams is, without having to think one moment about it, the automatic sociological response to joining a team. It's you versus them.

Don't believe me? Just listen to the way people talk about their church! I'm sure you know what I'm talking about, so I won't even bother to quote anyone.

Once it gets this far, it stops being about people and starts being about numbers (although, to be fair, it is never so cut and dry as this—or at least I hope not). And that's what people on the outside will think of it immediately. That's what people on the inside will come to think of it eventually. And down the road, no one will scarcely be able to perceive that anything is wrong with the picture. You call it by a name and that's what you get. You don't get a family of people. You get a roster and a point scale. Because you treated it like a team.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will make me crawl up into a ball and weep." Words are power things. If you call your friend "stupid" or "ugly" and keep calling him that—no matter how obviously untrue it may be—he will begin to doubt himself and will eventually accept it as truth. Adolf Hitler even said it of bold-faced lies: "If you tell a lie long enough and loud enough and often enough, the people will believe it." And if that is true of lies (as Hitler clearly demonstrated), then surely it must be true of half-truths, which are much easier to accept.

Remember what was said in the scenario I gave?: "...the moment you start referring to it that way, you start thinking of it that way, and pretty soon your children think of your family as an event and a tradition. And you'll be fighting that for the rest of your life."

Words shape worldviews and ideologies and revolutions. I know it's hard, and I know everyone else does it, and I know this is totally opposite of the standard paradigm, but don't allow yourself to make into something less what is intended to be something so much more.

Be a "Hudson." Be a part of Christ's "body." Be Father's loved child. Be the community of people who have been absolutely—I love it!—changed by the happy news about God.

Be more than a product of easy slips.

*   Understand that "church" (really Greek's "ekklesia") was a simple, everyday word and functionally meant "community," especially to Jewish hearers who were accustomed to hearing it used repeatedly in the Greek versions of the Old Testament for "the jewish community"—not at all the loaded, technical word we use today.

It's a pattern that is apparent in every human being. You need to feel loved and you need to feel secure, so you manipulate the people and the circumstances in your life, even in subconscious action, to attempt to convince yourself that these things are true. But the moment you bring control into a relationship, you rob your friend of the joy of giving what he could have given in love, and you rob yourself of the joy of receiving what he could have given in love. You cheat yourself of real opportunities for love and security. You cheapen so many friends by making them your pawns. And you reflect your own qualities upon God, expecting Him to act the same way toward you that you do toward the people in your life. But this is not unconditional love.

On a good day, coercion produces hypocrisy; on a bad day, rivers of blood. (Roger Williams, paraphrased)

You will accomplish more in the next two months developing a sincere interest in two people than you will ever accomplish in the next two years trying to get two people interested in you. (Tim Sanders)

James follows with an example of favoritism, and then a brief explanation—for the sake of this particular example—of why it makes no sense to honor the rich above the poor:

For example, suppose someone comes into your meeting dressed in fancy clothes and expensive jewelry, and another comes in who is poor and dressed in dirty clothes. If you give special attention and a good seat to the rich person, but you say to the poor one, "You can stand over there, or else sit on the floor"—well, doesn’t this discrimination show that your judgments are guided by evil motives?

Listen to me, dear brothers and sisters. Hasn’t God chosen the poor in this world to be rich in faith? Aren’t they the ones who will inherit the Kingdom he promised to those who love him? But you dishonor the poor! Isn’t it the rich who oppress you and drag you into court? Aren’t they the ones who slander Jesus Christ, whose noble name you bear? (2:2-7 NLT)

He explains how favoritism and prejudice break the Old Covenant Law. He reminds us that God despises any form of partiality. It's not just a trifle. He continues:

If you really carry out the royal law prescribed in Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you are doing well. But if you show favoritism, you commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

For whoever keeps the entire law, yet fails in one point, is guilty of breaking it all. For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." So if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you are a lawbreaker. (2:8-11 CSB)

But then, he returns to his original point to resolve the issue he left us with in verse 1: How is it that partiality and faith in Christ are mutually exclusive of each other? It's interesting to see the direction James takes with his reasoning. He lifts the weight of his argument off of the Old Covenant Law onto the New Covenant "law":

Speak and act as those who will be judged by the law of freedom. For judgment is without mercy to the one who hasn't shown mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (2:12-13 CSB)

So, James compares the Torah Law with this "law of freedom." James has already mentioned a "law of freedom" in his epistle—at James 1:25, where he exhorts us to always keep at the forefront of our minds our identity—the reality of the freedom we have in Christ—and to live according to that reality of freedom and grace. But what is this talk of a New Covenant "law"?

Paul uses similar terminology in his open letter to the Christians at Rome. We pick up his argument in Romans at 3:1-30:

Then what advantage has the Jew [over the Gentile]? Or what is the value of circumcision?... Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin.... Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. (ESV)

Well, what is a law? It's as the NIV has it here, a "principle"... a principle that is followed, a rule of action. So, when Paul says that there is no room for the Jews to boast in their nationality as though it made them any closer to God than other nations, he explains that this is because there is a principle of faith that needs to be considered. That principle of faith is "that a man is justified [made right with God] by faith apart from observing the law [of works]" (NIV). The "law of faith" is the principle of relationship that allows people like you and me to be reconciled with our Father, God. It is, in other terminology, "the Gospel." It is "Grace."

So, when James says, "favoritism is not consistent with faith in our Lord Jesus Christ" and "speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom" (TNIV) what does he mean? What's the connection?

He means that "the law of freedom" motivates us to love, greatly and equally, all people. Why? Because "the law of freedom" is the truth of freedom from condemnation. How do we know this? Because Paul said,

No condemnation now exists for those in Christ Jesus, because the Spirit's law of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. (Romans 8:1-2 CSB)

By faith in Christ, by having confidence in the power of God and His love for us, we are set free from the chains of sin and death, because there is no longer any condemnation over us. A condemnation is "a sentence of judgment which condemns some one to do, to give or to pay something." We are no longer criminals being judged. We are no longer condemned to attempt to pay the penalty from crimes too numerous to count. We are free. Rather than condemned, we have been forgiven.

A condemnation is also "an expression of strong disapproval," which is also something that does not exist for us in Christ. We are—you are—totally approved of God. He accepts you. He loves you. He validates you. He considers you valuable to Him. And there is absolutely nothing you can do to change that.

But how then can we, who have been forgiven of our incalculable debts, go on with unforgiveness in our hearts? How then can we, who have been accepted despite ourselves, go on rejecting others based upon our formulated criteria? How then can we, who are loved unconditionally, go on distributing love to others according to how they meet our standards?

Do you favor one person above another, because the one is "cool" and the other is decidedly "not"? Do you love and approve of one friend who is mature, thoughtful, and loving, but look down upon another in condescension who is immature, whiny, and selfish? Do you hang out only with people you find pleasant and avoid people who are annoying, are irritable, or have poor personal hygiene? Do you find yourself surrounded with people who hide well their sins on the inside, but wouldn't dream of befriending people who wear their sins on the outside? Do you stick close to your comfort zone when your comfort zone tells you to socialize only with people of your own ethnicity? Do you give the best seats to the rich?

It is with all this in mind that James continues his thought with, "What good is it, dear brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but don't show it by your actions?" (James 2:14 NLT)

Jesus taught the same thing:

Then Peter came to him and asked, "Lord, how often should I forgive someone who sins against me? Seven times?"

"No, not seven times," Jesus replied, "but seventy times seven!

"Therefore, the Kingdom of Heaven can be compared to a king who decided to bring his accounts up to date with servants who had borrowed money from him. In the process, one of his debtors was brought in who owed him millions of dollars. He couldn't pay, so his master ordered that he be sold—along with his wife, his children, and everything he owned—to pay the debt.

"But the man fell down before his master and begged him, 'Please, be patient with me, and I will pay it all.' Then his master was filled with pity for him, and he released him and forgave his debt.

"But when the man left the king, he went to a fellow servant who owed him a few thousand dollars. He grabbed him by the throat and demanded instant payment.

"His fellow servant fell down before him and begged for a little more time. 'Be patient with me, and I will pay it,' he pleaded. But his creditor wouldn't wait. He had the man arrested and put in prison until the debt could be paid in full.

"When some of the other servants saw this, they were very upset. They went to the king and told him everything that had happened. Then the king called in the man he had forgiven and said, 'You evil servant! I forgave you that tremendous debt because you pleaded with me. Shouldn’t you have mercy on your fellow servant, just as I had mercy on you?' Then the angry king sent the man to prison to be tortured until he had paid his entire debt.

"That's what my heavenly Father will do to you if you refuse to forgive your brothers and sisters from your heart." (Matthew 18:21-35 NLT)

Do you see then why "favoritism is not consistent with faith in our Lord Jesus Christ"?

But...

If someone merely listens to the message and does not live it out, he is like someone who gazes at his own face in a mirror. For he gazes at himself and then goes out and immediately forgets what sort of person he was.

Ah! "But," he says!

But the one who peers into the perfect law of liberty and fixes his attention there, and does not become a forgetful listener but one who lives it out—he will be blessed in what he does. (James 1:23-25 NET)

I'd like you to read that again, in the Contemporary English Version, to make sure you get the point:

But you must never stop looking at the perfect law that sets you free. God will bless you in everything you do, if you listen and obey, and don't just hear and forget. (1:25)

You are free. You are forgiven. You are accepted. And you must hold onto that truth with a deathgrip. There is no room for shame or guilt or any other form of self-condemnation. Because "there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus." There is only love. There is only grace. And when you fix your eyes on that—that is faith. It is confidence in God's love and promise: stubborn faith in stubborn promises.

Grace is God's acceptance of us. Faith is our acceptance of God's acceptance of us. (Adrian Rogers)

This freedom will change the way you look at others. It will change the way you act. Eugene Peterson sums it up pretty well with his paraphrase of James 2:14-17:

Dear friends, do you think you'll get anywhere in this if you learn all the right words but never do anything? Does merely talking about faith indicate that a person really has it? For instance, you come upon an old friend dressed in rags and half-starved and say, "Good morning, friend! Be clothed in Christ! Be filled with the Holy Spirit!" and walk off without providing so much as a coat or a cup of soup—where does that get you? Isn't it obvious that God-talk without God-acts is outrageous nonsense?

What is the Central Formative Principle of the gatherings of the people in your organization (i.e. church)? The Central Formative Principle of an organization is that principle that, above all others, is the most influential in its model, format, program, schedule, and practical values.

For example, if your Central Formative Principle is education, then you might meet like a typical institutional church, wherein the central-most thing is the teaching, and so the people sit facing forward, the way the schedule is oriented shows that education is primary, the service or meeting is programmed in such a way that perhaps almost all attention is given toward education, and the people are by-and-large passive recipients of educational learning. The immediate goal, organizationally speaking, is learning. The problem with this is that authentic community is not a function of education. So, you can be a part of such an organization and have all kinds of great teaching and never function in genuine community—never have any real depth in your relationships. The weekly calendar is filled mostly with opportunities that are educational, but very few opportunities for the community to flourish and function in honesty and grace as a whole, and therefore, if people are going to nourish the community, they have to do so outside of the weekly schedule and structure, rather than through them. And let’s face it: that rarely happens.

[Two more examples² of common Central Formative Principles of Western-styled churches come immediately to mind. See footnote two for those.]

When the CFP is education, the organization becomes shaky when the teaching is repetitive or has poor style, and the people are prone to dry intellectualism, "always learning but never able to come to an intimate knowledge of the Truth"—what T.S. Eliot once said becomes true of them: "We know too much, and are convinced of too little."

But, if the Central Formative Principle is authentic, vibrant, and holistic community, then the people will get education. Why? Because community is not a function of education, but education is a function of community. Education is not the centroid—community is—but education is in orbit. Education is present, but so is confession, accountability, fellowship, discipling, encouragement, prayer, social grace, the mission, personal experience with God, and all the other things necessary for a lively New Testament fellowship of Jesus-followers (and as an added bonus, the people aren't likely to be bored—but that's not the point). Of course, you can find all kinds of groups wherein the CFP is just "community for the sake of community" and not find education or many of the other important qualities, but if this is the case, then it is a crippled community (and effectively a social club), and not an authentic and holistic community focused on Jesus and His mission in the world.

The reason I bring this up is three-fold: 1) to show that it is possible, though difficult, to reform an institutional church into an organic church by recovering a Biblical Central Formative Principle, 2) to show that it is impossible to reform an institutional church into an organic church unless the Central Formative Principle changes (please withhold judgment for just a moment, I’ll qualify this below), and 3) to cause anyone reading this to reflect upon how the church or community of believers they are a part of is organized and whether it results in the maximum potential for a Bible community to glorify God through the transformation of lives.

As to point 2, when an institutional church realigns its CFP with community in the place of education or entertainment, it is not absolutely necessary for it to give up meeting in a church building with pews or to give up a lectural sermon. What is absolutely necessary is for the church to drastically change how it otherwise stimulates and elevates the other functions of community to nurture a more wholesome, unified, intentional, grace-oriented, prayer-saturated, and obedient body of believers.

Again, I’ll quote two of my favorite sayings: "Your systems are perfectly designed to produce the results they are getting." (Frederick Taylor) and "Radical changes require radical choices." (Or, for those of you who may be uncomfortable with my choice of words: "Drastic changes require drastic choices.")³

Your thoughts, in continuing this discussion, are greatly valued.

-dave

¹  The basic concept I picked up from somewhere in the first half of Frank Viola's Pagan Christianity. The term "Central Formative Principle," used in this way, is original to me so far as I have been able to determine. [RETURN]

²  If your Central Formative Principle is entertainment, then the main idea is to get together to feel good and not be bored. So, again, your organization is liable to meet in a face-forward style of architecture and seating, with a passive audience and individualistic bent, the calendar emphasizes entertainment, and the people get restless without constant preoccupation. One of the several problems with this is that community is not a function of entertainment either. And you can be an active part in this sort of organization and have no effective level of community.

If your Central Formative Principle is personal experience, then individualistic spiritual or emotional highs will be the ultimate goal, as can be the case in some loose charismatic gatherings. The problem, again, is that community is not a function of personal experience, but personal experience can certainly be a function of community. Individual experiences with God can take place outside of the context of community, but there are experiences with God that can only take place in the context of authentic community.

When the CFP is entertainment, the whole organization quickly erodes when the programs that are provided fail to give them something fresh, exciting, and polished.

When the CFP is personal experience, the organization can become self-obsessed or complacently introverted, overly high on individual expression, and low on confession and social grace. [RETURN]

³  To challenge whoever may be reading, what follows is a short list of quotations that I thought might be appropriate after reading this discussion:

• "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting different result." (Albert Einstein)
• "The good is the enemy of the best."
• "You might have a vision for your life, but a vision without a plan is just wishful thinking." (Graham Cooke)
• "Let me beg you, not to rest contented with the commonplace religion that is now so prevalent." (Adoniram Judson)
• "I have been thirty years forming my own views; and, in the course of this time, some of my hills have sunk, and some of my valleys have risen: but, how unreasonable within me to expect all this should take place in another person; and that, in the course of a year or two." (John Newton)
• "God assumes full responsibility for your obedience to Him.... That eliminates all reasons to be afraid." (Charles Stanley)

These verses imply a number of things about the purpose [of] Christian community. Here are a few, I see:

• To draw near to God
• To experience forgiveness
• To help each other hold fast and to not waver in our faith
• To spur each other on to love and good deeds
• To encourage each other

....I began to view "church" differently. Sometimes, I would be really tired on Sunday mornings, and would not feel up for going. I would feel the old indoctrination pulling at me saying: you really should go....

Anyway, when the "should" came into my mind, a simple question would come each time in response: "Have you forsaken gathering together with other people of faith?" Each time I heard this question, I realized I had, in fact, not forsaken Christian community (usually I was so tired because I had been to numerous gatherings with other believers all week). Further the question itself revealed to me that it wasn’t the joy of community that was drawing me to the Sunday morning service, but a sense of religious obligation.

Please understand, I am not "anti-Sunday-morning". I am only saying that whatever day we meet together our purpose should be to encourage and strengthen each other, and if we are doing something that doesn’t do that, then we’re not really doing "church" (which means "gathering") according to Hebrews 10:25. I’m also saying there really is nothing sacred about meeting on Sunday morning per se, unless it’s sacred to you.

Later in the discussion, Jeff commented:

This particular article caught my attention because it so closely resembles so many stories I have heard over the last few years and that of my own. Sometimes these stories are told with fists clinched and teeth grinding. Sometimes they are recounted with tears and great humility. Often, they are told with great pain and disillusionment. No matter, I think we should all listen to these cries. There is a prophetic voice ringing loud that something in our Americanized Christianity has gone awry. We have, over the course of time, drifted from the Center, which is Jesus. We have become comfortable with attending meetings, planning programs, arguing about music and clothing, tearing particular traditions apart, emerging, missionalizing, forgetting the masses who are not concerned with our petty arguments, and pretty much ignoring how to do life with one another.

As a result, much of what we do as Christians has become quite irreverant and irrelevant to those who do not yet know the God we claim to love. They see more hate and bitterness than the love that Jesus said would show people that we know Him.

Please understand, I do not mean to imply that "house" or "organic" churches are THE answer to all of our problems. I am not saying that everyone should leave and forsake the institutional church. In fact, I haven’t really heard anyone saying that. The point of this growing conversation is to cause us to really think about what we do and why we do it.

When I came across this discussion on Jeff's blog, I had been thinking about Hebrews 10:25 for two or three months. I think I was talking with someone about the principle of organic church when it dawned on me, much like it did with Mudsy, that the spirit of 10:25 isn’t that we make sure that we just so happen to be in the same place as a bunch of other Christians, nor even that we just so happen to listen to the same sermon, at the same time, and in the same place as other Christians. The point is that we ensure that we actively involve ourselves in authentic Christian community as we are able.

We can attend all kinds of meetings and services if we want and never be involved in authentic community. Most church people do.

So, what often happens is that people think, consciously or emotionally, "If I don’t go to church today, I will get dukie points with God, because I’ll be disobeying that verse the preacher quoted the other week." And so, they go, maybe chat a little, leave, and maybe, just maybe, even go out to eat with someone, and never experience any depth of community. So, despite their intent, they totally miss the point of Heb. 10:25 anyway. Friendship is not the same as community. Having Christian friends does not necessarily mean that you are involved in authentic Christian community with your friends.

Furthermore, it's not enough that Jesus is the subject of conversation. Being actively engaged in genuine Gospel community with fellow followers of Jesus means, yes, that we discuss Jesus and His kingdom, but also that we confess our sins, receive accountability (much more active, effective, and relational than mere "church discipline"), provoke each other "to love and to do good deeds" (to embody the Gospel), encourage each other and draw each other closer to God with joy and passion for His glory, and act as a functional part of the Body in all the various ways that the Body functions (follow the discussion of "the fullness of Christ" and "the body of Christ" in Ephesians).

And if you aren’t a part of this kind of community, then you aren’t living out the fullness of Jesus’ ecclesia and global "plan." Endeavor to become a part of a community of this kind.

It is only an empowered, grace-oriented, intentional, organic, relational, de-centralized, simple, humble, and passionate community with real believing faith in the power, wisdom, character, providence, and supremacy of God that can change the world as Jesus intended.

There is no room for pride—there is no perfection in human community (prior to the coming of the Kingdom in its fullness), but God forgive us if we aren’t pursuing these revelation of these realities in our lives and within our influence!

It is possible to be "intentional, organic, relational, de-centralized, simple" and meet in a "church building." But if so, then such a church is not institutional, even though it is also not a house church. It is, however, my opinion that this is a very difficult thing to pull off in Western church-cultures. I have not often seen it.

Radical changes require radical choices, usually. The problem is, every American Christian seems to admit "something needs to change," but then a large majority of them also say "but we don’t want to change anything."

My initial suggestion: substantial prayer with other believers. If you aren’t comfortable switching to a more house-church or cell-church model. That’s fine. But whatever you do, something has to change if you are going to see a spiritual change from the current state of affairs—sometimes those changes are purely metaphysical (spiritual or theological), and sometimes those changes are really practical. The business maxim is true: "Your systems are perfectly designed to produce the results they are getting." So, if you want to see different fruit in your life and in your church, you can’t just expect business-as-usual to produce them. Pray a LOT with other followers of Jesus (hours every week), read whole books of the Bible in community (Colossians, for example, usually takes less than 15 minutes), then obey what you read as if Jesus were returning next week, and see if things don’t begin to change. That's not a formula. It won't do anything magically. But one thing it will do, hopefully, is begin to help you to learn how to re-envision and re-approach your faith and teach you just how much you don't know and are so completely incapable of doing yourself.