Shall We Plant
Patrick Meads Blog for the Tuesday is so powerful I just had to share it with you.
Should we plant more churches? Let's dispense with the obvious: Jesus is not optional and we want more people to worship him in spirit and in truth. That said, is church planting the answer? May I be forthright at the risk of being offensive? Perhaps we shouldn't plant churches that are just like the churches we have if those churches are not reaching their communities and the cultures that surround them. Your church may be small and struggling because it is faithful, but more likely it is small and struggling because it is not connecting with the culture that lives outside its building. Putting up another building won't help.
George Hunter III wrote about the difference between Celtic and Roman evangelistic efforts ("The Celtic Way of Evangelism"). The Romans built a building and preached a system. You could belong to that group only if you came to their building and bought into their system. You had, in short, to look like the Romans. The Celts moved into an area and, instead of building a chapel, looked for ways to serve the community. They protected travelers, provided health care, helped mend fences both physical and emotional, and worked their way into the hearts of the people so effectively that the people belonged to the community before they even believed.
Here is a quick question, the answer to which will help you determine whether you are a Celtic or Roman style church. Is your church a redeeming force or a sacred outpost? The Crusaders held territory but didn't change hearts. Is your church a crusading church or does it transform the hearts of the people in their culture? Our churches are called to be pivot points of a movement working to reform the cultures of the present day; to engage the people who ARE around us rather than the people we WISH were around us. We must be like the first century Jews who were admonished by Paul to sit in peace with the Gentiles.
Hold the line? Stay the course? Three thousand churches in the US close their doors each year (source: George Barna). While they wanted things to change, they were not willing to change. they held to their traditions and programs, answering questions the culture was no longer asking. We baptize a lot of people, but none of them are baptized because we won an argument with them about their church, their baptism, or their worship. They are baptized because people of this faith community engaged them, befriended them, served them, loved them, and cared for them until they found themselves part of the community; willing to do anything to belong to the Jesus that had found them. I don't preach against the denominations. I try to out love them, out serve them, out Jesus them so that anyone who watches can see the difference. It works.
Mark Driscoll (read "Reformission" and "Confessions of a Reformission Rev") says that the church is called to love the gospel, the culture, and the church but most churches only love two of the three. If we love the gospel and our culture but not the church, we form a parachurch organization that tries to connect people to Jesus without connecting them to each other. If we love our church and our culture but not the gospel we become a liberal, mainline denomination without power to change the world. If we love the church and the gospel but not the culture, we become isolated and our churches slowly die (it can take a century or two), prone to legalism and irrelevance. We have determined that Rochester will be a church that reaches up, reaches in, and reaches out. We will fulfill all three parts of our calling.
Click here for the rest of the article.



Recent Comments