Having lived in both urban and suburban areas, I’ve yet to find an area in these United States that doesn’t already have at least one, if not zillions, of congregations already meeting in it. I think it’s interesting that we have a mindset that if our own denomination, or network, or whatever umbrella organization we feel connected to, doesn’t have a congregation in an area, then they’re probably not doing it right and a new church needs to be started there. What about using the congregations that already exist, the four churches who have touching parking lots, for example, and disciple people so that they live their commitment to christ themselves, rather than paying someone else to do it? (I know I’m echoing several folks sentiments here.)
I don’t see anything wrong with people moving to urban or poor areas. I’m all for that. But to do it with the intention of starting a new church still seems silly to me. I’ve lived in Detroit and in the Mission district of San Francisco – both of which are (or were, when I lived there) rather poor urban zones. But they had churches already. Why rebuild the wheel? Why not help those “dying” churches get their second wind? Does it please God when the energy and excitement of youth is spent “for his glory” while simultaneously ignoring the wisdom and experience of the christians already living in that area? It seems to me that the old but faithful need the excitement, abilities and energy of the young. And the young and energized need the wisdom and the encouragement of the old and perseverant.
yes, that can sometimes be wrong and arrogant and unhelpful. but... have you considered that there may be times when it's actually right? when the existing churches in the area are so off track that there is a need for a new church to come in and give the non-believers in the area a chance to hear the Gospel for real and to experience Christianity for real? of course it may not be the same in the US, so what I'm saying may not be relevant to the situation there, but from what I have seen here in the UK, just because there is a church somewhere, that doesn't mean there are people practising what I would call real Christianity. And I'm not talking just about the members of the congregation, I'm talking about the leadership too. So your suggestion of "using the congregations that already exist" just wouldn't be doable - the congregations are very comfortable where they are, practising some type of religion that has some connections to the Christian faith, and are led by people who teach them that that's the right way.
ReplyDeletejared asked the same question on FB.
ReplyDeletei suppose what matters in this case is whether you see yourself as a missionary (which is what the author of the article was suggesting) or whether you're looking for a church family that already exists.
i think we'd also be surprised to find that there are christians in some of those congregations. it might not be anyone in the leadership, but they might be there.
and i think that's a wonderful place to talk to people about God. they're expecting it. they go to church services because that is where it happens. you don't have to get a foot in the door to talk about God stuff, you can head right into it. in some ways what you said about being set in their ways does make it hard. but on the other hand, it can also be a great inroads to talking about serious stuff without having to work your way around to the topic.
... and in rereading the part that you quoted, it bugs me that i said "then they're probably not doing it right". the "they" i'm referring to there is the local churches, not the denoms, etc.
oh, that is exactly how I read it - that the "they" is about the existing local congregations, with the denomination/movement/whatever that's thinking about church planting believing that "they", i.e. the locals, aren't doing it right. And that's what I reacted to in my earlier comment - what I was trying to say is that sometimes "they" (the local churches) really aren't doing it right.
ReplyDeleteThough now that I look at this last sentence I think: well, of course nobody is going to be "doing it right" completely, we're all fallible human beings and any congregation is going to get some stuff wrong. (yes, even my own...) it's a question of judging how bad it is, and of course we're all going to have different opinions about where to draw these lines. My own views have certainly changed over the years.
i think we'd also be surprised to find that there are christians in some of those congregations.oh, I know there are Christians in some of those congregations - just not very many, and they may be regarded as the odd ones out. This reminds me of a particular couple in a church I was once part of, who I somehow felt were different and at the time, in my one-foot-in-Christ-one-foot-in-the-world state, I looked at them and shuddered and thought I'd hate to be like that... Thank God, I am like that now :)
oh yes, I had a look at that article and I think I understand his point. And if you send a missionary somewhere, it might be part of his role to go to a local church and find the tiny grain of real Christianity in there and nurture it - to find those real Christians who are marginalised and encourage them.
ReplyDeleteyes! exactly.
ReplyDeleteand also to build up the church. so often we look at other congregations and think, "oh, they're just a bunch of posers." and then not only do we not help them, but we tear them down or say bad things against them when we don't even really know them. we should be befriending them, encouraging them, and as we build relationship with them, we'll have room to enter discussions on things we disagree on. (although, i suspect that the "older, lifeless churches" might agree more than we realize. we just assume they don't because they're not us. and anything that's not us is suspect, right?)
yes, we do sometimes say bad things about people we haven't bothered to get to know. and there are times when we judge others because of outward things - I know I've done that and God had to open my eyes to some cultural differences behind people's different behaviour. If an English person is standing rigid when they sing, it doesn't mean they're not feeling the same passion for God that I'm feeling - but to my Israeli eyes it looks cold and lifeless. And of course there's the personality type issue as well - someone who is more T than F will probably express themselves differently. And there's age. And church background - what you are used to. Zillions of factors that go into how we express ourselves in worship. Someone from a different background might look at my way of praying and judge me as not respectful enough. We need to do more dialoguing and less judging.
ReplyDeleteand it seems to me that most church planting stands as a judgement to the churches that are already in the area. i think it's one thing if we've tried to build relationship with them and we find that they don't really adhere to the apostles creed or they preach a works gospel. (and i don't mean that we visit once and decide that, but we've been involved in the congregation for a year and had discussions and we find that's a main tenant of the congregation.) then it makes sense to plant a church in that area. but if, over the course of that year, we get people thinking and talking about scriptures and exploring what they really believe, i'd call that "seeking the purity of the church" (which is part of the book of church order of our denomination) and i think that brings glory to God. and as people are challenged and begin to grow, won't new people want to come and see what's going on? which fits the whole theory about how people gravitate towards new and growing churches... only it wouldn't be a new congregation, but a revitalized older congregation.
ReplyDelete