A while back both Adam and Sarah Walker Cleaveland posted about Mark Driscoll's recent blog entry on mainlines churches. (Mark is the founder of Mars Hill Church) I've had the posts saved in my bloglines for a while, with thoughts forming in my head about how to respond to Driscoll's post.
Driscoll, in a charming tale about filling his young son's heads with ridiculous stereotypes of mainline-church Christians, wrote about driving by a mainline church with his son, age 7:
"He asked me what that church believed and I told him they do not believe people are sinners, do not believe the Bible is to be taken literally but is more like a fantasy video game, do not believe you need Jesus to go to heaven, and do believe that being gay is cool with Christ."
He goes on to share his "ten easy steps to destroying a denomination." His first starts with "having a low view of scripture." His whole article angers me, and I'm tempted to take it point by point, but this post would end up rant-like, which I'd prefer to avoid, even though he has a lot to say about "liberal women" that I could write on at length. But I have to say that I do hate the phrase "low view of scripture" which to me only says that the speaker has a different view of scripture than I do. I certainly would never say that I have a low view of scripture - what does that mean? I've been studying the scriptures since I was a child who was curious about God and faith and how the Bible could help me understand both. I took semester after semester of Greek in college and seminary not to tear apart a book I don't care about or view lowly, but to better understand it, get closer to it. Frustrating, and very insulting.
Anyway, though, that's not the main thing I wanted to comment on. Driscoll also comments on declining membership in mainline denominations as proof of non-rightness, not-on-the-right-trackness. I also think there are things the mainline church needs to do, ways we need to drastically change if we want to offer anything relevant to people. I worry about the Church's future, life-span, and my place in an 'institutional church', which I love, but which drives me crazy. But I think statistics, increases and declines, can only be facts for us to ponder. Increasing numbers don't mean evangelical conservative churches are right. Declining numbers don't mean all mainline churches are wrong. The reverse would also be true, and you can remind me of this should evangelical and mainline churches ever be in reversed statistical places.
What do increased numbers and declining numbers really mean? This summer at my church, I've been teaching a course on World Religions - nothing fancy, just basic facts and theology of major world religions, and few that were of particular interest to the class. In my preparation, I was searching for stats about the world's fastest growing religions, and I found this at adherents.org:
Some of the fastest growing religions/world views are:
- animal rights
- activists
- Assemblies of God
- Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
- environmentalism
- Evangelicals
- Hinduism
- International Church of Christ
- Islam
- Jehovah's Witnesses
- Lubavitcher Hasidic Jews
- non-denominational community churches
- Pentecostalism
- primal-indigenous religion/revitalized tribal and "first peoples" organizations
- Seventh-day Adventists
- Soka Gakkai
- Sufism
- Unitarian Universalists/Unitarians
- Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
- Wicca
- Zen Buddhism
Quite a list! And what do these movements/religions have in common? Nothing much, as far as I can see. Do you see common threads? Why do you think these things are among the fastest growing?
Of course, I want my church to grow. I want people to want to be there, be a part of a community of faith, feel like being a part, being a disciple, is something they just can't live without. But I'm also so conscious of the challenging message of Jesus. Throughout the scriptures, though we hear of many coming to believe, we hear from Jesus about how hard what he says is, and how hard it is for people to hear what he has to say. We hear during his ministry that many are not able to accept his teachings, and stop following him, turning back to where they came from. If Jesus' ministry went through a time of decline, if eventually even his closest abandoned him - does that mean there was something wrong with what he was teaching?
I want my church to grow. But I also think people can be simply attracted to what is new, flashy, easy, convenient, socially fulfilling. I think some churches, both mainline and other, can grow for wrong reasons too.
How do we assess growth in discipleship, really? I'm not sure we can do it by the numbers, the stats. I know we can't do it entirely without either. How do you measure discipleship? Right now, I think much of our interest in numbers and stats is so that we can rank ourselves, and compete against each other, and secure financial status and power within or between or over denominations. Can we engage in new ministries if their success can't be numerically measured somehow? What are signs of effective ministry that aren't numerical?
15 comments:
good advice on church:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtI2pa2m5cg
Yeah, the "10,000 ______'s can't be wrong" argument is a curious one. No sense of context or history whatsoever. I wonder where the same folks would have been in the days of Arius and Athanasius...
I can hear the Arian conversation now: "The ten easy steps to destroying a congregation begins with believing that the Son is co-eternal with the Father..."
Ok, standing by what I commented earlier... Having read the blog piece, the LA Times article reference/quotation was to an article written a couple of weeks ago by a Catholic laywoman, interestingly enough. That article associated the ordination of women with negative growth and departure from orthodoxy.
But I stand by ordination of women precisely because of orthodoxy and a high view of Scripture. Not to mention that the "ordaining women is a slippery slope to affirming homosexuality" is a nonsensical argument countered by the number of women who are ordained in various denominations yet conservative in their views on sexuality.
Gee, I guess charicature isn't so helpful in understanding others, whether you agree with them or not.
Thank you for such a measured response Beth, as you say the numbers game is not important... it concerns me when Christians start to critisise one another in the way Driscolls article assumes he has the only and right way of believing...
as for growth, if it is numerical growth with no depth I wonder if it is growth at all what will happen when a strong wind blows???
I wondering if from a liberal's point of view if there can be such a thing as an apostate church? Is the worship of Sophia & the practice of Milk & Honey rituals in place of Holy Communion an ok thing?
While I don't agree with everything Droscoll is saying, I see his main point as being that churches who have abandoned orthodoxy cannot & will not survive. How he defines orthodoxy is different than we do within the UMC, but let's not write off everything he's saying for clearly there must be a reason that conservative evangelical churches are growing while liberal mainline ones are dying.
My own observation/perspective is that the so-called evangelical/conservative/non-denominational churches continue to show signs of substantial growth because the message that comes from within is consistent. Mainline denominations appear to be trying to play on both sides of the street and for the genuine seeker, this can be confusing and downright annoying. The message, if there is one, is lost.
Mainline denominations are constantly at odds within themselves. Why would anyone sign up for that chaos, confusion, and contentiousness when that can be had anywhere? Where is the sanctuary in that?
Joel
I wondering if you can answer the questions I posed or if you're just going to take the easy way out. You're taking the classic liberal approach to people who disagree with you. Rather than substantial dialogue and debate, you call names and seek to make me into hatefilled, homophobic, sexist neanderthal.
I don't often agree with Beth, but at least she makes her points without resorting to below the belt shots.
Westboro?? Yikes! Can they even be classified as a "church"??
Joel,
I did not mean to imply that you or the vast majority of like minded people would support the worship of Sophia and other pagan practices. I was deeply hopeful that someone from a liberal point of view would take a stand and say those things are wrong. You're unwillingness to do that leads me to believe that you actually don't have a problem with things like this happening in a so-called Christian church. And it is that implied support of heretical practices that I have a real problem with.
I'm more than willing to condemn the practices of groups like Westboro. I think their hatefilled words have nothing at all to do with Christ. As Micheal says, they can't rightly be called a Christian church. Will you say the same thing about those on the other end of the spectrum?
Beth, thank you so much for this post. It really ministers to me and says many things that I have felt inside as well. One of my pet peeves is being lumped into the "stupid apostate" category by evangelical non-mainliners. Thanks again.
Beth,
I'm a conservative formerly a Roman Catholic now a Southern Baptist married to a United Methodist.
I wrestle with the same issues, one is naming calling.
We conservatives, such as myself, tend to see things in black and white in terms of doctrine and discipline.
Yet, the love of Jesus Christ is boundless.
As to your list of fast growing movements, they do share something in common. Anything that interferes with the grace of the Holy Spirit unto the salvation in Jesus Christ is worldly at best, demonic at worst. Those aren't my words, those are a theological position of one of the Soouthern Baptist semanaries. I just happen to agree with this doctrinal position.
Beth, keep blogging in Christ. We need to keep open the conversation even when we don't see eye to eye.
John Flores
Frisco, Texas
These ideologies, religions, philosphies, etc. if they do not hold Jesus Christ as the only true path to salvation are merely "vanity of vanities".
I'll leave you with a Wesleyan moment.
Corinthians 1:12
Denominations in the Church
Being much concerned about the rise of denominations in the church, John Wesley tells of a dream he had. In the dream, he was ushered to the gates of Hell. There he asked, “Are there any Presbyterians here?” “Yes!”, came the answer. Then he asked, “Are there any Baptists? Any Episcopalians? Any Methodists?” The answer was Yes! each time. Much distressed, Wesley was then ushered to the gates of Heaven. There he asked the same question, and the answer was No! “No?” To this, Wesley asked, “Who then is inside?” The answer came back, “There are only Christians here.” (1 Cor. 1:10-17)
Martin Luther said, “I pray you leave my name alone. Do not call yourselves Lutherans, but Christians.” John Wesley said: “I wish the name Methodist might never be mentioned again, but lost in eternal oblivion.” Charles Spurgeon said, “I say of the Baptist name, let it perish, but let Christ’s own name last forever. I look forward with pleasure to the day when there will not be a Baptist living.”
Beth,
I'm a conservative formerly a Roman Catholic now a Southern Baptist married to a United Methodist.
I wrestle with the same issues, one is naming calling.
We conservatives, such as myself, tend to see things in black and white in terms of doctrine and discipline.
Yet, the love of Jesus Christ is boundless.
As to your list of fast growing movements, they do share something in common. Anything that interferes with the grace of the Holy Spirit unto the salvation in Jesus Christ is worldly at best, demonic at worst. Those aren't my words, those are a theological position of one of the Soouthern Baptist semanaries. I just happen to agree with this doctrinal position.
Beth, keep blogging in Christ. We need to keep open the conversation even when we don't see eye to eye.
John Flores
Frisco, Texas
These ideologies, religions, philosphies, etc. if they do not hold Jesus Christ as the only true path to salvation are merely "vanity of vanities".
I'll leave you with a Wesleyan moment.
Corinthians 1:12
Denominations in the Church
Being much concerned about the rise of denominations in the church, John Wesley tells of a dream he had. In the dream, he was ushered to the gates of Hell. There he asked, “Are there any Presbyterians here?” “Yes!”, came the answer. Then he asked, “Are there any Baptists? Any Episcopalians? Any Methodists?” The answer was Yes! each time. Much distressed, Wesley was then ushered to the gates of Heaven. There he asked the same question, and the answer was No! “No?” To this, Wesley asked, “Who then is inside?” The answer came back, “There are only Christians here.” (1 Cor. 1:10-17)
Martin Luther said, “I pray you leave my name alone. Do not call yourselves Lutherans, but Christians.” John Wesley said: “I wish the name Methodist might never be mentioned again, but lost in eternal oblivion.” Charles Spurgeon said, “I say of the Baptist name, let it perish, but let Christ’s own name last forever. I look forward with pleasure to the day when there will not be a Baptist living.”
Guy,
"50,000,000 _____'s can't be wrong" didn't work for Elvis either.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/explorer/B000002X33/2/ref=pd_lpo_ase/103-5017694-4895018?ie=UTF8
John Flores
Frisco, Texas
I never even heard of Sophia! I attend a UMC church (kind of a newbie) and in the last year I have attended 2 others in my town and nobody mentioned Sophia. I didn't see any funny stuff going on but now I'm going to have to go google this Sophia. All I saw were regular ol' do-gooders ringing handbells to the regular hymns and ... oh dear I googled, wish I hadn't. Gulp. You want a liberal to say that's an apostasy or whatever, well mark me down. I don't need that Sophia business to feel affirmed as a woman... now I don't know how I would feel if I were gay. I can guarantee you where I live most people would laugh at that...that's what they do down at the UU's and everyone kind of knows that. I guess I sound like a hick, making light of it and saying that's what they do down at the UU's. If I'd wanted to join the UU's I would have; I would have expected that. I'd be shocked if they did that at any UMC I know of. If I needed that stuff to feel affirmed as a woman and vital part of the community church or whatever I'd feel like a loser. I AM a loser and I'd feel like just more of a loser. Now I'm being snotty. But you want a liberal to stand up and say that's frige, OK here's one. Or maybe I'm not that liberal. I'm not conservative though. Some of my best friends are UU's. If I wanted to go to the UU and worship Gaia I could; now I am a big tree-hugger, it's just I don't need that to take the place of my religion. I don't know how to explain this. Down at the UU's they have a special service to worship Gaia; I'd rather do that than say that Sophia chant about my honeyed womanly wisdom. I guess I'm being sarcastic; call it my womanly wisdom. Kidding; almost everyone I know would laugh at that and it wouldn't catch on in a mainstream church here in the Midwest but it might at the UU's. I am being mean. May God bless and enlighten those Sophia people and make them feel affirmed as women in Him so they don't have to feel they need "Sophia."
Another "number" nobody talks about:
How many followers of Jesus have you 'lorded over' and wounded on your climb to the top of the heap? How many believers have left, or have been cast out by your harsh words or lack or love/grace? Who cares?
http://www.shatteredtrust.com
Post a Comment