TODAY AT CJWe had a very encouraging gathering today. The Farmers lead today's gathering and it focused on several texts dealing with encouragement. It was one of our best days of discussion in some time in my view. It also drifted back toward the reason for our existence as a community which in some way can be summed up with:
to encourage people in their spiritual walk where ever we encounter them. We think we are somewhat unique in that we would love others to join our community, however, we will help you even if you never come to our gatherings. We aren't after your money, we aren't after big numbers, we are just a community open to whatever doors God places before us. We have no staff to support, no building to keep up, no programs to staff, no machine to keep primed, none of that, just a simple community of people doing the best they can. There is something nice about simplicity. That's not to say things won't change as far as where we meet or things like that, but if we add those things we all agree we must be cautious to ensure loving people comes ahead of any institutional trappings.
NEXT TIME AT CJWe will have our joint communion gathering with Mosaic and the Church at Opelika. We will again meet at 10 AM at Auburn Christian Fellowship on Gay Street in Auburn. We'd love for you to join us as we know it will be a great day together.
THE NEWBYSThe kids and I went to Birmingham yesterday to witness the wedding of Adam and Kara. It was a wonderful event and a beautiful fall afternoon for this outdoor wedding. The reception was held at Disciples Fellowship. It was good too see many friends at DF. They are a wonderful group of people. I got to talk with my buddy Ken Haynes - who did a wonderful job at the wedding with the music.
AROUND THE BLOG WORLDSome very interesting reads I've came across lately. From Precipice Magazine an interview with Brian McLaren.
Darren King: Some have suggested that if the Church goes smaller (in numbers per grouping) and more organic in structure and expression that this might threaten the existence of the paid pastor in future decades. As a pastor yourself, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on this?Brian McLaren: This is a huge question that I plan to address a bit in the emergent/c piece I mentioned earlier. Let me say that I'm for vibrant faith communities in all forms - from micro churches and house churches and quantum and liquid churches, or whatever you want to call them - to the new monasticism work - to renewal and reinvention in the historic denominations, Catholic, Anglican, Methodist, and so on. I'm for cafe churches and megachurches and everything in between, including virtual churches. I think the worst thing we can do is get into an either-or argument. We need both-and.
So I think people who are pronouncing the death of the local congregation with a paid staff are overreacting. God knows, being a pastor is hard - it's the hardest job I've ever done by far - and it deserves a person's best effort, and responsible preparation, and it deserves a congregation's faithful financial support. But ... here's where the both/and comes in - I also believe that we need spontaneous neighborhood faith communities that will not be able to afford a paid pastor, nor will they need one. The problem will be to find ways to do this that don't destroy the unpaid pastor or her family. I was a bi-vocational church planter/pastor for many years, and I know that the cost on marriages and family life is often very high.
This is where the both/and comes in. What if well-funded megachurches decided to see some home-based faith communities as partners in ministry, so they could overlap and share resources and not see one another as enemies or even alternatives, but as two expressions of the same thing? That takes us in the direction I think we need to go, and will be good for the whole range of faith communities.In my view McLaren's point on both/and is exactly right. Because we are in the midst of a cultural shift many different ways of "church" are needed - the organic kind and the traditional kind - and variations on themes among those groups even. Wouldn't it be great if these places would work together? From our view we would welcome it; however, I don't know how welcome it would be the other direction. Oh sometimes we have people referred to us from the traditional churches, but its always under the table. You know, "don't tell anyone I told them about yall, but they won't fit into our culture." It would be funny if it weren't sad.
To read all of McLaren's interview click here:
Precipice MagazineDan Kimball has a very thought provoking blog entry titled: "Pews, Pulpits, Pastors, Preaching and other things that can get in the way of the church "being" the church"
Kimball is the author of "Emerging Church" and several other books.
On Pews -
We moved from the intimacy of a home, to standing and still seeing each other and relating to one another and able to bow down and pray or even lay flat and pray prostrate, to sitting in seats all looking at the front. Most of our church architecture today was either adapted from the Roman Basilica (the law court) which is the way most long rectangular church buildings with pews and raised stage and pulpit are - or the 17th Century Theater as churches adopted seating and layout like contemporary theaters.
On Pulpits -
There were no such things as "pulpits" in the early church or first in the 300 years of the church. They were primarily adapted from Greek and Roman forms of communicating and at first people sat to speak and standing to "preach" developed later. Pulpits became a focal point and raised high primarily after the Reformation. They create a definite distinction between the people in the seats and the person who gets behind the pulpit.
On Pastors (or preachers) -
In the early church it was all small house churches and there were the "shepherds" (pastors) who were leading and caring for the people. So there is leadership needed, but not as a formal title given only to paid professionals, which was a spiritual gift. When someone in any church over 75 or so people call the person who gets up front "pastor", it becomes different than the "shepherds" who knew all their "sheep" by name etc., which was possible to do in smaller house church settings. But as we use the now use the title "pastor" for the person who gets up and teaches - it is not the way it was in the New Testament. Again, I am a "pastor", but I am wondering if how we title ourselves like this can be detrimental to people not understanding there are also many of them who are "pastors" , who have that gift. We seem to only use it for the paid professionals (we only do that in our church currently, because of the current cultural defining of the word). To read all of Kimball's blog click here:
Vintage FaithGood thoughts.
Peace.