Friday, May 8, 2009

A Possible Alternative to Outsourcing the Faith

Disclaimer: Before you decide to label me a heretic, there are a few things you should know.

1. I absolutely love the church, for without it I would be a living wreck and dying one as well.

2. If my writing ever offends you, please know that is not my intent. I wish to question and challenge, but not offend.

3. If you feel the need to push back on my comments, you are welcome to do so. Just make sure you keep it civil and are speaking to the actual issue, not a psychoanalysis of me that you made in haste.

4. This note is long. I felt that I first had to build my case before presenting my alternative. Sorry for the length.

A Possible Alternative to Outsourcing the Faith:

There is something mystical when those who call upon the name of Christ gather together for the mutual encouragement in the faith. There is something beautiful when this same group of believers ventures out to spread the love of Jesus, whether it is through acts of charity or just through being a positive presence in a world that needs to hear Good News.

My fear is that this mystical, beautiful entity we call the church has abandoned the commission given it by Christ in the name of efficiency and convenience. Look at a typical Sunday in most churches across North America: Each week, a mass of people gathers inside a large room. They sing a few songs and call it worship, shake a few hands and call it fellowship, and smile while hurting inside. They will face the front and listen to one individual who presumably has heard the voice of God that week. This person will interpret the scriptures for each individual person and communicate what they say God has said. These people will then leave in an orderly fashion, usually heading for the nearest chain restaurant and may embarrass Jesus by forgetting his admonition to be kind to our neighbors.

Meanwhile, there is no major change in their lives. The ways they relate to family and work will remain the same. The content of their thoughts will be unmoved. There is no challenge, only boredom. There is no adventure, no abundant life. All of this goes on while a hurting world slowly bleeds for some type of positive change. It doesn’t have to be this way.

Last week, I posted a blog/note called, “Outsourcing the Faith,” in which I stated that the structures of the church do not allow for The Body of Christ to fulfill it’s God-given call. What it does instead is allow for those within the church to shrug off responsibility to a chosen few “professionals” who would facilitate the faith for them.

Most churches are run like Fortune 500 corporations that are governed from the top-down. The Senior Pastor is the CEO. He or she makes the decisions (casts “vision”) and runs them by the board/elders. The boards in most churches are usually similar to shareholders in a company. They are those who tithe the most and are most often known for their shrewd business sense (most church bylaws I’ve seen don’t have maturity in Christ as a written requirement for board participation). It is then the job of the Associate Pastors to “catch the vision” and communicate that to their various departments. This is also similar to the way Vice Presidents of corporations work within their companies (If the truth be told, most Associates are viewed as Vice Presidents. They are given the responsibility of overseeing the “ministry” departments of churches while the typical layperson is expected to follow.

What’s wrong with this is that if someone disagrees with the direction or vision the Senior Pastor supposedly received from God, then that person is ultimately in disagreement with God, since God is the one communicating to the Senior Pastor. This is a more localized version of papal infallibility and it’s dangerous.

Our structures and organizations for church speak volumes about our theology (as much as any sermon ever could). There is a doctrine spoken of in church history and in the scriptures and that is that every believer is a minister or a priest. Every person who calls on the name of Christ has just as much access to God as any other person, regardless of who writes their paycheck.

As I stated in my last note, I am not against paid church staff. Please understand that. When a church reaches a point that it needs someone to work full time so as to do the work of the Kingdom, then hiring someone to facilitate and help with administration only makes sense.

A point that I want to make clear is that most churches do their hiring from outside the church. Usually when they do this, they’re looking for someone “professional” who can be “efficient.” I have attended and know of several churches that were in need of hiring someone who could work with the youth ministry vocationally. Each time, there was a person or persons from the community who knew the kids well, taught well, and helped parents in training their children to become disciples. They were completely willing and able to lay down their other vocations to come on staff for the church, but those in leadership desired someone who fit a more “professional” profile. This idea of professionalism in ministry kills the identity of the average church attendee.

So the church, like a corporation, hired an outside “expert” to do the work of the ministry for them. What’s one of the first things that happen when a new person is hired to head a ministry in the church? Most everyone who played a major role within that ministry steps back, takes a deep breath, and goes back to life as usual. These people who were intimately involved in the community no longer feel necessary. They often feel that if they were to stay and help, they would get in the way of the professional has been given the title of new leader (What’s sad is that they probably would get in the way of this person, even though they are still very much needed).

My alternative is to do hiring from within the church community itself. If a minister leaves and someone or a group of some ones from the community steps in to fill the leadership void, maybe that’s God moving. Maybe he’s pushing someone into their calling of being a minister and maybe if the church hires an outside professional, they’re going to against what God wants. “But what if the person or group of persons can’t come on staff?” Why do we feel the need to hire staff to fill every ministry in the church? To be honest, I think much of this is because churches and their leaders will feel inadequate when compared to other churches. We’re like Israel demanding that God give them a king so that they could be like every other nation (an example as to how using the Old Testament monarchy model for church governance is dangerous).

When the community gathers, there needs to be opportunity for believers to encourage, prophesy (simply say the will of God), and worship together. This may mean that our gatherings need become smaller. In a culture that values quantity over quality, this can be a humble endeavor. What happens in many churches is that the leadership attempts to build a large mass of people who gather once a week. Once that mass becomes so large that no one knows anyone else, the leadership then decides to initiate small groups. Maybe a possible alternative would be to do this in reverse. Maybe the primary expression of communal worship could be the smaller groups gathering for mutual encouragement and correction. It’s much easier to gain momentum with a smaller group than a large one. It’s also easier for those within the group to engage the ministry using their gifts. Each smaller group could then gather with other groups for support and could work together for carrying out the way of Jesus in the world (I’m not saying this alternative is the only one. It’s just one that has been in the back of my mind lately. Other churches open up their teaching time to include progressive dialogue, which allows all people to add to the teaching, disagree, and encourage).

If we truly believe that all who call on the name of Christ are priests of God and ministers to a dying world, then our message needs to line up with our methods. This is not happening. I leave you with a quote from a brilliant man named Marshall McLuhan who coined the phrase, “The medium is the message.” It goes like this, “The content or message of any medium has about as much importance as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb.”

Enough of my rambling. What do you think?