INEXPERIENCED AND ALL-KNOWING

/7 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

When I Knew Everything

I had been a Christian for two years.  I was sitting in a service at a church I’d recently started attending.  As I listened to the pastor preach his sermon I found myself asking hosts of critical and, I thought, righteous questions.

“What is this guy even talking about?  Why doesn’t he preach expository sermons?  Why doesn’t he emphasize this or that doctrine more?  Why does he use that method to invite people to trust in the gospel?  Is this series ever going to end?  Why doesn’t he just hire someone else to take his spot and move into a subordinate role?  Why can’t he come up with a vision and mission I can get on board with?  Does our church even have a mission and vision?”  Blah, blah, blah.

 The funny thing (perhaps sad thing) is that when I was in my season of offering church leaders my hardest and most continuous criticisms over these kinds of issues thinking I was all-knowing about everything to do with church/ministry, I was totally inexperienced.  I’d never spent a single day in the shoes of a pastor, delivered or prepared a single sermon, led a Bible study, crafted any kind of mission or vision statement, trained teams, planted a church, or anything else.  And yet, I thought I had all the answers about how to solve everything those above me were doing wrong.

I describe myself during those days as suffering from what I now call “New-believer syndrome.”  This isn’t to be a knock on new followers of Jesus at all!  Not all new Christians go through what I did.  But the truth is that its very common for new Christians to go through a season after only being saved for a short time in which they get really critical and arrogant.  That was me.  My mindset was like, “Well of course I know everything about Christianity and the church!  I’ve been a Christian for six months, haven’t I! “

Getting Educated

Fast forward.  Now I’ve been in vocational ministry for over seven years.  And what God has slowly showed me through granting the education of actual street-level experience beyond the education of books I’d read and messages I’d heard early on about ministry is that I really knew far less than I thought I did!  I think back to those days of criticizing and challenging my leaders with embarrassment and shame.  I praise God that He was gracious and didn’t give me the cosmic knee-capping I deserved in my arrogance and ignorance.  As I got opportunities to lead I began to discover why leaders do things at times that I used to scoff at.  I learned that there are many things about ministry that you just can’t understand unless you actually are in the positions and go through the experiences.

 Meeting Others Who Know Everything

Now that I’ve been in vocational ministry, served as a pastor and planted churches, and have done lots of leadership training I’ve had the wonderful experience of meeting people who currently have the critical mentality from which I used to suffer.  The saddest and most heart-breaking thing I sometimes see is when people are stuck in this mentality five, ten, or even twenty or more years after meeting Jesus.  As I look back at my own experience and journey and observe others who are stuck in a spirit of criticism there seem to be some common contributing factors to developing this mindset:

1. Pride has always been a struggle

If you have a history of being arrogant, self-important, and a know-it-all in general before becoming a Christian, pride becomes an area of temptation the enemy really hammers you on in your new relationship with Jesus.  Much of those critical thoughts come from your own sinful flesh, and the rest of them come from demonic temptation at work in your mind.

2. They read far more books about the Bible than the Bible itself

For about the first two years of my relationship with Jesus the only times I’d actually crack my Bible open was when I was looking for a proof text to support a doctrine I’d learned from another book, or when I was at church.  What this led to was me using other books as my lens through which I filtered the Bible rather than me using the Bible as the lens through which I filtered the other books I read.  Because of this, when I got into debates about the criticisms I was voicing I would inevitably quote human authors instead of God’s word to prove my point.  That’s a dangerous place to dwell.

 3. They do most of their studying in isolation

Many people who come to Jesus today don’t get involved in local churches.  There is a huge disconnect here.  In the book of Acts no one who got saved refrained from getting involved in the life of the local church.  That isn’t to say you’re not saved if you aren’t in consistent community with other believers who make up a local church.  Its simply to point out that your willful practice of not being in community with a local church is way out of step with the biblical example.  God isn’t merely saving disconnected individuals scattered throughout the world; He is saving a people, a called-out assembly, and an interconnected, interdependent body.[1]

 The biblical example shows us that studying is to be done in community under experienced and equipped, spiritually gifted leaders.[2]  Personal Bible study is so valuable and necessary.  But so is study in community. Without others who are more spiritually mature and biblically educated challenging our conclusions and criticisms we develop unhealthy perspectives and unhelpful attitudes.

If pride has always been an issue for you, you read more books about the Bible than the Bible itself, and you do most of your study in isolation, you are a prime candidate to become today’s Inexperienced and All-knowing!

 Exhortations

Maybe you are one of today’s Inexperienced and All-knowing in the church. Or maybe you’re dealing with one of them right now.  If you’re dealing with one, chances are that you played the part of the Inexperienced and All-knowing of yesteryear.  But let me wrap this post up with encouragement for you both.

To today’s Inexperienced and All-knowing, please stop!  You don’t know as much as you think.  You’re hurting your leaders, not helping them.  And Jesus really is quite able to take care of His people without your arrogance and methods.  He’s chosen the leaders who are over you and you need to submit to Him by submitting to them, even though they are weak.  Have you considered that their weaknesses might be the precise reasons God chose them?  Read 1 Corinthians 1:26-31 and ask God for illumination.

To yesterday’s Inexperienced and All-knowing the message is simple- Don’t kill anyone!  Humble yourself and remember your own journey. First, repent to God for your former attitudes.  Next you may need to repent to the person you used to criticize.  After being a lead pastor for two months that is exactly what I had to do and it was healthy for me and the other pastor.  Lastly, deal with this mentality in those who come your way with grace and boldness.

“And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient…” 2 Timothy 2:24 NKJV

 “Preach the Word! Be ready in season and out of season.  Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.” 2 Timothy 4:2 NKJV

Peace

[1] Eph. 4:11-17; 1 Cor. 12; Acts 2:41-47; Ephesians as a whole.

[2] Acts 2:42; Titus 1:9

To Him Who Has Ears to Hear

/4 Comments/in , , , , , /by

It happened during the revival that took place in Judah, under the godly leadership of Hezekiah. They’d not observed Passover in a great while. Imagine that … no “communion” for many years in Israel or Judah! In fact, Hezekiah’s father Ahaz had been so corrupt and idolatrous that he’d completely shut down the temple, and cut off all sacrifices and worship to Yahweh.

So after making the Levites and priests sanctify themselves and then clean out the temple, sacrifices began again. The joy of worship and the covenant returned to God’s people. That’s when they moved to celebrate Passover, out of sheer appreciation for the LORD.

Hezekiah wanted to reach out to his brethren in the north, to the ten tribes of Israel. They’d been even more corrupt than Judah, but Hezekiah could not and would not hide their Lamp under a bushel. Good news is intended for sharing. So he sent out “evangelists” to invite their brethren to Jerusalem, that they might join them in the Passover and get right with God, and experience the joy of renewed and reconciled hearts.

2 Chronicles 30:10-11 So the runners passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, as far as Zebulun; but they laughed at them and mocked them. {11} Nevertheless some from Asher, Manasseh, and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem. 

As these runners went out, they were met with mixed responses. Many laughed and mocked them. But some humbled themselves and responded to the good news.

I’m impressed by the fact that the runners went out, that they shared the great news, that they invited many to join in their worship of Yahweh … even though many would reject the message! They persevered in their invitation. They did not focus on the ones who would laugh and mock, but rather upon those who would humble themselves and join in.

This reminds me of the persistence and motivation of the apostle Paul, who said “Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory” (2 Timothy 2:10). Paul knew there would be some who would respond and become part of God’s family, so he endured the laughing, the mocking, the ostracism, the persecution … his prize was God’s chosen ones, the ones who would believe. Of course, Paul’s prize is the Lord’s prize. The hidden treasure in the field (the church) was so worth it to Jesus that He went and sold all that He had to purchase the field (that He might have the treasure).

So here’s where this all shakes out for me, and I think for us.

I think we should be much more concerned for those who haven’t had a fair hearing, than about those who will laugh and mock.

I minister in Santa Cruz County. Recently, a guest speaker (a worldwide traveler who has ministered in many, many places here and abroad) made the comment that in all the places he’s ever been, Santa Cruz is the darkest place of all of them. Then he congratulated the fellowship for coming to Christ and being together as a body.

So yes, it’s a dark and challenging place. There is much opposition to the gospel here. There are many who mock the message of Christianity, and the Jesus they think is the real Jesus. They laugh.

But who cares? I/we need not be concerned about such folks. They may or may not respond when presented with the gospel of grace. It’s their choice. When resisted or rejected, we’ll just shake the dust off our feet and find those that will humble themselves and receive the good news.

I’m convinced of this: the Lord has His people in this place. There are numerous pre-Christians waiting to be told about our Blessed Master … and invited to join in.

They will be our focus. The gospel of grace, the preaching of the cross and resurrection, will be our message. We will be known for what we’re for, not for what we’re against. We’ll love Jesus, live for Jesus, and preach Jesus. Those who will come, will come. That’s our mission, worth enduring everything for.

Our view of our church members: People, Machinery, or Scenery?

/5 Comments/in , , , /by

From what I’ve been told, (which I haven’t been able to verify personally), a study was done many years ago by a student at a University in the North Western part of the United States.  As I understand it, the study was undertaken in order to discover how the people that live in that part of the country view other people.  The study was conducted by interviewing a variety of people and asking them to express their views about their family members, friends, acquaintances, and also those people that they observe but don’t interact with.

The conclusion of the study was that these “average” Americans basically placed people into one of the following 3 categories:  People, Machinery, or Scenery.

PEOPLE:  were those people that the interviewees had “real” realtionships with.  This included immediate family members, close friends, and a few others.  They knew the “stories” of those they considered PEOPLE, shared their own story with them, and were genuinely concerned about what was going on in their lives.

MACHINERY:  were those people that they interacted with as part of just living day to day life and who usually were fulfilling some kind of function that the interviewee needed in order to live life, (like the teller at the bank, the gas station attendant, the waitress, the lady behind the counter at the DMV, and so forth).  The MACHINERY were the people that they interacted with out of necessity, not out of choice.   The service or utility or function these people provided and that was needed by the interviewee was all the interviewee was interested in.  There was no interest in getting to know them, making themselves known to them, or showing care for them in any way.  What mattered was whether this person accomplished the task that the interviewee was deriving a benefit from.  And if that task wasn’t accomplished to the satisfaction of the interviewee, then even less thought was given to that person as a person and a mental note was made to discover someone else who was more competent at completing the function.

SCENERY: were those people, usually culturally or socio-enomically different than the interviewee, who were visible to them at different times, but usually at a distance.  In other words the interviewee knew they were out there and that they occupied space in the same little part of the world that they lived life in, but they didn’t have reason to interact with or engage them.  In many cases, they said that the distinction between these people and the actual scenery that surrounds day to day life such as trees, stop-lights, billboards, fences, etc., had been blurred to them.  Every now and then something would trigger a thought in them that forced them to recognize that these people really were people and not scenery, but that didn’t happen that often.

In my own travels and my ministry to Americans and those of other cultures both here in America and in other countries, I’ve come to the conclusion that placing other people into one of these categories is pretty much an expression of our self-knowledge that we are limited and can’t know at a real level all of the people that make up our day to day lives.  It’s beyond our capacity.  But because of our sin nature, we are generally content to leave people in those categories and never make an effort to personalize them.  We’re content to leave them in one of those two non-person categories.  This is universal, it exists in all cultures.

This really isn’t surprising to me.

What is surprising is that this universal, sin-influenced cultural trait, hasn’t been abandoned by those who are new creations in Christ.  And because this cultural trait either hasn’t been thought about or examined and compared to what God has to say about the person hood and value of each person created in His image and likeness, local churches inadvertently end up interacting with and then treating their own attendees the same way those in the world do.

As pastors and leaders, do we view the majority of those people sitting in the sanctuary at each of our church services as really nothing more than beautiful SCENERY that we enjoy with our eyes alone?  SCENERY that we love to view as a beautiful forest each week, but a forest whose trees we really don’t care about considering individually?

As pastors and leaders, do we view those that make the service run, (ushers, the audio & visual guys, parking lot attendants, even Children’s ministry servants and so forth), as just MACHINERY that is essential for the functioning of the service and really nothing more?

As pastors and leaders, do we only view our families and fellow staff as PEOPLE?  Are we content with viewing everyone else as either MACHINERY or SCENERY and then being satisfied with the minimal level of interaction that is required for relating to MACHINERY or SCENERY?

Even though there are those who attend our services and are content being viewed as SCENERY for a while–content to be viewed as part of the overall forest, they eventually will desire to be viewed and interacted with as an individual tree that is not only a significant member of the forest, but also significant to those they consider Godly.

Even though our faithful members who perform functions for the good of the whole operation know they are a part of the MACHINERY of the service, they probably also believe that they are viewed by their church leaders as PEOPLE.

Do we as leaders stop treating them as PEOPLE if they no longer perform the function that is necessary for the operation of the church service?  If we stop interacting with them as PEOPLE because they no longer serve as a part of the MACHINERY, maybe we never viewed them as PEOPLE in the first place?

And if that is what we communicate to them, either intentionally or unintentionally, we shouldn’t be surprised if they move on, wounded as they depart.

Even though our capacity for personally interacting with others as PEOPLE is limited by our finiteness, we should regularly question ourselves as to whether we have inadvertently been expressing to others in any way, shape, or form, that viewing other people as MACHINERY or SCENERY is acceptable to us, to our fellow leaders, and or to God.  We definitely don’t want to go there.  But has that been where we’ve been?

 

 

And one last thought.  How about asking 4 or 5 PEOPLE that we do interact with as PEOPLE, (and not just paid staff, but others who serve in some capacity in the church), on a regular basis whether in their opinion, we have been treating others as something other than people?  And then…..humbly accept their perspective of us as valid and respond appropriately.

 

 

 

Legalize Marijuana?

/14 Comments/in , , , , , , /by

During the Q&A following our service last night the following question was texted in…

Sorry if this is off topic but with it being in the news so often its hard not to notice, with pat robertson endorsing decriminalization of cannabis what should our position as christians on medical cannabis and cannabis in general?

I didn’t take time last night to answer it as I hadn’t heard or read about Pat Robertson’s statements and I wanted to make sure that I understood his position. That said, I do have some thoughts on this issue and having had a chance to look at what Robertson actually said, I figured I’d post an answer here.

The discussion of marijuana legalization is an interesting one, and I’m fairly certain that within a generation it will be legalized in the US. Public opinion on the subject is shifting and the younger demographic (i.e. Millennials) is largely in favor of the move. So, whether or not Christians and the Church agree with the move, we will very likely see a legislative shift within 10-15 years, or sooner.

Add to the discussion Pat Robertson’s remarks from earlier this month. Although they flew under my radar (which isn’t terribly hard to do), Robertson’s views are not new. He’s been advocating this stance for a couple of years, and primarily for pragmatic reasons.

“I just think it’s shocking how many of these young people wind up in prison and they get turned into hardcore criminals because they had a possession of a very small amount of a controlled substance, the whole thing is crazy. We’ve said, ‘Well, we’re conservatives, we’re tough on crime.’ That’s baloney.”

On this point, I basically agree.

Robertson also said, “I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol. I’ve never used marijuana and I don’t intend to, but it’s just one of those things that I think: this war on drugs just hasn’t succeeded.” Again, I don’t necessarily disagree on this point either. My primary concern is that many of the politicians I’ve read or heard on this subject have come at it from a totally different angle that concerns me. The reasoning goes something like this, “The war on drugs is costing us billions and is not working, we could legalize and regulate the marijuana industry in such a way that it generates great revenue for the government.” If we’re going to legalize and regulate marijuana solely to make money for the government, then why not prostitution or other controlled substances? Do we really cast aside morals for profit? What precedent does this set and what are the other unintended consequences of doing so with marijuana?

I am not against the lawful use of alcohol as the Bible allows for it’s use; as long as such use is not in excess, which the bible defines as drunkenness (Ephesians 5:18). There is however a lot of unlawful and excessive use in America, which has grave and costly consequences; such as the human cost… This year upwards of 10,839 people will die in drunk-driving crashes – one every 50 minutes. There will be huge economic and human costs associated with marijuana legalization too; many of which will not be realized until after it’s legalization. The questions abound; how do employers deal with marijuana smoking employees? How does the military? Is there a “legal limit” that can be smoked, or how does law enforcement enforce such a DUI charge for Marijuana? etc…

I could certainly go on, but ultimately this begs the question, how should the church respond when such a shift takes place? When it is no longer against the law and is as prevalent as cigarettes and alcohol, what does the church say when Joe Parishioner smokes a bowl in the church parking-lot before each service? I think the answer lies [again] in Ephesians 5:18. Although alcohol is the direct focal point of the verse, [I believe] the principle still stands for any controlled substance. When you come under the influence of said substance and are essential “drunken” you have partaken unto excess. I’ve never smoked marijuana, and do not intend to, but by observation and interaction with people who have, I’m just not sure that you can take a hit of marijuana and not be “under the influence.” Therefore, I believe that it will still be an issue of sinful excess to partake.

The immediate rebuttal or followup question will be, “Is it then sinful to use a controlled substance for medicinal use if it brings you under it’s influence?” I think that this too has a Biblical answer.

Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.

– Proverbs 31:6-7

Thoughts/Comments?

 

 

On Pat Robertson’s position

NYT

Washington Post

Seeking that Still Small Voice

/9 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

I have to admit that I am in a transitional season in my life. Newly transplanted in the Pacific Northwest, transitioning into the Senior Pastor position at Crossroads Community Church, changes are everywhere. I have moved from young, small churches to a very large and established church. New surroundings and experiences. New challenges and events. But truly the biggest change that is happening is in my own heart. God is doing something in me.

I have realized in a new and profound way how loud our world has gotten. I have always been a fan of technology. I have always been an early adopter. But whether it is the Twittesphere, the blogosphere, the new Facebook crazes, viral YouTube videos, so much of it is just straight up noise. For some time I have been noticing how most of the internet chatter is just a regurgitation of a few profoundly gifted people. I find myself waking up and checking the phone first off, Twitter, Facebook, email, texts. All noise I tell you. I have no less than three noise devises on my person at any given time. How many of us find ourselves staring at our devises while people, true and living images of God, are right in front of us being ignored? How many of us hide behind our emails or computers while there is a vast and lost world needing to be connected with in Jesus’ name?

Deep within my heart there is a longing for the simplicity of the still small voice of God. The voice that doesn’t pander to celebrity or the winds of culture. The voice that speaks of love, community, hope and redemption. It’s that voice that doesn’t live in our superficial divides over theology or ministry style. It’s the voice that is deeply Biblical without being legalistic or superficial. It has nothing to do with the proclivities of modern evangelicals and the various camps. That voice has everything to do with love and truth. The voice that wants to help us help others see God’s grace at work in their lives and circumstances.

I have also realized that that still small voice is terrifying renegade. We come seeking one thing and we get another thing. We have wants/desires/hopes/dreams and we get God’s alternative and deeply perplexing agenda. We want to do and God says don’t do. We want reward when God says decrease. We want American dreams spiritually fulfilled and instead we get our status quo called into question and new and terrifying horizon energized.

I cannot speak for you. But for me, I am seeking that still small voice.

The Real Saint Patrick: His Life and Mission

/6 Comments/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

SAINT PATRICK: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY

Saint Patrick, the great fifth century Christian missionary to Ireland, has historically been a most intriguing and obscure figure to the Christian church, as well as the entire world. Countless myths and legends have been told about this man. Many poems and stories have been written about him. Many theologians and missiologists have debated extensively on his religious allegiance and missionary philosophy. The question is can anything be agreed upon about Saint Patrick? In all of the hype and interest generated by his life and mission, is there anything that can be known for sure about him in the twenty-first century?

This writing is an to attempt to give an account of the facts generally agreed upon by students of this intriguing man with the goal of painting as accurate a picture of his true life and mission as possible. The life and mission of Saint Patrick are a most fascinating and edifying study, and I’m excited to share some of what can be known about them.

WHEN PATRICK WAS A WEE LADD

Patrick was born sometime in the late fourth century between the years 385-390 A.D. in the area known today as northeast England. His people were called Britons. They were a Celtic people that had been Romanized under the Christian Roman Empire which in part encompassed modern-day England. Thus, Patrick was culturally very Roman and disconnected from his Celtic roots. The Britons spoke mainly Latin and an early form of Welsh. Patrick was born into an aristocratic, wealthy, and religious family. His father, Calpurnius, was a deacon in the Roman Church and owned at least two estates. Not much is known about his mother.

Patrick seems to have been a fairly average boy in his early childhood. He went to school where he learned Latin (the common language at the time due to the influence of Rome) and Welsh, which was the more native and peasant tongue of the British Isles. Though his parents were actively involved in church and Patrick had grown up going to Mass, Patrick was at best a very lukewarm Christian in his younger days. Through a series of tragic events set in motion when he was a young man, his life, and especially the state of his lax Christian devotion, would change forever.

FROM RICHES TO SLAVERY

When Patrick was just sixteen years old he was taken captive along with many of his family’s servants when Irish pirates raided one of his father’s estates near the west coast of Britain at a town called Bannavem Taberniae. Patrick was forced onto a ship which sailed away to Ireland where he was sold in the slave market to a tribal chief and Druid named Miliuc Moccu Boin. The chief put Patrick to work tending his cattle herds in the Irish countryside.

Patrick remained enslaved for six years. It was during this time that he came to know the truth of Romans 8:28— “And we know that God causes all things work together for good to those that love God, to those that are called according to His purpose…” in experience. In his book, The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the West Again, George G. Hunter writes about the three key changes that Patrick went through during his time in captivity:

“During his years of enslavement, Patrick experienced three profound changes. First, the periods when Patrick was isolated in the wilderness herding cattle connected him with what theologians call the ‘natural revelation’ of God. He sensed with the winds, the seasons, the creatures, and the nights under the stars the presence of God; he identified this presence with the Triune God he had learned about in the Catechism. In his more or less autobiographical ‘Declaration’ Patrick tells us, ‘After I had arrived in Ireland I found myself pasturing flocks daily, and I prayed a number of times each day. More and more the love and fear of God came to me and my faith grew and my spirit was exercised, until I was praying up to a hundred times every day and in the night nearly as often.’ Patrick became a devout Christian and the change was obvious to his captors.  Second, Patrick changed in another way during the periods he spent with his captors in their settlement. He came to understand the Irish Celtic people and their language and culture…Third Patrick came to love his captors, to identify with them, and to hope for their reconciliation to God. One day, he would feel they were his people.”

MIRACLES IN SUCCESSION

Thus, Patrick was converted, and now God had plans for him. In the sixth year of Patrick’s captivity he received a vision from God in which he was told that he was to escape his slavery and that a ship was waiting to take him home to Briton. A voice told him, “You are going home! Look! Your ship is ready!” Patrick rose from his sleep and fled from his captors to find a ship waiting for him. He attempted to acquire permission to sail home on the ship but the captain refused him. Patrick began praying and he tells us in his aforementioned Declaration that before his prayer was even completed God had changed the captain’s heart and he began calling for Patrick to come aboard. So Patrick made the 200 mile trip back to his homeland and people in Briton as the Holy Spirit had prophesied to him.

Once back home Patrick had hardly settled in when he would receive another word from God, this time functioning as his call to be the first missionary Bishop to Ireland, his place of captivity. John Holmes documents the extraordinary event:

“One night he had a vision in which he saw a man named Victoricus coming to him with a great number of letters. He read the title of one which said, ‘THE CRY OF THE IRISH’ and at that moment he seemed to hear the voice of the people who lived by the Wood of Volcut which is by the western sea. Unitedly they said, ‘Holy youth we are asking you to come and walk among us again.’ Patrick was so moved that he could read no more…It would seem that from that moment there was born in his heart a burden to bring the Gospel to that nation from which he says, pointedly, ‘I was only just able to escape.’”

TRAINING FOR THE MISSION FIELD

Upon receiving this divine commissioning Patrick determined to prepare himself for his destiny as a missionary to Ireland. He began studying the Celtic people and Irish language intently as his heart flamed for them. He also began to be very active in his local church. He became a Deacon and in a short time was elevated to the office of Bishop. Shortly after receiving his bishopric he left his homeland again for Ireland; this time not as a captive of pirates, but as the slave of Christ for the Gospel to the Irish. It was the year 432 A.D.

NEW CULTURES AND NEW METHODS

The Irish people that Patrick would serve were, in Roman terms, very much uncivilized. They had no organized cities, no real road systems, and they had no unified form of government. They moved in small nomadic groups through the rough countryside and forests of Ireland living off the land. The people lived in tribes (clans) that consisted mainly of extended family. Patrick knew that he would have to be innovative when it came to ministering to them. He would not be able to simply plant parish churches in the traditional sense near a populated city as the Church had done everywhere else. There were no such cities. He had to find new methods to reach a different culture.

So what did he do? Patrick’s method of reaching these tribal nomadic people was what we would call “contextualization” in missiological terms today. It seems that his practice was to seek out the leaders of the tribal settlement he went into in hopes of either converting them or at least getting permission to serve amongst them for strategic purposes. Next, he would engage people in conversation and service ministry for relationship building while looking for receptive individuals within the clan. He would pray for physically impaired and demon possessed people as well as assist in mediating conflicts between tribesmen. He would engage in open air preaching.

In all of this he did a great deal of contextualizing. For example, the Irish people were very musical and poetic, so Patrick employed the use of these art forms which made sense to them culturally in an attempt to communicate the truth of the Bible in ways they would understand. He wrote worshipful lyrics set to Celtic tunes for them to sing and portrayed biblical images for them in Celtic forms of visual arts. This enhanced his ability to communicate the message of Jesus to them effectively.

As groups of people began to be born-again through Patrick’s gospel teaching, instead of forcing them to become culturally Roman he would allow and encourage them to express the essence of real Christianity in Celtic forms. The most fascinating way he did this was by creating what Hunter calls “monastic communities” instead of Roman cathedrals. These were essentially the native Irish version of a church-plant. The monastic community lived the Christian life together in a circularly built fort. They would meet multiple times a day for worship and prayer, and in the evening for a biblical message every night. They lived together, worked together, ate together, and worshiped together. It was an extremely tightly knit body of believers that lived all of the Christian life in vibrant spiritual community. In his book Church History in Plain Language,Bruce Shelley said of these communities that, “…the monastic community, maintaining itself on the land, fitted the agricultural communities of the Celts better than the parish-church system so common in the Roman Empire.”

A NEW COMMUNITY

The main method of outreach from within the monastic community was that of hospitality. They had a guest house in a sectioned off portion of the community that was by far more comfortable than any other dwelling used by the believers themselves. They would love and serve every visitor that came to them and live the life of Christ out before them. Patrick considered himself and the believers in these communities accountable to God to serve this way because of his biblical conviction that believers are each a “letter of Christ.” He wanted the message of the love of Jesus to be communicated without words to unbelievers through their lifestyles of love and grace. They wanted to influence the lost into the faith by extending the love and Person of Christ to them in behavior and community.

IMPACT OF THE WORK

Patrick’s method of contextualizing the gospel in presentation and the essence of Christian community in Celtic cultural expression proved very successful in the conversion of massive amounts of Irish people. Though much of Ireland is said to have remained unconverted upon his death in 460 A.D. there is thought to have been thousands of Christian converts in Ireland due to his ministry. Some estimate that there may have been as many as one-thousand believers in some of the individual larger monastic communities.

PAIN IN THE JOURNEY

However, in spite of Patrick’s success in Ireland, his missionary years spent there were not all easy. In his Declaration Patrick writes of being persecuted, slandered, and even enslaved as many as three more times during his ministry. Things weren’t always easy for his converts either. In fact, one of the two original writings of Saint Patrick (unanimously held as authentic by scholars) which the world has access to today is a letter in which he rebukes a local ruler for allowing his men to brutally murder and pillage a group of freshly baptized believers and to sell their young women.

Clearly the most cutting opposition Patrick endured during his ministry was that of the disapproval of his tactics later expressed by the very church and people who had once affirmed and sent him out to serve Ireland. The traditional minds of the people in his hometown did not accept Patrick’s replacing of the culturally Roman aspects of Christianity with culturally Celtic expressions. Patrick clearly wrote from a distressed heart in addressing this issue in his Declaration.

The far-reaching missional impact of Saint Patrick’s ministry is impressive. Historians point to Ireland as becoming a mission work launching pad for years to come after the death of Patrick. It served as the home-base for missionary endeavors for the eventual evangelization of Britain, Germany, and Switzerland to name a few. An example of the great Irish missionaries that are said to have been products of Patrick’s work years earlier were men like Columbanus. A century after Patrick, Columbanus led the missionary charge into the above mentioned countries and established them as centers for evangelistic efforts.

WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON ANYWAY?

Another thing that has been perpetuated throughout history ever since Patrick’s death is what seems to be a never ending debate between Catholics and Protestants over whether or not Patrick was what people today would consider a good Catholic or more of today’s evangelical theological persuasion. Patrick seems to be an interesting mix of both camps. While he was certainly an ordained Bishop in the Roman Catholic Church of the Holy Roman Empire (which certainly means he had practices and beliefs in common with today’s Catholicism), even a quick reading of his Declaration makes clear that his single most emphasized teaching was that of the simple gospel of grace. That fact shows that he was very evangelical even though the term was not yet used. It seems he was Roman Catholic by tradition, but evangelical in the essence of his gospel faith. This is abundantly clear from this quote taken from his Declaration in which he wrote of his purpose and success, “For I am very much God’s debtor who gave me such great grace that many people were reborn in God through me and afterwards confirmed, and that clerics were ordained for them everywhere, for a people just coming to the faith, whom the Lord took from the utmost parts of the earth as he once had promised through his prophets.” The words “grace…reborn…and faith” in this quotation say it all.

SEEING GOD AND HOPE IN THE EXPERIENCES OF SAINT PATRICK

Patrick’s life serves as a reminder to us that our circumstances are never out of the plan or control of God. Patrick was taken prisoner when he was just sixteen and was in captivity until he was twenty-two. I think Patrick must have been confused and lonely and wondered at times (even after his conversion) if God could or would help him. Yet, by the end of Patrick’s life it is absolutely clear that his time in captivity is exactly what he needed to go through to become the missionary warrior God wanted him to be. God was there the whole time working things out for His glory and Patrick’s good, no matter how bleak things probably seemed.

I have certainly never experienced anything like being taken captive for six years, but I have been through things like family divorce, physical affliction, and more. So in terms of application, I believe God would remind us through the life of Saint Patrick that our past is not an accident, and our present and future are not out of God’s control. God has allowed or caused everything we come into contact with because he wants to use it now or in the future to prepare us to effectively serve others for His glory. This is the truth in our hardships.
Bibliography

Holmes, J. M. The Real Saint Patrick. Belfast, N. Ireland: Ambassador Productions, 1997.

Hunter, George G. III. The Celtic Way of Evangelism. Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2000.

Shelley, Bruce L. Church History in Plain Language 2nd Edition. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995.

 

Organizational Structure

/8 Comments/in , , , , , /by

There is no shortage of reading materials when it comes to church leadership and governance.  This is a topic that people like to write on because so many struggle through these issues.  I am no exception.  This May 20, I am celebrating the 5-year anniversary of restarting Valley Baptist Church.  We started with about 12 people with a vision and hope from God.  The ride has been amazing to say the least, but throughout the journey I have found that I have been stretched consistently as a leader.  Just when I think I have figured things out, everything has changed.  I guess this is just life.

Through this journey I have had great freedom to lead–for this I am thankful. Up to this point, I would describe our structure as “Pastor led, church affirmed.”  To assist the leading I have utilized a group of about 8 men that carry the title of “deacons” and a lady who carries the title of “treasurer.”  This structure is in place mainly because this was the structure (not the people) I inherited on paper.  The development was intentionally slow to grow trust with the church.  In June of 2009, I updated the constitution to expand and clarify some points, but not to radically alter the constitution. The main change was concerning the appointment of official leadership of the church.  Before it followed more of a congregational-led model whereas now leaders are appointed annually by the senior pastor and approved by the body at the annual meeting.  After five years, I feel like I am truly entering the season where I am free to lead the church.  There is trust.  I’m not going anywhere and the people know that I am here for them and am acting in the best interest of the church.

Here are some questions I have been wrestling through.  Where did your style of church governance come from?  A piece of paper, traditions, your denomination, or who knows?  Do you have a board?  Why?  Because business’ do?  I like asking a lot of questions and I find myself asking the all important question related to this subject, “What does the Bible have to say about this subject and how should it workout practically in my church?”

I’ve reached a point where I can no longer push the weight in a healthy manner.  If everyone showed up on a given Sunday, we would have about 150 people in attendance.  I cannot shepherd this many people alone, nor do I think we are done growing, so how do I lead the church into the next season?  From Scripture I am convinced the church is to be led through elders (along with a number of synonymous titles), with a leader amongst them, deacons that support, and a church of believers that fulfill the ministry.  The question is, “What does this look like practically for me in this setting in the coming years?”

How has this worked itself out in your ministry setting?  I would love to hear your input!

Here are some books that have encouraged me on this journey…

On Being a Pastor, Alistar Begg and Derek Prime

On Church Leadership, Mark Driscoll

Sticky Teams, Larry Osborne

The New Testament Deacon, Alexander Strauch

Saying it Well, Charles Swindoll

The Unconscious Ill-Equipping Of The Saints

/3 Comments/in , , , , , , , /by

The good Bible teaching that occurs in many churches is not enough to equip Christ following congregants to interact effectively with the world.  In fact, I believe that some pastors are unconsciously hindering their flocks, and are, as a result, “ill-equipping” them for the work of ministry.

I recently heard a tremendous quote, and I will try to paraphrase.  The speaker spoke of the American Church and said, “We are a subculture of a sub culture.  We read each other’s book, we sing each other’s songs, and we scratch each other’s backs”.

I completely agree that the Body of Christ is a sub culture, and that each movement or denomination is a further sub culture, and finally, that each individual church within a movement or denomination is a sub, sub, sub culture.  There is nothing wrong with that…to a point.

Each culture and sub culture has its own language.  The lack of awareness that we (the Church) have regarding our sub, sub culture language is the thing that concerns me. What do we sound like to the world?

As followers of Jesus, we have been given the Great Commission, to “make disciples of all nations”.  Most of the people in our churches understand and agree with that.

However, here is the rub.  Here is the problem.  The people in our churches often parrot the words they hear us pastors speak.  If they hear us only speak “Christianese”, and our particular brand of “Christianese”, then that is how many of them will speak.  They will seek to explain the eternal truths of God by using language that is familiar only to their sub, sub culture.

I believe that we who stand in the pulpit need to speak in the language of our culture and of the current generation.  We do not need to descend into vulgar speaking or innuendo, but we need to communicate the truths of Jesus in ways that would make sense to any unbeliever walking in off the street.

The purpose for that is not just for the unbeliever who walks into our church.  The bigger and perhaps more important purpose is that we will equip our churches to use words that the unbelieving world will recognize.  Without telling them how to communicate the Gospel, we will be bestowing upon them a language, a vocabulary, and a communication style, whereby they will be unconsciously equipped to speak to an unbelieving world.

A word to those who preach and teach: Let us be careful to not use decades old “Christianese” simply because that is what we grew up on.  May the younger generation of pastors not only use the Christian sub culture language of their generation. May we read and listen widely, that we may adopt the language of this generation, so that we might more effectively preach the Gospel, and equip our listeners to share the Gospel in a language that can be understood by the world around us.

Random Thoughts On Leadership

/12 Comments/in , , , /by

Over the years, I have been very laid back about most things.  That has been good and bad.  The good is that I haven’t over-hyped our church or goaded people into doing things.  (No fleshly results). The bad is that at times I should have been much more intentional in imparting vision, mobilizing, and motivating in direct ways.  I thank God that He brings us along.  I am increasingly enjoying getting out in front of things now. That’s not a natural gift for me, but perhaps, an imparted skill.

God can use our personalities, and I believe He desires to do so, but woe to us when we substitute our personalities for Spirit led living and leading.  People want to follow leaders.  We need to constantly be careful about how we lead.  May we develop churches that follow Jesus first and foremost.  I think it is easier for people to follow people than to follow God.  Let’s not take advantage of that.

King David ordained his son Solomon to follow in his place.  He did this while he still had influence and power.  Moses ordained Joshua.  Paul appointed Timothy.  The models of older pastors raising up younger pastors and handing off ministry to them is very attractive to me.  I have been a senior pastor for 20 years, and a pastor for 23 years.  I look forward to the next season of my life in preparing the guys that will take our church forward.  I am thankful for the models that have been presented to us, i.e. Bill Ritchie & Daniel Fusco, as well as others.

Not everybody in our church thinks like me.  I don’t why I thought they did.  I am continuing to learn to listen to the voices of the faithful saints as they share ideas about ministry and community interfacing.  Pastors are unique animals, and I think that at least for me, I sometimes lose the pulse of the man in the pew.  It is good to talk with the folks in our church and hear their ideas.

Back to the idea of leading….there is a great need for people to be Spirit led, and to receive vision from the Lord…but I also believe that we pastors need to share vision and provide opportunities.  I know that I am preaching to the choir.  My thought is that our brethren need to always be Kingdom minded and Kingdom motivated, but (possibly) expressing that in two ways.  1) According to how God is leading them in their day to day lives, without our direction. 2)  According to how God might impart to me, (as their pastor) larger events and opportunities.  I pray that the people in our church act both independently and corporately.

I don’t like making mistakes, but I love learning form from them. Wink

Early on in my marriage, I had a suspicion that God might be calling me to be a pastor, but I never realized how important it would be that He gave me a “pastor’s wife” as my wife.  My wife has radically enhanced my ability to serve as a pastor.

Speaking of training up the next generation of pastor’s…don’t forget to help their wives grow into their respective position as a pastor’s wife.  Some guys are held back or hindered because their wives were not nurtured and helped to grow into their position as a pastor’s wife.

I heard a pastor once say, “It’s good to be afraid again”.  He spoke of the fact that at that time in his life, he was taking a big step of faith and following a new course for life.  His entire routine was being set aside, and a new lifestyle was being developed.  His “fear” was refreshing to him, because it signaled utter dependence upon Jesus, instead of nominal dependence sought out in the routine of life.

God’s grace IS sufficient.

A “Theology of suffering”: Develop it and pass it on–there’s trouble ahead!

/10 Comments/in , , , , , , , /by

A number of our church members are refugees from Burma/Myanmar.  Needless to say, based on their personal experiences with the government of Burma, they have zero trust that anything the government has agreed to recently will actually change the situation for their families, other Christians, and other ethnic minorities that still live in that country.

My associate pastor and his wife are from Syria.  They are the only members of their immediate families that live in the U.S.  His wife’s parents live in Homs and have had to move to a village in the hills outside of the city–a village that has had the electricity cut off by the military and food  and medical supplies severely limited.  They don’t know yet whether their home in Homs has survived the bombings.

Suffice it to say that for some of our church members and almost ALL of the refugees that our church reaches out to, government or ethnic oppression has been a way of life.  Personal SUFFERING as the result of the decisions of others has been the norm in their lives, not the exception.

Ministering to these people from the truths of God’s word isn’t a great challenge.  His word has much to say about the subject of suffering and most of it has to do with suffering that is the result of persecution rather than the suffering that results from disease and so forth.

And in this process, something has become painfully and convictingly apparent to me:  I need to tighten up my “theology of suffering” to include that which is the result of animosity from others due to being known as a follower of Jesus.

As I survey the history of the church in the United States even right up till today, outside of a few strands within the African-American church,  a “theology of suffering” has never really been developed and passed on to American Christians as part of that which will help them mature in Christ.

Here’s my take on why this is and what I believe pastors need to consider:

First–In my opinion, America is not now and has never been a valid political and governmental expression of the Kingdom of God.  No earthly government or political system can be an expression of the Kingdom of God.  If the United States or any other country actually was, then Jesus was mistaken when He clarified to the Pharisees what the Kingdom of God actually is, (Luke 17:20,21).

Second–During the entire history of the Christian church, there have only been a few countries where being a follower of Jesus actually “pays” rather than “costs” in any substantive way.  The United States has been the greatest example of this.

Third–If we’re being honest, the sheer fact that we as pastors need to define New Testament words and terms like:  “persecution”,  being “reviled”, being “hated”, being “defamed”, being spoken against as “evildoers”, or “suffering for righteousness sake” for our members should tell us something about the odd environment that we live and minister in.

Fourth–If that isn’t clear enough, then the reality that we need to find examples of what this type of treatment looks like from church history or from what is currently taking place in many countries around the world, should set off our alarm bells!

Let’s face it–life for the follower of Jesus in America just isn’t that similar to what is described as the norm in the New Testament or what others in church history or in other countries today experience.

But…….if we’re paying attention at all to what is happening in this country,  then we know that radical changes have begun and will more than likely continue–even if the current administration suffers a defeat in the next election.

What kind of changes?  Changes that I believe  will make it possible for us to give examples of the things above, (included in my 3rd point), FROM WITHIN our own country and perhaps even our own personal experiences.

Personally, I believe that God is permitting things to unfold in such a way that the requirement to find examples from history and other countries will be removed—we’ll be living it.  We’ll be fully biblical in a way that we always thought we were, but maybe actually weren’t.

I’m convinced that God is steering the foolish decisions of many powerful and influential leaders in our country so that not only will it be clear to everyone that the Kingdom of God and the United States of America are not one and the same, (which many Christians don’t understand right now), but also so that those who truly are citizens of His Kingdom will know by experience themselves a greater number of the truths of His word.

In other words, I don’t believe it will be long until 2 Tim 3:12 Yes, and all who desire to live Godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution, becomes a description of our own experiences and not just those from history or other countries.

Now please don’t misunderstand me.

–I’m NOT praying that God destroys the country I’ve been blessed to be raised in and have served as part of the military.  The country that has probably done a better job of representing some Kingdom principles in its interaction with other countries than most other countries and that has provided resources for me and and thousands of others to go and live in other countries to spread the good news and help with expanding His Kingdom around the world.

–I’m NOT eager to suffer persecution or any of the other things that the bible seems to indicate could be the norm for someone who follows Jesus.

–And, I’m NOT saying that we should abandon the freedoms we have in this country that God has blessed us with so that we really can have a meaningful influence on the political system or government we live under.  By our vote, our voices, and many other means, we can and should try to move the government and political system towards standards that are in line with righteousness and are ultimately best for all citizens.

So, because of all the above, I believe each and every pastor would do well to develop a “theology of suffering” and then pass it on BEFORE the reality of what so many others have experienced becomes a part of our experience.