We continue with commenting on the fourth of the five qualities of movements that change the world, Steve Addison’s new book—“rapid mobilization.”
Let me comment on four structures for this blog and then deal with more next time.
One of the things that militates against this kind of mobilization is the ecclesiastical structures that exist today that really become strictures against a movement becoming dynamic and spontaneous. What are some of the structures that can easily become strictures that hinder both the growth of a local church in quantity and quality as well as the multiplication of that church leading to a church multiplication movement?
In a recent ministry trip I saw again how structures that are not biblical can hinder the growth, the expansion, the health, and the multiplication of churches. We need to read and realize the implications of what Roland Allen called, “The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church and the Causes which Hinder it.” I would like to encourage us to look at structures that hinder the spontaneous expansion of the church and apply them to your context.
Structures are not wrong in themselves. All work or ministry requires some kind of structure but there are hindering structures that become strictures and there are what could be called “empowering structures” that encourage expansion, growth, and health. Christian Schwarz calls these types of structures “effective structures” – i.e. structures that work rather than hinder.
Here are some examples of non-functional structures that end up being strictures that discourage spontaneity.
First, the creation of structures that had a goal of outreach by church planting and multiplication but have turned inward to care for churches that do not reproduce. This happens as denominations or fellowships of churches come into being with a vision of reaching the lost and planting new churches. But then they turn inward and live to keep their structures alive rather than to spontaneously reach out, disciple, and plant new churches. Roland Allen states: “There is a horrible tendency for an organization to grow in importance till it overshadows the end of its existence, and begins to exist for itself.” (Allen 1956, 129). This can happen to missions or missionary organizations that move from multiplication to maintenance. This inward turning is usually towards the tightening of control in such a way that spontaneity is stifled.
Second, a wrong distinction between “clergy” and “laymen.” Leaders are necessary but a wrong distinction between those “set apart” for so called paid, full-time ministry compared to bi-vocational ministry hinders the expansion of the church. I remember attending a key seminar given by Donald McGavran on networks or denominations that grow and those that do not grow. One of the keys to a growing movement was lay leaders who plant new churches. There are vast untapped resources for the planting and multiplication of new churches that is hindered by what could be called “elitism” in our church structures.
Structures that recognize leadership are not wrong but structures that stricture ministry because of a lack of formal education and formal recognition are deadening to the growth of the church. This is also seen in the restriction of the ordinances (or sacraments in some groups) of baptism and the Lord’s Supper to only ordained leaders. It is important to not handle the ordinances lightly and there needs to discipline in the local church but to restrict godly leaders from caring for the ordinances will hinder the growth of the church especially in starting new churches. In a recent article in Christianity Today on the growth of the churches in Cuba, Jeremy Weber states: “ ‘The church is growing because pastors have loosened power,’ said a 34 year-old pastor in central Cuba. Pastors in his rural network of nine house churches are allowing lay missionaries to plant churches and even conduct baptisms and weddings because the pastors can’t travel enough to keep up with demand.” (Weber 2009, 24)
One of the great encouragements in the fellowship of churches that we worked with in France was the setting apart of a young man as a recognized evangelist even though he was lacking educational requirements that are so often put onto those who want to serve the Lord. The result of this was the planting of a new church in a new region as Charles served with his heart.
Third, what Roland Allen called “Fear for the Doctrine” in chapter four of his book The Spontaneous Expansion of the Church (London: World Dominion Press, 1956). he idea here is that if we expand and start new churches or if we unleash potential leadership, we risk a move away from biblical doctrine.
Listen here to Greg Hubbard, “…if we are honest, only God controls His church. Moral failings and doctrinal issues have plagued some of the most structured and controlled church denominations throughout history. Control structures have not proven effective in eliminating problems. It seems that control structures may do more to limit the spontaneous expansion of the church than they have done to preserve its purity.” (Hubbard 2004, 59).
There are true structures that can be put into place that encourage faithfulness to biblical doctrine such as a daughter church having as its doctrine statement that of its mother church.
Fourth, The bias of previous experiences and traditions. Jaroslav Pelikan has said, whereas tradition is the living faith of the dead, traditionalism is the dead faith of the living.” (Pelikan in Bellah 1985). The seven last words of the church are “we never did it that way before.” We get entangled in our “sacred cows” –traditions which hinder us from creative ideas. Christian Schwarz states, “Our research confirmed for the first time an extremely negative relationship between traditionalism and both growth and quality within the church.” (Schwarz 2006, 30).
IYKDWYBDYKGWYBG which translates to “if you keep doing what you’ve been doing you’ll keep getting what you’ve been getting.” In other words , if we keep doing ministry that is unproductive in terms of winning disciples, planting new churches and raising up leadership things will continue that way. However, if we seek to break through this vicious cycle and move into new ways of doing ministry we may see new things happen.
This was the whole experience of the Jerusalem Council as seen in Acts 15. The apostles and elders decided to move ahead in a new way and the result was the great breakthrough as seen in Acts.
When I was in Melbourne, Australia, in May of this year, I had a fascinating discussion with Jossy Chacko, director of Empart, a church-planting mission working in India. Their vision is to plant 100,000 churches in North India by the year 2030. He shared that the best church planters are gleaned from the harvest and that they discover that workers who have had a more traditional approach to church planting are less effective because of their previous experience. (Chacko 2007)
More next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment