dustypath.org - Doug's Blog

Home

Doug's Blog

The Dusty Path
The Dusty Path is a community of people who are joyfully discovering what it means to really surrender to and follow Jesus as he leads us along the dusty path as His disciples. Enjoy the journey.

The Dusty Path

Doug's Blog

Pick Up Your Mat

Pick Up Your Mat And Walk

I love to sit around and talk about what needs to be done in the Church—what followers of Jesus should be doing to bless their communities and incarnate Christ to those who do not know him. Yeah, one of my favorite things is to get together with a group of friends and talk about what it looks like to really follow Him. I know a lot of people like me too.

It is humbling to know that God has changed my heart over the years and allowed me to see His heart for the poor in a more real way. Several months ago, I wrote to our ministry team, “[we] stand at the precipice of unprecedented times. In the past, people with spiritual inklings would turn to a Christian church; now they are turning elsewhere. More and more it seems people need to be drawn to Jesus before they will ever set foot in a church – they must see Jesus lived out in our work and in our families.” I believe those words with every fiber of my being. But, for so long, they have been just that, words.

As I said, I know a lot of people like me too, people who find it real easy – even entertaining and enjoyable -- to sit and talk and complain or encourage, all while paralyzed by fear or the unknown from doing anything. So why do I just sit there? Why am I paralyzed? The answer, although not pretty, is pretty simple: lack of faith.

Jesus’ response, when he saw the guy paralyzed for decades but unable to get to the healing waters, was to ask him “do you want to be healed?” The guy told Jesus all the reasons why he had not been able to get to the water, why he had been sitting on his mat for so long. Jesus almost didn’t seem concerned about the legitimately valid excuses – I mean the guy was physically paralyzed. Instead, He said to him “pick up your matt and walk,” and immediately the man did just that, and was no longer paralyzed.

I think I hear Jesus saying that to me and people like me. “Quit sitting there paralyzed, pick up your mat and walk.” And, I’m pretty convinced that when we do that, it will be our faith that makes us well, and not just us, but the world around us, as the light that will begin to emanate from us is seen in the darkness and brokenness of paralyzed peoples lives.

It’s time to pick up our mats and stop being paralyzed.

Visiting The Flood

The Flood – .

Last night I visited Flood Church in San Diego. I had heard about the church for a while, but had never been. I had set up a meeting with an opportunity to visit with two friends who don’t know Jesus. Didn’t know what to expect, so just showed up.

I walked into the gymnasium where they gather and could not see. I smelled the incense my eyes adjusting to the darkness, brightened only with candle flames, as we found seats (only tripping on two chairs in the process). When the worship leader came out and picked up a guitar, he said, “tonight we are going to do something different.” I thought “oh no.” And he continued, “we are going to start playing music and we will just go on as the Lord directs us.” He continued to say that this was not a time to sit in our seats, but rather to go around the room to the various areas of art, and prayer and communion, and just listen to God. And I thought, oh no . . . I brought unbelievers . . . they need to have someone inspiring walk onto the stage to tell them about Jesus. Now what?

An hour later, as I sang in the dark, separated from my friends as we were exploring the room, I praised God for allowing me to bring my friends this night, for allowing them to experience the mystery and wonder of God, and to see others modeling what it looks like to worship in a way that shows that they know God . . . actually know Him. When Pastor Scott came up, I actually was disappointed – I thought nothing needed to be added to the evening. But, it was all good.

The lesson: why do I always think that I can only share Jesus with words – mine and others? What do I say about Him when I don’t talk? Words are great, but life is so much more powerful.

When we met up again at the end of the service, they hadn’t walked down an isle or prayed a prayer, both fine things, but not ultimate things. What they did say is that they really enjoyed the time, and that they really want to start going to church, and that they had a relative who would never go to church, but might go to Flood, and that they would invite her to come back with them.

Very cool.

Carnie Church

Carnie Church – what message are we sending.

Step right up, one throw free, guaranteed winner, come on buddy, win a prize for the lady.

Carnie Dude, trying so hard to get your attention. Trying so hard to get you to come over, trying so hard to even get you to look at him, to make eye contact. Do you look, smile, say no thanks, or pretend not to notice the obnoxious yelling directed at you from 10 feet to your right. Or, do you look at him make some sarcastic comment and tell him those things are all rigged? Whatever your reaction before you escape the clutches of Carnie Dude, once free you laugh -- but at the same time you’re glad he’s fixed his attention on his next potential “customer.”

Sometimes we evangelicals look a lot like Carnie Dude. I wonder what those who are just walking past us are thinking as they not so secretly hope we will move on to our next potential customer. I mean, we sure do look pretty desperate sometimes, trying whatever we can to just get someone to come in the door.

Why People Leave

People choose to leave churchs for a whole lot of different reasons. I found this article kind of interesting. Ten Myths About Church Leavers

Ten Myths About Church Leavers

Alan Jaimieson

Despite the almost mantra-like status of the statement "people are leaving the church" there still appears to be little understanding about who is leaving, when they leave, why they leave, and what happens to them and their faith after they leave. Of course everyone has their own view on these issues but few, especially our church leaders, have taken the time to sit down and talk with an actual leaver or two.

It is much easier dealing with stereotypes than actual people, even if the stereotypes don't help us understand what is really going on. For those interested in moving beyond the stereotypes and asking: "Who are these people who are leaving our churches?" an examination of some myths about church leavers may prove helpful.

Myth ONE

It is only the traditional mainline churches that have large numbers of leavers. While it is true that people are leaving the traditional churches1 people are also leaving evangelical, charismatic and Pentecostal churches. These are the churches which have been growing both in New Zealand and overseas. They are the churches which - with their focus on overt biblical teaching, vibrant worship and greater opportunities for participation - have attracted many young converts as well as those disillusioned with the traditional churches.

However, these growing churches also have a 'back door'. Estimates as to how large this back door is vary depending on who you're talking to. But studies like those done by Elaine Bolitho on the back door in the Baptist churches in New Zealand have shown something of the degree of loss in these so-called 'growing' churches.

Bolitho's study looked at membership figures for the Baptist churches.2 She found that between 1989 and 1996 the Baptist churches of New Zealand had a small overall membership decline (from 23,601 members to 23,031). However during this period over eleven thousand new members were added to Baptist churches. Taking into account those who died and the fact that Baptist churches had transferred more people in than out, she found that 10,118 members were 'lost' without record.

This means that for those seven years (1989 to 1996) the net result was a loss of 570 people - a percentage loss of 108% of new members. In effect this means that for every one hundred new members added to the Baptist churches of New Zealand one hundred and eight left. These leavers could not be accounted for as moving to another church or dying.

This was a substantial increase in back door leavers from previous periods between 1948 and 1988, for which Bolitho provided comparative figures.3

Figures from Pentecostal churches also point to a large number of church leavers. The Apostolic Church in New Zealand figures, for example, have shown dramatic recent growth, but a closer look at the figures also indicate a steady back door loss rate of approximately 10% per annum.4 If Bolitho's findings and those from the Apostolic church are replicated in other groupings of evangelical, charismatic and Pentecostal churches it indicates that there is a sizeable number (perhaps even a growing number) of leavers from these churches.

Myth two

The people who leave are young adults, people on the fringe of our churches, and people who have not been in the church for very long.

Obviously some leavers are in these categories, but they are not the only ones to leave. In the research I did - based on 108 interviews with church leavers across New Zealand - I found the church leavers from Pentecostal and charismatic churches were predominantly middle aged (70% were aged between 35 and 45 years) and had been involved in their respective churches as adults (ie beyond their 18th birthday) for an average of 15.8 years. While there are other categories of leavers, here is one category of leavers that few seem to consider.

Myth three

Those with children are less likely to leave.

In 1990 5 Newsweek magazine ran an article titled "And the children shall lead them: Young Americans return to God." The article suggested that people brought up within the church who left in the turbulent period of the 1960s were likely to return to church when they became parents themselves.

This was later supported by Roof's6 study in which he stated "unquestionably, the most frequently cited reasons (for people returning to church) have to do with family life. The influence of a spouse and keeping harmony within the family are strong factors, but far more important is the religious upbringing of children. The presence of young, school-age children and feelings of paternal responsibility for them drives (baby) boomers back to church."7

While we may have an understanding that children will draw people back, or hold them in our churches, this assumption is called into question by the choices the people I interviewed have made. 80% of them had children under their care but nevertheless they chose to leave their church, with the almost inevitable result that the children left too.

For some time now youth leaders have been suggesting that the intermediate age group is becoming the crucial age point in terms of children's continued interest and involvement in church.8 It may be that when these children's grumbles about going to church connect with the deep dissatisfaction of the parents, the stage is set for the family to eventually leave altogether.

Myth four

If Mum and Dad go to church, their children will grow up to be churchgoers too.9

Generally speaking there is an understanding that strong church beliefs and practice through childhood will influence subsequent adult behaviour. While such an influence may well affect subsequent beliefs, values and faith contents, recent research has begun to question the degree to which church attendance and involvement is also set in childhood.

An American study of five hundred Presbyterian adults between 33 and 42 years of age found that "the influence of positive parent-child bonds was very weak. They concluded that "the effect of early social learning was weaker in our data than in most past research and the reason is probably that our sample consisted of adults at least 33 years old, whereas earlier research looked at persons of high school age or college [university] age.

"The effects of childhood social learning during childhood and youth apparently wear down under the pressure of later influences." This is supported by another study10 which found that spouses became more important than childhood religious backgrounds.

In my own research (albeit qualitative research and therefore involving a relatively small sample) there were no indications of any major differences between the faith of those who had strong church childhood backgrounds, and those who were from nominal family backgrounds - or even a non-church background.

The leavers I interviewed were made up of 28%11 who had strong church backgrounds as children (that is they attended children's and youth programmes run by the church and were supported in doing so by their parents' own involvement in the church). A further 40% came from nominal church backgrounds (that is they attended some church-based children's programmes and/or youth programmes but were not supported by the regular attendance and involvement of their parents in a church). Finally, 30% of the leavers interviewed had no church background in their childhood and teenage years.

Myth five

The people who leave lack commitment.

All 108 of the people I interviewed had made adult (post 18th birthday) commitments to their Christian faith and to their local church. For a number this was the continuation of a previous commitment, while for others it involved a deliberate step of commitment in their adult years.

94% of those I interviewed had also been involved in significant leadership positions within their churches and 40% had been involved for one year or more as either a full-time (paid) Christian worker for a local church, para-church group, or overseas missionary organisation, or studied full-time in a theological institution - many had done both.

Myth six

Leavers don't have an adequate grounding in the faith.

Again this is hard to substantiate if the people I met are indicative of church leavers. The people I interviewed had been, on average, part of their respective churches for 15.8 years.

94% held significant leadership positions within the church and 40% had been full-time Christian workers for at least one year. A third of those interviewed had undergone some form of theological study. Coupled with this, most spoke of very clear and vivid experiences of God at work in their lives.

Myth seven

They leave because of the increased pressure on people's time today.

Many church leaders point to today's increased demands on people's time (the net effect of longer working hours and women returning to the workforce) and the greater leisure options available to them (Sunday sport and shopping, television, and the growing restaurant and café industries) as reasons why people cease to attend church.

Although the leavers I spoke with were well aware of these changes to their lifestyle, and a number spoke of them as contributing factors, none of the people who mentioned time pressure as a factor indicated that it was the major factor in their decision to leave.

Underlying each person's account were far more significant factors than those raised by the time involved in being part of a church community. In fact, many of the leavers had gone on to replace time spent in church with other faith-nurturing commitments.

Myth eight

They leave because of personal issues and disagreements with church leaders.

For a small percentage of those I spoke with, the principal reasons for their leaving were to do with the direction or vision of their church, or issues of disagreement with those in leadership. Seldom were these one-off issues. Most involved a series of disappointments and disagreements with those in leadership over a protracted period of time.

For the vast majority of leavers, however, such points of disagreement were a minor part of the overall decision to leave. For many they merely acted as a final straw in a process of leaving that had been going on for a period of months, if not years.

Myth nine

They'll be coming back.

The leavers I spoke with were adamant that they would not be returning to the kind of church they had left. In some cases I have been able to keep in touch with these leavers and to date the majority of them have not returned.

Some do become loosely involved on the fringe of a different group of churches to those they left. They tend to do this by attending the occasional Catholic mass, Anglican communion, Taize, Celtic, multi-media or alternative service.

Even when people do go back to another evangelical Pentecostal or charismatic church they tend to stay very much on the fringes and do not become involved in the leadership and core roles where they were once to be found. Often there is another reason for their return - perhaps the church provides an attractive youth-group for their teenagers, for example.

Myth ten

They are backsliding and giving away their faith.

When I began this research I expected to find that the longer people were out of the church community the more their faith would decline, and in the end most would to all intents move away from Christian faith. This was not the case for a very high percentage of the church leavers I was to meet.

In fact, while these people are clear that they have left their churches and have no plans to return, they are equally adamant that they are continuing in Christian faith. It is to this paradox that I want to return in the June/July issue of Reality.

Notes

1 By 'traditional' I mean the big four denominations - Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist and Catholic. Census and denominational attendance figures have repeatedly indicated the decline in these churches.

2 Which are lower than Baptist church attendance figures as they only record people who through baptism or transfer from another church have chosen to formally become members of the church.

3 Bolitho, E.E. (1997) Hole in the Bucket. Seminar to Auckland, Waikato and Bay of Plenty Baptist leaders, October 1997 (Auckland).

4 Taylor L. 1997 "Denominational Growth" in Patrick B. (ed) New Vision New Zealand Vol II, Auckland, Vision New Zealand. p 69

5 December 17

6 W C Roof: A Generation of Seekers: The Spiritual Journeys of the Baby Boom Generation, San Francisco Harper, 1993, p 246.

7 This was supported by other studies and predictions - for example Hoge, D.R.; Johnson, B.; Luidens, D.A. (1993) "Determinants of church involvement of young adults who grew up in Presbyterian churches", Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion: Vol 32 No 3, p 242-255.

8 The Presbyterian Church report titled "How to keep the young people you have and get more" 1998. States that of the young people interviewed in this report who left the church "Most dropped out of church based activities (Sunday schools, clubs etc.) before or during their thirteenth year". p 31.

9 A common interpretation of Proverbs 22:6: "Train a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it."

10 Willits, F.K. & Crider, D.M. (1989) Church attendance and traditional religious beliefs in adolescence and young adulthood: a panel study, Review of Religious Research. Vol 31, No 1, p 68-81.

11 These percentages have been rounded.

Alan is part of a Wellington-based group called 'Spirited Exchanges', which provides a forum for those who have left church or are finding it unhelpful in their continued journey of faith. The group is an endeavour of Wellington Central Baptist Church, where Alan is co-senior pastor. He has completed a PhD (in sociology) on the topic "Churchless Faith", which analysed why people leave churches and their journies of faith outside the church.

Copied from www.reality.org.nz

Missional Church

This article by Tim Keller, Pastor at Redeemer Presbytarian Church in NYC is a great primer on what it means to be a missional church.

In the West for nearly 1,000 years, the relationship of (Anglo-European) Christian churches to the broader culture was a relationship known as "Christendom." The institutions of society "Christianized" people, and stigmatized non-Christian belief and behavior. Though people were "Christianized" by the culture, they were not regenerated or converted with the Gospel. The church's job was then to challenge persons into a vital, living relation with Christ.

There were great advantages and yet great disadvantages to 'Christendom.' The advantage was that there was a common language for public moral discourse with which society could discuss what was 'the good.' The disadvantage was that Christian morality without gospel-changed hearts often led to cruelty and hypocrisy. Think of how the small town in "Christendom" treated the unwed mother or the gay person. Also, under "Christendom" the church often was silent against abuses of power of the ruling classes over the weak. For these reasons and others, the church in Europe and North America has been losing its privileged place as the arbiter of public morality since at least the mid 19th century. The decline of Christendom has accelerated greatly since the end of WWII.

The British missionary Lesslie Newbigin went to India around 1950. There he was involved with a church living 'in mission' in a very non-Christian culture. When he returned to England some 30 years later, he discovered that now the Western church too existed in a non-Christian society, but it had not adapted to its new situation. Though public institutions and popular culture of Europe and North America no longer 'Christianized' people, the church still ran its ministries assuming that a stream of 'Christianized', traditional/moral people would simply show up in services. Some churches certainly did 'evangelism' as one ministry among many. But the church in the West had not become completely 'missional'--adapting and reformulating absolutely everything it did in worship, discipleship, community, and service--so as to be engaged with the non-Christian society around it. It had not developed a 'missiology of western culture' the way it had done so for other non-believing cultures.

One of the reasons much of the American evangelical church has not experienced the same precipitous decline as the Protestant churches of Europe and Canada is because in the U.S. there is still a 'heartland' with the remnants of the old 'Christendom' society. There the informal public culture (though not the formal public institutions) still stigmatizes non-Christian beliefs and behavior. "There is a fundamental schism in American cultural, political, and economic life. There's the quicker-growing, economically vibrant...morally relativist, urban-oriented, culturally adventuresome, sexually polymorphous, and ethnically diverse nation...and there's the small town, nuclear-family, religiously-oriented, white-centric other America, [with]...its diminishing cultural and economic force....[T]wo nations..." Michael Wolff, New York, Feb 26 2001, p. 19. In conservative regions, it is still possible to see people profess faith and the church grow without becoming 'missional.' Most traditional evangelical churches still can only win people to Christ who are temperamentally traditional and conservative. But, as Wolff notes, this is a 'shrinking market.' And eventually evangelical churches ensconced in the declining, remaining enclaves of "Christendom" will have to learn how to become 'missional'. If it does not do that it will decline or die.

We don't simply need evangelistic churches, but rather 'missional' churches.

The Elements of a Missional Church

1. Discourse in the vernacular.

        • In 'Christendom' there is little difference between the language inside and outside of the church. Documents of the early U.S. Congress, for example, are riddled with allusions to and references from the Bible. Biblical technical terms are well-known inside and outside. In a missional church, however, terms must be explained.

        • The missional church avoids 'tribal' language, stylized prayer language, unnecessary evangelical pious 'jargon', and archaic language that seeks to set a 'spritual tone.'

        • The missional church avoids 'we-them' language, disdainful jokes that mock people of different politics and beliefs, and dismissive, disrespectful comments about those who differ with us

        • The missional church avoids sentimental, pompous, 'inspirational' talk . Instead we engage the culture with gentle, self-deprecating but joyful irony the gospel creates. Humility + joy = gospel irony and realism.

        • The missional church avoids ever talking as if non-believing people are not present. If you speak and discourse as if your whole neighborhood is present (not just scattered Christians), eventually more and more of your neighborhood will find their way in or be invited.

        • Unless all of the above is the outflow of a truly humble-bold gospel-changed heart, it is all just 'marketing' and 'spin.'

2. Enter and re-tell the culture's stories with the gospel

        • In "Christendom" it is possible to simply exhort Christianized people to "do what they know they should." There is little or no real engagement, listening, or persuasion. It is more a matter of exhortation (and often, heavy reliance on guilt.) In a missional church preaching and communication should always assume the presence of skeptical people, and should engage their stories, not simply talk about "old times."

        • To "enter" means to show sympathy toward and deep acquaintance with the literature, music, theater, etc. of the existing culture's hopes, dreams, 'heroic' narratives, fears.

        • The older culture's story was--to be a good person, a good father/mother, son/daughter, to live a decent, merciful, good life.

        • Now the culture's story is-- a) to be free and self-created and authentic (theme of freedom from oppression), and b) to make the world safe for everyone else to be the same (theme of inclusion of the 'other'; justice).

        • To "re-tell" means to show how only in Christ can we have freedom without slavery and embracing of the 'other' without injustice.

3. Theologically train lay people for public life and vocation

        • In 'Christendom' you can afford to train people just in prayer, Bible study, evangelism-private world skills--because they are not facing radically non-Christian values in their public life--where they work, in their neighborhood, etc.

        • In a 'missional' church, the laity needs theological education to 'think Christianly' about everything and work with Christian distinctiveness. They need to know: a) what cultural practices are common grace and to be embraced, b) what practices are antithetical to the gospel and must be rejected, c) what practices can be adapted/revised.

         • In a 'missional' situation, lay people renewing and transforming the culture through distinctively Christian vocations must be lifted up as real 'kingdom work' and ministry along with the traditional ministry of the Word.

        • Finally, Christians will have to use the gospel to demonstrate true, Biblical love and 'tolerance' in "the public square" toward those with whom we deeply differ. This tolerance should equal or exceed that which opposing views show toward Christians. The charge of intolerance is perhaps the main 'defeater' of the gospel in the non-Christian west.

4. Create Christian community which is counter-cultural and counter-intuitive.

        • In Christendom, 'fellowship' is basically just a set of nurturing relationships, support and accountability. That is necessary, of course.

        • In a missional church, however, Christian community must go beyond that to embody a 'counter-culture,' showing the world how radically different a Christian society is with regard to sex, money, and power.

        • In sex. We avoid both the secular society's idolization of sex and traditional society's fear of sex. We also exhibit love rather than hostility or fear toward those whose sexual lifepatterns are different.

        • In money. We promote a radically generous commitment of time, money, relationships, and living space to social justice and the needs of the poor, the immigrant, the economically and physically weak.

        • In power. We are committed to power-sharing and relationship-building between races and classes that are alienated outside of the Body of Christ.

        • In general, a church must be more deeply and practically committed to deeds of compassion and social justice than traditional liberal churches and more deeply and practically committed to evangelism and conversion than traditional fundamentalist churches. This kind of church is profoundly 'counter-intuitive' to American observers. It breaks their ability to categorize (and dismiss) it as liberal or conservative. Only this kind of church has any chance in the nonChristian west.

5. Practice Christian unity as much as possible on the local level.

        • In Christendom, when 'everyone was a Christian' it was necessary (perhaps) for a church to define itself over against other churches. That is, to get an identity you had to say, "we are not like that church over there, or those Christians over here."

        • Today, however, it is much more illuminating and helpful for a church to define itself over against 'the world'--the values of the non-Christian culture. It is very important that we not spend our time bashing and criticizing other kinds of churches. That simply plays in to the common 'defeater' that Christians are all intolerant.

        • While we have to align ourselves in denominations that share many of our distinctives, at the local level we should cooperate and reach out to and support the other congregations and churches in our local area. This will raise many thorny issues, of course, but our bias should be in the direction of cooperation.

Case Study

Let me show you how this goes beyond any 'program.' These are elements that have to be present in every area of the church. So, for example, what makes a small group 'missional'? A 'missional' small group is not necessarily one which is doing some kind of specific 'evangelism' program (though that is to be recommended) Rather, 1) if its members love and talk positively about the city/neighborhood, 2) if they speak in language that is not filled with pious tribal or technical terms and phrases, nor disdainful and embattled language, 3) if in their Bible study they apply the gospel to the core concerns and stories of the people of the culture, 4) if they are obviously interested in and engaged with the literature and art and thought of the surrounding culture and can discuss it both appreciatively and yet critically, 5) if they exhibit deep concern for the poor and generosity with their money and purity and respect with regard to opposite sex, and show humility toward people of other races and cultures, 6) they do not bash other Christians and churches--then seekers and non-believing people from the city A) will be invited and B) will come and will stay as they explore spiritual issues. If these marks are not there it will only be able to include believers or traditional, "Christianized" people.

[ Back ]