My Take: In Praise of Congregations:

by Raj Attiken, August 15, 2015: For most Adventists, the face of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the local congregation. The Adventism lived and modeled in their local church is the Adventism they know. Their involvement and engagement with the Adventist Church happens primarily at their local church and its ministries. While they may be aware of, and even involved in, the larger denominational entity and its ministries, their primary and dominant point of engagement is with their local church. The flourishing of local congregations, therefore, should be a matter of interest to Adventists. Healthy, Christ-centered, vibrant congregations have immense potential to have long-term impact on the lives of people in and outside the church.
In the current climate in which denominational actions, pronouncements, programs, and personnel have seized the attention and emotions of Adventists, it seems that the local congregation is invisible or nonexistent. Its presence and contribution seem completely eclipsed by the din and tumult of denominational concerns. In this context, it is important to be reminded that the local congregation is the life-blood of the denomination, and that its contribution cannot be replicated anywhere else. Also, that there is nothing about the denomination that can and should keep a local congregation from pursuing its vision and fulfilling its mission. Nothing! If denominational leaders employ fear and guilt to garner support or compliance, the congregation can refuse to be captive to that fear; it can instead celebrate its hope and assurance in Christ. If denominational leaders issue unreasonable edicts, the congregation can opt for reason and conscience. If denominational leaders advocate for injustice and inequality, the local congregation can be an exemplar of justice, equality and fairness. The local church – the worshiping, nurturing, ministering community – is the church. Everything else is para-church. If there are no congregations, there can be no denomination.
Congregations play a vital role in bringing people to faith, nurturing them in the faith, and equipping them to live their faith. They help guide the faith-formation of our young. They hold space for youthful questioning and adult exploration. They provide opportunity for us to be periodically reminded of the humility that must characterize Christian living, and hold a spot for us at the Lord’s Table. They help keep hope alive. They welcome into the family those who enter the waters of baptism. They make sacrifices to educate our children. They bless the marriage of our sons and daughters. They provide comfort when grief strikes. They accompany us through life’s ups and downs. By their stable, permanent presence, investment, and engagement in the community, they “earn the right to be heard” – the right to tell the story of Jesus in compelling ways. Their presence is a reminder to society that faith, God, and the sacred are enduring realities.
Congregations are not mere social groupings. They are communities inspired and empowered by the Spirit of God. The Spirit is present when they gather. The Spirit equips its members with all the spiritual gifts they need to make their congregation a healthy, wholesome community. Congregational leaders have the freedom to discover and discern what the Spirit wishes to make of their congregation. They can lay Spirit-led plans. They can set Spirit-led goals. They can employ Spirit-led methods to fulfill the mission for which God has raised up their particular church in their particular place.
Research on congregational life has identified the complex dynamics that are at play in congregations of all sizes. The late Lyle Schaller, who was called the dean of church consultants, taught and wrote extensively about congregations. In my early years as a pastor of small churches, I was attracted to his typology of churches based on size. Small churches are cats — they have “nine lives,” he cautioned us! Denominations try to merge them, yoke them, close them, or ignore them – but they survive. Trying to direct and manage a small church is like trying to take a cat for a walk!
Schaller’s descriptive typology of church size included the collie, the garden, the house, the mansion, and the ranch, each with its distinctive dynamics, idiosyncrasies, leadership and pastoral needs. Schaller also outlined how denominational staff can best relate to, and serve, congregations of various sizes. In recent decades other church consultants have developed further useful approaches to the study of congregations and how best to nurture their health and vitality.
Mega-church pastor, Bill Hybels, who is known for his passion for the local church, wrote: “There’s nothing like the local church when it’s working right. Its beauty is indescribable. Its power is breathtaking. Its potential is unlimited. It comforts the grieving and heals the broken in the context of community. It builds bridges to seekers and offers truth to the confused. It provides resources for those in need and opens its arms to the forgotten, the downtrodden, the disillusioned. It breaks the chains of addictions, frees the oppressed, and offers belonging to the marginalized of this world. Whatever capacity for human suffering, the church has a greater capacity for healing and wholeness. . . .No other organization on earth is like the church. Nothing even comes close.”1
The operative phrase in Hybels’ description of the local church is “. . .when it’s working right.” Pastors, lay leaders, and members generally work hard to get their local church “working right.” Their efforts should be recognized, affirmed, and supported. Denominational programs, campaigns, and extravaganzas come and go, but the local church remains as a steady and faithful witness to the enduring power of faith, hope, and love. The local church deserves our care. That’s my take!
1 Hybels, Bill. Courageous Leadership (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002), p. 23.
” Also, that there is nothing about the denomination that can and should keep a local congregation from pursuing its vision and fulfilling its mission. Nothing! If denominational leaders employ fear and guilt to garner support or compliance, the congregation can refuse to be captive to that fear; it can instead celebrate its hope and assurance in Christ.”
The local church is part of the whole. It is not as independent as you would claim it is or could be. The influence of authority over and above the local church is a viable authority to keep the church together.
A local church can opt to “pull out” and do their own thing. But all local churches are not free from the influence of the upper authority and members in a general way still trust their leadership and those who hold influence and authority.
Churches still use the Sabbath School Quarterly, and some still read the Review. They assume these publications are substancially correct and they still form the basic doctrines of Adventism.
Couple the above observation with the doctrine of the “unconditional election of the SDA church” and you have a people who are strongly influenced with a cult mentality similar to the Jews of past and present history. Unconditional election destroys bible morality and accountability with some false idea that somehow, “God is in control” no matter what the church does. The bible is no longer the final authority, the church is. And this is now the real conflict in…
Adventism that is being discussed and agitated on the various ministries both liberal and conservative. Many conservatives advocate “the church, the church” and liberals advocate science, human speculation, and who knows what. But it is a fact that neither side advocate, “the bible, the bible.”
What is your scriptural foundation for claiming “unconditional election of the SDA Church?” I’m having trouble finding that in my Bible. What I do find is that God chooses to guide and empower individuals who join together and function as a spiritual body we call the local church. Yes, the New Testament talks about leaders in the church, but I’m not finding any mention about a local conference office, a union office, a division office or a General Conference.
Apparently you’ve met a whole lot of tradition in the church but somehow missed meeting the Holy Spirit.
William, you might want to be careful.
Mark 3:
23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.
27 No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.
28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:
One Chapter, one set of verses describes the issue. He tells us how to build strong families that build a strong Church; after he ordained the 12. He tells us how to defeat satan. He also tells us about blaspheme of the HOLY SPIRIT; that you have now stated you own multiple times.
We Love you brother. We would not try; if we did not think there was hope and you are worth it.
Please read what a person actually writes before you heap accusations on them because you have grossly contradicted your screen name. Your statement about me claiming many times that I “own” the Holy Spirit is as far from reality as east is from west. Far be it from me to EVER make such a claim because the Holy Spirit reminds me continually of my faults and failings. I want the Holy Spirit to OWN ME. I advocate for people to follow the Holy Spirit because that is what Jesus told His followers to do and because of the rich blessings I have enjoyed as a result of following His leading and ministering as He instructed me to do in His power. You can enjoy those blessings, too, if you are willing to surrender your ego that has apparently misled you into thinking you know all that is right and that you are supposed to be the corrector of what you think are the errors in others.
William, you said: “Apparently you’ve met a whole lot of tradition in the church but somehow missed meeting the Holy Spirit.” just this morning above.
Now you do the same thing, again. Is this following HIS Leading and Ministry as you state you are doing?
Do you minister reconciliation or fight to promote your own little opinions? You want to learn but don’t want BIBLE Scripture thrown at you? Could you please give the BIBLE and HOLY SPIRIT back to GOD now?
2 Corinthians 5:
17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
” You can enjoy those blessings, too, if you are willing to surrender your ego that has apparently misled you into thinking you know all that is right and that you are supposed to be the corrector of what you think are the errors in others.”
WoW…….is this “the pot calling the kettle black?” or what….. when it comes to “judging” William, you are high on the list of the one that does it.
Raj,
Once again, you have sounded a clear message to which we would do well to pay attention! Thank you.
I totally agree. As we see in the New Testament, the local congregation is where the church lives because it is where we meet and minister to our communities. It is where the Holy Spirit has the greatest potential to be seen working and experienced. Indeed, the entire church structure above the local church could disappear and the local church would quickly learn to survive without it and, in many cases, would do far better without it because the members have lost sight of the power of God that enables them to function without higher human leadership.
” Indeed, the entire church structure above the local church could disappear and the local church would quickly learn to survive without it and, in many cases, would do far better without it ”
You’re antinomian spirit of independence is typical of many, William.
Neither did I suggest any “unconditional election” for any means of grace that God may have ordained. I suggested that many may assume this false idea by way of EGW who stated, “The church may seem to fall, but does not…..” and goes on to affirm the final victory for “the church”.
Our final accountability is based on each individual who is in some sense, “the church” at least in their own behalf. This does not negate the divine ideal of a church community where each individual will affirm and represent all the other members of the church community. Those who advocate diversity in doctrine as the acceptable norm create mass confusion. If don’t agree with the corporate doctrine we must move on. It is absurd to suppose we can all believe as we please in contrast to the corporate whole is simply inane. Yet this is advocated by many who post on A-today and Spectrum.
The liberals who attack government and form for the corporate whole, will join those conservatives who hold “the church” above the word of God.” Neither side accepts the bible as the only rule of faith and practice.
When Wilson stated he would support whatever was voted in the issue presented, proved he held the church above his…
Antinomian? Please, be careful what accusations you hurl at others because I’m just a student of the Word and a follower of the Holy Spirit.
Since you claim to be focused on the Bible, perhaps you could enlighten by answering a few questions.
1. How is obeying the instruction of Jesus to let the Holy Spirit inhabit and empower us to minister His love “antinomian” as you have charged?
2. Where in my comments have you ever seen me say that we don’t need to obey God’s law?
3. What more important command from Jesus is there for us to follow than His specific instruction to work in the power of the Holy Spirit?
4. Is not the Holy Spirit leading God’s church? If so, why do you assume that it is essential for the church to have multiple layers of bureaucracy giving instructions to members instead of the members taking guidance directly from God?
5. If God guided Abraham out of Ur into a land which he knew not, is He any less capable of personally leading you or me today?
John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
YES, CHRIST prayed for the FATHER to send us another Comforter and the HOLY GHOST will personally lead us; all of us.
Here is the fallacy in wisdom; reverse order.
Item 5 is true; individually.
Item 4 if the Holy Spirit is leading GOD’s Church, why would we not assume that this structure is needed; especially if we have to teach all nations as commanded in Matthew 28. Are you not stating that all of these persons, their works and callings are useless?
Item 3 is true; individually.
Item 2 maybe look at the first 3 and the last 3 Commandments?
Item 1 is true; individually.
Many of us have to worry about you and everyone else; including those that you impact or attempt to lead.
This seems to be a pretty self centered (and indulging) view and self defeating.
Maybe if you start your own religion (please don’t use Adventist in the name), buy you a Church, register it with the State, plead you are exempt to the IRS, have to deal with the required protections and operations, personnel, taxes and support for a while; you can gain wisdom in such (at least in one single little local area).
You want to throw away all the blood, sweat and tears that went into building all this; because it doesn’t fit into your personal opinion.
Keep studying. There is much more about the Holy Spirit for you to learn. The more you learn about the Holy Spirit, the more you will learn about how far the church has wandered away from Him and how the structure of the church often prevents the Holy Spirit from working.
Acts 2:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
You do not own GOD.
You do not own CHRIST.
You do not own the HOLY GHOST (or in SPIRIT).
You do not own the BIBLE.
You do not own the Church; much blood, sweat and tears went into its creation, including that of CHRIST.
You are nothing more than a spoilt child that didn’t get his way. I don’t think I can make it any simpler than that for you. All you seem to do now is run your mouth; but never say “anything”. I think you might have idolized yourself so much that you can’t pull you head out of your behind and clean the crap out of your eyes and ears enough to learn; or maybe you just need mental help.
You are the wanderer. We no longer feel comfortable with you or your spoilt ideologies around our children or families; you scare us. Is that clear enough for you?
I may be the least, but by HIS Grace and Blessings I do set at the FATHERS table. Most of us partake of the HOLY SPIRIT; when you do not claim possession. Do we not have a say? The rest of us in the Body are all out there working to fix a broken Church; while you preach disunity, instead of reconciliation. We are following HIS PLAN; you offer no like solution. We have tried very hard in heart, Love, patience and tolerance; we are soon out of options.
own convictions of truth as he understood it in the bible. His so-called conservative theology just went down the toilet. He obviously does not believe the bible is the only and final rule of faith and practice, but the church is. He abandons the bible and opts for “The church”.
The unity both sides have is a “spirit ethic” both liberal and conservative. The Holy Spirit working through human instrumentalities transcends the written word. Human reason and speculation takes the place of clear and definitive objective givens with the argument, “The bible is not clear so we can decide for ourselves what it means and what it teaches.”
Holding to the church as the final authority, is no better than appealing to science as the final authority. It is still man’s reasoning above the written word and in clear opposition to the written word.
Small wonder Jesus said, “Straight is the gate……..and few there be that find it.”
All this stated confusion is the key to Rome’s success who can point to all the confusion as the clear and obvious reason the Catholic church has been ordained by God to state and define bible truth.
People are looking for stability. Since it has been abandon by claiming the bible is not sufficient nor understandable by both sides, Rome is ready to offer that stability that even the SDA church can not offer since the bible has been abandon and replaced by “the church has said.”
By any chance are you the only person you expect to see going in?
There will be at least two people in heaven: Bill Sorensen and I. Not sure about you, Noel, but hopefully you will join us too, so that will make three.
I rest in God’s promise that my salvation is secure. However, I am puzzled about how people who claim to believe scripture could doubt that about me when I simply advocate for obeying the instruction Jesus gave us about following the Holy Spirit. Is that part of obeying God simply too difficult to believe?
There are many churches that are not BIBLE churches. The SDA Church is however a Bible Church. “to the Law and Testimony”, if not according to…..light…..The Bible is a “total” road map of how to get from where you are, to where you desire to be. It speaks to every lover, of the knowledge and wisdom of God’s Creation, and of the plan of salvation. It tells of the movements of mankind down through the ages as tribes and groups, and the stories of individual’s hardship, struggle, and the triumphant victories gained in faith of the Christ. It speaks to man in every age according to his needs, knowledge, intelligence, and wisdom acquired. The Holy Spirit is an active force in the lives of individuals, giving guidance and directions for life, here and now, and for eternity. These instructions are sometimes changeable, not set in stone, as the masses inhabit the Earth, and God permits each to interpret HIS eternal Cosmic plan, and their participation. The early history does little to woo the soul to the inner circle, but the NEW COVENANT OF JESUS CHRIST, HIS UNBOUNDED LOVE FOR HIS CREATION, HIS SELF SACRIFICE IN SHEDDING HIS BLOOD FOR EVERY SINGLE SOUL, DRAWS each of us to HIS unbridled love and care.
Some would have the path so harsh, and joyless, and unlovingly presented, to actually turn away souls of God’s kingdom. As Raj has presented, the church of JESUS IS ALIVE, VIBRANT, LOVING, TEACHING, SHARING, INVITING, ALL TO ENTER God’s
SANCTUARY OF PEACE.
Don’t all Protestant Christians churches claim to be “Bible Only”? When EGW is added to the Bible, as happens most frequently in sermon and print, it can no longer claim to be “Bible Only.” She is used a source for the propositional truths claimed by the SdA church and “authoritative” which should be for the Bible alone.
I have the privilege of living in a Conference where most of the current top officers have a strong background in pastoral and teaching ministries. Though not without faults (like the rest of us), these good folk actually seem to view their roles very much as enabling and facilitating the work of local churches and schools.
May their tribe increase!
Amen!
Jim,
Like you, in recent decades I have seen a major shift in attitude among church leaders from telling churches what they should be doing to being more focused on nurturing and building them. I am grateful to see that. Unfortunately, we have a lot of years of damage to overcome from the old attitude of directing instead of nurturing. It is not easy to overcome being pastor-dependent, something that prevents people from discovering the individual empowerment of the Holy Spirit and the multitude of ministries God wants us doing to share His love. I’m of the opinion that when a pastor leaves a church in many cases the best thing a conference president can do is wait a minimum of one year before ever talking with them about a replacement so the members have a chance to begin recapturing ownership of the church and stepping-up to fill leadership roles typically surrendered to the pastor. The churches where I have seen this done were all shrinking before their pastor left (or was driven-out by criticism) and some of them have since begun growing.
Anyone going further to the path of congregationalism ought to read and study:
Sidney E. Mead, The Lively Experiment: The Shaping of Christianity in America (New York: Harper & Row, 1963).
Nathan O. Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1991).
It is NOT an easy or untried path.
I prefer the scriptural model over human commentaries. Authors are good at imposing their particular experience and opinions on what God is waiting to do in each of us and in our churches, but which we are not doing because we are not seeking Him first and foremost.
Two more observations:
One’s commitment to the life of a local congregation need not diminish or detract from a commitment to the lordship of Jesus Christ, the leading of the Spirit, or the authority of Scripture. In fact, the latter three commitments result in one’s commitment to the congregation being meaningful, productive, and fulfilling.
Second, one can be committed to the life of a local congregation without embracing or espousing “congregationalism.” Rigid independence, unhealthy dependence, or dysfunctional co-dependence are all tendencies to guard against. A wholesome interdependence within a worldwide sisterhood of congregations can add value to the congregation as well as to the network of congregations. The fear of “congregationalism” (whatever is meant by that) should not keep us from investing in congregations to make them beautiful communities of faith, hope, and love!
The recent actions at S.A. demonstrate that the leaders do not trust the members and have even tightened some beliefs to discourage independent thinking and action.
Raj,
Since “Congregationalism” is a hot buzzword meaning different things to different people, perhaps we would benefit from a more precise description of concept. I use it to mean a church that may be affiliated with a denomination but which operates largely without guidance or a major financial burden from that denomination while depending primarily on the Holy Spirit for guidance and power to do the work God gives them to do. I see two large obstacles to the vitality such a situation offers a church. First is the major financial burden imposed on a local church by being part of a conference and second is that the historic way in which the SDA church has operated has created a pastor-dependent culture where the Holy Spirit is, at best, a casual mention and an even rarer experience. As a result we have at-least a significant amount of unhealthy dependence and dysfunctional co-dependence in spite of the best intentions, motives and actions of the conference leaders. Fortunately this is a situation that can be changed, but which will only change when believers embrace the scriptural instruction to seek the Holy Spirit and let Him become the focus of their spiritual life, both individually and corporately as a local church.
All politics are local, and while congregations are all local they are not unaffected by centralized authority just as all are affected by the federal government. As long as congregations don’t try to “color outside the lines” they are doing well, but try something that the leaders disagree on, and it will be a different matter.
That is why congregationalism is not allowed in the SdA church. Controllers are fearful of what they cannot control.
Elaine,
If by “congregationalism” you mean complete autonomy of the local congregation — it is true that it is incompatible with participation in, and the shared benefits of, a “sisterhood” of churches. However, there is much that congregations can do to enhance their life and ministry that still respect the shared covenants we have as a network of churches.
I agree with you that wherever leadership is exerted as control and abuse of power and authority, the local congregation can be limited in “coloring outside the lines.” This condition, however, is not universal. There are places where congregations have freedom to experiment, succeed, fail, learn, and flourish! It is up to denominational leaders to create and shape such environments in which congregations feel empowered to pursue their visions and goals.
Don’t the Baptists have a loose federation of all their congregations? Couldn’t more autonomy be offered to those congregations that have long been flourishing with little central control?
There may be new congregations that may need more oversight, but for those that are shown to be mature and using good judgment, it is like releasing your adult children to make choices without parental control and total oversight. Trust is what is missing. And recent actions brings distrust on all sides.
Don’t the Baptists have a loose federation of all their congregations? Couldn’t more autonomy be offered to those congregations that have long been flourishing with little central control?
There may be new congregations that may need more oversight, but for those that are shown to be mature and using good judgment, it is like releasing your adult children to make choices without parental control and total oversight. Trust is what is missing. And recent actions brings distrust on all sides.
Jimmy Carter severed his membership with his local congregation because of their position on women, but he still remains a Baptist.
Don’t the Baptists have a loose federation of all their congregations? Couldn’t more autonomy be offered to those congregations that have long been flourishing with little central control?
There may be new congregations that may need more oversight, but for those that are shown to be mature and using good judgment, it is like releasing your adult children to make choices without parental control and total oversight. Trust is what is missing. And recent actions brings distrust on all sides.
Jimmy Carter severed his membership with his local congregation because of their position on women, but he still remains a Baptist. Why can’t it work both ways?
Brother William Noel’s comment on August 15, 2015 at 10:17 am, said: “I prefer the scriptural model over human commentaries”. That is a LAME response. I hope you own a few books beyond a good concordance and a Bible.
Since you prefer sola scriptura” you may want to look at these six verses. These are the most relevant for me in understanding what the Bible is saying to me about church governance.
1 Timothy 3:1-7, 1Timothy 3:8-13, 1 Peter 5:1, Titus 1:5, Acts 15:6, Acts 15:2
In spite of your apparent rejection of “human commentaries” This is my “human commentary”/understanding of what is at stake in the issue of church government based on the verses above. The issue of church government or congregationalism can be addressed by asking four simple questions:
1. Who owns the property?
2. Who chooses the leaders?
3. Who sets the doctrine, mission and operations?
4. Who controls the money?
There you have it in a nutshell–property, leaders, doctrine and money. That’s the “stuff” of ordinary church life. The way you answer those questions determines what kind of government you have in your church.
Following God’s model for the church in scripture is not lame unless you’re calling God’s instructions lame.
After that you raise some good questions. The first thing to remember about those verses is that with the exception of Acts, all of them were about actions required to establish functional local congregations. The issue in Acts was what of the ceremonial laws should be imposed on the Gentiles and it was referred to those given the greatest amount of Holy Spirit power so the answer would be coming from God. There is no hint there of any church structure such as we have today.
Property ownership is a simple matter resolved through local incorporation.
If the congregation is focused on following the Holy Spirit then God will make obvious who should be in leadership by equipping them to be effective. That is the way it works in my church and I can tell you that it works well without a Nominating Committee.
Doctrine, mission and operations are made clear by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. While Jesus sent His apostles to distant places, the mission of the local church is first and foremost local.
Who controls the money? In a church that is focused on following the Holy Spirit that is a cooperative effort using the structure that the congregation forms. Clear lines of authority and responsibility are essential and the auditing function provided by the conference can as easily be obtained from a local CPA.
Have you read the Church Manual?
I have. Have you studied the instructions in the Bible about following the Holy Spirit? Do you regard the Church Manual as being equally authoritative?
Raj, how about showcasing conferences ‘that are working right’?
For example, are you aware of any conference that goes over the pastoral assessment of the needs of the congregation(s) they are assigned to, and them reviews the pastor’s sermon series for the coming quarter? I’ve asked, and I’ve not identified one yet.
As for preaching support, proper use of the crucial, “Amen?” seems to pretty much assure an “A” grade.
With 70% of the tithe going to cover non pastoral resources, congregations and pulpit calendars are reduced to slots to pencil in.
And when it comes to the pulpits, the conference seems to have little option but to rely on the speaker’s prayer before opening the bible when it comes to meeting true congregational needs.
Maybe I’m tainted by lack of experience, splitting my attendance between an institutional congregation and a 250+ congregation where I counted fewer than 100 attending today.
While you see the local church remaining as “a steady and faithful witness to the enduring power of faith, hope, and love,” I’m thinking more like a spiritual pacifier of a sort. I’m wondering as I write if that describes my attendance as well. Perhaps with the institutional congregation, though it seems less so with the ‘little’ ones.
There are exceptions, perhaps. If so, let’s report on them specifically.
Bill,
I don’t have researched information on which conferences, if any, review their pastors’ sermon series. We had a system of periodic pastoral evaluations by their congregations, followed up with professional development plans that each pastor developed and submitted to us. These were the basis for periodic conversations. Reviewing sermon plans was not one of the elements, however.
My description of the local congregation was a mix of the real and the ideal. Each congregation is unique, and each one exhibits, to one degree or the other, the various characteristics of a healthy congregation. Congregational health is not, in my opinion, always linked to the size of congregations. There are “little” churches that are vibrant and healthy. (My next Opinion piece on AT will be on small congregations!)
Raj,
I’m curious what metrics were used to measure pastoral performance and whether any of them looked at the growth and vitality of ministries in addition to the typical functions of “doing church?”
Brother Noel, perhaps my use of the word lame was an overstatement. While your answers to my questions are interesting, I can’t help but share my unease and lack of joy at the prospect of changes ahead in discarding the organization of the church that I am a part of. The paradigm shift that will be needed is monumental.
Adventist missiologist Jon Dybdahl: “If the church ceases to be missionary, it has not simply failed in its task, but has actually ceased being the church.”—Adventist Mission in the 21st Century (Hagerstown Md.: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 1999), pp. 17, 18.
The winds of change are blowing, separating the wheat from the chaff. Even identifying who is “wheat” and who is “chaff” can become a point of contention, depending on the group to which one belongs. Unfortunately, what we currently see and feel is only the beginning of the rift that is developing within the larger Church world. Unless a major revival occurs, this rift will only grow deeper and wider. It seems like there are three churches:
1. A Church that holds fast to the truth and faces the brunt of opposition because it refuses to bend.
2. A Church in the middle trying to “ride the fence” through accommodation or or compromise in order to avoid persecution and societal rejection (see Revelation 2:12-17).
3. A lukewarm, “Laodicean-like” Church (see Revelation 3:14-22) that has allowed compromise to run its full course, stripping it completely of the power of God and leaving…
I also should clarify. I do not advocate for a wholesale discarding of the church organization, rather a major downsizing of it to refocus our attention on following the Holy Spirit personally and locally and by that way motivating each of us to contribute as active parts of the larger body of Christ. Our biggest challenge in doing that is upending a multi-generational attitude about the church being authoritative instead of God being the undisputed authority, guide and source of power in the church. Instead of depending on the conference, union, division or GC for direction, we should first and foremost be seeking God because it is He who provides it to each of us along with the power to do whatever He asks.
Right now I’m working hard on finishing two book projects for commercial publication and discussions such as this are reminding me that my next book project needs to be about the ministry God has given me to do. You would be utterly amazed by the stories I have to share of what I have seen Him do.
We tend to not believe something is possible until we see it done and even then we don’t believe it is possible for us to do it until we see our neighbor doing it. In that same way, we don’t want to believe God’s promises about the Holy Spirit until we see Him working through the person sitting next to us.
Brother William, please let us know about the progress on your book. I’ll buy it and read it. Although we don’t always agree I want to thank you for your thoughtful responses and comments. I look for your comments because I can learn from them. One of my favorite quotes from Marcia Conner about learning:
“We define learning as the transformative process of taking in information that, when internalized and mixed with what we have experienced, changes what we know and builds on what we can do. It’s based on input, process, and reflection. It is what changes us.”
― Marcia Conner, The New Social Learning: A Guide to Transforming Organizations Through Social Media
Please, don’t hold your breath waiting for the book about my ministry experience because books are a far more challenging and time-consuming process than most people imagine. I had hoped to have the current book (popular fiction) on Amazon as an e-book six months ago but reality has intervened. I probably will be working on the sequel for several more months so I can’t even begin to predict when the book about my ministry experience might be released.
Dybdahl was right about when the church loses its’ essential focus on mission because that is the focus of the Holy Spirit. The slow growth rate and even decline of the church in North America and other places is clear evidence of the individual members of the church having lost a zeal for missions and the organization of the church itself failing to connect them with the source of power enabling them to become missionaries.
While we wish to be the first church you described, the vigor with which some are vocally opposing and distorting discussions about the Holy Spirit shows how some Adventists are holding fast to a perception of truth that is failing. That perception if rooted in pastor-dependent congregations where the church is authoritative and knowledge of facts believed to be correct about God are held supreme instead of humbling ourselves before God and being willing to serve others in the power He offers us in the Holy Spirit. That is how the church that thought it matched your first description became Laodicea instead. Only the Holy Spirit can transform us into the church God wants us to be.
(cont.)
Jesus out of the picture.
These are sobering times!
I posted this on the on-line Review as a comment to the editorial by Bill Knott about Marginalizing. I only post it here because I never know what they will refuse to post and they are not required to tell you according to their own policy.
“We can assume the author means some kind of discipline of those he, or the church, should administer in behalf of the SDA community. The fact is, the church has not disciplined on any viable or consistent level for several decades. How does Bill Knott think that all the sudden the church will now begin to do so? And if they did, as many have asked, “Just who is to be disciplined and what are the stated and given reasons to take such action?”
Apparently he suggests anyone who would attack leadership authority should be the target for discipline. Or, perhaps he means the attitude people take in their challenge that he considers so offensive. The simple fact is, the church is beyond any viable discipline since it has not been administered on any level in the past, and simply can not do so, either today, or in the future.
Like willful children who refuse the authority of their parents, and all the parents do is either, warn, and/or patronize the child without any dynamic action. Since they have done nothing dynamic in the past, they have no way of do so, either in the present or future. Both Eli and Samuel were guilty of this scenario. And we see the result, especially in the case of Eli who lost his sons, but probably his own…
salvation as well.
We see a great deal of “bickering” in the church about how to understand the bible and the basis of interpretation. There will be on consensus on this issue either. But we can know that God knows how to bring about a situation that will force those who pervert and corrupt scripture to eventually admit they are no longer going by the bible. In some cases, we see it already. And many imply the same idea, even though they will not admit it now. The Reformation forced Rome to eventually admit they had abandon the bible for a “spirit ethic” whereby the Holy Spirit leads the church over and above scripture. We see the seeds of this already in some areas of conflict over various views of doctrine and teaching. Such will eventually admit they no longer think the bible is a viable revelation of truth and is beyond understanding of just exactly what it means, and thus, the church must decide and the members must accept the church’s decision.
Bill Knott’s editorial is so non-definitive that it has no substancial meaning and thus, no one really knows what he means. Well, maybe he doesn’t either?
The congregation is the one indispensable unit of the church. The health and welfare of congregations is critical. But let’s face it. The attention is elsewhere, as Raj points out. That is what happens when organizations become bureaucratic. We have become that.
In the last 30 years, nearly every business, industry and institution has reorganized for greater efficiency and competitiveness, usually into a flatter organizational structure. Not us. There are so many efficiencies just waiting for us, but we ignore them in favor of fiefdoms. If we could be just as effective at a lower cost point, are we being good stewards of the money from the congregations?
I favor a congregational structure. I feel that it is more akin to the early church of Acts. And it would have less of a tendency to feel as if there is a “GC papacy” or “Adventist pope.” http://TinyUrl.com/GCpapacy
“Also, that there is nothing about the denomination that can and should keep a local congregation from pursuing its vision and fulfilling its mission. Nothing!”
How about:
• The flow of money out of the local church. I wonder how long Raj Attiken would have put up with a congregation that decided to spend a greater portion of its tithe locally?
• The reputation of the denomination that (in our case) makes it hard to sit with a group of other Christians without noticing their automatic pulling away when you admit who you are.
• The stubbornness against change and flexibility that causes thoughtful people to flee, and alienates our children.
• A theology that is increasingly obsolete, as more and more years pass and Jesus doesn’t return.
Not saying a congregation can’t push back a bit against some of these things. But “nothing”? Makes me think Mr. Attiken knows very little about congregations.
Sounds good. How about we follow HIS PLAN, teach our children, stop resisting the authority of the Church, be good Stewards of the offerings that belong to HIM, create a strong House, stop listening to children, stop worrying about the peer pressure of the world and do our jobs.
2 Peter 1:”20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”
Romans 13:”1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”
Matthew 15:”9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” (and again in Mark 7:7).
WOW, the above 2 comments totally miss the precious knowledge
Raj offers re:the beauty and strength of the local congregations. This is the “Genesis, Genius, and Power” of the Church. Mt 11:25 “At that time Jesus said, I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children”. Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?? Mt 18:2,& 3, “He called a little child and had him stand among them. And HE said: I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven”.
Think about it!!!! Must one become so learned that he shouts verbiage incessantly, one who will enter the kingdom of heaven?? Read Matthew 18:2 & 3 oer and oer.
Then humble yourself as in Matthew 18:
2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Throw away your worldly baggage.
Matthew 11:
24 But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
And no man knoweth the SON, but the FATHER. We would not have to shout if you would give up yourself and the world. But we Love you and will continue as any adult would with a child.
The local congregations know and live this. Read the verses again; then read 1 Timothy 2:
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
This is not…