When the disciples marveled at the architecture of the Temple, Jesus contrasted its ephemeral nature with the glory of His resurrected body, the eternal temple of God. He could make the same comparison with any of the imposing structures that serve as churches today.

I once got involved with a ministry to soldiers in Iraq. We packaged gifts and sent them to the field with personal notes and words of encouragement. The program was so successful that Gary Sinise of CSI New York fame threw a concert every July to help us raise funds. When the war began to wind down, the leader said she would find another reason to keep the program going. Why the need to continue? It had served its purpose admirably. She just felt the need to memorialize the ministry.

Programs can easily become monuments to their founders. Perhaps they met a very real need at one time though that need has ceased to exist. Some needs may not be large enough to organize into a program or they may not be a priority for leadership. Some people are not joiners and will not voluntarily participate in a church program. Some people are shy about sharing their needs. Nonetheless, once a program has become part of the church schedule, it takes on a life of its own. Mere activity gives the impression of progress. Rarely does anyone stop to ask whether a program is actually achieving its purpose.

There should be an avenue of service for every believer, but church programs built around specific agendas seldom provide a ministry role for everyone. What is to be done for the person whom God has called to some other role or for whom the need doesn’t fit the agenda? A better approach, in many cases, would be to form a ministry task force. The job of the task force would be to identify individual needs and allocate the resources to meet them.   Rather than formalize a response with a one size fits all program, the ministry task force would be able to tailor its response to each individual need. Once the need gets met, it could move on rather than institutionalize the program.

This was the approach the Apostle Paul took. Note how many different partners he had depending on the ministry: 

The Apostle Paul’s Ministry Partners

Paul had some thirty seven different ministry partners. Some of these partners worked alongside him, others supported him, and still others served jail time with him, but they all united with him to reach those who had never heard the gospel. Each partner or combination of partners performed different roles depending on the nature of the ministry. The fact that Paul had so many partners indicates that his ministry was constantly changing with the needs on the ground. No church program or formal agenda handcuffed him.

The early church made a practice of caring for needs we entrust to the government and social welfare agencies today.  Providing meals for widows was one such ministry. The Apostles chose a committee of seven men to ensure that both the Hebraic widows and the Greek-speaking widows in Jerusalem got their fair share of food. Paul took up a collection from the Asian churches to meet the needs of the suffering saints in Jerusalem, and believers of the church at Jerusalem sold their possessions to provide for the needs of the less fortunate among them.

Due to the affluence of our American society, needs may not be so apparent as they were even fifty years ago, but individuals still experience misfortune, families still suffer loss, and the elderly still struggle with loneliness and disability. Just because the modern church has gotten out of the practice of meeting practical needs does not mean there are no needs.  The church may not be able to manage all of these needs but they can encourage their members to root out the needs and minister to one another in practical ways. The Internet allows people to make their needs known from the comfort of their own homes even if they cannot get to church. Given the sophistication of modern communications, there is no excuse for overlooking the needs of the church family.

* Paul's Ministry Partners:

Aquilla, Luke, Lucius, Tychicus, Apphia, Andonichus, Marcus, Urbane, Aristarchus, Archippus, Nymphus, Onesiphorus, Carpus, Barnabus
Phebe, Philemon, Epaphras, Demus, Priscilla, Secundus, Erastus, Epaphroditus, Silas, Sopater, Jason, Gaius, Tertius, Timothy, Justus, Junia, Titus, Trophimus, Tyrannus

The base of operations is the place where men, women and materiel are deployed in preparation for battle. Troops don’t dig in and wait for the enemy to come to the base. Why would the enemy want to attack the stronghold where there is no tactical advantage? No, troops bring the battle to the enemy. The base is for provisioning, regrouping and redeploying. This is the proper mission of the church building. It should be a place where we prepare for the battle. The enemy isn’t going to come to us. We have to go to him.

If we are going to use the church building as a base of operations, we need to rethink the way we do church. The church building with its auditorium and classrooms functions as a modern community center more than it does a first century style church, except that community centers are buzzing with activity six days a week.  It is designed for didactic activities like preaching, teaching and worship, activities that deluge newcomers with new information. Combine that with the fact that visitors are surrounded on all sides by a whole lot of strangers and a subculture they don’t understand, and church can be a very forbidding place! It is easy for newcomers to get lost in the crowd since there is no easy way to distinguish them from regular churchgoers.  For this reason, the church doesn’t readily assimilate outsiders. So many never return for a second time.

Since most people come to Christ outside the church, perhaps we should think about using venues other than the church for outreach. Community centers, civic centers, club houses, restaurants, retirement homes, public auditoriums, believers’ homes, public parks, hotel conference rooms, movie theaters, camps and recreation centers are some possibilities. Pick the type of venue with which your target audience is most familiar.

Church Mission Statement

Draft a mission statement for your church that describes how you will build the Kingdom of God in your corner of the world. Include specific people groups, objectives and methods. Start with ‘the least of these’ in your community. Where is the need for the Good News the greatest? Develop ministries that match the objectives and meet folks at their point of need. Get to know their world. Minister incarnationally—mingle with them in their familiar surroundings before expecting them to come to church. Remember, Jesus equated the church with His body, not the Temple building, so as part of His Body, you are the church wherever you go.

Consider targeting ministry to some of the following groups:

1.      The unemployed

2.      Broken families

3.      Troubled teens

4.      Victims of abuse

5.      Convicts and ex-convicts

6.      The elderly

7.      The disabled

8.      The destitute

9.      The lonely

10.      The discouraged

11.      Alienated Christians

12.      The homeless

13.      Fill in the blank

Read the local paper with a highlighter, marking articles that point out needs in your community. Then determine where you might find these people. Try social welfare agencies, the county jail, juvenile detention centers, employment groups, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, civic centers, etc. Form relationships with the police department, courts, department of child and family services, and other social service groups that are at the forefront of the fight for family values, peace and justice. Be prepared to offer your services in a way that supports their mission and provides opportunities for sharing the love of Christ. Then you can say in all sincerity that you have put feet to Christ's command to 'go ye into all the world.'

My son was so traumatized by this incident that he became violent when he reached his teens. He began doing drugs and abusing alcohol. He became promiscuous. He was so dangerous that we had to send him to a very expensive boarding school. I used up my life savings and went deep in debt to pay for this school and for therapy.

My wife blamed my son’s problems on me and drove me out of our home. She began an affair with her boss and took what little I had left.

When I realized I could no longer handle all the stress by myself and that neither the church nor my family would help, I approached TEAM. They denied the entire affair. Then I was able to contact some of the other victims on the Internet and TEAM leaders began to change their story. Still, they refused to help me pay off any of my enormous bills, saying they were not at fault. But the fact is that they subsequently began to screen for pedophiles as part of their recruitment process, a tacit admission that they never should have allowed this man on the field.

TEAM’s negligence cost me my life savings, put me deep in debt and resulted in the loss of my family. I haven’t seen either of my children in over a decade. All I asked from TEAM was a token payment of $10,000, a mere pittance compared to what they cost me. Here is their response:

“Hi Craig, 

Here at TEAM we have carefully considered and discussed the matter of your request that we make a payment to you as a means to bring to a closure your ongoing dissent with TEAM because of the wrongful actions of Phil Fondaw.  Along with you, we truly abhor the evil that was done by Phil in Japan and grieve for those children …who were abused by him—including your son.  At the end of our deliberations, however, we have decided to not make a payment to you.  We really believe that TEAM is not the party that wronged you and the other victims of Phil, rather it is Phil himself whom you need to address.  

Sincerely,

Elmer Lorenz 

TEAM Director of Operations”

This same man told me that to make a payment to any of the victims would be a tacit admission of guilt.

The reason I am writing you is to ask for you help in encouraging the leaders of TEAM to fulfill their Christian duties. At the very least, they should take to heart the biblical injunction to bear one another’s burdens. After all, if they don’t qualify as a burden bearer then who does?

I have enclosed a letter which I would like you to read and sign and then send on to the designated recipients, if you so choose. Then if you don’t mind, please let me know how you responded my emailing me at craig@casualchristian.net. In so doing you will help bring this matter to resolution in a way that glorifies God.

Thank you and God bless.

Sincerely,

Craig Olson

Enc. Letter to TEAM

Longing for a Church Home

Afterwards, I visited a number of other churches in this same town hoping to find a friendlier environment. This town is a very well-to-do community with a long Christian tradition. The founder of the local Christian college helped usher slaves to freedom via the underground railway during the Civil War. Billy Graham, the renowned evangelist, graduated from this school. The town is home to numerous Christian organizations. Collegeprowler.com, a college rating service, describes the town this way:

“The city… has a couple factors that are visibly reflected by its inhabitants:
1) [The] County is one of the richest counties in the nation, and
2) [The city] has one of the highest percentages of churches per capita in the world. As such, neighborhoods surrounding the school are mostly comprised of wealthy, white, church-going families …This creates a wonderful relationship between the local community and the College, but also makes it seem like the students are encapsulated in somewhat of a bubble, unable to see the real world.

Even so, the city itself has a cozy small town feel, with delightful parks and coffee shops within walking distance. The surrounding cities … are home to a much more culturally enriching scene.”

I found it so difficult to find a friendly church in this Evangelical Mecca that I began rating the welcome I received from various churches and sending it to the pastors. I either received no response or a defensive reply saying I hadn’t given them a chance to get to know me. Of course, a simple greeting at the door would have been the first step in such a process! Anyway, it is usually up to established members to welcome newcomers, not vice versa.

What Caring Community?

The early church warmly embraced anyone who was willing to risk life and limb to join their fellowship. No one escaped their notice. If they left, they were immediatley missed and no doubt someone followed up to see what had happened to them. They would certainly not be ignored if they wandered into one of the furtive little gatherings. The early church desperately needed the support of every member to survive in a hostile environment. It was hang together or hang alone for them.

Today it is eay to slip into a worship service unobserved or disappear right off the radar screen without anyone taking notice. Small groups try to bring a degree of intimacy to the fellowship, but seldom even scratch the surface of members' lives or provide the level of support needed in times of crisis. The reason? The modern church has defined Christian ministry almost entirely in terms of religious education. Church facilities resemble nothing more than college campuses with their lecture hall, classrooms, gymnasium and cafeterias. Small groups, Sunday School classes, and worship services all provide a medium for doing Bible study. But where are these Bible lessons put into practice by the Christian community?  Paul addressed most of his letters to the churches, not just the leadership,  because they practiced the faith corporately. These letters were read publicly to the entire membership during church gatherings.

The best example of this tendency of the modern church to emphasize theory over practice is the failure to implement the one another's of the Bible. Bear one another's burdens, love one another, honor one another, welcome one another with a holy kiss, accept one another, live in harmony with one another, be devoted to one another, forgive one another, bear with one another, admonish one another, encourage one another, etc. These are all things done together in close community, something  most churches do not provide.

You see, the modern church is not a 'one another' kind of institution. It is all about me and my personal reltionship with Jesus Christ. It is about my spiritual growth. It is about my stewardship, my witness, my faithfulness. And while these things are important, they need to be tied into the life of the body of Christ by the one anothers.

My son was abused by a TEAM missionary. I have sought relief from some of the terrible emotional and financial burdens this incident placed on me and my family. The mission still denies any responsibility so I am stuck with hundreds of thousands of dollars in rehabilitation, boarding school, and lost wages due to an emotional breakdown from the stress. My wife blamed me for my son's problems and drove me out of my home so she could carry on an affair with her boss. She took everything she could get her hands on in the process.

I appealed to pastors, friends, family, TEAM supporters and many others to apply some pressure on TEAM to help out with the expenses they created. Not a single  person was willing to lift a finger. Many people expressed sympathy or offered prayers but delined to confront TEAM leaders. Because the modern church  has so individualized the faith experience, people expect others to handle their own problems. They never see the need for concerted action on another's behalf.

Recently I met a brother who has been staying at a mission because he is unemployed and cannot afford rent. He spoke in glowing terms of his church so I asked him if he had approached the leadership for help. He had not even considered the possibility, but his lack of expectations did not diminish his enthusiasm one iota. When I gave him some money to help tide him over until he found suitable housing, he didn't know what to say. This kind of gesture should be commonplace among Christians. I also sent some money to one of the other victims of the same pedophile who molested my son. His immediate response was, "What do you want from me?" He was an independent businessman who was suffering from the recession and totally tapped out. Unfortunately, this response to a spontaneous gift is not uncommon. What a difference from the early church which shared sacrificially with hurting members and other churches that experienced hardship.

1. Build a relationship. We live in such an impersonal culture nowadays. People are pestered by telemarketers, pollsters, merchants, and anyone with a product or service to sell. We all feel like someone wants a piece of us. We don’t even make the effort to get to know our own neighbors anymore. So when a total stranger comes along and drops a two-minute spiel on us in the hopes of making a convert, we feel cheap and used. Take the time to win folks’ confidence and show they mean more than just a notch on a Bible.

Jesus had a knack for making people feel special. He brought a deep-seated sense of worth to women, the disabled, Samaritans and tax collectors, groups that were scorned by His culture. He touched the untouchables, fraternized with outcasts, and held up the despised as examples of righteousness. He included women in His inner circle though they were denied a seat at table with guests and access to the inner courts of the Temple.

2. Make people feel special. The American culture prizes celebrity. Yet the vast majority of us live in anonymity. Therefore many people feel profoundly insignificant. You can show people how highly God prizes them by honoring them yourself. Using the person’s name often when you address him or her is a very simple and effective way to show respect. Maybe you think this sounds silly, but you would be surprised how seldom you call someone else by name in the course of a conversation. You create a subtle pull on others, gradually drawing them in by simply addressing them by name instead of just aiming comments at them. You will begin to build a deeper rapport with them. People rarely draw near to those who never call them by name. The best salesmen use their customer’s name frequently in the course of a conversation without seeming the least bit contrived. Indeed the use of a person’s name should be genuine and sincere, a sign of true respect.

Show others that you value them by honoring their opinions, values, skills and talents, and the contributions they make. Commemorate events that are special to them. There is no better way to show your esteem for someone than to ask for his or her advice. Show him that he is a person of worth in your eyes and it will be easier to model God’s love for him.

3. Learn people’s culture. That might be something as complex and time consuming as learning their language, if you are a missionary in a foreign culture.  Or it might be something as simple as getting to know their neighborhood, school, business, or family. You have to speak their language, know their concerns, and feel their pain. Remember how effectively Bill Clinton established rapport by identifying with people’s pain? You want to be sincere, though.

4.  Touch people where they hurt. Perhaps it is a single mom who could use help babysitting or maintaining her car, a family who is stressed out by a rebellious teenager, or a husband or wife who is dealing with an unfaithful spouse.  Maybe it’s a young person who is struggling with some important life issue and needs input from another who has been there and done that. No matter the situation, you can win people’s confidence by showing a genuine interest in their tangible needs and doing whatever is in your power to help.

5. Become part of another’s world. God sent His Son, Jesus Christ, as an infant. He inhabited a womb just like ours. He was born in humble circumstances. He experienced joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain like us. So He understood the people to whom he ministered. He was one of them. We need to live among the people whom we hope to win to Christ. We cannot drive up to a ghetto in a Rolls Royce and expect to have any impact. So if we want to reach those who are most receptive to the gospel—‘the least of these,’ we may have to forfeit some of the trappings of our considerable wealth.

 6. Show a lively interest in others. Our culture is based on rugged individualism, the ability to achieve great things by determination and hard work. That is one of the great strengths of America, but it has some major drawbacks. As folks strive to realize their own dreams, they can become very focused on themselves and lose interest in others.  There are lots of talkers and few listeners. You have no doubt heard the old adage that God gave us two ears and only one mouth because He wants us to spend twice as much time listening as talking. Display a little interest in other’s affairs and you will win lots of friends who will not just bend your ear but seek your advice when times get tough. Dale Carnegie once said, “You can make more friends in two months by becoming really interested in other people than you can in two years by trying to get other people interested in you.”

7. Use the anonymity of the Web. If you are a church webmaster, be mindful of the fact that the Internet offers a level of anonymity that encourages users to open up and share things they might not reveal in a face-to-face encounter. That is why people hook up online and sexual predators ply their trade in cyberspace. On the positive side, people sometimes reveal hopes and dreams, hurts and disappointments that otherwise could not be pried out of them. So it’s a great place to probe for felt needs that might open a doorway to deeper spiritual needs.

There are some excellent evangelism guides produced by a few organizations that develop materials for the web.  One organization is called Web Evangelism, another is the Internet Evangelism Coalition and the third is TruthMedia Internet Group. Web Evangelism provides training for online evangelists including rationale, methods, and resources. The Internet Evangelism Coalition sponsors an Internet Evangelism Day in April every year for the purpose of encouraging churches to make their websites appeal to non-Christians. They provide tips on website construction and evangelism training.  TruthMedia has a number of short training videos for doing evangelism online. Whether you are considering doing evangelism online or personal evangelism face to face, these are some great resources to help you on your way.

Many secular institutions provide avenues for their employees to openly express disagreements in a constructive way. For example, my wife's company does an anonymous online survey every year that gives employees a chance to offer constructive criticism of their superiors. There is still one institution, however,  that discourages dissent. That institution is the church. Most church leaders would be horrified at the prospect of an anonymous review. They would view it as insubordination. You won't find an op-ed page in the church newsletter.

I have told a number of church leaders about my disappointments with the church. One accused me of 'church bashing.'  When I told another that the church was due for revival, he said he didn't like the word, 'revival.' His comment made no sense to me. After all, the word  just means to 'revitalize' or bring back to life. And to argue that the spiritual condition of the church is just fine when all of the same problems that plague society, like divorce and addiction to pornography, are just as prevalent in the church, is a tough sell.  Then it occurred to me. To say the church needs revival would mean that he and his seminary brethren hadn't been doing their job!  Although I am sure he wouldn't admit it, he considered the church a work of his hands rather than a product of the Holy Spirit.

I have never belonged to a church that had a mechanism for providing feedback to leadership. So leaders have no idea whether their ministries are achieving their objectives. Without regular feedback, what would stop errant leadership from continuing to stray? But voicing a difference of opinion with church leadership is generally frowned upon.

Where does this 'brook no dissent' mentality come from? I believe it comes from the mistaken notion that leadership is ordained by God and their decisions are gospel. So anyone who disagrees is challenging the will of God. That would be a legitimate viewpoint if human beings were guided by wholly altruistic motives. But the fact  is that  we all have hidden agendas and promote our own self interests. Take for instance the leadership of the mission that covered up the molestation of my son. When I asked for help in bearing the enormous costs of rehabilitation and boarding school, they flat refused saying what happened was not their fault. In the same letter, they said they truly mourned for the victims. How they could mourn for the victims and refuse to help any of them at the same time strains credulity. Even if they bore no fault, nothing  kept them from helping the victims bear their very heavy burdens as scripture commands. That voice they heard telling them 'no' was probably not the voice of God, but their own instinct for self preservation speaking. That is why we need to hear different viewpoints. Proverbs 15:21 says, "Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed." Leaders must be willing to hear all sides of an issue.

Unike secular organizations, there are no licensing bodies or regulatory agencies that provide oversight for the church. Although I looked far and wide for an organization that could bring some pressure to bear on the leadership of the mission, I could only find one group. All they did was  write standards for Christian organizations regarding sexual abuse. They had no enforcement authority at all and they didn't even answer my inquiry.  This lack of accountability has enabled the mission to ignore the needs of those whom they have harmed.

There hasn't been a nationwide revival in the United States since before the Civil War. By the time the Third Great Awakening had run its course, it had spread from coast to coast producing over 50,000 converts per week and a total of over one million new believers. Nationwide, the population of the churches had been increased by ten percent. There was a return to public morality as taverns were closed and businessmen paid off their debts. Charities and volunteers multiplied as faith found expression in humanitarian work.

Why don't we see this kind of outpouring of the Holy Spirit today? It is because church leaders have replaced reliance on the Holy Spirit with human methods such as  church growth and management techniques. The church has produced a type of synthetic growth characterized by a church full opportunists who seek the blessings of church membership but are not prepared to sacrifice in service to Christ. However,  because leaders will hear no critique of the way they do things, the church just keeps drifting farther and farther off course.

If we ever want to see God pour out his Holy Spirit upon the church in revival, our leaders need to be receptive to constructive criticism, turn from their reliance on man-made methods, and depend on the Holy Spirit build His church.

So say Frank Viola and George Barna in their book, Pagan Christianity. The premise of their book is that many of today’s worship forms come not from apostolic practices, but date back only as far the 4th century AD. It was at that time that Christianity received the official imprimatur of the Roman Emperor Theodosius. Christian churches moved from the intimacy of private homes into large, impersonal assembly halls patterned after the Roman gathering places called basilicas. These arenas had a lecture hall resembling the modern sanctuary.  As the new ecclesiastical class sought to establish their religious bona fides, ministry became more didactic and worship became less participatory. The outcome, according to these authors, has been an artificial spiritual hierarchy and passive laity that have robbed the modern church of its authority and vitality.

Today pastors do not take the time to develop the kind of close personal relationships that enabled early church leaders to offer personal words of encouragement and correction to believers because they are absorbed in the task of management.  Rather than gear ministries to needs on the ground, they design them to promote numerical growth and increase participation in programs. The result has been that four in ten Christians avoid church and over ninety percent of visitors feel so unwelcome that they never return for a second visit.

Such recent developments as the breakdown of Christian community, the rise of populist preachers and mega-churches, the employment of super‑sized church staffs, and the alienation of both believers and non-believers from the institutional church are at least in part the result of the abandonment of apostolic worship forms. The church as a professional organization has become uprooted from its heritage and lost its relevance to a needy world.

The Bible has become “more like a guideline,” to quote the infamous pirate Barbossa of Pirates of the Caribbean. Believers pick and choose what parts to obey. According to George Barna in a study on the demise of the biblical mindset, “an estimated sixteen million evangelical Christians …also embrace an additional set of beliefs …to their profession of faith in Christ …” Consequently, the church has lost its Christian distinctives just like the children of Israel failed to “come out and be separate” from the surrounding nations.

Many people have learned to be content with the state of the modern church simply because it is all they know. Yet average giving is four percent of income. Ninety five percent of Christians have never led anyone to the Lord. Sixty three percent of pastors have not led anyone to the Lord in the past two years. Forty nine percent of pastors spend no time ministering outside the church during the week. Christians indulge just as much in entertainment as anyone else. They spend as much, owe as much, and give as little as anyone else. They have the same divorce rates, the same obsession with pornography, and the same values as the rest of society. They have no idea what normative behavior for the church is from a historical perspective.

There are many reasons for the decline of the church in this land. Some are cultural such as the tendency to adopt the norms and values of the surrounding society. These include moral relativism, commitment to a political philosophy that denies God, a perspective of history that trivializes the roles of men and women of faith, a capitalistic vision of the church that equates size and prosperity with success, a mistaken notion of the relationship between faith and public policy that rules out Christian activism, and a humanistic and pseudo scientific view of origins. A creeping careerism has taken the role of ministry out of the hands of regular believers and placed it into the hands of formally trained clergy who supposedly have the specialized skills necessary to carry out the mission of the church.

Formal religious education has become a requirement for more and more ministry roles as seminaries and Bible schools pump out more graduates in need of jobs. Consequently, ministry has become more academic and less practical—more compartmentalized and inflexible. Future pastors are taught management theory as though the church were subject to the same principles as any man made organization. Churches have come to resemble nothing more than educational establishments with lecture halls, classrooms and gymnasiums. Ministry has been packaged into programs geared towards affinity or age groups, leaving those with needs not shared unattended.

To the many people who have become disillusioned with the church, its practitioners say, “We too have been disappointed at one time or another because the church is filled with imperfect people. If you find the perfect church, don’t join it because you will spoil it.” They treat every failure of the church as an anomaly, but the failures are the result of an unbiblical view of the church. Imagine if Martin Luther had condoned the apostasy of the Catholic church of his day. There would have been no Reformation. 

The churches in Asia Minor, on the other hand, were a collection of believers who lived in close proximity to one another and depended upon each other to nurture and sustain their common faith. Church for them was the organizing element for life in vital community.

Today the measure of commitment is participation in programs rather than the quality of relationships and depth of devotion to Christ. People transition easily between churches to find one that suits them. They barely leave a ripple when they go. They don’t make much of a splash when they join, either. It would be difficult to characterize these churches as Paul described the churches of his day because their members are such an amorphous bunch, their bonds are so tenuous and their relationships are so superficial.

Ministry in the modern church is almost entirely about acquiring Bible knowledge, not about building fellowship. Preachers expound Scripture in the weekly worship service. Sunday school classes teach Bible lessons. Evangelism is all about spreading the gospel. Teachers and preachers offer answers to life’s questions. Their teachings apply almost exclusively to individual experience since there is no real Christian community in the apostolic sense. Putting teaching into practice is an entirely individual matter. The church provides few resources once the believer has left the premises Sunday morning after the worship service.

Because the church in America has so miserably failed at being the Body of Christ, people cannot see the importance of belonging to a church, as Barna notes in his study on American’s commitment, “While nearly half of the adult population attends religious services during a typical week, people’s conceptual bond to the local church remains tenuous. Fewer than one out of every five adults firmly believes that a congregational church is a critical element in their spiritual growth and just as few strongly contend that participation in some type of community of faith is required for them to achieve their full potential.”

According to a study reported by the Internet Evangelism Coalition, ninety–two percent of church visitors who leave after less than six weeks do so because they do not feel welcome. The churches in the town where I live are notorious for their lack of welcome, and this town has been called an “Evangelical Mecca” for its overabundance of churches and Christian institutions.

It is interesting to note that no apostle ever chastised a church for not welcoming new members. The closest word to “welcome” in the early church was the word “greet.” Today we have “greeters” who meet people at the front door and shake their hands. In the language of the early church, “greet” meant to “embrace” or “kiss.” It entailed a level of affection and familiarity far surpassing the notion of a mere handshake. Paul frequently admonished believers to greet one another “with a holy kiss,” but never felt it necessary to urge them to welcome new members into their midst. It would certainly have been impossible for a total stranger to join one of the intimate little church gatherings without anyone taking notice!

I have yet to attend a church where the members are so fond of one another that they express their affection openly. How would Paul describe your church? Are relationships among your members deep and rich, filled with compassion, caring, and self-sacrifice like the Thessalonians and Colossians? How much do you know about the personal challenges and triumphs of your fellow believers? Do you trust your Christian family enough to share your personal struggles with them? It was the believers’ love for one another that drew others into their midst in the first century. Do you know anyone in your church that came to Christ because they were drawn by the members’ love for one another? On the other hand, how  many people do you know who won't darken the door of a church because of the hypocrisy of Christians?

 From The Casual Christian pp. 124-125

“Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed” (Prv 15:22).

Second, the leader will eventually build a little world suited primarily or even entirely to his own needs. Like the pastor who used his administrative assistant as a gatekeeper, he will take liberties with others, employing them to his own ends.

Third, as the leader becomes more isolated, he will lose touch with the needs and aspirations of those to whom he ministers, like that same pastor who devoted himself exclusively to preaching and sermon preparation in his suite of offices. The church will become cold and distant and visitors will not feel welcome.

Fourth, the perceptions of the leadership will become distorted, leading them to make ministry decisions based on a false reality rather than an accurate assessment of facts on the ground, like the leaders who took a position against the associate pastor and the parents who supported him.

Fifth, unless accountability is enforced at some point, the members may rebel by defecting in large numbers or forcing the ouster of the leadership. Following the incident involving the departure of the associate pastor there was a large exodus from this church.

Transparentchurch.org has some very good recommendations on ways to avoid concentrating too much power in too few hands. The writers suggest, “No one person should be the final authority on someone’s dismissal in a church.  The reason is simple. If the church hired them …the church should dismiss them, too.  All staff and employee dismissals, even voluntary resignations, should be brought before, discussed, and voted on by the congregation to ensure transparency and integrity in the process.”⁴ Unfortunately, this is often not the case, as was evident in the firing of the associate pastor. 

Church members have a natural tendency to build a little bubble around their pastors. They put them up on a pedestal. I recently met for mediation with two leaders from the mission of the man who molested my son.  I mentioned the fact that I once met with their superintendent in Japan. One of the men then launched into a glowing tribute to this man who could walk into a room and command everyone’s attention because of his impressive stature. This was the very same man who was responsible for the supervision of the missionary who molested my son. This tendency to idolize leadership interferes with the free flow of information, especially information that is not favorable to the leaders. Consequently, pastors often have a skewed perception of the spiritual condition of their flock.

One way religious leaders can build rapport with church members and open themselves up for honest dialogue is to shed the spiritual veneer that many of them have so assiduously cultivated. The pious pontifications of a Sunday sermon and reluctance to confess sins openly only serve to wrap religious leaders in an impervious mantle of spiritual superiority. It discourages people from sharing their own failures and shortcomings and insulates their leader from honest and open criticism.        

 From The Casual Christian pp. 69-70

In reality, what the associate pastor had was not an anger management problem but an audacity problem—he dared to stand up to the authorities when he believed they were wrong. The result was that many people left the church and the associate pastor had to find a senior pastorate at another church because the well had been so poisoned.

That same senior pastor has written a number of Bible commentaries and devotionals and sat on the translation committee for the New English Standard version of the Bible. He is well known in Christian circles and highly regarded in the church. Because he was such a hot ticket, he was able to rule his staff with an iron hand and exercised tight control over the board of elders. He was a self-styled “preaching pastor” and spent most of the week in his suite of offices on the top floor of the church preparing his sermons. He did not fraternize much with people at church. His job was to explore the great riches of the Bible and extract the nuggets that others could not find. He did a terrific job of exposition in a historical context, but he never brought the truth out of the first century and applied it to everyday challenges.

His church was filled with a sort of spiritual intelligentsia—Bible teachers from a well-known Christian liberal arts college next door and leaders of the many Christian organizations around town. I suspect there are more published authors per capita in that church than almost any other church in America, especially since two different Christian publishing houses were represented among the membership. They have plenty of Bible knowledge, but the church hasn't seen significant growth for years.

The same church had a very autocratic elder board. They never allowed the congregation to have input into pastoral searches. On one occasion, I suggested that the chairman of the board consider polling the congregation on what priorities they have for their next pastor. He honestly had never even considered the idea but said he would give it a try. Needless to say, it never happened.

It was common practice at annual meetings to urge members to approve a measure that had the unanimous support of the board. Votes were done by a show of hands, so no one ever wanted to identify himself or herself as a member of the opposition. I considered this very intimidating and said so to the leadership. I suggested voting anonymously by ballot so people would feel free to express their opinions without any coercion. This idea was never implemented, either.

When the pastor retired, I expressed my concerns in a letter to his successor, “A word of advice. Open your heart to the people. Do not hole up in that corner suite of offices and isolate yourself from the members. Get rid of the gatekeeper at the foot of the stairs to the office suite and put a waiting room for visitors upstairs in the room that holds the massive conference table. Don’t use your secretary to screen calls and emails. Send a message that folks are welcome to meet with you. Keep ballots secret at meetings. No raised hands or voice votes.  Then folks won’t feel intimidated if they don’t go along with leadership. There has never been a voice vote that did not go the elders’ way. Stay in touch, stay in tune, and stay accountable!”

Paul was entrusted with a vision of heaven so glorious that God gave him a thorn in the flesh to keep him humble.  Yet he never threw his weight around. He was contrite even when he found it necessary to chastise the Corinthian church for their rebellion. It pained him to think that his harsh words might wound some of the believers. He said, “For out of great distress and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears, not to make you sad, but to let you know the love that I have especially for you” (2 Cor 2:4). This is the attitude of a man for whom love of God’s people surpassed his pride in his ability to exposit the scriptures. Oh that more pastors had such a deep love for their flock and such genuine humility!

From The Casual Christian pp. 67-68