|
There is a healthy relationship with Jesus without a
relationship to the church.
(In
response to Tim Stafford, senior writer for Christianity Today's article
"The Church—Why Bother?}
by john o'keefe
I
have to admit, this is somewhat new for me;
not the disagreeing part, but the part where I
actually voice the concerns i have about a
particular article and author that i disagree
with strongly. but I think what Tim Stafford
has shared (in his Christian
Today article) is so wrong, so misguided,
so hurtful, so not scriptural and so not Christian
that I felt a strong need to stand firm on
scripture and call him on his views.
now, some may see this as "arguing"
with a brother, or "causing" dissention
in the church, or even as "not very
postmodern", but I think this article and
the ideas that flow from it are so poorly
based, so poorly grounded, and can be so
misused that I am very willing to be labeled
"whatever" in the eyes of time and
those who agree with him. heck, I am
willing to be racked over the coals because I
just think Tim's kind of thinking causes more
problems then it solves. Now, what I am
going to do is point out what I believe are
flaws in Tim's argument, and then share with
you the way I believe Scripture speaks.
The
Faulty Premise of Stafford
Let
me start with his premise that "for you
to be saved, you must attend a
church." Stafford
implies (in several
places) that salvation is based on going to
church. Now
if that is the case it it stands to reason that it must be the "right church" and
I wonder, which
one would that be? Could it be that Stafford
found the perfect church and
that we all now should attend the one he
suggests? After all, if salvation is delivered,
or found, in or through the church then what
does it matter what my relationship with
Christ is? All i need do is go to church
on a weekly bases and sit there, and I will be
saved. the idea that
salvation is tied to the church is both nonbibical and controlling. to even
suggest that it is the case shows a weak theological stance and a poor
understanding of salvation by faith -
Stafford
uses the
term "Gnostic" to describe those who
have no relationship with his expression of church, but I wonder if he knows
what that word means? It seems to me that someone once said that we would
be worshiping God in spirit and truth, now who
could that someone be? Jesus
Christ! Is Stafford
telling me that Jesus
got it wrong? that we need to abide by
the worship styles of the old, and not follow
the teachings of Christ? In John 4:23-24 (NIV)
Jesus says, "Yet
a time is coming and has now come when the
true worshipers will worship the Father in
spirit and truth, for they are the kind of
worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit,
and his worshipers must worship in spirit and
in truth.” In no place in
Scripture is the church viewed as a
"literal" body of Christ, but is explained
as a "figurative" body meaning those
gather together. in fact, in more places
the church viewed as a community of people who
gather in homes. the church is seen as a
"household." and if the church
today was a "house" a place of safety,
then I think more people would be in church
today. The idea that one
"must" be in church for salvation is
so not scriptural and so not a teaching of the
church that Stafford
is too far off base.
What Stafford
seems to forget is what is plainly
stated in Acts 4:12 "Salvation
is found in no one else, for there is no other
name under heaven given to men by which we
must be saved.” Or what is said
in Romans 1:16, "I
am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is
the power of God for the salvation of everyone
who believes: first for the Jew, then for the
Gentile." Stafford
also
misquotes Cyprian's (a "Bishop and Martyr"
who died in 258 AD) call to "be in
church." Cyprian's call was to be
in "Mass" and that any disconnection
to that Mass is seen as being "outside
salvation."
He
Missed The Boat
I
find if funny that he brings out the "para-church" groups as
part of the problem (the funny part is that he makes his living from para-church
groups paying for ad space on the CT site) - but history shows that para-church groups
formed and grew
because the church failed to do it's "job" - it failed to share the
faith, so para-church groups formed to do it for them, it failed to reach the poor, so
the para-church groups did it for them - it failed to feed the hungry, cloth the
naked and care for the sick, so the para-church groups did it for them. By the
end of ww2, American "Christians" who attended church were too busy
playing Christian and writing checks to truly put their faith into action.
They found that it was easier to base the church on the politics of the day,
then the teachings of Christ.
What
Stafford seems to forget is that of the 23 million he
quotes as "not being in church" yet claiming to be
Christian is that
most of that number come from denominations that over the past 20 years have
lost over 50% of their people. most are not from "seeker" church
as he likes to think, but rather from what I call "old-line"
denominations, Methodist (all kinds) Baptist (all 250 denominations of them) Presbyterians (all) and other "smaller"
denominations. Denominations that have
spent more time worried about their
"power base" then in teaching people
to live a Christian life. Denominations
more concerned with collecting their fees,
then in helping make disciples of people and
teach them to live about the human standards
they set for themselves.
Fallen
is Not an Excuse
Stafford
writes: "In February 2003,
Christianity Today
featured Bono, lead singer for the rock group U2, and his campaign for the
church to become more involved in the fight against AIDS. Bono emerged as a star
example of the unchurched Christian." funny, that a call to help
those suffering with aids is seen as "strange" to a man who goes to
church - yet the call comes from a man who is deeper in faith then those filling
the churches. The idea that means as Christians we are to "do"
our faith seems to be foreign to Stafford.
His idea seems to be "just be in church,
and all will be fine." i wonder how
much of that is based on the lose of
collections and how much is truly concerned
with teaching the people to love, not gossip
and not backbite those sitting next to
them. It's funny that he is critical of bono going to a
Roman Catholic church when the theology he seems to be expressing is "salvation
can not happen apart from the church" is very Roman Catholic. Stafford
writes, "I don't want to be hard on Bono and
other unchurched Christians. Churches are not always nice places. Some of the
church fathers used "No salvation outside the church" to stifle
dissent and maintain a monopoly on power. Even today a demand for church
commitment can be the basis for abusing people, using fear and conformity to
rule." He also expresses the idea that if you are
treated bad in a church it makes you closer to
God. And that caused me great concern,
because he quotes scripture to back that up (2
Corinthians 1 & 4). But,
after reading it, i was given peace in my spirit
when i realized he misquoted the scripture and
that Paul is speaking on the way the world
treats us, and not the way the church treats
us. All that did for me was make is certain
in my mind that Stafford
confuse the world with
the church. The idea that those in the
church should treat me as those outside the
church is misguided and harmful.
Allowing people to abuse members of the church
and call into question their theology for
saying that it is wrong, is just not
scriptural. Funny, he knows that it is wrong, and can (and in my opinion
always - always - does) cause a power play on others. yet he thinks that
is ok, and the abuse is worth the effort - bad form. We are called by the
very Scripture he seems to be ignoring to live
above human desires, to live in the light of
Christ and express the love we MUST have for
each other. But Stafford, like many in the Evangelical
community us the "fall of man" as a
copout to treat people poorly and to abuse
others and get away with it. what does
Smith do with the following scripture:
Mark
7:20-23:
"He went on: “What comes out of a man
is what makes him ‘unclean.’ For from
within, out of men's hearts, come evil
thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder,
adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness,
envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these
evils come from inside and make a man
‘unclean.’ ”
Romans
1:28-32:
"Furthermore, since they did not think it
worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he
gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what
ought not to be done. They have become filled
with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and
depravity. They are full of envy, murder,
strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
slanderers, Godhaters, insolent, arrogant and
boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they
disobey their parents; they are senseless,
faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although
they know God's righteous decree that those
who do such things deserve death, they not
only continue to do these very things but also
approve of those who practice them."
1
Corinthian 5:6-8:
"Your boasting is not good. Don't you
know that a little yeast works through the
whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old
yeast that you may be a new batch without
yeast–as you really are. For Christ, our
Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.
Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with
the old yeast, the yeast of malice and
wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the
bread of sincerity and truth."
Ephesians
4:29-32: "Do not let any
unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but
only what is helpful for building others up
according to their needs, that it may benefit
those who listen. And do not grieve the
Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed
for the day of redemption. Get rid of
all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and
slander, along with every form of
malice. Be kind and compassionate to one
another, forgiving each other, just as in
Christ God forgave you."
Colossians
3:5-11: "Put to death,
therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly
nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust,
evil desires and greed, which is
idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of
God is coming. You used to walk in these
ways, in the life you once lived. But
now you must rid yourselves of all such things
as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and
filthy language from your lips. Do not
lie to each other, since you have taken off
your old self with its practices and have put
on the new self, which is being renewed in
knowledge in the image of its Creator.
Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or
uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or
free, but Christ is all, and is in all."
Titus
3:3-7: "At one time we too were
foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by
all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived
in malice and envy, being hated and hating one
another. But when the kindness and love
of God our Savior appeared, he saved us,
not because of righteous things we had done,
but because of his mercy. He saved us through
the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy
Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously
through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that,
having been justified by his grace, we might
become heirs having the hope of eternal
life. This is a trustworthy saying. And
I want you to stress these things, so that
those who have trusted in God may be careful
to devote themselves to doing what is good.
These things are excellent and profitable for
everyone."
1
Peter 2:1-3: "Therefore, rid
yourselves of all malice and all deceit,
hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every
kind. Like newborn babies, crave pure
spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up
in your salvation, now that you have tasted
that the Lord is good."
To
be honest, there are a ton of other scriptures
that make my point that the is a gathering of
changed people, and if that change is not
happening then they are not a church.
So, if a person does not go to Stafford's
backbiting church then they are ok, because
that is not a "church" To me,
dear I say that i question their commitment to
the teachings of Christ and their love for the
teachings of humanity. They are using
the "fall" as a copout to walking in
the light of Christ. The idea that "A significant minority of Christians
feel wounded by the church," is
so not the case. Does he reality see 23 million
as a "minority?" Then, he blames his friend
(and I have to think he needs to learn the meaning of what friendship is) for looking to
his church for help - and not getting the help he needed - the church let's
people down, and then blames the people they let down. Stafford
seems to be
carrying on the misconceptions of the church
and the misguided teachings of the church
past. When he asks, "The hard questions come next: Just what
do they miss?" My first response is, gossip and backstabbing,
ignoring needs, closed minds, malice, unrighteous
spirits and the non-teaching of the love,
grace and forgiveness of Christ. One
needs to remember that Paul left many churches
that treated him in a bad way. Stafford
strives hard to voice that Paul had troubles
stayed with the church; but he uses poor logic
to defend that idea. He expresses that
Paul had troubles with a certain church in Asia,
but he does not mention that Paul was not at
that Church any longer - he left. He
felt that what they did was wrong, so he left
that church. My suggestion to Stafford
is
that he reread his Pauline letters, and see
that Paul is very against churches that
express the faith as he claimed.
Talk
about not getting the bigger picture, and
seeing that his words will fall upon deaf ears
he writes, "How can we communicate this to unchurched Christians? The
only way I know is to preach it. We need to tell them, even if it goes against
the grain of our culture. We need to tell them, even if talking so frankly goes
against our philosophy of outreach." Stafford
needs to
remember, that "unchurched" means
they are not in church to hear the voice that
proclaims they are wrong. Which brings
to life the point that the church has become
it's own best listener and is so inbred that
new ideas escape them and cause them to live
in fear.
When
Stafford adds, "If people commit themselves to the church, they will
undoubtedly suffer. The church will fail them and frustrate them, because it is
a human institution. Yet it will also bless them, even as it fails. A living,
breathing congregation is the only place to live in a healthy relationship to
God. That is because it is the only place on earth where Jesus has chosen to
dwell. How can you enjoy the benefits of Christ if you detach yourself from the
living Christ?" I have to say, sorry, how can it be "the
biblical body of
church" the "bride of Christ" and then "a human institution?"
How can we ignore the call to life a life not
based in human tradition, but in a life
transformed by the spirit? If we say, it
is a "both/and" thing - that it can.
And, if we can have a "both/and"
then not going to church is a valid movement
of God in his people.
Closing
The
main problem I am having with Stafford
and his
stance is that it is not found in scripture
and it is so closed to the working of the holy
spirit. Stafford
forgets that many of the
people outside the church are very much
Christian. Maybe not the way he would
like to limit the definition, but they are
very Christian. I find that the theology
expressed by Stafford
naturally flows to the
desire of claiming that one church is
"more" church then another. If
i do not attend his church, am I still a
Christian? If i do not agree with him,
am I still a Christian? If i read Stafford
the right way, the answer is "no, I am
not." I find Stafford's
"logic" faulty, limited and
closed. but then again, could it just be how he wants to define church?
|
