Church is Not a "Failed Experiment"
by Suzanne Hadley Gosselin on 04/22/2008 at 2:15 PM
In "Dear Disillusioned Church," twenty-something Katie Galli reviews two books about the church. Though the books are targeted at young adults who may feel at odds with some aspects of the American church, Galli expressed frustration with the authors' failure to encourage their readers to meaningfully connect with the body of believers:
An oft-disillusioned (and hopelessly idealistic) 20-something myself, I picked up Life After Church: God's Call to Disillusioned Christians (InterVarsity), and Dear Church: Letters from a Disillusioned Generation (Zondervan). I figured that I'd find writers who share my frustrations. But I was also hoping they would push me toward a deeper and richer relationship with the church -- and in this, I was left unsatisfied.
Instead of encouraging young people to invest in and commit to their local churches, the books essentially give twenty-somethings a free pass to abandon the "failed experiment" of the church and start something new (like a home groups). This kind of attitude frustrates me. I wrote about it in "Designer Church" and "Quarantining a Generation."
Despite the church's flaws, we are wrong to pridefully reject it. Whether or not the church is satisfying our personal tastes or expectations, we are responsible to be part of it simply to be obedient to Christ. Galli points out we shouldn't look down our noses at church just because it operates in an orderly (and American) way and bears marks of tradition.
Yes, we're Americans. We multitask all day long. Efficiency is one of our top cultural values. I, too, am pragmatic. I'd like to use Sunday morning to worship God, to get a few pointers on how to improve my relationship with Jesus, and to reconnect with community. But every Sunday, the first words heard at my institutional church are, "Blessed be God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." And I'm reminded that we gather weekly not to hear a practical talk on how to better live out our faith or to provide a venue to tell our friends about Jesus. We gather corporately to worship God, to celebrate the redeeming work of Christ on the cross, and to remember that our lives are not about us.
And that kind of weekly reminder is far more valuable than a constant diet of cynicism or a critical attitude toward the church. Katie concludes with this:
The church can indeed be bureaucratic, inefficient, and, at times, hopelessly outdated. It remains one of the most embarrassing institutions to which one can belong. But it has also given us a 2,000-year legacy of saints and social reformers, and a rich liturgy and theology -- the very gift 20-somethings need to grow into the full stature of Christ.
1. obewan said the following at 2:31 PM on Apr 22:
“the books essentially give twenty-somethings a free pass to abandon the "failed experiment" of the church and start something new (like a home groups).”
Not to be contrary, but my current mega church of 5000 members started in the basement of someone's home 20 years ago. It is a radical ministry now, which has over 400 weekly small group Bible studies – that meet in homes. It is a real connecting place – like the New Testament church probably was – even though we have so many people.
2. Matthew said the following at 2:42 PM on Apr 22:
This is a messy issue because there are probably some slick, seeker-oriented churches and some old, tradition-trapped churches that ought to be abandoned or totally revamped because they're not being faithful to the Gospel at all and their worship is meaningless. There are probably some people dissatisfied with church institutions that should start a home church and worship God corporately in that way.
But there are probably more people in churches that are still trying to be faithful but have lost their way a little and they need humble, gracious young people who are otherwise tempted to leave. These people need to step up and seek to be faithful where God has called them and contribute to the life of a healthy church as they worship there.
3. KarlH said the following at 2:57 PM on Apr 22:
I would agree that calling it a "failed experiment" isn't quite right, but I find no issue with changing things up a bit. After all, the early church and Christ's ministry seems a quite more like a home group or something along those lines than today's modern "church".
4. Jacob said the following at 3:33 PM on Apr 22:
I like this. Pure and simple, church isn't about you. It's about worshiping God and giving him the praise he is due. Unsurprisingly, the greatest commandment is not to love yourself, but is to love Almighty God.
5. Katie B said the following at 4:29 PM on Apr 22:
this is fascinating, and I would agree with Galli except that I would define church a little more broadly. I have been studying Acts 2 recently, and came to the conclusion that we put too many extra's onto the concept of church, and even the gospel. On the day of pentecost 3000 people came to christ and 'They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.' (verse 42)
That is what people did when they were saved: they gathered together in fellowship, celebrating communion, studying and praying. Thats what we do in church, but we can do that in homegroups and other ways. What is it about 'church' as we define it today that offers more than that and we cant get anywhere else? I am not saying we should snub the church out of pride, but I think it is equally damaging to define church so narrowly as to sudgest that there is something more that we need than what is in the bible. I would sudgest reading "They like Jesus but not the Church" which is directed to people trying to reach the unchurched.
The church as we know it today is far from what it started as. There is a sociological evolution of christianity that is apparent in history. In Jerusalem christianity was born as a religious movement, it got to greece and became a philosophy, moved on to rome where it transformed from a movement into an institution, it swept across europe as a culture, and became in America a big business. Ichak Adizes analized the corporate lifecycle and found that all orginizations follow the same basic pattern of growth and decline. The american church as an institution(individual churches and denominations vary) is showing the signs of approaching the end of its life. The thing is, according to adizes, there is no way to stop the decline or reverse it, every orginization will eventually run its course, and trying to do so isnt even favorable. That when we get to the point of death, rebirth is the best solution. The time is coming where we need to reinvent the church. And it is ok if it looks different than it did before. but a lot of our church reforms look more like the valley of dry bones after they flesh had returned to the corpses, but before they were made alive again. Its like rearanging deck chairs on a sinking ship. We need to let go of the church so that God can ressurect it, and the people in place for that task are this genereation, the rising leaders who have completely different ways of thinking and relating and working than the previous, and they should be given freedom and encouraged to engage within and outside of the institutional church, because after all, The mission isnt to be the church or maintain the church, the church is the vehicle to carry out God's mission to the world.
6. Jackie Concepcion said the following at 6:33 PM on Apr 22:
I share similar views with Matthew. I believe there are some churches that have new-age views or very traditional views.
I can relate because I have had this problem- not having the opportunity to establish myself and develop in a church.(My parents were pastors and when there wasnt enough funds,the church was closed down- we've been bouncing from church to church for 8 years)
My question is what do you do when you want to and you try to find a church were you can worship God but the doctrine is corrupted? What should you do when the churches don't speak about God- they just speak about fundrasing or how material possession is the only way to know God is pleased with you?
I would really like to know how one should act in such a situtation and what I can do because I am tired of my family bouncing from church to church.
7. peter said the following at 8:31 PM on Apr 22:
So...you're basically defining church to be the traditional model. Who is to say which model of meeting is best? As long as it's gospel centered, who are we to judge?
8. Dani said the following at 8:39 PM on Apr 22:
This is neat that this came up right now, because we're discussing what the church is in my church's college group. The main point that has been stressed week after week is that there are three defining "marks" of the church: the preaching of the word, the right administration of the sacraments, and church discipline.
Churches, and other groups, mess up when we try to separate those three. The preaching of the word must be followed rightly, thus we administer the sacraments (baptism and communion), which must be taken rightly, thus the church disciplines its members.
Personally, one of the saddest parts of today's church culture is the stepping away from church discipline. One of the main reasons I joined my church is their strong emphasis on accountability and pastors and elders truly shepherding and caring for the flock. People go to church now to get some fellowship, or feel a good vibe, or hear what they want to hear from the pulpit--so many do not want anything to do with conviction or discipline or accountability.
9. ScottW said the following at 8:53 PM on Apr 22:
With all due respect for KatieB (#5), Ichak Adizes is gravely mistaken when he says that the church is approaching the end of its life. The church is Christ's bride which he bought with his own blood, and he WILL preserve it. It may be very small compared to former times in America, but it will survive.
Also, I'm not sure where you were going with this statement, "We need to let go of the church so that God can ressurect it." I'll post my thoughts and then you can correct me or add to your post. We are the church, you, me, Suzanne, and every person who has ever called on the name of Jesus. It's not a building, denomination, institution, it's the gathering of the redeemed to worship the Triune God.
I hope I don't come as harsh, I can be pretty opinionated and I just see some things in your post I disagree with.
10. Katie P. said the following at 10:24 PM on Apr 22:
I think I understand what the author is trying to say, but am not sure that she communicated it very well. I agree that people should not throw up their hands and walk away from their individual churches without honestly trying to change things or speak to those in leadership with concerns. However, I am a little confused as to why meeting in "home groups" instead of a traditional, American-style church is viewed negatively. To me, size and location seem to be a neutral issue - as believers, we ARE the church, regardless of the size or place of our meeting. Believers in most of the world (and virtually all of the persecuted world) worship in home groups, and most don't know that there is anything different. And God is moving in their churches, just as He is still moving in some American churches, whether they meet in a basement or a strip mall. But maybe I am missing something :)
11. Godfrey said the following at 10:26 PM on Apr 22:
There are a lot of reasons to be disillusioned with the church, and I'm pretty disillusioned myself. The church needs to change. But so do we.
Lack of community is one of the shortcomings I've felt in the three churches I've attended over the last eight years. More could be done to foster community, and much of the responsibility for that rests with the church leadership.
At the same time, I've increasingly come to realize that I'm also responsible for creating community. It's easy to slip into a consumer mentality in which we show up on Sunday morning and expect church to "work" without any effort on our part. Even if it could be that way, that's not the way it should be. The church is supposed to be a body, with each part contributing. I'm not the most sociable person imaginable, but I could still do more to introduce myself to others. I could invite people over for dinner. And if I tried to build community, at whatever small scale I can, others might follow my example. There's a popular song called "Waiting on the World to Change." Part of our problem in the church may be that we're waiting on the church to change, without remembering that we are the church.
It's also important to remember that neither the church, nor I, will be perfect. It can be easy, as an individual, to look at the church and think, "Why would I want to associate with such a group?" The failings of the church at large can be rather public. But the question could be switched around. "Why would the church want to have anything to do with me?" Especially since most of my shortcomings won't be nearly as public or as easily discovered as those of the church. This is where the Grace upon which our faith is founded should come into play.
One final thought. Part of what we may see as shortcomings of the church may actually be shortcomings of contemporary society at large. Or at least shortcomings of society as reflected in the church. I've used the example of community. Part of the reason that community is so hard is that I don't see the people I go to church with during the week unless I'm intentional about it. In small towns, and in times past, I wouldn't have to be so intentional. If the church is falling short because of the society in which we find ourselves, that does not excuse the church. But it does mean that we should seek a better understanding of the influence of society on the church, and that we should be more willing to extend grace to the church.
Pessimism and critique and skepticism are easy, but hope is hard.
12. Jo said the following at 12:11 AM on Apr 23:
Like Obewan (#1), my church began when a small group of people began a home-group style shuch because of doctrinal differences with their current church. We're very far from being a 'mega-church', but we've been established now for 25+ years. Unlike many churches that begin in the same way, we have an excellent relationship with the original church that was left, there was never any animosity or ugliness.
I agree that it's not right to just cut loose for trivial reasons, I think we should ideally be committed to a local church - but I also think the story of my church is completely acceptable. A lot of churches begin this way and if it's done respectfully and for the right reasons, I think it's good.
13. Rachael said the following at 12:44 AM on Apr 23:
In some countries and perhaps places of America, some 'churches' might actually be the size of some 'small groups'. Most churches in America, though, are not the size of small groups. While I personally wouldn't want to go to a small home group type of gathering in place of 'church church' (in the traditional sense), we should remember that many of our ideas about what 'church' is are not necessarily the same as what the 'church' was in the early days. Essentially the church is the body of believers, not a building or tradition. I guess I'm not involved in an 'alternative church', though, so I'm not incredibly knowledge about what they do. I like a combination of ministry, community, teaching, and corporate worship. But that doesn't mean that's the magic combo of what must be done.
14. Brendan said the following at 1:25 AM on Apr 23:
What is the church? Is it an institution or is it the people?
My understanding is that ekklesia translates literally as "a calling out." And that's what it was...Christians were called out of the world and gathered together and that was the church.
I dunno...While I liked most of the post, the line about the home church got to me. If my friend who plays guitar led a worship set and someone else preaches a message, are we illegit because we're not part of a parish?
15. Matthew said the following at 7:10 AM on Apr 23:
Jackie,
If a church is teaching that material possession is the only way to know God is pleased with you, get out! They're not teaching the truth at all.
Depending on where you live, you might have to compromise on some things. You may have to go to a church that has no outreach whatsoever to find appropriate, God-glorifying doctrine or a church that doesn't affirm everything about baptism or soteriology that you agree with to find a community that worships God in spirit and truth. No church is perfect, but you have to decide what is most important in a church and sacrifice the less important things.
16. J.T. said the following at 9:00 AM on Apr 23:
I go to a church in a small town in the south that was established in 1837. (We even have a man that goes there whose mother attended during the Civil War!) The running joke in our church is that the pews have been there since 1812, the hymnals since 1787, and the traditions since the Reformation.
17. A. said the following at 9:21 AM on Apr 23:
I just liked the use of the word disillusioned... for some reason until I read that article I really hadn't thought about it - but it really is where I'm at... I've lived here for 2 years now, and I've visited almost every church in the area, and attended two different churches for close to a year each, but I still don't find that I can find one that I can fit into (that I'm not made to feel an outsider - even unintentionally) and that is biblical at the same time... it seems that your choice is one or the other... so yes I am disillusioned with the churches in my own area...
What we now need are some books and articles for those of us whom are disillusioned but whom keep church as an important enough thing to keep going despite our disillusionment - who keep going despite the fact that some days it really feels very pointless and that we're getting nothing out of it (when we're not otherwise in a dry spell spiritually...)
18. David said the following at 9:35 AM on Apr 23:
Why did the early church meet in homes? Was it because meeting in homes was prescribed? No - Christians were being persecuted and they were meeting in secret!
Obewan is correct in saying that his church started by meeting in a home. Many church plants start this way. But church plants aren't designed to continue as home groups. They're desire is to grow and one day they will look much like a "traditional" church. Too often, individuals use the "home group" model to make church like they want it to be, so they can be comfortable.
What's missing? In a word - accountability. 1st century Christians devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles - those that had studied at the Lord's feet. You can't devote yourself to studying at the feet of an Apostle (pastor) if Bob from IT is leading your homegroup. Theological study is not irrelevant. It is necessary for the proper interpretation of scripture. I believe Christians today simply do not want to submit to the authority of an organized church.
I yield the remainder of my time.
19. Sarah P. said the following at 9:38 AM on Apr 23:
I think my generation in general tends to forget the concept of grace. We are so focused on perfection and technological marvels that promise more and better that perhaps we have forgotten we will never actually be perfect. We therefore think we have a free pass to critique anything.
Of course churches are broken. They have never been unbroken in all of human history. We're working together to do the best we can, that's all, and praying desperately to God for grace all along.
Now if the church doesn't recognize its need for grace, that might be eventually a good reason to look elsewhere.
20. Dawnson said the following at 10:17 AM on Apr 23:
David #18:
"What's missing? In a word - accountability. 1st century Christians devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles - those that had studied at the Lord's feet. You can't devote yourself to studying at the feet of an Apostle (pastor) if Bob from IT is leading your homegroup. Theological study is not irrelevant. It is necessary for the proper interpretation of scripture. I believe Christians today simply do not want to submit to the authority of an organized church."
Very good point. I'll have to think about that, thank you.
21. PLH said the following at 11:05 AM on Apr 23:
David (18), I agree with you about accountability. Often, non denominational or house churches seem to lack accountability to a group outside of their own.
I'd also add that while people talk about the church as a group of believers in this blog, the Church is also historical and universal. It's important to feel connected to brothers and sisters in the past and in all parts of the world because we miss valuable perspectives about what being a Christian means when we only worship and listen to people who have the same background, experiences as us. So, while we should seek chnage in the Church, I'm not sure breaking away and repudiating the Church's past is best either. We should learn from the mistakes of the past and also celebrate the good things the Church has accomplished.
22. Katie B said the following at 11:39 AM on Apr 23:
ScottW: not harsh at all, I appreciate your thoughts. Just to clarify though, Adizes didnt anaylze the church, he looked at orginizations and institutions in general. The application of his corporate lifecycle model to churches is made by some pastors today, looking at the institutions and orginzations of the church, not the church as the Body. THe way we do church now is vastly different than the way it was instituted at pentacost, and has nothing to do with where we meet, or the syles or cultural influences. The church was born as a movement, the people of God carrying out the mission of GOd with devotion and zeal. Today we have an institution which is largely self contained, looking exactly like anyother worldly institution in organization and structure, just with a different focus. The church started out as a movement on fire with a mission from GOd, it seems to have let there ways and structures become GOd's mission. THis is not to say that there is no evangelism or ministry, but that we do it our way, generally for our own ends, even if we mean well, example the fall of the willow creek method.
It isnt that the way we do church is inherently wrong or shouldnt be done, but it would be a grave mistake to assume that the institution of the church is the bride that God will preserve. There is a difference between institution and Body. THe institution is in decline, (Check out the Gallup Group for stats) One of their members describes the american church as 'a heartattack waiting to happen'
I agree with you, Christianity will survive in america, but trying to keep something alive that isnt crucial to God's mission will hurt it more in the long run, thats what I meant by letting the church go. the devotion to teachings, fellowship, breaking bread, and prayer that characterized the newborn church will never end, I intend to be a part of that, whatever it looks like.
23. Suzanne said the following at 4:43 PM on Apr 23:
I would like to clarify that I did not mean to discredit the ministry of the home church. My point was, maybe we should reconsider "blowing up" the established church and starting over. True, there are probably certain aspects that need to be eradicated, but giving up on multigenerational congregations of true worshipers would be a mistake, in my opinion.
24. brx said the following at 7:25 PM on Apr 23:
A "free pass"?? Seems like what it really takes is a calling and a sending. It comes to mind that Jesus says "Go" while many institutions say "stay".
What i think it comes down to: A constant asking of what is Jesus putting on your heart to do and are you remaining faithful to do it?
It's the ever-present issues of wineskins for new wine and how to blend vintages.
Grace, peace, & adventure!
25. Mark said the following at 7:31 PM on Apr 23:
Amen to what Katie B had to say. I would also add that the 'institution' of the church is not what will be saved. Ultimately, what matters is the people. Parachurch organizations such as Campus Crusade, Bible studies, etc. all involve crucial people and are all part of the church of Christ.
Don't get me wrong, the church is needed and functions as the 'face of Christ' so to speak to outside societies. But it by no means is the 'only way' the church can function. Ultimately, fellowhship and accountability, in whatever form, are needed, but not necessarily through traditional means. Ultimately, the key is to gain fellowship with believers through the worship of Christ.
Tradition for the sake of tradition is bad. But to keep the traditions that REALLY matter...that is the key.
26. brx said the following at 7:35 PM on Apr 23:
It's the nature of people groups to seek some sense of structure, organization, and predictability -- and that is not bad.
It is also the nature of God with His infinitely greater wisdom and bigger plans, to frequently do things that confound peoples' limited understanding of structure, order, and predictability.
So, it's probably best if we remain flexible and trust that Jesus knows what He is doing with His Church and churches.
Grace, peace, & adventure!
27. Esther said the following at 8:26 PM on Apr 24:
Just this week I attended a small group meeting that is one of many that my 4000+ attendees church offers. Yes, there are big Sunday services, but even there we are told that "this is not church, you need to be connected to a community of believers". The 'big church' is able to offer many services and coordinating applications, but the small group is the forum for growth and fellowship. Sometimes someone apologizes when they share something that is really difficult or personal, but that's the true point of church- joining with other believers in applying the truth of Christ to the reality of our lives, not just in theory or possiblility, but in the "right now" situations. Have you laughed, cried and prayed with someone this week? I think that's a good test of the church 'experiment'.
28. Suzanne said the following at 11:45 PM on Apr 24:
My grandma always said if you think you've found the perfect church, don't worry; once you join it won't be anymore :-)
Committing to the Church imo means committing to be part of Christ's body. We can't escape being the Church, so if we're unhappy with the way things are being done, we are the ones who can make that change happen.
If the church seems dead, go liven it up! If it's sad, bring some joy; if it's fearful, remind the people about God's power. We need to encourage one another in the faith, not abandon each other.
If spiritual gifts are meant for the edification of the Body, then do we have an obligation to exercise them in the context of church where everyone can benefit?
29. Christina (in green) said the following at 7:24 AM on Apr 25:
Suzanne,
It sounds a lot like marriage =p
30. brx said the following at 4:03 PM on Apr 25:
Christina (in green) wrote:
"It sounds a lot like marriage =p "
Yeah! awesome similie, Christina! Both parties in a marriage need to give each other freedom to be who they are - while still encouraging each other.
One word of caution: being committed to the Church and a local body does NOT mean we are in a marriage covenant with the local body. We are in a marriage covenant with Christ, not a local body. A few years ago I read a little J. Harris book in which I got the idea he was saying we are married in commitment to the local church body. That concept really messed with my heart and head as I wrestled with it - particularly because I was having a hard time with some differences in me and the local church I have been a member of and helped grow. I'm finally realizing that the Bride of Christ is waaaay larger than a local body. Jesus gives us each the freedom & grace to be ourselves and to go and grow and serve in the areas of our passions where the doors are open. I needed to allow that same kind of freedom for my local church and fellow leaders instead of sitting around moping outside a closed door.
It's an interesting mix now; I'm attending, encouraging, and have deep friends in one church, but ministering, going deeper, and leading in other areas... Sometimes it feels odd, but it also seems to fit with my passion for encouraging greaty unity among the local churches.
Grace, peace & adventure!
PS: Thanks Suzanne, for bringing up the topic again and clarifying.
PSS: Christina, how's the engineering life balance going? Better? :) ?
31. TINA said the following at 10:41 AM on Feb 3:
Don't you realize that all of you together are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God lives in you?
(1 CORINTHIANS 3:16)
God's old temple was made of stone,His new temple is in our hearts.
32. Christina (in green) said the following at 12:40 PM on Feb 3:
Wow...brx...
I missed something lol.
The balance started getting better right about the time you posted that =p
April 21st to be exact!
Work still could improve, but I at least have something to look forward to when I get home ;)