The Orchestra of Creation

Don't you love it when scientists discover things they think eliminate God from the world and end up proving just the opposite?

I have been fascinated for years by the developments in theoretical physics to do with the origin of the universe. Without retracing ground I have written on before I will begin at the point of string theory and the voice of God.

Put too simply, string  theory says that at the base of all reality we do not have the elementary particles that we learnt about in school, but rather we find that reality consists of vibrating “strings” that together make up all the elementary particles. These require 10 dimensions to exist instead of the 4 that we are normally aware of; 3 spatial and one time.

My take on this from a theological point of view is that these extra dimensions are the ones blocked from us at the Fall when there was a “curtain” dropped that separated the physical from the spiritual dimensions. We were left in a physical world in which we were only aware of the 4 dimensions. The lost dimensions were hidden from us, as it were. However in the new creation in Jesus these have been restored to us. We now see in part, but when Jesus appears we will see in fullness. What we now see in part are extra dimensions such as prophecy, miracles, healings, glimpses of eternity, etc.

The string vibrations are the voice of God. Just as the vibration of a violin string produces sound, music, so the vibration of the strings of the universe is the result of the music, sound, voice, of God. It is what musicians have called the music of the spheres. God's voice is at the basis of everything. “And God said, let there be …”

The latest discoveries suggest that this view of string theory has a major flaw, the problem of infinity, where at the centre of all there  is a “singularity” which results in the problem of infinity where nothing can hold together. In fact there is an “infinity of infinities.”

Stephen Hawking was an opponent of string theory because of this problem of infinity. Now he says that the problem is overcome by the latest discoveries.

The  latest discovery is that rather than individual strings vibrating, the strings form clumps which vibrate in an even more complex manner, called membranes. To me this sounds like an analogy of an orchestra. This is called super string theory and requires 11 dimensions.

So now we do not have singular notes in this “music of the spheres” but we have the complex melody of an orchestra: an even more wonderful sound. It sounds a bit like the sound of heaven spoken of in Revelation 4-5.

I know that I have oversimplified complex matters of theoretical physics, and drawn conclusions that need more explanation,  But  in their search for elegant solutions to the formation of the universe, physicists have come up with a beautiful description of Genesis 1 where God created by His Word,  with the added bonus of God's continuing upholding of creation by His Word in the continuing underlying orchestral symphony of matter.

Isn't God great! The more scientists try to explain  the universe without God, the more they reveal the majesty and beauty of God to those who have the spiritual eyes to see by faith.

In fact there was a further postscript to the latest work, and that is that there are 10 to the power of 500 (ie 1 with 500 zeros) universes predicted by a their theories. I wonder what more they will discover to glorify our great and wonderful God.

Psalm 53:1 NIV
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
Psalm 2:4 NIV
The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them.

Programs or People

     

When I first came to VHF in 1995  I was determined that we would concentrate on people rather than running a range of programs. It all sounded so right that everyone embraced it enthusiastically. After all I was called to View Hill Fellowship for this very reason, to transition the Fellowship from a program based church to a cell church. I am sure that none of us really realised what was involved at the time.

This emphasis on cell church was a reaction against the programmatic church which was virtually universal at the time. Many, in many churches, had used programs in the church in a way which resulted in the program being more important role than an active relational life with Jesus and His people. The “means” had become the “message”. People were crying out for the reality of a relationship with Jesus. Instead, the church was providing program after program which resulted in several unintended outcomes.

 Church had become engrossed in the latest and greatest programs coming largely from the USA: church growth, evangelistic programs, worship seminars, etc. We poured over the books coming from the “successful” mega churches. Rick Warren headed the list.

Once people had completed each program, there was one more folder on their bookshelf. That was finished, now what's next?

Most churches were like this, to one degree or another. In the case of VHF there was a desire to discover a more relational form of church life. It was in this context that i was called to VHF to transition the church to a cell based church.

The process started well, even though I began the changes far too early albeit at the encouragement of the leadership and members. This was a major error and one which would bedevil us for the whole time there, and ultimately torpedo the transition. I had not yet built enough “emotional capital” in the church. This takes time, at least a year or more.

Once people started to really see what was involved in the transition, they began to retreat to the more comfortable position of a programmatic church. Relationships are far more difficulty to negotiate. This is particularly so when it is expected that those relationships were to be subject to the greater relationship with the Lord Jesus and His call to make disciples. This ultimately involved people seeing that they were being called to reach out to others, involve these new friends in their cell, and move towards multiplication once the cell got to such a size where very close relationships could not be achieved. Such cells could not grow beyond about 15 or so people if closeness was to be maintained.

Ultimately there was a reluctance to reach out and grow since this meant a perceived break in existing relationships.

All attempts to continue along the cell church model failed and we soon retreated into the familiar program based church, even though we called it cell based.

Subsequently I have come to see that this is a common story in democratic countries. The cell model seems to work best in societies which are more controlled, the so called “command economies.” In such societies people are used to being told what to do, and will do it. However in democratic societies there is no such pressure to conform. We are used to doing whatever we want to, and heaven help anyone who tries to tell me otherwise. After all, I am free to do whatever I want to. Such is the attitude of most people in democratic societies. We will reach out to help others, but only as it suits me and my situation.

In such a society, church usually becomes one of the activities I will be involved in on a voluntary basis , as I have time and interest. This might sound like a parody, but it is not far from the truth. If it were otherwise there would be many more people active in sharing the gospel in a sacrificial way. “Go” would replace “come” in our approach to spreading the gospel.

There is much more analysis of those 12 years at VHF which will have to wait for another time.

From my current  perspective, outside of leadership in the parish system, I see other issues at play, which I could not even see, let alone evaluate, when I was within that structure.

The main issue is also the most controversial. The very system within which we operate virtually guarantees a retreat into “safe” life in the church, and against an evangelistic lifestyle. Our structures encourage, or even mandate, a “come” mentality rather than “go into all the world “ view. We call on members to come to church so they can be evangelised and so add to the membership of the church. This leads to seeker friendly churches, “back to church” Sundays, special guest services and so on.

Don’t get me wrong. Numbers are important, they represent people. It is important that the church grows numerically as well as spiritually. But this is not what we see when we examine church life in our society. We see a shrinking church, with some wonderful exceptions. We see growth being by transfer from other churches rather than by conversion. We see people making their choice of church based on what is best for the children, or other activities. There is a dynamic that is attractive in a “busy” church. We can have activities that suit our needs. But is it what Jesus instituted?

However, is this what church is meant to be? I don’t see this in what little we know about the early church, or what we see in other societies where the gospel is heard for the first time. It seems to be a problem specific to areas where people are relatively well off, where being a Christian is easy, where people are many generations from the initial introduction of the gospel. It is not a problem of first generation Christians, by and large, or where being a Christian involves sacrifice and persecution.

Comfort and security are two of the main obstacles to a vibrant faith. It has been so throughout history. Even in the early life of Israel, Moses warned the people about this danger.

When the LORD your God brings you into the land he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to give you--a land with large, flourishing cities you did not build, houses filled with all kinds of good things you did not provide, wells you did not dig, and vineyards and olive groves you did not plant--then when you eat and are satisfied, be careful that you do not forget the LORD, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

(Deu 6:10-12 NIV)

Nominalism is only a short distance away from vibrancy and dependence on God for everything.

This is a matter of a faulty ecclesiology which is very hard to counter. Jesus’ commands are ignored, or watered down, rather than being obeyed. Ecclesiology is the forgotten discipline of many churches which are faithful to Biblical precepts in most other areas. I have written, and will continue to write extensively on this.

Another obstacle is the pressure that many young families face in raising a family and pursuing a career. The amount of time people can devote to church life is under great pressure. This is not a comment on their Christian life which should be on show in work, family and every other part of life. Church life is, rightly, subservient to family life. However, even with this caveat, some hide behind work and family and use these as excuses rather than reasons for low engagement with the church.

It is precisely in this time when your family is young that lasting attitudes are made. This is the time when children notice what their parents are doing and saying and so judging what church really means to them. This is the time that the church needs to be equipping parents to teach their children, not sending their children to Sunday school for the church to teach them. Sunday school is a good place for children to have fun and join with other children, but it is not the place that God intended for the faith to be passed on. That belongs in the family, and more precisely, with the father. The church’s role is one of equipping.

This equipping role is not just the equipping of families to minister to their children, but for all the members to be equipped for whatever role God has shaped them for, not just church work. This is one of the main missing ingredients in our ecclesiology. The few hours a week we spend in church are meant to be the “engine room” for the rest of the week. We are meant to be equipped for whatever we spend our time in during the week; work, family, leisure, community work, etc.

It is interesting that it was only when I stepped outside my role of parish leadership that I saw this as clearly as I do now. I certainly preached this, tried to model it by championing member’s roles in society and tried to disciple people along this line. But I did not have the passion  or ability to swim against the tide of society and church culture to see it achieved. I wonder how much of this was an unconscious dependence on the parish for my “salary”? It is certainly easier to speak of these matters when you are not dependent on the people for your livelihood, but I think it is a larger issue than this. I believe it is a spiritual issue where you are blinkered to some issues when you are in the midst of them.

This is the issue with culture of all kinds. When you live in, or under, a culture, you are often not aware of the effects of that culture. It is something you imbibe by merely being in it. That is one reason that we find other cultures hard to understand yet those in the different culture are perfectly at ease. Such is the difficulty with cross cultural evangelism, or at an even darker side, the reason for fear and intolerance of foreign cultures that we see in our country at the moment with Muslim immigration. In earlier years it was an intolerance of Southern European immigration. Even earlier it was an intolerance of our indigenous people. Whatever the different culture involved, it is hard to leave our own culture behind.

This is also true of church culture. When we were born again of the Spirit of God, we were born into the Kingdom of God. The culture of the Kingdom is as different from our normal culture as that between any other culture you can name, say Ethiopian for an example. The problem arises when we know that we are born again, yet fail to move into the Kingdom culture and instead keep within a church culture which is more influenced by tradition than we care to acknowledge.

A careful reading of the New Testament should make us aware of this, but the power of the practiced culture of church is very strong. How are we to fully understand the teachings of Jesus about the Kingdom of God? We read the parables but miss the main point. In fact Jesus said that this would be the case when His disciples asked why He spoke in parables.

The disciples came to him and asked, "Why do you speak to the people in parables?" He replied, "Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. This is why I speak to them in parables: "Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

(Mat 13:10-17 NIV)

The parables were meant to HIDE the truth from all who would not come with faith, a radical and transforming faith, a faith that was prepared to forgo everything for the sake of Jesus and the gospel of the Kingdom, even to the point of death. So we use the parables as cautionary tales rather than the radical teachings that they are.

There are many other passages in the New Testament that can’t be understood in any other way as well. For example,

As they were walking along the road, a man said to him, "I will follow you wherever you go." Jesus replied, "Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father." Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God." Still another said, "I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say goodbye to my family." Jesus replied, "No one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for service in the kingdom of God."

(Luke 9:57-62 NIV)

I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

(Gal 2:20 NIV)

Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

(Gal 5:24 NIV)

But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ--the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith. I want to know Christ--yes, to know the power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, and so, somehow, attaining to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already arrived at my goal, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me. Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus. All of us, then, who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained. Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters, and just as you have us as a model, keep your eyes on those who live as we do.

(Php 3:7-17 NIV)

And there are many more. In fact the whole of Jesus’ teaching emphasises the gulf between the culture of the world and that of the Kingdom of God. Unfortunately, since the time of Emperor Constantine in the 4^th Century, the church has increasingly imbibed the culture of the surrounding society. It is even seen on the pages of the New Testament with Paul’s admonition to the Corinthian Church. They had become worldly.

Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly--mere infants in Christ.

(1Co 3:1 NIV)

This is an almost universal problem, but it is not one we are to tolerate.

The way of the Kingdom of God is not the easy road. It is difficult. It does require sacrifice. It will mean that you will be swimming against the tide of society and much of the church. But it is the only way that is acceptable to Jesus. His love for us demands that we give our all for Him. Our love for Him must overcome all opposition from whatever source it comes.

Further blogs will address the issue of ecclesiology in more detail. This is one of the missing points of the Protestant Reformation, and the key to a productive life in Jesus.

Paul in Rome

Paul's time in Rome must have been very frustrating as well as very significant. It was significant because he had, at long last, brought the gospel to the very centre of the western world. Here he was preaching almost without hindrance while under house arrest. Granted he was under arrest and so had to face a formal trial at some time, but in the meantime he was not too uncomfortable and had relatively free access to people.

Paul wasted no time. It was only three days after he arrived in Rome that he began to preach. He was conscious of the need to steward his time and energy. It would be more than two years before his execution but he was not to know that.

This was the very thing which also made it frustrating.  Many influential people came to hear him, but also he could not escape the Jewish party that saw him as an opponent to their way of religion.

In Acts 28 we see part of the outworking of this. Paul goes to great lengths to explain to the Jewish leaders about the Kingdom of God and how Jesus fitted in to their own history and understanding of faith.

Some believed and followed The Way, but others stirred up trouble. Paul then quoted from Isaiah the same passage that Jesus used.

Acts 28
26 “‘Go to this people and say,
“You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
    you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.”
27 For this people’s heart has become calloused;
    they hardly hear with their ears,
    and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
    hear with their ears,
    understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.’

Jesus used this passage to explain why He hid His teaching in parables rather than plain speech.

The passage explains that ultimately Jesus’ teachings can only really be understood through the eye of faith. Pure human reasoning will get you so far, to the point of curiosity, but will not bring you to a full understanding of Jesus and His Kingdom. Even when you have ‘crossed the river ‘ there is a fundamental need to keep moving forward towards the Father. Jesus the way, the ONLY way to achieve this. It is His Kingdom that we preach. It is Jesus alone that we worship. It is Jesus alone who we allow to govern our thinking and actions. He alone is the answer to every question that this world asks. His ways may (will) seem ineffective to those early on the path, but to those of us who have walked this part for decades, it is so clear that Jesus has all the answers if only He is heard properly.

There is a point where you need to stop trying to convince people about the Kingdom of God and move on to more productive grounds, where people will listen AND obey. Where this point is must be shown to you by the Holy Spirit. But there is a point where such action is to be taken. Jesus spoke of it in terms of wiping the dust off your feet and going to the next village. Both Jesus and Paul seemed to have a very low threshold of staying, and seemed to move on quite quickly.

Time is too short to spend excessive time in argument when there are others who will listen and respond.

The Isaiah quote has seemed harsh to many people, since it speaks of a veiling of the gospel to many, if not most, people. It speaks to a situation where people have heard and heard the gospel to such a degree that they are inoculated against the real gospel. It is a frightening thing to realise that we can do danger to people's faith by continuing to preach the truth them. People who have been so inoculated can't hear the truth anymore. Their spirits actually reject it in the same way as a person inoculated against a disease will actively fight that disease in their body.

Could that be part of the reason for the writer to the Hebrews saying:

Hebrews 6:4-8 NIV
[4] It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, [5] who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age [6] and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace. [7] Land that drinks in the rain often falling on it and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is farmed receives the blessing of God. [8] But land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned.”

This is a most serious matter. There seem to be many who would fit this category in many churches and among those who have left the church for a range of reasons. Ultimately it is Jesus who will determine who they are when he separates “the sheep from the goats” at the end of time.

While we do not determine who these are, we are told, in the passage under consideration, that we are not to spend too much time trying to convince such people.

Some will undoubtedly point me to Jesus’ teaching about the shepherd who leaves the 99 to go after the one lost  one. I would answer that this is a completely different matter from those who have “been inoculated.”

The bottom line in Acts 28 and elsewhere is that we are to be stewards of our time and opportunities. There are so many who need to hear of Jesus and His Kingdom that we are to be wise as to how much time and effort we spend on the “hard and rocky ground”, when there are so many productive opportunities and fruitful grounds where we could be investing our time and energy.

Who should you be moving on to?

Where is the Church?

When Paul and Barnabas went to Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13) They were initially welcomed and invited to preach in the Synagogue on the Sabbath. It was clearly a mixed synagogue with “men of Israel and you who fear God” present. Paul recounted the history of Israel and showed that Jesus was the promised Messiah The challenge at the end of the sermon brought a mixed response. He challenged the scoffers as well as calling all to follow Jesus.

The response was very positive overall. The people begged Paul to elaborate on the following Sabbath. Some even couldn’t wait that long and followed Paul and Barnabas to hear more during the week. 

The stage had been set. On the following Sabbath “almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of the Lord”. This was clearly the largest crowd the synagogue had seen at one of their meetings for a long time as it stirred up the jealousy of the regulars. It must have been quite a meeting.

When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy. They began to contradict what Paul was saying and heaped abuse on him.

(Act 13:45 NIV)

What caused this I wonder? Could it be a matter of power and control? The leaders of the synagogue had a nice polite gathering each Sabbath. Now this out of town preacher comes along, gets a large following and starts to challenge their conventional wisdom. Even though Paul was preaching as a Jew to Jews, using the Jewish Scriptures, they must have been  confronted by the fact that Paul’s preaching had such a dramatic effect.

Paul’s response probably inflamed the situation even more since he declared they were unworthy to receive this message of salvation and turned to the Gentiles instead. Here is an outsider, even though he would have come with a prominent reputation, daring to challenge the established leadership of the Synagogue. He was telling them what they should have known and been practising. After all the Jews  were called by God to be the instruments of spreading His message to all nations, and Paul reminded them of this. They had failed in this and now Paul was to go directly to the Gentiles. What a slap in the face for the established “church”, which is what the synagogue represented.

The leaders then stirred up the prominent membership of the synagogue, “devout women and prominent men”, and proceeded to drive Paul and Barnabas out of the city.

However the word of God had been sown and would take root after they left.

Paul and Barnabas continued on their journey “filled with joy and the Holy Spirit”.

What does this have to say to us?  

A great deal if we have ears to hear.

The true gospel of Jesus will always challenge us in ways that we will find hard to accept if we are not attuned to the Holy Spirit alive in us.  Jesus calls us to a life so different from our existing lives that we automatically reinterpret what He is saying. Our lives, especially our church lives, are usually well ordered and comfortable. After all if we are challenged too much there is always an option to leave that church and find another where our likes can be indulged.

Church growth, so called, in much of the developed world is as much about transfer from another church as it is growth by new birth of unbelievers. 

Thom Rainer in a recent blog post (http://thomrainer.com/2014/08/eleven-observations-church-transfer-growth/), made the following 11 observations:

1. “In the recent past (15 to 20 years), transfer growth was rewarded. Churches and church leaders were recognized for the total number of new members who joined their churches. Thus, at least implicitly, transfer growth was seen as important as conversion growth (where a non-Christian becomes a believer and joins the church).
2. The pendulum has swung, and transfer growth is viewed more negatively today. The Millennials specifically seem to have an aversion to this type of church growth.
3. Much of transfer growth has been the result of the consumer mentality creeping into churches. Many Christians have become church hoppers and shoppers to find the right church that meets their needs and preferences. They view a local congregation as a country club with perks for the members.
4. It has not been uncommon for pastors to become competitive and antagonistic about members transferring from one church to another. This attitude is less common today than it was over a decade ago.
5. Transfer growth can mask sickness in a church. Churches can be lauded for their fast growth, even if the growth includes very few new Christians. So it is possible for a church to be held in high regard even though its members are disobedient to the Great Commission.
6. Transfer growth has been easy in many churches because of low membership standards. If churches truly communicate and expect members to be fully functioning in the congregation, fewer would transfer with a consumer mindset.
7. The decline of cultural Christianity has slowed the flow of church transfer growth. Many persons, including some non-Christians, used to transfer into the “popular” church in town because church membership was a cultural expectation. That is no longer true in most areas of our country.
8. More pastors and other church leaders are actually contacting the church from which a person desires to transfer. They are attempting to confirm that the person has been a member in good standing, and that he or she is not transferring unresolved problems with their membership.
9. Despite obvious issues concerning transfer growth, we should not assume all transfer growth is bad. It’s a bad metaphor, but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
10. Some church members seek to transfer because of major doctrinal aberrations in their churches. I recently spoke to someone who left her church because the leadership denied the exclusivity of salvation through Christ.
11. The fastest growing category of transfer growth today takes place when a person moves out of his or her community. We should be thankful for Christians who seek a church home when they move to a new community. This category of transfer growth is becoming the most common because of the mobile nature of our culture.”

Some of these observations are positive, or neutral. But the general thrust of the observations illustrates the problem faced by the church in developed nations. 

When the challenge of being like Jesus (after all that is what being a disciple of Jesus means) is put before people, the most common response (other than apathy) is something like, “We are fine here, don’t disturb us.” In fact if the very structure of the church is challenged, as I believe it must be if we are to be obedient to Jesus, then an even  more strident response is garnered.

It amazes me how protective of the structure of the established church people are, when its “gatekeepers” are challenged to examine what the New Testament  actually says about the nature and function of the church. Defensiveness is the mildest response I have experienced so far. The response is usually much stronger.

This puts me in a real dilemma. I love the church. I also love the Anglican church into which I was born again, nurtured, trained and equipped for ministry. I love the fact that this expression of the church truly is the “mid path” between the Catholic and Protestant wings of the church. It is like the image that Jesus painted of a tree with wide branches embracing different expressions of the Faith. Of course I am not blind to her deficiencies, the compromises which are tearing the worldwide Anglican Communion apart, the nominalism which attends so much of her membership and so on. I could list my grievances easily. But that does not take away my love for and commitment to  the Anglican Church as she was meant to be. The 39 Articles of Religion, the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and the other instruments of unity have much to teach the rest of the world, despite the fact that these instruments are largely in tatters today.  The Book of Common Prayer properly understood is also a unique resource for public gatherings, opening up these gatherings to all the believers and not just a priestly caste.

 The history of the English Church from the 2^nd Century until now is also a story of the work of the Holy Spirit preserving the faith of disciples through good and bad times. The way we have got rid of human domination only to take it up again, is a commentary on the Book of Judges. 

This early Celtic Church has much to teach us and I will write a separate blog about that.

But none of this allows me to remain silent when I see the parlous nature of much of the established church today, of all denominations, Conservative, Pentecostal, Catholic, Non-conformist, etc.

It is even more saddening to recognise that many of the issues faced today are not new, but have been there from the beginning. In the New Testament we see example after example, especially in Paul’s letters, of problems in the church. Problems are common. However it is the way we face these issues and deal with them that matters.

Many today cannot even see the problems. Let me just sketch a few of the major ones that exercise me.

•  The hierarchical structure of the church where all power and control is exercised from above. Jesus’ pattern of servant leadership is all but ignored today.

• Concentration on buildings rather than people, with the attendant redirection of finance to buildings and maintenance.

• Lack of equipping for all kinds of ministries of every disciple. Equipping for ministry is the one key role of the church gathered, so that we can be scattered into the world.

•  The whole question of discipleship, or the lack thereof.

•  The way money and resources are used. Most of the resources of church members go into self serving areas of comfort and security. Whereas I believe that the bulk of our resources should be invested in mission, properly understood as making Jesus known where He has not been known before with the consequent planting of new churches.

•  The Kingdom of God should be our major focus and then to allow Jesus to build His Church

• Comfort and security as against servanthood and sacrifice.

• Forgetting that God the Father is the focus of all things. The First and Great Commandment has become diluted with the Second. That is, we have become more focussed on ourselves and others than on God and His Kingdom.  Some of this is a reaction to a neglect of social responsibility in the past, but the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction now.

• The Church  has become in many areas little more than a social grouping or amateur social work agency. Even in its good expressions, it is doing the work that God gave to the famiy and not to the church.  Parents have given their children over to the church for their “religious education.” This is seen so clearly in our emphasis on children’s and youth work almost to the exclusion of equipping parents to do all this work as God intended. We have divided what God has made one.

• The last point can be expanded to the whole compartmentalising of church activities: children, youth, women, men, singles, married, etc. God’s pattern is of the husband and wife together growing strong so that THEY can pass their faith on to their children. Single people can be nurtured within the church as they exercise their unique role of ministry in a range of areas.

•   We have changed the thrust of the Great Commission to “COME” instead of “GO”. There is so much we can learn from the first 600-1200 years of the English Church. From its beginning in the early second century to its zenith in the seventh century right through to its demise by the twelfth, the Celtic Church was a powerful instrument in the evangelisation of the British Isles and much of Europe, until it was emasculated by the overwhelming authority of the Pope in Rome. It was a wonderful equipping and sending church, little seen since, until some parts of the last century.

What do I want to see?

I long to see the church rise in power and authority as she will when we catch a glimpse of the glory of the Cross and the power in sacrifice. Real power will then be seen in the way it was seen in Jesus, and not in the way of ecclesiastical authority, seen throughout the ages.

This can only happen as we see Jesus as all in all, sacrifice our lives in His service and love the Father so much through Jesus and the Holy Spirit that we will hold back nothing from Him. We will then be like the overcomers of Revelation 12:

They triumphed over him (the dragon, devil) by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death.

(Rev 12:11 NIV)

Revelation 12:11 (MSG)
¹¹  They defeated him through the blood of the Lamb and the bold word of their witness. They weren't in love with themselves; they were willing to die for Christ.

Is this too much to hope and work for? Surely not! 

This can be seen in many places around the world, including the developed world. God has His faithful people all throughout the world.

All that is needed is for those of us with such a mind and will to stand up and declare the truth of the unchanging Gospel of the Kingdom of God.

This will inevitably bring a confrontation with the established powers and authorities in the church. How we negotiate that confrontation will determine the effectiveness of the Church in growing the powerful Kingdom of God.