Church... now serving its xx billionth customer
"So how do we do it?" was the earnest question.
And as the speaker tried to explain it was about principles rather than getting a template, a thought formed in my mind and I put my hand up.
The speaker indicated for me to speak.
"The problem is that when people say they want to improve church, they are really wanting to improve the event, and not the people."
Whether it is school, church or another organisation, we often don't step far back enough. Their goal is usually how can we keep doing things essentially the way we always have but get a better result. Too many people seem to be just too invested in how things are - even if they say they are not.
So I was at a conference last weekend about how do we contextualise Jesus' story and mission to the different sectors of Australia (that is how do we present the message of Christ and help people grow as followers of Jesus wherever they are particularly located in Australia). It was a given that huge sections of Australians (and by implication Australian Christians also) aren't receiving what Jesus has to offer in ways that are relevant or understandable to them.
The evangelical speaker, internationally renowned, was pushing the point that the main mission of the church (that is the people of Jesus) should be about making disciples and not evangelism, that is our purpose is to concentrate on making robust 'little Christ's.
He had explained the Christian church in 180AD had processes (catechisms) whereby people who wanted to be followers of Jesus could not make a profession that "Jesus is their Lord and Saviour" until they had completed a training period of at least 2 years and sometimes up to 5 years. The time duration didn't depend on that individual, but when the elders and his sponsor/discipler decided he was ready.
Then the question was asked how do we do that in today's context.
In addition to the above point about church being 'people not event', I also commented that the church seems to be obsessed with mass-delivery systems, as if it can't be successful unless the processes could be delivered to large numbers of people at the one time. Anything that could not be delivered to the masses didn't seem to register as being a viable way of 'doing church'.
[I'm having trouble writing this blog at this point. One of the reasons I've resisted writing blogs is that on one level it can often encourage vanity. There is a certain level of 'oh, aren't I clever that I came up with this idea and recorded it down' or 'look didn't I show that person or those people how clever I was by saying that at the time.' No matter how I try to write about this situation, it still comes across along those lines. And by writing this aside, I can compound my ego-masturbation further by implying 'oh, look how humble I am by trying to downplay how clever I was in that situation.' Lord, forgive me.]
Anyway, the speaker who is much much wiser than I, and probably realised I wanted to say more at this stage, allowed me to vent my more ignorant views instead of talking from his much greater experience...
"I think the problem is people are only thinking about making disciples on a mass-delivery scale and I don't think that is effective at all. It has to be on a one-to-one basis. It has to be long-term. Jewish Rabbinic discipleship, was like what Jesus did with his disciples, the students lived with their teacher over a long period of time, eavesdropping and spying on their teacher, seeing them in a huge range of contexts, watching and remembering how their teacher reacted to all those circumstances. Too often the church talks about becoming Jesus' disciples in largely mystical terms, something completely nebulous and unpredictable. We can use 'spiritual' terms in our explanations and sound like we are saying a lot, but in fact we are saying nothing. Sure, there is the work of the Holy Spirit and aspects of how God works that is completely unpredictable. But I don't think God made it too hard for us to get it.
To make a disciple is a quite simple. Spend time one on one with them over a long period of time in a wide range of circumstances - not to just talk, but share in real life experiences - be involved in the practical aspects of each other lives."
A couple of days again I was speaking to a friend who had read my blog and said not everyone can become a school teacher. And I agreed.
In fact, just being a school teacher as a Christian isn't discipleship either. Sure I have long-term exposure to many, but again it has to be a one-to-one process long term. Being a school teacher however puts me in a space long term where I can be observed, spied on, and eavesdropped in many different circumstances. Sure there is still a disparity between who I really am and what I am on about and what my role as a school teacher sets me up as - but I do have some opportunity to help them see past the facade every now and again.
Because of the fragmented lives most of us live today, many of us don't get to see other followers of Christ live out their lives as 'little Christs' in different circumstances. That is why I said to my friend, the best thing he can do (and by implication, any one else that calls themselves followers of Christ) is to adopt a disciple - whether that is someone who identifies themselves as a fellow follower or not is irrelevant - and spend a lot of time with them long-term (ie years) - doing life together and on occasions talking and reflecting about that. Our job is to help them understand what it really means to live as a follower of Christ. It's up to them and the Holy Spirit whether they make a lasting commitment to Christ. To force them to make a commitment prematurely happens way too often as it is, and probably goes a long way to explaining the high drop out rate from Christianity.
My friend complained he was more flawed than I and was worried he didn't really have that much to offer others by being a discipler. I said that helps his prospective disciple to feel like he can identify more with him. And by being deeply involved with another person genuinely striving to be more like Christ, will result in his student posing ideas and questions that will push him further along. We learn more about our faith when we actually have to engage it in real ways. For the majority of Christians, their faith is largely an intellectual pursuit with some moral guidance thrown in.
I also commented that like the 12-step process, discipling some one else, helps us with loving our neighbour as ourselves - as it forces us to think more and more about others rather than allow us to remain self-absorbed as we naturally tend to.
So despite our natural tendencies to think about church, discipleship cannot be yet another mass-delivery system of the church. But if every one in a church community was to become an active discipler of one other, that community would affect many.
Impractical? Ineffective? Too hard to get everyone on board? Just an excuse to spend time with others not really achieving anything of worth? Comments?
And as the speaker tried to explain it was about principles rather than getting a template, a thought formed in my mind and I put my hand up.
The speaker indicated for me to speak.
"The problem is that when people say they want to improve church, they are really wanting to improve the event, and not the people."
Whether it is school, church or another organisation, we often don't step far back enough. Their goal is usually how can we keep doing things essentially the way we always have but get a better result. Too many people seem to be just too invested in how things are - even if they say they are not.
So I was at a conference last weekend about how do we contextualise Jesus' story and mission to the different sectors of Australia (that is how do we present the message of Christ and help people grow as followers of Jesus wherever they are particularly located in Australia). It was a given that huge sections of Australians (and by implication Australian Christians also) aren't receiving what Jesus has to offer in ways that are relevant or understandable to them.
The evangelical speaker, internationally renowned, was pushing the point that the main mission of the church (that is the people of Jesus) should be about making disciples and not evangelism, that is our purpose is to concentrate on making robust 'little Christ's.
He had explained the Christian church in 180AD had processes (catechisms) whereby people who wanted to be followers of Jesus could not make a profession that "Jesus is their Lord and Saviour" until they had completed a training period of at least 2 years and sometimes up to 5 years. The time duration didn't depend on that individual, but when the elders and his sponsor/discipler decided he was ready.
Then the question was asked how do we do that in today's context.
In addition to the above point about church being 'people not event', I also commented that the church seems to be obsessed with mass-delivery systems, as if it can't be successful unless the processes could be delivered to large numbers of people at the one time. Anything that could not be delivered to the masses didn't seem to register as being a viable way of 'doing church'.
[I'm having trouble writing this blog at this point. One of the reasons I've resisted writing blogs is that on one level it can often encourage vanity. There is a certain level of 'oh, aren't I clever that I came up with this idea and recorded it down' or 'look didn't I show that person or those people how clever I was by saying that at the time.' No matter how I try to write about this situation, it still comes across along those lines. And by writing this aside, I can compound my ego-masturbation further by implying 'oh, look how humble I am by trying to downplay how clever I was in that situation.' Lord, forgive me.]
Anyway, the speaker who is much much wiser than I, and probably realised I wanted to say more at this stage, allowed me to vent my more ignorant views instead of talking from his much greater experience...
"I think the problem is people are only thinking about making disciples on a mass-delivery scale and I don't think that is effective at all. It has to be on a one-to-one basis. It has to be long-term. Jewish Rabbinic discipleship, was like what Jesus did with his disciples, the students lived with their teacher over a long period of time, eavesdropping and spying on their teacher, seeing them in a huge range of contexts, watching and remembering how their teacher reacted to all those circumstances. Too often the church talks about becoming Jesus' disciples in largely mystical terms, something completely nebulous and unpredictable. We can use 'spiritual' terms in our explanations and sound like we are saying a lot, but in fact we are saying nothing. Sure, there is the work of the Holy Spirit and aspects of how God works that is completely unpredictable. But I don't think God made it too hard for us to get it.
To make a disciple is a quite simple. Spend time one on one with them over a long period of time in a wide range of circumstances - not to just talk, but share in real life experiences - be involved in the practical aspects of each other lives."
A couple of days again I was speaking to a friend who had read my blog and said not everyone can become a school teacher. And I agreed.
In fact, just being a school teacher as a Christian isn't discipleship either. Sure I have long-term exposure to many, but again it has to be a one-to-one process long term. Being a school teacher however puts me in a space long term where I can be observed, spied on, and eavesdropped in many different circumstances. Sure there is still a disparity between who I really am and what I am on about and what my role as a school teacher sets me up as - but I do have some opportunity to help them see past the facade every now and again.
Because of the fragmented lives most of us live today, many of us don't get to see other followers of Christ live out their lives as 'little Christs' in different circumstances. That is why I said to my friend, the best thing he can do (and by implication, any one else that calls themselves followers of Christ) is to adopt a disciple - whether that is someone who identifies themselves as a fellow follower or not is irrelevant - and spend a lot of time with them long-term (ie years) - doing life together and on occasions talking and reflecting about that. Our job is to help them understand what it really means to live as a follower of Christ. It's up to them and the Holy Spirit whether they make a lasting commitment to Christ. To force them to make a commitment prematurely happens way too often as it is, and probably goes a long way to explaining the high drop out rate from Christianity.
My friend complained he was more flawed than I and was worried he didn't really have that much to offer others by being a discipler. I said that helps his prospective disciple to feel like he can identify more with him. And by being deeply involved with another person genuinely striving to be more like Christ, will result in his student posing ideas and questions that will push him further along. We learn more about our faith when we actually have to engage it in real ways. For the majority of Christians, their faith is largely an intellectual pursuit with some moral guidance thrown in.
I also commented that like the 12-step process, discipling some one else, helps us with loving our neighbour as ourselves - as it forces us to think more and more about others rather than allow us to remain self-absorbed as we naturally tend to.
So despite our natural tendencies to think about church, discipleship cannot be yet another mass-delivery system of the church. But if every one in a church community was to become an active discipler of one other, that community would affect many.
Impractical? Ineffective? Too hard to get everyone on board? Just an excuse to spend time with others not really achieving anything of worth? Comments?
posted by Andrew Chua @ 9:12 PM
4 comments
