Theological Musings

everal have prodded me to write about my positive experiences with simple church, rather than focus on criticisms of conventional church models. This is entirely fair, and I hope to do some of that here.

To begin with, I must offer a bit of a disclaimer. We have not fully experienced simple church in any kind of long-term, lasting situation yet. We are still very much “in process” and on the journey. Much of what I write about is still in its infancy, and some is even still very much in the outworking of theory.

Having said that, I will share a basic chronology of the journey, and augment with observations and personal testimony along the way.

Some of the seeds of simple church were planted many years ago when I was first involved in various implementations of small groups within a larger structure. Many times, I hear people say that some of the deepest experiences of spiritual growth and fellowship have taken place in small groups. My experience concurs.

Those small group experiences were very varied. Some were extremely structured, and others were much more informal. Perhaps one of the most memorable situations was when I was in college. The group of college kids in my home church began to get a bit frustrated with the Sunday School class that was provided for us. It just seemed like the teacher wasn’t really teaching much of anything that was prompting any kind of spiritual growth to take place.

We decided to start meeting in an unofficial capacity outside of the church structure for additional fellowship and study. We carefully chose a meeting time that would not conflict in any way with the church’s schedule, and we all continued to faithfully attend the Sunday School class on Sunday mornings (as well as the regular church services).

Each Saturday evening (I believe that was when we met), we invited different people to come speak with our group — at the start, it was usually one of the elders of the church. Over time, we invited other speakers from outside the church, and eventually began to spend time in the Word without a “leader”. It was fascinating! We would spend hours together as a group, fellowshipping, worshiping, praying, and studying. It felt like some of the most deep growth I had ever experienced in my life up until that point.

I don’t remember how long that group survived, but eventually, it ended up being viewed as an “unsanctioned” meeting, and we were told by the elders that we could no longer meet without continual elder oversight. Hmmm, maybe that was a foreshadowing of where things would end up going in my experience! We allowed one of the elders to “restructure” the group, and although there were still some times of growth, for the most part, things changed dramatically, and the group disintegrated over time.

At any rate, I never forgot that experience, nor others that were similar (I’m talking about the growth aspect). I spent many more years (probably about 15) involved in various levels of church leadership and laity. I taught, I preached, I “led worship”, I sat and listened, I gave financially, I received financially, I played, I sang…

Fast forward to the year 2003. I’ve written previously some of the details of what led me to reconsider my overall thinking on church organization, so I won’t repeat all of the details here. But suffice it to say that by the summer of 2003, I was seeking something different.

At this point, I had no clue that anybody else had ever had the same thoughts I was having. I tentatively shared them with Christy (to whom I was engaged to be married), fearing that it might scare her off. Instead, I found her to be quite open to what I was talking about, and together we began to search for answers.

I officially resigned my last church position in December, 2003 in preparation for my move to Boone, NC, and to pursue this new concept (new to me). As Christy and I found, however, many before us had already discovered the concept of what we termed at the time “house church”. We had not yet heard the term “simple church”, but what we read and studied both in terms of Scripture and resources from those already “doing it” matched our thoughts.

In February, 2004, we got together with several other families who also seemed to be seeking this type of fellowship, and began our first attempt at a “house church”. For the next eighteen months, we experienced quite a bit of what we imagined it could be like.

Not everything during that time was perfect. In fact, there was actually quite a bit of stuff that wasn’t even close to perfect! But once again, we experienced some of the same things that I had experienced earlier in life.

There were times when our gatherings would last over five hours! And even then, leaving would be reluctant. It was so thrilling to see so many people contribute to the gathering. Whether it was simple musical worship, or Spirit-led times of prayer, or challenging discussions about various texts of scripture, it was so refreshing.

During that time, I became even more convinced that nothing could replace the type of gathering where all are free to contribute. Not based on a schedule or agenda, nor on anyone’s “position” within the group, but simply as the Spirit led.

Eventually, for a variety of reasons, one family after another left. With the exception of us, everyone was still heavily involved in other churches (which was fine with us — we never asked anyone to leave their church), and eventually that pulled them away. Finally, it was back to just us.

In the months following, we made every effort to rest in Jesus and not try to force anything to happen. At times, it seemed lonely. Very lonely. But over time, God brought people into our lives who shared the same passion.

Currently, we are still seeking together what that means. Our gatherings together are not nearly as frequent as we would like. (By “we”, I mean all of us who are seeking this together.) But when we do get together, I still feel that same excitement and delight at watching the body work together in fellowship and growth. And I come away feeling refreshed and eager to get back together again!

It’s kind of funny because we don’t meet all together weekly, and yet when we do meet, it’s usually for four or five hours. It’s like getting together with family — in fact, that’s what it is. And while we don’t have all the answers (or even very many of them) as to what it should look like, or what it will look like in the future, I do feel like we’re on the right path.

In these gatherings, I continually find myself challenged and encouraged. I find that my awareness of the indwelling of Christ is heightened beyond anything I have ever experienced. And my love for Him and for His body deepens.

In addition to the gatherings as a group, there are the personal relationships. Two of my regular readers and commenters here (Raborn and David [ded]) are part of this family. And while I don’t get to spend as much time with David as I would like (not even close!), I do get the blessing of meeting with Raborn on a weekly basis for either breakfast or lunch. Those times are deeply challenging, refreshing, and encouraging to me. And two to three hours can fly by in a heartbeat!

All in all, with the exception of wishing that we could figure out a way to meet more frequently as a gathering of believers, I can’t say that I would necessarily trade any of this for anything else. And I’m learning to see simple church as a lifestyle of relationships, not just a certain type or frequency of meeting. In some ways, because of my interaction with David and Raborn here, this blog is a part of our simple church. And it allows us to connect with other believers in unique ways, too. My times with Raborn are part of simple church. Times when we fellowship together even when only one other couple can make it are part of simple church.

Simple church is a “way of life” for us, and we are constantly seeking more ways to make that a reality. I don’t know where this journey will lead, but I’m loving it!

Until next time,

steve

othing of substance here, but wanted to alert you to some new things around here at Theological Musings, if you’re interested.

First of all, you may have noticed that I changed the banner picture at the top of the blog. I loved the misty bridge picture that came with the template, but finally found a good picture to substitute and make my blog that much more original. Where did I find such a picture, you ask? Right out our back window last October when the leaves were their prettiest here in Boone.

I also updated my picture in the sidebar, since the other one was well over a year old. I took the opportunity to enjoy the new Photoshop Elements software that we received as a Christmas present by overlaying my picture onto a picture of the Blue Ridge Mountains that we took just a few miles from our house. The mountains are beautiful. Now, if I could just do something about the fact that my face is quite a bit rounder in this later picture than it was a year ago. Sigh…

Also, some of you may have noticed that I have included functionality on my blog now to see “Snap Previews” of external links before clicking them. A good example of this is when you mouseover this link right here. You should see a popup that shows what the target website looks like before you click on it. This only works with “external links” — that is, links that are outside of my blog. If I link to another page within my blog, you won’t see the preview. I also have disabled it for links to Bible passages on BibleGateway (such as John 3:16). There isn’t any need to preview those sites, in my opinion. (By the way, this plugin is available for WordPress.com users, as well, according to this article.)

Finally, I have added a new page to my blog called “WP Plugins“. This page would better be called “WP Plugin” (singular) for the moment, since I only have written one plugin, but hopefully this will not be the last plugin I write. As I develop more plugins, I’ll add them to that page.

Writing plugins for WordPress is a new thing for me, and I’m very excited about having written my first one. It wasn’t a whole lot more than making modifications to an existing WordPress function, but it was something that I wanted to have in terms of functionality, and something that I couldn’t find elsewhere in other plugins. So, I tried it myself, based on the info received on a support forum, and have now released it to the public!

If any of you have WordPress (I don’t know if you can install additional plugins on WordPress.com blogs, or just self-hosted WordPress blogs like I have), and would be interested in being something of a beta tester on this, download it and let me know what needs changed or what works well.

Thanks! I hope you all are having a blessed day. I hope to post again soon.

Until next time,

steve

n May, 2006, I wrote a post called “The Danger of Arrogance“. It was a reminder to myself that passionate feelings about something can sometimes lead to arrogance. In that post, referring to the way I had spoken with someone during a lunch meeting, I wrote:

Here I was diagnosing all the ills of the institutional church, pronouncing the cure, and expecting everyone to just say, “Ohhh, but of course. You’re right!” And meanwhile, I ignored the voice of the Spirit of God prompting me to back off and humble myself.

Well, I still find it difficult to find the fine line between passion and arrogance. And I still find it difficult to know how to talk about some of the things I’m passionate about without it sounding like I am slamming anything different from my ideas.

Recently, a newfound blogging friend, Brandon (who has commented here a couple of times, and is married to Heather, who also comments here) wrote a post regarding the comments he has read on various blogs about “institutional church”. Brandon was wisely cautioning people not to criticize without offering solutions. He writes:

…I see…volumes of criticism (both constructive and otherwise) followed by no real solutions to the problems and weaknesses of the institutional church.

This concerns me, too, but not for the same reason as Brandon. I’m not as concerned about the other blogs out there as I am about my own blog. In fact, I asked Brandon in the comments section if mine was one of the blogs to which he referred. I asked that because I want so desperately to do something other than just criticize.

In a comment on a recent post, my dear friend Gordon Cloud gave me a gentle prod:

If I may put a bug in your ear, it would be nice sometime to hear you discuss how simple church is blessing you and enhancing your growth.

I understand what Gordon is saying. And I definitely would be remiss if I didn’t share some of the ways in which God has brought people into my life in a non-conventional church setting who have spurred me on to love and good deeds! If I didn’t share some of the things that have taken place in my life since stepping outside the institutional model, I would be telling only half the story.

But at the same time, I find myself just staring at the monitor, attempting to post in response to Gordon’s comment, and not knowing how to articulate all I want to say.

In an attempt to outline what I perceive to be alternative ways of accomplishing what Jesus intends for His church, I find myself with no other point of reference than the way things are conventionally done.

It’s what we know. It’s how most of us have grown up. I don’t know of anyone reading this blog who has been outside the institution for even 10 years. And for most of us, it’s either much more recent than that, or we’re still in the institution. More than a few of my most faithful commenters are not only still in the institution, but are leaders within that context! How that has ever happened, I have no clue!

So, whenever I find myself trying to describe what we pursue in a simple church setting, I find the constant frame of reference to be what we used to do in the conventional model. And quite honestly, because I’m sometimes responding to questions from people within the institution (such as my recent Q and A posts in response to Gordon), it seems impossible to respond in a way that doesn’t involve some form of comparison or critique.

How can I talk about multiple elder leadership without contrasting it with a senior pastor configuration? How can I talk about freedom for the Spirit to move within the body, allowing edification to come from and through anyone in the group without comparing it to passive spectators listening to one man preaching? How can I present passages such as Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 14 without showing how it compares to what we have been doing?

If there’s a way, I’m open to someone showing me that way. I guess I could just present my views and leave the comparisons up to the mind of the reader, but I don’t know how effective that is. Part of the reason I find this difficult is because I know how easy it is to justify whatever we’re doing by thinking that we’re being true to the principles of Scripture. I know I still struggle with that in my current context!

Brandon concluded his post with the sentence: “The institutional church needs help, but it’s not hopeless….” While I understand Brandon’s point, and I don’t really want to say that it’s “hopeless”, I also have attempted to present different ways of looking at that.

If the institutional church is still valid for some, I at least want to let others know that there are alternatives. Maybe some of what I write about doesn’t apply to people who are actually vocationally leading churches. But for the average Joe Layman sitting in the pew, I think there is a tendency to not even be aware that there is anything different they could experience.

I spent almost 35 years of my life “in church”, only about 6-8 cumulative years of that really involved in leadership. And I can tell you from that experience, that while I was sitting in the pews, mostly observing what the leaders were doing on the stage (since most of the experience in the pew is passive), I didn’t know there was anything else for me to do!

I never dreamed that there could be a more interactive, edifying, challenging way of meeting together. I never dreamed that I could be in a room with 5-10 or 15 other people and gain more insight into God’s word. I never dreamed that I could be sitting in a living room with others and worship deeply without having a professional band up in the front. Or that I could learn as much from the “ordinary housewife” sharing what God had been speaking to her as I could from the most gifted of preachers.

And when I did start to question why we were doing things the way we were, I never dreamed that there were others like me. I thought I was really going off the deep end. I figured I must be losing my mind completely. (Some of you probably think that actually is true about me! ) Until I discovered that there are thousands of people like me, living this out every week, every day.

I recently received an email from someone who had stumbled across this blog. I won’t reveal anything personal about this person, and I hope they don’t mind me quoting a slightly-edited portion of their email, but I share this only because this is a story I hear time and time again. And it is my story, too:

I have been amazed that God is moving in such a way [of leading people into simple church] all around the world…. What shocks me even more is that so many people have made this step already. I thought [I was] somehow unique…. It is encouraging to see that many have gone before me.

It is primarily for this reason that I write about simple church. I want people to know that they are not alone in questioning elements of the institutional church. And I want to provide a place to discuss some of those questions.

In doing that, I think I sometimes cross the line into arrogant criticism of the church. This is never my intent! Please believe that.

However, I am grateful for these times when I am forced to step back and, once again, re-evaluate how I express my thoughts. And I will continue to try to find that balance.

To any who have been offended by what I have written here, I am truly sorry. If there is anything I can do to right that wrong, please let me know. And may God receive all the glory for any positive that comes from this humble endeavor.

Until next time,

steve

t’s very rare for me to post twice in one day (and by the time I finished editing and publishing this, it was a couple of minutes after midnight anyway!), but 1 Peter 5:1-3 is something that I have continued to mull over since posting earlier today, and I see several very important things in those verses. Allow me to point some of them out here:

Therefore, I exhort the elders among you,…shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock.

1. I wonder if the word “among” is significant. The description of elder here is not one who is removed from the rest of the flock, nor one who is above the rest of the flock, nor one who is coming in from the outside, but “among” us.
2. Peter exhorts elders plural. He did not say, “I exhort the elder among you” or “I exhort the senior elder” or…you get the picture.
3. “not under compulsion” could possibly play into discussions about whether or not pastors should, as a general rule, be salaried employees of a corporation called a church. Why do I say this? Because…
4. Peter says this should be “voluntarily…and not for sordid gain”. Now, I realize that one can draw a salary without doing it “for sordid gain”, but I think it’s interesting that Peter seems to be focused quite a bit on the monetary aspect (or lack thereof) of “eldering”.
5. Note, too, that he equates the “voluntarily” part (if I’m reading this right) with “the will of God”. Could he be thinking back to Jesus’ instructions about not leading like the Gentiles did, by “lording it over” people? He was there when Jesus said it, ya know
6. “proving to be examples to the flock” sounds an awful lot like “living it out” in front of them. This is a whole lot more about how a man lives, than what he teaches or preaches.

Now, most churches I know of and have been in are very good at having “volunteer” elders (well, apart from the “hey, Bob, we need to fill an elder slot for the next year. I know you’d allow us to nominate you, right?”), but does our “one man up top” structure encourage people to look at the lives of the elders? Or does it encourage them to look at the pastor alone for their leadership? And how much are they able to learn from the pastor’s life vs. how much they attempt to learn from his teaching/preaching?

Until next time,

steve

n part 1, I dealt with the first of three questions from Gordon Cloud regarding some differences in the simpler approach to church “structure”, vis-à-vis more traditional, conventional models of church administration. In this post, I would like to move on to the second and third questions. To review, the three questions were:

1. Where does the Bible mandate multiple elders? (I know it gives a historical reference to their existence, but it does to pastor/teachers as well)
2. In the simple church model, where do the biblical offices of pastor and deacon fit in?
3. Where do musicians fit in? (You’re going to have a hard time convincing me that God hasn’t equipped you for this ministry! )

Gordon asks in the second question about the “biblical offices of pastor and deacon”. The wording of this question reveals some of the presuppositions that are brought to these types of discussions, and results in a bit of a loaded question, so bear with me while I dissect it!

First of all, the adjective “biblical” gets used a lot to imply that the noun modified is mandated by Scripture and is therefore necessary for “correct” ecclesiology. I’m not necessarily saying that Gordon was consciously thinking this when he used the word “biblical”, but I think it’s necessary first of all to examine whether or not “offices” are biblical, either for pastor or deacon, in light of this question.

One could possibly make the case for the office of deacon. 1 Timothy 3 begins with instructions regarding “any man [who] aspires to the office of overseer”, which appears from Scripture to be synonymous with “elder”. Then, in verse 8, Paul continues with “Deacons likewise”, which appears grammatically to put deacons in the same category as elders/overseers with regard to the term “office”.

However, no such instructions can be found for an “office of pastor”. In fact, the only time the word “pastor” is used in the New Testament, with regard to the church (and not literal shepherds or Jesus Himself), is in Ephesians 4. I have made the point on this blog before that there are problems using Ephesians 4:11 to defend our modern view of “pastor”, and especially that of “senior pastor”. Two of the problems are listed here:

• The “pastors” mentioned in Ephesians 4 are “gifts” to the Church, not necessarily positions or offices to be filled.
• If we maintain that an “office of pastor” is necessary based on Ephesians 4, then we must reckon with the offices of apostle, prophet, evangelist, and teacher (if one does not hyphenate pastor-teacher into one gift, which is possible to do).

I have heard some in the past attempt to apply passages regarding “elders” to “pastors”, and thereby find much more NT support for the “office of pastor”. Based on some of the descriptions and instructions regarding elders (most notably, 1 Peter 5:1-3), I think it is quite possible to view pastors as elders and vice-versa.

The difficulty with this, though, is that it ends up leading back to the discussion on multiple elders. Is the NT record indicative of one elder leading the church? Some refer to the “senior pastor” as “the teaching elder”, or some “first among equals”, etc. but these designations are nowhere found in Scripture. The only distinction that is made among elders or “shepherds” is that Jesus is the Chief Shepherd. For example, here is 1 Peter 5:1-4 (NASB):

Therefore, I exhort the elders among you, as your fellow elder and witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker also of the glory that is to be revealed, shepherd the flock of God among you, exercising oversight not under compulsion, but voluntarily, according to the will of God; and not for sordid gain, but with eagerness; nor yet as lording it over those allotted to your charge, but proving to be examples to the flock. And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.

Peter contrasts between earthly “shepherds” and Jesus, “the Chief Shepherd”. Not between “pastors” and “elders” or “senior pastor” and other “staff pastors”.

So, we’ve dealt with the “office of pastor”, but what about the deacons? I recently made this point in a discussion somewhere else (although at the moment, I can’t recall where!) that deacons existed in Acts 6 to fill a particular need. There is no indication that this “office” continued on in every single church. However, Paul does give instructions, as I’ve already noted, as to the qualities of a deacon, so it is quite possible that deacons were “the norm” in all of the churches in the NT.

The point that I want to make here isn’t so much that deacons did or did not exist in some churches. The point, again, is with regard to their functioning, and what that role is to the body. I see no evidence that any of these gifts are holes that must be filled at all times in every church. But to the extent that the Spirit gifts and calls people in the body for these roles, they function organically in the body.

So, with all of this in mind, my response to Gordon would be that my experience with simple church and interaction with others on a similar journey is that all of the gifts and types of servants mentioned in the Bible are legitimate roles in the body of Christ. Pastors, elders, deacons, etc. are not opposed by simple church models.

But here is the key difference between the simpler method of church and the conventional model that we see around us: In a simple church environment, the recognition of these gifts (and the exercise of them) is a much more organic, informal process. Simple churches do not generally hire someone (and especially not from the outside) to do the work of shepherding the flock. Rather, those among them who are gifted in those areas function in that capacity as needed.

It bears repeating once again that the gifts given to the church are for the maturing of the body, and not for the lifelong listening/receiving by the members of the body.

I’ve gone pretty long on this second question, like I did with the first, so let me just briefly answer the third (because the answer is quite brief anyway).

Where do musicians fit in? The mentions of music in the New Testament (with regard to the church), are simply that we should speak to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. While at times, I do share my musical talents with different assemblies of believers, I do not believe that I am gifted musically for that purpose alone, nor do I believe that my musical talent entitles me to any special position or status within the church. But the question relates to music within the simple church concept, so let me address it in that light.

Music is actually one of those areas that often causes confusion when one steps outside of the traditional structures of our churches. Quite often, many will assume that we must have some form of music during our gatherings, and quickly, the move is made to identify someone in the group who can “lead” that. However, I believe this is completely unnecessary. According to 1 Corinthians 14, anyone can (and should) bring a song as the Spirit leads.

I do not derive my philosophy of music in the church in the same way that some conclude that musical instruments are inappropriate. So I’m not saying that certain uses of music within the church are wrong, per se. However, I don’t believe that “congregational singing” is as essential to our gatherings as we often seem to think it is. In fact, if I could say this without it sounding really obnoxious, I think that the reason we have elevated “congregational singing” so much is because this is one of the few ways we allow the otherwise passive congregation to participate.

In light of what I have just shared, I will attempt to write a post in the near future outlining some of my particular thoughts on how music can be used within the gathering of believers.

Until next time,

steve