We attend school, but we do not attend a hospital. I don’t believer we attend work either. We do not attend a pub or a bar but we attend a music concert. We also attend a movie premier. We attend a hockey game, but if I play hockey, I can not say I’m attending the hockey game – nor do I attend the arena.
Why don’t we attend a hospital? Because we bring something and we get something. Illness and healing.
At our places of employment we most definitely bring something to the table – our time, our skills, our experience(s), and our expertise – and we definitely get something – our paycheques – and hopefully some sense of accomplishment and value.
When we frequent a bar or a pub we become part of that crowd that evening. The bartender does not set the “atmosphere”, the crowd does. We’re getting closer to abandoning the one-man-show issue.
When I attend a music concert or a movie premier I am only an observer – a spectator. Apart from paying admission, I am only taking something away with me. I am bringing nothing. I am sharing nothing.
So why is it that we are supposed to attend church? The answer is; I think we are not supposed to attend church. The fact is we do attend church. We attend church like we attend a movie premier or a music concert. We attend as an observer and a spectator. We walk away with something (hopefully!) but bring nothing – maybe only the price of admission.
I don’t think this is what Paul meant when he describes the “church” as one body (1 Corinthians 12:12-27). I don’t think Paul wanted us to buy an admission ticket and attend a hockey game. I think Paul wanted us to buy hockey gear and play hockey! When will we stop attending church and start “playing” it? We don’t attend church. We are church.
So where do we buy the hockey gear? How do we play the game? What does that look like?
There exists a very real, very practical aspect of church today that necessitates a Business Model. It’s a simply fact of economics. Bills need to be paid. Money needs to be made. Take away the money and the bills don’t get paid. Take away parishioners and you take away the numbers. Take away the numbers and the money goes away.
Until “church”, or the Institutional Church, stops functioning on an Economic Business Model, this 80-20 will never go away.
I find this disturbing. I hear talk about trying to emulate church leadership after the New Testament times with its pastors and elders, and presbyters, etc., but what I repeatedly see is the Economic Business Model. I don’t believe Jesus and His 12 Disciples’ ministry was based upon this model.
Before we can even begin to entertain how church is “done” and before we can begin even asking the question, we must first look at changing how the most basic, practical, and mundane issues of how it is managed is done. How do we pay the rent? Or, maybe, even that’s asking the wrong question. Should we even be paying rent? The Church does not need a roof over her head. The Church is a Corporate Entity, but it is not a person like you and me.
But Church, as this Corporate Entity, has a roof over her head while individual people are left out in the cold of a spiritual wilderness. And I don’t believe this is what the Lord had ever intended.
Jesus said that He had sheep of other folds (John 10:16). He also repeatedly told Peter to “Feed my lambs”. “Take care of my sheep”. “Feed my sheep”. (John 21:15-17). So the question begs to be asked: Why does the church have a roof over her head while there are people left out in the cold of a spiritual wilderness?
Good article! I'd be very interested to here where this goes and if any results come about!
Thought provoking article. I agree with Seph and am also interrested in where this will go. Nevertheless, there is a joy in the presence of many believers worshipping together (I believe that worship is more than just the music time, btw.) How can this be accomplished without a building or renting a facility for the "event"? I am involved in a group of several couples who gather at least weekly but not on a set night. We are intentinal about our relationship and our spiritual journey. Once every 4 - 6 weeks we have a larger meeting in a home where many like-minded people come together and celebrate. (This gathering is more like a traditional church.) I (we) wonder what the Lord is doing and if this is how our fellowship should be. We are all from and have been in leadership positions in a the IC. Question - How do small groups of followers impact large problems i.e. hurriciane relief?
I find myself confronted with the inadequacy of the current church model as well. If I were to offer some sort of alternative, it would be based on the house churches of the 1st century. In those small groups of families, people would have the freedom to share their lives together in a more meaningful way than the current model often allows. Evangelism wouldn't be inviting someone to Sunday school--it would be inviting someone to hang out at a friend's house. The house church would provide love and support in a very deep way.
However, we live in a society filled with cultural movements, flat screen TVs, and special effects as well as natural disasters and terrorism. In order to engage society at its best and worst, there needs to be something bigger than the house church. This is where "para-house-church organizations" would come in. The "para-house-church organizations" would serve as a point of connection for the small churches. They would provide occasional "conferences" (for lack of a better term) with worship, preaching, and training for the members of the house churches as well as a way for the small house churches to organize large-scale responses to things like natural disasters and terrorism.
The small house churches would be a place for intimacy and loving-support, and the "para-house-church organizations" would provide a greater sense of belonging and would help equip the house churches to serve each other and their communities.
Just a thought.
Why do people "go" to church? What are they looking for? Evidently, about 20 percent want to be involved in some kind of service, the rest are looking for something else. I know a few reasons people go. Some do it out of a sense of obligation because that's the way they have been taught. To these, it doesn't make so much difference what happens at church (within reason). It's enough that they were there and did what they should do: obligation accomplished. Others are there hoping they can, for a brief time in their hectic weekly schedule, experience some peace, joy, love or transcendent presence. Many go because it's better than being alone. I think this "Eleanor Rigby" crowd is probably huge, and this is an area that most churches don't understand very well. In the book of Titus, Paul requires that elders be gifted in hospitality. Jesus was good at this...he even got criticized for the amount of partying he did! Did you ever see a church leadership job posting that had this requirement on it? Probably not. I think the reason elders required the gift of hospitality is that so much of the churches ministry took place in home based small groups. Maybe the 80-20 rule is just something to be lived with. Bikers proudly wear their 1% patch to celebrate a comment once made by law enforcement that 99% of people were law-abiding. So, print up some 20% patches and let them be worn by people who want to serve the 80%!
There are so many problems with the way most people do church, I'll only mention a few. First, and I know it goes against the grain of most people is that the churches are filled with unregererate people and we welcomes them in by leaving the welcome mat at the front door. The church is "only" believer anyway so why bring in the tares. Second, the church is arranged along the buisness model with a CEO in charge. I'm sorry but Jesus is my CEO and his Holy Spirit leads me and I will not attend a "church" that has a man as CEO. My wife and I meet at a home where there is 100 percent participation because many have teaching gifts that is normally monopolized by the professionals and they do a much better job because it is from the Holy Spirit, not a seminary.
I am encouraged by this article. As a veteran staff member in churches I have been puzzled by the way we do nay things including bringing people into participation in the ministries of the church. I think Mr. harting has done a good job of defining the problem and offering some thoughtful insight into approaching it in a new manner.
Thank you for writing an article that raises important issues wihtout belittling, degrading or simply dismissing people.
Well Done!
good article. i think this will be a real challenge for church leaders to grasp let alone implement. i am part of a church plant in los angeles that has the vision to meet primarily in people's homes 3 weeks out of the month and then altogether once a month on sundays for a big blowout corporate service. sounds great but they are struggling with it. when i started attending (uh oh there's that word) they had shut down the home groups and had just one big meeting and the big blowout meeting once a month (they serve a meal too at the monthly service), so it felt more like a regular church especially since it was all happening on sundays. interestingly, we have just lost our corporate meeting space. it was a cool artsy loftlike space, and we will miss it, but now i'm hoping we'll be forced to go back to the home model where i think real community will happen. i love the idea of also having a once a month meeting altogether, but if that's all there is i don't believe community will really take hold.
This article was thought-provoking. So much so that I starting looking at percentages in our young church. Good news is I figured around 65% of our people are involved in some kind of ministry. Looks like we have some room for improvement! And I would say our church life doesn't revolve around Sunday morning but it definitely is 'a' focus.
This makes me wonder if a church culture of expectation (but hopefully not legalism) and equipping and empowering--even if the big gathering on Sunday mornings remains central--doesn't move us towards abolishing the 80/20 rule. I say structure is part of it, values and expectation is more so. In my experience if you keep the bar high (and biblical) much of the 80% doesn't stick around too long...or even better they start to contribute and participate.
There are a number of factors. Mike has expressed something important.
In moving to an "emerging church" I have found a lot I like but also am somewhat frustrated at how much it follows traditional modern church models which I'm not used to living in. An effect is to feed the 80/20 phenomenon.
My background is with "unprogrammed" Friends (Quaker) meetings. There is no order of service, and generally no paid staff. The spectator mentality that afflicts most churches is not catered to. Maybe 20% of the group are the ones who do a lot of the work, but far more than that do some of the work or it simply isn't viable.
This doesn't mean we should just copy them, but it should open a broader perspective than just looking at tweaking the same old modern church structure. Many of the things accepted as givens don't need to be. It's interesting that my church has a staff of 14 (admittedly, several of them are part-time) while a nearby Friends meeting that is a little larger and very active existed for centuries with no paid staff at all, and now has one part-time paid administrative person.
Although I really like our Senior Pastor, I was one of the few who voted against hiring him. It had nothing to do with him. Rather, I question the superman Senior Pastor model that the job description called for. The church has a Leadership Team of non-staff, sort of a Board of Elders, but doesn't know what to do with it now that we have a pastor who is really full-time at the Church (when Brian McLaren was still on staff, it was used to fill in because he spend so much time speaking and writing that a lot of the normal Senior Pastor stuff he couldn't do). That's an indictment of the Church, IMHO.
Now I realize that many Emerging Churches do not follow the modern church model as much as Cedar Ridge does. But we all need to look at how the Body of Christ really should be functioning.
Great thought provocing article! I agree that the current models for Churches are inadequete. However, I fundamentally disagree with the 20/80 thought. First of all it is only applied to the Church organization proper. What is not applied in this line of thought is the work that is performed outside of the Church's walls. It doesn't include the people who are putting their faith and belief into action by being witnesses in the community through a large variety of other activities. It is usually promoted by people who feel that they are doing ALL the work in the proper Church organization. When we examine the scriptures we can see this same principal in play. After all we can see the active ministries of Paul, John, and Peter, (the 20%), but we see nothing of the ministries of Simon, Andrew, or the other disciples (the 80%). This doesn't mean that these other disciples didn't do the work of the Church. I would put forth that their ministries were just as powerful and important.
Additionally, I see flaws in the "home Church" model as well. I personally don't believe this is the model presented by the early Church. While Jesus did take his ministry into gatherings at homes, he also and mostly spoke out in the public and in the Synagogues. The same holds true for Paul and Peter as well. Jesus repeatedly told us to "GO". The fundamental principle behing any Christian Church should be to raise up disciples to send out. Home Churches, as well as small groups, and even the current Churches are are by principal designed to "draw in".
While the Bible does encourage us to gather together to encourage and support each other. It never implies to stay there. While Paul established Churches and they probably gatherd in homes. We see various disciples going out from these Churches to continue spreading the gospel.
That's my 2 cents.
Jon Anderhub
Nice thoughts, Alan.
As long as the "main event" mentality continues to be perceived as successful by counting heads and dollars, the mega-church will continue to justify its existence by pulling out the scripture verses they want to work for them. I can't tell you how many times I have heard building programs and expansion of worship services justified by the preacher refering to the Great Commission in Matthew 28. Last time I read this passage the gist of Christ's challenge to his disciples was to go and make more disciples. Interesting how the term "discipleship" has fallen into disuse because the mega-church has more or less deemed it impractical.
I question whether any small spiritual group needs oversite from a larger institution when this only serves to create expectation of numerical growth and the question of whether or not the group will contribute financial support. From my seat, it appears that we are saying that it is not feasible to rely on the power of God, the name of Christ, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. It seems like such a "papal" model when any individual or group is required to get it's teaching from the institutional church. The church is the Body of Christ however, whenever and wherever it meets, and it doesn't need a professional class of ministers of a multi-million dollar facility to make this happen.
Unfortunately, Alan, the heart of the problem lies beyond church structure to the very way in which we look at the church and its purpose. The problem is that we spend way too much time focusing on the church and how to make it better. What we are really doing is focusing on ourselves. This self-love (or self-hatred) is at the very heart of the problem that you are writing about. Unfortunately, in a way, you are feeding the problem.
Who, in the Bible, spent the most time focusing on their own internal structure; who started their own sect because the one in power wasn't good enough, holy enough; who stoned the one's that broke the rules? The PHARISEES! Jesus, however, went into the community. He went to the poor. He went to the sick. He healed people on the street. He taught in the hills. The focus for Jesus was not the temple but the community.
For the Body of Christ, the Church--yes, that's right, the Church is Christ's body present in the world--the church service is like the cardio-respiratory system. It supplies blood and oxygen, life and vigor to the body parts. But if that's all the Church is then we have a dead Church. Where are the muscles? Where are the hands and feet at work in the community? THESE ARE WHAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT? WHAT "SEEKERS" ARE LOOKING FOR? No one cares if someone has a really good heart and set of lungs if THEY ARE NOT USING THEM!
What I say is stop worrying about structure. Stop caring about the 80-20 rule. And start getting your hands and feet dirty in the community. Love your brothers and sisters in Christ. Listen to them. Pray for them. And lead them out to the streets and preach the good news with your hands and with your mouth. That's the Church!
What a current topic! Something is stirring all across the world. This has definately been my personal question for a while now. Something that has continued to come back to me is that I can not judge other churches and how they work because in the end they and we are responsible to God for our obedience to Him. God is out of our box. It is not for me to judge other churches in whether they are right or wrong as long as they are keeping to the fundamentals of scripture, the format is not important.
I definately believe God is doing a new thing in this next generation of what church looks like, however I don't think that means the other is wrong, it is just different. There is new wine that needs a new wine skin but that doesn't mean we throw the old wine out. God wants to preserve both.
I think we would do well to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus and honour those who have gone before us, seeing what God is doing next. The mega church is still reaching those that the small churches aren't and vice versa. As long as community is kept and Jesus the focuss, let us keep building His kingdom and not our own.
Great work.
Naomi from Australia.
Maybe 20% seen and 80% hidden. Probably not but we don't know. I would fit into the 80% most of the time, according to these stats anyway. One of the reasons I need the church is to come together and refuel b/c we find strength coming together as a body of believers. This is where we are reminded that we are not alone and that our purpose is the same... to reach and save the lost. Some of us love structure and/or are called to a paticular program of service in the church building. Our church as we know it today might not make it without these people that have blessed us with "their" gifts. The programs that seem to run short on workers, well, if God isn't calling people in to fill the vacancys then maybe God is trying to shape us in a different direction. If we are being disobedient to a calling, then God will work on our heart. We as a body, need to try our best to not guilt trip those who "seem" to be doing nothing. We need to change our thinking by faith and start believing that they are fulfilling their calling! Can you imagine the change in the atmosphere! We then could start encouraging our invisible workers by saying, "Thank you for those who reach out to their neighbor, thank you to those who tell people about the gospel, thank you to those who have bible studies in their homes, and thank you for the intecessors that pray for our church and the lost. Alot of you are not known, but by faith we know you are there and we thank you." We just need to remember that God has given us all a territory and it may not be in one of the church programs. Would we be less oppressed as a church if we saw things from this perspective of faith?
I have a novel idea, let's replace the pastor with Christ. The word pastor is mention once in the Bible but by tradition from Rome, the "church" has made a man to be the sole harbinger of the Holy Spirit in the gathering. The clergy is the problem, just see what Jesus say's about the Nicolatians. My wife and I gather with Christians somehow, someway about every day without an "educated" man on a pulpit philosophying down on us. signed finally home.
I hear questions like "how could we help with herrican relief" if we are only small groups--How did the New Testament church do it? If we are small communities we will be able to meet needs even more. No more 70%going to paid staff--25% to buildings, and a combined 5% to missions and benevolence.
100% of the New Testament churches collection money went to help believers in need--now it is the complete opposite and most people are unaware or don't care.
Great comments mike--I am guessing you read Frank Viola??
While I do agree with Mike to some extent, I do disagree with never having any paid positions. Paul says that if there are any among you who have dedicated themselves to study and teaching and do a good job of it, they deserve to be paid some compensation for their time, since they are sacrificing some of their time to aid the body. So, the early church did give some of it's funds to someone who was an excellent teacher- though you're right, probably not the bulk of what they brought in.
As we get in our cars and drive to church, we again ignore the 2nd commandment like we do every other day of the week. If rather we looked at our neighborhoods as the congregation that God has given to us and spend this time interacting with them...loving them...paying attention to the lazuras's that are laying at the ends of our gates, with bleeding sores that the dogs are licking. These that are longing to eat even a crumb of real spiritual food...only they don't even know that we have such food, because they don't know who we really are or that we actually have a life with God the source of Life.
Yes the 2nd Commandment says to Love your neighbor as yourself. Are you just now trying to justify yourself for not loving, let alone knowing your neighbor, by saying, "yeah but who is my neighbor?"
OK say we were to begin to befriend our neighbors and just treat them like they are worthwhile people, each of them as being a person we can appreciate, bring a plate of cookies over to, or ask them over for coffee. Or if they are painting their house, just show up in old chlothes and a paintbrush.
After a friendship has begun, at some point you might let them know that you aren't satisfied with the current church structure. You might find they feel the same way. Don't expect to win those that are entrenched in the modern church, but go to those that aren't. King David & Jesus took on the outcast and the unwanted, why do we think we should bring over all the mainstream churchy churchy churchy type people.
We could begin to meet in homes but not allow ourselves to merely take on the same "in these walls structure". We must follow in the footsteps of Jesus and spend time with another person in daily life type stuff. That's were real living is learned, where it is seen and has a chance to rub off onto another and take root. If I am invited in to a home, not a guest, but rather a friend or an uncle, I would eat dinner and see how a family can interact, how a wise father deals with children who do act foolish at times. I would enjoy helping with the dishes after dinner, and see first hand how parents put their children to bed without yelling at the kids. You can read all this stuff in a book, hear it in a sermon, have a counselor explain it to you. But when you see and experience it first hand, you can bet the reproduction of it in my own life will have a 1000 times better chance of success.
That's what Jesus meant by make disciples. We don't have to live together, that's a bit overboard and overwhelming, but we can spend some time together, and that's enough. To be treated like a worthwhile person, a friend worth knowing, a friend worth having. That's what we need. That's the morsle, the cup of cool water, etc, that Jesus is asking for and He's right accross our street.
We being rich, rich in the earthly and in the spiritual knowledge, think that by possesing these gifts that we will have these riches through all of eternity.
But allas, all were given the talents to work with. But not all put them to use for the master. The one who didn't was thrown out into outer darkness where there was weeping and gnashing of teath, and where the master said "depart from me for I never knew you" etc etc etc. and finally we think that we are rich and have need of nothing (because we know so much and have so much in resorces. But because we spend so much time entertaining ourselves with either TV's Movie's or even our great worship services which are just meetings and there's not much real service that goes on; I'm afraid all the alter calls whether I fell down or someone pushed me down, all of the cool things that happened "Ooohh come and see Gold Dust" which we called "manifestations" never really made the church into a people who loved their neighbors so that now we are overwhelmed with followers. Besides manifestations should be Christs Love flowing through us forcusing on the needs of our neighbors this will automatically winn them to Christ without our having to hound them like an irritatingly pushy salesman.
We can meet in homes three time a month, then meet in a bigger building once month, this way one building could service 4 full congregation, spreading the financial burden over 4 times the people. Also the people would be doing most of the ministering to oneanother and to the rest of the people in their neighborhoods, where the other neighbors can see and become a part of something worhwhile.
Thanks for Listening Kirk
Sounds like my kids used to when they were teenagers - " I do all the work and no-one lese is doing anything!". My experience must be unique because I have found that 20% do the work because they only want people who will 'play their games in their way'. If it is fun everyone wants to play! (regardless of the game-e.g. it doesnt matter if its traditional or emergent)
Just a suggestion: I reckon every successful church (well functioning as a community of believers) actually has two roles - one is the cruise director to keep the '99' statisfied and the deck chairs arranged in an acceptable order; and a captain - to steer the ship and facilitate the '1' coming back on board.
Get rid of the 80% by starting your own church - bet you find it a bit boring.
Excellent point, Glenda. I confess I get a bit tired of everyone wining about being the real believers who do all the work while everyone else is a slaggard. Each should do what God has called them to do and be. We don't need to stand in judgment on everyone else. I've been a part of all kinds of churches including house churches. They can be just as dysfunctional. As long as we keep focusing on the structure we're probably missing the point.
I agree with the article that the current structure caters to the 80/20 model. As far as corporate worship goes, that's not necessarily a problem. Others may do other things the rest of the week in or out of church. Still others are at different stages of spiritual development and may do more later.
Let's just relax and love God and neighbor ...
The model for the order of the Church body is clearly represented by Jesus and his disciples. Jesus being the Savior/Shepherd/Pastor and leader of a group of folk that called themselves disciples. Then he commissions them to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every living creature. That was the great commission. Which is also our job today. The other thing I am reminded of is that Martha sat at the feet of Jesus while Mary served. There will always be some that will do the work of whatever sort that it is and some that is comfortable just sitting at his feet. Jesus did not ridicule her for just sitting there doing apparently nothing. As a matter of fact he said "she has chosen that good part." That seems a little like the 80% to me that are comfortable with just sitting. However we should take into consideration that everyone has his or her proper gift of what ever manner it is. Mary being the cook, server and possibly dishwasher did the manual labor as some do today. But Martha chose to listen attentively to all the words that Jesus spoke so her life would be changed drastically. That is the other 20% if it is fact a 80/20 rule in Churches today. Regardless of what part we play, there is a need to be about our Fathers business and a need to sit at his feet to learn for a life changing experience.
(16)
We attend school, but we do not attend a hospital. I don’t believer we attend work either. We do not attend a pub or a bar but we attend a music concert. We also attend a movie premier. We attend a hockey game, but if I play hockey, I can not say I’m attending the hockey game – nor do I attend the arena.
Why don’t we attend a hospital? Because we bring something and we get something. Illness and healing.
At our places of employment we most definitely bring something to the table – our time, our skills, our experience(s), and our expertise – and we definitely get something – our paycheques – and hopefully some sense of accomplishment and value.
When we frequent a bar or a pub we become part of that crowd that evening. The bartender does not set the “atmosphere”, the crowd does. We’re getting closer to abandoning the one-man-show issue.
When I attend a music concert or a movie premier I am only an observer – a spectator. Apart from paying admission, I am only taking something away with me. I am bringing nothing. I am sharing nothing.
So why is it that we are supposed to attend church? The answer is; I think we are not supposed to attend church. The fact is we do attend church. We attend church like we attend a movie premier or a music concert. We attend as an observer and a spectator. We walk away with something (hopefully!) but bring nothing – maybe only the price of admission.
I don’t think this is what Paul meant when he describes the “church” as one body (1 Corinthians 12:12-27). I don’t think Paul wanted us to buy an admission ticket and attend a hockey game. I think Paul wanted us to buy hockey gear and play hockey! When will we stop attending church and start “playing” it? We don’t attend church. We are church.
So where do we buy the hockey gear? How do we play the game? What does that look like?
There exists a very real, very practical aspect of church today that necessitates a Business Model. It’s a simply fact of economics. Bills need to be paid. Money needs to be made. Take away the money and the bills don’t get paid. Take away parishioners and you take away the numbers. Take away the numbers and the money goes away.
Until “church”, or the Institutional Church, stops functioning on an Economic Business Model, this 80-20 will never go away.
I find this disturbing. I hear talk about trying to emulate church leadership after the New Testament times with its pastors and elders, and presbyters, etc., but what I repeatedly see is the Economic Business Model. I don’t believe Jesus and His 12 Disciples’ ministry was based upon this model.
Before we can even begin to entertain how church is “done” and before we can begin even asking the question, we must first look at changing how the most basic, practical, and mundane issues of how it is managed is done. How do we pay the rent? Or, maybe, even that’s asking the wrong question. Should we even be paying rent? The Church does not need a roof over her head. The Church is a Corporate Entity, but it is not a person like you and me.
But Church, as this Corporate Entity, has a roof over her head while individual people are left out in the cold of a spiritual wilderness. And I don’t believe this is what the Lord had ever intended.
Jesus said that He had sheep of other folds (John 10:16). He also repeatedly told Peter to “Feed my lambs”. “Take care of my sheep”. “Feed my sheep”. (John 21:15-17). So the question begs to be asked: Why does the church have a roof over her head while there are people left out in the cold of a spiritual wilderness?
Good article! I'd be very interested to here where this goes and if any results come about!
Posted by Seph | Posted at 12/27/2006 9:01 PMThought provoking article. I agree with Seph and am also interrested in where this will go. Nevertheless, there is a joy in the presence of many believers worshipping together (I believe that worship is more than just the music time, btw.) How can this be accomplished without a building or renting a facility for the "event"? I am involved in a group of several couples who gather at least weekly but not on a set night. We are intentinal about our relationship and our spiritual journey. Once every 4 - 6 weeks we have a larger meeting in a home where many like-minded people come together and celebrate. (This gathering is more like a traditional church.) I (we) wonder what the Lord is doing and if this is how our fellowship should be. We are all from and have been in leadership positions in a the IC. Question - How do small groups of followers impact large problems i.e. hurriciane relief? Posted by Gordontaj | Posted at 12/29/2006 7:48 AM
I find myself confronted with the inadequacy of the current church model as well. If I were to offer some sort of alternative, it would be based on the house churches of the 1st century. In those small groups of families, people would have the freedom to share their lives together in a more meaningful way than the current model often allows. Evangelism wouldn't be inviting someone to Sunday school--it would be inviting someone to hang out at a friend's house. The house church would provide love and support in a very deep way.
However, we live in a society filled with cultural movements, flat screen TVs, and special effects as well as natural disasters and terrorism. In order to engage society at its best and worst, there needs to be something bigger than the house church. This is where "para-house-church organizations" would come in. The "para-house-church organizations" would serve as a point of connection for the small churches. They would provide occasional "conferences" (for lack of a better term) with worship, preaching, and training for the members of the house churches as well as a way for the small house churches to organize large-scale responses to things like natural disasters and terrorism.
The small house churches would be a place for intimacy and loving-support, and the "para-house-church organizations" would provide a greater sense of belonging and would help equip the house churches to serve each other and their communities.
Just a thought.
Posted by Matt | Posted at 12/31/2006 12:01 AMWhy do people "go" to church? What are they looking for? Evidently, about 20 percent want to be involved in some kind of service, the rest are looking for something else. I know a few reasons people go. Some do it out of a sense of obligation because that's the way they have been taught. To these, it doesn't make so much difference what happens at church (within reason). It's enough that they were there and did what they should do: obligation accomplished. Others are there hoping they can, for a brief time in their hectic weekly schedule, experience some peace, joy, love or transcendent presence. Many go because it's better than being alone. I think this "Eleanor Rigby" crowd is probably huge, and this is an area that most churches don't understand very well. In the book of Titus, Paul requires that elders be gifted in hospitality. Jesus was good at this...he even got criticized for the amount of partying he did! Did you ever see a church leadership job posting that had this requirement on it? Probably not. I think the reason elders required the gift of hospitality is that so much of the churches ministry took place in home based small groups. Maybe the 80-20 rule is just something to be lived with. Bikers proudly wear their 1% patch to celebrate a comment once made by law enforcement that 99% of people were law-abiding. So, print up some 20% patches and let them be worn by people who want to serve the 80%! Posted by Hugh | Posted at 12/31/2006 9:57 AM
There are so many problems with the way most people do church, I'll only mention a few. First, and I know it goes against the grain of most people is that the churches are filled with unregererate people and we welcomes them in by leaving the welcome mat at the front door. The church is "only" believer anyway so why bring in the tares. Second, the church is arranged along the buisness model with a CEO in charge. I'm sorry but Jesus is my CEO and his Holy Spirit leads me and I will not attend a "church" that has a man as CEO. My wife and I meet at a home where there is 100 percent participation because many have teaching gifts that is normally monopolized by the professionals and they do a much better job because it is from the Holy Spirit, not a seminary. Posted by Mike | Posted at 01/16/2007 6:05 AM
I am encouraged by this article. As a veteran staff member in churches I have been puzzled by the way we do nay things including bringing people into participation in the ministries of the church. I think Mr. harting has done a good job of defining the problem and offering some thoughtful insight into approaching it in a new manner.
Thank you for writing an article that raises important issues wihtout belittling, degrading or simply dismissing people.
Well Done!
Posted by virgil | Posted at 01/22/2007 11:34 AMgood article. i think this will be a real challenge for church leaders to grasp let alone implement. i am part of a church plant in los angeles that has the vision to meet primarily in people's homes 3 weeks out of the month and then altogether once a month on sundays for a big blowout corporate service. sounds great but they are struggling with it. when i started attending (uh oh there's that word) they had shut down the home groups and had just one big meeting and the big blowout meeting once a month (they serve a meal too at the monthly service), so it felt more like a regular church especially since it was all happening on sundays. interestingly, we have just lost our corporate meeting space. it was a cool artsy loftlike space, and we will miss it, but now i'm hoping we'll be forced to go back to the home model where i think real community will happen. i love the idea of also having a once a month meeting altogether, but if that's all there is i don't believe community will really take hold. Posted by linda | Posted at 02/03/2007 11:50 AM
This article was thought-provoking. So much so that I starting looking at percentages in our young church. Good news is I figured around 65% of our people are involved in some kind of ministry. Looks like we have some room for improvement! And I would say our church life doesn't revolve around Sunday morning but it definitely is 'a' focus.
This makes me wonder if a church culture of expectation (but hopefully not legalism) and equipping and empowering--even if the big gathering on Sunday mornings remains central--doesn't move us towards abolishing the 80/20 rule. I say structure is part of it, values and expectation is more so. In my experience if you keep the bar high (and biblical) much of the 80% doesn't stick around too long...or even better they start to contribute and participate.
Posted by Matt | Posted at 02/22/2007 3:56 PMThere are a number of factors. Mike has expressed something important.
In moving to an "emerging church" I have found a lot I like but also am somewhat frustrated at how much it follows traditional modern church models which I'm not used to living in. An effect is to feed the 80/20 phenomenon.
My background is with "unprogrammed" Friends (Quaker) meetings. There is no order of service, and generally no paid staff. The spectator mentality that afflicts most churches is not catered to. Maybe 20% of the group are the ones who do a lot of the work, but far more than that do some of the work or it simply isn't viable.
This doesn't mean we should just copy them, but it should open a broader perspective than just looking at tweaking the same old modern church structure. Many of the things accepted as givens don't need to be. It's interesting that my church has a staff of 14 (admittedly, several of them are part-time) while a nearby Friends meeting that is a little larger and very active existed for centuries with no paid staff at all, and now has one part-time paid administrative person.
Although I really like our Senior Pastor, I was one of the few who voted against hiring him. It had nothing to do with him. Rather, I question the superman Senior Pastor model that the job description called for. The church has a Leadership Team of non-staff, sort of a Board of Elders, but doesn't know what to do with it now that we have a pastor who is really full-time at the Church (when Brian McLaren was still on staff, it was used to fill in because he spend so much time speaking and writing that a lot of the normal Senior Pastor stuff he couldn't do). That's an indictment of the Church, IMHO.
Now I realize that many Emerging Churches do not follow the modern church model as much as Cedar Ridge does. But we all need to look at how the Body of Christ really should be functioning.
Posted by Bill Samuel | Posted at 02/22/2007 4:06 PMGreat thought provocing article! I agree that the current models for Churches are inadequete. However, I fundamentally disagree with the 20/80 thought. First of all it is only applied to the Church organization proper. What is not applied in this line of thought is the work that is performed outside of the Church's walls. It doesn't include the people who are putting their faith and belief into action by being witnesses in the community through a large variety of other activities. It is usually promoted by people who feel that they are doing ALL the work in the proper Church organization. When we examine the scriptures we can see this same principal in play. After all we can see the active ministries of Paul, John, and Peter, (the 20%), but we see nothing of the ministries of Simon, Andrew, or the other disciples (the 80%). This doesn't mean that these other disciples didn't do the work of the Church. I would put forth that their ministries were just as powerful and important.
Additionally, I see flaws in the "home Church" model as well. I personally don't believe this is the model presented by the early Church. While Jesus did take his ministry into gatherings at homes, he also and mostly spoke out in the public and in the Synagogues. The same holds true for Paul and Peter as well. Jesus repeatedly told us to "GO". The fundamental principle behing any Christian Church should be to raise up disciples to send out. Home Churches, as well as small groups, and even the current Churches are are by principal designed to "draw in".
While the Bible does encourage us to gather together to encourage and support each other. It never implies to stay there. While Paul established Churches and they probably gatherd in homes. We see various disciples going out from these Churches to continue spreading the gospel.
That's my 2 cents.
Jon Anderhub
Posted by Jon Anderhub | Posted at 02/23/2007 9:29 AMNice thoughts, Alan.
As long as the "main event" mentality continues to be perceived as successful by counting heads and dollars, the mega-church will continue to justify its existence by pulling out the scripture verses they want to work for them. I can't tell you how many times I have heard building programs and expansion of worship services justified by the preacher refering to the Great Commission in Matthew 28. Last time I read this passage the gist of Christ's challenge to his disciples was to go and make more disciples. Interesting how the term "discipleship" has fallen into disuse because the mega-church has more or less deemed it impractical.
I question whether any small spiritual group needs oversite from a larger institution when this only serves to create expectation of numerical growth and the question of whether or not the group will contribute financial support. From my seat, it appears that we are saying that it is not feasible to rely on the power of God, the name of Christ, and the leading of the Holy Spirit. It seems like such a "papal" model when any individual or group is required to get it's teaching from the institutional church. The church is the Body of Christ however, whenever and wherever it meets, and it doesn't need a professional class of ministers of a multi-million dollar facility to make this happen.
Posted by Dan Gilliam | Posted at 03/05/2007 9:17 AMUnfortunately, Alan, the heart of the problem lies beyond church structure to the very way in which we look at the church and its purpose. The problem is that we spend way too much time focusing on the church and how to make it better. What we are really doing is focusing on ourselves. This self-love (or self-hatred) is at the very heart of the problem that you are writing about. Unfortunately, in a way, you are feeding the problem.
Who, in the Bible, spent the most time focusing on their own internal structure; who started their own sect because the one in power wasn't good enough, holy enough; who stoned the one's that broke the rules? The PHARISEES! Jesus, however, went into the community. He went to the poor. He went to the sick. He healed people on the street. He taught in the hills. The focus for Jesus was not the temple but the community.
For the Body of Christ, the Church--yes, that's right, the Church is Christ's body present in the world--the church service is like the cardio-respiratory system. It supplies blood and oxygen, life and vigor to the body parts. But if that's all the Church is then we have a dead Church. Where are the muscles? Where are the hands and feet at work in the community? THESE ARE WHAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT? WHAT "SEEKERS" ARE LOOKING FOR? No one cares if someone has a really good heart and set of lungs if THEY ARE NOT USING THEM!
What I say is stop worrying about structure. Stop caring about the 80-20 rule. And start getting your hands and feet dirty in the community. Love your brothers and sisters in Christ. Listen to them. Pray for them. And lead them out to the streets and preach the good news with your hands and with your mouth. That's the Church!
Posted by Joe Bunting | Posted at 04/07/2007 11:22 AMWhat a current topic! Something is stirring all across the world. This has definately been my personal question for a while now. Something that has continued to come back to me is that I can not judge other churches and how they work because in the end they and we are responsible to God for our obedience to Him. God is out of our box. It is not for me to judge other churches in whether they are right or wrong as long as they are keeping to the fundamentals of scripture, the format is not important.
I definately believe God is doing a new thing in this next generation of what church looks like, however I don't think that means the other is wrong, it is just different. There is new wine that needs a new wine skin but that doesn't mean we throw the old wine out. God wants to preserve both.
I think we would do well to keep our eyes fixed on Jesus and honour those who have gone before us, seeing what God is doing next. The mega church is still reaching those that the small churches aren't and vice versa. As long as community is kept and Jesus the focuss, let us keep building His kingdom and not our own.
Great work.
Naomi from Australia.
Posted by Naomi Bailey | Posted at 04/23/2007 5:32 PMMaybe 20% seen and 80% hidden. Probably not but we don't know. I would fit into the 80% most of the time, according to these stats anyway. One of the reasons I need the church is to come together and refuel b/c we find strength coming together as a body of believers. This is where we are reminded that we are not alone and that our purpose is the same... to reach and save the lost. Some of us love structure and/or are called to a paticular program of service in the church building. Our church as we know it today might not make it without these people that have blessed us with "their" gifts. The programs that seem to run short on workers, well, if God isn't calling people in to fill the vacancys then maybe God is trying to shape us in a different direction. If we are being disobedient to a calling, then God will work on our heart. We as a body, need to try our best to not guilt trip those who "seem" to be doing nothing. We need to change our thinking by faith and start believing that they are fulfilling their calling! Can you imagine the change in the atmosphere! We then could start encouraging our invisible workers by saying, "Thank you for those who reach out to their neighbor, thank you to those who tell people about the gospel, thank you to those who have bible studies in their homes, and thank you for the intecessors that pray for our church and the lost. Alot of you are not known, but by faith we know you are there and we thank you." We just need to remember that God has given us all a territory and it may not be in one of the church programs. Would we be less oppressed as a church if we saw things from this perspective of faith? Posted by Sue | Posted at 04/28/2007 9:24 AM
I have a novel idea, let's replace the pastor with Christ. The word pastor is mention once in the Bible but by tradition from Rome, the "church" has made a man to be the sole harbinger of the Holy Spirit in the gathering. The clergy is the problem, just see what Jesus say's about the Nicolatians. My wife and I gather with Christians somehow, someway about every day without an "educated" man on a pulpit philosophying down on us. signed finally home. Posted by Mike | Posted at 05/07/2007 4:18 AM
I hear questions like "how could we help with herrican relief" if we are only small groups--How did the New Testament church do it? If we are small communities we will be able to meet needs even more. No more 70%going to paid staff--25% to buildings, and a combined 5% to missions and benevolence.
100% of the New Testament churches collection money went to help believers in need--now it is the complete opposite and most people are unaware or don't care.
Posted by mike cole | Posted at 07/07/2007 8:09 AMGreat comments mike--I am guessing you read Frank Viola?? Posted by mike cole | Posted at 07/07/2007 8:11 AM
While I do agree with Mike to some extent, I do disagree with never having any paid positions. Paul says that if there are any among you who have dedicated themselves to study and teaching and do a good job of it, they deserve to be paid some compensation for their time, since they are sacrificing some of their time to aid the body. So, the early church did give some of it's funds to someone who was an excellent teacher- though you're right, probably not the bulk of what they brought in. Posted by Cody | Posted at 08/01/2007 12:07 PM
As we get in our cars and drive to church, we again ignore the 2nd commandment like we do every other day of the week. If rather we looked at our neighborhoods as the congregation that God has given to us and spend this time interacting with them...loving them...paying attention to the lazuras's that are laying at the ends of our gates, with bleeding sores that the dogs are licking. These that are longing to eat even a crumb of real spiritual food...only they don't even know that we have such food, because they don't know who we really are or that we actually have a life with God the source of Life.
Yes the 2nd Commandment says to Love your neighbor as yourself. Are you just now trying to justify yourself for not loving, let alone knowing your neighbor, by saying, "yeah but who is my neighbor?"
OK say we were to begin to befriend our neighbors and just treat them like they are worthwhile people, each of them as being a person we can appreciate, bring a plate of cookies over to, or ask them over for coffee. Or if they are painting their house, just show up in old chlothes and a paintbrush.
After a friendship has begun, at some point you might let them know that you aren't satisfied with the current church structure. You might find they feel the same way. Don't expect to win those that are entrenched in the modern church, but go to those that aren't. King David & Jesus took on the outcast and the unwanted, why do we think we should bring over all the mainstream churchy churchy churchy type people.
We could begin to meet in homes but not allow ourselves to merely take on the same "in these walls structure". We must follow in the footsteps of Jesus and spend time with another person in daily life type stuff. That's were real living is learned, where it is seen and has a chance to rub off onto another and take root. If I am invited in to a home, not a guest, but rather a friend or an uncle, I would eat dinner and see how a family can interact, how a wise father deals with children who do act foolish at times. I would enjoy helping with the dishes after dinner, and see first hand how parents put their children to bed without yelling at the kids. You can read all this stuff in a book, hear it in a sermon, have a counselor explain it to you. But when you see and experience it first hand, you can bet the reproduction of it in my own life will have a 1000 times better chance of success.
That's what Jesus meant by make disciples. We don't have to live together, that's a bit overboard and overwhelming, but we can spend some time together, and that's enough. To be treated like a worthwhile person, a friend worth knowing, a friend worth having. That's what we need. That's the morsle, the cup of cool water, etc, that Jesus is asking for and He's right accross our street.
We being rich, rich in the earthly and in the spiritual knowledge, think that by possesing these gifts that we will have these riches through all of eternity.
But allas, all were given the talents to work with. But not all put them to use for the master. The one who didn't was thrown out into outer darkness where there was weeping and gnashing of teath, and where the master said "depart from me for I never knew you" etc etc etc. and finally we think that we are rich and have need of nothing (because we know so much and have so much in resorces. But because we spend so much time entertaining ourselves with either TV's Movie's or even our great worship services which are just meetings and there's not much real service that goes on; I'm afraid all the alter calls whether I fell down or someone pushed me down, all of the cool things that happened "Ooohh come and see Gold Dust" which we called "manifestations" never really made the church into a people who loved their neighbors so that now we are overwhelmed with followers. Besides manifestations should be Christs Love flowing through us forcusing on the needs of our neighbors this will automatically winn them to Christ without our having to hound them like an irritatingly pushy salesman.
We can meet in homes three time a month, then meet in a bigger building once month, this way one building could service 4 full congregation, spreading the financial burden over 4 times the people. Also the people would be doing most of the ministering to oneanother and to the rest of the people in their neighborhoods, where the other neighbors can see and become a part of something worhwhile.
Thanks for Listening Kirk
Posted by Kirk Osgood | Posted at 08/02/2007 1:27 AMSounds like my kids used to when they were teenagers - " I do all the work and no-one lese is doing anything!". My experience must be unique because I have found that 20% do the work because they only want people who will 'play their games in their way'. If it is fun everyone wants to play! (regardless of the game-e.g. it doesnt matter if its traditional or emergent)
Just a suggestion: I reckon every successful church (well functioning as a community of believers) actually has two roles - one is the cruise director to keep the '99' statisfied and the deck chairs arranged in an acceptable order; and a captain - to steer the ship and facilitate the '1' coming back on board.
Get rid of the 80% by starting your own church - bet you find it a bit boring.
Posted by Glenda | Posted at 08/07/2007 4:40 AMExcellent point, Glenda. I confess I get a bit tired of everyone wining about being the real believers who do all the work while everyone else is a slaggard. Each should do what God has called them to do and be. We don't need to stand in judgment on everyone else. I've been a part of all kinds of churches including house churches. They can be just as dysfunctional. As long as we keep focusing on the structure we're probably missing the point.
I agree with the article that the current structure caters to the 80/20 model. As far as corporate worship goes, that's not necessarily a problem. Others may do other things the rest of the week in or out of church. Still others are at different stages of spiritual development and may do more later.
Let's just relax and love God and neighbor ...
Posted by Rick | Posted at 09/14/2007 12:45 PMThe model for the order of the Church body is clearly represented by Jesus and his disciples. Jesus being the Savior/Shepherd/Pastor and leader of a group of folk that called themselves disciples. Then he commissions them to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every living creature. That was the great commission. Which is also our job today. The other thing I am reminded of is that Martha sat at the feet of Jesus while Mary served. There will always be some that will do the work of whatever sort that it is and some that is comfortable just sitting at his feet. Jesus did not ridicule her for just sitting there doing apparently nothing. As a matter of fact he said "she has chosen that good part." That seems a little like the 80% to me that are comfortable with just sitting. However we should take into consideration that everyone has his or her proper gift of what ever manner it is. Mary being the cook, server and possibly dishwasher did the manual labor as some do today. But Martha chose to listen attentively to all the words that Jesus spoke so her life would be changed drastically. That is the other 20% if it is fact a 80/20 rule in Churches today. Regardless of what part we play, there is a need to be about our Fathers business and a need to sit at his feet to learn for a life changing experience. Posted by Dorothy | Posted at 02/26/2008 9:43 PM