Why Churches Suck

The Cult of the Pastor-god

2011-11-08T12:12:00.000-08:00

When the church is at itshealthiest, many people contribute to the life of the body with gifts they’vebeen given. One of those gifts is“pastoring”, or care-taking. Mixed withall the other gifts in the body, the whole community is healthy, alive, free,and an expression of God’s love in the world that is obvious and undeniable.

But this is very rare among churchgatherings.

Much more often, the group isdominated and defined by the personality of one person: the Pastor-god.

The Pastor-god is not merely acontributor within the body; he is the voice, the face, and the authority inthe church. He is the boss, the CEO, theexample, the teacher, the father-figure.

In the Cult of the Pastor-god, theyare called “God’s anointed”. Theyare the one who communicates God’s word to the followers. They are the mouth, while the church is theears. Their part is to provide care anddiscipline to the people; the people’s part is to listen, honor, and follow.

And in many churches, this modelworks flawlessly. People really wantsomeone to lead and protect them—without it they feel vulnerable and lost. And of course there are no shortage of peoplewilling to assume this role of the Pastor-god.

The Pastor-god claims to not wantadulation and adoration from the people, but inwardly they crave it. The people claim they don’t believetheir pastor is a god, but they treat him like he is. When the pastor makes them proud, they heapaccolades. When the pastor does not liveup to his god-like standard, they look for ways to take him down.

When the Pastor-god is there, thepeople feel safe. When the Pastor-godgoes away, the people are devastated.

Of course this is nothing new—peopleare afraid to be leaderless, as was the nation of Israel when they demanded aleader:

But the people refused to listen toSamuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all theother nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight ourbattles.” (I Samuel 8:19-20)

God reluctantly gave them their leader, anoutstanding young man named Saul. Theircraving for a leader was satisfied, but it was wrong; what resulted wasanxiety, strife, war, madness, and death.

One of the reasons churches sucktoday is because they are much less like the body of Christ and much more like theCult of the Pastor-god—or "the cult of personality." More and more within the church are recognizing this disturbing reality:

“...evangelicalism is not so much a religion as a series of fast-movingpersonality cults.” ― Frank Schaeffer

Thinking about this, I could not getthe image of an old Star Trek episode out of my mind. It’s called Who Mourns for Adonais and it’s about the Enterprise crew comingface to face with Apollo, one of the gods from earth’s ancient culture.

Remember this one?

As the episode goes, back whenthe gods (turns out they were actually aliens) came to earth, the primitivepeople saw their power and naturally fell down to worship them. Under their authority, people felt caredfor--and the gods were happy to have the attention. It was a comfortable, but immature and ultimately dysfunctionalrelationship. The gods’ part was toprovide care and discipline to the people; the people’s part was to listen,honor, and follow…

…just like in the Cult of thePastor-god.

In those days, to defy the gods wasa fearful thing—as Captain Kirk discovered when he dared to defy Apollo’sauthority:

Kirk: “Apollo, we’re willing to talk, but you’ll find we don’t bow to every creature whohappens to have a bag of tricks.”

Apollo: “Agamemnon was one suchas you, and Hercules--pride and arrogance. They defied me, until they felt my wrath.”

Have you ever been called “proud” or“arrogant” by a pastor-god when you questioned their authority? If you have,you have come face-to-face with the Cult of the Pastor-god.

Apollo expected these people to falldown and honor him just like people did in the ancient days. But Kirk, recognizing the dysfunction of suchan authoritarian relationship, continued to defy—and the conflict escalates:

Apollo: “I could sweep you out ofexistence with a wave of my hand, and bring you back again. I can give life ordeath. What else does mankind demand of its gods?”

Kirk: “Mankind has no need forgods. We find the one quite adequate.”

Apollo: “We shall not debate,mortal. I offer you eternal rest andhappiness according to the ancient ways. I ask little in return. But what I askfor I insist upon.”

The one thing he cannot handleoutright defiance; he can only insist on its authority, and promise judgmentupon the one who dares defy them. If you do decide you need to escape thecult, understand one thing:

There is no gentle way to get out of the cult of thePastor-god.

If you are struggling to get freefrom a pastor-god cult, please re-read that last sentence a couple more times. This will be a battle of wills.

Eventually, Kirk and his crew haduse force to disable Apollo’s source of power. Apollo was reduced to histrue, powerless nature.

In the end,Apollo lost everything and is reduced to tears:

Apollo: “I would have cherished you,cared for you. I would have loved you like a father loves his children. Did I askso much?”

Kirk: “We’ve outgrown you. You askedfor something we can no longer give.”

And there’s the thing. Even people who have been raised life-long ina pastor-god cult are realizing they can no longer give outright honor and obedienceto a religious authority figure. Andthey shouldn’t. Our leader is Christ,not the one up front with the loud voice and the big platform.

More and more people in the body ofChrist are finding true “body life” outside of the Cult of the Pastor-god--butit hasn’t come without a price. Theemotional turmoil that comes from separating from an old authority figure canbe intense, even devastating.

I’ll repeat: There is no gentleway to get out of the cult of the Pastor-god.

I have my war story of leaving the Cult of thePastor-god, and I know many of you do too. If you want to share your story in the comments, please feel free.

Church, Inc.: The Lust for More

2011-09-02T10:42:00.001-07:00

I finally got around to watching Food, Inc., a movie describing how the "bigger-faster-more profitable" mindset of food mega-corporations has compromised and poisoned the food we eat, from the farm to the factory to the drive-up window.

I found it interesting that although this is really a scandalous and destructive story of our world right now, I didn’t find it shocking, sensationalist or unrealistic. This is indeed the sad state of how most of us eat, day after day, from cradle to the grave. Most of us don’t give this a thought, many are aware but don’t care, some of us recognize it and are angry but feel powerless to do anything about it, and fewer still are working against the system to bring about something better.

I say this, not with an speck of judgementalism against any of us, whether producer or consumer, because I have been just as much a participant as anyone else. But I do see it for what it is--a large-scale sickness that has taken over an entire culture.

The good news of the movie is that there is growing awareness of this phenomenon, along with a growing movement of people that are doing something about it--people that know a better way, where natural processes are allowed to flourish and where people can live happier and healthier lives.

I’m not sure I can think of a better analogy for the condition of the church today.

Now that I think of it, it may not even be an analogy; it may actually be the same problem.

For as long as I have been a believer, I have known, felt, believed from my core and taught that the church is an organism, not a human institution. I take very seriously those verses about the “body” of Christ being made up of individual believers as “members”, who, in all their human diversity, find Christ as their center and as such become capable of creating communities around the world who function in love, grace, and generosity both toward one another and toward the world. I think much of my whole journey as a believer has been a quest to see and experience the body of Christ functioning in this way, and seeing in many cases that the body of Christ has been co-opted by dead corporate mechanisms.

Despite church marketing's claim to be living “the body of Christ”, what we find instead is a corporation that consumes resources to keep itself alive; that craves economic “efficiency” at the expense of individuals; that uses multimedia, imagery, and public relations to attract and keep their followers--imagery that is proven to be false advertising once a person is “on the inside”; and that instead of helping people heal and get stronger, makes them more dependent and sick.

You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. (Mattew 23:27)

As with the food industry, many people are not aware of this, others don’t care, or they feel powerless to change anything about it, but a small but growing number of people are very inspired and intentional to do something about this.

The similarities between the food industry and the church institution are so strong it begs me to ask, what makes this happen? How does the original bring life, and the counterfeit bring death? How did we get to the dark side of religion, perhaps even with good intentions?

The best answer I have for now is, the lust for more.

"The leech has two daughters. 'Give! Give!' they cry. "There are three things that are never satisfied, four that never say, 'Enough!': the grave, the barren womb, land, which is never satisfied with water, and fire, which never says, 'Enough!' (Proverbs 30:15-16)

Farmers that are sold out to the mega-corporation didn’t always start that way. Many started for the love of farming, but financial pressure and the desire to succeed pulled them into the system. In the same way, pastors that are sold out to the church institution didn’t always start that way. Many started for the love of people, but financial pressure and the need to keep their job, along with the bar of “success” being set by larger, more attractive churches pulled them into the system.

Apparently there is a point at which a God-given desire for growth and fruitfulness (a good thing) mutates into a compulsion over finances and popularity (not a good thing). It seems there comes a point when you WILL sacrifice individuals for the sake of your success as a corporate entity.

The world of “church” is experiencing a seismic and systematic shift; many have checked out of the church system completely, while others are working to rebuild their local assemblies on a better foundation of Christ alone, minus the Churchianity. Questioning the church institution has been typically dismissed as “heresy” and “fringe”, but that’s changing and even affecting the mainstream commentators. A recent article in Christianity Today, discussing the condition of today’s church leaders, said that:

“...the state of the modern American pastorate has been shaped so that these sins—especially pride and hypocrisy—are impossible to escape.” (emphasis mine)

The question raised by this statement is, if a church is functioning in a healthy way, how can it possibly make pride and hypocrisy inescapable? Doesn't this mean we should revisit the system instead of simply giving the platitude answer that "we just need to pray more for the pastors"? For more discussion on this matter, I recommend a recent podcast conversation with Wayne Jacobson.

How does a sick institution try to solve its problems? With institutionalized solutions that always create new sets of problems. For example, health problems created by slaughterhouses coated in manure are “fixed” by injecting antibiotics into the food, rather than revisiting a process that covers animals, people, and machinery in manure. An example in the church world is that emotional and spiritual problems created by judgementalism and shame are “fixed” by counseling methods that pick apart the psyche and apply “scripture” to unearth every evil motive, rather than revisiting a system that reinforces judgementalism and shame every Sunday. Or as Darin Hufford once said to me in a personal conversation, "the church is busy trying to solve problems they have themselves created."

So what do we do about this? Can we do anything about this?

I have been accused of focusing on problems, not solutions. In general, that’s true (actually, it's a "duh"; you noticed the name of the blog, right?). However, that does not mean I don’t have ideas about the solutions; it’s just not what I talk about here. Other people are doing a great job with that.

That being said, I think there is a real solution for this, as there is in the food industry. I've experienced this in person, and so have many others: The hope is in believers recognizing and renouncing their institutional ways and embracing the simple, yet highly inefficient life in the body of Christ.

As it is, the machinery of Church Inc. will continue its path of spiritual wreckage, getting only worse, if people like you and I don’t do something different. So, at the risk of getting “preachy”, I offer this closing challenge:

If you participate in a local church, especially if you are a leader, ask yourself: When you consider your church, what do you crave for it? Are you constantly pining away for fuller church services, more money to work with, more success for the organization (and by extension, success for you)? If we’d be honest, many of us do. This is, I believe, the lust for more, and the primary pull toward the dark side of Church, Inc. If you really care about the work of Christ in this world, look again at your strikingly un-corporate Jesus, look your people in the eyes, and do what you need to do to live out "the body of Christ" and reject the lust for more.

If you are among those who have checked out to detoxify from Church, Inc. (a very necessary process in many cases), ask yourself: Are you re-connecting with believers and re-participating in the face-to-face, hands-on life in the body of Christ? Have you perhaps exchanged in-person fellowship for online discussions about the evils of institutional church? If you really want to experience Jesus in the “pure” sense, it will involve connection, not isolation.

We can do something about this.

The Nasty New Taste of Funda-gelicalism.

2011-04-05T09:38:00.000-07:00

In the world of candy, Reese’s is known as “two great tastes that taste great together.” In the church world, Funda-gelicalism is sort of the opposite—a toxic combination of two flavors of Christianity that not only taste terrible together, but that inevitably infect and sicken the ones who consume it. Watch out—this new flavor has become available at all church denominations, and may already be being served up at a church near you.

Here’s the recipe:

Part one: Evangelicalism. Before you panic, let me begin by saying this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Evangelicalism says you should be born again, or personally converted to faith in Christ; you should actively communicate the power of the cross and gospel of Jesus to those who haven’t heard it; and the Bible is God’s word. In American history, Evangelicalism has served as a middle ground between the right wing of Fundamentalism and the left wing of Liberal Christianity. Plus it generally identifies with the positive changes made during the reformation. Not bad.

This is the ideal that sounds Biblical and looks good in textbooks. But when you start to actually live in the Evangelical world, you may discover that these ideals have mutated into something much less noble.

Some examples:

· Since you can’t really KNOW for sure if someone is really “born again”, you have to “judge” if they are, based on the evidence they show. This “evidence” varies from camp to camp—it might be speaking in tongues, verbally confessing Jesus as Savior, getting baptized, quitting a drug habit, signing up for a small group, or trading in your Buck Cherry T-shirt for a nice suit (or whatever other clothing is fashionable in your church). Whatever the case, you are now being judged as “in” or “out”, based on the behavior you display.

· To a large degree, Evangelicalism has been defined by its preachers (Edwards, Finney, Moody, etc.), who in their passion to see people “born again” have used every method (“Methodist”, anyone?) under the sun to convince people to follow Jesus, like tent meetings, revivals, street preaching, music concerts, theatrical productions, scare tactics (“Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God”), mass marketing, coffee houses, scare tactics (“Left Behind”), cool music, cool clothes, nice buildings, rockin’ sound systems, apologetics, missions trips, demonstrations of compassion (“look how much our church LOVES people”), scare tactics (“Obama is the Antichrist”), hip videos, etc. Whether slick, silly, or scary, all these methods are designed to compel people to “follow Jesus”…or, put more realistically, to make our church bigger. The fact is, churches are really businesses, and they need money for operations. So unfortunately, what’s called “preaching Christ” has in many cases morphed into good-old-fashioned American marketing and sales (i.e. manipulation).

Now let’s bring our second element into the recipe:

Part two: Fundamentalism. In a nutshell, fundamentalism takes the Bible and yells out the angry-sounding parts. It’s as much, or even more,about attitude as it is about doctrine. Fundamentalism is pissed off at the world, all other religions, all philosophies, and especially Christians who are not Fundamentalists. It was established in the early 20^th century in America with a document called The Fundamentals. It has attempted, with varying degrees of success and failure, to take over Christian denominations and American politics. In general, society doesn’t like fundamentalism, which is fine; because fundamentalism doesn’t like society either.

To fundamentalism, “love” is defined as scolding someone until they are bullied into doing the right thing—in this case, following Jesus. It’s much the same kind of “love” that you see coming from abusive, alcoholic dads and authority figures (so it's not surprising that many Fundamentalists were raised in alcoholic or abusive environments). It’s always about intimidation and fear, with the real goal being domination. Other people are not to be coddled, they are to be frightened into submission. Independent thinking is discouraged with lines like “If you’re too open minded your brains will fall out.” It is all about absolute, unquestioning submission to “God’s Word” (incidentally, so is Islam).

This is, in fact, not the God of the Bible at all; but Fundamentalism claims that it is. They have recast God as the ultimate violent abuser.

Now, none of this is new; in fact, for these very reasons, there was initially a split between Evangelicals and Fundamentalists. Basically, Evangelicals want the church to get bigger, and they realized that you generally don’t do that by scolding people. So the two groups parted ways, with the Fundamentalists continuing their rant against the world, and the Evangelicals taking a deep breath, dressing better, and getting on TV.

But as it turns out, Evangelicalism’s success in America started to create its own set of problems—mostly, that it became “cool.” All of a sudden, everybody was an Evangelical—presidents, Catholics, mainline Protestants, celebrities, football coaches (and teams!), musicians, authors, CEOs. Why? It started making money, big-time. And by following the money, it also followed the economic bubble that inflated into the 2000’s and popped somewhere around the end of 2007. Because the movement had so closely aligned with the American economy, it also sank with it.

Then something fascinating happened. The once-moderate Evangelicals took a hard turn to the right.

How did that happen? Well, the pastors had to explain to their churches why they were having trouble paying for the big building they just built. They turned against their immediate past, and explained it was because the church had gotten so commercialized (because of Rick Warren and Bill Hybels), and lost its heritage. So then, they started to look toward their “roots” to maintain credibility to their congregation, who had become pretty upset that their offerings had been splurged on multimedia equipment, more property, and splashy conferences for their pastors. The “worship teams” that had been built up to a grandiose Hillsongs-like status through the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s, all of a sudden seemed ego-driven and Hollywood-like (i.e. “worldy”). People didn’t want to hear about “bigger” and “better” any more. They wanted to go back to their roots—their Fundamentalist roots, that is.

At the same time, a growing number of people were taking a different approach with their frustration—that is, upon discovering how much of their church was an institutional façade vs. how little of it was a functional expression of the Body of Christ, simply left. And when they left, they took their money with them, making budget and morale even more problematic. This effectively left the new Funda-gelicals in charge.

And so, many well-salaried pastors were fired and replaced with cheaper, more conservative counterparts. Worship teams were stripped back, turning off their sound systems and singing “I’m going back to the heart of worship”. “Humility, not stardom; more of You, less of me” became a popular theme in messages and music—acoustic guitars and ardent, guilt-driven artists became more popular. The piles of "Purpose-Driven" materials were quietly pushed to the bargain bin and dropped from the church library. Mark Driscoll magically appeared, just in time to scold the church for it's worldliness. Christian musicians became more angry, too—especially the ones who couldn’t make it in Nashville.

So in the vacuum left by weakened “pop” Evangelicalism, the Funda-gelicals stepped in, more than happy (well, as happy as they can be) to do so.

This latest breed would probably not want to be associated with something as extreme as Westboro Baptist Church, but I’ve noticed they actually use the same logic. When I saw the following video (foul language warning), I noticed that as ridiculous as these people are, their reasoning is exactly the same as many of the new Funda-gelicals, which is: “God said it; I believe it; that settles it; if you don’t agree, go to hell.” In a lot of ways, Westboro is just Fundamentalism being more honest about itself.

And of course, they hate Rob Bell (and anybody else who likes him). Even before Love Wins came out, they went for the kill on the blogosphere. And even after it turns out the book doesn’t say what they said it was going to say (that everyone is saved and that there’s no such thing as hell), they still want him silenced—and continue to take every opportunity to debunk and humiliate him.

As I said before, Fundamentalism is as much about the attitude of “slam-dunk” condescension as it is about doctrine. A lot of Fundamentalist doctrine is no different from Evangelical doctrine, honestly; the difference is the attitude. Evangelicalism at least tries to win people over by being friendly; Fundamentalism is rude, and doesn’t care if you believe or not—in fact, it expects you to not believe, thus sealing your doom even further.

So, let’s review…

I am not against Evangelicalism. On paper, it is a valid way to consider the Christian faith. But in the real world, Evangelicalism does unfortunately tend toward toward judgmentalism (because of the emphasis on observable behavior) and psychological manipulation (because of the need to “win” people over to Christ)—but all with a friendly face. Now that Evangelicalism has been getting the wind knocked out of it, through financial difficulties and a new fear of liberalism, it is struggling for stability. Where is it trying to find stability? In the arms of its abusive past, namely, Fundamentalism.

It might seem I'm painting with a broad brush here, but I'm not. Every individual, every local church, every denomination, has Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism in varying amounts. Your results may vary. This is what I've seen, and all I’m saying is, watch out for this; it ain’t no Reese’s candy.

The Body of Christ vs. the Church Corporation

2010-12-29T10:42:00.000-08:00

"The elders have decided that your days at [this] Church have come to an end...please have your office cleared out by the end of the week."

After the initial shock of hearing these words spoken to me by my fellow pastors, which was after having poured ten years of heart, soul, and professional life into this particular church, I was left wondering how "the Body of Christ" could so abruptly dispose of one of its own with all the grace of a scene from Dilbert or Office Space.

Since then, I have learned that I am far from alone in this sort of experience. I continue to meet "former pastors" all the time. Some, like me, found themselves on the receiving end of a wave of office politics. Others have stepped down willingly (I consider these the wiser ones), because they discovered that working in a church had less to do with actual ministry and more to do with power moves, finances, and image management.

I can't help but wonder how this continues to happen so often in churches, and along the way have made some observations in this blog about what’s really going on beneath the surface. Predictably, I've been told by Christians that "the church is full of imperfect people" and that I should just "forgive and let God deal with it." And believe it or not, this is what I have done. It hasn't been easy, but nonetheless this is what I continue to do.

However, I still think we as co-workers in God's Kingdom are responsible to learn from things like this and make changes--lest we continue to plod along in our ignorance, repeating our mistakes and letting more and more people get abused in the process.

What I have learned over this time is that there really is a difference between the Body of Christ and a Church Corporation--and that it is not only possible, but vitally important for God's people to recognize the difference. It’s easy to miss this.

The Latin word corpus means “body”. The Church of Jesus Christ is a “body”, made up of many parts, created by God for the purpose of continuing Jesus’ ministry on earth. A Corporation is also a “body”, but of a different kind--created by people for the purpose of financial strength and influence in the community; whether the corporation is “for profit” or “non-profit”, it thrives on finances and growth. And in many churches, the body of Christ has taken on the form of a corporation.

Many believers never give this a thought. It is assumed that the “church” they attend is in fact “the body of Christ”, when in fact there are two bodies at work—the body of Christ (the believers themselves), and the church corporation (the business structure). These two entities co-exist in almost all local churches, thus creating one of the most basic problems in the Christianity of our day.

Does your church have a budget, staff, and/or facility? If so, there is a strong pull to become less like the body of Christ and more like a corporation.

Of course this is nothing new. The church has taken on worldly forms of organization ever since the days of Constantine (if this is new information for you, I recommend Pagan Christianity by Viola and Barna). What’s different now is that many members of the body of Christ are abandoning those forms in favor of less structured ones, which is creating a real crisis in the world of corporate Christianity.

More and more believers are discovering that what they thought was the body of Christ in their church is, in fact, a corporation--sustained by money and power politics. And while there are still many wonderful members of the body of Christ existing in these environments, the financial and power cravings inherent in a corporation are increasingly at odds with the community of love and grace that is the body of Christ.

Many believers intuitively feel this war going on—resulting in the large-scale disillusionment we see within Christianity—but have a hard time identifying or naming the problem. They’ve been taught that the church corporation IS the body of Christ, and although it may be “imperfect”, we should not criticize or find fault; because, after all “it is the body of Christ” and you shouldn’t “tear it down” or be “divisive”. This misunderstanding has kept many believers from standing up for the body of Christ in the midst of corporate takeovers in their own churches.

I think that to understand the conflict between these two “bodies” is to understand a lot of what’s gone wrong in many churches.

It can be difficult to discern at times: When things go wrong, such as abuse, condemnation, manipulation, corruption, secrecy, guilt tactics, pressure, obligation, or punishment for nonconformity in a church, where does that come from? Is this just the effects of an “imperfect” body of Christ, or the bitter fruit of a corrupt system that above all else needs to feed and protect itself?

This is, in fact, the essential difference between the two kinds of “bodies”. One (the body of Christ) lives to extend and give to others, the other (the corporation) lives off of others in order to keep itself alive. At its deepest level, the body of Christ embodies Jesus in this world, and continues the ministry and message that Jesus gave when he was on earth—the mission is everything. At its deepest level, the corporation exists to add value to its investors through the success and expansion of the organization—the mission (or “mission statement”) is a means to that end.

The body of Christ cares about all kinds of people and makes sacrifices to express God’s love and grace to others. The church corporation cares about bottom line, budget, expansion, reputation, growth and will use or misuse people as necessary to achieve those objectives. The body of Christ has a heart; the church corporation does not, although for public relations’ sake it pretends to.

Make no mistake; these are two conflicting entities, and they are constantly at war in local churches. In some cases, the body of Christ is holding the corporation at bay; in others the corporation has already taken over, and the life and freedom of the body of Christ has been minimized and even rendered ineffective.

In the best of corporate churches, the leaders recognize this tension and do their best to keep the corporate side of things contained, and they hope that the relational side outweighs the corporate side. They may even have the presence of mind to be aware that money-giving “investors” may use their giving as a tool of control in the church. But still, too many church leaders fall prey to the lure of financial support or status in the community and thus give away their spiritual birthright, in exchange for a tasty bowl of soup.

Is there a simple solution to this? I don’t think so. Without the clear leadership of Jesus himself in our gatherings, and the bold determination to submit to one another and follow Him alone, we will still try to find a “Saul” to lead us. We still crave the “security” that comes from a familiar church environment, even if we see corruption in it. In our present economic upheaval, we still desperately hope that a strong, well-led organization and leadership will make things right for us. Truth be told, we also still love to be part of the winning team, the one that’s growing in strength and numbers. And so “investors” and “leaders” become very attractive to us, and by taking the bait, we fall into corporate Christianity.

Maybe the most important thing is to simply for now be aware of this and to refocus on Jesus himself rather than the particular drama and politics of our church bodies. Maybe we just need to be aware that the “body” and the “corporation” are indeed at war with one another--and in many cases, the corporation is winning. But maybe, with that awareness, we as followers of Christ can see more clearly where “the body” ends and “the corporation” begins. Maybe that will help us see why things are happening the way they are and give us the boldness to speak up when it’s needed.

Ted Haggard and the Institutional Church

2010-02-21T15:39:00.000-08:00

Followers of this blog know that it is partly my own rant about the destructive nature of churches corrupted by money-power politics, and partly my own quest to see the true church rise up in the love of God and live up to her potential as the bride of Christ. If you’re following this blog, I’m guessing you may share my passion about this.

That being said, I have been following the continuing Ted Haggard story with great interest; and if you haven’t, you really should (if you don’t know the story at all, Google it and come back later!). If you’ve lumped this story in with the other famous “church leader scandals” (Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, et al) that have by now faded into outdated comedy material, you may want to reconsider. I think this story is far from over, and personally I believe the implications to the American church are yet to be seen.

I felt uniquely privileged last November to be able to meet Ted personally--not only see him speak in my home church, but also to share meals with him, and to talk casually at a friend’s house an unhurried, informal, heart-to-heart way. How often do you get an opportunity like that? I’m still amazed by this, especially considering I’m part of a small church body in a small town in Wisconsin.

A lot of people might assume that Ted is just another "Christian celebrity”, seeking a big following and a big income, willing to manipulate gullible followers to his own advantage. Simply put, I don’t believe that; I think Ted is the real deal.

I’ve met my share of shallow, phony church leaders, long on image management and short on integrity; outwardly communicating love for people while secretly resenting them--maybe you have too. Because of my own experiences, I think that my pastoral B.S. detector is in peak condition; if anything, it might be a bit too sensitive—kind of like the war veteran that hits the deck in the grocery store when a display gets knocked over. My naivety in this area is long gone.

However, I can honestly say when I met Ted, I didn’t get the “sleazy pastor” vibe—at all. What I did sense was a person highly gifted in leadership, passionate about the church, genuinely interested in people as individuals, brutally honest, and wide-open transparent about the personal struggles that led to his scandal and fall from leadership as a pastor. To me, this is what a pastor should be, but rarely is.

So what does all this have to do with the institutional church? One of my beliefs about churches driven by money-power politics is that they regularly discard gifted leaders that might be "bad for business". Check the statistics; gifted pastors that love the church are being thrown under the bus by church boards all over the country—1500 a month last I checked. The “shepherds” are being regularly replaced by “hirelings” that know how to look good, maintain morale and keep people giving.

Here’s the story with Ted: Yes, he got overtaken by a behavior that violated his relationship with his wife, his family, and his church; he needed to step down. We all know this, but this is not the whole story. We who claim to care about the church also need to take a look at how Ted was treated by the leaders who immediately banned him from entering the church, exiled him from the state of Colorado, while claiming to the congregation and to the world that they had offered him a “restoration process.” You will more about this in months to come.

Institutionalized churches exhibit a very predictable behavior in times of “transition”: Whenever a leader is lost, there is a leadership vacuum, and a power grab naturally ensues. Usually it’s a group that’s felt frustrated and marginalized and has been building up steam, sometimes for years. When a weakness is detected in the current leadership, any opportunity to capitalize on that weakness and gain control over the leadership is seized with all-out intensity. The former leader will often be criticized, even demonized; the new leaders will present themselves as the “saviors” of the church and proceed to win the church body over to their viewpoint. This is the pattern that is repeated, again and again, in churches all over America, on a regular basis. Ted’s former church would be no exception.

Up to this point, much of the story has been focused on Ted and his sin. This is beginning to turn around; Ted’s wife, Gayle, just released her best-seller, Why I Stayed, and is now having the opportunity to share her story all over the national media—not only about her relationship with Ted, but also about their experience of being very un-lovingly exiled by the church leaders. From what Ted told me, he is not done telling his story either; stay tuned over the next year for his side of this whole ordeal.

I believe this story is significant. Money-power-politics churches get away with crucifying their leaders constantly. For the most part, congregations and church members are either unaware of how this works, apathetic, or powerless to do anything about it. Corrupt leadership continues to hold many churches hostage, sucking the life out its members, and preventing the body of Christ to grow, in the name of protecting reputation and cashflow. I believe Ted Haggard has a good chance of addressing this issue in a very public way; I hope this story will help the body of Christ understand what’s really going on in many of their churches, and then do something about it.

Book Review: "The Misunderstood God" by Darin Hufford

2009-11-11T07:14:00.000-08:00

When you consider the God of Christianity and how He relates to His children, what kind of person do you envision?

Someone like this:

...A God who is absolutely patient and understanding with you, regardless of how badly you misbehave; someone who knows and loves your the deepest part of your heart; someone who is selfless, never wanting for Himself what belongs to others; someone who will lower Himself to help you; someone who makes Himself vulnerable so He can have a relationship with you; someone who doesn't hide himself from you; someone who is truly happy when you are praised and honored; someone mature enough to handle mistreatment or disrespect gracefully; someone who truly disregards your failures, and never once holds them over your head; someone who loves the REAL you, including the whole truth about you; someone who trusts you, and is excited about your future; someone who will always stand by you through everything, without exception...

Or someone like this:

...A God with a hair-trigger temper; someone who may be nice, but only so that He can get what He wants; someone who craves attention for Himself, who loves to impress you with his power; someone who loves to remind people how wonderful He is; someone who is disrespectful toward His inferiors; someone who gets upset if He's not given enough attention; someone you need to walk on eggshells around; someone who always reminds you of your mistakes, and uses fear and threats to keep you in line; someone that focuses on your faults and weaknesses; someone who doesn't really care if you heart gets stepped on; someone who doesn't trust you to anything right; someone who is constantly disappointed in you; and someone who, if things get bad enough, will leave you...

At the risk of being trite, I'll call the first description God A and the second God B.

In The Misunderstood God, author Darin Hufford presents the idea that God A is in fact the true God--the God of love as described in the famous "love chapter" of 1 Corinthians 13--but that Christian religion has instead given us God B. This God is someone who looks more like an abusive father or a paranoid leader than the source of absolute, pure, untainted, undiluted love.

According to Darin, God A is the one that every person, deep in their heart, knows is the true God, whether or not they even believe in Him. We instinctively know this, and long to experience this kind of love.

But in many cases, when we encounter Christianity, we discover a God who is unsatisfied with us until we behave perfectly. We learn about a God who expects us to obey and worship Him even if our heart isn't in it, a God who uses guilt to makes us behave better, a God who doesn't want us to shine too brightly, because it will make us proud and draw attention away from Him, a God who will not bless you unless you give yourself and your money to Him, and a God who needs to micromanage every detail of your life.

Even the message of Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection has been distorted by this misunderstanding about who God is. In Darin's words:

Sadly, the gospel message has been affected by this way of thinking. "God loves you; come to Him," has been turned into, "Jesus got a major beating that was meant for you, so come to Him." (p. 63)

Darin speaks from his own experience as a child, father, believer, and former pastor. He discovered that in many ways, the God of his religion was exactly opposite from the God of love. As a former pastor myself, this rang true to my own experience. We both had the disheartening experience of discovering that the deeper you get into religion, the more damaging it is to relationships. How could such a thing be? Darin nails the answer on the head, and I for one am deeply thankful.

Essentially, The Misunderstood God is a look at "the love chapter", but from the perspective that if God is love, and love is patient, kind, etc., then God must have these qualities. And if God is like this, then how on earth is the church giving us God B?

Of course your experience may not mirror Darin's. You may not have had the same kind of family upbringing, the same religious upbringing, or the same relational dysfunctions. You may not identify with him in all these areas. You may not agree with him on every point--I'm not sure I do. If you've been trained in theology, you may squirm just a little.

That's not the point, of course. The bottom line is, what is God really like, as a person? Your answer to this question affects everything else--your theology, your interpretation of scripture, your church life, everything. That's why you should at least read and consider what it has to say. Is it possible you've been trying to serve a distorted image that's more like your human dad than like God the Father? If there really is a "God A", I want to know that one.

Darin is not cut from the traditional Christian cloth, and is already held with contempt in some Christian circles; this book will not increase his popularity among these folks. I suspect he will take some heat for some statements that cut directly across the grain of even the most easy-going Christians, such as:

When we say that God wants to "use us" in some way to further His purposes, we are truly saying an awful thing about His heart...The gifts He has given you are never to be used at your expense. He does not want you to be used by anyone, and He will never use you. Your gifts were given to you for the purpose of bringing joy to your life, not for the purpose of serving Him or furthering His cause. Your happiness is His cause. (pp. 99-100)

I can already hear the Bible verses being quoted and the voices being raised in righteous indignation! This statement, taken out of context, seems to promote a completely self-centered approach to the Christian life. But if you will read the whole story, you will discover that the whole message is love, and love only lives when it is given to another.

If God is love, what does that look like? Is it more like the classic dysfunctional family, where relationships are characterized by power struggles, insecurity, one-upmanship, scapegoating, lying, and manipulation? Or is it something beautiful that my heart knows and longs for? Is it truly unconditional love that is steady, peaceful, patient, supportive, and absolutely reliable?

Obviously this is not an objective book review; I want you to read this book! You may love it or hate it, but it probably won't just fade into your memory like so many other things you have read. This is a unique book; it's not a new teaching, although it may feel new, because so many of us are generally confused about our relationship with God--what He really thinks about us, how He really feels about us.

Personally, I am very thankful this was written. I think you will find it true to life, honest, profound, and maybe a little unsettling, but in a good way. My hope, and I'm sure Darin's hope as well, is that ultimately you will discover and know this God of love for yourself.

My Club is Better than Your Club (part 1)

2009-10-23T07:01:00.000-07:00

Let's face it: Churches, organizationally speaking, are faith-based clubs, of which you are either a member or not.

They are all looking for new committed members, so that they can continue to exist, or possibly even grow. Every one of them has good reasons why theirs is better than the other ones in town. It might be better music, better drama, a better pastor, better preaching/teaching, better facilities, nicer people, better multimedia, staff, missions projects, community activities, outreach programs, Bible studies, doctrinal statements, counseling, youth activities, kids' programs, political associations, status in the community, etc.

Go ahead, ask any pastor or priest why their church is a better choice than the other ones in town--if they are a good salesperson, you should get a nice list of reasons.

I remember once seeing a Catholic priest meeting with some potential members, saying "the thing about the Catholic church is that everything you see inside the building MEANS something." I don't know...that might be a selling point for somebody, but I don't really care that much about symbolism.

I guess I need a different kind of club--maybe something a little more intellectual and edgy. That's my personality, after all.

There's nothing wrong with joining a club that fits your personality, right? So if you find one you like, why not? Go for it.

What is a club? It's:

"an association of persons for some common object usually jointly supported and meeting periodically; also : a group identified by some common characteristic b : the meeting place of a club <lunch at the club> c : an association of persons participating in a plan by which they agree to make regular payments or purchases in order to secure some advantage." (Merriam-Webster)

That could describe most churches, I think.

So then, what does it take to join a club?

First, you need to be eligible and willing to commit to membership. In the case of church membership, to be eligible, you need to agree to the church's doctrinal statement. In some you need to say you have a personal relationship with Jesus. Of course they hope that you believe the statement with your whole heart, not just agree mentally. But since there's no way of proving that one way or the other, a mental agreement will have to do.

Most churches also have some doctrinal "distinctives" that set them apart from the other churches in town. These might be something along the lines of baptism, communion, spiritual gifts, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the nature of the trinity, predestination, free will, or the end times. You'll need to agree to those too. On the other hand, if you're not sure about your beliefs in these areas, don't worry that much. You'll have plenty of time to be taught these things as a member. Just sign the paper, ok? Let's not split hairs.

Second, you will need to be accepted as a member. You're not going to embarrass the church with your reputation, are you? Or make it seem like the church is condoning a sinful lifestyle? Or, maybe you have baggage from your last church. If you have a pentecostal background, for example, are you going to disrupt our worship services with your demonstrative worship methods? You're not going to fight with us over our view on baptism, are you? We need to make sure you really "fit" here.

But if everybody's agreeable up to this point, you can become a member--you're in! What now?

Well, of course there's the whole money issue. How else can we keep the lights on and the staff paid? We might call it a tithe, or an offering, or something else; the important thing is that our club keeps running. So above all, make sure you are giving money regularly, sacrificially, and faithfully. You don't want to be responsible for "robbing from God" and letting our club fall apart, do you?

Beyond giving money, you should also make sure to participate in the activities and classes as they're offered. It might fill up your schedule to an unmanageable level, but the important thing is that you are getting attached to THIS group of people and that you are learning OUR way of thinking and relating to God. Then you will truly understand, at a deep level, why our club is better than the others in town.

I remember being raised Lutheran, and being taught why their view on communion was right and the other Synod's view was wrong, and why they didn't associate with churches that associated with certain Christian movements, like ecumenism, for example. Later on, I discovered literature from the Worldwide Church of God, where I learned all about why they "got it" about God's plan and all the other churches in the world didn't.

Later, I became involved in a United Pentecostal Church and learned how the rest of Christendom had been deceiving the world with their unbiblical, tri-theistic view of the trinity and baptism. I also learned there that your clothing and appearance set you apart from the world (and the other so-called "Christians") that doesn't know God. In those days, I felt very superior to all the other, less enlightened, Christian clubs. That was a great feeling!

After a few years in that club, however, I started investigating into the world of Fundamentalism, where I learned that everything I learned at the Pentecostal church was wrong. I learned this from the best of the best, at a seminary led by a high-powered Bible teacher named John MacArthur. It totally messed up my previous church associations, and I had to upend my life once again, but at last I had found a better, more biblical club to join...for now.

But then, after a while, I discovered that Fundamentalism not only has deep divisions within its own ranks, but it ultimately cares a lot more about being doctrinally right than loving people (especially people with inferior doctrine)...so, I slowly walked away, shifted my paradigm once again, and joined a more moderate kind of Evangelicalism. It was kind of a mix of former Fundamentalists and Protestants and Catholics and Pentecostals who decided not to talk about these things in the open. Just keep things simple, don't dig too deep, put on an inspiring presentation on Sundays, keep people busy with activities and classes, and we're good to go! That worked really well for quite some time.

But a funny thing happened there, too...

After ten years of commitment to this particular club as a member and as leader/pastor, I was informed that I was a "square peg" where they needed a "round hole". I didn't fit in anymore, if indeed I ever did in the first place. How could this be, I wondered? I thought the body of Christ accepted all kinds of people, even different kinds of leaders? Nope, it really doesn't work that way at this club. You really need to fit in. You really need to be a representative of "our way" of doing things. If you're going to be a member and a leader in our club, you have to see things our way, and fit in with our style. Apparently one of the games they played in this club was "King of the Mountain"--and in the end, I lost.

Fair enough, I guess. If I joined the team at McDonald's and refused to wear the uniform, I would probably get fired. If I joined the local Republican party, but kept bringing up problems and questions with the party, I might get tossed out. I can appreciate that.

I just have to wonder though...what do all of these clubs have to do with the body of Christ? Is this really what Jesus had in mind when He birthed The Church? Didn't Jesus come up with something better than a myriad of Christian clubs competing for members?

Gosh, I sure hope so! More on this to come...

Actually, I AM Looking for the Perfect Church

2009-08-13T08:25:00.000-07:00

Ever heard these kinds of statements before?

"If you find the perfect church, don't join it, because then it won't be perfect anymore."

"If you should find the perfect church
Without one fault or smear,
For goodness sake! Don't join that church
You'd spoil the atmosphere."

I get the point. True, there are no perfect people, so if you put a bunch of them together there will be flaws. And to look for any group of people that will meet your every human need and never disappoint you is a vain pursuit. I get that.

But let's cut to the chase: These are statements typically made by people that want you to join (or stay in) their church, but don't want you to criticize anything that you might find wrong. Right?

Is there a culture of gossip in the church? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Is there favoritism toward the rich? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Is there corruption in the leadership? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Are people in positions they are not gifted for? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Is scripture used inappropriately to manipulate people's insecurities? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Are the relationships in the church co-dependent or abusive? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.
Are all tough questions answered with a pat answer from the "inner circle"? Don't criticize, there's no perfect church.

Just keep attending and giving your money, and don't criticize. There's no perfect church.

But actually, I am looking for the perfect church. As it turns out, so is Jesus:

"He [Jesus] gave up his life for her [the church] to make her holy and clean, washed by the cleansing of God’s word. He did this to present her to himself as a glorious church without a spot or wrinkle or any other blemish." - Ephesians 5:26-27

Jesus prayed to the Father: "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they [the church] may be perfected in unity..." - John 17:22-23

Does this mean I expect to be treated perfectly by every believer? No, I don't. Does this mean I expect moral perfection and impeccable behavior? No. Does this mean I expect every believer to have no struggle with any vice? Of course not. Is that Jesus' real goal for his church on earth? No.

What I do expect from the church is that it will display the same qualities of love, peace, courage, forgiveness, grace, hope, conviction, and faith that Jesus did.

A perfect church is not made up of perfect people--it simply expresses the spirit of Jesus, who is perfect.

Is this too much to expect? I don't think so--I've seen it happen:

I've been in churches that are anxious, and ones that are peaceful.
I've been in churches that gossip, and ones that refuse to.
I've been in churches that abuse people, and ones that don't.
I've been in churches that control and manipulate the weak, and ones that don't.
I've been in churches that stir up guilt, and ones that understand grace.

If your particular church group is characterized by anxiety, suspicion, gossip, manipulation, dysfunction, or fear, look for something better--NOW. Don't waste any more of your precious time looking for a healthy meal in a dumpster; it's not going to get better without a demolition. You have my permission to go out and "look for the perfect church".

You may have to wander in the wilderness to find it, but it's there.

...and as it turns out, the perfect church is not made up of perfect people at all!

If you have discovered a relationship with fellow believers that is peaceful, open, honest, free, emotionally healthy, growing, and full of faith--you have found the perfect church! Live in it, participate, use your gifts, glorify God, and tell people the good news you have discovered.

Jesus is creating the perfect church, and yes, you CAN find it.

A Tribute to Trashed Pastors

2009-06-01T15:46:00.000-07:00

Today I want to take a moment and remember those who have been crushed under the load of institutional "pastoring"--for the most part, good, godly people who believed they were following God's calling to serve, but who unwittingly got sucked into a mechanical religious system, only to be spit out when their usefulness came to an end.

I never thought I would be in those ranks, but I am. I realize I am only one person with an extremely narrow scope of experience, but in my 20 years of actively serving God in ministry, I have personally witnessed the demise of several strong, sincere leaders as they lost their livelihood, dignity, and human spirit, in their effort to "pastor" a local church. If you haven't been through this yourself, I suspect you may know someone who has.

I use the word "pastor" in quotes, because I am referring to the modern-day definition of pastoring, not the biblical one. The modern-day pastor is not "pastoring" in the New Testament sense as much as being the head of a religious organization. These kinds of "pastors" are expected to be in equal parts a leader, a teacher, a counselor, a strategist, a family person, a business manager, an orator, a fundraiser, fun-loving, social, morally impeccable, and of course Christ-like.

A pastor who is paid to take on this ridiculous level of responsibility is constantly evaluated by their performance in every one of these areas. Their career, and the their income, depends on it. They are expected to not only understand the political and relational minefield contained in their local church body, but also to maneuver it with skill, confidence, and poise. Admitting the inability to keep up will be fatal to their career.

The pastor's family must be in a constant state of approval by the church's money people, elders, and other key position holders and influencers. A pastor might be walking the tightrope of his/her job description adequately, only to have an errant spouse or child throw everything out of balance. Some pastors find this environment revolting, while others thrive on it, like a celebrity thrives on an audience. No one goes unaffected, however. This environment corrupts even the most sincere.

One of the pastors I knew lost his spirit and his position after a daughter became pregnant out of wedlock. The next one fell to an online relationship resulting in adultery. Another was humiliated, along with his wife and small children, in front of the church, because they didn't measure up to the expectations of the various boards and committees. The most successful of the ones I knew valiantly fought the "old guard" for over a decade, and helped a church grow, only to ultimately succumb to burnout, career loss, and bankruptcy.

One of the ways that churches suck is how they suck the life out of its leaders.

For me, it was stubbornly believing that an institutional church could function organically--for believing that people should serve through giftedness, not position. My insistence was more than this system could tolerate, and I was also "thrown under the bus" in a wave of political maneuvers. My own experience of getting trashed by the church came after twenty years of pursuing ministry; when I was a young adult, I abandoned my previous career, believing I was giving myself to the most noble of professions. I was deceived, and now I have a lot of catching up to do.

Someone outside of the situation might reasonably ask: Weren't these leaders at fault? Don't they take some responsibility for their own results? Of course they do. I'm sure they are reminded of this daily, through regret and guilt. I know I am.

Sinners or saints, martyrs, well-meaning fools, or self-centered egotists, whatever you want to call them, they all lie on a huge, invisible scrapheap. They may find new work, they may manage to rebuild a life, they may even continue on and take on another pastoring role; but the fact remains that they have been sucked in and spit out by the church machine.

THE Church described in the Bible is not without its problems and faults, even under the purest of circumstances. But this religious-political entity we call "church" today has an even deeper challenge: It is not a community at all. It is a religious business above all, and it is stealing, killing, and destroying the most sincere, the most generous, and the most sacrificial people in its ranks--those who would dare take on the role of "pastor."

I know there's a time to move beyond this, think positively, embrace God's grace, release the pain of the past, and experience the best of the life God has planned for us. I know there is no real value in dwelling on this level of personal carnage. So if this is too heavy or too negative for you, I apologize.

Still, I think this is a story that needs to be told.

Do you have a story?

Church Heirarchy, part 2: Who Are You "of"?

2009-05-26T07:31:00.000-07:00

Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. For some members of Chloe’s household have told me about your quarrels, my dear brothers and sisters. Some of you are saying, “I am a follower of Paul.” Others are saying, “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Peter,” or “I follow only Christ.” (1 Corinthians 1:10-12)

Who do you follow? Who are you "of?"

When you are asked about your faith or your church life, how do you answer? Do you answer with the name of your church, the name of your senior Pastor, or the name of your denomination? That is what most people want to know, usually. What denomination are you with? What church do you go to? Who's your pastor?

In other words, who are you "of"? Inquiring minds want to know!

We really do want to know. People really like, even need, to have clean categories by which to associate or disassociate with one another. Oh, you're Catholic; you're Southern Baptist; you're Assembly of God--now I know how to relate to you. Oh, you're part of Bethel, St. Mark's, Calvary, House of Praise, Community Church, etc--I know about them. Oh, you're at Pastor Johnson's church, Pastor Bill's, Father Tom's, or whatever--I've heard about them.

And once we can name who we are, then we can also know who we are not. We are NOT traditional, contemporary, pentecostal, liturgical, reformed, Calvinist, pre-millenial, emergent, denominational, etc. That's wrong; we're right. This gives us our identity, our tradition, our sense of security.

There's just one rather large problem with all this, however: The Church described in the New Testament is not like this; in fact, it directly opposes this way of "doing church."

In The Church, the Body of Christ, all members are members of one another--every other believer, both locally and universally (Ephesians 4:25). It is an invisible community made up of relationships that are equal, loving, considerate, forgiving, and encouraging.

Jesus very clearly said that we should not identify ourselves under particular teachers.

“Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah." (Matthew 23:8-12)

The Apostle Paul also made it clear that dividing ourselves up according to church leaders is divisive and wrong.

Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. For some members of Chloe’s household have told me about your quarrels, my dear brothers and sisters. Some of you are saying, “I am a follower of Paul.” Others are saying, “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Peter,” or “I follow only Christ.” (1 Corinthians 1:10-12)

Let me ask this question a different way to pastors: If you are a church leader, who follows you?

Yes, there are such things as pastors, elders, teachers, and other kinds of leaders in the church. But they are only there for one purpose--to encourage the Body to grow up under Jesus Christ, the true leader, teacher, priest, and authority:

He is the one who gave these gifts to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers. Their responsibility is to equip God's people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ, until we come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God's Son that we will be mature and full grown in the Lord, measuring up to the full stature of Christ. Then we will no longer be like children, forever changing our minds about what we believe because someone has told us something different or because someone has cleverly lied to us and made the lie sound like the truth. Instead, we will hold to the truth in love, becoming more and more in every way like Christ, who is the head of his body, the church. (Ephesians 4:11-15)

Here's another reason why churches suck:

When people divide up into camps, they suck loyalty away from Jesus Christ, suck the growth potential out of their members, and suck the life out of those human leaders by placing superhuman expectations on them (see Church Hierarchy, part 1).

In "churches" of the top-down hierarchical variety, members are members ally themselves under one particular Senior Pastor, who is usually under one particular governing body, who is usually under one particular denomination, who in turn find their identity in how they are distinct from, and in some way superior to, the other denominations, governing bodies, and local pastors and members.

The Church that is really alive in Jesus Christ and functioning as His Body has one head--Jesus himself. Churches that rely on a top-down chain of command find their "life" and identity under a human organization or a human leader, which sets them apart from all the other human organizations and leaders out there. When you become a member of a hierarchical church, you commit yourself to operate under that particular "head", who is not Jesus Christ, but a human leader or organization.

So who are you "of"? And if you're a pastor or other appointed church leader, who is "of" you? How much identity do you find in who you are "under" or "over"?

I'm not suggesting that you quit your church, if you are part of one. I'm not suggesting that you stage a rebellion against your pastor, priest, or denomination. I'm not suggesting that you go "house church". I'm just asking. Who are you "of"? When you need to understand something about God, who do you go to? When you are looking for authority in your spiritual life, who do you look to? When you are looking for a sense of security, leadership, vision, direction, or assurance, where do you turn? To Jesus or your pastor?

If you are a pastor or other church leader, where do you want people to turn for these things? Do you really want them to turn to Jesus Christ and the presence of the Holy Spirit that's found in the open fellowship of all believers? Or does that concern you that they will get "off track"? Do you feel a need to be the guide, the leader, the teacher, over the body of Christ? How much security do you find in your position?

People who have not found security in Jesus Christ need a human leader to give them step-by-step directions. And pastors who have not found their true confidence in Jesus Christ need followers to depend on them and give them a sense of purpose.

Church hierarchy sucks, because it is essentially co-dependent. It is also very, very hard to escape and discover true freedom and security in Christ.

But that's where faith really lives. Your identity is in Jesus Christ and your membership in his one body.

Who do you follow?

Church Heirarchy, part 1: Someone to Watch Over Me

2009-04-14T07:11:00.000-07:00

“Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah." (Matthew 23:8-12)

When you think of a "pastor"--what comes to mind?

Not any particular pastor, good or bad. Just a pastor, in general. What is that person? What do they do? What is their job and responsibility? What makes a good one? A bad one?

If you're like most people, you think of a pastor as the primary leader of a local church. In some churches, the pastor is the CEO, or final authority; but even if he (or she) doesn't have spiritual authority over the church, they are at least the most visible staff member--the one everyone looks to (and pays) for inspiration, leadership, and an example of mature Christianity. They typically need to function as the churches chief manager, counselor, and public speaker specializing in Bible teaching.

Regardless of the particular politics of a given church, the pastor (and pastoral staff) are usually expected to fill these roles and responsibilities. They are expected to spend more time on the business of the church than the "non-pastor" members. It is expected that they will devote their full-time efforts to leading and managing that particular church. They are also expected to live at a higher ethical standard then the typical "non-pastor" members.

The church member's job is to attend and participate, and pay for their pastoral staff to uphold these roles. The pastor's job is to uphold these roles; if they do not, they will lose their position. After all, that's what they're paid for, right? They need to be about the business of the church full time, because the "non-pastors" are already busy with their "secular" work. Somebody needs to make sure the church keeps running and growing. That job falls to the pastor, of course.

That's the predominant thought, anyway--that's what we have all been conditioned to think about pastors. Pastors (clergy) have been given more responsibility and authority than laity. They are "over" and the rest of us are looking up to them. So, if you're looking for God's direction, you really need to check in with your pastor. They have the position of authority; they are your spiritual covering; they are your 'teacher'; they have been given the wisdom.

So what's the big deal? I see at least two really big problems with this:

It puts certain "specially qualified and approved" people in the unbiblical role of spiritual Teacher and Father-figure--roles which belongs only to God.
On a practical level, it does more harm than good to the people involved. Take a look at these stats from The Fuller Institute, George Barna, and Pastoral Care, Inc.

90% of the pastors report working between 55 to 75 hours per week.
80% believe pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families. Many pastor's children do not attend church now because of what the church has done to their parents.
33% state that being in the ministry is an outright hazard to their family.
75% report significant stress-related crisis at least once in their ministry.
90% feel they are inadequately trained to cope with the ministry demands.
50% feel unable to meet the demands of the job.
70% say they have a lower self-image now than when they first started.
70% do not have someone they consider a close friend.
40% report serious conflict with a parishioner at least once a month.
33% confess having involved in inappropriate sexual behavior with someone in the church .
50% have considered leaving the ministry in the last months.
50% of the ministers starting out will not last 5 years.
1 out of every 10 ministers will actually retire as a minister in some form.
94% of clergy families feel the pressures of the pastor's ministry.
66% of church members expect a minister and family to live at a higher moral standard than themselves.
Moral values of a Christian is no different than those who consider themselves as non-Christians.
The average American will tell 23 lies a day.
The profession of “Pastor” is near the bottom of a survey of the most-respected professions, just above “car salesman”.
Over 4,000 churches closed in America last year.
Over 1,700 pastors left the ministry every month last year.
Over 1,300 pastors were terminated by the local church each month , many without cause.
Over 3,500 people a day left the church last year.
Many denominations report an “empty pulpit crisis”. They cannot find ministers willing to fill positions.

And if this is happening to the leaders, how is that affecting the churches they are leading? How does it affect morale? The community life of the body of Christ? Spiritual growth? The mission of the Church?

Incidentally, these are not just statistics to me. They precisely describe my own experience as one who has been both a pastor and a former pastor. Maybe you can relate too; the numbers of us "ex-pastors" out there is growing every year!

Here's why I think church hierarchy (i.e. the Clergy-Laity system) sucks: The idea of putting a person in charge of God's church does not come from God. It comes from the human desire to have a human leader.

We crave structure that we can understand and see with our eyes. As a result, we naturally assign people these roles of spiritual leadership, even though God specifically told us not to. And we all suffer for it.

This isn't a new problem, by the way; the same thing happened with the people of Israel, didn't it? God wanted to lead the people Himself, but they didn't want that--they wanted a human leader, much like the kind they had seen over other nations. he prophet Samuel warned them of the consequences of this, but they insisted:

But the people refused to listen to Samuel’s warning. “Even so, we still want a king,” they said. “We want to be like the nations around us. Our king will judge us and lead us into battle.” (1 Samuel 8:19-20)

This set a pattern that held for generations--with mixed results, and many, many tragedies for God's people. When Jesus finally came to reiterate God's view on this topic, he put it this way:

“Don’t let anyone call you ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one teacher, and all of you are equal as brothers and sisters. And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your spiritual Father. And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah." (Matthew 23:8-12)

Later on, in the early life of the Church, the apostle Paul warned against Christian believers aligning themselves under particular church leaders:

Some of you are saying, “I am a follower of Paul.” Others are saying, “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Peter,” or “I follow only Christ.” Has Christ been divided into factions? Was I, Paul, crucified for you? Were any of you baptized in the name of Paul? Of course not! (1 Corinthians 1:12-13)

When the Roman Emperor Constantine gave Christianity a government-approved presence in the 300s A.D., he effectively gave God's people back the human leaders they craved. After this, churches became local organizations, each with their own dedicated building and their own human leadership--just like the government, just like the local pagan religions, just like "the nations" that Israel looked to. And this basic form, with some revision, has remained with us to this day.

Nowadays we say things like, "I am a Lutheran," "I am a Southern Baptist," "I go to Pastor _______'s church," or "I am a part of the _________ church family." What is the implication of all of these statements? They all imply that we find our spiritual identity under one particular group, organization or leader. But there is still only one Body, and only one Leader.

I figure that for many people reading this, the burning question might be: But doesn't the Bible teach that the Church has leaders, pastors, elders, etc.? Don't we as sheep need shepherds to guide us? The answer is, yes; but more on that next time...

Please understand that I'm not saying "pastors" are unbiblical; they are one of God's gifts to the Church. Beyond that, many people who are pastoring right now are great, godly people with a passion to serve God's Church. I am not against any people, especially those who have committed themselves to the call to ministry. I'm saying that how we've turned pastors into a clergy class, which has authority over the laity, is unbiblical.

The churches we know and experience today are more often operated like a government, a business, or a military organization. In those kinds of organizations, it's normal to have a top-down flowchart of command. It's what we all know, understand, and are used to.

But it's not how the body of Christ works.

I know this topic may be a tough sell for some. You may be reading this disagree with me, and that would be fine. This is my blog, you can write yours. Conversation is a good thing. I am not the be-all and know-all. I am only speaking from my own perspective, my own experience, and my own understanding of God's word.

In part two of Church Heirarchy, I'll focus more on the solution than the problem. If this clergy-laity thing sucks, then what doesn't? How can we as followers of Christ begin to trust our true Leader more and more, so we can follow where He's leading?

Thanks for taking the time to read through and consider this, and please feel free to sound off with any thoughts you might have about Church Heirarchy.

Church Politics, part 2: What Can Be Done?

2009-03-16T18:58:00.000-07:00

In part one, we discovered that church politics suck. But you probably didn't need a blog to tell you that!

In his book The 8th Habit, Stephen Covey identifies what he calls "five emotional cancers" you might find in any given group or organization:

Criticizing
Complaining
Comparing
Competing
Contending

He points out that when these things find their way into a group of people, or a culture, these cells will "metastasize" and infect the group so that it ultimately becomes so polarized and divided that it's incapable of producing anything of real quality.

We already know we can find sick politics in our workplaces, governments, schools, and other organizations, so maybe it shouldn't surprise us to find it in churches as well.

But if it's in the church, isn't this simply a matter of "there are no perfect churches", and we must simply learn to accept it?

Absolutely not! "Politics as usual" is unacceptable in the body of Christ. Take another look at Covey's emotional cancers, and compare it to the apostle Paul's list of "the works of the flesh":

"...hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, divisions, the feeling that everyone is wrong except those in your own little group..." (Galatians 5:20)

Our calling as THE Church, on the other hand, is to refuse that way of doing things:

"Get rid of all bitterness, rage, anger, harsh words, and slander, as well as all types of malicious behavior. Instead, be kind to each other, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, just as God through Christ has forgiven you." (Ephesians 4:31-32)

But many churches don't refuse politics, they embrace them. Even worse, the leadership will very often protect the politics by reframing and justifying them with biblical language and/or reassuring words, whether in public or private. This is nothing more than a PR smokescreen to keep church members ignorant. And to complete the circuit, many church members would rather not know what's really going on--it's simply too disturbing.

If we find ourselves in an environment where anyone who questions how things 'really' operate gets labeled as "divisive" or "unteachable", and membership responds with "amen", then its clear we're in the church politics soup--and we're in deep.

So here's a question: If you discover that your church has been infested with politics--that it's more about control than community--what can you, as one person, actually do about it?

Now if you're a follower of Christ, there are some things you should not do. Mostly, the things you should NOT do include things related to revenge, returning evil for evil, or further dividing the believers into camps. For a believer, these approaches are not an option...they may be very tempting at times, but they are off limits to those who claim to follow Christ.

"That old law about 'an eye for an eye' leaves everybody blind. The time is always right to do the right thing." (Martin Luther King, Jr.)

"Revenge is always the weak pleasure of a little and narrow mind." (Juvenal)

"Never pay back evil with more evil. Do things in such a way that everyone can see you are honorable." (Romans 12:17)

In other words, don't go there. You don't fight gossip by gossiping about the gossipers! That approach doesn't improve anything or glorify God in any way.

The spirit-led approach is to unclench your fists, take a deep cleansing breath, do the hard work of confronting the appropriate people graciously and thoroughly if needed, and then make a confident, peaceful choice about where you will continue to fellowship.

I'll explain this in more detail soon, but first:

Chances are you will be VERY emotional about this, because frankly, a church that operates on politics is wrong, and if you have God's spirit in you, this will offend you to the core. Make no mistake: When a church is functioning by strong personalities and under-the-table power moves more than by God's gifting of EVERY member of the body, it is messed up.

It's also hard to see this happen in a church you've connected with for any period of time. Chances are you have good friends there. You may even have a good relationship with the people in leadership. Everybody might have a great heart and the best of intentions; but if the system's got the cancer, it's got the cancer--you can't just ignore it.

So, because confronting a sick system can be an emotional, gut-wrenching, scary thing, it might be helpful to see what to do in baby steps:

Come to terms with your own political tendencies. As mentioned before, you're not immune to this problem; chances are you have played some yourself. Have you ever chosen to associate with those who you felt would improve your status or position in the church? Have you ever said things about your fellow believers that you would never say if they were in the room? You don't have to wallow in guilt about this--just acknowledge that you have played the game too, so there's no reason to feel superior. That being said...
Stop playing the game. Again, if you take a defensive, combative posture, or start using your own style of manipulation to make your point, you're still playing the game--stop it! The only way out of this mess is to stop playing the game. Refuse to participate, even when others are coaxing you back in.
Re-read Matthew 18 and confront the appropriate person/people. Follow Jesus' directions here and guide your actions accordingly. If you need to approach someone about this issue, do it individually at first, then bring others in by degrees. This will require courage on your part. It may even be some of the hardest stuff you've ever done in your life!
If positive change comes, rejoice! If you'll recall, the prophet Jonah didn't actually want Ninevah to repent; he would have rather seen them be judged for their sin, and he was actually disappointed that God showed mercy on them! If your confrontation leads to acknowledgment and real turnaround, rejoice! Don't forget that God does not rejoice in judgement; He rejoices in restoration.
If the politics are pervasive, consider a healthier fellowship. If, despite your best efforts, your attempts to confront the politics in your church go nowhere, you do have options. If you feel it's the right thing to stay and be a light in a dark place, then you have the option to stay--but if you stay, no more complaining! If however you find you are starving for healthy, Christ-centered fellowship, then it might be best to leave this church in God's hands, say your good-byes, and peacefully move on. The body of Christ is bigger and more alive than you may even realize, and you may find it in the most unlikely places!

And the adventure continues, right?

THE Church is a community where people work at loving one another. There is the "grace and peace" the apostle Paul mentioned so often. They don't divide into camps at the first sign of disagreement. If you've been living in politically-charged church environment for a long time, it may actually be shocking to discover that it doesn't have to be that way!

THE Church, when it rids itself of human politics, is a beautiful thing:

"Under his direction, the whole body is fitted together perfectly. As each part does its own special work, it helps the other parts grow, so that the whole body is healthy and growing and full of love." (Ephesians 4:16)

Notice how it says "as each part does its own special work". One reason that doesn't happen like it should is church hierarchy, or a top-down approach to running the church. I'll get into that topic next.

Please give me your thoughts about this topic of dealing with church politics. Have you been through this? Are you about ready to go through this? What's been your experience? I'd love to hear from you.

Church Politics, part 1: The Power Struggle

2009-03-13T04:49:00.000-07:00

"Politics are not the task of a Christian." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

"You are jealous of one another and quarrel with each other. Doesn’t that prove you are controlled by your sinful nature? Aren’t you living like people of the world? When one of you says, 'I am a follower of Paul,' and another says, “I follow Apollos,” aren’t you acting just like people of the world?" - Paul the Apostle, 1 Cor. 3:3-4

Miriam-Webster defines politics as "competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government)." But in a church? Inconceivable!

If you are new to the faith or to church life, it can be an exciting, amazing thing. Everything is new, God is real to you, you've discovered a new way of life, you love to worship with other believers, and you marvel at how different life is in the kingdom of God!

But along the way, you might start to notice things that happen in your church--things that are just a bit disturbing. Sure, you see people make mistakes and have flaws--you can handle that (who doesn't have flaws?). You may disagree with something that's said from the pulpit--you can live with that (we're not going to agree on everything, right?). But as you dig deeper, you start to discover some more unsettling dynamics within the church organization...things that are just--wrong.

You discover that there are "money people" who magically seem to get their way more consistently than others. You discover cliques, just like the kind you had in high school. You discover that decisions are made behind the scenes, and that every now and then staff members of the church just "disappear", with no clear explanation.

If you bring this up, you're told that "well, there are no perfect churches"--meaning, you just need to accept this as normal. If you press the issue, you may find yourself a bit more socially (or spiritually) marginalized than before. If you do get to have a meeting with a leader to express your concern, you may experience a politically correct response, an insincere head nod, a questioning of your spiritual maturity, or even outright hostility.

What is going on?

Welcome to church politics.

The unfortunate reality is that in many churches, politics are as natural as breathing--it's just "how things are done". But if that's the air we've breathed, it's given us lung cancer.

If you have the opportunity to get "under the hood" in many churches, you may just find all the things you thought only belonged in a good spy thriller: money, power, control, strategic alliances, lobbyists, secret meetings, scapegoating, lying, sex, you name it.

Some might say that if you have the right type of church, this doesn't happen. But the reality is, it doesn't matter which type of government is used, whether it's a congregation-led, elder-led, pastor-led, denomination-led, board-led, or whatever. Where there is a governing system involved, and where there is money involved, there will be politics.

As Galadriel so eloquently put it at the beginning of the movie The Fellowship of the Ring, we are still talking about "the race of men, who above all else desire power." How true.

From the inception of the church in the first century, it took less than three hundred years for it to be hijacked by the government and morphed into a religious institution, fully loaded with internal and external politics and power structures. And despite various reformations and upheavals since that time, politics continues to be the real "power" that keeps many churches functioning from week to week.

All of this, of course, stands in stark contrast to the kingdom of God that Jesus taught about, and how THE Church is taught by God to function:

“You know that the rulers in this world lord it over their people, and officials flaunt their authority over those under them. But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first among you must become your slave." (Matthew 20:25-27)

^"When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear...hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division..." (Galatians 5:20)

"...throw off your old sinful nature and your former way of life, which is corrupted by lust and deception. Instead, let the Spirit renew your thoughts and attitudes. Put on your new nature, created to be like God—truly righteous and holy. So stop telling lies. Let us tell our neighbors the truth, for we are all parts of the same body." (Ephesians 4:22-25)

So that's why church politics sucks; it feels wrong, because it is wrong; there is no place for it in THE Church.

But what's the alternative? Are there ways we can resist these all-too-common human power plays, and instead operate in the peaceful, yet powerful way that God designed THE Church to operate?

Absolutely. To quote another line from The Lord of the Rings, "there is always hope."

More on that in part 2...

Introduction

2009-03-10T08:23:00.000-07:00

Greetings everyone!

Let me explain: This may sound like I'm against people and church families and pastors (yours, for example); I am most definitely not. I go to "a church", and I love it. I don't doubt that you may too.

This blog is an expression of my own experience with churches as organizations--many of them, covering a wide range of types and sizes, over my entire lifetime. Of course, my experience may not reflect yours, and that's fine. But if the point of writing is to express of your own viewpoint, then this is what I'm doing.

My experience with churches as a person raised in one, than as one who left it, then came back as a "new convert", then a ministry leader, pastor, ex-pastor, etc. has been one of the biggest defining points of my life. My experience with churches has been an adventure of seeking, discovery, amazing experiences, deep pain, and renewal. Maybe yours has too.

I also come to this writing with my faith intact, amazingly enough. You may be surprised to discover that, despite my title, I still believe in the church--THE Church, that is. I'll explain what I mean by THE Church along the way, as I explore its differences from "churches", which are, I believe, not exactly what Jesus had in mind.

What I want to share here is my own observations and viewpoint about the many differences between churches and THE Church. As I've indicated, I think one sucks and the other doesn't. But I want to be really clear about this.

I have come to the conclusion that churches differ from THE Church in the areas of Competition, Marketing, Budget, Chain of Command, Inner Politics, Public Politics, Bureaucracy, Religion, Lecture-Hall Style, and Organizational Paradigm.

The main sections of this writing will be:

Church politics sucks
Church business sucks
Church hierarchy sucks
Church teaching sucks
Church culture sucks

For some, it may seem somewhat sensationalist to use the word "sucks" for all these things. You might have me on that--to a point. Because when I use the word "sucks", it's because, unfortunately, these things really do suck--they suck the life out of people, and they suck the life out of God's good news, turning it into an overly-complicated religious/social/political/business system--which is no good news at all.

Where does this all lead?

I don't pretend that this writing will change the church world; it probably won't. This is something that's been around for thousands of years (even before "the church" began), and will be around until the resolution of all things.

What I hope this will do is give voice and clarity to the person who is confused by all this. I also hope that it will encourage those who have felt something "not quite right" about the whole church thing, but don't want to give up on the church.

I hope this may even help church leaders in their effort to lead God's people. Please remember that anything critical I may say about churches or church leaders is never meant to take anything away from the character and dedication that define many of them. My criticisms are never personal; they are systematic. But the system affects everyone within it, including the leaders.

When I first got into ministry, I was unaware of any of this. Now I know, and I wish I had known much earlier. When you're a leader in a church, you want to do the right thing. I understand that, and never mean any disrespect or discouragement to anyone. But what I've discovered is that when you're leading in "churches", the rules are different than in THE Church. You've been led to think it's one way, but it's really not. And almost 1500 pastors per year in America are fired or forced to resign, because what they thought it was, isn't what it really is.

So, please join me on this journey. I will express my thoughts, because that's what writing is all about. But I don't claim to be the final voice. This is a conversation that needs to happen; please join it.