by Jon Zens
_______________________________________________________________
Dear
___________
In
the past month I*ve met with _________ on several occasions, and he has shared
with me some of the things the Lord is doing in the assembly. Along with the
areas of rejoicing were also some areas of concern. Since I have been through
some church experiences (1968-1982) that generally parallel what you are going
through, I would like to encourage you with respect to several key areas. My
concerns, based on what I*ve seen over the years, are that if you do not deal
soon with some key issues in an up-front way, you run the risk of losing even
the good things that exist now.
First, I sense that you are in somewhat of a tension, and therefore in
a predicament: you don*t want to be the center point of ministry, yet the
traditional pastor-role you are now expected to fulfill forces you to be the
center point. Since you are seen as a traditional pastor by many in the
assembly, it seems to me that the burden falls on you to take concrete steps to
diffuse the focus that the unscriptural pastor-role brings upon you. [1] If you allow yourself to be squeezed into the
traditional mold, then the assembly will expect the bulk of ministry to fall
upon you, and the New Testament concept of every-member ministry will never be
realized or practiced.
You
need to think through, therefore, whether you are going to lead the flock in
the context of the unscriptural expectations of “the pastor,” or lead in a
manner informed by the New Testament where you purposely decentralize yourself
and encourage the brethren to practice the 58 “one-another” ministries given by
Christ. [2]
Secondly, I would encourage you to evaluate the clamor for “preaching in
the church.” The traditional view not only says that the one who is supported
must do most ministry, but also asserts that he must
“preach” every Sunday behind a pulpit. But any study of the Greek words used
for “preach” in the New Testament will reveal that this proclamation occurred
in the presence of unbelievers, outside the meetings of the saints. For
example, Noah is called a “preacher (or ‘herald*) of righteousness” in 2 Peter
2:5. Yet his preaching was obviously to the scoffing, unbelieving culture
around him. The centrality of preaching in the church arose in a very suspect
context: where church and state were joined together, and the citizens of a city
had to be in church or face punishment by civil authorities. Clearly, in this
setting the churches would be filled with unbelievers. But the meeting
described in 1 Corinthians 14 is for the edification of believers. [3]
“Preaching” in the New Testament relates to the activity of evangelism, not to
a “sermon” in a church building.
If
the above remarks are true, then you need to model something other than a
replication of the errors of tradition. Since 1977 I have tried to deflate the
sermon tradition by teaching in a dialogical manner. I teach from God*s Word
for 20-40 mm., and then have an open discussion by inviting those present to
give their insights, ask questions, seek clarification, express disagreement,
etc. This method allows for serious teaching, but also involves the
congregation in the teaching/learning process. It is no secret that
communication studies have shown that the absolute worst way for people to
learn important things is a monologue (sermon). The meeting in 1 Corinthians
14, on the other hand, is multifaceted, participational, not focused on one
person, and resulted in the mutual edification of the body.
Thirdly, it is vitally important for any new congregation to learn how to
work through kingdom issues together. Discerning the mind of Christ on
any given issue requires everyone*s commitment to search the Scriptures
until there is a common understanding, and then to act together
accordingly. At a minimum, the process should include these important steps:
Pray, fast and seek the Lord together as a necessary prelude to
understanding and growth.
Pray specifically that the Holy Spirit will enlighten and direct the
study of his Word.
Thoroughly study all the relevant passages together in a setting of
mutual submission, openness and humility.
After searching the Scriptures together, summarize what has been
clearly discerned, what is still gray, and where any disagreements still
remain.
If necessary, pursue follow-up studies together which focus on
clarifying and resolving gray areas and points of divergence.
When the congregation has peace about the mind of the
Lord on an issue, then — and only then — is it ready to put it
into practice.
For
example, if a congregation had different opinions about how important sermons
were in the body, what would happen if they studied the New Testament together
in light of this question: “Can we find in the New Testament by example or
precept the traditional notion that ‘the pastor* must preach a monologue behind
a pulpit every Sunday?” If the six steps above were followed with this question
in mind, would you expect healthy change to take place? People would be exposed
to God*s Word, and would have to be willing to alter their opinions New
Testament if they were not substantiated by Scripture. If they concluded that
the New Testament knows nothing about sermons given by the same person every
Sunday, then they would be free to follow what the New Testament does say about
teaching and edification in the body meetings.
I
suggest that it would be beneficial for you to lead the assembly through a
mutual study on something like “The Priesthood of All Believers,” or “The 58
‘One-Another* Duties of Believers.” Traditions of men block obedience to
Scripture (Mark 7:9). Such traditions will only be confronted, jettisoned and
replaced by obedience to Christ if believers practice in-depth Bible study
bathed in humility. The reason why ungodly traditions march on unchallenged is
because few take the time to scrutinize the status quo inherited from
the fathers.
Lastly, I would encourage you to stay away from the impulse to buy a
building. Meet in homes, rent a building, rent an existing church building, but
don*t at this point sink a bundle of Christ*s money into another ecclesiastical
structure. Much time needs to be spent developing and deepening edification in
the body of Christ before using a cent to purchase an edifice. [4]
Purchasing a building in your current circumstances sends all the wrong
messages, and perpetuates an emphasis on “place” that is contrary to the New
Covenant that Christ established (John 4:20-24).
Perhaps
you have a fear of losing some people if you were to pursue certain issues in
light of God*s Word. But the truth is that the longer an assembly goes on
without oneness of mind on key issues, the worse will be the explosion that
occurs down the road. Better to have 20 people united around a common vision
discerned from the Word, than to have 100 steeped in various traditions who are
unwilling to have their cherished sacred cows scrutinized by Christ*s truth. I
hope we are horrified at being identified with the scathing words Christ
directed to the Pharisees: “Full well you reject the commandment of God in
order that you may keep your own tradition” (Mark 7:9) [5]
Thank
you for considering these points. I hope you will give these important matters
the prayerful study they deserve. I don*t claim to have all the answers, but in
God*s providence over the years I have been involved in a number of church
situations. I am trying to help you avoid the deep heartache that comes when
traditions instead of Christ*s Word shape people*s church-life. The longer one
goes down the wrong road, the harder it is to get back to the right road. If
you have questions, a desire for clarification, etc., please feel free to
contact me. I am open to meet with you, or talk with you any time.
Your
friend in Christ*s bonds,
Jon
Zens
_____________________________________________________________________
Notes
from “Letter to a Church Leader”
[1]
“My friends and I assembled for our first church meeting. I had tried to
prepare them, but they were not ready for God to use them. I was keenly and
uncomfortably aware that these people were looking to me to do something. I was
not doubtful that God would move if I taught. The people had heard me teach and
wanted more, but I was looking for God to do something else. This was not going
to be my teaching meeting. I warned to do everything possible to create an
environment where each one would feel comfortable in sharing anything from God
as they were inspired. I thought the most I could do to effect
this was to do nothing at all. As we worshiped I encouraged all to look to the
Lord for inspiration for something to share. It was a new idea to most. I knew
they were still looking to me. In the fear of God, I knelt on the floor of the
living room and covered my face. I knew some felt foolish looking to me when I
had Just buried my face in the carpet.“ (Timothy
Sheaff, “The Law of the House,” unpublished manuscript, 1998, p. 12)
[2] “I am convinced that before the plurality of elders
will make sense to believers, they must first see that they have
responsibilities as priests. A functioning eldership is simply an extension of
a functioning priesthood. For example, all Christians are encouraged to
‘admonish one another* (Romans
[3] “The sermons in the New Testament were usually directed
to people outside the Christian community, on an irregular basis as need arose,
rather than at regular intervals. Even when outsiders came to Christian
meetings, there is nothing to suggest that they heard or were converted through
sermons (1 Corinthians
[4] “Church buildings attest to five facts about the
church today. First, church buildings are a witness to our immobility. What is
more immovable than a church building? And yet Christians are, supposedly,
wayfaring pilgrims. Christians are to be a mobile people.... Second, church
buildings are a witness to our inflexibility. As soon as we erect a church
building, we cut down our options by at least seventy-five percent.... Third,
church buildings are a witness to our lack of fellowship. Church buildings may
be worshipful places, but usually they are not friendly places They are uncomfortable and impersonal.... Fourth, church
buildings are a witness to our pride. We insist that our church structures must
be beautiful and well-appointed — which usually means expensive — and justify
this on the grounds that God deserves the best.... Finally, church buildings
are a witness to our class divisions. The early church was composed of rich and
poor, Jew and Greek, black and white, ignorant and educated. But our modem
church buildings advertise to the world that this is not true today. A
sociologist can take a casual look at ten church buildings and their
denominational brand names and then predict with high accuracy the education,
income, occupations and social position of the majority of their respective
members.” (Howard Snyder, The Problem of Wineskins, IVP, 1975, pp 69,
70, 71, 72)
[5] “In Mark 7 some key observations can be isolated
regarding detrimental traditions. Jesus* remarks about traditions are as
relevant today as they were in the first century:
1.
The Pharisees were offended and puzzled when Jesus* disciples did not conform
to their longstanding traditions (7:5)
2.
These traditions originated from the religious experts — ‘the tradition of the
elders* — and had taken the force of law over time
3.
Such traditions tend to multiply and become the focus of attention instead of
more important issues (7:4, cf. Matthew
4.
When the worship of God is rooted in man-made rules it becomes vain (7:6, 7).
Hence the crucial importance of discerning what is of God and what is of man in
our worship together.
5. When traditions are elevated as a standard, the commands of God
take a back seat (7:8).
6.
The commands of God will be flagrantly violated when zeal is directed toward
observing traditions (7:9-12).
7.
The Word of God is made of no effect when people are fixated on traditions
handed down from previous generations (
8
Fixation on traditions tends to permeate all of one*s existence — “you do many
things like that” (