Christian Robots

My mother introduced me to the church when I was very young. I do not recall a time in my life when I was not connected with the church, except it was a much looser connection while in college. Since most of my life I have been part of one denomination, I know the liturgy of worship, the way the church runs itself, and the correct responses and timing. There is comfort in the familiarity of being a member of a church most of your life. There is also a pitfall which comes with being an active member most of your life. The pitfall is that you can easily become a robotic church participant.

The condition which I am labeling as “robotic church participant” comes from having such a familiarity that little to no thought is put into the actions and words which the person uses during worship. This also extends to going through the church year without thought to the meaning of the festivals and special days throughout the year. The person just goes through the motions of being a participant but does not have a spiritual feeling while doing so.

An example of a robotic church participant is when someone says the words of the Lord’s Prayer during worship but does not consider what is being said. The words are so memorized that there is not much thought required and the person just goes along with the audible flow of the other participants in worship. A person can easily do this because saying the Lord’s Prayer is so common and extends beyond denominational lines. This becomes very obvious if you happen to be worshiping with a congregation that changes a few words in the prayer, i.e., “debts and debtors” versus “trespasses and trespass.”

You may be asking yourself, “Why is this so important.” I think this is important because it seems to me that God intended the church to be about relationships. These relationships include between God and each individual, as well as, between the individuals in the church body. Relationships require thoughts, communications, and feelings. If a person is just going through the motions, then it is much more about completing a task versus enhancing a relationship.

If you are a person who has grown up in the church like I have, I caution you to not fall into the pitfall of being a robotic church participant. Engage yourself fully in worship, service, and the relationships which are a part of being a member of the church. Experience the spiritual emotions of what you say, the actions you take, and the commitments you make. I am sure that God prefers a fully engaged person rather than a spiritual robot. If God only wanted robots, God would not have given us free thought and free will.

Church Bullies

As I have written about before, the church is not exempt from the realities of interpersonal relationships outside of the church. While there is a desire that inside the walls of a church there is safety and love instead of hatred and attacks, this desire is something still to strive for and not a reality. The human behaviors which we encounter in neighborhoods, workplaces, and social groups can all be found within the church. This may be the reason that when we do, and we will, encounter negative and hurtful behaviors in the church, it seems even worse than in other settings.

I doubt that any of us have not encountered a bully at least once in our lives. Perhaps the first time occurred on the playground of our elementary school. A bully is anyone who uses intimidation, hateful words, or even physical attacks to manipulate someone into doing or giving them whatever they demand. Schools have always been an environment where bullies seem to exist. However, workplaces can also have a fair number of bullies. Today, social media has opened new avenues for bullies to exert their power. Our education system has worked hard to reduce the impact of bullies on the lives of students but this is a difficult task in light of the number of adults who are bullies as well and youth learn behaviors from adults. The one location which we all hope is free from bullying is the church. Sadly, this is not the case. Church bullies exist and the behaviors are identical to what can be found in the other settings which I have just mentioned.

So what does a church bully look like?

As is the case in the schools, workplaces, and other groups, there are all types of bullies. In addition, to the different types, there are a variety of methods which are utilized to achieve the desired responses from those who are being bullied. I will share a few from personal experience and/or observation.

The Money Bully

One of the most common forms of bully in the church is the money bully. This is an individual who attempts to use their financial contributions as leverage in getting their desires met. They might say something such as… “If the new sanctuary carpet is green, I will stop meeting my pledge commitment.” Their goal is to create the perception that the church will experience a huge financial disadvantage if their preferred color of carpet is not chosen during the sanctuary remodel. An interesting aspect of this type of bully is that there is little evidence available to confirm the threat. Since most church financial giving is kept highly confidential, a person may make the threat even though they are one of the average or below average contributors. Also, will the person actually carry through on the threat is an unknown.

The Volunteer Bully

These are the individuals who use their volunteer hours to manipulate a situation. Usually this type of bully will be heard saying a similar statement like…”I will just stop helping with (fill in the blank) if I am not allowed to (fill in the blank).” Their goal is to take control of the event or project by threatening to walk away if their preferences are not followed. Since the church’s ministry is primarily accomplished through strong volunteers, this threat can carry some weight in the decisions being made by whoever is in charge.

The Behind-the-Scenes Bully

A bully of this persuasion operates in the shadows. The individual enjoys having parking lot conversations with others to rally others to the bully’s way of thinking. These days the conversations do not even necessarily have to occur in the parking lot thanks to the use of email and social media messaging. Bullies who utilize these methods try to undermine the leaders who they disagree with and achieve their goals and desires. I think they can be the most dangerous type of bullies because of their clandestine approach.

What do we do?

Let me first respond by stating that dealing with a bully is never easy. It requires courage and risk. Accepting those requirements, confronting bullying in the church starts by naming it truthfully. The tendency is to dance around the issue and try to redirect so that an actual confrontation can be avoided. By not confronting, the bullying is actually encouraged. The bully gains confidence and feels there is no threat to their power. With time, this will create an environment which will destroy the participation of others and negatively impact the ministry of the congregation.

Once honest naming of the bullying occurs, the leaders within the congregation must have a conversation with the one doing the bullying. This conversation should always occur with at least two leaders present. Important to this conversation is the attitude which the leaders take into it. The goal should always be to work for reconciliation and to affirm the bully’s positives, to acknowledge their views, and to strive to redirect their energies in a positive direction. However, the leaders also need to make sure they point out why this type of behavior has a negative impact on the ministry. Support in changing behavior should be promised by the leaders.

After the initial conversation, a follow-up conversation should occur. During this second conversation, the person should be able to express how they feel they are changing their approach and where they may need additional support. The person should also be given the opportunity to state any continuing or new concerns which may be present with the project or ministry task. If continued bullying behavior has been identified, the leaders must address this honestly as well.

Unfortunately, even after continued conversation with the bully, there may not be a resolution and the behavior continues. If this occurs, then the leadership of the congregation as a whole must make a decision regarding the future of the individual within the life of the congregation. The choice of a bully to continue the behavior is the bully’s choice. The choice of the leadership to allow it to continue to exist within the congregation is the leadership’s choice. Sometimes leaders have to make the difficult decision to allow a person to find another spiritual community which may be a better fit for their desires.

I have only raised a few types of bullies encountered in the church. The reality is that there are bullies in the church. The health of the congregation and its ministry depends upon the willingness of the leadership to address this behavior.

If you have other types of bullies which you have encountered in the church, or have other suggestions on how to address this behavior, please be sure to comment.

One Person

A pitfall which can be a destructive force within the church is when everything revolves around one person—the pastor. When I was in seminary, one of my professors reminded the class of an important truth, he said that we had to be cautious about everything becoming about us as the pastor. We had been guided on all the important aspects of being a pastor. The importance of building relationships; effectively communicating the Gospel in actions and words; and walking alongside people as they began, continued, or finished their faith journeys were a few of these meaningful insights.

I learned that finding a connecting point with as many members of the congregation as possible was valuable. This did not mean everyone would like me but if I could find a way to connect with them in their lives, I could more effectively serve them as a spiritual support and teacher. Building relationships became important in my ministry alongside those who I had been called to serve.

My ability to communicate the Gospel in a manner which allowed people to incorporate it in their thoughts and lives was a gift that God has given me. This was identified by others before I made the step to attend seminary. Others pointing out this gift from God was one of the aspects of my recognizing the call God has placed on my life. My background in public speaking, which began in high school, enhanced the delivering of the Lord’s message on Sunday mornings. I also have a passion for, and some would say a gift for teaching.

Building relationships and communicating the Gospel became cornerstones to my ministry efforts. There were other areas of ministry which I was not the best at but these which I did possess became valuable in my work. I believe that these two cornerstones also endeared me to many members in the congregations which I have been blessed to serve. However, I was always mindful of the warning my professor gave me and my classmates in seminary. I would remind myself, and sometimes others, that I am called to serve with the people in a congregation for a relatively short period of time but they were called to continue to serve when I had been led elsewhere.

The issue that I see in some situations is that the pastor becomes beloved by members of the congregation. Why this creates problems is that when a pastor becomes beloved, it can be easy for that individual’s ego to become too powerful for her/him to manage effectively. This is only fueled when the congregation loves the pastor so much they fail to see the pastor’s warts. A pastor on a pedestal is bound to take a huge fall one day when their ego and the blindness of the congregation fails to keep the person humble.

Another issue which can arise is that members of the congregation can start abdicating their responsibilities as followers of Christ to the pastor. When there is not equal footing and responsibility within the relationships of the church, everything can easily become all about the pastor. The successes and the failures become the pastor’s. The effectiveness of the ministry is weakened due to the reality that no one person can possibly do everything needed. Pastors make mistakes like any other human being so when this occurs, and it WILL occur, if no shared ministry between pastor and members exists, the mistake can have devastating consequences.

When Jesus gave the Great Commission, it was given to a community of believers. There were apostles, teachers, merchants, fishermen, parents, children, families, farmers, lawyers, and all types of individuals with all forms of gifts and talents. Never was it intended that ministry should ever be about one person. The community of faith was designed to be a COMMUNITY which walked together, laughed together, cried together, learned together, and served together. Nowhere in Scripture does it indicate that one person, the pastor, should be the center of the community and the chief architect of ministry. I have never discovered the finding of an addendum where the Great Commission moved from being a community call to a one-person call.

It is not about the pastor. It is about a community of believers who have a leader who has been given the title of pastor working together to effectively communicate the Gospel to the place and time in which they live. Making ministry about the pastor, good or bad, is a way to destroy the potential ministry which can be done.

Pastor Crush

Why would someone choose to go into full-time ministry? This is a question that many people ask especially today. There used to be a time when full-time ministry, or becoming a pastor, was considered a noble aspiration. During the Middle Ages, it was considered an academic pursuit that was reserved for the wealthy who could afford to get a formalized education. The culture of today seems much different and many factors contribute to the less than lofty stature full-time ministry now occupies. So, why would someone choose to go into full-time ministry?

For me, I consider it to have been a limited choice. Why I state it in such a manner is because long before I would “choose” to enter full-time ministry, a sense of call was placed upon me. I come from a denomination which emphasizes the understanding of a call. The church culture in which I grew up, and would eventually seek ordination from, felt that every person has a call placed upon her or his life by God. Some are called to be teachers, some business leaders, some lawyers, some medical professionals, and the list goes on through every form of employment and volunteer opportunity that comes to mind. I was taught that each person has a call, or often multiple calls, placed on them by God. Just because God places a call upon a person, the person is not required to fulfill the call. In fact, many individuals pursue other courses in their lives. However, after years of resisting the call into full-time ministry, I chose to respond reluctantly in the affirmative.

General themes of why a person answers the call to full-time ministry exist. One of the reasons some give is a desire to help others on a daily basis experience the love of God. Another reason is to assist others in developing answers to their questions regarding their faith. Other responses might include a fulfillment in walking through life’s challenges with another person. For me, it was a strong desire to open for others the wonder of what a relationship with the Lord might mean in their life.

Whatever the answer to the question of why a person has gone into full-time ministry, a sad reality exists…the church is crushing pastors at a very alarming rate. What I mean by this is that in too many conversations with colleagues and those who have exited from full-time ministry, I have heard too often that the demands of the congregation and the denominational hierarchy crushed their passion and desire to continue in full-time ministry. Too often these demands distract the pastor from their role as a shepherd, teacher, companion, and spiritual leader. I would say that the demands actually prohibit the pastor from fulfilling these other roles. Yet, these are usually the roles which lead the person to enter full-time ministry.

Let me share a few examples of these demands. The first one which quickly comes to mind is the demand of being the referee. What does refereeing have to do with being a pastor? Well, it really should not have anything to do with it but often the pastor is the one expected to enter conflicts within the church and reduce or eliminate the conflict. Imagine being a parent who has over one hundred kids who have a tendency to enter squabbles over toys, control of the television, or who gets to play the Xbox next. This is often what a pastor feels like when trying to maneuver through all the he-said, she-said arguments which arise out of situations such as who decides what to serve at the Fall Festival Dinner.

Another example of the demands which crush a pastor is the endless amount of discussion and input from a variety of individuals in order to make a decision. Churches love to have committees to discuss and plan everything from what coffee to serve during fellowship time to what songs to sing during the Christmas season. While there is indeed value in seeking input from various voices and creating an atmosphere of participation among the members, these groups often get bogged down in details and personal opinions. These details and personal opinions frequently lead to the squabbles I mentioned in the above paragraph. The other issue which arises is that little progress is made in making a decision and it all is very time-consuming.

A third example which is too frequent is the financial stress the pastor absorbs. When it comes to church finances, the same story exists in some level in every church, there never seems to be enough money for anything. This leads to many different burdens placed on a pastor. One is the idea that a pastor should be the chief fundraiser of the church. Some members view it to be the pastor’s responsibility to find creative ways to bring money into the congregation and then lead those fundraising efforts as spokesperson and arm twister but do these things in a very unintimidating manner. The other side of the coin is that the pastor is often charged with the responsibility to reduce and maintain spending at the lowest level possible. The pastor is left to rely on volunteers and donated monies to accomplish all that needs to be accomplished from repairing the leaky flat roof to having weekly activities for youth from age 0 to 35. Of course the use of volunteer labor will also require being flexible and understanding that they have real lives so cannot accomplish what they commit to doing for four to sixteen weeks. Yet the pastor gets the blame when things are not done correctly and in a timely manner.

The list of examples can grow with each exhausted pastor with who you have the chance to speak. Horror stories and tears are in abundance as pastors tell of the demands placed upon them and the way in which they are often treated. Besides the personal anguish and abuse, yes, I will call it abuse, the issue that tears most pastors hearts the most is that they do not have the time or the energy to live out the passion which called them to full-time ministry in the first place. Every once in a while they are fortunate to see a glimmer of their call fulfilled in the life of another person but these occur like shooting stars at night which are fleeting and way too infrequent.

The congregations and denominations of the church are crushing the pastors who feel God calling them to full-time ministry. It is the congregations and denominations who are losing out on women and men who would love to shepherd, teach, walk alongside, encourage, and spiritually lead in the example of Jesus. Until the church wakes up to this reality and does something meaningful about it, you will continue to see pastors step out of full-time ministry, pulpits remain empty, and seminaries have fewer and fewer students.

A New Era

A reality which is not easy for most churches to accept is that we now live in a time referred to as post-Christendom. What this means is that the elevated status which the Christian church experienced previously is no longer true today. Anyone who is actively involved in a church realizes that there are fewer people who attend worship services, even fewer people who attend activities sponsored by the church, and extremely fewer people who participate in any form of Christian education classes than in the 1950s in the United States. There are many factors which has led to the movement past Christendom but this is a reality which needs to be accepted.

If this is the reality which we now face in the Western Christian church, what are we to do about it? My first response is to realize that well planned programming and an outstanding marketing campaign are no longer the answers. The general approach of the church when it was on top of the societal spectrum was all we have to do is get them in the door then we will be able to add them as members. This could not be any farther from the truth these days. I have watched churches (and attempted myself) to provide the best programming options for people. I have seen very hard work put into getting the name of a church before as many people as possible. Yet, over and over this produced limited, if any, measurable results.

What the church needs to realize is that the priority of getting people in the pews is a futile goal. Instead, the church needs to move out of the building and to the locations where the people are located. This will require the church to operate in a completely different manner than the way we have conducted ourselves in the past. The training that our church leaders have received, and in many cases still are receiving, will provide limited assistance as we move into this new era. There remains value in our church leaders learning the academic information so they can assist people when they are searching for their own answers. However, there now needs to be a component regarding how to seek out people where they live, work, and play. Training must be done to teach our leaders ways to minister outside the building and to lead other members of the fellowship to do the same.

My perception is that we are being required to the model of ministry which was common during Jesus’ time and a model which the church has adopted at various times throughout history. Jesus clearly went where the people were to minister to them and to share the message from God. He would be found in pastures, on hillsides, along lakes, in market places, and in the temples and synagogues. He would spend his time taking care of the physical and spiritual needs of the people. Then he would share the message of God using images which the people in the particular location understood. There was not a specific location which was set aside for worship, practical ministry, or education. A specific day or time was not set up for any of this to take place.

Another reality of the post-Christendom society in which we live is that what people are seeking in their faith journeys is different today than in the era before. While there is still a place for ritual and learning, people today want to focus on practically applying their faith to life. There exists a strong desire to make an impact on the world in a positive manner. Instead of an inward focus, there is an outward focus. The church has an awesome opportunity here and can emerge as a great leader in this area. First, we demonstrate it by leaving the walls of a building and immersing ourselves where people are gathering. Second, we share our love in words and actions which allows us to point to God, the source and very nature of love. Third, we make ourselves available for people to ask questions. Fourth, we show people how to apply the love of God in their daily lives and as a body of individuals who go into the world instead of a building.

The church is no longer on top. We can choose to sit in our buildings, spend hours trying to figure out how to get others to come sit in our buildings, and bemoan the fact that our buildings become emptier every year, or…. We can re-imagine how we can be the church outside of the walls. We can learn to worship, teach, care for, and fellowship with people in a variety of settings. We can learn from the model of Jesus and the itinerant leaders of our past. We can continue to be the church with a new list of priorities.

Not Here, Well Maybe

The church is filled with perfect people.

Some churches are full of sin but not mine.

At my church we make sure that we protect against those type of people.

Our pastor is an example of a very righteous person.

We are a group of people who have done away with our sinful behaviors and follow the Lord.

Everybody is friendly in my church, takes care of one another and accepts everyone.

Which of these statements do you believe? Amazingly, these are actual statements which I have heard people make regarding their congregation. Add to these statements the perceptions that some people have from the outside. An observer would come to the conclusion that the church is a place where sin does not exist. This conclusion could not be any farther from the truth. The church is as full of sin as any other group in the world.

Since the church consists of humans, the church is going to have sin. We are reminded in the letter to the Romans, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” (Romans 3:23, NIV). When a person becomes a member of a congregation, either formally or informally, this reality stated in Scripture does not change. This being the case, there is going to be sin in the church. In fact, one of the many sins is lying about this truth.

Honestly, I do not think that anyone truly believes that the church is without sin. Yet a lot of people in congregations everywhere want to downplay or deny this truth in an attempt to present a better image to those outside the walls. I am not sure if they feel that this will cause others to desire to join the congregation or if it is a case of them wanting to show they are better than what is in the world. Either way, this image of a sin-free church does more damage for the ministries of the Lord than it could ever benefit.

Instead of trying to state that the church is a place where sin does not exist, we should actually be sharing a more important message. The message of the church should be that it is a place where forgiveness is given unconditionally. After all, this is the message that Jesus Christ gave over and over again in his actions and teachings. This is the message which the apostle Paul declared as he and others fulfilled Christ’s commandment to go into the world.

Within the church there are lies, hatred, bigotry, hypocrisy, theft, divisions, sexual misconduct, and all other sinful behaviors witnessed in everyday life in a multitude of places. Sinners exist within the church. More importantly though, within the church there is forgiveness, love, grace, restoration, healing, support, encouragement and acceptance. These are the traits which the church should show as it strives to demonstrate to the world an alternative to sin.

Sin exists in the church at the same level it does anywhere else but here it is always forgiven and reconciliation is possible.

Second Verse Same as the First

It can be very easy in life to get into a routine and to repeat it over and over again. Since many aspects of life need to be maintained each day, a person can experience repetitive behaviors and patterns. The same can be said of organizations and institutions. Certain parts of maintaining an organization or institution needs to be addressed on a daily or weekly basis. Because of this it is easy to get into ruts on an individual or corporate level. The church is definitely not immune to this experience.

I have often heard church leaders complain because they seem unable to move a specific congregation or body of the church forward. They indicate that attempts to take a new direction or to achieve a new goal often falter. Frustration quickly becomes an attitude and many give up the effort which had given them so much enthusiasm. Often this begins a pattern of assigning blame and bitterness can set into place.

When an outside person examines the situation, it becomes very clear that the group has become stuck in a rut. The individuals involved, including the leader most of the time, repeat the patterns of behavior and the series of activities over and over using the same methods and approaches. They state that they wish to see change but the words do not translate into significant actions. This leads to experiencing the same outcomes time after time. Yet for some reason no one appears able to understand why change does not occur.

If a different outcome is truly desired, then the cycle must be broken. Breaking the cycle requires a substantive altering of behaviors, actions, and attitudes. A new path and/or approach must be adopted. Just rearranging the pattern a little bit will not result in any redirection. Often the most important alteration is a change in attitude. In order to achieve this, shifts in leadership team members may be necessary. Other times elimination of cherished activities may be required. Adoption of a new set of standards may be necessary. Above all, communication and re-education are mandatory.

A good starting point in redirection is asking a question, “Why do we do this?” This question is quickly followed by another, “What would happen if we no longer did this?” These questions should be applied to every aspect of the entity which is seeking change. Honestly doing some self-examination and being willing to discontinue anything which no longer meets the needs of the group will assist the body to get out of a rut and move forward in a positive direction.

So if you are feeling like you are singing the same words of a song over and over again, I encourage you to make an effort to break the cycle and start a new song. The church would greatly benefit from this if the cycle is broken. If your leadership team does not choose to do so, then expect that your outcomes will never change.

A New Role

A fabulous author, leader, and visionary, the late Phyllis Tickle, talked about a trend in the Church. She presented the idea that every approximate five hundred years, the Church would do a garage sale. What she was referring to is the idea that due to a variety of forces, the Church was made to look at itself and determine what aspects of being the Church it was going to keep and what aspects would be discarded as the Church moved forward into the future. Her viewpoint was that the Church is currently in one of those periods which started in the early 2000s or a little earlier. (To read about this more in depth read her book, The Great Emergence: How the Church is Changing and Why [2008].)

I think that her theory is very accurate. I also think that we are still in the midst of one of the Church’s “garage sales.” There is a lot of turmoil within the institutional church. We are trying to figure out what will take us into the next five hundred years in a way which will serve the people of God both within and outside of the Church. This inventory and choosing is being done by individuals and by the corporate body. I have addressed this in previous posts without referencing Tickle’s theory but definitely in the same vein as her theory.

In this post, I want to lift up the idea that there is a growing need for nontraditional ministry models. Specifically, I am thinking about the role of leaders, usually referred to as clergy, in nontraditional ministry. The traditional clergy role is one which is connected to a specific congregation, in a specific location, under a denominational title. I do not support the elimination of the traditional role as I have just described but I think it is time that the Church is open to other ways for clergy to live out a ministry role. A vital one which is overlooked as of now is one that utilizes technology.

With the increase in technology and the manner in which it connects us in new ways, I believe it is time for the Church to acknowledge a ministry role for clergy which focuses on technological connections. To date, the Church has just added to the list of duties for traditional clergy, a component which points toward involvement in social media and the internet. I have personally been one of these traditional clergy who has attempted to actively use technology in my ministry. The problem with this is that there is not enough time to adequately serve in this capacity. The amount of time and energy necessary to fulfill the traditional role of clergy as I outlined above, leaves a fair inadequate amount of time and energy to do any sort of justice to a social media ministry. In order to honestly provide ministry in this area, the Church must acknowledge it as a validated ministry with the same status as a clergy person serving in a local congregation.

One aspect of ministry which Jesus demonstrated and the Church has at times striven to live out is the idea that ministry occurs where people are at a given time. Jesus did this by walking from village to village and sitting on hillsides or by lakes. The Church has done this by sending people to new lands. I believe this is what Jesus meant when Matthew records him saying, “Go and make disciples of all nations…” The key word here is GO. Jesus intended the Church to go where the people are. Today, the people are in the cyberworld. For me, this legitimized the importance of an affirmed ministry role for clergy in this aspect of life.

Do you agree that this is a need? How might this need be part of the change happening in the Church? What other nontraditional ministry roles need to be considered?

A Savior

One of the challenges which I see in the church, especially among leaders, is confusion over who is the savior. The problem is not that these leaders, and some members, struggle to come up with a description of Jesus Christ. Many of them do a great job of telling the life story of Jesus, talking about his earthly ministry, and giving a theological explanation regarding his death and resurrection. The issue is that in their zeal for fulfilling the Great Commandment, they begin to think that they are responsible for ensuring the salvation of others. This could not be farther from the truth.

Jesus came with a purpose, some may even say a call. Jesus’ purpose was to destroy all the barriers between humanity and God. God’s desire is that all may experience the fullness of God’s love in a lasting relationship with God. The difficulty in the achievement of this is humans have chosen often to take paths which lead them away from God. These paths make us vulnerable to committing unloving actions and to experience the impact of those actions taken by others. They also can give us a distorted understanding of love. Jesus’ ministry was focused on correcting this distortion and showing how these paths lead us away from God.

Jesus broke down social barriers which humanity created amongst themselves. Jesus presented a definition of love that was unconditional and with a focus toward others and not self. He reminded everyone what it meant to be in relationship with God. Actions which he took supported his words and showed us how we are to demonstrate God’s love to one another. All this culminated in his loving action taken on a cross where he gave his life to remove any remaining barriers we might have between us and God.

That final action by Jesus which led to his death and resurrection is sufficient for all people. Through this action, Jesus saved us from the paths we take which lead us away from the love of God. Jesus does not need us to recreate or to add to this action. Instead, Jesus told us to go out into the world and to tell all the people of his breaking of all barriers. More importantly, Jesus desires us to demonstrate this work in our own actions and words.

There is not one of us who is the Savior. That position has been filled by Jesus Christ. We do not have it within our abilities to break down the ultimate barrier between God and humanity. What we do have is the ability to introduce the Savior to others by our lives. Our expressing of the love of God and attributing that love for the choices we make in life will open doors for individuals to first experience and then begin to understand what God’s love is truly about.

YOU ARE NOT THE SAVIOR! Instead, spend your time introducing the Savior to others through your life and the sharing of God’s love.

Using A Liturgy

Liturgy in the church is something which can cause quite an argument. Some individuals have the view that without liturgy to guide worship, there has not been genuine worship. On the other side are individuals who view liturgy as a heavy burden from the ancient past which causes worship to be dreadful instead of energized. More than a few remain somewhere in the middle. In recent times, this has been a struggle played out among many congregations and within many denominations. Little surprise that there exists a broad spectrum of the type and amount of liturgy experienced throughout the church.

For those who may not understand the term of liturgy, it is the form which public worship takes within a religion, most often Christianity. The arrangement of the different elements of the worship service is prescribed and followed in each worship service with only a little variation. The actual words, music, and prayers may or may not change but the order and structure remains the same.

My experience in the church has been one in which there has always been some type of liturgy guiding the worship service. I have been in settings where it may not be as pronounced but it is still present. Participants in some worship settings in which I have participated may not even think about the liturgy being used or the basis for the choice of liturgy.

Like many aspects of the church, there are positives and negatives when it comes to the liturgy. First, some positives. The most evident one is that by using a prescribed liturgy, the worship participants who attend regularly know exactly what will happen next in the service whether they have a printed guide or not. In addition, many parts of the service are easily memorized since they are used every week. An example would be a liturgy which includes the Lord’s Prayer. The participants tend to memorize these words early in their worship experience and each week it remains the same. Another benefit to a liturgy is that for worship leaders and planners, it provides a guide for their work. Each week they know what elements they need to prepare. The leadership also knows the order and movement in the worship space.

Now, some negatives which accompany the use of liturgy. One negative is that liturgy can lull a participant into going through the worship service almost on autopilot. All the positives listed above regarding memorization and knowing what comes next can allow a participant to not even think about what is being done. Another pitfall of liturgy is that often the meaning behind the elements and the ordering of those elements gets lost. I mentioned earlier that some participants may not even realize that a liturgy is in place because they have forgotten or it has not been explained what the liturgy is and the reason for every aspect of it. Most liturgies have a theological, practical, and spiritual meaning to them but with time those understandings can be forgotten. The third problem with liturgy is that if someone is a new participant, the individual can become lost since regular attenders just move from element to element with little or no explanation. This can turn a newcomer off since they do not wish to feel ignorant or become very self-conscious of their lack of knowledge.

Much of the negative can be overcome. The key is that communication about the chosen liturgy must happen regularly both verbally and in print. Discussion around the meaning of what is done and why it is done in the prescribed fashion must occur with those who are regularly participating. Explanation of each element and the flow needs to be shared by the worship leaders and/or in whatever printed materials are used so that the newcomer feels she/he has a guide which empowers them to participate.

So here are the questions which I would like each reader to answer:

  1. Does your worship setting use a liturgy? If so, what is that liturgy?
  2. Do you understand why a liturgy is in place and what the elements of it might be?
  3. Is liturgy an aid or a hindrance to the worship experience?