Celebrating the gift to serve

In my life, I’ve been involved in a number of discussions on the gifts of the Spirit. Mainline churches are usually accused that they do not give enough attention to the gifts while other churches are accused that they only emphasise a few spectacular gifts, such as the gift of healing, of speaking in tongues and driving out of demons. Usually, somewhere in the discussion I’ll ask why we don’t make much more about the gift of serving. When Paul writes in Romans 12 about the gifts of the Spirit, he says in verse 7: If it is serving, let him serve… (Not surprisingly, that remark usually ends the argument!)

I’m still waiting that one of the well known evangelists stand up one day and inform the audience that he/she has received a gift for serving and that anyone who needs to be served, should come forward!

This past Saturday I experienced something like this. After our church had received the Courageous Leadership Award for our home-based caring project in Swaziland, I had been looking for an opportunity where I could get the entire group of caregivers together to show then the trophy we had received and to honour them for the unselfish work they are doing. At last our opportunity came when we were able to organise a celebration function on Saturday. Of the 380 caregivers presently in the project, 350 arrived by bus, by car and by taxi. We had rented a school hall and by the time everybody had turned up, the hall was packed. A few people were asked to speak and in between the existing eleven groups which are part of the home-based caring project came forward – some to sing and some to do a short drama to demonstrate how they are working in the community.

My wife summed it up very well when she made the remark afterwards that she looked at the group and was absolutely amazed to see how happy they are. At one point I spoke to the headmaster of the school (who is an elder at our church and a close friend of mine) and told him that there is no way that I would do this work, if I had to do it for money. And I thought to myself that maybe these caregivers truly have received the gift of serving. I can give no other logical explanation why they would keep on doing this work, without receiving a salary, often taking the little food they have in their homes (most of the caregivers live in extreme poverty and a number of them are HIV-positive themselves) to share it with their clients, and still be happy to do it.

Swaziland’s Minister of Education also attended the function. He had actually come on behalf of the Minister of Health, (a friend of mine) who was unable to come and then asked his colleague to come on his behalf. The Minister of Health had no idea what the work was all about and while the groups were singing, he kept on asking me questions to get more information, as he was supposed to give a speech and had no idea what to talk about! (I wasn’t really worried – Swazis have a gift to speak!) But as the morning progressed he kept on telling me that he could not believe what he was seeing. He just could not believe that people would volunteer to take care of the sick and the dying, without being paid for the work.

When we were through and we had had lunch, I could barely contain my emotions. I look at the church of today and see how they struggle with deep theological questions. And then I look at these people, content with what they have, with no concern at all about the deep theological questions church leaders are discussing, merely doing what they believe God has called them to do. And, as far as I can see, they are much happier than most Christian leaders I know.

Manipulating people into giving money for mission

I’ve said it before: I struggle to come to terms with missionaries manipulating funds from people in order to support their mission. Yesterday I received an email from someone that I don’t know within a mission that I know nothing about. The only time I hear from him is when they are in dire need of money. Freely translated, the email says the following: “Please pray with us that Father will provide and will bless our bank account at XXXX bank, account number XXXXXXXXXXX with R1720.85 (Rand – the South African currency) for essential reparations which need to be made to the mission vehicle. The reparations cannot be postponed and must be done as soon as possible. Also praise the Lord that HE will provide for the reparations.”
My emotions see-sawed between fury, indignation, frustration and disappointment after reading this.  Most mission newsletters do speak about their needs. I have no problem with this. On many occasions people have said to me that they do want to hear about specific needs so that they can find means of providing what is really necessary. From time to time someone would ask me for a bank account number. But I’m getting sick and tired when I feel that missionaries are trying to manipulate others in giving money to them by taking them on a guilt-trip. Looking at that email my first question is: Make up your mind. Do you want us to pray that God will provide the money or do you want us to give the money? I would probably not even have had a problem if they had sent out regular newsletters to a number of prayer supporters with whom they have some kind of relationship and then to contact them with this special need. But asking that we pray that God will put the money into their account! I feel that I’m being misused.
I know a great number of people reading this blog are missionaries themselves. I would like to hear from those who are not missionaries but who feel obliged to support missionaries: How do you want to be approached when there is a specific need in some ministry? Do you want to be asked directly? Would you rather that God indicated where He wants you to get involved? Do you ever pray about where God wants you to give your money?
Help us, who are full-time missionaries, to understand how people feel who support missionaries.

Some thoughts on Fundamentalism and the Emerging Church

My son directed me to a certain blog earlier this week. John Frye who, I must say, has a talent for writing, published two posts on John 4 (Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well). In the one post he wrote the story as a Fundamentalist Jesus would tell what had happened there and in the second post he wrote the story in the way that an Emergent Jesus would tell the story. I’ve always been extremely wary to categorise myself as a certain type of believer, mainly because, what is acceptable today, is unacceptable tomorrow. We are probably all aware that, in certain circles, it’s not acceptable to merely be a Christian anymore. In fact, even being a born again Christian is not enough. You need to be a truly born again Christian to be acceptable to some. I wonder what’s next. (I predict that in the time to come, “emergent” will not be acceptable anymore and a new term will be thought out to describe what God expected the church to be right from the start.)
I read the posts of John Frey and immediately asked myself a few questions. Firstly, when reading the post where the story is told in the words of the Fundamentalist Jesus, I wondered whether I knew anyone who would interpret John 4 in the way that it is written there. I understand that John is trying to prove a point. And I understand that he’s making use of irony to get the message across. But, in my fairly wide group of friends (and especially in Swaziland) I know a great number of people who would probably be described as Fundamentalist believers. Many of these people are extremely legalistic in their viewpoints. With my knowledge of theology, I feel differently about many issues. But many of these people are an example to me in the way in which they live their daily lives. They are totally devoted to God. Many of them had to break with their culture and with their families in order to become followers of Christ. And I don’t know a single one of them who would even closely interpret John 4 in the way in which John Frey told the story.
Secondly, I asked myself how I would have felt had I been a Fundamentalist believer. I would probably have been angry and hurt. But I would most certainly not have been convinced that I might be wrong. Any chance of a meaningful conversation is cut off by a post like this. Many people have complimented John Frey on his posts (and as I said, it’s really well written), but the people who liked these posts were those who agreed with him. To ridicule someone because of a certain viewpoint they have, has never, as far as I know, convinced such a person to accept the opponent’s viewpoint.
Thirdly, I asked myself the question what the big difference is between Fundamentalists and someone who writes in the way in which these posts were written. And in a certain sense they are the same. One of the problems which I have with Fundamentalists is that they leave very little chance of discussing issues. People would say that they believe the Bible “as it is” which is interpreted to mean: “If you don’t agree with me, then you’re wrong!” And in essence, this is exactly what I felt when reading these two posts: “The way in which the Bible should be interpreted, is through the spectacles of an Emergent Jesus, and if you don’t agree with me, then you’re wrong!”
I’m all for an open discussion on the meaning of the Bible. I know enough about theology to realise that some things in the Bible cannot be interpreted merely by reading the words in the Bible. You need to study the culture and the background. Sometimes you need more information on the Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic in which the original texts were written. Some interpretations within the Bible have had to be adapted after realising that we misunderstood the Bible in the past. (I can still remember, as a kid, the first time a woman came into our church without wearing a hat!) We had close friends at our house last week to whom I had to say at one point that I cannot agree on their viewpoint about certain theological issues. In fact, I feel strongly that their viewpoint is incorrect. But I never had to ridicule them to prove my point. And most probably, because we’re such great friends, we’ll continue the discussion when next we have dinner together.
And I couldn’t help but wonder how an Emergent Jesus would have spoken the words of Matthew 5:22: “Carelessly call a brother ‘idiot!’ and you just might find yourself hauled into court. Thoughtlessly yell ‘stupid!’ at a sister and you are on the brink of hellfire. The simple moral fact is that words kill.”

Marketing your Church

A few days ago someone sent me a link to a Youtube video clip with the title: What if Starbucks marketed like a church? I was able to watch it then, but unfortunately it seems to have been removed from Youtube in the meantime. (It’s worthwhile to go to http://eugenecho.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/what-if-starbucks-marketed-like-a-church/ On this blog the video clip still seems to be working and there’s some great comments written about the clip.) It’s really quite funny and although it’s obviously exaggerated, the message comes across. If we want to market the church, we have to get more professional about it.
But then I thought that the title of the clip could also be put the other way round and someone innovative would probably be able to manufacture an equally funny clip: “What if the church marketed like Starbucks?” I’m all for becoming more professional in the church. I’m all for making use of certain business principles in the church. I believe that a vision and mission statement can really help a church to get focussed. But I’m not convinced that churches should be run entirely in the way that a business is run. (By the way – I had a cup of coffee at Starbucks at Cairo airport earlier this year, and not only was the coffee terrible but the atmosphere was even worse with a group of teens shouting and screaming at two in the morning, while I had only one desire – to get some sleep while waiting for a connecting flight. That morning I felt as if I would never set my foot in a Starbucks again!)
Let’s get back to the analogy of Starbucks. What do they want to do? Starbucks’ vision reads as follows: “Establish Starbucks as the premier perveyor of the finest coffee in the world while maintaining our uncompromising principles while we grow.” I can immediately sense a problem if we start marketing the church in this way. In fact, many churches do exactly this: “Establish XYZ Church as the premier perveyor of the gospel.” I read Rick Warren’s Purpose Driven Church not long after it was first published, and one of the things I remember is his attitude that there are many churches doing wonderful work. At their church they have a certain vision and a certain way of doing things. People who feel that they do not fit in, are free to worship at another church. Saddleback isn’t in competition with other Christian churches. Starbucks, on the other hand, is in strong competition with all other coffee shops and have to ensure that their standard is at such a level that people will prefer to drink their coffee instead of going to their competition. To achieve this aim, they do things in a certain way: Buy the best coffee beans. Install the best coffee machines. Give the staff the necessary training to make and serve the coffee.
The church, even though it needs to be run in a professional way, has an entirely different way of doing things. The church isn’t there to market the gospel or to market Jesus Christ. The church, one could say, is demonstrating what it means to live under the authority of Jesus Christ. The church, contrary to Starbucks, isn’t the place which I visit when I have a “thirst” or a desire for a good sermon. The church is there to change my entire focus on life, to change me (mostly focussed on myself and my own desires) in such a way that in my family life, my business life, my recreational life and wherever I am, I live as a changed person, now focussed on God and His desires, which means that I’m not in the church business because it makes me feel good, but because I know that this is what God wants from me. Contrary to going to Starbucks, I’m not part of the church to have a good feeling about myself, but to willingly go through the process of dying unto myself so that God can live through me. And this is not always an enjoyable process!
As I said: I’m all for churches being run more professionally. But I know of churches which are run extremely professionally but which still fail to get the main message across of a changed life, focussed on God and on the world for which Jesus gave His life.

Allowing new members into the church

This morning I attended church at a friend’s congregation who was having his farewell service before he moves away to another city in South Africa. As part of the service, five young people became “full” members of the church. The way in which this happened, was the same way in which I became a member of my church when I was sixteen years of age. We attended six years of Sunday School and then a further five years of “Catechism” where we learnt about the formal doctrines of the church. The last year was conducted by our minister and usually involved the more difficult doctrines that non-theologians struggled with. After all this formal teaching, we appeared before a committee who had the opportunity to question us and to have informal discussions with us, until eventually we were all approved to be members of the church. And the emphasis falls on the word “all”, because with this method, you can hardly refuse someone who had gone through this entire process of eleven years of preparation to become a member. At the very least, the consequences of such a decision would be that the potential member’s family and friends would leave the church and find somewhere else to worship – and who wants that to happen?
One of the amusing things which I remember about those days was when we had eventually been allowed as members of the church and we posed for a picture to be taken afterwards. A boy who was with me in class at school and who had quite a reputation (and not a good one!) for his life-style, was standing next to me. At some point, as we were waiting for the photographer to take his shot, he whispered in my ear: “I think I will now have to start changing my life-style!” Needless to say, he never did.
I suspect that most mainline churches are struggling with the same problem – people becoming members of the church because they grew up in this church, but without having any relationship with God. And while it’s fine to have those people worshiping at your church, it becomes a problem when they commit themselves to becoming members of that particular denomination. When you become a member of a church, you are promising, amongst other things, to become actively involved with God’s work. But of course, if you had never been actively involved in God’s work before, chances are small (Read: “Non-existent”) that it will happen merely because you had become an “official” member of a church.
Things were different in the early church. To become a member of the church in New Testament times could well mean that you would literally be thrown to the lions. Such a decision could not be taken lightly. In my own church in Swaziland, we allow people to worship with us for years until they are personally convinced that they really want to join the church. I’d be dishonest if I would say that this has a major impact on the lives of our members, but at least I’m not compelling people to tell lies, merely because they feel forced to become members.
I have absolutely no idea what the solution to this problem is. I’m convinced that it’s not only the mainline churches who have a problem with this. I have dear friends in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches (and who are willing to be honest about their experiences,) and I find that they have much the same problem. In their case, people have to be baptised in order to become members of their churches, but often, due to pressure from their parents or peers, they are baptised, while proclaiming their faith in Jesus Christ, but still without living in a relationship with Him. The method in which you become a church member has very little influence on the quality of your membership, especially if you feel pressured into becoming a member.
So, if you have success stories to share, I would love to hear about them.

Becoming a church for and in your community

This past Sunday I was invited to speak at a church on the outskirts of Johannesburg. A few years ago this was an exclusively White community and church membership and attendance clearly indicated the demographic pattern of the community. This was the situation all over South Africa before 1994. But with the new democratically-elected government which came into power in 1994, things started changing. Exclusive White communities in certain areas, especially within the centres of the larger cities like Johannesburg, Pretoria and Durban, started being replaced by other ethnic groups. This had a great effect upon churches, as churches which catered exclusively for the needs of White, Afrikaans-speaking people, experienced a sudden and tremendous decrease in church membership and attendance. Churches which had thousands of members and packed buildings during their regular worship services on a Sunday, suddenly struggled to survive. After a time the inevitable happened when the church buildings were sold, sometimes to shop owners needing storage place and even to people of other faiths which then changed the buildings to make it a place of worship for people of their religion.
One particular church in Pretoria has always been a sad example for me of how a church failed to use the new opportunities that had come their way. This particular church followed the route described above. Fortunately, when they decided to close doors, they sold the church building to a another evangelical church group which then opened the doors again and started to cater for the needs of the people who were then occupying the apartments in that area. And as far as I know, the church is doing well. It’s not a White, Afrikaans-speaking church anymore, but then, the community does not exist out of White, Afrikaans-speaking people anymore!
On this past Sunday I spoke at a church which, if the leader had not persevered, would probably also have had to shut doors a number of years ago. Except for the fact that he saw the change in demographics, not as a threat but rather as an opportunity. When I entered the church, I was immediately struck by the multi-cultural atmosphere within the church. People from different ethnic groups mixed in a friendly and comfortable manner. The church leadership also reflects the diverse cultures of the area. They have two worship services – one in Afrikaans and one in English. The second service was, in a sense, even more diverse than the Afrikaans service. Those attending were mostly non-South Africans. They included people from countries such as Zimbabwe, Nigeria and other African countries. But they also come from a diverse religious background, including Roman Catholic and even traditional African religions. Some came in the traditional clothing of their own country. The only common denominators are that they are all interested in the Christian faith and that they all understand English.
When I left the church after speaking at both these worship services, I thought about Eric Bryant’s excellent book, Peppermint-filled piñatas, which I had reviewed here. And I thought about lost opportunities, where churches had been sold to shop owners or to people from other, non-Christian religions, while many people who are still interested in Christianity have nowhere to worship on a Sunday. Which further led me to the topic of this blog: Becoming a church for and in your community!

Lars and the real girl

We watched an excellent DVD last night: Lars and the real girl. I’m not going to write much about the plot. It’s enough to say that, in the hands of a different director, this could have ended up as a filthy piece of junk. But Craig Gillespie, who was nominated for the 2007 Most Promising Filmmaker award by the Chicago Film Critics Association, succeeded in making a movie that has an extremely deep message and speaks to Christians in a remarkable way.
I’m more or less sick and tired (and have been for the past twenty or thirty years!) of movies where pastors and priests are nearly always shown to be corrupt, with a total inability to do anything right in their congregations. They either steal money, cheat on their spouses (except for the priests who are not married but who still get involved in extra-marital affairs), act absolutely loveless and do everything Hollywood likes to blame Christians of doing.
This movie was totally different, without being soppy. It shows how the church members first struggle to do the right thing and then, as the movie progresses, they become increasingly convinced that they are indeed right in what they are doing, until eventually the movie ends in a way that is not even considered when the movie starts – but it proves that the church members, under the leadership of their minister, did indeed make the right decision.
If what I’m writing doesn’t make much sense, it’s merely because I don’t want to give away the plot. So if you feel that you want to see something that is a quite few notches above the normal movies shown on big screen, I can wholeheartedly recommend this movie.
I’d like to hear how you experienced this movie.