This is a cheap and artificial imitation of the real thing, a description that suits many churches today. They are artificial, their membership is artificial, their worship and service are artificial, the preaching is artificial, etc.
They offer an artificial remedy for a real spiritual problem. The love and care they show are artificial. Their involvement in the world as the Voice of God is artificial - they tend more to be the official chaplains of political parties and governments than prophetic voices bringing the Word of God to a needy society.
It is surely time for a new reformation and spiritual revolution within the churches. No longer can ministers hold on to their reformed heritage; they must go and make that reformed heritage real in today's church; otherwise it will remain a plastic church!
Do you really want that?
"It is surely time for a new reformation and spiritual revolution within the churches."
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comment about the artificiality of many churches, indeed probably the great majority.
It not due to the institutional nature of most of them, and by sharp contrast their departure from the basic simplicity of the New Testament pattern?
In the light of such a tragic situation - what then Hazlett is your suggested remedy?
There is an urgent need for the church to get her priorities sorted out and corrected.
ReplyDelete* She needs to renewed commitment to the Spirit-anointed preaching of the Word of God is all its fulness.
* The church must seek the sovereign Lord as never before for His heavenly blessing.
* Her single desire is for the fire of God to fall upon the church and especially upon the preaching of the Gospel.
* She must labour to listen to God speak through His own Word, and then to preach what He says from the Scriptures.
* There must be a return to reformed and biblical church order, with the minister or teaching elder taking his God-given role seriously, and stop mimicking the fallen world.
* The 16th century Protestant Reformation was ushered in when the Word of God was given freedom from ecclesiastical restrictions to do its own saving work in men's hearts, and thereby to bring in the re-formation of Christ's Church on earth.
* The spiritual revolution will only come when members and ministers see just how deplorable her spiritual condition really is; to date, they nearly all go on as if everything in the ecclesiastical garden was rosy. They are living in denial. This must stop!
* There must be profound brokenness for the spiritual state of the church, and no more avoidance of the real issues.
These are some issues that come to mind; they are but a start. But one thing of which I am very sure is this, that when Christians diminish the place of the preaching of the Word/Gospel by men called, set apart, and equipped for this highest of all callings, they are holding back the day when God will come and re-visit His people. That said, even such discrediting of the sermon as an integral element in the diet of weekly worship will not stop God when He chooses to come. It is bad enough for ministers to do this through sermons that are dogma driven, or just simply unfaithful to the Scriptures, but for Christians to do the same is utterly deplorable.
But any reformation and spiritual revolution that diminishes the sermon, which is the public pronouncement of the message of God to the people, is but a further sign of the depth of the apostasy into which the Christian Church has fallen!
Hazlett. In reply to your comment on 'Plastic Church' I would like to respond again to your concerns which are indeed pressing issues.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure we all agree that the church (certainly in the West) is in a parlous state. You make various suggestions by way of remedial action, and I certainly agree with some of your points: i.e. Yes, an urgent need to re-consider priorities. Yes, the church needs to seek the sovereign Lord - but that is a permanent and continuing need.
However, I also believe that there are some NT priorities missing from your assessment - and ones which need to take precedence over some of those you list.
You seem to believe that one of these priorities is more preaching, better preaching, and what you call a "return to a "reformed and biblical church order".
In reply I ask - Is "better" preaching really the answer?
However, I agree there needs to be a return to church order, but question whether this is synonymous with the leading features handed down to us from the Protestant reformation.
Some of these include:
The clergy/pastor/laity divide.
The centrality of the solo 'pastor' role.
The central focus on preaching (to Christians).
The suppression of the NT doctrine of the functioning priesthood of all believers.
The entrenched tradition of the "worship service".
A rejection of Paul's pattern for the actual functioning of the whole body of Christ, potentially, when gathered, in line with Paul's clear teaching in 1 Cor. 12-14.
The failure to grasp the absolute essential place of spiritual gifts (from Christ Himself) as set out by Paul in Ephesians 4.
In effect then, a 'closed system'.
Consider the following relevant comment:
"In many local churches one sees little evidence that it is the Holy Spirit who has appointed various persons to specific ministries. Too often we do not find every joint working together so that nothing is lacking, and the whole body is built up in love. Why?
There is a reason, and it is crucial. The New Testament assumes certain preconditions, and where these preconditions are lacking, New Testament results will not follow. Paul's teaching about the gifts of the Spirit assume a New Testament view of the church." (Howard Snyder 'Liberating the Church)
I believe a reversal of these deficiences, in other words a renewed reformation, is urgently needed. Note. It does not include a commitment to more preaching (to Christians), which in any event has its origins not in the NT, but to pagan Greek, and later Roman, practices to do more with cultural ties with rhetoric and public speaking.
There are those of us, including many leaders, theologically conservative and therefore equally committed to Scripture, who do not believe that traditional preaching in the church (not evangelistic preaching to unbelievers wherever done) is to be encouraged at the expense of the prop0er functioning of the rest of the body of Christ when gathered.
Why then do we not practice the pattern Paul sets out in 1 Cor. 12-14 & Eph. 4?
This does not address all the pressing questions you have raised, but they are a start!
Disparaging Gospel preaching is certainly not the way forward, but a renewed energy from the Holy Spirit on the preaching is urgently needed.
ReplyDeleteI think that Paul wrote his letters in order to deal with failures within the church, and had there not been these failures, the letters might never have been written. In this sense and for this reason, we may be thankful to God that His church was not prefect in the beginning.
Paul recognises a 'teaching elder' role within the church, but that is far from 'solo' ministry. Every member has a 'ministerial' role in the life of the church, which is sometimes well and sometimes not so well exercised. Too many have a ministry of discouragement rather than the reverse.
Hazlett. You say "Disparaging Gospel preaching is certainly not the way forward.". Indeed so, and not for a moment have I inferred this is my posts on this blog.
ReplyDeleteGospel preaching, if by that we mean the presentation of the Gospel to unbelievers is a basic function of the church and gifted evangelists in particular.
As I'm sure you know, from the record of Acts alone, preaching in the NT is predominantly an activity taking place outside of church gatherings in the context of evangelism.
The various Greek terms translated as 'preach', or 'preaching' in the AV, with their many nuances can be found in any good lexicon or concordance. Unfortunately most of these differences in meaning have been obscured by contemporary assumptions attached to the word "preach".
There is actually almost nil by way of recorded NT speeches which we can cite as "preaching" occasionss directed to believers when gathered.
In effect then we have taken "preaching" to believers (for which there is no NT evidence) and substituted it for the mutual ministries of 1 Cor. 12-14, and many other NT passages (for which there is overwhelming evidence)
Why?
May I recommend to you the classic study on this tragic reversal by David Norrington? 'To Preach Or Not To Preach? The Church's Urgent Question. (now out of print, but I have a spare copy) I'm glad to say it is being considered for re-publication.