Church

Leading in the Construction of Christ’s Church

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Blue Construction

As one who has benefited from reading Jim Collins, John Kotter, Stephen Covey, and several other leadership gurus from the business world, I found this quote from Tony Morgan‘s Developing a Theology of Leadership  to be a very helpful reminder and convicting corrective:

It is true that we church leaders can learn from business leaders, but the corporate world should not set the foundation from which we lead. We can also learn from fellow church leaders, but they are also human and don’t provide a perfect model for Biblical leadership. When we look to other leaders, we are essentially holding on to our traditions rather than embracing the truth about leadership found in God’s Word. The Bible needs to become our filter for truth in every area of our life and ministry just because we see others doing it doesn’t mean that’s how God designed it.

Like Morgan, I still believe there is much to be learned from those who are effective in business, government, coaching, and other spheres. But as a pastor of a church – an under-Shepherd of part of the Church that Jesus is building – it is essential that I not fall for the notion that I will or can gain the most wisdom from these sources. I must never neglect or assume what the bible has to say about Leadership. Instead I must constantly submit all ideas of leadership, from whatever sources, to the scrutiny of the Scripture.

Matthew 16.18 reminds me that I am but a foreman, and that it is Jesus who is the architect, developer, and contractor. My job is to follow his design, and his lead.

Fellowship of Jesus’ Followers

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Community Collage

Stanley Grenz wrote, in Theology for the Community of God:

“The fellowship of Jesus’ followers is not merely a loose coalition of individuals who acknowledge Jesus. Rather, it is a community of disciples who seek to walk together in accordance with the principles of the kingdom. As Christ’s church, we desire to live out in the present the final reality that will come at the end of history, namely, the reconciled community. This forms the ultimate reason why the goal of evangelism is disciple making. The Spirit directs his great creative work toward establishing the eschatological community, a people who are bonded together by their mutual obedience to the God revealed in Jesus. It is their commitment to living as Jesus’ disciples which facilitates the mutuality that characterizes the community they form”

Cries of the Poor

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Comedian Steven Colbert made this statements:

“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.”

Now I am not one who believes that the United States was ever a “Christian Nation” in any true sense.  While it is evident that through our history our forefathers were guided by Judeo-Christian morays, and that the vast majority of citizens have traditonally recognized some expression of Christianity as the prevailing or most permeating faith in the land, the nation itself has held a different set of standards from than the gospel of Christ…

As to what solutions Colbert has to offer, I do not know.  But I know he has a valid point.

In a paper titled, Gospel-driven Principles, Dick Kaufmann, of Harbor Church in San Diego, makes these suggestions about our engagement with the poor:

1. KNOW THE POOR

The poor are mentioned over 200 times in the Old Testament. But who are the poor?

  • The Poor Are Needy. They have little or nothing of what the world values and as a result the world discards them. Now the Bible does say that some people squander the world’s goods and end up poor as a result of irresponsibility. But what is striking is this—80 to 90% of the passages on the poor do not say they had wealth but were irresponsible. On the contrary, there is reference to the fact that irresponsibility is a result of poverty not the cause of poverty. For example, Proverbs 10:15: “The wealth of the rich is their fortified city, but poverty is the ruin of the poor.” Frequently crime, addictions, irresponsibility, and unrest are a response to poverty. The Bible says by and large the vast majority of people who are in misery are born and come up having nothing of value so they are thrown away.

What is to be our response to the poor who are needy? Mercy. Overwhelmingly, the passages on the poor are not a rebuke to the poor but a call to God’s people to show them mercy. “Do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother…Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart” (Deuteronomy 15:7-11).

  • The Poor Are Powerless. As a result they are oppressed. They have little that the world values but the little they have the world takes away. “A poor man’s field may produce abundant food, but injustice sweeps it away” (Proverbs 13:23). “A poor man is shunned by all his relatives—how much more do his friends avoid him! Though he pursues them with pleading, they are nowhere to be found” (Proverbs 19:7). You see it is not just a matter of irresponsibility. Things are broken. The poor are powerless; as a result, the little that they have is taken away from them.

What is to be our response to the poor who are oppressed? Justice. God calls us to defend the cause of the oppressed (Psalm 82). “Seek justice, encourage the oppressed, defend the cause of the fatherless, and plead the case of the widow” (Isaiah 1:17). But the problem goes much deeper than any social program can deal with. And so the Bible not only exhorts us to do justice but also to look to the day when God will come and make all things right. “The needy will not always be forgotten (Psalm 9:18)…’Because of the oppression of the weak and groaning of the needy, I will arise,’ says the Lord” (Psalm 12:5). And so Jesus begins his ministry reading from Isaiah 61 – “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.” Central to what it means to be a follower of Jesus is to bring relief to the poor through mercy and justice. The Gospel helps us to know the poor and the Gospel helps us to…

2. BECOME THE POOR

In Matthew, Jesus does say, “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3). The Gospel comes to you only if you get rid of your middle-class spirit and get the spirit of the poor. That means three things:

  1. Acknowledge That You Are Needy. The middle-class spirit says: “If I live a good life then I will have something of value to present to God. If I give to the poor, show mercy and do justice I can present something to God that he will value. I can do it.” But the Gospel says: “No one is good, no not one.” Even our good deeds are filthy rags. They stink of self-righteousness. Because they have been done to feel superior to others and to get leverage with God so that He owes us a good life. They have absolutely no value to God.
  1. Acknowledge That You Are Powerless. The middle class spirit says: “Okay, if I have failed I will just pick myself up and try harder. I will turn over a new leaf. I may be down but I am not out. I’ll double my effort. Never say never, think positive, visualize success—I can do it. I will do it!” But the Gospel says: “Not only are you spiritually bankrupt with nothing of value to present to God but you are totally incapable of reversing the situation.” It is like a drowning man trying to pull himself out by his own hair. No, it is worse. It is like a dead man trying to dig himself out of the grave. The Bible says: You are spiritually dead and totally powerless to do anything that would merit God’s approval.
  1. Acknowledge That Your Only Hope Is A Poor Man. Trust in the King who became a poor man. He was born in a feed bin, in a cattle shed. At his dedication, his parents gave the smallest offering possible. He was raised in a poor family, in a poor community. All his life he was poor. “Foxes have holes and birds have nests but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” He entered Jerusalem on a borrowed donkey, had his last meal in a borrowed room, and was buried in a borrowed grave. He died naked. He had little the world valued and the little he had was taken away. He was discarded, thrown away. And only because of Him do you we have any hope. Your only hope is a crucified poor man. If this offends you, you are middle class in spirit and you cannot be saved. You must become the poor. And finally, the Gospel calls us and enables us to…

3. LOVE THE POOR

To the extent that the Gospel works in your heart you will love the poor in three ways:

  1. You Will Identify With The Poor. You will see that they are just like you. You will see their dirty, tattered clothes and think: “All my righteousness is a filthy rag, but in Christ we both are clothed in his white robes of righteousness.” You don’t pity them. You have empathy for them, but you don’t look down on them. You respect them. Instead of serving them in a paternalistic way you see them as partners in ministry—people from whom you have much to learn.
  1. You Will Be Generous To The Poor. Does the Bible call us to give everything away? No. Does it call us to stay rich? No. The Bible calls us to become incredibly contented and daringly generous with what we have because our riches are in heaven.
  1. You Will Stand With And For The Poor. That’s what it means to do justice for the oppressed. The Gospel frees us from our obsession with our reputation and our comfort and enables us to so identify with the poor that we are willing to stand with and for them against injustice and oppression.

The Gospel of Jesus is for the poor and only the poor—the spiritually poor and especially the materially poor. For the Gospel to come to you, you must become poor. When that happens the Gospel enables you to know and love the poor.

Turning Consumers Into Missionaries

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

In this video, Hugh Halter offers some helpful suggestions about turning church consumers into people who live on mission for and with Christ. While this is a long video, in the current climate of American church culture, I found it worth taking the time to consider.  I broke it up into viewing sections – watching 15-20 minutes at a time, making note of the point at which I stopped, and picking up again as I had time.  While I don’t embrace all of Halter’s ecclesiology (i.e. ways we govern and do church), I am hungry to chew on any ideas in-line with the compelling mission of the gospel.  Halter has proven to have both an appreciation of the gospel and good ideas for missional mobilization.

Ministry Diagnosis Questions

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Country Doctor

As a pastor it is not only requisite to be a student of God’s Word, but it is also essential to be a student of the people to whom I preach and teach.  This is true for any church or ministry leader.  If we do not know the Bible, and sound doctrine, we have nothing to offer. But even if we have voluminous knowledge, if we do not know the people with whom we are called to share these truths, then we will not know how to apply these truths.  It would be as ineffective as a medic possessing all the medicines but without enough biological understanding to make a valid diagnosis.

In a recent post, 9 Questions for Ministry Leaders, Paul Tripp identifies nine helpful questions to ask ourselves, and to discuss with the other leaders in our churches or ministries, as we attempt to become effective students and exegetes of our people:

  1. What are the cultural idols that are particularly attractive to my people?
  2. Where do they tend to buy into an unbiblical worldview with its accompanying hopes and dreams?
  3. Are there themes of spiritual struggle that I need to speak to?
  4. Where do they tend to get discouraged and need the hope of the gospel?
  5. What is the level of their biblical literacy and theological knowledge?
  6. How many of them are actively involved in service, and how many are “ecclesiastical consumers”?
  7. What do they tend to struggle with in the workplace?
  8. What do they wrestle with at home?
  9. What are they reading, watching, and listening to, and how are they influenced by it?

To Stop It or Not to Stop It, That is a Question

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Street Lights at Night

The ministry web site, ChurchLeaders.com, reported news of an unfortunate event in Colorado, and then asked the provocative rhetorical question: “How would you have handled it?” After a little thought I decided I would take a stab at taking the question, taking it beyond the mere rhetorical, and actually trying to answer it – albeit purely hypothetically.

Here’s the situation:

Pastors of a church in Lakewood, Colo., halted a funeral service in their church for a lesbian woman on Saturday, January 10, because the tribute video the family prepared showed photos of the woman kissing her partner. Fifteen minutes after the service was to begin, lead the pastor canceled the event when organizers would not edit the footage out of the video. Mourners, which numbered more than 150, then re-loaded the casket into the hearse, gathered the flowers and proceeded across the street to a mortuary, where the service continued.

Whether this account gives sufficient accurate details, I do not know. Assuming that it does, I still think I would have reacted differently than the pastor of the church.  But lingering questions also make my response conditional.

First, I would want to know if the deceased woman was a member of the congregation or not.  It would make a difference.  I am assuming that she was not, since there is no mention of any connection with the church. And what is stated would seem to suggest she was not; that this was simply a business arrangement the church had with the local funeral home.

New Hope Ministries was chosen for the memorial service because of its location – close to where Collier and her friends grew up, friends said.

So my first thought is that, to the degree it us up to me, I would not likely have voted to approve the service at our church in the first place.  However, since the service had been approved, I am uncomfortable with the decision of the pastor to stop the service in progress.

Someone might be curious as to why I would not have voted to approve the service in the first place.  Perhaps there may even be an assumption of my motives – whether one would be inclined to agree with or chafe at those presumed motives.  But my answer is in one sense simpler, and in another more complex, than might be assumed.

I would not have voted to approve the service, not because of the sexual orientation of the individual, but simply because it would require an unusual circumstance for me to vote to use the church building for a service for someone with no connection with the church.  I would not say never, but rarely – and only with very good reason.  This is both a practical and communal issue.  Practically, funerals and weddings take a lot of manpower.  I would prefer to respect the time demands upon the deacons of our church, and our other volunteers, and not embrace a service for mere commercial reasons.  If, however, it is someone who is part of the church family, well then I think every reasonable effort ought to be made to honor the person and support the family.

Would sexual orientation have any effect on my decision?  No, not really. At least not to do what the pastor in this situation reportedly did.

Continue reading →

Three Times a Month

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Abstract Trinity (Dumitru Verdianu)

Thom Rainer recently noted that there has been a marked change in the measure of comitment the average Christian had to his or her church. At least there has been a change in one measurable detail:

An active church member 15 years ago attended church three times a week. Now it’s three times a month

I do not know if this is an accurate assessment from some of Rainer’s research, or if this is more of an anecdotal hyberbole reflecting an evident trend. Regardless, I suspect that it is not far off base.

I also suspect there are some reasons. Among them would seem:

  • Baby Boomers Reaching Retirment Age
  • Rise of Churchless Christianity

Is Bigger Really Better?

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Big Fish Small Pond, Small Fish Big Pond

No matter how much I have grown to despise the discussion, it seems I cannot avoid it entirely.  Almost any conversation about church, it seems, inevitably gravitates in some form toward the Bigger is Better or Great Things Come in Small Packages debate.

It is not always an actual debate. In fact it is probably more often than not simply an expression of personal preference. But I have come to loathe the whole subject, having come to believe that the comparisons are largely irrelevant. There are some great large churches, and there are some great small churches; There are some horrendous large churches, and there are some pathetic small churches. And there are good and bad churches of all sizes in between.  The issue is not which size is best, but rather: Is your particular church – and my particular church – healthy, God-honoring, and fruitful?

That said, and with no desire to encourage debate, I found an observation by Neil Cole to be interesting:

There are millions of people in smaller congregations across the country who live with a feeling that they are failures because their church isn’t as big as the megaplex congregation down the street. This is sad and should not be the case.

A global survey conducted by Christian Schwartz found that smaller churches consistently scored higher than large churches in seven out of eight qualitative characteristics of a healthy church. A more recent study of churches in America, conducted by Ed Stetzer and Life Way Research, revealed that churches of two hundred or less are four times more likely to plant a daughter church than churches of one thousand or more. The research seems to even indicate that the pattern continues—the smaller the size of the church the more fertile they are in planting churches.

It pains me that so many churches and leaders suffer from an inferiority complex when in fact they could very well be more healthy and fruitful than the big-box church down the street.

I am not suggesting that the mega church is something we need to end, I am simply saying that we need other kinds of churches to truly transform our world. I also do not want people in huge churches to think that just because they have more people and more money that they are more blessed by God. The stats tell us that ten smaller churches of 100 people will accomplish much more than one church of 1000.

Read the rest of  Cole’s article: Is Bigger Really Better?

And again, while not wanting to prompt debate, I do welcome any comments about Cole’s observations.

Messy Christian Communities

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

Missional Communities

As our church makes the slow but intentional shift toward Missional Communities, I found this illustration to be a good picture of the contrast between common perception and ideal reality of what such communities, or small groups, and even church is like.

On the left side, “What People Think It Looks Like“, we see the idea that the Christian life is one that should be free of ugliness.  It makes sense, right?  If all the people in the group are saved by Jesus, forgiven of sin, and empowered to overcome their sin, then a gathering of Christians should be pretty clean, and always leading us upaward.  Isn’t this what Paul calls for in Ephesians 4?

I therefore, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called,2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.  (v. 1-3 ESV)

11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. (v. 11-13 NIV)

It is the picture God calls for, through Paul, in these verses.  But it is the ideal; the objective. It is not the complete picture, at least not at present.  It is sort of a Norman Rockwell version of the Christian life lived in community.  It is true.  But it does not show the complexity, and the brokenness that is all around us, nor the baggage that we all carry in varying degree.

But we have hope to experience it.  Afterall, God has promised it. He has said that he is at work in us, and he would finish what he started. (Philippians 1.6)  And we get a taste of it, if we have the privilege of engaging in a genuine Christian community.

The picture on the right, however, “What It Really Looks Like“, is a reflection of the present reality of Christian community.  It is often messy.  And if it is done right, it should get messier. This is OK, though, because this is God’s means of achieving the picturesque image we may have in our minds when reading Ephesians 4.  It is the sharing of life, the freedom and safety to unload our baggage in the presence of others who, rather than judging and comdeming, help us to sort through it, to own our part, and to see ourselves – and our messes – as God sees: through the lenses of the gospel.

Because each of us has our own mess, it only makes sense that a collection of people would look like a bigger mess.  But there is a beauty in that mess!  Because in the midst of that mess, love is shown.  Love leads to freedom and honesty.  Honesty leads us to the gospel, the power of which transforms us, cleanses us, and frees us from the bondage of all that is aweful and ugly.

Neil Cole has rightly said:

“Life is messy. If someone doesn’t break your heart, you’re not doing it right.”

Likewise, if we are living in community with other Christians, and it never gets messier, it may be a sign that we are not doing it right. Thank God for the messes!  Thank God that he cares about our messes! Thanks to God, he has promised to clean our messes, and use other messed up people in the process.

Please note that while the picture on the right is messy, it does go up.  It is not that there is no evidence of change, of improvement.  There certainly is!  It is just not always a pretty picture on the way.  But it is beautiful – to God and to us – both in process and as a result. This is the beautiful reality of the Christian community – the church.

Being the Church in the World: Distinctiveness

/ Dennis Griffith / 2 Comments

In this video John Stott discusses what he calls one of the most neglected themes in the Bible: Distinctiveness.

With all the clamoring for church to be seen as relevant in our culture, perhaps we – the Church – have lost sight of the call to be different.  Not different for the sake of being different, but different nevertheless.  Christians are to be different because, rather than being conformed to the principles of this world, we are more-and-more to be conformed to the likeness of Christ – in character, in passions, and in perspective.  We are to be formed by the Word, and consequently we become different from those around us.

Relevance has it’s place.  There is no merit in being irrelevant – and even less in just being weird.  But relevance must be considered as only one item, and it must be understood alongside with how we are also to be different from the world around us, and distinct in the communities where we live.

Honest Answer to Honest Questions, and Open Dialogue Wherever Possible

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Dialog & Discuss

Boyce College professor, Denny Burk, has posted an interesting warning about a common tactic employed by some with theological agendas – especially those with liberalizing theological agendas.  His post is titled:  Should Churches “Dialogue” About Sexuality?

Having read through it a couple of times I find myself appreciating Burk’s concern.  Burk notes that many a subtle debate may begin with a seemingly reasonable appeal:

“…with the liberals calling for more dialogue about the issue.”

Then, citing conservative writer Rod Dreher:

Ah, the old “conversation starter” or “dialogue” trick. Any time you see a progressive member of your church try this, you must understand that this is the wedge that they will use to pry the orthodox out. The “conversation” will be one-sided, and will not end until the orthodox have surrendered or left, because the progressives will never, ever take “no” for an answer.

While I am not one who is overly concerned about debate, or about being drawn into compromised theology, I have seen this tactic employed.  (For the sake of fairness, I must admit that I have seen the technique attempted by both those on the theological left, and by some on the far right.  It just seems that those on the far right are more likely to quckly show their hand, their agenda.)  So I agree with Burk, we need to be mindful of this, and encourage the people in our churches– or at least our church leaders – to be mindful of this ploy.

However, what Burk is addressing is not the biggest challenge to the church I serve.  Our congregation is pretty well rooted in sound theology and conservatism.  (NOTE: These are not always the same thing, especially when the conservatism is more political than theological.)  For most of our members it is not difficult to get them to accept the authority of God’s Word on any particular subject.  Our  commitment to deep, rich, historic, orthodoxy is one of the primary reasons they are part of the church.  And while we have many who are doing inspiring works throughout our community, it is far more a concern whether we can get some of the others to love and engage their neighbors – most of whom are likely to differ with us on any number of social issues – than it is whether they will be susceptible to trendy Spirits of the Age.

So while I appreciate Burk’s wisdom, I believe we also need to prepare people to “dialogue”.

Dialogue is how we engage people, without requiring that they agree with us as a precondition of  being welcome in our church or wanted as a friend.  Dialogue is one way we are able to express and cultivate love for our neighbors.  Dialogue may be the only way for some to hear what God has to say about a particular subject, as we appropriately bring our understanding of the Word into the conversations. Dialogue about issues in which we (at least) initially differ may be the means by which some hear the gospel for the first time – as the gospel does apply in some manner to all matters.

No doubt some readers will be uncomfortable with my call to dialogue with unbelievers and with theological compromisers (- which usually qualifies them as unbelievers).  But I am convinced that somewhere, somehow, we need to cultivate environments that encourage dialogue – and we must do this for the sake of the gospel.

I don’t feel alone in this thought. It is what Francis Schaeffer called for a couple generations ago.  In his Two Contents, Two Realities, the second content was: Honest Answers to Honest Questions.

I agree that we must be wise, and that there are times when conversation should be cut off – such as when it is apparent that the “dialogue” is not honest but rather a cloak over a subversive agenda. This is what Burk has in view, and so it is why I appreciate his thoughts.  But, just so there is no mistaking Burk’s counsel as an invitation for Evangelicals to hide out in the fortress of the church, I also feel compelled to contend for genuine dialogue, since it is the only way we will have opportunity to hear Honest Questions from our culture to which we may offer Honest Answers from God’s Word.

More Than Numbers

/ Dennis Griffith / 1 Comment

Miracle Gro

Here is a needed reminder:

I’m not so sure God cares how big your church is. Seriously. If your numbers aren’t “growing,” so what? I’m also not sure that the sign of a vibrant healthy church is ever-increasing growth, significant growth. It seems to me that the sign of a vibrant, healthy fully alive church is one where God’s people are growing in love, knowledge, and insight, not numbers. I’d rather be in a church like this than a church that is “growing” with greater numbers of people with shallow faiths who do not love well.

Where did Paul ever rebuke a church because their numbers were not growing by some set of hoped for percentage points?

Great point. I would add: Or Jesus, in his Letters to the 7 Churches in Revelation 2-3…

I get the church growth rationale.  And I agree with some of the foundations of it, at least as it was originally developed as a mission strategy. But the American obsession with Bigger is Better has distorted much – maybe most – of the good that the original proponents of church growth may have intended.  Many of us have misapplied the whole concept of growth and mistaken it as the measuring stick for God’s blessing.  Size of a congregation is about as good of an indicator of being blessed by God, as is wealth an indicator of worth; or better still, as height an indicator of greatness.  (In other words, not a valid standard at all.) Consequently, faithfulness and substance is often subverted by gimmicks and pragmatism.  Whatever works to get them in… right?

Years ago, while I was servivng a fast growing congregation (that a year later showed the evidence of serious fractures), a good and gifted friend was “languishing” in a church that could not quite break the 100 barrier – even on Easter.  He was discouraged –  to put it mildly.  To encourage him, I offered a parallel thought.  Knowing of a huge community college in his city, I asked about the number of students who attended the school. He said he estimated 50,000 – 60,000 students.  So I observed that the school must be some impressive, prestigious place.  After all Harvard has only 6000 or so students.  The guy who is president of that community college must be thought of as having had 10 times the success as the guy who can’t lead a school any larger than Harvard!

He got the my point of my sarcasm.  It is a ridiculous analogy to compare a community college with a school with the history, the resources, and he selectivity of a Harvard.  Size is no indication of anything.  And neither is size any measure of a church.

 

To read the whole short post I quoted at the top, click: A Healthy Vibrant Church May Never Be Big

 

 

Thoughts on Easter Giveaways

/ Dennis Griffith / Leave a comment

Field of Eggs

I was stunned the first time I read about the plan of a church in the area where we then lived to give away prizes at an Easter gathering.  And they were not just going to give stuff away, they were planning to create a frenzy.  A helicopter was leased, piloted by some guy in an Easter Bunny costume (which alone raises questions).  With people gathered at a rented junior high school soccer field, the Easter Bunny would drop plastic Easter Eggs each filled with either candy, cash, or with redeemable certificates for such items as i-pods, cell phones, etc. And they did this on Easter Sunday right after their services.  It just seemed wrong, but I held my tongue.

For two weeks leading up to the “drop” the local newspaper contained a full page ad promoting this “celebration”. But it was not until I read an interview with the pastor the day after Easter that I could stand it no longer.  His statement that set me off?  He said:  “We’re just loving on our neighbors.”

While that statement may seem benign enough, I felt compelled to respond. So I shot him an e-mail.  I had met the guy before, though did not know him well.  But I hoped he would at least consider his actions, or the potential effects of them.  So I wrote him a note challenging his notion of “loving his neighbors”.

I told him that he was not so much loving his neighbors as he was buying them, or bribing them.  True, he had gathered a large group to an Easter event, but it was not because of the proclamation of Christ crucified and resurrected (- though I assume that was mentioned at the actual church service).  How many in attendance were actually members of other congregations who were enticed only by the promise of goodies? (No, no one from the church I served attended their event.)  I conceded that perhaps such a giveaway would have been an expression of love had they chosen to hold it at one of the local public housing projects, and limited the participation to those with minimal incomes.  After all, that would have given to those who are without, and given to those who can give no more to the church than their presence.  But they had been advertising for weeks to the whole city – wealthy, middle-class, and poor alike.  They were merely buying potential “customers” – just like Wal-Mart, Best Buy, or any other consumer-driven business does.

Perhaps not surprising, I did not get a response to my e-mail.  The next year the church added a giveaway at the worship service – a new car to some lucky person with the correct number on their Easter Sunday worship bulletin.  I did not bother to send another e-mail.  I just mused in disappointment about what seems to be replacing the gospel in too many churches.

Apparently I am not alone in my distaste for this practice.  I recently read a post by Jared Wilson, who also has some concerns about it.  In his post Wilson gives ten spot-on-right reasons why he thinks luring people in with cash and prizes is not a good idea:

1. It creates buzz about cash and prizes, not the Easter event. When the media takes notice, nobody wants to interview these pastors about the resurrection. They want them to talk about the loot.

2. It identifies the church not with the resurrection, but with giving toys away. It makes us look like entertainment centers or providers of goods and services, not people of the Way who are centered on Christ.

3. Contrary to some offered justifications, giving prizes away is not parallel to Jesus’ providing for the crowds. Jesus healed people and fed them. This is not the same as giving un-poor people an iPod.

4. It appeals to greed and consumerism. There is no biblical precedent for appealing to one’s sin before telling them to repent of it. This is a nonsensical appeal.

5. Yes, Jesus said he would make us fishers of men, but extrapolating from this to devise all means of bait is not only unwarranted, it’s exegetically ignorant. The metaphor Jesus is offering here is just of people moving from the business of fishing to the business of the kingdom. There is no methodology being demonstrated here. (But the most common one would have been throwing out nets anyway, not baiting a hook.)

6. It is dishonest “bait and switch” methodology. Sure, the people coming for the goodies know they’re coming to church. But it’s still a disingenuous offer. The message of the gospel is not made for Trojan horses.

7. It demonstrates distrust in the compelling news that a man came back from the dead!! I mean, if nobody’s buying that amazing news, we can’t sell it to them with cheap gadgets.

8. It demonstrates distrust in the power of the gospel when we think we have to put it inside something more appealing to be effective. What the giveaways really communicate is that we think the gospel needs our help, and that our own community is not attractive enough in our living out of the implications of the gospel.

9. The emerging data from years of research into this kind of practice of marketing/evangelism attractional church stuff shows the kind of disciples it produces are not strong. I have no doubt these churches are going to see decisions Easter weekend. They’ll herald them on Twitter and on the blogs. As questionable a practice as that can be, I’d be extra interested in how discipled these folks are in a year or two years or three. Hype has always produced “decisions.” Would anyone argue that after 30 years or so of the attractional approach to evangelism the evangelical church is better off, more Christ-centered, more biblically mature?

10. What you win them with is what you win them to.