|
Churches that
Develop the Christian Mind
J.P. Moreland
Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article
St Paul tells
us that the church – not the university, the media, or the public
schools – is the pillar and support of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15).
But you would never know it by actually examining our local church
practices week by week or by observing the goals and objectives set
by many parachurch ministries. As we near the end of the second
millennium in the era of our Lord, we evangelicals need to ask
ourselves three very important and painful questions.
First, why is
our impact not proportionate to our numbers? If the evangelical
community is even one-third the size polls tell us it is, we should
be turning this culture upside down. Second, why are ministers no
longer viewed as the intellectual and cultural leaders in their
communities that they once were? Compared to pastors of the past,
contemporary ministers have lost much of their authority among both
unbelievers and the members of their own flocks. Third, how is it
possible for a person to be an active member of an evangelical
church for twenty or thirty years and still know next to nothing
about the history and theology of the Christian religion, the
methods and tools required for serious Bible study, and the skills
and information necessary to preach and defend Christianity in a
post-Christian, neopagan culture?
I cannot offer
a full response to theses questions here, even if I were Adequate
for the task (which I am not). But twenty-six years of ministry
have convinced me of this: Among a small handful of factors
foundational to such a response is the hostility or indifference to
the development of an intellectual life in the way we go about our
business in the church. Having planted two churches and four
Campus Crusade ministries from scratch, pastored in two other
congregations, and spoken in hundreds of churches during the last
quarter century, I have become convinced that we evangelicals
neither value nor have a strategy for developing every member of our
congregations to one degree or another as Christian thinkers. To
convince yourself of this you need only look regularly at the types
of books that show up on the Christian booksellers’ top-ten list.
Since the 1960s, we have experienced an evolution in what we expect
a local church pastor to be. Forty years ago he was expected to be
a resident authority on theology and biblical teaching. Slowly this
gave way to a model of the pastor as the CEO of the church, the
administrative and organizational leader. Today the ministers we
want are Christianized pop therapists, who are entertaining to
listen to.
In the midst
of all this, the church has become primarily a hospital to soothe
empty selves instead of a war college to mobilize and train an army
of men and women to occupy territory and advance the kingdom until
the King returns. Of course, the church should actually be both
hospital and war college and, in fact, much, much more. But there
is no question that we are not succeeding in mobilizing such and
army and training them with the intellectual and spiritual skills
necessary to enter deeply and profoundly into the spiritual life and
to destroy speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the
knowledge of God. A church incompetent cannot effectively be a
church militant. And make no mistake, like it or not, we are in a
war for the hearts, minds, and destinies of men and women all around
us.
Because the
stakes are so high, we simply cannot afford to tolerate this
situation any longer. I am not suggesting that we evangelicals are
not making progress or doing well in a number of areas. But neither
is my head in the sand. We must recommit ourselves to developing
richer, deeper, more powerful churches for Jesus Christ and the good
of others and ourselves. And as philosopher Roger Trigg points out,
it is a matter of common sense that “Any commitment, it seems,
depends on two distinct elements. It presupposes certain beliefs
[to be true] and it also involves a personal dedication to the
actions implied by them.”
This means that we must become convinced that change
is needed and we must be willing to pay the price to bring about
that change.
Change is not
valuable for its own sake, and I have no interest in novelty just to
be novel. Many of the things we do in the local church are good and
should remain a part of our philosophy or ministry. But no
business, movement, or group will survive and flourish if its
resistance to relevant and important change is rooted in the idea
that we should keep doing something simply because that’s the way
we’ve always done it. The purpose of this chapter is to rouse
discussion among us and to provide some practical suggestions with
which to experiment in our churches. If you don’t agree with the
ideas and suggestions to follow, then at least argue about them
among your brothers and sisters. Find out where and why you think I
am wrong and come up with better suggestions.
I offer on
word of caution before we proceed. If what I am about to say is
true, then we need to change a number of things we are currently
doing in the church. Unfortunately, People can get hurt in the way
we bring about change, and it is all too easy to look for people to
blame for things that are going wrong. These harmful approaches and
attitudes are foreign to the spirit of Christ, so read what follows
with a tender spirit as well as with a tough mind.
REFURBISHING
THE LOCAL CHURCH
Philosophy of
Ministry
1. No senior
pastors:
Any local church or any individual believer should have a philosophy
of ministry – that is, a view about the purpose, objectives,
structures, and methods of ministry that ought to characterize a
local church ministry. In my view, any philosophy of local church
ministry ought to be clear about three very crucial ideas. First,
the local church in the New Testament contained a plurality of
elders (see Acts 14:23, 20:28; Philippians 1:1; Hebrews 13:17). The
New Testament knows nothing about a senior pastor. In my opinion,
the emergence of the senior pastor in the local church is one of the
factors that has most significantly undermined the development of
healthy churches.
Think about
it. More and more people go into the pastorate to get their own
significance needs met, and congregations are increasingly filled
with empty selves, as we saw in chapter four. Given these facts,
the senior pastor model actually produces a codependence that often
feeds the egos of senior pastors while allowing parishioners to
remain passive. None of this is intentional, but the effects are
still real. The senior pastor model tends to create a situation in
which we identify the church as “Pastor Smith’s church” and
parishioners come to support his ministry. If a visitor asks where
the minister is, instead of pointing to the entire congregation (as
the New Testament would indicate, since we are all ministers of the
new covenant), we actually point to Pastor Smith. On the other
hand, poor Pastor Smith increasingly gets isolated from people and
peer accountability, and eventually, he dries up spiritually if he
is not careful.
The local
church should be led and taught b a plurality of voices called
elders, and these voices should be equal. If so-called lay elders
(I dislike the word lay!) do not have the seminary training
possessed by those paid to be in “full-time” local church ministry,
then the church needs to develop a long-term plan to give them that
training in the church itself or elsewhere. No one person has
enough gifts, perspective, and maturity to be given the opportunity
disproportionately to shape the personality and texture of a local
church. If Christ is actually the head of the church, our church
structures ought to reflect that fact, and a group of
under-shepherds, not a senior pastor, should collectively seek His
guidance in leading the congregation.
2. What the
pastoral staff and elders should be doing:
Second, Ephesians 4:11-16 may well be the most critical section in
the entire New Testament for informing the nature of local church
leadership. In that passage, the apostle Paul tells us that God has
given the church evangelists and pastors-teachers (among other
persons) who have a very specific function in the body. Their job
description is to equip others for ministry, not to do the ministry
themselves and have others come and passively support them. For
example, the test of the gift of evangelism is not how effective you
are at winning others to Christ, but rather, your track record at
training others to evangelize. The senior pastor model tends to
centralize ministry around the church building and the pastor
himself. Where he is, is where the action is. We bring people to
him to evangelize, to counsel, and so forth. On this view, there is
little need actually to equip parishioners to develop their own
gifts, talents, and ministries because their job is to support
the minister.
But according
to Ephesians 4, this tradition has it backwards. New Testament
ministry is decentralized, and the function of
pastors-teachers is to equip others to do the ministry. If we
were more serious about this approach, we would do a better job of
providing theological, biblical, philosophical, psychological, and
other forms of training in our churches because without it, the
ministers (that is, the members of the church) would not be
adequately equipped to do the ministry.
3. The
distinction between forms and functions:
Third, we need to make a careful distinction between forms and
functions in the church.
A New Testament function is an absolute biblical mandate that
every church must do __ for example, edify believers,
worship God, evangelize the lost, and so forth. Functions are
unchanging non-negotiables.
By contrast,
a form is a culturally relative means of fulfilling biblical
functions. Forms are valuable as a means to accomplish those
functions and should be constantly evaluated, kept, or replaced n
light of their effectiveness. Examples of forms are the existence
of youth directors, Sunday school classes, vacation Bible schools,
the order used in the worship service along with the kinds of music
utilized and so forth. We must keep in mind that we are free
__ genuinely and honestly free in Christ __ to
adjust our forms any way we wish, under the constraints of common
sense, biblical teaching, and effectiveness. If the way a specific
church conducts Sunday school classes is not effective in fulfilling
the function of teaching people in the faith, then we should change
it.
Serious harm
has been done to our churches by confusing forms and functions and
by clinging to the former just because we have always done them a
certain way. We have no right to adjust our functions, but we have
a duty to examine constantly our forms. A church that does not do
this will have a lot to answer for at the judgment seat of the Head
of the church.
Before I offer
several suggestions for refurbishing the local church that, in one
way or another, express these three core components of philosophy of
ministry, I want to summarize more precisely what I am claiming.
The local church ought to be led by a plurality of elders whose main
job is to develop the ministries of others. They are to see to it
that embers of the body discover their spiritual gifts and natural
talent and receive the training and equipping necessary to be good
at their ministries individually and corporately. The elders are
free to do whatever is necessary to the forms in the church in order
to succeed in equipping the saints to accomplish biblical functions
for the church. If this is correct, then the church must see
herself as an educational institution, and the development of the
Christian mind will be at the forefront of the church’s ministry
strategy of equipping the saints.
Practical
Suggestions
Here are a
number of practical suggestions for making this philosophy of
ministry a reality in the local church. I have actually done most
of these in my own ministry and have witnessed their effectiveness
firsthand.
1. Sermons:
We must overhaul our understanding of the sermon along with our
evaluation of what counts as a good one. The filling station
approach (people come each week to get filled up until next week) is
itself running out of gas. Yet we persist in viewing the sermon as
a popular message that ought to be grasped easily by all who attend
and evaluated solely on the basis of its pleasurableness,
entertainment value, and practical orientation. Unfortunately,
twenty years of exposure to these types of messages result in a
congregation filled with people who have learned very little about
their religion and who are inappropriately dependent upon someone
else to tell them what to believe each week.
I do not
dispute that sermons should be interesting and of practical value.
But when most people say they want a sermon to be practical, I don’t
think they really mean how-to’s and religious formulas as opposed to
reasoned sermons that argue a case and actually cause people to
learn something new. After all, most practicing Christians sense
deep in their hearts that they know far too little about their faith
and are embarrassed about it. They want to be stretched to learn
something regularly and cumulatively over the years by the sermons
they hear. What people really want when they say they desire
practical sermons is this: They want passion and deep commitment to
come through the message instead of a talk that sounds like it was
hurriedly put together the day before.
How can we
improve the quality of the sermons in our churches? I have three
suggestions. First, we need to be more thoughtful and serious about
supplementary material for the sermon. A small bulletin insert with
three points is inadequate if, in fact, the sermon is a teaching
vehicle. Instead, a detailed handout of two or three pages on
regular-sized paper ought to be given to people. It should include
detailed, structured notes following the sermon structure; a set of
study exercises on the last page; recommendations for further
reflection that week; and a bibliography. After a series is
completed, these could be put together (with sermon tapes) to form a
nice mini-course on the series topic for later study or distribution
to those not attending the church.
Further,
before a series begins, a book or commentary should be selected,
order forms assed out, and copies sold the week before the series
begins. Reading assignments could be given each week during the
series. I once preached a series on 1 Peter, and seventy-five
copies of a good commentary on the book were purchased by the
congregation. I listed each week’s text along with the relevant
page numbers in the commentary on a sheet of paper the first week of
the series. A number of people came to the sermon prepared to think
about what I was teaching since they had read the commentary on the
text prior to the message. Among other things, this forced me to
work harder on my messages because people were not taking my word
for it about the meaning of a passage! Can you imagine! They had
their own ideas about the text! Anything we can do with
supplementary materials to get people reading and thinking about a
series topic will enhance learning and growth.
Second, from
time to time a minister should intentionally pitch a message to the
upper one-third of the congregation, intellectually speaking. This
may leave some people feeling a bit left out and confused during the
sermon, which is unfortunate, but the alternative (which we follow
almost all of the time) is to dumb down our sermons so often that
the upper one-third get bored and have to look elsewhere for
spiritual and intellectual food. The intellectual level of our
messages ought to be varied to provide more of a balance for all of
the congregation. Furthermore, such and approach may motivate those
in the lower two-thirds to work to catch up!
Finally, for
two reasons I do not think a single individual ought to preach more
than half (twenty six) the Sundays during the year. First, no one
person ought to have a disproportionate influence through the pulpit
because, inevitably, the church will take on that person’s
strengths, weaknesses, and emphases. Now, who among us is adequate
for this? No one. By rotating speakers, the body gets exposure to
God’s truth being poured through a number of different
personalities, and that is more healthy. If one person is a better
speaker than the others, he should train (equip) the rest over the
years to be more adequate. As a result, the local church will have
a growing number of competent leaders able to preach and
consequently not be so dependent on one person.
Here is an
important question: Would it inordinately impact your church’s
attendance and effectiveness if the main preacher went to another
church? If the answer is yes, your church is going about its
business in the wrong way. Leaders are not being developed in the
body, and the pulpit is not being adequately shared.
Second, no one
who preaches week after week can do adequate study for a message or
deeply process and internalize the sermon topic spiritually. What
inevitably happens is that a pastor will rely on his speaking
ability and skills at putting together a message. Unfortunately, I
have been in this situation myself, and my messages started sounding
hollow and packaged. After several weeks of preaching, I started
giving talks instead of preaching my passions and feeding others the
fruit of my own deep study. In one church where I was a
pastor-teacher, we rotated preaching among four people and each of
us knew that he would have a four-to eight-week series coming up in,
say, three months. That gave us the chance to work on a subject for
a long time. By the time our turn on the calendar arrived, we were
well prepared intellectually and spiritually.
2. The church
library:
Those in charge of the church library should see their job to be one
of enlisting a growing number of church members into an army of
readers and learners who, over the years, are becoming spiritually
mature, clearly thinking believers who know what and why they
believe. The church library ought to be large, and it should
contain intellectual resources and not just self-help books. I
recognize that building the church library costs money, but our
investment of funds should reflect our values and we should value
intellectual resources enough to pay for them.
In one church
where I was a pastor-teacher, we had a library of twelve thousand
volumes. As with most church libraries, its location was off the
beaten path. So every single Sunday different volunteers on a
rotating basis set up tables in the foyer, placed five hundred books
on those tables, and actually greeted people at the door and invited
them to check out a book or purchase a mini-course from previous
sermon series. Hundreds of books were regularly checked out and
read that would have stayed on the shelf if we had simply left them
in the out-of –sight-out-of-mind church library.
Church
librarians should see to it that book reviews are regularly inserted
into the bulletin and that each month several copies of a featured
book are secured on consignment and sold in the lobby. For several
years, the railroad industry all but died in this country because it
wrongly defined its purpose. Railroad employees should have seen
themselves in the transportation industry, not the railroad industry
per se. Likewise, those who work in the church library must ask
themselves what they are about. They do not serve to process books
and keep the library open. They serve to enhance the development of
a thinking, reading, literate congregation.
3. Sunday
school and study centers:
For many churches, the main purpose for a Sunday school class is to
enfold, not to educate. A Sunday school class provides a place of
contact with a mid-sized group numbering somewhere between the large
congregational meeting and the small group. So understood, Sunday
school classes require no preparation and little commitment to study
on the part of the participants, and, if judged by their effects
over several years, they accomplish little by way of actual
education. Now it may surprise you to know that I do not think that
this situation is bad in and of itself. More specifically, I think
some vehicle for enfolding people and building group cohesion at a
mid-sized-level church is appropriate, and Sunday school may well be
that vehicle.
What we need,
however, is to develop alternative, parallel classes that have a
distinctively educational focus, so people can choose one or the
other or alternate between the two. My friend Walt Russell and I
co-labored at Grace Fellowship Church in Baltimore for three years
in what we called the Grace Discovery Center. We developed a set of
course offerings that changed each quarter of the year. A few weeks
prior to a change in church quarter, we passed out a list of course
offerings and signed people up for the study center classes.
Courses cost
from $25 to $75 depending on the number of hours of classroom
instruction required. We varied the times of meetings. Some
Discovery Center classes met on Wednesday nights from 7:00 to 9:00
P.M., some met for three hours on four consecutive Saturday
mornings, some lasted from 7:00 to 9:30 Friday evening and from 9:00
A.M. to 4:00 P.M. the following day with a lunch break, others ran
parallel to the Sunday school hour. Each course had a syllabus,
required texts, and assignments (papers, letters to the editor,
etc.), and grades were given out. We had classes in Greek,
counseling, systematic theology, church history, apologetics, the
history of philosophy, various vocations (medical ethics,
Christianity and science, education and childhood development), and
other areas. We used books written by unbelievers as well as
believers and published by companies ranging from Oxford University
Press to standard evangelical houses. If your church doesn’t have
the teaching resources for such a study center, you should band
together with two or three other churches and form a jointly
sponsored study center.
The Discovery
Center also sponsored very focused weekend retreats not of interest
to everyone. For example, a group of around forty adults in the
church had a special interest in Christianity and politics. So the
Discovery Center responded to the need to equip these saints by
hosting a weekend conference on the topic and flying in a Christian
scholar who could address it competently, and we required that all
attenders purchase and read a specific book on the topic (and state
on a three-by-five-inch card that they had done so) before they
could attend.
The simple
fact is that Sunday school as it’s currently practiced is not doing
the job of developing the Christian mind, and there may be more
pressing legitimate objectives (enfolding) for such classes. If
this is so, we need to develop other ways of seeing to it that the
local church develops Christian thinkers equipped to do the work of
ministry. At the church in Baltimore, one group of twenty people
studied psychology and pastoral counseling for a whole year under a
local Christian psychologist. One Sunday morning, we called them
all up to the front of the church and passed out a list of their
names and phone numbers to the congregation, and the elders laid
hands on them to dedicate this group to the body as those
responsible for the counseling ministry in the church. None of us
who were elders or paid staff members were especially gifted in this
area, but we saw our biblical mandate to be that of ensuring the job
was done by equipping others. Among other things, this freed us up
to do more work in leadership development in the church while those
with the training and desire to counsel fulfilled that role in the
body.
Eighteen
engineers and scientists in the body went through and eighteen=month
study of science and Christianity. One Sunday morning we dedicated
this group in front of the church just as we had the counseling
group. These scientists and engineers were looked to by the body as
people who could help families if issues in creation and evolution
arose. For the first time in their lives, what these men and women
had studied in college and chosen as a vocation became relevant to
their discipleship unto Jesus and their ministry in the body! We
need to offer more courses in church partitioned along vocational
lines to tap into natural motivation, opportunity, and talent.
4. Deepening
the value of the intellectual life and raising the visibility of
Christian intellectuals and intellectual work:
A group’s values will largely determine the corporate and individual
behavior of the group. And a group must find ways to foster,
sustain, and propagate its values among its members. If the local
church is to overcome its anti-intellectualism, it must find ways to
raise conscious awareness of the value of the intellectual life
among its members. Most believers know the names of leading
Christian speakers and radio personalities. But how many of us know
our Christian intellectuals, celebrate their accomplishments on our
behalf, pray regularly for the intellectual war they wage, and hold
them forth as heroes and vocational role models among our teenagers?
If we do this for missionaries, why don’t we do it for Christian
intellectuals? We should, because we are in a struggle about ideas
and need to raise up a new generation of Christian scholars. In our
master of arts program in philosophy and ethics at Talbot School of
Theology, one of our goals is to help raise up one hundred men and
women in the next twenty-five years who will study under us, go on
for their PH.D., and become evangelical university professors at
schools all across the country. The local church needs to be more
intentional about fostering the intellectual life and mobilizing a
new generation of Christian intellectuals. Here are some
suggestions for doing this.
First, we
should regularly incorporate vocational or apologetical testimonies
and book reports on timely topics into our services. Selected
worshipers should be given five minutes to share how they are
growing to think more christianly as a businessperson, a teacher, or
whatever. They should share what they are reading, the issues with
which they are grappling, and the progress they are making. People
should share occasions where apologetics has aided their own
ministry of evangelism and discipleship. Once a month we ought to
entertain a brief book review of a key new book, some of which
should be written by influential unbelievers. We can do a better
job of encouraging a life of reading, apologetical argumentation,
and vocational integration during our services.
Second, we
ought to identify intellectual leaders who are associated with the
evangelical community or historic Christianity more broadly
conceived and find ways to hold forth their lifework as possible
vocations for our young people. Further, Christian intellectuals,
especially university professors, sometimes feel a bit estranged
from the sociological ambience of their local churches and from the
anti-Christian ideas of their colleagues. We need to do a better
job of recognizing, celebrating, enfolding, and aiding these
intellectuals in their work. An occasional bulletin announcement to
pray for professor so-and-so who labors for Christ at a local
college would be a wonderful thing. We get upset because we are
underrepresented in the university. But how many churches have
taken specific steps to encourage the university professors (and
graduate students soon to be university professor) among their
membership to be faithful to orthodoxy and to be bold in their
vocation?
Third, we need
to prepare teenagers for the intellectual world they will face in
college. The summer after high school graduation, it would be a
good idea to hold a summer institute in apologetics to try to offer
some worldview instruction to prepare our young brothers and sisters
to think more carefully about what they will study at the
university. Such and institute could also be used to challenge
teens with the ideal of vocation as the point of college in the
first place. Having worked with college students for twenty-six
years, I can testify that our churches are not preparing young
people for what they will face intellectually in their college
years, and we simply must be more intentional about this.
Fourth, we
should be more proactive in supporting and enfolding members of the
body who go to graduate school. Many churches have a number of
people each year who engage in graduate studies. Often, these
people begin to identify with their department of study in such a
way that they are sociologized out of a vibrant evangelical
commitment. Why should we abandon these students in this way?
Graduate students do not simply need the same sort of fellowship as
everyone else in the church. They need intellectual support as
well. I think each August we should print a list of students
heading off for graduate school that includes their names,
universities, addresses, and majors. These students should be
brought before the congregation, admonished to develop Christian
minds in their graduate work, and dedicated to the Lord by the
laying on of hands by the elders. If possible, they should be
paired up with someone in the church who is engaged in the same
vocation, and this person could be available for support through
letters, phone conversations about issues in the discipline, and so
forth. Can you imagine the extent to which the Christian mind would
emerge in this culture if thousands of churches began to practice
this?
Finally, we
need to increase our individual and congregational giving to support
Christian scholarship. When I speak in a church, I sometimes
challenge people to ask themselves just how much of their individual
giving or church budget goes to support the development of Christian
scholarship? Most people have never even thought of such an idea.
Evangelical colleges and seminaries are grossly under-funded. As a
result, many such schools are tuition driven and their faculties are
underpaid, strapped with inordinate teaching loads, and left with
inadequate library resources and funds for professional conferences
compare to their secular counterparts. And we expect those schools
and their faculties to compete in the war of ideas!
Moreover,
there is less scholarship money available to students who attend
evangelical colleges and seminaries compared to those who attend
secular institutions. When I did my doctorate at USC, I received
$10,000 a year for three years. The university knew that if I (and
other graduate students) had time to spend in the library and on
academic work, this would increase my chances of getting a teaching
job and making a contribution in the academic world, and eventually,
would bode well for USC. Unfortunately, students at evangelical
seminaries face high tuitions and, therefore, must work at part-time
jobs when they could be in the library improving their educational
experience and ministerial training. If we evangelicals are tired
of being underrepresented in the media, the university, and the
government, then we need to support evangelical scholarship,
especially solid evangelical colleges and seminaries, because such
institutions nurture the intellectual leaders of the future.
SUMMARY
The morning I
began to write this chapter, I picked up a newspaper and read the
editorial page. One of the featured editorials was defense of
Promise Keepers against feminist and liberal critiques of that
movement.
The article was articulate, carefully written, overtly evangelical,
and powerfully presented. And it was read by millions of people.
What really stirred my heart, however, was not just the substance of
the article but who wrote it __ Brad Stetson. This may
not mean much to you, but it was symbolic to me. I have met Dr.
Stetson. He is a young, dedicated evangelical who did his Ph.D. in
social ethics concurrently with two of my faculty colleagues and is
symbolic of a new and, hopefully, growing breed of younger
evangelical intellectuals. I was encouraged to see a faithful,
well-trained evangelical scholar impact the public marketplace of
ideas that is available to laypeople in the community.
What I am
saying in this chapter is that we need one hundred thousand Brad
Stetsons to write editorials, penetrate secular universities, write
books, speak on talk shows, and much, much more. The local church
needs to be more intentional in finding and developing the young
Brad Stetsons now in her ranks. May almighty God help us to do just
that.
Excerpted from
Love Your God with All Your Mind by J.P. Moreland, copyright
1997. Used by permission of NavPress,
www.navpress.com. All rights reserved.
J.P.
Moreland is professor of philosophy at Talbot School of
Theology, Biola University in LaMiranda, California. He is the
author of numerous books, including Scaling the Secular City
and Does God Exist?
NOTES:
|