Thursday, May 20, 2010

Someone Must Lead: Part 2

Leadership is God's tool to motivate people for good. Nehemiah is a good example of this. The book opens with Nehemiah receiving bad report from homeland. The people are disgraced; the city is in ruins; and the walls are torn down. Grief stricken he went first to God and then before the king. Before one he was on his way to rebuild the walls. Upon arrival he inspects the walls and then assembles the people. He points to the walls and says, "You see this trouble we are in, how Jerusalem lies in ruins with its gates burned (2:17)." Had they missed this feature of their home town? Of course not. The rubble was there for decades. The problem was that they got so used to seeing the mess that they no longer yearned for a better day. They adjusted to the statues-quo and needed a leader to call them to a better future.


Nehemiah issues such a call. He says, "Come, let us build the wall of Jerusalem, that we may no longer suffer derision." Now with clear leadership and a big vision in front of them the people respond with the words, "Let us arise and build." And they strengthened their hand for the good work (2:18).


Groups rarely see the need and respond to the call without such leadership. Groups without leadership often adopt a comfort mentality that sees the normal as good, whether it is or not. That is one reason God provides leadership.


That is why there is a real need in the church for proactive leadership. All too often leaders are reactive and are moved only by complaints. Thus leaders spend most of their time putting out fires instead of leading the charge. The net result is a loss of mission and vision as people lead the leaders.


This is deadly for a church, because it gives authority to those who complain the loudest. In such cases, it is impossible to move forward. Obvious problems are rarely addressed, and if they are, they are addressed with the speed of a turtle running uphill. In such environments everything--and I mean everything--becomes a negotiation (Southern Baptists read this as business meetings). And when everything is a negotiation nothing--no matter how bad it is--nothing becomes a matter of urgency.


To combat this God calls out leaders to lead with urgency. Veteran missionary J. Oswald Sanders is right to say,

Churches grow in every way when they are guided by strong, spiritual leaders with the touch of the supernatural radiating in their service. The church sinks into confusion and malaise without such leadership. Today those who preach with majesty and spiritual power are few, and the booming voice of the church has become a pathetic whisper (Sanders, Spiritual Leadership, 19).


We need such leaders if our voice it to rise above a whisper. God gives leadership to promote his mission. Let us not be among the number who sink into confusion and ineffectiveness. Let us lead, because someone must lead. God said so.

Someone Must Lead: Part 1

In our day words like "leadership" and "authority" are dirty words. We are individuals. No one tells us what to do. We have no authority, and we do not like to be lead. From the cradle we made demands and attempt to chart our own course, and we expect others to see it the same way.

To make matters worse, we witness abuses of authority that makes us resist all leadership. The banker who abuses connections, the politician who abuses power, and countless other examples leave us less than enthusiastic about the idea of leadership.


This is certainly true in the church, especially congregationally governed churches. Each individual has both an opinion and a vote, which often makes the will of the masses the guiding light of the church.

But God has ordained that churches have leadership--that leaders lead as others follow. He appoints leaders to push God's people toward God's mission. Thus he gives leaders as a gift to equip the saints for the work of ministry (Eph. 4). In short, leadership is God's idea for the advancement of his glory and the good of his saints.


So what is a spiritual leader? A spiritual leader is one who sees God's direction and uses God's means to influence others to accomplish God's mission in reliance on God's power. They are a tool in God's hand, a tool that is both necessary and good for the church.

They are necessary, in part, because nature abhors a vacuum. In the absence of godly leadership, leadership by consensus often leads to disaster. Consider, for example, the children of Israel in Ex. 32. Moses was, at this point, their leader. He was God's agent to lead the Exodus through the Red Sea. Now God calls him up to receive the law, which took some time. Hence, Exodus 32 opens by saying, "When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down the mountain." Here is the beginning of trouble. With Moses gone, the people want to fill the void themselves. They persuade Aaron to build a golden calf for worship, making this event one of the lowest in the nation's history.

The point I strike under is this: a short time without leadership proves disastrous for the people. Without leadership to point the way, the people naturally find the path of sin. Once off mission, they find disaster. The same can be true in our day. Leaders must constantly keep the mission of God before the people of God. Without this people drift from God's plan. It is true that people will often resist and resent leadership in the church, but they will hate the consequences of its absence much worse.

What is Zeal?

J.C. Ryle gives us a classic description of zeal when he writes:

Zeal in religion is a burning desire to please God, to do His will, and to advance His glory in the world in every possible way . . .
A zealous man in religion is pre-eminently a man of one thing. It is not enough to say that he is earnest, hearty, uncompromising, thorough-going, whole-hearted, fervent in spirit. He only sees one thing, he cares for one thing, he lives for one thing, he is swallowed up in one thing; and that one thing is to please God. Whether he lives, or whether he dies--whether he has health, or whether he has sickness--whether he is rich, or whether he is poor--whether he pleases man, or whether he gives offence--whether he is thought wise, or whether he is thought foolish--whether he gets blame, or whether he gets praise--whether he gets honour, or whether he gets shame--for all this the zealous man cares nothing at all. He burns for one thing; and that one thing is to please God, and to advance his glory. If he is consumed in the very burning, he cares not for it--he is content. He feels that, like a lamp, he is made to burn . . . (Quoted in J.I. Packer, Knowing God, 173)."

Why Wouldn't You Want to God to Church?

A few weeks ago a local newspaper writer responded to the question, "Do you have to be a Christian to go to church?" As I read the article, a few things came to mind. This is my response to this question.


Does one have to go to church to be a Christian? Lord only knows how many times I have been asked this question, and I am not alone. Typically our answers center around the blessing received from church affiliation. That is, we often point to the great blessing of fellowship or having people to pray with and for you. Who, after all, doesn't want that?

Surely this impulse is right. We should point out the blessings. But is there more to say?

I believe there is. First, the question itself represents a misunderstanding of the church. It assumes that the church is a static thing that you go to instead of a living thing that you are part of. Many think of churches in terms of a building where stuff happens. We see the church as a monument of bricks instead of a movement of people. That is why many often say, "Let's go to church," or "There is a service at the church." While it is good and necessary to gather together (Acts 2:42-47; Hebrews 10:25), the NT pictures the church as a living organism. It is the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:22ff.) made up of witnesses to the gospel of Christ (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). It is what Christ himself is building to push back the resistance of hell (Matt. 16:18). And it is the ordained instrument of God to display his wisdom (Eph. 3:10). None of this can be fully accomplished within the narrow confines of a building.

Second, when we answer this question purely in terms of what one gets out of church, we cater to the consumer mentality of our day. We act as if "getting something out of it" is the only reason to be involved in a church. Thus we relegate the church to a dispenser of religious goods and services--a virtual Wal-Mart for the soul--that you check in and out of as you needs dictate.


Such a mindset loses sight of the fact that God purchased the church at great cost to himself. When speaking to a group of church leaders in Ephesus, Paul said, "Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood (Acts 20:28)." Two things stand out. First, the church here is called God's church--a fact that should underscore the importance of the church. Second, he purchased the church with the blood of his son--a fact that should create respect for the church.

You know the value of something by what you are willing to pay for it. A few years ago we tried to sell a house. The economy had just crashed and the housing market was in shambles. Nevertheless, I was sure that our house had retained its value so we placed in on the market with a firm price. Months went by with no takers. Our agents tried to get me to lower the price, but I assured them of the houses value. Finally, a courageous person told me, "I hate to break it to you, but your house is worth what someone will pay for it."

If that was true for my house, might it be true for God's church? We honor God when we value what he values. If a person claims to love the God who died to save them, wouldn't that person love the movement he died to create? Do not misunderstand what I am saying. God saves us individually. But God also has a plan for us corporately. We do not honor God as individuals when we question is wisdom in giving us the church. The fact of the matter is this: when we dismiss or disregard the bride, we insult the husband.

That being said, the real question not, "Do I have to go to church to be a Christian?" The real question is, "If I am a Christian, why wouldn't I want to go to church?" Perhaps this better illustrates the heart of the matter.

Friday, May 14, 2010

Masculine Holiness

You have got to love this. C.T. Studd once wrote:

Too long we have been waiting for one another to begin! The time for waiting is past! . . . Should such men as we fear? Before the whole world, aye, before the sleepy, lukewarm, faithless, namby-pamby Christian world, we will dare to trust God, . . . and we will do it with His joy unspeakable singing aloud in our hearts. We will a thousand times sooner die trusting only in our God than live trusting in man. And when we come to this position the battle is already won, and the end of the glorious campaign in sight. We will have the real Holiness of God, not the sickly stuff of talk and dainty words and pretty thoughts; we will have a Masculine Holiness, one of daring faith and works for Jesus Christ (quoted in David Platt, Radical, 178-179).

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Could this be Us?

While reading a secular book on change, one quote grabbed my attention. The author described why people often resist changing in order to move forward. The reason for this Resistance, he explained, is often fear. The person caught in this fear:

[D]on't think about growth. They don't think about personal renewal. They don't think about developing whatever leadership they have. Instead they cling defensively to what they currently have. In effect, they embrace the past, not the future (John Kotter, Leading Change, 185).

Change happens so fast. What was once common and expected is now outdated and sometimes laughable. I wonder if we sometimes remain stuck in our current state because we are simply afraid. Is that why churches sometimes fight so violently to remain the same?

Fear is a real experience that is only conquered by a superior fear and confidence. That is why the Bible constantly drives us to a healthy fear of God (Prov. 1:7) and a robust confidence in God's sovereign goodness (Rom. 8:28). If fear constrains, God will liberate. And we will be the better for it.

Disinfecting Christians vs. Discipling Believers

In a good new book entitled Radical, pastor and author David Platt draws a helpful distinction between disinfecting Christians versus discipling believers. He describes the process of disinfecting Christians like this:

Disinfecting Christians from the world involves isolating followers of Christ in a spiritual safe-deposit box called the church building and teaching them to be good. In this strategy, success in the church is defined by how big a building you have to house all the Christians, and the goal is to gather as many people as possible for a couple of hours each week in that place where we are isolated and insulated from the realities of the world around us. When someone asks, "Where is your church?" we point them to a building or give them an address, and everything centers around what happens at that location (104).

Sadly I believe that this is not only the mentality of many church, but it is also the stated goal. Thus many believers are willing to invite people to church but hesitant to invite the same people to Christ. This is not only different from the biblical picture, but it also works against it. Platt describes the biblical alternative by saying:

Whereas disinfecting Christians involves isolating them and teaching them to be good, discipling Christians involves propelling Christians into the world to risk their lives for the sake of others. Now the world is the focus, and we gauge success in the church not on the hundreds or thousands whom we can get into our buildings but on the hundreds or thousands who are leaving our buildings to take on the world with the disciples they are making. In this case, we would never think that the disciple-making plan of Jesus could take place in one service a week at one location led by one or two teachers (105).

Hardly a day goes by when some one does not ask me how many people go to our church. I understand what is behind the question. It is a veiled way of asking how "successful" we are. Oh for the day when people begin to ask, "How many people are you sending from your church?" Then we will be getting close to the pattern of Jesus. On this account, John Piper has it right when he says that we should measure the effectiveness of a church be sending capacity not seating capacity.