Ep 40: Let the Professionals Handle It

Listen to the episode here!

We’re deep into the heart of Soil and Roots now because we’re talking about how human beings are formed, and how we’re formed in community.

And the evidence of this formation is not really about how many Bible verses we know or how many Christian events we attend.

Are we people who, according to our loved ones, are repentant? Is confession a hallmark of our character? Are we people who love our enemies well?

We’ve been discussing that, for various reasons, modern Christianity tends to lose sight of New Testament discipleship.  When you ask the average Christian today what “discipleship” is, we tend to think of someone who goes to church and knows a lot about Jesus and the Bible.  Many people think that a Christian and a disciple are the same thing. Sadly, that isn’t always the case.

A disciple is someone whose life is centered around becoming more like Jesus.  Someone who apprentices with Jesus.

And we’re designed to be discipled in immersive communities.  We become like someone else by intentionally being in community with others who desire the same thing.

Discipleship as Relationship

The New Testament model of formation is centered on relationship, on being with God and one another, in community.

I’m moved by Robert Coleman’s description of discipleship in the early church: “Reading the Acts, one gets the impression that the Christians just enjoyed doing things together.  In these casual relationships, probably more than in their gathered meetings, they learned what it meant to follow Christ in the daily routine of life.”[1]

“The spiritual life of the Christian community is interwoven with their continuous interpersonal association.”[2]

Exploring these types of immersive communities in the modern age is nothing new. Dietrich Bonhoeffer explored it with great insight in his book, Life Together.

He makes some shocking claims about groups that gather only for “spiritual” reasons, meaning people who gather together just for Christian activities but have no other associations.

“A purely spiritual relationship is not only dangerous but also an altogether abnormal thing.  When physical and family relationships or ordinary associations…are not projected into the spiritual community, then we must be especially careful.  That is why…it is precisely in retreats of short duration that the human element develops most easily.  Nothing is easier than to stimulate the glow of fellowship in a few days of life together, but nothing is more fatal to the sound, sober brotherly fellowship of everyday life.”[3]

I would imagine both Coleman and Bonhoeffer would be concerned about the modern small-group movement, where strangers are often brought together for a few hours every two weeks to grow in Christ together.  People who have no other natural associations.

As Kyle and I talked about in the last episode, there is a sense that these immersive communities (what we call Greenhouses) are best formed around existing relationships, where we already have some connection and live together.

The Basics of a Greenhouse

And we’re starting to really put some flesh around how these five-element communities solve the Three Primary Problems. And yes, we’ll have one or two new visual aids outlining all of this by the end of the season, for us to reference.

Let’s review the purpose, focus, objectives, and elements of an immersive community.

The purpose is to help us be formed into the likeness of Jesus.  Discipleship is an immersive, community journey.

The focus of such a community is to teach and live the Kingdom.  Since the Kingdom of God is the primary theme of the New Testament and the grand narrative of Scripture, disciples get to know our King in the context of His Kingdom.  Many theologians refer to this reality as the “Upside Down Kingdom” for good reason. The Kingdom of Light operates on a very different set of principles than what many of us are used to.

The objectives are to embrace the heart of Jesus while we explore our own hearts so that we grow in Him. We explore His ideas, our own ideas, and see where they differ. If spiritual formation means becoming more like our King, we need to know Him and ourselves. So, a Greenhouse is far more than a Bible study or a curriculum.  It’s where we gather to form our hearts.

They embody Five Key Elements (which is why we sometimes refer to them as five-element communities). Disciples treat time differently from other people.  We test and embrace various habits, all designed to draw us closer to God.  We form tight communities in our journey, and we do so with intimacy, transparency, and trust.  And we continue to grow through repetitive and increasingly complex instruction.

And we’ve started to answer the “how” question.  How do we recreate these immersive communities?

A first reasonable step is prayer.  And a second step is to work with the willing.  Find people with whom you’re already in a natural relationship and who are desperate for Jesus.  Who want to re-orient their lives around becoming more like Him.  Who recognize the human longing for committed confessional communities like the type we see on sit-coms.

Candidly, the people most attuned to their need for Jesus and genuine community may be those well-acquainted with suffering.  The people most willing to sacrificially commit to a like-minded group may be those who know pain, trials, and grief well.  They’ll resonate with this type of community because their hearts have been broken like the heart of Jesus.

People who refuse to deal with their grief, whose solution to all things Christian is just to gut it out and move on, or who live in a performance-based Christianity, won’t be particularly attracted to immersive communities. Or they may come for a while and move on.  They’ll just keep finding ways to cope with life instead of digging into it.

Overall, the absence of this type of tight, committed, vulnerable community is partially a modern phenomenon.  Before the invention of the automobile and the Industrial Revolution, many people were part of tight-knit communities that “did life together,” whether they wanted to or not.  It was just “life.” We didn’t have the mobility we do now, so the community you were born into was most likely the community in which you died.

This gets to one of the primary challenges of recreating five-element communities in our time.  How do we recreate sitcom-type Greenhouses when sitcom communities are made up? When they reflect something we long for but have difficulty forming? How do we find other people who commit to their community as their primary group when we’re all part of various groups that are hard to keep together in our mobile, transient lives?

How do we find a group of people who commit to being with one another for our formation when our Western lifestyle works in the opposite direction? Rugged individualism, pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps, trying to keep our disintegrated groups together?

What if?

Here’s another potential challenge to the formation of Greenhouses: what if, in some cases, our modern church institutions are actually working against us? What if our churches are, consciously or unconsciously, promoting ideas that don’t actually lead to our spiritual formation? That further disintegration, self-directed discipleship, and a lack of genuine community?

Ah, here’s some more of that tension I promised you.

Because here’s a question at the heart of recreating five-element communities.  Does this immersive community have to be a part of or inside a modern local church institution or denomination?  If our hearts long to be a part of a community that wants to be with us, a community that is admittedly messy but also one committed to seeking our goodness, are we out of luck if we can’t create that through an official local church?

If we agree that discipleship is a community journey, does this type of community have to be a small group or a Bible study at a church, or can it be recreated in a neighborhood, with a group of friends, or with a few families who know each other and decide to gather? Can true, biblical, healthy spiritual formation happen outside of a denomination or traditional church structure?

If Bonhoeffer is right, that Christian community is best when it isn’t forced together solely for spiritual purposes, what do we do with that when many of us do just that – we gather together on Sundays and small group nights with people with whom we may have very little affiliation?

Let’s quickly define two terms here related to “church,” because that word gets used in all sorts of ways.

The “church institutional” relates to structures and systems in which people function.  So, this refers to local churches, denominations, seminaries, and other Christian organizations.

The “church universal” relates to the worldwide community of people. People who are genuinely following Jesus.

As we talk about five-element communities and “church,” those two terms become very important, as we’re about to discover.

Assembling together

Church institutional leaders are quick to pull out Hebrews 10:25 to remind us we shouldn’t give up assembling together at our local churches.

Verses 24 and 25 say: “And let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.”[4]

I really need to stop watching these short Christian videos on social media, but I came across one last week where the preacher claimed the two primary reasons people stop going to church institutions are hypocrisy and abuse in the church.

Quite predictably, he pulled out Hebrews 10:25 and basically said that, yes, people are sinners, so we should expect hypocrisy in the church, and being harmed in a church institution is no reason not to return. So, get your butt back into a church building.

He failed to mention that, if spiritual formation is about becoming more like Jesus, we might reasonably expect a bit less hypocrisy in our churches if our churches are making disciples. If the point of our church institutions is to form us to love more and sin less, might we not hope to find less hypocrisy in the church? I know, sounds crazy.

And to suggest that the solution to someone who’s just experienced spiritual abuse in an institution is for her to jump right back into an institution is very unwise and could potentially cause further harm.

How about a caring community comes to her for a while?

Professional Christianity

I just finished a book called Holy Sexuality and the Gospel by Dr. Christopher Yuan.  It’s an important book, and I recommend it, particularly if you have questions or concerns about human sexuality, marriage, and the overall state of the family in the West.  Yuan is a critical thinker and makes a substantial case for maintaining and promoting the biblical model for sex and marriage.

I’m not bringing up his book for those reasons, however. He makes some statements about discipleship and the church that I’ve wrestled with, but that seem to reflect the unconscious ideas many of us have about “church” today. Particularly, church institutions.

And, I would argue, Yuan makes the case for what I’ll call “professional” Christianity.  We as laypeople need to always take our cues from the “professional” Christians – institutions and leaders who have certain degrees, certain levels of intellect, and certain levels of institutional authority.

Here’s what he writes about what he calls “the spiritual family.”

“One of the main reasons I include this chapter on spiritual family is because of the growing trend of Christians believing that involvement in the local church – our spiritual family – is unnecessary.  They will often justify their stance like this: ‘I have close Christian friends. Going to church doesn’t make you a Christian.  The church is not a building, but it’s people.  My Christian friends and I are the church, so we don’t need to go to church.”

He continues, “These men and women may experience intimacy and commitment with their Christian friends but are isolated from true family. Being untethered from a local church is being untethered from Christ.”

He goes on, “Christian friends are essential and can provide godly counsel.  But they can also provide poor counsel, especially when separated from the wisdom and accountability of the people of God.”

“Christian friends are part of the body of Christ, but we cannot say they are the body of Christ or can replace it!”[5]

These are strong statements. They essentially equate the church institutional with the church universal.

Yuan says, “Being untethered from a local church (an institution) is being untethered from Christ.” And somehow, because your Christian friends may not go to an institutional church, they are not the body of Christ.

In other words, if you are not a part of the modern concept of church as we currently assume it (an institution with certain professional standards and protocols), you are untethered from Christ.

Later, he writes specifically about discipleship. “Our pastors, elders, and church leaders must be present in our lives. But this occurs only if we include them and allow them to speak wisdom and truth to us.  In essence, this is discipleship.  Although discipleship involves a strong friendship between mentor and disciple, friendship is not equivalent to discipleship.  The ideal context for discipleship is the local church.”[6]

He gives three primary reasons why discipleship should occur only within the local church: the preaching of the word, the sacraments, and what he calls “the headship and the body.”[7]

I would imagine Dr. Yuan and Robert Coleman (whom I quoted at the beginning) would disagree on discipleship.  Coleman says we grow in Christ as we live with one another in community, while Yuan maintains we can’t be discipled unless we are being mentored by an institutional church leader.

The underlying assumption of Yuan’s conclusions is that we, as laypeople, are dependent on professionals and their institutions for our spiritual formation, and nothing apart from these modern institutions can reasonably be considered “church.”

So, let’s take a look at Yuan’s three reasons why discipleship can only happen in the presence of a local church leader.

Preaching

1.  The preaching of the Word. I’ve commented on this before.  With modern technology, we have access to thousands upon thousands of sermons and messages from times present and times past.  Any person who wants good, solid preaching and who owns a smartphone can get it whenever they want.

I sometimes hear from pulpits that there is something special or unique about listening to a sermon in a church building, but I don’t personally understand it.  I have an easier time listening to sermons while walking in the park with headphones than I do sitting in a church building.

As we explored in another episode, discussing, debating, and dissecting a sermon in a committed group may be a far superior way to absorb the message than just listening to it as a monologue.

It seems the norm in the New Testament was to deliver a message and then discuss it. It was an environment of ongoing dialogue in an interactive group, not just a presentation.   Peter’s sermon in Acts 2 immediately resulted in an interactive Q&A.

So, if we’re sitting in a church building listening to a monologue, does that fully reflect the New Testament assumptions about “preaching?”

Sacraments

2.  The Sacraments.  Yuan concludes that communion and baptism can only occur under the supervision and structure of a local church.   It’s a valid point.  I’ll only note that you can find thinkers and theologians on both sides of this. Some argue that mature believers (laypeople) can baptize and serve communion, while others maintain that only church officers may perform the sacraments.

So, if a mature Christian father baptizes his son in the backyard pool, does that count?  If a family opts to take communion together at the kitchen table every few weeks, does that qualify as “true” communion?

The Headship and the Body

3.  The headship of the church and the body.

I think what Yuan and others are getting at here is doctrinal integrity and accountability.  Meaning, we rely on our professional church institutions to teach, preach, and maintain biblical accuracy.

He writes, “Christian friends are essential and can provide godly counsel.  But they can also provide poor counsel, especially when separated from the wisdom and accountability of the people of God…”

I assume he means that pastors and elders can be relied upon to provide consistent wisdom and accountability.  That’s quite a claim.  I’ve heard some pastors and elders give fantastic, wise counsel, and I’ve heard others give terrible, if not harmful, counsel.

I’m not sure why a certain level of academic degree or a professional Christian title automatically makes someone wise.

But are we, as laypeople, to rely on our church institutions for doctrinal integrity?

There’s a United Methodist church two miles from my house that has strayed very far from doctrinal integrity.  It sits in the shadow of a large health-and-wealth church that promotes leadership and self-fulfillment as the chief end of man.

Go to a Presbyterian church? Which kind? There are currently five primary types of Presbyterianism, and as best as I understand it, doctrinal differences are the primary reason for those splits.

Institutional slide

How many denominations and seminaries have changed their doctrinal positions over the past 50 years?  How many have changed in the last five?

Harvard was formed as an orthodox Christian institution.

Liberty University reports that “Almost all Ivy League institutions had similar beginnings. They were established by conservative Connecticut Congregationalists (Yale), pro-Awakening New Jersey Presbyterians (Princeton), devout Rhode Island Baptists (Brown), and mission-minded New Hampshire evangelicals (Dartmouth). These schools shared common commitments to the authority of the Word of God, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the need for a Christian influence in society.”[8]

How many Protestant denominations are there in the U.S. right now?  It’s hard to find a reasonable answer, but it seems to measure in the hundreds if not the thousands. And then we have non-denominational churches.

I would imagine that each denomination and each non-denominational church claims it has doctrinal authority and accuracy.  Despite the fact that there are various positions on the sacraments, creation, end times, church governance, gifts of the spirit, membership, music style, which version of the Bible is correct, and so on.

To be fair, if we pulled up the websites of 100 random Protestant churches and examined each church’s doctrinal statement, we would find a lot in common among them. That’s encouraging, though it suggests that churches and denominations are splitting over all sorts of other issues not listed in their core statements.

It seems that American church history features a fair number of institutions that start with good intent and orthodox teaching, only to adapt and shift over time, and then new institutions start up to recover what the older groups have lost. And they all claim biblical authority, and most use Scripture verses to back up their claims.

With at least hundreds of denominations and hundreds of other churches all claiming doctrinal accuracy, could we not understand why we, as laypeople, might develop some institutional fatigue?  Though the majority of pastors and leaders are quality people, we still hear too many stories of respected church leaders falling from grace, even though they taught good doctrine.  Could we not understand why the common layperson may develop some healthy skepticism?

That, perhaps, simply repeatedly telling us to get back into a local church institution because of Hebrews 10:25 begins to ring a little hollow because you’re not actually addressing the fact that some modern church institutions don’t embody the characteristics of “assembling together” that the writer of Hebrews is even talking about?

I suppose institutions are concerned that Christians may start meeting on their own and go off the rails theologically because we don’t have the professionals in the room.  With due respect, many of us as laypeople have the same concern about your institutions.

Institutions and Personal Character

There’s no doubt the early church established some structure and authority to clarify Scripture and encourage healthy communities. We find the Jerusalem Council in Acts, and we find qualifications for church officers in 1 Timothy, Titus, and 1 Peter. Many of Paul’s letters include corrections to bad doctrine.

But we need to be careful and wise in our current age. We need to be careful not to confuse institutional authority with personal character.

What do I mean?  Well, let’s take a quick look at some of the qualifications for elders.  What sort of things do we find in the Bible that describe community authority?

Someone who is above reproach, faithful in marriage, self-controlled, hospitable, gentle, not quick-tempered, loving what is good, sensible, and holding fast the faithful word to exhort and correct.

Certainly, leaders need to be biblically sound. Most of the things on these lists are heart qualities. Character traits.  Leaders who are being formed more and more into the character of Jesus. Servants.

Paul and Peter both endorse leaders who exhibit the heart of Jesus, particularly in how they relate to their families and others.

Meaning that institutions are only as healthy as the character of the leaders who fill them.

Doctrinal statements, books on church protocol, and traditions all have their place, though let’s recognize that they are all human inventions that developed over time.  Biblically speaking, we aren’t to be as concerned about structure as we are to be about character.

And we can only assess the character of our leaders if we know them. That suggests small communities where we can, over time, discern people’s hearts.

We live in an age of Christian celebrities and growing institutions.  I watch this person on TV and follow their YouTube channel.  We tend to become enamored with the intellectual prowess or speaking abilities of these teachers, but have we met any of them?

I don’t know how they treat their spouses.  I don’t know what their kids are like.  I don’t know how they handle their finances or if they’re self-controlled, humble, or gentle.

If the Biblical assessment of leadership is primarily a character assessment, why do we follow so many people whose character we have no opportunity to assess? And their institutions?

That isn’t to say strangers don’t preach good sermons or write good books.  Not at all.  But we’ve developed a lot of institutional loyalty without knowing the character of the leaders of those institutions.

Other Challenges

Plus, there are some practical problems here.  If discipleship can only happen in the presence of an approved church leader, what does a Christian do if they have no Bible-believing churches in their area? I have several friends in that situation right now.  They don’t belong to a local church – not because they don’t want to, but because they can’t find one. How can they be discipled if their spiritual growth is dependent on an officer of a local church?

Also, do most churches expect their leaders to personally disciple their congregations?

I’ve been in Bible-believing churches my entire life.  I don’t recall that offer ever being made from a pulpit. I don’t recall any pastor or elder offering to personally disciple me or anyone else, whether it was a large or small church. In general, the pastor is expected to preach a good sermon and provide pastoral care. The elders and deacons administrate the business of the church.

I’m sure there are churches where staff and leaders personally disciple members, but is that the norm in our institutions?

Obey Your Elders

Years ago, I was ordained as an elder in a particular denomination.  The process involved being nominated by the congregation, followed by 10 months of theological training. There were three of us in the class, all laypeople with families and careers.

We had to pass both a written and an oral exam at the end of the ten months to qualify as an elder.

The written exam was all about theology, which was fine. However, I expected the oral examination to be more about assessing my character.  Was I a person who reflected the character of Jesus? Could I serve and love the congregation well? Was I a repentant person? Would I sacrificially give myself to the people in the church?

I’ll never forget standing before a small group of denominational leaders, who were examining us.

The first gentleman to speak was an elder from another local church.  He looked up and directed his first question to one of the other candidates, a friend of mine who was a banker.

The elder said, “Name the three books of the Bible where Melchizedek appears and tell me the significance of each.”

I realized at that moment that this process was not about assessing my character and that this oral examination was not a valuable use of anyone’s time.

And, at least in the case of the elder, his desire was not to vet us, but rather to flex his theological muscles and to put my friend in his place.  None of us knew the answer, and none of us knew why knowing the answer would make us better elders.

Let’s Dig Deeper

While we shouldn’t be surprised that certain church leaders insist we be part of modern church institutions because those institutions supposedly hold the keys to proper doctrine and protocol, they shouldn’t be surprised that some of us respond with thoughtful skepticism, given the track record of too many Christian institutions.

Though certainly not true of every institution, scandals involving institutional leadership are common and erode laypeople’s trust.  Whether the number of scandals is increasing is probably hard to determine, though we probably know more about them in the Internet age.

And we live in a time of heightened intellectualism, where celebrity speakers are prized for their knowledge and speaking skills.  Yet we’re supposed to select and follow leaders based on their character.  And it’s not possible to determine someone’s character simply by listening to whatever comes out of their mouth.

I don’t think we should wonder why some Christians are checking out of our current institutions.

Maybe it is because of hypocrisy or abuse, but maybe some people’s hearts are longing for community, trust, a place where they’re free to doubt, a place where they can fail, a place that truly wants them to live holy lives and is willing to go to the mat for them. And they just aren’t finding it, so they’re giving up.

Maybe our hearts are longing for something beyond correct doctrine and apologetics, as vital as those are.  Maybe our hearts are longing for more than a proper Christian worldview, as important as that is.

Maybe we’re longing for people who are longing for us.

The West has developed the idea, the assumption, that only “professional” Christians and “professional” institutions can be sources of authority.  And our society tends to place great value on degrees, titles, and institutional power.

Advanced degrees and seminaries can be very good things.  They can be wonderful things.  We owe a debt of gratitude to people with degrees and titles who have made extraordinary contributions to the Christian faith.

But the Christian life is rarely simple.  The underlying idea that the only way to fulfill Hebrews 10:25 is to engage with a modern local church institution seems to be a pat answer that assumes the local church institution is doctrinally sound and led by people of excellent character, and that it embodies the spirit of what the writer of Hebrews is talking about.

We need to be careful not to fall into legalism here.  Many local church bodies are doctrinally sound and led by people of exceptional character.  But many aren’t.

To Greenhouse or Not to Greenhouse?

And so, let’s pose this question.  Let’s say a group of families, say 10 people total, gather together twice a week to be formed in Christ.

During the first gathering, they listen to a sermon, and then they break it down. They discuss it, they wrestle with it from Scripture and other texts.  Doubt and debate are welcome.

During the second gathering, they open their hearts.  They talk about their struggles; they confess their sins.  They talk through their hurts and wounds. They work on listening to each other’s stories.  They decide to practice fasting, and they come together to share their experiences.

They repeat these two weekly meetings, becoming deeply committed to the gatherings, to each other, and to those around them. This gathering becomes their prime community.

Is this not “church?”  Is this not discipleship?  Are we going to claim they are “untethered from the body of Christ” because they aren’t sitting in a certain building with “official” institutional church leaders guiding them?

Ultimately, I think each of us has to wrestle with this, but I would suggest that what I’ve just described is far closer to the New Testament idea of church and “assembling together” than what some in the West have come to assume and accept as “institutional” church.

And five-element communities can take many forms.  There’s a model in which it functions as a program within the local church. It could be that they gather and grow together outside the local church, while people still attend their respective church institutions for preaching, the sacraments, and service.

In the absence of a local church, would it be wrong for a Greenhouse to form so that community discipleship happens in homes or within groups of families?  Seems to me that’s a really good idea.

These are difficult questions, but let’s raise them and discuss and debate them.

We do need to be careful not to honor and elevate Christian institutions simply because they exist.  Doctrinal integrity and character are ultimately bound up in people, not in institutions. Institutions are temporary. People are eternal.

The Janitor

A few months ago, I took my young adult sons to a local church for a weekend men’s conference.  Over the years, I’ve been to a bunch of these things.  They usually feature some sports cars, maybe a professional athlete or two, and a keynote speaker of some renown.

This event had all of these elements. The presence of cars, athletes, and celebrity Christians unconsciously drives home the modern idea of male success, even at churches where we’re supposed to be learning how to wash one another’s feet.

The main speaker was a mega church pastor from out west.  He has a popular YouTube channel and a multi-campus church. He even referred to himself as a CEO at one point. I don’t remember much of what he preached, but he told jokes in all the right places and was serious in all the right places.

As I sat there listening, I suddenly realized something.  The man I most wanted to hear from…was the church janitor.

I wanted to hear the heart of the guy who cleans the bathrooms and rearranges the chairs in the sanctuary each week. The guy who smiles at people passing by picks up the toy a child has dropped and hands it back to her.  The guy who quietly goes about his work, work that most of society frowns on, and takes pride in keeping the church clean.  The guy who does his job, goes home to his wife, plays with his kids, helps them with their homework, and then gets up the next morning and does the same thing.

The guy who drives an old pick-up, doesn’t care about YouTube, and has never met the CEO of a church. He’s just learning to do the things Jesus did and to increase the Kingdom in the realm God has given him.

I could learn a lot from him.  About contentment.  About patience.  About service and sacrifice.  I bet that guy would make great disciples.

[1] Coleman, R. Master Plan of Discipleship (p. 59). Revell.

[2] Coleman, R. Master Plan of Discipleship (p. 60). Revell.

[3] Bonhoeffer, D. (1954). Life Together (pp 38-39). HarperOne.

[4] New American Standard Bible: 1995 update (Heb 10:24–25). (1995). The Lockman Foundation.

[5] Yuan, C. (2018).  Holy Sexuality and the Gospel (pp. 131-132). Multnomah.

[6] Yuan, C. (2018).  Holy Sexuality and the Gospel (p. 134). Multnomah.

[7] Yuan, C. (2018).  Holy Sexuality and the Gospel (pp. 132-134). Multnomah.

[8] https://www.liberty.edu/journal/article/christianity-and-the-american-university/#:~:text=Almost%20all%20Ivy%20League%20institutions,New%20Hampshire%20evangelicals%20(Dartmouth).