When our boys were young, at the end of the day Linda and I would often ask them, “So what did you do in school today?”
Sometimes they’d reply, “Nothing.” We knew that couldn’t be literally true. They did something, just nothing they felt was notable.

What would you say if your Heavenly Father asked you, “So what did you do today? Did you change the world?”

We’re not always good judges of which actions are significant. We tend to think they have to be heroic deeds that affect thousands. But that is not true.

Recently I heard Pastor Jon Tyson say, “We know everything about that which we can do nothing about and almost nothing about that which we can do everything about.”

For example, we may know a lot about the fires out West, the progress with a Covid vaccine, and who is injured on the Steelers. But we can do nothing about any of them.

On the other hand, do I know the name of my neighbor two doors down? Do I know who is hungry in my area? Do I know which of my coworkers is discouraged or who has wondered about spiritual questions lately? If we knew about these things, we could do a lot about them.

In this information age, let’s beware of Neil Postman calls, “Low Information to Action Ratio” (or, “LIAR”.) Let’s not confuse outrage with action, or information with accomplishment.

It’s fine to be aware of current events, but let’s focus on doing what the Lord has called us to do. We are commanded to love God with our whole being and to love others as ourselves. And we can do something about that today. It may not be a high-profile act, but it will make a difference. As Mother Teresa said, “Not all of us can do great things, but we can do small things with great love.” And at the end of the day, that is something.

If Churches Could Talk:
Western Church: “On no! We can’t meet for worship in large groups!”
Underground Global Church: “And the problem is…?”

The irony is the persecuted underground church cannot meet for worship in large groups, yet it is growing rapidly. The free Church in the West has focused most of its resources on the weekend gathering and it has been shrinking.

God may be using (I didn’t say “causing”) Covid to help transform the Western Church from an audience into an army.

Say, “church,” to an American and they might picture a worship service they attend, or perhaps they think of a building. Thinking of church in that way will turn participants into spectators. Or perhaps hearing the word “church” will prompt others to think of a favorite ministry that meets a felt need. Perceiving the church that way will make participants consumers. This is not meant as a criticism on our nation’s church members; it is simply an observation of the way our churches have been designed to operate.

But say, “church” to a persecuted Chinese or Iranian believer and a different picture comes to their minds. They will picture people they know – a small group of fellow believers. The reason that the persecuted church is growing and experiencing the power of God is that the believers are actively obeying the call of Jesus to reach the unreached and to care for one another. They are an army.

For the last 20 years, at Crossroads we have taught that the Church was born with two “wings”:
1. the large group gathering for worship, and
2. the small group for life together. (Acts 5:42)

We need both wings. (When I am 35,000 feet in the air on an airplane, it is really hard for me to decide which wing is most important!) I experience something unique when I gather with a large of fellow believers to praise God, and the disciple-making power of God has shaped me in my small group experiences.

However, due to the pandemic, the large gathering is not always possible – and even where it is, the experience is certainly not the same. Maybe God is using Covid to help us activate the under-used small group wing of the Church.

Jesus said, “Wherever 2 or 3 of you are gathered, I am there in the midst.” He knew there would be times and places where 2 or 3 would be all that could gather, and he wanted us to know it was spiritually significant.

We see disciples multiplying rapidly in house churches around the world, even where they are persecuted. Why don’t we see that same growth through small groups in America?

One reason is that in a persecuted land everyone expects church to happen entirely in the group. In other words, all the functions of the church happen in the house church. There is no other option.

By contrast, in the U.S., small groups are generally structured to fulfill just one or two of the purposes of the Church: “fellowship,” and Bible Study, for example. Groups don’t thrive when they don’t fulfill all the purposes of the Church: worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry, and evangelism. When small groups carry out just one or two of the purposes of the church, people will see them as an optional program for church members that are into that sort of thing.

Perhaps the Lord is using this Covid experience to reshape his Church. For the foreseeable future, churches will not be able to rely on in-person worship as their primary expression of church. Churches that focus on doing all the purposes in small groups will make disciples and thrive under the Spirit’s power.

Let’s be real; merely changing the size of our gatherings will not bring revival. There are other factors that connected with a focus on house church-size groups. We’ll look at those in upcoming blog posts.

Justice is necessary. No justice, no peace.

But justice alone will not heal our land; only love can do that

— the world-changing kind of love that Jesus displayed on the cross.

      Not cops or protesters, but cops with protesters.

      Not black or white, but black with white.

Justice is necessary because it is an expression of love.

“Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth.” (1 Corinthians 13:5)

“[Love] does not dishonor others…. It is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.” (1 Cor. 13:5)

We need more than justice; we need love. Only love can eradicate injustice at its roots by replacing it with relationship. And only the Holy Spirit can produce the love we need.

Our nation is burning.

“Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.

     where there is hatred, let me sow love;

     where there is injury, pardon;

     where there is doubt, faith;

     where there is despair, hope;

     where there is darkness light;

     where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek

     to be consoled as to console,

     to be understood as to understand,

     to be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive,

It is in pardoning that we are pardoned,

And it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen.”

After the attacks on America on 9/11, people thronged to churches — for a while. But they didn’t stay. They were temporarily spiritually open, but then they disappeared.

Why?
For one: Searching people are not looking for someone to stand 40 feet in front of them to tell them the way, they need someone next to them to show them the way.

Corporate worship is an important expression of the church, but it is not the most effective for disciple-making. Discipleship requires relationship.

Jesus said, “Follow me”, not “listen to me preach.” Of course, the twelve did hear him preach, but so did thousands of others. The difference between the crowd and the twelve was the depth of relationship. The twelve disciples lived and traveled with Jesus for 3 years. They watched him go off early in the morning to pray, which promoted them to ask him, “teach us to pray.” Even their opponents could see that they were marked by spending time with Jesus.

“When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.” (Acts 4:13)

Discipleship requires relationship because we need to be close enough to each other to influence each other toward Jesus. That can’t happen in a large crowd, shoulder-to-shoulder for an hour, even with 20 minutes of light conversation and coffee thrown in.

To learn to love and obey Jesus, we need to spend time with a few others who are doing that. We need to see into their lives, and watch how they handle ups and downs in dependence on God. We best learn to pray by being next to more experienced believers as they pray. We best learn to share our faith by watching a fellow disciple evangelize. These things don’t happen in a worship service.

I am not trying to belittle the corporate worship experience. It’s just that I don’t need to convince many that there is a role for the large worship gathering. We’re already committed to that. But we overestimate the discipleship impact it has.

In the new normal, effective churches will prioritize holistic small groups while worshipping corporately.

As the debate over human sexuality roils the United Methodist Church, progressives have warned traditionalists that by not affirming same-sex marriage they will find themselves “on the wrong side of history.” The assumption is that in the future, same-sex marriage will be so widely accepted that people will wonder how anyone in the church could have ever been against it.

But is that really so?

If “history” is taken to refer to the prevailing opinion of secular Western culture, that is certainly true. A strong majority of Americans (just over 60%) support same-sex marriage[1]. The Supreme Court codified that support, making it the law of the land. We do not need to wait for Americans to approve of pastors performing same-sex weddings; they support it now.

But church history has a much longer arc, and it bends in a different direction. For 2,000 years the Church has spoken with one voice in teaching that God’s design is that marriage is the covenantal union of one man and one woman. Those who are shaping church history today strongly affirm that position. And they do not live in the United States.

The Dawn of the Third Church

For the first one thousand years of church history, the epicenter of the Christian world was in the Eastern half of the Roman Empire (Orthodox.) For the second millennium that center shifted to the West — to Europe (and eventually the United States.)

Today, the epicenter of the Church has moved to the Global South. Missiologist Walbert Bühlman writes, “Now the Third Millennium will evidently stand under the leadership of the Third Church, the Southern Church. I am convinced that the most important drives and inspirations for the whole church in the future will come from the Third Church.”[2]

The church is declining in the West and expanding in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. One hundred years ago, 80% of the world’s Christians lived in Europe or the United States. Today that number has shrunk to 40%. Christians in the West now make up a minority of the Church worldwide.

One out of four Christians alive today lives in Africa. The Pew Research Center estimates that will grow to 40 percent by 2030.

World Christianity’s center has moved not only South, but also East. In the last century, Christianity in Asia grew at twice the rate of population. Asia’s Christian population of 350 million is projected to grow to 460 million by 2025.[3]

Researcher Mark Noll points out:

* Last Sunday, more Christians attended worship in China than in all of Europe put together.

* More Anglicans attended church in Kenya than did Anglicans in Britain, Canada and the U.S. (Episcopal) combined.

* The number of Anglicans in church in Nigeria was several times the number in Kenya.[4]

Today’s prototypical Christian is a 35-year-old Nigerian woman. Close to half of the Christian believers who have ever lived are alive right now — and they are overwhelmingly orthodox.

Coming to America

This historic shift in the Church is starting to be felt in the West.

About half the church-goers in London are African or African-Caribbean. The largest Christian congregation in Europe is in Kiev, and it is pastored by a Nigerian.

Immigration is transforming the Church in America. Hispanic immigrants account for 70% of the growth of the U.S. Catholic church since 1960. And today there are three times more Protestant (mostly Charismatic) Hispanics than Episcopalians.[5] This trend will continue. Asian and African immigrants are bringing their faith to America. The global South and East are sending missionaries to the United States, which is now one of the world’s largest mission fields.

The United Methodist Church is simply mirroring the path of the global Church. Where the Church is growing fastest, it holds an orthodox position on sexuality and marriage. Where the Church is shrinking fastest, it is jettisoning orthodox teaching on sexuality (among other theological tenets.)

Progressive United Methodist Conferences in the U.S. are shrinking rapidly, while orthodox areas continue to grow.

Consider:

* More United Methodists reside in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2.9 million) than in the Western, North Central, and Northeastern Jurisdictions combined (2.6 million).

            * More United Methodists worship in Mozambique than in Northern Illinois, which includes the Chicago metro area.[6]

* Most of the largest UM churches in the U.S. are theologically evangelical.

In the wake of the 2019 special General Conference, United Methodists need to understand that the church-shaping influence of African Christians is not an anomalous quirk of our polity. It is an expression of the direction of global Christianity.

Given these realities, it is ironic that the disappearing progressive Church in the West speaks as if it is the vanguard of God’s emerging work in the world. Admittedly, a spiritual truth is not discerned merely by its popularity (that’s a topic for another post). However, to say that traditionalists are on the wrong side of history is factually incorrect.

Traditionalists may be out of step with secular American opinions about sexuality, but they are on the right side of Church history.

In the unfolding story of the Church, the progressive wing of the U.S. church is becoming history while the orthodox global Church is making history.

[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/support-for-same-sex-marriage-isnt-unanimous/

[2] The New Global Mission, by Samuel Escobar, InterVaristy Press, p. 16

[3] Think Christianity is dying? No, Christianity is shifting dramatically  by Wes Granberg-Michaelson; (www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/05/20/think-christianity-is-dying-no-christianity-is-shifting-dramatically/?utm_term=.f09680561b7b)

[4] A Snapshot of the Global Church, by Justin Taylor in The Gospel Coalition website March 28, 2019.

[5] See Think Christianity is Dying?

[6] The Shifting Axis of Methodism, by Steve Beard; www.goodnewsmag.org/2019/03/shifting-axis-of-methodism/

Jesus said, “According to your faith let it be done to you.” (Matthew 9:29)

What will your life be like next year? Five years from now? The answer to that question will not be determined primarily by chance, your DNA or by the state of the economy. It will not be your appearance, talent, family of origin or your education that will most shape your destiny. The best predictor of your future is the vitality of your faith.
The level of your faith will influence the type of challenges to which you will rise and the attitudes you will display. It will govern the amount of resilience you will show in the face of hardship, the depth of your relationships and the amount of God’s power that flows through your life. Your faith will even determine whether or not you live beyond the grave. Our faith shapes more of our lives than we realize.
— From the Introduction of my recent book, “Hear it, See it, Risk it.”

A Letter to my UM Friends

A while ago I approached some United Methodist friends, who are leaders in the movement to change the Book of Discipline’s stance on sexuality. I asked each one a series of questions, and simply listened. After processing what they told me, this is my response.

Thank you for taking the time to patiently answer my questions about your stance regarding sexuality and the United Methodist Church. I knew where you stood on the issue, but I wanted to be sure I understood why you hold the position you do.

I have thought a lot about what you told me, and I considered a few options as to how I might respond.

I first considered writing a rebuttal that articulated my position. I believe it to be God-honoring, grace-laced, theologically coherent and the best hope for the future of our church. But there is no point in that. It wouldn’t change your mind, and I am not anxious to be defined by what I’m against.

Another response option was to identify and elaborate on all the points on which we agree. There are many. But again, that would accomplish little. Our points of agreement will not eliminate the implications of the difference in our perspectives.

Not responding didn’t feel right, either.

So in the end, I have decided to share with you the conclusion I reached after thinking about what you told me: I count you as brothers and sisters in Christ, but I doubt we will be part of the same denomination some years from now. And that is OK. Really it is.

Let me explain.

The UMC’s conversations about sexuality are greatly complicated by our confusing Christian unity with denominational unity and identity. Because we do not distinguish between the two, we have a very hard time drawing lines appropriately.

Bishop and former seminary professor Scott Jones teaches that denominational unity is a by-product of three elements: our doctrine, our discipline and our mission.

            1. Doctrine

            Perhaps Christian unity simply depends on simply affirming that “Jesus is Lord.” But denominational unity and identity requires more.

The issue of homosexuality is often difficult for people to work through because each side’s position is a natural outgrowth of their core theology, and those theologies differ. Since we start from different assumptions, we arrive at different conclusions.

As I listened to your answers to my questions, I realized that we differed significantly in our understanding of the nature of sin, redemption, biblical authority and of the Gospel.

These are not small matters.

Christians do not have to believe alike about all things, but unity within a denomination does require certain amount of shared doctrinal understanding. As United Methodists we have long sought to avoid defining essential doctrine, and the result is that we cannot address an issue of sexuality with one mind.

            2. Discipline

            Members of a functional denomination share agreement on polity and on the basics of how to carry out ministry. In contrast, many members of our church do not agree on the validity of our Book of Discipline.

To put it bluntly: if we can’t agree on whom we will marry or whom should be ordained, are we really one denomination?

            3. Mission

Our mission as currently practiced is not a source of division, but neither is it a source of unique identity or unity.

The stated mission of the United Methodist Church is to make disciples of Jesus Christ for the transformation of the world. That is a broad statement that most Christian churches could agree on; it is not uniquely United Methodist.

The word “mission” as used by most United Methodists translates as social action and public service. Again, there is nothing wrong with these things, but it does not set us apart from many other Christian bodies who do the same things.

So, the issue of homosexuality is rocking our church because we do not have enough unity of doctrine, discipline or mission to allow us to define a shared United Methodist identity.

The result is that we get confused because some Christians do not agree with our stance on sexuality, and we assume the task is to figure out a way for all to live under the UM umbrella. That is not possible, desirable or even consistent with our practice in other areas.

For example, last year at a clergy retreat, our Bishop shared that our Board of Ordained Ministry turned down a candidate because he didn’t believe in baptizing infants, only those who could profess faith for themselves. The Bishop emphasized that this was not the theology of the United Methodist Church, and that no one could be ordained by us while holding to that view.

My colleagues in the room were not shocked or disturbed by the Bishop’s statement. No one stood to argue that this is a justice issue and that there should be “a seat at the table” for everyone, regardless of their stance on baptismal procedures. No one stood to protest that we were violating the core value of inclusion, or that we were ignoring this man’s gifts for ministry. 

The reason no one protested is because everyone accepts the fact that United Methodist theology leads us to baptize infants, and that those who believe in baptizing only adults should join the Baptist Church.

Everyone in the room knew that we are not saying that those who don’t baptize infants are not Christians, we are simply saying they are not United Methodists. And that is fine. Christians can disagree with one another about baptismal theology and still be part of the Body of Christ; they just might not be part of the same denomination.

Likewise, Christians may disagree on whether non-celibate homosexuals can be pastors, but they may not be able to be part of the same denomination.

Denominations are subsets of the universal body of Christ, and those subsets are defined by drawing lines. That definition creates a denominational identity and allows people to recognize where they belong.

When we draw lines around insignificant matters, we become divisive. But both sides today agree that the issue of sexuality is not insignificant because our disagreement stems from core doctrinal and disciplinary differences.

We cannot bring denominational unity by avoiding definition. We will not become more unified by declaring that each church or Conference or Jurisdiction will make their own determination on ordination and marriage, because that doesn’t solve the root problem of our differences: the doctrine or discipline which leads to unity. (And it merely produces many smaller-scale divisions, as those within each conference or jurisdiction decide what to do when their group decides in a direction they cannot support.) To say “we are not of one mind” may be self-evident, but it will not help us function as a denomination.

Attempting to avoid drawing a line will cause our denominational identity to dissolve into a watered-down version of universal Christian unity.

Instead, let us celebrate both the unity of all Christians and the uniqueness of individual denominational groups.

The reason I earlier said it is OK if we do not belong to the same denomination is that ten thousand years from now, it won’t matter to which denomination we belonged.

In the end, I wonder if we care a lot more about preserving the current structure of the United Methodist Church than God does.

Of course, God infinitely cares about people called United Methodists, but I’m just not sure God cares as much about the structure called United Methodism.

Heck, not even John Wesley cared whether Methodism would continue to exist.

“I am not afraid that the people called Methodists should ever cease to exist either in Europe or America. But I am afraid lest they should only exist as a dead sect, having the form of religion without the power. And this undoubtedly will be the case unless they hold fast both the doctrine, spirit, and discipline with which they first set out.”

Barna just released a survey of unchurched people’s attitudes. Here is the summary paragraph:
“….the top motivators for considering a church are knowing that everyone will be welcomed (32%), making friends and nurturing friendships (29%), support during difficult times (28%) and learning more about God (27%). Less motivating are opportunities for Bible study, volunteer opportunities, discussions of issues and topics and the provision of child care.” – (http://www.umc.org/who-we-are/new-survey-ranks-welcoming-top-factor-in-church-choice)
Some point to this survey as justification for the UMC changing its position on homosexuality. The thinking goes, “The number one factor they look for is that everyone will be welcomed. Therefore, we must change our church law to open marriage and ordination to LGBTQ persons in order to have a future.”
A few points to keep in mind about the survey’s findings:

• These are pre-conversion attitudes. When we come to faith in Jesus, we go from death to life, receive the Holy Spirit and begin the process of spiritual growth which will transform our minds (Rom. 21:1) That will change our opinions. To use market research as the rationale for changing doctrine is the very definition of being co-opted by culture.
• In every truly evangelistic and biblically-functioning church everyone will be welcomed. That does not equate with approving of every lifestyle, opinion, habit or practice of everyone who walks through the door. We invite everyone to be on the journey toward knowing Jesus.
• The findings reveal inconsistencies. For example, a top motivator is to learn more about God. At the same time, the survey reveals that seekers are not interested in studying the Bible or discussions, which is a primary way to learn about God. They also want to make friends and nurture relationships, but they are not interested in volunteer opportunities, which are a significant avenue for doing so.

I am not suggesting that we ignore these findings, simply that we use them wisely and with Spirit-led insight. As a church we need a missionary mindset. Good missionaries seek to understand the culture in which they minister so that they can effectively reach people with the life-transforming Gospel of Jesus. That does not mean they let culture dictate their message; it means they learn to approach people without needlessly tripping cultural barriers.
The master missionary Apostle Paul said, “I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.” (1 Cor. 9:22-23)  That is cultural adaptation.
At the same time, he never changed his message: “Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, ²³ but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, ²⁴ but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. ²⁵ For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.” (1 Cor. 1:22-25) 
 

A host of recent studies have all come to the same conclusion: the Church in the U.S. is losing ground.
Surveys says that church members are not attending worship as often as they used to. Many in the millennial generation are not attending at all, declaring “none” when asked about their religious preference.
And now, the “nones’ are being joined by the “dones”. These are long-time members who once were very active but who now have completely dropped out of church. They were once all in, and now they are all out.
Sociologist Josh Packard says the “dones” he interviewed have dropped out because, a) they are tired of being lectured to in sermons, and b) they are tired of a passive Christianity. *
I believe there are significant cultural forces at work in American society which are fueling these trends.
That aside, taking Packard’s assertions at face value would suggest a couple of systemic issues at work within the modern Protestant church.
1. If the “dones” are leaving because they are “Tired of being lectured to” and having someone tell them what to do, that would indicate they do not believe they are hearing from God in the preaching. Could the recent emphasis on “relevant” rather than exegetical preaching have back-fired? Perhaps.
And if the only other significant component in the worship service is contemporary worship music, it might not be enough to inspire people’s attendance. Modern worship songs are often criticized for a lack of depth in the lyrics, and many church report that it is normal for worshippers to listen rather than participate in the singing.
2. The “dones” are saying that they want to be actively participating in meaningful ministry and do not want to sit in the shadow of a star pastor (or suffer the boredom of a mediocre pastor). This would indicate a rejection of the dominant model of church in American evangelicalism, which could be described as “come to the Sunday show”.
In a nutshell, these findings point to two needs for the church:
1. Help people experience the transcendent presence of God in worship.
Only 3 of 10 American worshippers say they usually experience God in worship now. No wonder may are choosing not to go. But where people experience the mystery of Jesus’ presence, they will be there.
2. Live as the body of Christ.
We are not meant to be an audience, nor an extension of the pastor’s ambition. We are to live in relationship with each other and be sent into the world with love and power as Kingdom agents.
Churches which help people experience these tow realities will have few people dropping out.
What do you see happening in these trends?
 
* Thom Shcultz – Rise of the “Done with Church” Population; http://www.churchleaders.com/outreach-missions/outreach-missions-articles/177144-thom-schultz-rise-of-the-done-with-church-population.html
 

 
“What agenda should our group meetings follow?”
“How often should our group meet?”
There are a million and one decisions to make when leading a cell church.
For answer, you could copy another church’s practice, but there are at least two problems with that.
First, it probably won’t work as well for you as it does for them. Their practice is shaped by their context and is based on what God led them to do. You probably don’t live in their city and even if you do, you are not them.
Second, someone is eventually going to ask, “Why do we do it that way?” You need a different answer besides, “So-and-so Church does it that way, and they’re blessed”. If you don’t have a better answer, it will leave people unconvinced and dissatisfied.
The best answers to the questions of practice are based on the scriptural and Kingdom values.
Here are a couple of biblical truths which can guide you in the building of a solid cell ministry foundation.
Truth #1- A disciple is one who hears and obeys Jesus.
Jesus clearly defined the kind of disciples we are to make:
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,  and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. (Matthew 28:19-20)
The goal of your ministry is not to get a lot of people into groups. The goal is to make disciples who hear and obey.
So when confronting options for designing your cell ministry procedures, a key question to ask is, “Which approach will best help people hear and obey the Lord’s word?”
 
Truth # 2: Discipleship happens in a relational context.
When Jesus started making disciples, he said, “Follow me.” He didn’t say, “Listen to me teach,” or “read my books.” He invited the 12 into community. His disciple making was personal.
The New Testament gives us at least 50 “One another” statements: “love one another,” “bear one another’s burdens,” “forgive one another,” and so on.
In order to grow in our faith, we must be with “one another.” As Ralph Moore said, “No relationship, no discipleship.”
So when making cell ministry decisions, consider “What will promote true community and influence?”
 
You may come up with structures that look similar to those of another church, but the key is you will have built your ministry on scriptural fondations, not trending fads.