"At present the military and economic might of Western nations is struggling to counter the threat of international terrorism. It is proving difficult to defeat an enemy made up of local cells working toward a common vision with high autonomy but shared values. They are flexible, responsive, opportunistic, influential, and effective. Together they seem to have an impact on our world far beyond what they would if they formed themselves into a structured, identifiable organization. Churches can and should adopt the same model with a greater impact as we “wage peace” on the world."- Tim Chester and Steve Timmis, Total Church, p. 109,110
3 comments:
I know, I need to read the whole book... (and I plan to, Lord willing-- thanks, Zach). I'm just a bit concerned by this emphasis on a lack of structure in churches being a *good* thing. I hope that these authors aren't against having elders in a church? Elders are a priority for local churches in the Bible. I hope that I'm misunderstanding the authors, due to the fact that I *haven't* yet read the entire book.
As for whether "plurality of elders"-structured churches should be smaller, I love DSC, but I do believe that such churches should be smaller, if at all possible. Capitol Hill Baptist had one morning service, and after it was over, the members and visitors would normally stay in the sanctuary and talk (sharing lives, not just chit-chat) with each other for between 30 minutes to an hour. It was such great fellowship, and we didn't have to worry about clearing out of the sanctuary to make room for another service. Then, groups of people would have lunch together at peoples' houses or apartments (or at a restaurant, for the non-Sabbitarians!). Sometimes, after lunch, groups of church members would do works of mercy, such visiting older members who were now in nursing homes and physically unable to go to church. Finally, we would gather again at the church building for an evening service of sharing prayer needs and hearing another, shorter sermon.
It was literally all-day church and fellowship on Sunday (and I never got tired of it-- far from it!), and it was possible largely because the elders never allowed the congregation to outgrow one morning and one evening service (same congregation for both services, but with fewer visitors in the evenings). By the time that the congregation started to grow too large for one morning service, the elders had already sent someone out to plant a church nearby. Members who lived closer to the new church plant would be gently encouraged to attend there (though by no means was it insisted upon by the elders). Some members would start attending the church plant, which created room for new members and visitors at CHBC-- it worked wonderfully.
Anyway, that's my experience of church life at a "smaller" church with a plurality of elders (at least smaller than DSC-- about 500 members and around 200-250 visitors on a usual Sunday morning).
Numerous typos there... mea culpa... I shouldn't type posts after nights of too little sleep! :-)
Zach,
This will be the last post on this thread for me (for now)-- please know that none of what I just wrote was meant to express anything *bad* about larger churches, such as DSC. As a DSC member, I have joyfully, seriously covenanted together with you and the other members to glorify God in ABQ and elsewhere. I wouldn't be at any other church, as a resident of the 505 (well, if I ever move closer to Central, I might go to City On A Hill-- maybe)! There are simply certain advantages to smaller churches though-- just as there can be advantages to larger churches.
Post a Comment