Disciple-making leaders

John Risbridger talks to Marcus Honeysett of Living Leadership

 

JR: You speak around the country about the need to grow and disciple leaders within local churches. Briefly, how do you understand biblical leadership?

MH: Paul speaks in Philippians 1 and 2 Corinthians 1 about working with people for their progress and joy in God, so that they grow firm in their faith and have abundant joy in Christ. That’s a great, simple definition of spiritual leadership. You don’t have to think very hard to see why a church that is standing firm in their faith and full of godly joy is going to be a beacon for the gospel.

JR: That is quite a different understanding to running meetings or managing the organisation of the church.

MH: It’s possible for churches to drift into a wrong understanding of why they exist. What started off as a group that wanted to impact its area with the gospel can, after a period, mutate into one that merely meets for believers to get their own spiritual needs met. The kind of leaders the church looks for depends on their understanding of their DNA. The first will look for leaders who equip and release all the disciples to be a community of witnesses; the second will look for someone who serves the organisation and ministers to the perceived needs of the Christians.

JR: So a major priority for leaders in local churches is to be equippers and facilitators?

MH: I find it hard to read Ephesians 4 any other way. I recently asked a group of leaders to read this chapter of the Bible and complete the following sentence: ‘According to Ephesians 4 the goal of biblical leadership is…’ Someone instantly replied: ‘To equip and release disciples who make disciples’. That’s it in a nutshell. The work of leaders is not to do all the gospel work while everyone else supports and pays for them. It’s to enable the gospel ministry of every Christian and help the church grow a sense of being a team of disciples working together.

JR: That will be a significant mindset shift for some churches. Can you recommend any books to help a church think about it?

MH: There is some really good material being written at the moment to help churches think about this critical shift in their thinking. Neil Hudson from LICC (Imagine Church — Releasing Whole Life Disciples, IVP) has written helpfully on how the contract (actual or implicit) between congregation and leaders needs to shift from one of ‘pastoral care’ to ‘pastoral equipping’. Colin Marshall and Tony Payne address the same idea powerfully in their book, The Trellis and the Vine (The Good Book Company). You could do much worse than take one of these as your church book of the term.

JR: I’ve heard that Fruitful Leaders by Marcus Honeysett isn’t bad either! Why is it important, in your view, for leaders to train disciples to disciple others?

MH: I recently read somewhere that there are three fads that tend to come and go in churches: discipleship, mission and leadership training. I believe that we should combine all three and understand that we need to train leaders to make disciples who are actively participating in mission: disciples who know how to disciple other people. I agree with Steve Timmis when he says that, if we aren’t involved in some way in making disciples, then we aren’t disciples ourselves, because disciples make disciples.

That is the fundamental principle behind 2 Timothy 2.2, in which Paul tells Timothy to take what he has learned from him and pass it on to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others. That’s four generations’ worth of believers and a vision for multiplication all in one verse!

JR: Don’t all church leaders train their churches to be involved in disciple-making?

MH: You would hope so. In reality, I think the number of churches which actually train every member to be involved in disciple-making is vanishingly small. The same is true for many leader-development programmes, which train people in theology and ministry skills but often don’t do much on how to make and multiply disciples.

And yet the fundamental call of God on every church is to go into the world and make disciples of Jesus: active followers, actively participating in Jesus’s mission, responding to his call to join his great cause. I’m constantly amazed at the number of people in local churches who haven’t grasped this core principle.

JR: How should the principle of making disciples shape the development of new leaders?

MH: It needs to shape leader-training programmes at all levels in churches and Bible colleges. Every element of training should aim to fulfil this goal. We need to train leaders to handle the Bible well, not just as an end in itself, but to make disciples who take the gospel to their neighbourhood and to the nations. We need to train people to pastor well, not as an end in itself, but so that those we pastor in turn counsel and nurture others. We need to train leaders who are certain that the local church is not just a chaplaincy for meeting the needs of Christians, but a mission team for impacting the world with the gospel. And we need to train leaders of churches, which haven’t got the disciple-making vision yet, to effect the difficult changes in church culture that will be needed and to handle the resistance they will encounter along the way.

JR: One new initiative you are involved in is the School of Missional Disciple-Making. Tell us a bit about it.

MH: The School is a joint initiative between Living Leadership and Above Bar Church in Southampton. Students and trainers come from a wide range of churches across Southampton and teaching input comes from people from several local churches, as well as the Navigators and Damaris. The curriculum is fully centred on the need to grow disciple-making leaders. It combines four tracks: (1) Bible handling, (2) spiritual formation of leaders, (3) principles of mission-focussed church and biblical leadership, and (4) how to disciple others and equip them, in turn, to disciple others. The School is both strongly biblical and deeply practical, encouraging the students to engage with non-Christians, one-to-one discipling and small group huddles with junior leaders, as well as identifying mission-focussed needs and opportunities in the city. It is great to see Above Bar and other churches establishing disciple-making as the core DNA of new leaders.

JR: So who is it for and is it really just a cheaper alternative to Bible College?

MH: No. Our focus is not on training a small number of people to be pastors (although for some we hope this may be a first step in that direction), but on training a large number of people at all levels to be disciple-making disciples!

JR: So how many students are involved and what are your plans for the future?

MH: During this pilot year we have 14 students. We are currently starting to recruit for next year’s intake, which we hope will be larger and draw people from a wider range of churches. Our vision for the coming years is to work with local churches to help develop training initiatives with the same ethos and content in other locations across the country.

John Risbridger is pastor of Above Bar Church, Southampton, and Marcus Honeysettis director of the organisation Living Leadership. If you would like to know more about the School of Missional Disciple-Making or Living Leadership, seehttp://www.missionaldisciplemaking.org.uk and http://www.livingleadership.org

 

(This article was first published in the February 2013 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)

Remember the poor – Local church responsibility towards financially needy believers

We are living in days in which many Christians have been plunged into great financial difficulties.

This is often through no fault of their own. Our country is in the throes of significant economic recession, and it seems likely that far greater financial heartaches are just around the corner for our stagnating economy.

Christians are not immune from the effects of the near collapse of Western capitalism. Unemployment can suddenly strike, or be the unwanted lot of students even years after graduation. Sickness within the family can bring less opportunity to earn, coupled with greater living costs. State benefits have been squeezed and the criteria for receiving them toughened, often rather arbitrarily.

I want to bring out five key principles from the New Testament to show that local churches have a responsibility for those in financial difficulty in their midst and beyond. And then I want to show how one very ordinary local church, with fewer than 100 members, has sought to help those going through such times. My aim is to spur churches to think about their God-given duties in this area.

1. Supporting others is normal

The organised support of the poor in the fellowship is part of normal church life. This was part of the everyday life of the church in Jerusalem, seemingly from its inception (Acts 4.34-35, and 6.1ff).

Doubtless there were exceptional circumstances there, as many converted at Pentecost remained in the city to learn more of their newfound faith. Yet, surely, the principle of organised help for the needy jumps out to us from the text. Sadly, a combination of right suspicion against a ‘social gospel’ and the rampant individualism of our culture have deadened us to the need for organised care for those in dire financial straits in our midst.

2. Consequence of love

Organised care is a natural extension of individual Christian love. The joy of new life in Christ and of truly belonging to God’s people inevitably brought a spontaneous sharing and hospitality in the days after Pentecost (Acts 2.44-45). Indeed, such practical love is the natural and essential fruit of true conversion (Matthew 25.34ff). And, as time passed and the needs increased, it was very appropriate that the ministry of care was formalised, so that needs were not missed (Acts 4.32-35, compare 6.1ff).

3. The issue of need

The issue of need is the key question (Acts 2.45 and 4.34-35), not how the people got into that need. These matters must be handled with grace and understanding, though it may well also be important to seek to provide help with handling money, if the financial support is to be truly effective.

The ministry of Christians Against Poverty (CAP) can be very useful here, though that doesn’t obviate the need to preach on such issues in the church life. Some question whether there is any need for churches to support their poor, living as we do in a wonderful welfare state. Yet, often, benefits do not arrive quickly enough, nor are they generous enough to meet all needs. Others point out that some financial needs are so great — for example, wealthy believers becoming bankrupt — that few, if any, churches could help meet those needs. Yet local churches can still provide help, which can be wonderfully reassuring and vital to the mental and spiritual strength of those fallen on hard times.

4. Practical wisdom

Support needs to be handled with wisdom, grace and efficiency. The apostles were made aware of flaws in the system of welfare distribution in the Jerusalem church (Acts 6.1). Whether those failings were due to prejudice or inefficiency is hard to say, but it brought dangerous tensions and conflicts to the church. Indeed, anyone who has been in church life for any length of time will have experienced church tensions over money, especially when it comes to being generous with it! That is why it was necessary to have such a group of wonderfully spiritual men to sort the apparently pretty straightforward practical problem out (Acts 6.3). Support always needs to be wisely and sensitively tackled.

5. Outsiders too

The church’s responsibility is not restricted to those in our own back yard. Preoccupation with our own fellowship can be selfish and unspiritual. The New Testament gives us a vision, not simply for the evangelism of the whole world, but for meeting the practical needs of the wider church community. Surely, no thoughtful Christian can remain unchallenged by Paul’s preoccupation with the collection for the poor believers in Jerusalem (Romans 15.23-28).

One church’s experience

Among the things that we at Dewsbury Evangelical Church have been able to do to help believers financially have been the following. We have helped asylum seekers with their living and legal costs, including, on occasions, making a commitment to pay them a weekly ‘subsistence allowance’ and making collections for solicitors’ fees. We have provided holidays for poor families, sometimes by arranging for them to stay in the homes of believers (living in rather nicer areas than Dewsbury!) while the owners themselves are away on holiday. We have paid for youngsters attending YP groups to go on our church camp.

We have sometimes sent money with our Asian worker on his visits to Pakistan to try to help the struggling church there. We have set up a small disasters committee in the church so that the church members can be encouraged to make collections to support famine or earthquake relief (often through Christian organisations) when the need is most urgent.

Help on a weekly basis

And we have established a scheme to provide poorer members among us with bags of groceries on a weekly or fortnightly basis. Since this is an effective, much appreciated, and easily replicated scheme, it is probably worth explaining how it works in some detail.

This scheme was the brainwave of one of our lady members. We provide bags of groceries for those most in need in the fellowship, serving perhaps six or seven families or individuals in an average week. More than 10% of our membership has received them. Recipients include the unemployed, the low paid, asylum seekers, the sick, the elderly, and those under sudden and unexpected financial strain.

The groceries, including hopefully some more luxury items, are collected from better off members in the congregation — most of us! Members are encouraged to buy a little extra when they visit, or order from, the supermarket and to bring it with them to church on a Sunday. That is then organised into bags for those in need by two thoughtful ladies in the fellowship who have gladly undertaken the responsibility. A letter has been issued by the deacons to all who belong to us explaining the working of the scheme, and giving advice about the range of stuff required in our somewhat multi-cultural congregation.

The bags are then either picked up by those for whom they are intended, often after the evening service or the prayer meeting, or delivered to their homes. The bags of groceries are not huge, but they make a real contribution to those in need and express the sympathy and love of the church to those who receive them. We encourage all members to be on the look-out for those in need among us, as many believers are very reluctant to ask for help, even if their needs are urgent.

Giving and receiving

The scheme is far from perfect, but works well and is relatively simple to operate. If needs exceed supply we try to inform members of that situation, but often that has brought the opposite problem! Sadly, we have very little facility to store groceries, and none to store furniture: more room would be a great asset to this work.

Some have found it difficult to receive from the scheme, but it is easier when they realise that others in the church also benefit. Many also respond to the thought that if and when they are in a better financial position they will be able to contribute to the scheme which is helping them now (2 Corinthians 8.14). Sometimes it throws up difficult questions about whether we can and should extend the service into the community, but on the whole it has been a really helpful development in church life. I have written about it not to trumpet what we are doing, but simply to show others one way in which our corporate responsibility to the poorer among us can begin to be met.

Graham Heaps is pastor of Dewsbury Evangelical Church, Yorkshire.

 

(This article was first published in the February 2013 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)

Who are all these people?

As Britain’s population is changing, what are the implications for the ministry of our churches?

According to the 2011 census, published in December, the population of England and Wales was 56.1 million, the UK total being around 63 million.

Other sources expect that roughly two million will be added to the population of England each five years up to 2031. But who are these people? Who will make up our congregations in coming years? Who will be the people we are to evangelise for Christ?

Elderly people

The number of people aged 65 and over in the population has increased by 14.4% since 2001. One in six people are of retirement age. Numbers of elderly people are set to grow even more because the post-war baby boomers are about to enter retirement age. Other sources say, the numbers aged 85 plus will grow as well, almost entirely due to reductions in mortality.

This provides us with a number of pastoral challenges. We will need to grow ministry to older people. With more families caring for elderly relatives, we will need to care for the carers. With the breakdown of family life in society generally, will churches be involved in providing care to the elderly in the neighbourhood? Churches may need to look to have ‘age workers’ as well as ‘youth workers’.

Alongside this, we may well see an increase in the numbers of active, healthy and able people in the church who have retired. Yes, many will be involved in looking after grandchildren and aging parents, but others may wish to be useful to the church. How can we train and release these folk into some kind of ministry (Titus 2.14; 3.8)?

Immigrant people

International migration has been much higher in the last ten years than in the previous decade. The 2011 census found that seven and a half million people living in England and Wales were born outside Britain, an increase from 4.6 million a decade earlier. White British people are now a minority in London. Migrant inflow is dominated, currently, by those coming to study. Some migrants have a Christian background. Many other migrants are from other faiths. Often people from overseas seem far more open to the gospel than indigenous Anglo-Saxons. Pastorally, this means that there are increased opportunities for friendship and evangelism towards internationals.

Three million people live in households where no adult speaks English as their first language. We need to recognise and use the folk in our congregations who are able to speak foreign languages — often Spanish, French, Arabic or Polish are very helpful. Migrants can be helped by the church running an ‘English conversation’ group which aids their knowledge of English and perhaps can help them more generally with filling in forms and being alongside them in the ups and downs of immigrant life — dealing with landlords, employers, etc. Can we use Christianity Explored in its simpler English format?

Young people

The birth rate increased in 2008, but by 2011 had fallen back slightly. It seems that much of that increased birth rate is among people from overseas. Many migrants have tended to keep to the traditional structure of the family with husband working and wives at home with the children. They tend towards larger families. Of the population more generally, one in three children lives with a single parent or step-parent.

The white indigenous population has shied away from marriage and, if they are married, often both husband and wife work and have smaller numbers of children. How this will affect our traditional ‘youth works’ is yet to be seen. If, for example, the bulk of young people in future are from a Muslim background, how accessible will they be to the churches? The facts are that child populations are expected to grow fastest in cities (in particular, Nottingham, Leicester, Manchester and London).

Single people

In 2011, a quarter of people living in England and Wales were single (in some way — never married, divorced, widowed). This amounts to 11 million people and reflects the growing number choosing not to marry. In church the estimate is that there are three single women to every one single male.

This is a time bomb for the churches, because, whatever your take is on single folk, most single people feel at best awkward and at worst unwanted in church. Singles believe church is aimed at families and they don’t fit. Many leave the church due to this. But, if trends continue, the future is much more single than married.

In a recent survey on the dating site Christian Connection, 80% said that their church did not put on anything for single people, or did not recognise them or affirm them. 46% said that their church leaders’ advice was unhelpful, unrealistic, impersonal or simply lacking.

A friend who runs a singles group says candidly that singles are very sensitive and often over-react, as they feel marginalised. About two-thirds of single people would prefer to be in a relationship.

Let me lift the lid a little on the singles’ world. Those who have never been married tend to grieve or be angry that God has not answered their prayers and provided a spouse and children. This is not recognised in most churches. Many singles feel worthless because they are not in a relationship or have a family. They are rarely in church leadership. Singles may have personal issues, problems, which make them awkward and not ready for a relationship. Divorcees frequently carry guilt over the break-up of marriage. Single parents shoulder huge burdens of raising a family alone. Widowed people often idolise their deceased partner and find it hard to accept anyone else. Most singles feel isolated and lonely. Singleness is on the increase and is not something churches can afford to leave on the sidelines any more.

Poorer people

In future, we are likely to be less well off. The current recession and accompanying austerity will be very difficult to climb out of and is expected to continue until 2018. We are likely to see many more redundant people in our congregations who need our help. Without work people tend to feel worthless and can fall into depressive or dependent life styles.

With the economic uncertainties, there will be more couples where both work to fund housing and family life. The 2011 census indicated that the number of people in private, rented accommodation has almost doubled, while homeowners with mortgages fell significantly. This may also go along with greater mobility, as people move more frequently to get work. Will this mean it will be harder to retain younger and middle-aged people in a local church and give stability to the work? During the recession of the 1980s, one pastor said it was like preaching to a procession rather than a congregation.

Religious people

Between 2001 and 2011, the number of people identifying themselves as Christian fell from 71.7% to 59.3%. Meanwhile, those who say they have no religion increased from 14.8% to 25.1%. The number of Muslims increased from 3% to 4.8%.

Tweeters, bloggers, etc.

Our times have seen the dawn of the Information Technology age. With websites and emails and Twitter and podcasts and Facebook, there is lots more information available and the people of a church are and seemingly will be exposed to many more ‘voices’ and opinions than ever before.

One result is that our people have access to a lot more ‘Christian’ resources. To put it bluntly, they might listen to their pastor perhaps twice a week. But they may well be listening to five or six of John Piper’s sermons on podcast each week. Well, praise the Lord for that. But who is their pastor? If their pastor is not up to JP’s standard, how well do they listen to him?

And what happens when it’s not John Piper they are listening to, but some cowboy on ‘the God Channel’? How do church leaderships get to grips with this? There’s a lot of good teaching out there, but also a lot of false teaching. How do leaderships guard their people?

Many things remain the same in church life, but here are some changes to consider as we face the future at the beginning of a new year.

John Benton
Chertsey Street Baptist Church, Guildford, Surrey

 

(This article was first published in the January 2013 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)

Churches and charitable status

Much ink has been spilled recently over the decision by the Charity Commission to deny the Plymouth Brethren charitable status in respect of one of its gospel halls in Devon (the Preston Down Trust).

The church trust, a member of the Exclusive Brethren, was refused charitable status on the basis that it failed to demonstrate that it provided a genuine public benefit.

A storm of opposition has swelled in some quarters in response to the decision reached by the Charity Commission. On November 13, a heated debate took place in Westminster, leading some MPs to call for an inquiry into the Charity Commission’s interpretation of the law and its handling of the much debated public benefit test.

Some Christians have also commented that the Commission’s decision to deny charitable status to a long established church organisation is a sign of the increasing secularisation of society and reflects how far the country has drifted from its Christian moorings.

But what are the ramifications of the Charity Commission’s recent decision for the wider church?

The law

From 1891, and even from as far back at 1601, particular types of charities, such as ones that advanced religion and education or relieved poverty, were presumed as being of public benefit.

The Charities Act 2006 brought about a paradigm shift in how public benefit is assessed. The presumption that certain charities satisfy the test by their very nature has now gone. The Charity Commission asserts that the new Act imposes a duty on all charities to demonstrate, explicitly, that their aims are for the public benefit. Churches, including the Exclusive Brethren, are no exception to this rule.

The public benefit test

The 2006 Act has led to greater scrutiny by the Charity Commission of charities seeking charitable status. In so doing it has been argued that the Commission is going beyond its role as a regulator by imposing an unnecessarily high public benefit threshold on charities seeking registration. Of even greater concern has been the dispute as to whether the Commission is, in fact, wrongly interpreting the law in relation to the new public benefit test.

The issue at the heart of the Commission’s decision in the Preston Down application was the extent to which organisations and, in particular, churches like the Preston Down Trust should be accessible to the public so that they meet the public benefit test. The Commission’s decision in this case was that the church’s restrictions on who could attend worship and the limited extent to which the church was open to the public meant that they were not providing a public benefit.

Comment

But is the Charity Commission correct in interpreting the public benefit test in this way and, if so, is this a problem for the wider church?

Many practitioners and commentators in the charity sector consider that the Commission has set the bar far too high when considering whether charities meet the public benefit test. The Commission appears to be seeking more evidence to satisfy the public benefit test than is required by the law.

However, it is important to note that the Commission has not just adopted this approach to applications by Christian groups and churches. Applications by non-religious charities, such as community centres and art galleries, are also finding their applications questioned for failing to meet the public benefit test.

While noting that the bar is currently being set too high, it is important that all charities, secular and Christian, applying for registration are subject to proper scrutiny. Charitable status carries the benefit of tax breaks and Gift Aid. If a charity is to receive such benefits from the public purse to aid its public service, it can only be right that the charity uses such privileges to give back to society.

One can understand the Commission’s stance that, to receive public benefits, a charity must provide a public benefit. The public benefit test (properly applied) should serve to screen applications from charities whose aims may not be for the good of society.

The current approach of the Commission and its demands that applicants demonstrate a high level of public benefit raise important questions for evangelical Christians.

The Charity Commission’s approach is a reminder of how important it is for the church to fulfil its mission in accordance with the principles of 1 Peter 2.12. The publicity sparked by the Preston Down case gives all churches and Christian organisations the opportunity to reflect on how they are practically living out their faith in worship and service.

Like many public bodies, the Charity Commission has not been immune to the government’s austerity programme. Figures suggest the Commission has had its annual budget slashed by up to a third. In years gone by the Commission registered charities with less scrutiny and then continued to monitor new charities to ensure they met the public benefit. While such an approach was beneficial, it was expensive and heavy in staff labour. A shift towards greater regulation at the time a charity applies for registration rather than providing continued input later on may simply be the only way the Commission can operate within its budget.

Practical solutions

What can a Christian group or church do to ensure it meets the raised public benefit hurdle in an application for charitable status?

1. Do not assume necessarily that the Charity Commission understands what a church or Christian group does. In my experience of helping Christian organisations apply for charitable status, it has been necessary to spell out what happens at services and activities which go on each week. This process demonstrates to the Commission how the church is meeting the public benefit test by acting in accordance with its objects.

2. Conduct an ‘audit’ of the church’s activities. Churches and Christian groups, like all charitable bodies, should be accountable. To be good stewards of the benefits received by obtaining charitable status, an ‘audit’ of what the church does in engaging the public can be useful. Considering the church’s activities enables it to assess how it is welcoming its visitors to its services and identifies where it can be serving them.

3. However, it is important that Christian groups avoid the danger of simply listing their practical activities to obtain the approval of the Charity Commission. I would advise Christian organisations to make clear in their application that the public genuinely benefits from Christian worship and teaching. While this is something that has always been recognised as a public benefit in law, it is now often met with misunderstanding or confusion by the Commission. In my experience, the approach of the Charity Commission can, sadly, reflect the secular view that the Christian faith is not inherently for the public benefit. This is all the more reason for Christians to stand firm and maintain the principle that the heart of the Christian faith is above all else for the lasting good of the public.

Ben Bourne helps Christian groups and churches obtain charitable status and is a charity and employment solicitor at Ellis-Fermor & Negus Solicitors (http://www.ellis-fermor.co.uk).

(This article was first published in the January 2013 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)

Notes to growing Christians from David Jackman: sticking with the church

Let’s continue our thinking about the local church, in God’s great purposes.

It is very easy to give up on enthusiastic involvement, because it isn’t what we would like it to be. Some Christians become disappointed because, in spite of all their input, in service, prayer, money and time, the results they have hoped for just don’t come. So, they quietly withdraw, concluding that church isn’t worth the hassle. Others see only faults in the organisation, the preaching, the music — especially the music! — and 100 other variables. If I can’t remake the church in my image, the way I want it to be, I’m not playing — I’ll take my bat home.

Church hopper?

Sometimes, there is more than a little justification for all this. Leadership and management structures can be crass and ultimately alienating. Church leaders can become dominant overlords, empire builders who expect everyone to dance to their latest enthusiasm. People can be abused by their churches. If that is so, then the time may be ripe for a change. It is not a sin to change churches, though it can be a toxic habit to become a ‘church hopper’, always looking for the perfect (non-existent) church. But if leadership is dictatorial, even brutal, like the shepherds of Ezekiel 34, it will be right to look for another church.

No opt out

What we cannot do is to opt out. ‘Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another — and all the more as you see the Day approaching’ (Hebrews 10.25). An unchurched Christian is a contradiction in terms — unless he is on a spiritual desert island! What we need to realise is that each individual’s participation and contribution is vital to God’s plans and purposes for each local church. There seem to be two major ingredients to this.

Firstly, we need the fellowship of other Christians, to strengthen us for our daily lives in the world. We gather in order to scatter, but to do so from a position of strength and vitality. Each of us impacts every other part of the local body far more than we usually recognise. A critical spirit of negativism will quickly spread, like yeast through dough, whereas a cheerful positive spirit can encourage others to be thankful, to count their many blessings and to trust God’s unchanging faithfulness, day by day. Even our attitude has an impact on others, for good or ill, before we consider the effect of our words and actions.

Every church should compile an inventory of the gifts, talents and skills of its members, so that we can use whatever time and energy we have for building up the body of Christ, in the most effective ways. If you are operating in an area for which you are gifted, you will enjoy your Christian service and you will find that the energy flows in. Sadly, the opposite is equally true. But the more involved you are, the more you will be fulfilled, through loving service, which is Christ’s pattern for his people. And the more you will feel that your contribution is worthwhile in bringing your local expression of Christ’s body a little bit nearer what a local church should be.

New society

So, what should it be? This is the second aspect of God’s plans. The church should be a demonstration on earth of the transforming power of the gospel, taking people from the widest variety possible of backgrounds, ethnicity and experience, and fashioning them into a united body of loving servants, who express the gospel of Calvary sacrifice, in everyday reality. It is the alternative society; the greatest evidence in this world of the power of the gospel to transform and renew. It is a declaration to all the hostile forces of evil that Christ is the victor, that evil will finally be extinguished and that God’s Kingdom rules, now and for ever. ‘God’s intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places, according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished [already!] in Christ Jesus, our Lord’ (Ephesians 3.10-11).

That is why the local church matters so much. It is the greatest evangelistic tool that we have, because it is the fleshing-out in transformed lives of the realities which the gospel message proclaims. No wonder the enemy will do all he can to fragment and destroy it, or to persuade us that it really isn’t worth investing in! Yet, the city of God remains. That is our eternal destination, so let’s get involved here, in time.

David Jackman writes the ‘Notes to growing Christians’ column for EN.

This article was first published in the November 2011 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057

Youth leaders column from Dave Fenton: Team player

So how do you run a youth programme?

Does everybody have to be involved with every decision or do you have a dictator? How does information get circulated or do you just get to hear about things if you happen to be around.

Whether you have a team of 20 or two people doing the work, organisation is a live issue. If I know something that the rest of the team don’t, do I need to tell them or would it be better not to tell them? How do plans get made? Is your whole work driven by the vision and energy of one person who just goes on producing ideas, or does everything have to go through a committee? The worst committee I ever sat on had the minutes of the previous meeting as its agenda, so we spoke about the same things every meeting!

The day before is too late

What prompted this article was a leader who spoke to me recently bemoaning the fact that very few people turned up to his leaders meeting. I asked him when he called the meeting. His answer was not unusual — ‘by email the day before’. If we are working in a team (and most of us are) we have to ask what is going to make that team function as well as it can. I would have a few essentials.

A regular meeting of the team (however small) is vital to pray, plan and envision. Teams actually get tired of people with excessive vision who come and dump their latest plan every meeting. It’s better if a vision comes to a meeting to be communicated, discussed and adopted. Somebody introduces it, we all have input (hopefully based on pre-meeting thought and prayer — which requires information) but it is adopted and moved forward by the whole team.

The same is true for detailed planning. Any meeting you have should be liberating. Once you have decided it is clear who is going to do what, whether that is the leader or the person ordering the pizzas, you can get on with it. Sometimes someone has to make a clear decision, but the team needs to know if the meeting has been switched from one venue to another, so tell them. Of course not everything is decided by committee, but a leaders team needs to be ‘in the loop’.

And one last thing for those who are ‘full time’. Your plan may not be the best plan — have the humility to allow it to be modified by those you serve with. Biblical leadership always seems to have a plurality about it. Be positive about that and work with your team for the glory of God. And get your leaders meetings in the diary for 2012.

 

Dave Fenton – associate minister at Christ Church Winchester and Training Director of Root 66 which runs training courses for youth ministers across the UK. He also leads the youth teams at New Word Alive.

 

This article was first published in the January 2012 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057

Still all to play for

The Parliamentary vote on February 5 went in favour of redefining marriage. But it’s hard to know who really ‘won’ the vote on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. What is clear is that the government had to rely upon the votes of the opposition parties to secure further passage of the Bill through Parliament.

Although 440 votes for and 175 against is a very clear majority in favour, only around 130 were expected to vote against this Bill, which David Cameron is keen to push through and enshrine in law at the earliest opportunity. Add to that a few abstentions and around 35 who didn’t vote at all, and we see more widespread support of biblical marriage than was predicted. This is surprising, considering the current trend in society to embrace all things ‘progressive’ and ‘equal’, and that anyone opposing this Bill is labelled old fashioned at best and a bigoted homophobe at worst.

Protection
Over 70 MPs wanted to speak on the Bill, and Maria Miller, the Minister for Women and Equalities, took many interventions during her reading of it. Questions raised covered the impact of the Bill upon teachers, chaplains, religious leaders, with MPs asking for reassurance that the rights of one group would not now trump the rights of another. Her answers were at times evasive; teachers will be protected from having to promote same-sex marriage (SSM), but she twice avoided answering questions upon the freedom of schools to teach only traditional marriage.

Europe
With regard to the role of Europe and the prosecution of a faith group which did not agree with SSM, Ms. Miller explained that three unlikely events would have to happen for the European Court to be able to force a faith group to comply with the new law, and she believes that the possibility of this combination of events occurring is ‘inconceivable’.

Opting in
Less reassuring were her comments that the Church of England and the Church in Wales would be able to opt in to marrying same-sex couples. Her answer did not make it entirely clear whether or not that would mean individual congregations, or the denomination as a whole. However, discriminating between faith groups in the way the government proposes, with its ‘quadruple lock’ designed to protect church ministers and others, may be illegal under European law. More worrying was Shadow Equalities Minister Yvette Cooper’s comment. She said: ‘[An] individual’s views within an individual faith group was not something that should be a protected characteristic in the Equality Act’. That statement invites many questions about how ministers in an ‘opt in’ denomination would fare if they refused to marry a same-sex couple. Laws formed by one party can easily be changed when another comes into government, and perhaps this hints at where the Marriage Bill may go in the future. Many of the responses drew to mind the comments made about the competing rights of B&B owners and gay couples. The reassurances in the Marriage Bill echo those made, and subsequently reneged upon, a number of years ago.

Although MPs were given a free vote on the Bill itself, there was a three-line whip on the process the Bill now takes through Parliament. MPs followed up the first vote by passing a procedure that will see the next stage of debate take place not in the Commons, where media scrutiny can take place freely, but within a small government-selected group of MPs. 55 MPs defied the whip, showing just how deep opposition to this Bill is.

This article was first published in the March 2013 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.

http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057

Notes to growing Christians from David Jackman: Christ, the focus of unity

The visiting preacher was asked by the minister’s precocious offspring, over lunch: ‘And what abomination do you belong to?’

The wry smile produced by such an enquiry indicates how much we all struggle with the cultural expressions of ‘church’ in our society. Archbishop William Temple once suggested that the biggest hindrance to the spread of the Christian church is the Christian church, and one can see why, when the record of the past and the mistakes of the present are examined.

Of course, the Bible does not deal with the category of denominations. They did not exist in New Testament times, though the seeds may have been visible in Corinth, where the Christians seem to have been lining up behind their favourite leaders and forming separatist groups, or parties. ‘I follow Paul; I follow Apollos; I follow Cephas; I follow Christ.’ But Paul will have none of it. ‘Is Christ divided?’ (1 Corinthians 1.12-13). Then how can his followers be?

However much their ministry may be blessed and valued, no earthly leader can serve as Christ serves the church, by giving himself up for her. His person and work are the only ground of Christian unity, because they are the very heart of the gospel, which brings us to new life. ‘So then’, Paul concludes, ‘no more boasting about men!’ (1 Corinthians 3.21).

Universal

The Bible knows only two expressions of the body of Christ, the church of which he is the head. The first is the church universal, which is the total number of the redeemed both here on earth and already in heaven. The picture in Revelation 7.9 of an innumerable multitude from every nation, tribe, people and language is the Bible’s destination-point for the saving purposes of God through the work of our Lord Jesus Christ. ‘Salvation belongs to our God, who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb’ (Revelation 7.10). When we gather together as believers in corporate worship, here on earth, we are an outcrop of the greater heavenly reality of the worshipping church, already in the presence of Christ, so that our ascriptions of praise join with theirs, since we are one body.

But this universal reality is expressed in the local church, here in this world. This is why active involvement in a local gathering of Christians, however imperfect it may be, can never be regarded as an optional extra. When first we believe the good news of Jesus and receive his salvation, we are born again, made spiritually alive, as the Holy Spirit comes to live within our now redeemed personalities. So, we are all different, unique even; but we are all one in Christ Jesus, because the very life of God has been implanted in our souls. That is why the Bible talks about Christians as members of one body, each with differing gifts and tasks to fulfil (Romans 12.3-8, 1 Corinthians 12), but the same life energising us all. We belong together, because we each separately belong to Christ — and Christ is not divided.

Local

It is a mark of the new birth to join together with my fellow Christians (now brothers and sisters), to strengthen and encourage one another, in fellowship, by the participation in corporate praise and thanksgiving, intercessory prayer and sound biblical teaching, as a local gathering (congregation) of the one universal church. The local church is the fundamental unit by which the locus of God’s presence and the glory of Christ are to be revealed to the world. This point is clearly made in the opening of Revelation, where John receives an overwhelming vision of the risen Christ (1.12-18), whose location is ‘among the lampstands’. Later, we are told that the seven lampstands are the seven churches (1.20), which are then delineated as seven local congregations from Ephesus to Laodicea, in chapters 2 and 3. You find the risen Christ among the local congregations of his people, where his rule is exercised. They are the contemporary expression of the gospel.

Total

Most probably, the total congregation in a city would be made up of several house churches, and sometimes different city groups had links with other cities, as when Paul’s letters were passed around, or they received apostolic messengers. What did not exist were denominations, as we now have them, though they were not necessarily forbidden. What they must not become is the focus of unity or of our ultimate loyalty. That must be Christ alone at the centre of his faithful people, everywhere. But more about that next month…

David Jackman writes the ‘Notes to growing Christians’ column for EN.

This article was first published in the October 2011 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057

Renaming your church?

How you are known? That’s what a name is… how you are known.

But, of course, that needs to be based on who you are, or you are acting under false pretences. God doesn’t do that — when he makes himself known as YHWH or Jesus, it’s a faithful and true witness to who he is. A name conveys who you are.

How then do you decide a church name? For many, the church has already got one — inherited, or given from the ‘parent’ church. Continuity is valuable — we hold firmly to the tradition handed down to us: and the gospel and the God who gave it are unchanging. On the other hand, we evangelise a changing world where:

* Language changes, and meanings too.
* Cultures change, and perceptions too.
* Techniques change, and opportunities too. For example, we found 75% of people come to our church through the internet, which didn’t exist when the church was named. We contact local people most broadly through colourful printed material: the means we use to make ourselves known do impact how we identify ourselves.

Known by whom?

When naming a church, or changing its name, we need to ask, ‘Who do we want to know us?’ ‘What will this name communicate to them?’ It’s most natural to think of names which have rich meaning to Christians. Yet we want to make ourselves known to the world for the sake of the gospel; so if a name which has become precious to us does not communicate anything positive to the community in which God has placed us, it probably needs a rethink. You see, church names are an issue of gospel effectiveness, not a box-ticking aid for Christians trying to find the church they like most.

Who are we?

Over the past few years, we at Bournville Evangelical Church became more aware of the significance of how we present ourselves — so we started a review process! We wanted to get things right for the next 7-10 years. Richard Underwood (Pastoral Director of FIEC) offered to help the church membership and friends through an internal review to take our temperature.

We did so confident in our foundations: our core beliefs, structures, and ministry emphases (Word and Spirit, prayer and community, outreach). Richard helped us look again at who we are, and what we are called to be. He made us ask whether how we functioned was consonant with the gospel we claim as our driving force. Having reviewed these areas, we knew ourselves better and so could determine how we should be known.

One specific point which emerged was that the word ‘evangelical’ in the church name did not communicate well. It’s accurate as jargon: we are thoroughly evangelical in the richest sense of the word — but when we are introducing the church to outsiders, it’s a turn-off. Why? Possibly fed by international news and broad use of the term, this word now conjures up Qu’ran-burning, gay-hating, happy-clappy, unthinking fundamentalists (another hi-jacked word). So, to faithfully communicate the character God had given the church, we probably needed a name change!

That was the easy bit. What new name would accurately make us known to outsiders? Five suggestions came up from church members — Emmanuel, Christ Church, Cornerstone, Trinity and Oak Tree Church (the latter mainly because the hall in which we meet is on Oak Tree Lane). As we thought and talked, it became clear that the consensus was coalescing around Oak Tree Church. It was noted that the more theological ‘church’ names merely communicate ‘religious name’ to an outsider — not the name’s meaning.

Seeking wise advice

At this stage, we received comment and then took advice from Christians working in marketing, design and branding. Yes, we should have done that first, for a more informed approach! However, we were glad to have involved the church fully from the start. We were pointed to the horribly named ChurchMarketingSucks website, and the Igor Naming Guide. These made the point that, in our culture, there’s much to be said for names that present a picture, rather than are literally descriptive (think ‘Apple’ vs. ‘IBM’): names that fuel the imagination rather than inform the mind. We were encouraged to consider names which would bring the associations we wanted — such as life and rootedness. We took the point, which confirmed our attraction towards ‘Oak Tree Church’ — a name which has some biblical allusion, but a local feel for our Bournville area (remembering that the name is for the unconverted to know and find us, not for attracting Christian cognoscenti). Non-Christian friends confirmed that they found it a welcoming name. So, we adopted Oak Tree Church as our working name, although legally we keep the old name until we change the constitution.

Logo and launch

Logos are a big deal, particularly in seeking to reach an image-loaded culture. But what potential for endless debates and tweaks! The deacons gained approval to come up with a proposal. We engaged a Christian designer (you’d get an architect for the building!) and having outlined to him something of the character of the church, we considered three options he drafted. One was tweaked a couple of times, with feedback from non-Christians, then presented to the congregation. We had no alternative, but did give people the power of veto. If people had said ‘No’, we would have gone back to the drawing board. It got a ‘Yes’!

Happily, this process coincided with the church’s 20th anniversary, and we made that service a re-launch under the new name and logo. We invited past members, and all conceivable local players: schools, the MP, other churches, local councillors, and representation from companies and voluntary groups (having sent most of them church Christmas cards previously). There was a good turn out and we had a joyful day of thankfulness to God, from which everyone departed with a commemorative mug (with logo).

Name the fruit

So now we have started to function with a new name. It’s rather early to gauge the results, but we have more confidence in going to people with a name we don’t have to explain away. It’s been quite a lengthy process, but going through it together has enhanced, not threatened unity. It cost us several hundred pounds, but it’s been money well spent to improve our gospel effectiveness. And so we trust and hope that our new name will bring glory to the only Name that counts.

Please feel free to contact the author to discuss any of the issues raised in this article: chrisandpersis@talktalk.net

Chris Thomas

(This article was first published in the January 2012 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)

The Lewis revival

60 years ago saw the end of a move of God on the Isle of Lewis.

The Hebrides is a group of islands around 40 miles west of the north of Scotland. Lewis is the most northerly island and Harris is its southern peninsula. The Western Isles had experienced a number of short periods of revival at the end of the 19th and during the first half of the 20th centuries, but especially between 1949 and 1952.

Spiritual crisis

The main preacher God used in this revival was Duncan Campbell. He was born in 1898 and was converted to Christ at the age of 15. He spent some time working for the Faith Mission, but resigned from that organisation in 1925 to go into other ministry. But some 20 years later he went through a spiritual crisis which challenged him to retrace his steps and rejoin the Faith Mission. It was at a conference in Edinburgh that things came to a head.

He said: ‘As I sat listening to Dr. Fitch, I suddenly became conscious of my unfitness to be on the platform. I saw the barrenness of my life and ministry. I saw the pride of my own heart. How very humiliating it was to discover that I was proud of the fact that I was booked to speak at five conventions that year! That night, in desperation on the floor of my study, I cast myself afresh on the mercy of God. He heard my cry for pardon and cleansing, and, as I lay prostrate before him, wave after wave of divine consciousness came over me and the love of the Saviour flooded my being; and in that hour I knew that my life and ministry could never be the same again… If in any small measure God has been pleased to use me, it is all because of what he did for me that night’.

Nights of prayer

Here, in edited form, is how Duncan Campbell described the beginning of the revival.

‘In November 1949, this gracious movement began on the island of Lewis. Two old women, one of them 84 years of age and the other 82 — one of them stone blind, were greatly burdened because of the appalling state of their own parish. It was true that not a single young person attended public worship. A verse gripped them: “I will pour water on him that is thirsty and floods upon the dry ground”. They were so burdened that both of them decided to spend so much time in prayer twice a week. On Tuesday they got on their knees at 10 o’clock in the evening and remained on their knees until 3 or 4 o’clock in the morning, two old women in a very humble cottage.

‘One night, one of the sisters had a vision. Now remember, in revival, God works in wonderful ways. In the vision she saw the church of her fathers crowded with young people, packed to the doors, and a strange minister standing in the pulpit. And she was so impressed by the vision that she sent for the parish minister.

‘Are my hands clean?’

‘In response the minister called his church office bearers together and seven of them met in a barn to pray on Tuesday and on Friday. And the two old women got on their knees and prayed with them. Well, that continued for some weeks until one night one young man, a deacon in the church, got up and read Psalm 24. “Who shall ascend the hill of God? Who shall stand in his holy place? He that has clean hands and a pure heart.” And then that young man closed his Bible. And looking down at the minister and the other office bearers, he said: “It seems to me to be so much humbug to be praying as we are praying, to be waiting as we are waiting, if we ourselves are not rightly related to God”. And then he lifted his two hands and prayed, “God, are my hands clean? Is my heart pure?” But he got no further. That young man fell to his knees and then fell into a trance. Now don’t ask me to explain this because I can’t. When that happened in the barn, the power of God swept into the parish. And an awareness of God gripped the community such as hadn’t been known for over 100 years. An awareness of God — that’s revival, that’s revival. And on the following day, the looms were silent, little work was done on the farms as men and women gave themselves to thinking on eternal things gripped by eternal realities.’

Coming to Lewis

Without going into detail, a number of things happened resulting in Duncan Campbell being called to the island to preach. Again he takes up the story.

‘We got to the church about quarter to nine to find about 300 people gathered and I gave an address. Nothing really happened during the service. It was a good meeting. A sense of God, a consciousness of his Spirit moving, but nothing beyond that. So I pronounced the benediction and we were leaving the church I would say about a quarter to 11.

‘Just as I am walking down the aisle, along with this young deacon who read the psalm in the barn, he suddenly stood in the aisle and, looking up to the heavens, he said: “God, you can’t fail us. God, you promised to pour water on the thirsty and floods upon the dry ground — God, you can’t fail us!” Just then the door opened — it is now 11 o’clock. The door of the church opens and the local blacksmith comes back into the church and says: “Mr. Campbell, something wonderful has happened. Oh, we were praying that God would pour water on the thirsty and floods upon the dry ground and listen, he’s done it, he’s done it!” When I went to the door of the church I saw a congregation of approximately 600 people. 600 people — where had they come from? What had happened? I believe that that very night God swept in Pentecostal power — the power of the Holy Ghost. What happened in the early days of the apostles was happening now in the parish of Barvas.

The dance hall

‘Over 100 young people were at the dance in the parish hall and they weren’t thinking of God or eternity. God was not in all of their thoughts. They were there to have a good night when suddenly the power of God fell upon the dance. The music ceased and in a matter of minutes, the hall was empty. They fled from the hall as a man fleeing from a plague. And they made for the church. They are now standing outside. They saw lights in the church. That was a house of God and they were going to it and they went. Men and women who had gone to bed rose, dressed, and made for the church. Nothing in the way of publicity. But God took the situation in hand. A hunger and a thirst gripped the people. 600 of them now are at the church standing outside.

‘This dear man, the blacksmith, turned to me and said: “I think that we should sing a psalm”. And they sang and they sang and they sang verse after verse. Oh, what singing! What singing! And then the doors were opened and the congregation flocked back into the church. Now the church is crowded — a church to seat over 800 is now packed to capacity. It is now going on towards midnight. I managed to make my way through the crowd along the aisle toward the pulpit. I found a young woman, a teacher in the grammar school, lying prostrate on the floor of the pulpit praying: “Oh, God, is there mercy for me? Oh, God, is there mercy for me?” She was one of those at the dance. But she is now lying on the floor of the pulpit crying to God for mercy.

‘That meeting continued until 4 o’clock in the morning. I couldn’t tell you how many were saved that night, but of this I am sure and certain that at least five young men who were saved in that church that night are today ministers in the church of Scotland having gone through university and college.’

This article is based on the book Sounds from Heaven, the Revival on the Island of Lewis, 1949-1952 by Colin & Mary Peckham (published by Christian Focus) and on an address given by Duncan Campbell in 1968 which can be found on the Shilohouse Ministries website, http://www.shilohouse.org/Hebrides_Revival.htm

John Benton

(This article was first published in the July 2012 issue of Evangelicals Now. For more news, artciles or reviews, subscribe to EN or contact us for more information.
http://www.e-n.org.uk 0845 225 0057)