So what is my job? Correction

Those of you who follow the blog will remember that I recently wrote:

'Those who are happy to come to the show and sing the happy songs and have their ears tickled - the day is coming when the battle will be engaged and you will find yourself 'not fit for purpose' - time to 'man up' Church!'

This brought about the following response:

'How much more emotional manipulation are you going to employ on your site to get people to be doing what you, Vic, think people should be doing?

This isn't your job, Vic - your job is to seek after God and put yourself at his disposal.  Be loved by him and then love others as you are loved.

Your job is not to guilt-trip, embarrass or intimidate people into conforming to your ideology... this is the fast-track to burn-out. 

Come back to me on this one, and tell me why I'm wrong.'

Well, I did indeed come back to them and this is instalment number three (in a series of goodness knows how many) because another of the jobs I do is to tell people when they are doing wrong, or doing it wrongly. Now of course I don't employ emotional manipulation or guilt-trips, embarrassment or intimidation (after all, I'm not a liberal you know :-) ) but I do employ telling the truth in love as per today's reading of Galatians 6 which I have paraphrased elsewhere as:

'Guys, if you see someone doing something wrong, those of you who know me should restore them gently; but take care in the way that you do it so that you don't end up being wrong too!'

Now this 'wrongness' that we need to take care not to fall into is often demonstrated by the hardline fundamentalist and the 'Jesus wants everyone to be happy' liberals alike who point the finger and denounce, attack, vilify and engage in the finely tuned art of the ad hominem.

But you see my role means that when I see people who are sitting in front of the TV when they should be getting fit for the role for which they've volunteered I have to tell them that they are slacking. When I see people who claim to be Christians and yet their attitudes, lifestyles or behaviour deny this, then it's my role to come alongside and help them understand, accept and amend their ways accordingly. This is not the wicked application of rules and regulations but helping people to reach their fullest potential as people and as disciples - and we do want that, don't we?

My critic is wrong because to do anything other that strive to get one's own life sorted and working as well as possible and take this as the datum for those who are part of the Church is to be a hypocrite - and I struggle to ensure that I'm not that. My critic is also wrong because not only do I avoid all the things they accuse me of (and in accusing me perhaps come close to owning them for themselves) but I work hard to train, equip and release (I know some don't like this terminology but isn't that Biblical language) and to work alongside (and for if the opportunity arises) others in the Church.

The problem is that some would see just being in the Church as enough and the more those in the Church are like the world the better it is. After all, if we don't confront people with their errors then they are happy to have us around and therefore Church is popular.

And of course it is because it doesn't ask for set standards of behaviour but accepts everything (including the spirit of divination according to Schori's last sermon on the wicked Paul!) on the premise that whatever makes you happy pleases God.

Psalm 119 tells us that the person who keeps God's laws and seeks the Lord with all their heart - they are truly happy, not the foolish who will perish because of their folly and their desire to make their god in their own image.

No, I'm sorry but when I see people who claim to be Christian avoiding the discipline that comes from denying ourselves and taking up our cross and embarking on a life of discipline, prayer and praise that is the hallmark of true discipleship, then I have to offer correction by coming alongside.

We have one chance at this life (Heb 9.27) and my role is to do it the very best I can and to help others. I use the same measure on them as I do for myself and this is right - for it's part of my job as a family member.

We watch out for and correct each other in love - don't we?

What makes church valid? post the first

An interesting discussion on the question 'what makes a church valid' soon stretched into what makes a service valid too.

After all, if you put on an evening service and you get six or seven people turn up for it, is this an effective use of the clergy's time?

Does the fact that those who come would not have come to a church service had the evening service not been on offer suddenly make it valid?

What about the same service with only four turning up, where does the line get drawn and how long is it before we perhaps consider the example from the Old Testament (Gen 18: 16 - 33) and find ourselves pleading for our services in the same way that Abraham pleaded before the LORD for the inhabitants of Sodom:

When the men got up to leave, they looked down toward Sodom, and Abraham walked along with them to see them on their way. Then the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do?  Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”
Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know. The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.

Then Abraham approached him and said: 
“Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing - to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?”
The Lord said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

Then Abraham spoke up again: “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five people?”
“If I find forty-five there,” he said, “I will not destroy it.”

Once again he spoke to him, “What if only forty are found there?”
He said, “For the sake of forty, I will not do it.”

Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?”
He answered, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.”

Abraham said, “Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?”
He said, “For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.”

Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?”
He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

When the Lord had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.

So can we take from this passage some guidance? Do we decide that 'valid' church has to have more than ten in a service?

Do we look at fifty (midi church) as the number that renders a congregation, fellowship or church as valid?

Do we take one hundred (large church) as the critical mass (sorry not knocking high church here, honest!) and the number that confers validity, efficacy and sustainability?

I know of a person for whom, in my view, the existence of a church service is made valid because they cannot do morning services and because there is an evening service provided they can remain part of Church and come alongside others to worship. The fellowship, the provision and the ability to come before the Lord in a church setting all conspire to make this a valid service.

But what of those buildings which see but a handful for their evensongs, should we decide that they are 'no longer to be tolerated' after all, if we stop these services we can stay at home and watch 'Downturn Alley' and the like. To quote a colleague, 'They don't want to come out and I'm happy to let them!"

Are numbers the deciding factor?

Are we merely becoming lazy or downhearted when we resign ourselves to the fact that once of a Sunday (and in the morning) is enough?

Church - How do you like yours (and why and what and how and who and . . . )

How many do we need in a place before we can save it and those within I wonder?