Sometimes our church traditions can get in the way of doing what we’re supposed to be doing. For example, I am not convinced that it is wise for most churches to have buildings, meet on Sunday morning, and be non-profit.
Sure, there are times when these things make sense. But in many ways today, such practices are only getting in the way of reaching out to unbelievers and adequately making disciples.
Good and Bad Church Traditions
So how can we discern good and helpful traditions from bad ones?
One good way is to practice something I learned from my two-year old: ask “Why?” a lot.
To discover if a certain church practice should be continued or not, ask “Why?” about it seven times.
If, in asking “Why?” seven times, you don’t get to a good reason, you might want to consider dumping whatever it was you were asking “Why?” about.
And if you ever answer “Because the Bible says so” then ask “Where?” and “Is that really what that verse means?”
This is often good to do with a group of people because they can help you answer the questions, and tell you when an answer is not valid. You may have to “tweak” your question asking a bit to get at the root of the issue, but the point is to ruthlessly examine and question everything. It may look like this:
Here’s how it works:
Asking Why? about Sunday Church
Statement: The church meets on Sunday morning.
Why?
Possible answers:
It’s the Sabbath. (No, it isn’t. Saturday is.)
It’s the day Jesus rose from the dead (So? Where does it say we have to meet on the day Jesus rose from the dead? Doesn’t Paul say all days are equal?)
It’s a day that everybody has off. (Not any more. If we’re trying to meet when most people are free, would Tuesday night be better? And for that matter, why do we want to meet when most people can meet? Furthermore, which people are “most people?”)
See how this works?
Just keep questioning everything you do in the church, and with some careful, critical thinking, you come to see that most of what the church does, it does by tradition: just because we’ve always done it that way.
This frees us up to realize that if there is a better way to make disciples, we should do it, even if we have to abandon most of our traditions.
Asking Why About Preaching
What if we asked “why” about preaching?
Why do we have preaching?
So we can teach the Bible and make disciples.
Ok. Why? Is preaching the best way to teach the Bible and make disciples?
Well, it is not the only way (or even the best way) to do either.
Ok. So if there are better ways, back to the original question: Why do we have preaching?
Well, because the pastor has the spiritual gift of teaching and he should get to use his gift.
Ok. So why is the pastor the one who gets to use the majority of the church service using his gift, and why is preaching the best way to use the gift of teaching?
Well, other people get to use their gifts too, but the pastor went to Seminary, and we’re paying him to preach, and preaching is when he can reach the most people all at once with biblical truth. If he had to use his gifts one-on-one, it would take hundreds of hours of week to disseminate the same biblical truth. And besides, Paul told Timothy to “Preach the Word.”
I see. Each of those statements is going to need it’s own “Why?” question: Why did the pastor have to go to seminary to get his training to use his gift when we don’t send others to seminary to get training to practice their gifts? Why are we paying the pastor to use his gift when we don’t pay others to use theirs? Why do we need to reach a lot of people all at once with biblical truth? (Which returns to the earlier question of whether or not preaching is the best way to make disciples.) And why do we need to follow today the same instruction that Paul gave Timothy? And related to that, why do we think think the practice of “preaching” as it is done today is the same thing Paul meant when he told Timothy to “preach” the Word? If we do have to follow Paul’s instruction to Timothy (which isn’t yet certain), why don’t we figure out what Paul meant by “preach the Word” and then do that?
This line of questioning goes on and on.
The end result is that we eventually see that there are no good reasons for why churches do most of what they do. Often, as we try to defend the practices and traditions of the church, we find ourselves talking in circles and arguing from the basis of the way things have always been done, which keeps us from thinking about how things could be done.
You don’t sound very orthodox Jeremy. 🙂 I like it.
Trent,
Some days, I think I’m turning into a heretic. Certain critics out there would say I’m already there…. ha ha.
Thanks for your postings over at http://www.freegracechurches.org and on your own blog!
“Make disciples” is not well understood these days, as the word is rarely used. If we said, “Make apprentices”, people would know what we meant. We can’t make disciples by teaching in class only. At some point, we have to TAKE them to the jobsite and SHOW them how it’s done. That means we who are leading have to GO out of the nice warm building and get in the streets, where things are real, raw, and sometimes uncomfortable. Some of those we encounter there may become newer apprentices.
One thing is sure, they aren’t coming already to the “church”, because they don’t trust the organization. Fact is, I don’t either, not all that much. Once I learned to leave the brick and mortar for the cobblestones, I haven’t looked back all that much. I sometimes encountered Jesus in the “church”, but He’s always out here in the Ekklesia.
We meet on the first day of the week to break bread because we have the example of the early church in doing this (Acts 20:7).
I also believe that meeting on the first day of the week has a very important symbolic meaning when compared with the Sabbath of the law.
http://morningmeditations.wordpress.com/2007/11/06/the-lords-day-a-day-of-grace/
They met pretty much every day, not just once a week.
Steve,
I agree that this is why the typical church meets on Sunday, but the example of the early church does not mean that this is when all future churches should also meet. We must distinguish between “descriptive” passages and “prescriptive.”
Here I go again…….. being challenged to THINK. Steve had a good reply. But you, Jeremy, responded with a interesting point of view…. “descriptive” and “prescriptive!” Now I have to THINK on these things! Hmmmm?
Interesting!
Diane
🙂
Religion/Traditions hinder true spiritual growth and keep us from an actual relationship with the Holy Spirit = Christ .
Yes. So the sooner we challenge religion/tradition, the better. But some traditions are helpful, and there is no such things as traditionless Christianity.
I like the tradition of simply “going to” church, the drive across town has become a good family time road trip.
Jason,
For most families, this is a time of arguments… I think most of the family fights we had were while driving to church.
Yes, sir. I raised 5 kids. We never had a peaceful trip.
I agree it;s no fun to chop some throats , and hope the crying stops before we get there service.
Well… In the OT God worked and then ceased from His work and rested on the 7th day. In the NT, it’s not by works, it’s God’s grace. So we began, on the first day of the week, Acts 20:7; 1Cor.16:2 (Rev. 1:10), resting in the completed work of our Risen Savior, and then walking in His Grace.
But, I agree, there is very little in the NT to guide us in what a church gathering should be like. The one constant is that we should gather as the Body of Christ…
Jerry,
I agree.
In my book, “The Skeleton Church” I argue that the gathering is primarily spiritual, and is done by God into Jesus Christ. Physical gatherings are also beneficial for edification and encouragement.