Part 2: First Century Church (The Super-Model)
OK, I lied. I said in a recent comment that my next post would be about the Ancient-Future Church. Let’s make that the next one after this one.
Here’s the reason: Post-Modern Church, as I stated, is a mindset. It is a way to BE the Church, not just a way to DO Church. The same goes for First Century Church.
I see a progression here. There’s GO, then DO, then BE. Godobe. Cool.
Most people’s first experience with Church is just to GO. Observe. Absorb. Maybe participate where it’s comfortable.
The next step for a maturing believer is to DO Church. Help with something. Lead something. Start something.
But the Church is not reaching its potential in anyone’s life until he or she learns to BE the Church. They must recognize that they carry the Church with them everywhere. They are Christ’s kingdom in microcosm. Notice, however, that once a believer begins to be the Church, they will not stop doing or going.
Although “Being” is the last step in the progression, I want to this series to begin with it. Learning how to be the Church involves investigating one’s mindset and lifestyle. That’s why so many people have so much unlearning to do when they start to be the Church. Their DOINGS have been so wrapped up in wrong mindsets and lifestyles. A good grasp of post-modernism is fundamental to understanding how to be the Church in this day and age. And on the opposite end of the historical spectrum is the First Century Church. While working to keep our head in the clouds of current culture, are we also making sure that our feet are planted on God’s own ecclesial foundation?
Let me introduce you to the First Century Church with a paraphrase of Acts 2:42-47:
The first Christians devoted themselves to the Apostle’s teaching, to prayer, to joy, to unity, to eating together, to selflessly providing for one anothers’ needs, to meeting in each others’ homes, and to simple, focused lives. God did miracles among them and drew many people in their communities to Himself and His salvation.
Granted, in a literal sense this talks more about DOING than about BEING. But it is painfully obvious what sort of being was going on here. And that is the mindset and lifestyle of total dedication to God and to each other. Notice that, although it says that they prayed, it doesn’t say how long, or in what language, or in how large a group. Although it says they learned, it doesn’t say who taught, or how many taught, or if there was preaching, or discussion, or quarterlies. Although it says they had joy, it doesn’t say if they expressed it with music, or dancing, or shouting (but they definitely expressed it through EATING.)
My point is… this is not a passage about form or style. It is the definition of Being the Church. God purposely left it up to us to figure out the rest. I believe He did that both to test our unity and showcase our diversity.
How fitting that our own God-inspired Model (Super-Model?) should be so vague. Let us talk and talk till the cows come home and leave again about how to DO Church. Let us pray and experiment and dabble. Let us rejoice in the myriad manifestations of Church. But Father, don’t let us stray from that which you’ve called us to BE.
As the drink says… SoBe.
Posted at 1:48 PM
View 9 comments made so far
Add a comment
Links to this post
9 Comments:
Amen brotha.
I find the progression you mentioned to be rather ironic, yet understandable. If you really come to terms with the Christian life you notice that being always precedes going or doing. Being is the fuel that motivates us to go and empowers us to do. Too often, and unfortunately SO often, Christians try to put the latter two before the first. They are described in 2 Timothy 3:1-5 as "holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power". In other words, they are too busy with religion to BE in devoted relationship with God. And in Psalm 127:1-2, God reminds us that:
"Unless the LORD builds the house, they labor in vain who build it; unless the LORD guards the city, the watchman keeps awake in vain. It is vain for you to rise up early, to retire late, to eat the bread of painful labors; for He gives to His beloved {even in his} sleep."
And again, "BE still and KNOW that I am God."
It is unfortunate that so many have to labor in vain before they truly come to terms with the all-sufficiency and supreme satisfaction of God. We may be tempted to say that God uses the process of godobe to refine us and draw us closer to Him, because many times that is what results. But to accept that process as the way He wills to engage us and use us is to misunderstand the meaning of vanity.
Although you may not have consciously intended to refute the godobe progression as God's will for us, you have at least subconsciously, for you have understood and demonstrated the importance of the priority of BEING by the order in which you are publishing these posts. Thank you.
On a different note, i am curious to explore the facts surrounding the passage in Acts you paraphrased and commented on, in particular, "They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching." There are two possible interpretations of that phrase. One possibility is that they devoted themselves to the written instruction of the apostles, and may have taken turns "teaching" that to one another. This would be the likely case IF the apostles (church planters) were absent (because they had left to go plant other churches or because they were dead). The other possibility is that the apostles stuck around and pastored the flock for a while, in which case this passage would be describing the early believers' devotion to the direct tutelage of the apostles. In that case, the scripture would be indicating who was doing the teaching--the apostles were.
If the latter interpretation is correct (and finding out whether or not it is would be a fairly easy task, but one which i have not yet pursued), then a few more questions arise as to the application of this verse. First, are there modern day apostles to which this could apply? Second, how is one granted the authority of apostleship? Third, to what extent should disciples commit to the direct instruction of such apostles, if they indeed exist, as opposed to or in addition to the written instruction of the original apostles? And what does that mean, anyway?
There's a mouthful to chew. Enjoy! :)
Mama piranha, do you see now where our theological grappling meets application? It's good stuff. But darn it, now i have some research to do.
Mama piranha, do you see now where our theological grappling meets application?
I think you mistook my previous comment, I don't at all question the importance of theological grappling...although I think there is less necessity for it than we participate in within the western church. You and Ryan are clearly "wired" more that way than others are...not a bad thing. I'm for a good theological grappling as much as the next gal but probably less than you 2 ;)
Beloved, you've alerted me to a muddy point in my post, so I will clarify.
The reason I arrange the three words in that order, GO, DO, BE, is because that's the order of maturation. Most people won't DO church until they GO to church. And most people won't BE the church until they DO church.
But once you've learned to BE, you've discovered the foundation upon which you must GO and DO. BEing becomes preeminent.
And Makeesha... I hope you don't think we spend all our time at our gatherings philosophizing and apologeticizing. We strive to truly worship and fellowship and do the work of God. But on a blog... it's all talk, eh?
Eh!! :)
Well spoken sir.
"I hope you don't think we spend all our time at our gatherings philosophizing and apologeticizing."
oye vey - I'm not communicating effectively - of course I don't think that, you probably wouldn't have a very successful ministry if that were the case.
Who said we had an effective ministry?
heheheh
I'm speaking in faith ;)
In case no one noticed, i am either utterly ignorant or just plain blind. In reference to my response regarding "the teaching of the Apostles", if i would've taken a brief moment to reread the immediate context i would have noticed that the apostles were indeed physically present. ("Many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles.") So that guides our interpretation, because it does in fact indicate who was doing the teaching and who was devoting themselves to that teaching. May we strike this conversation back up? :) (reread my analysis on my previous response to the topic).
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home