Tag Archives: organic church life

My Interview on Gottalife Radio

I was interviewed on Gottalife Radio by the spirited Scotsman Kenny Russell in the Summer of 2009. If you’re not familiar with my journey out of the organized church into organic church life, you will want to listen to this interview in its entirety.

I’m sharing this interview because I do have many new readers, but also because I want to be transparent about how our lives reflect a real journey with Christ. If we’re growing, we ought to be in a constant state of flux.

My wife and I learned a great deal about Christ in community between 2006-2011. Much that we have learned through the years has been refined, as we have since moved back into more organizational forms of church life.

If you’ve been following this blog, you know that I’ve recently made clear here, here, and here that organized Christianity is not the enemy of authentic Christian community. Many well-intentioned folks have overcorrected in their attempts to discover a more familial church life.

While a great deal of organized religion has lost its way in attempting to market the gospel way to evangelical consumers, there is a pronounced leadership and organizational church life that is able to do great good for the Kingdom. For “organic” Christians to discount or demean these forms with talk of “good is the enemy of what’s best” isn’t helpful.

In fact, I even think it can be divisive. We should celebrate wherever and whenever Christ is being known in community and the church is actively on mission for God’s Kingdom. I have issued this challenge before.

Planting a New Church

I think it’s now time for me to follow through with a calling God placed on my life many years ago. I believe that the Lord would have me plant a new church as its lead teaching pastor.

I’m currently in an exploratory stage with intentions of planting a different sort of church in our city. I’m convinced that the Lord desires to have a fellowship that works to bridge the gap(s) between the church and academy, faith and reason, and science and theology—to create a community of radical disciples who get all of their life from Jesus, not from their theological opinions. This is especially needed in the Bible Belt of the United States.

I envision a learning church that seeks to remove intellectual obstacles that needlessly bar people from the Kingdom—a church that isn’t afraid to ask questions. The Lord wants a church that truly loves like Christ. He wants a church whose allegiance is given only to King Jesus and the upside-down Kingdom that is coming to earth.

I must confess that I’ve been deeply inspired by the work of Greg Boyd at Woodland Hills Church in St. Paul, MN.

I would appreciate your prayers as we venture into the unknown. I believe the Lord wants to turn the tides of pop-culture Christianity and respond to religious fundamentalism that breeds toxic cynicism, that may well be keeping an entire generation from seeing the beautiful Kingdom of God.

Please stay tuned, I’ll soon be posting more of my thoughts here at the blog, and how you can help. In the meantime, thank you for your prayers.

Enjoy the interview! Be sure to listen to the second half, that’s what I dig the most. Jesus is awesome, saints.

D.D. Flowers, 2012.


An Organic Church Challenge

For those who follow my blog, you know I’ve been reassessing my understanding of “organic” church life in the NT. As I mentioned in a few recent posts, I’m finding that it’s not really helpful to use the term, especially since it has gone viral.

I agree with much of the contrast that is drawn between the church as institution vs. organism. So, I’m currently opening myself up in order to imagine a church life that does not grow out of reaction to the abuses of the organized church, or from the neglect of the NT by those who believe they have obtained something of Christ that others have not.

Here are some thoughts I’ve been having.

It is entirely understandable that many people hear what some “organic” folks are advocating (as I have also advocated) sounds like an abandonment of all ecclesiastical structures. It then becomes confusing for folks to hear them say that it’s OK to have some sort of skeletal structure, you just need to find the “balance” in it all.

What does that look like? We can all say, “It doesn’t look like this or that…” but I don’t see how it’s possible to judge one church from another on whether Christ is truly reigning in their meetings based off our prescriptive readings of the NT. I’m fine with saying there are things the NT does not explicitly teach, advocate, or allow—even prohibits—things that are antithetical to every-member functioning. But beyond that I think we need to be careful how we proceed in setting boundaries.

It seems to me that the “organic” promoter viewing another person’s practice of church life (with all of their biases, interpretations of Scripture about church practice, good/bad personal experiences, etc.) could make many wrong judgments about many churches because they don’t fit their own vision of NT church life. This concerns me.

Something else that troubles me is the constant downplaying of teaching and doctrine. At the same time I hear “organic” advocates affirming that teaching and doctrine are good for the church. Huh? Which is it? Naturally, folks in and outside of these house churches hear this and think that doctrine can only divide and that it’s not conducive to “gathering around” Christ.

I don’t think that’s what the “organic” leaders mean, so I think it really needs some clarification if they’re going to help others hear what they’re trying to say about Christ and the church.

I also think it assumes that we have a prescriptive church life, instead of a descriptive one contained in the NT. It might at times be necessary for a church to become a forum for discussing doctrine. Just like there are times the church needs to adapt for other concerns facing the community. I believe the unveiling of Christ can happen during these times as well.

Could it be that assuming Christ can’t be unveiled during these times is also a reaction that equally leads to wrong conclusions?

Having spent a few years in “organic” church life, I’m beginning to think that we should keep a big vision of Christ and a small vision of the church, as far as our ideas and expectations are concerned.

We can learn this from those who first pioneered the house church movements within China and the United States.

This would require us celebrate Christ in community wherever we find it (calling others to that), and say less when it comes to critiquing the church practices of others who sincerely love the Lord and are being faithful to him where they are.

I hear more lines touching on what church life is not, than what it is. Which seems to translate that there are tons of things that folks serious about church life will not do if they want to meet around Christ. I don’t think that’s what is intended, but I feel that’s what those on the outside hear. I heard that on the inside, and I’m now hearing it as I have put a little distance between myself and the “organic” folks.

I tend to think a generous ecclesiology that is Christ-centered in community, is not continually preoccupied with denouncing what may be “pagan” Christianity, but rather it is concerned for sharing the Christ you know and leaving it at that. Are “organic” folks OK with that?

Some days I’m not so sure.

I don’t think this means there isn’t a place for deconstructing the church, (cause I do!) especially among those who are asking questions and are open to rethinking the wineskins. However, if we’re not careful, we can easily set ourselves up against those that don’t meet like us or share the same vision for the church. We can easily build more walls than open up doors.

We can forget our visions of Christ at this point… they will only edify those that agree with us. Though in the end it’s not edification, just spiritual narcissism nicely contained in elitism masked as dreams and visions.

Since it is a “balance” that we seek (one that is hard to reach and know when we’ve reached it), I don’t see how it’s honest and edifying to talk like we know exactly what the church is supposed to look like when we’re getting it right (or when we think we are). Lord, help us!

In a nutshell, we need more humble recognition that the Lord moves through the church in more ways than one. Then we may rejoice with others receiving their own revelation of Christ and being faithful to their calling.


A Shift in My Ecclesiology

I recently revealed that I’m experiencing a shift in my ecclesiology. For the sake of clarification, I do still agree with much of what Sparks, Nee, Viola, and others have written about Christ in “organic” community. I don’t want anyone to think I believe a little institutionalism is cool or that the church is nebulous in nature. I think both miss the mark for Christian community.

As for the nebulous church idea, I really appreciate the work of Wayne Jacobsen, but his view of community is a bit loosey goosey for me. Knowing Christ in community requires people in committed relationships—that’s the very nature of a worshipping “community.”

I agree that the church should function as an organism in its familial context. But I also think it’s possible that it can at times look like an organization–depending on the season and the context of the church. That’s the great thing about an organism. It can do that. Nevertheless, it will always adhere to Christ in community, regardless of the changes in culture and context.

That means that I don’t think it is possible to fully know Christ in community when the center of church life is a one-hour weekly service (or Sunday school) where only a few function and there is little interaction among the saints. That isn’t to say larger gatherings with music and teaching are off limits to us. That would be prohibiting something that can and does edify folks. I have heard this time and again, “We miss the music and teaching.” I hear a longing to receive these gifts.

The problem for a lot of “organic” church folks is that’s all they had ever experienced. After having experienced face-to-face community, it’s easy to then voice criticisms of the large corporate gatherings. In some minds there was abuse there in that setting, therefore, everything that resembles that sort of thing should be rejected. I have also met folks who have experienced pain and abuse in small groups and house churches. So they run to the isolated pew or leave the church altogether. It’s all reactionary thinking.

Constantine did not invent large gatherings involving worship and teaching. The Jews, and later Jewish Christians, were doing that in the synagogues long before the great dragon polluted the church and set a full-blown priesthood in place to rule over church services.

No matter what order you adopt, some great stuff can happen in a larger setting, but the rubber hits the road in the face-to-face community. Unfortunately, most folks view church life as a teaching time or two during the week, not a shared life together in and outside church meetings.

What I intended to communicate in my last post is that I am disassociating myself with a strict order and calling for a redefining (or clarification) of the NT pattern, which is Christ alone. The church is free to edify and structure their life together any way they choose. As long as “Christ in community” (which at the heart means every-member functioning) is being known in their practice, not just in rhetoric and theory, there is freedom to allow the Spirit to mold that local ekklesia into a unique vessel for God’s glory.

If a church chooses to have a larger worship and teaching time for the exercise of those gifts, an event that the early church was likely not able to do on a regular basis, that’s awesome! But I believe this should only be seen as the dessert, not the main course—a great thing, but not the main thing. Discipleship plays out in relationships through Christian community.

The challenge is building a church life centered upon Christ in community, not upon a one-hour service. I may write on this later, because I think there are things that a church could do to see to it that the body of believers steers away from taking on the trappings of an institution that works only to maintain its overhead. That’s where my thoughts are currently going.

I suppose I’m exploring the many ways Christ can be experienced in community apart from a rigid order or trying to reduplicate the same context and experience of the first-century church. That might be easier for Christians in Mexico or China to relate to in their political and cultural context, but most folks in the US know a different context.

That’s not me shirking the NT pattern of church life, that’s me seeking to uphold it in the pattern of Christ.

Therefore, we should not envision any set order for any church. The Spirit will shape every community of believers each according to their gifts and context—always at the same time holding them to the pattern of Christ. The Lord sees in color, not in black and white. And the Lord may show us colors we have never seen before if we are open to receiving them with joy.

It’s not about finding the right church order or the secrets of the first church for a new book. It’s simply about learning to appreciate the many ways God is able to work his power through faithful followers of Christ.

D.D. Flowers, 2011.


The Community Life of God (Book Review)

The God Who Is Relationship

A Book Review of “The Community Life of God: Seeing the Godhead As the Model for All Relationships” by Milt Rodriguez

“God is not an individual” says Milt Rodriguez.  “He is a fellowship of three Persons; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” (p.14).

In The Community Life of God, Milt Rodriguez weaves together the story of God’s desire to plant himself in His people.  God’s image is a “communal” image.  The Lord created man in His image of community.  And taking from the Tree of Life (i.e. Christ) is to take from the relational God.

It was in the Garden of Eden that the serpent sought to keep God’s image from becoming a reality in the hearts of men.  The enemy of God presented man with individual living out of his own soul-life (i.e. will, emotions, intellect).  Instead of man pursuing spiritual living after taking from the communal life of God, he experiences separation from God and other men.

Rodriguez proposes that much of Christian activity today is spent furthering the individualistic mindset that is so popular in our culture.  Even when believers come together corporately there is not an understanding of God’s image among us.  Church life ought to be more than socializing and individual Christian ministries.

Milt writes, “Personhood and identity can only be defined by relating to others. You will never truly “find yourself” until you are living in the community life of God” (p.62)

What is the sort of fellowship the Lord desires among his ekklesia?

“This fellowship is the place where there is nothing to hide. Complete truthfulness and complete honesty rule here.  The Father, Son, and Spirit do not hold back anything from one another… there is no fear of loss” (p. 116).

As Christian Smith has written, “Community means more than having lots of meetings. It means jointly building a way of life, a group memory, and a common anticipated future.” (Going to the Root: Nine Proposals for Radical Church Renewal, p.2)

In order for us to experience the community life of God, we must embrace the cross.  Rodriguez says there “will be one brother or sister who rubs you the wrong way.”  It is there we embrace the cross and learn “they are part of the same body as you. You belong to them and they belong to you” (p.152).

Finally, this community life of God cannot work in meeting once a week.  We all know this to be true, but still we place other things before God’s heart.  We sacrifice the church on the altar of family, jobs, and personal ministries.

Milt says, “He (God) wants you and me and every other believer to be actively involved on a daily basis. This is why we were born.  This is why we live on this planet” (p.170).

Brothers and sisters, if we are going to participate in God’s eternal purpose, we must be intentional about our relationships within the local ekklesia of Christ.  We must give and receive sacrificially in order that we might know the God who is within Himself, relationship.

There have been many books written on the church being rooted in the Triune image of God, but this one delivers in a simple and easy-to-read presentation.  I recommend this book to all of those who are longing to discover that the church is born out of the very heart of the relational God.

What others are saying?

“This little book provides a clear window into the ultimate source of authentic body life. Delve into its pages and meet the God who is beyond what most of us have imagined, the God in whose collective voice all genuine churches echo.” –Frank Viola, author of Pagan Christianity, From Eternity to Here, and Finding Organic Church, www.frankviola.com

“I was deeply blessed, refreshed and challenged by this book. The author casts the spotlight on the reality and wonder that “God” is really the community life of three persons – a fact virtually untouched in traditional theology. Milt shows from various angles how the community life of God is the foundation of our organic ekklesia life together in Christ.”–Jon Zens, Editor, Searching Together; author of A Church Building Every ½ Mile and “What’s With Paul & Women? www.searchingtogether.org

Milt Rodriguez

Milt Rodriguez has been living in and planting organic expressions of church since 1990. He has also authored several books including The Butterfly in You and The Temple Within.  He currently lives with his wife Mary in Gainesville, Flordia.  He is a dear brother in the Lord and I am happy to call him my friend.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 500 other followers

%d bloggers like this: