Worship While It’s Warm

I am a fairly active blogger.  Despite the demands of school, work and parenting, I actually consider my participation in blogs a great diversion and there are 2 sites that I regularly engage in.  These are not just any blogs but ones to discuss biblical and theological topics amongst other believers in Christ.  Now occasionally, there will be someone participating that makes it clear they are not Christian.  Except for these rare instances where this is specified, it is assumed that given the nature of the topics, the folks you are interacting with are believer in Jesus Christ.  In fact, they say they are.  Perhaps that should be good enough.

Along my travels I met a dear woman by the name of Susan who I now call my friend.  I quickly recognized that Susan had a heart for evangelism but also had a keen discernment for spotting phonies.  What do I mean by that?  Well, people who by all accounts appeared Christian, went to Bible believing churches, could even quote Scripture and would readily profess they were Christians…they believe in Jesus.  I will admit that there were people I engaged in dialogue with that had me fooled, too.  They said they were believers and perhaps that was good enough for me.  Of course, after some time engaged in a topic that is considered an essential component of Christian faith, I have discovered that some will diverge and that’s where I’ll begin to question.  I admire Susan for being able to pick this up a lot quicker than me and her boldness in pointing it out when needed.

So  how do we know who is a true believer?   And who are we to judge what is in a person’s heart?  After all, if a person says they are a Christian, which is saying they are in Christ, isn’t that enough?  Shouldn’t we just take their word for it?  I’ll come back to these questions because I think they will bear import for where I think I’m going with this series of posts.

It does occur to me that the blogging community is but a mirror of our churches.  That probably in most, if not all congregations, you have non-genuine believers mixed in with genuine believers.  But the ungeniune believers will be so mixed in with the genuine believers that it is not likely distinguishable who is true and who is false.  There are really folks who go to church every Sunday, who participate in church activities, who raise their hands during worship, who read their Bibles and who even serve in our churches that while making a Christian appearance, do not know Christ.  Or rather, are not known by Him.  It is this group of people that I believed Jesus referred to in Matthew 7:21-23 that claim to call Him Lord.

Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.  Many will say to Me on that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?  And then I will declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness

Not everyone who is immersed in the business of being a Christian actually is one.   Jesus also makes mention later on in the 13th chapter of Matthew, that there will be the tares mixed in with the wheat in reference to the fact that in every body of believers exist those that are not His and are implanted to reak havoc in the body of Christ.  But this fact will not be so noticeable.

I think this is a very sobering thought.  The most signficant reason is that those who do not know Christ as Savior can mislead those who do simply because they are believed to be Christian and even spiritual.   Even worse, that there are those who are in fact pawns of the enemy to surreptitiously plant deceptions. It is sobering because it should give us great cause to examine our hearts and our faith, and see if we are actually believers as Paul urges in 2 Cor 13:5.

So I wanted to explore the marks of a true believer, what does Jesus mean by those who do His will and why this is important.   I’m not sure how deep I intend to go in the soteriological issues but at minimum there has to be a general discussion in order to understand a genuine salvific process.  We need to be aware that there are enemies at the gate and without careful introspection, that enemy could be us.

Here’s a familiar passage

Have this attitude in yourselves which is also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likenes of men.  Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.  (Phil 2:5-8)

I think sometimes we can become numb to passages like this.  Surely, we who follow Christ and strive to learn His word as accurately as possible glaze over such familiarity as the incarnation with the dismissive tone of “I know that”.  We know that Christ laid aside His deity to be like us to save us…duh!

Yet the passage begins with instructions:  YOU think like this also.  YOU lay aside your rights for the sake of others.  It wasn’t just that Christ lay aside the glory and majesty due Him, but it did so for an express purpose…us.  He had the ability to blast the religious leaders out the water and toss Rome on its head.  The glorious appearance of His second coming, when ALL will see His majesty will be in full view, could have been unveiled with His first appearance.  After all, isn’t that what the Jews were expecting?  His attitude could have been “I have the right for you to see me as I am”.  His love for us would not allow Him to do that.  His purpose for reconciliation would cause Him rather subjection to horrific brutality and seemingly dishonor, because there was a greater concern.

And more than reconciliation, God had a purpose to demonstrate His glory through a new administration, called the church.   It was to graft in us gentiles into God’s covenant promises for the sake of showing Christ to the world.  But it requires cooperation and mutual submission of the component parts, which we are.  It requires us to think of the greater purpose.

We think so highly of ourselves, though.  We want credit.  We want for people to see us shine, to see us for who we are.  Often our attitudes are cloaked in spiritual garb to give the allusion of submission to godly mandates.  Surely we would never ascribe to the Pharisetical formula of religious appearance, but I have to imagine that in the deep recesses of our hearts, we want recognition for spiritual giftedness,  inate abilities and godly pursuits.  I confess, I do at times.

We take offense when our rights have been violated, no matter how subtly.   We are quick to respond when people cross us, berate us, ignore us, or disagree with us.  And I believe that at the core of our offense is the desire to have things our way.  Because after all, perhaps we know what’s best.

Yes, most certainly Jesus knew what was best, too; not only the ability for man to be reconciled with God, but for God to demonstrate His glory the church, a body of know-nothing, self-pleasing, pompous misfits that He has deemed worthy to call heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ.  This was of far more importance than strutting His rights.  And what He asks is that we have the same attitude, to consider the needs of others that make up the body that you are also a part of, so we can operate as a body and glorify God.  Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ.

I found this article recently posted on CNN, compelling in light of my most recent post.  I continue to carry an impassioned belief  that the church for whom Christ died should operate in a manner that dumbfounds the world through through loving relationships that may not make sense from a social or humanistic perspective.   After all, didn’t Jesus say that they will know we are His disciples by the love we have one for the other.  But can we really do that and remain racially segregated?

Here’s the article…

Why Many Americans Prefer their Sunday Segregated

By John Blake
CNN

(CNN) — The Rev. Paul Earl Sheppard had recently become the senior pastor of a suburban church in California when a group of parishioners came to him with a disturbing personal question.

They were worried because the racial makeup of their small church was changing. They warned Sheppard that the church’s newest members would try to seize control because members of their race were inherently aggressive. What was he was going to do if more of “them” tried to join their church?

“One man asked me if I was prepared for a hostile takeover,” says Sheppard, pastor of Abundant Life Christian Fellowship in Mountain View, California.

The nervous parishioners were African-American, and the church’s newcomers were white. Sheppard says the experience demonstrated why racially integrated churches are difficult to create and even harder to sustain. Some blacks as well as whites prefer segregated Sundays, religious scholars and members of interracial churches say.

Americans may be poised to nominate a black man to run for president, but it’s segregation as usual in U.S. churches, according to the scholars. Only about 5 percent of the nation’s churches are racially integrated, and half of them are in the process of becoming all-black or all-white, says Curtiss Paul DeYoung, co-author of “United by Faith,” a book that examines interracial churches in the United States.

DeYoung’s numbers are backed by other scholars who’ve done similar research. They say integrated churches are rare because attending one is like tiptoeing through a racial minefield. Just like in society, racial tensions in the church can erupt over everything from sharing power to interracial dating.

DeYoung, who is also an ordained minister, once led an interracial congregation in Minneapolis, Minnesota, that eventually went all-black. He defines an interracial church as one in which at least 20 percent its membership belongs to a racial group other than that church’s largest racial group.

“I left after five years,” DeYoung says. “I was worn out from the battles.”

The men and women who remain and lead interracial churches often operate like presidential candidates. They say they live with the constant anxiety of knowing that an innocuous comment or gesture can easily mushroom into a crisis that threatens their support.

“It’s not all ‘Kumbaya’ and ‘We are the World,’ ” says Sheppard, the pastor of the Northern California church, who was raised by his father, a Baptist preacher, in the black church. “There are plenty of skirmishes.”

Can’t we just be Christians?

If it’s so tough, why bother? That’s one of the first questions interracial churches must address.

DeYoung says he encountered many blacks who said they wanted a racial timeout on Sunday.

“They would say, ‘I need a place of refuge,’” he says. “They said, ‘I need to come to a place on Sunday morning where I don’t experience racism.’ ”

Whites also complained of their own version of racial fatigue, other scholars say.

Theodore Brelsford, co-author of “We Are the Church Together,” another book that looks at interracial churches, says whites often say that church should transcend race.

“They’d say, ‘Can’t we just get along without talking about race all the time? Can’t we just be Christians?’”

Not really, say advocates for interracial churches. They argue that churches should be interracial whenever possible because their success could ultimately reduce racial friction in America.

American churches haven’t traditionally done a good job at being racially inclusive, scholars say. Slavery and Jim Crow kept blacks and whites apart in the pews in the nation’s early history. Some large contemporary black denominations, like the African Methodist Episcopal church, were formed because blacks couldn’t find acceptance in white churches.

Large denominations like the Methodists, Baptists and Presbyterians split over race in the 19th century when their members clashed over the issue of slavery, Michael Emerson, a scholar on interracial churches, recounted in his book, “Divided by Faith.”

But interracial church advocates say the church was never meant to be segregated. They point to the New Testament description of the first Christian church as an ethnic stew — it deliberately broke social divisions by uniting groups that were traditionally hostile to one another, they say.

DeYoung, the “United by Faith” co-author, says the first-century Christian church grew so rapidly precisely because it was so inclusive. He says the church inspired wonder because its leaders were able to form a community that cut across the rigid class and ethnic divisions that characterized the ancient Roman world.

“People said that if Jews, Greeks, Africans, slaves, men and women - the huge divides of that time period — could come together successfully, there must be something to this religion,” DeYoung says.

Biblical precedents, though, may not be enough to make someone attend church with a person of another race. Something else is needed: a tenacious pastor who goads his or her church to reach across racial lines, interracial church scholars say.

The Rev. Rodney Woo, senior pastor of Wilcrest Baptist Church in Houston, Texas, may be such a person. He leads a congregation of blacks, whites and Latinos. Like many leaders of interracial churches, he is driven in part by a personal awakening.

Woo’s mother is white, and his father is part Chinese. He attended an all-black high school growing up in Port Arthur, Texas, where he still remembers what it was like to be a minority.

“Everyone understands the rules, the lingo, the mind-set — except you,” he says. “It was invaluable, but I didn’t know it at the time.”

When he became pastor of Wilcrest in 1992, he was determined to shield his church members from such an experience. But an exodus of whites, commonly referred to as “white flight” was already taking place in the neighborhood and the church.

Membership fell to about 200 people. At least one church member suggested that Woo could change the church’s fortunes by adding a “d” to his last name.

“The fear there was people would think I was Chinese,” he says. “There would be a flood of all these Asians coming in, and what would we do then?”

Woo kept his last name and his vision. He made racial diversity part of the church’s mission statement. He preached it from the pulpit and lived it in his life. He says Wilcrest now has about 500 members, and is evenly divided among white, Latino and black members.

Woo doesn’t say his church has resolved all of its racial tensions. There are spats over music, length of service, even how to address Woo. Blacks prefer to address him more formally, while whites prefer to call him by his first name, (a sign of disrespect in black church culture), Woo says.

Woo tries to defuse the tension by offering something for everyone: gospel and traditional music, an integrated pastoral staff, “down-home” preaching and a more refined sermon at times.

But he knows it’s not enough. And he’s all right with that.

“If there’s not any tension, we probably haven’t done too well,” he says. “If one group feels too comfortable, we’ve probably neglected another group.”

Going from “they” to “we”

Sometimes, though, a determined pastor is not enough. Interracial churches can also implode on issues far more explosive than worship styles — like sex and power.

One such issue is interracial dating. Some scholars and leaders who deal with interracial issues say it’s not unusual for parents in racially-mixed churches to leave when their teenage kids begin dating.

Woo saw that exodus at Wilcrest. Some parents talked about the importance of a multiracial church, until their kid became attracted to someone from another race within the church.

“As kids began to date, some things get revealed,” he says. “They didn’t want their kids involved in interracial dating — and that’s not just whites.”

Accepting black leadership is another touchy subject. Most interracial churches are led by white pastors. A congregation typically becomes all-black if a black pastor is hired, says DeYoung, the “United by Faith” co-author.

“As long as the top person, the senior pastor, is white, power sort of resides with whites,” DeYoung says. “But when that shifts, it does something psychologically to people. People usually leave.”

Black pastors who do gain the acceptance of interracial congregations still have to watch themselves. Some white parishioners, even progressive ones, get uneasy when a black pastor gets too fiery in the pulpit, says Brelsford, co-author of “We are the Church Together.”

“A black church sermon that could be understood as impassioned might be interpreted as angry and defensive by a white congregation,” Brelsford says. “It could kick into fear of black men.”

Sheppard, the black minister of the church in California, says he modified his style to appeal to all sorts of people.

He says he abandoned the pulpit pyrotechnics he learned growing up in the black church when his congregation’s racial mix changed. He also carries his authority lightly, dressing casually in the pulpit and consulting with church committees before making decisions. In conversation, he’s relaxed and accessible.

“I’m very aware of how rare this is,” he says of being the black minister of an interracial congregation. “I’m humbled by it.”

The people in the pews must also do their share of adapting, scholars and ministers say. Only when ethnic groups no longer feel compelled to abandon their entire culture on Sunday morning can a church claim to be interracial, Brelsford says.

An interracial church isn’t one in which all the black members act, dress and worship like the church’s majority white members to make them feel comfortable, he says.

Interracial churches resist “taking one dominant identity and forcing everyone to fit into it,” Brelsford says.

That appears to have happened at Sheppard’s church in Northern, California. Since its rocky early days, it has now grown to a multiracial congregation of about 6,000 people. Whites, blacks, Asians, Latinos - all now attend.

“We refuse,” Sheppard says, “to be a one-flavor-fits-all church.”

Interracial congregations often include people who probably wouldn’t have become friends in any other circumstances. They are people like Dwight Pryor, a black man who grew up in segregated Mississippi seeing blacks brutalized by whites. He says he grew up disliking white people.

Today, Pryor says he is best friends with a white member of Wilcrest, a man who grew up in Alabama during segregation in a family that hated blacks.

When Pryor sees his friend on Sunday, he says he no longer sees a “they” or a “them” trying to invade his world. He sees his brother in Christ.

“We come to love each other,” he says. “When I look into his eyes, I can see the love of Jesus Christ. He and I have become friends.”

In Paul’s letter to Philemon, he is appealing to Philemon to regard Onesimus as a brother.  Not such an easy thing to do for Philemon because apparently Onesimus was not only his former slave, but transgressed against Philemon in some way (vs.11, 18).  The heart of Paul’s plea is don’t look at Onesimus as a slave and someone that has wrong you.  When you see him, see him as your brother in Christ.

This begs the question of how do we see our brothers and sisters in Christ, especially with respect to race.  Does the saint who is African-American look on his white counterpart as a white person or as a redeemed component of the larger body, the body of which the African-American is also part of.  Does the white christian regard the latino with partiality and suspicion should fellowship dare be elevated to a greater level of intimacy than the superficial nomenclature of brother in Christ?

As I am exploring churches in Dallas, I am finding such a racial polarization that I think would not exist.  But it does and that even amongst “Bible” churches, with nearly identical doctrinal statements.  I have been to churches with all white congregations and I have been to churches with all black congregations.  And I am asking the question if through our segregated service, are we really representing the Body of Christ, or do we first see ourselves individually and corporately through racial and social lenses only applying the label of brother or sister in Christ as a matter of convenience and appropriate verbiage.  It does seem like convenience plays quite the role in our separatedness but I’ll get to that in a minute.  I can’t help but think that the  substance behind that label is lost when we segregate and choose to stay in our corners of churchy comfort.

When we come to Christ, 1 Corinthians 12 identifies that though we are many members, the Spirit baptizes us into the kingdom as part of the whole. Therefore, how we operate both individually and corporately should correspond to the unification of the Spirit in the body. We are no longer are own and the impact should be a compulsion to see ourselves as intricately linked to other members. What’s interesting is that Paul places the perspective of who we are to one another in context of spiritual gifts (vs. 1). And these are the same gifts that we are to use for one another (1 Peter 4:10) and this serves the purpose of building up the church (Eph 2:16). Because the body is who Christ died for and who is His bride. And I can’t help but think that when we segregate on the basis of race, that we are withholding the spiritual enablements that have been granted to us and reserving them for those that WE deem worthy. I believe that’s what James refers to as “partiality” and I think it must grieve the heart of God.

Therefore, I think the most important aspect of our relation to one another is that it is in accordance with a spiritual unity that must take precedence over a social or cultural one.  Here is where racial lines must take a back seat to the unity in the Spirit and identification with our position within the body - we are one in Christ.  Consider Galatians 3:28:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ.

And wasn’t this at the heart of Paul’s plea to Philemon?  Though he was a slave, don’t see him as that.  See him as a brother.   But more than that, treat him as a brother.  Don’t just call him that but really be that.

I do recognize that cultural foundations play a significant role in the make-up of our assemblies and ultimately, our selection of a church. Because let’s face it, it is far more comfortable to associate with people of our own race. The contrast of musical styles alone can drive each group to their separate corners and has. Preaching styles differ. The black preacher can use an impassioned homiletic that might be confused with anger. The white preacher’s deliverance may appear boring to some cultures.

But given our position in Christ, I consider our call to brotherly love and service a prompting to step outside of our comfort zone to engage in intimate fellowship with people of a different race. I found it interesting that in the service I attended this past Sunday comprised of nearly all African-Americans, one of the pastors cited the passage in John 4 where Jesus approaches the woman at the well and clarifies what true worship is, “God is a Spirit and they that worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in truth” (vs.24). But I think the greater recognition of this passage is the fact the Jesus went out of his way to “fellowship” with a person of another race, who his human race considered contemptible and inferior. And he deviated from His linear path in order to convey what true worship was. As New Testament believers, isn’t true worship operating as the Body of Christ, linked to one another in a way that would dumbfound a worldly system defined by cultural and social norms?

Perhaps Jesus’ actions here should serve as an example for us regarding our cultural comfort.  It is easy to fellowship with people that look like us, sound like us, worship like us.  But maybe the greater law of love would have us to be a little uncomfortable in consideration of the greater good, to endure a musical style not of our preference, to gain a better understanding of the other race through meaningful and intimate dialogue and relationships.  For we who believe in Jesus and acknowledge Him as Savior are part of the church, not black church, white church or hispanic church but Church. And perhaps if we change the lens of perspective in consideration of our brothers and sisters, regardless of race, maybe we might see a little more diversity in our congregations.  That is my hope and that is my prayer.

In Paul’s letter to the Philippians, he tells this beloved church of his that he hopes to send Timothy to them shortly apparently so he can report back to Paul and let him know how they are doing. For both he and Timothy genuinely care about what is going on with them and this will encourage Paul greatly since he is in prison at the time of his writing (3:19-20). Paul has already sent Epaphroditus, another of his fellow workers and another who has genuine concern for the Philippian church. Once again, Paul says in 3:28, that sending Epahroditus will relieve Paul upon hearing of there welfare. The same pattern is also indicated in his letter to the Colossians letting them know that Tychicus and Onesimus are on their way.

What is interesting is that Paul is writing these letters from prison. He does not have the luxury or the liberty to check on these folks. But he is so concerned about what is going on with them, that he makes every effort to see that people are sent to check on them and report back how they are doing. If I was in prison I am not so sure I would be that concerned about how others are doing. But Paul does because I think that first that he understands one thing, that I am becoming increasingly mindful of and that is that people matter.

I find that dealing with people is often challenging. People can be selfish, stubborn, disagreeable, delusional and short sighted. Above all, people can be hurtful. I confess that I can be a bit of a hermit and have little problem with reclusiveness, especially if the alternate is deal with people that for whatever reason would cause some degree of friction or discomfort. It’s more comfortable to be in front of my computer with my books (aka my throne) and learn away. But by doing so not only am I missing out on life’s greatest blessings but I am also shortchanging my Christian walk.

People are at the heart of God’s concerns. It was not sufficient just for God to create the heavens and earth, the sun, moon and stars. Man was needed. People were needed and so the earth was populated. After the flood, God indicates in Genesis 8:21 that He will never curse the ground on account of man.

If I live to myself, I am not really living. For God is relational and created us as relational beings. For when we come to Christ, it is not so we can become regenerate and individualistic. No, we then become members of the body of Christ, a piece of the whole. We are commended to think of others better than ourselves, to look after the welfare of others, to do good to others, to pray for others and above all, to love. When another hurts it should have an impact on us. This is why I believe that gossip and partiality are so insidious because it significantly undermines the relational connection we are to have with one another. When we cut others in this manner not only are we bruising the body but we are essentially saying that people don’t matter.

It is not for doctrine or denominations or buildings that Christ died, but it is for people that God loves and calls to himself. We have many disagreements within the body of Christ and yes, we are called to shun doctrine that does not align with essentials of our Christian faith. But in the process, we don’t shun people because above all, people matter.

(I promise I will get back to my testimony)

Do you like your family? I’m sure the answers will vary among the readers. For some of you may have wonderful, nurturing families that are tight-knit, supportive where you enjoy spending time with one another. On the opposite ends are dysfunctional families where relational tension and friction abound and there may even be a sordid or distasteful history. But one thing is certain, you came with the family you have.

So it is with the body of Christ. When I consider Ephesians 4:1

Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called,

The calling in context of chapters 3 and 4, is that Christ does not draw us to operate individually but to be part of His body. Unfortunately, we live in a very individualistic culture that promotes the needs of self over a corporate mindset. But this is not so in the body of Christ. The minute we say yes to Jesus, we become part of God’s family.

Also consider 1 Corinthians 12:12

For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.

But I am painfully aware of those members who have encountered abuse to the extent that the only viable option for any type of peace, is to disassociate with other family members. I liken some of the experiences to some client files that I get to examine in the course of my job (I manage a federal funding program that distributes funding to homeless service providers throughout my state). It is not uncommon for me to find that some folks have ended up homeless due to substance abuse and behavioral issues that had its roots in troubled family histories, most notably childhood sexual abuse. And while this is quite a strong statement in comparison to the trauma and abuse that some members of God’s family have experienced, I do think it is and adequate analogy. For consider what childhood sexual abuse entails:

1) harmful acts against a child by those who were supposed to protect them

2) the violation of innocence where there should have been nurturing.

3) the production of emotional harm due to this violation

Yes, some have been violated as spiritual children and experienced extreme harm by those who were supposed to protect them. My heart does go out to those who have experienced this. There are others, who may not have experienced this severity but nonetheless, have been so disenchanted with how family members operate are as equally hurt and isolated and consider association to likely produce pain rather than comfort. So they disconnect.

But this is not the picture of God’s family life that I see in the bible. As members of the body Christ, our love and concern for the well-being of others should take precedent over personal needs and selfish ambition. We hurt when others hurt, we rejoice when others rejoice (Romans 12:15). We love, we care, we nourish, we encourage and sometimes even admonish. But even that should be done with the heart of concern for the other person. Shepherds are to tend to the needs of the flock and desire the spiritual growth of each member. They are to serve as an example not provide a dictator rulership.

So if you’re reading this and you have been burned by dysfunctional body life within God’s family, I encourage you to allow healthy connections to fellow members. We are all fallible human beings who demonstrate myriad acts of imperfection on a regular basis. Give the body a shot because that’s what you were called for.  You’re not supposed to go it alone.

And I would encourage those of us who have experienced healthiness in our fellowship to seek out those who have been burned. Embrace them and show them that the love of Jesus is not what they experienced. It is also for this, that we have been called.