New York Times reported today that the Diocese of San Joaquin voted on Saturday, Dec. 9th, to split from the Episcopal Church.  As reported, this is monumental because it’s the first time in the church’s history that an entire diocese has split from the church. 

The split stems from the ongoing battle within the Episcopal Church regarding the Bible’s authority, particularly as it relates to homosexuality.  “The church will inevitably leave the Bible behind at point after point,” said Bishop John David Schofield of San Joaquin to the diocesan convention on Friday, “but since on this view the Bible is the word of fallible men rather than of the infallible God, leaving it behind is no great loss.”

Let me encourage you to take the time to read this article and to keep an eye on the Episcopal Church.  Church history is chalked full of moments such as this.  In addition, it highlights the truth that the church of Jesus Christ will stand or fall on the Bible’s authority. 

(You can also find information on the diocese’s website.) 

The title for my post is the title of our pastor’s first sermon series. Yes, we have a Pastor who is devoted full time to caring for the souls of 3ABC. Now you wouldn’t know it by the level of conversation about it on this blog, but we are thrilled that Kurt and his family are now with us. This Sunday, November 18, Kurt will begin a series of five sermons from Philippians.

As I said in remarks Sunday evening, I am convinced that Kurt is the right man to lead our church. Handing the church over to someone who has not been a member with us, is like handing over a daughter to some dude in marriage. Right now I can’t imagine there will ever be a man worthy of marrying my daughter. I’ve been told that when the time comes for a daughter to marry, most of the time you’re OK with him. In the case of handing the church over to Kurt, I’m more than OK. We are very blessed that he should be with us.

Okay, this seems to be the month for Christianity Today articles. And there is yet another one I couldn’t pass up. Don’t worry! You’re not going to get another two-part series because the results of the survey summarize perfectly the need for the local church. Here’s the purpose of the survey:

To understand the range and differences among American Christians, Christianity Today International (publisher of Leadership) recently partnered with Zondervan Publishers to commission Knowledge Networks to conduct attitudinal and behavioral research of U.S. Christians. In September 2006, more than 1,000 self-identified Christians 18 years of age and older were surveyed on their religious beliefs and practices. The results reveal a number of significant differences…In fact, portraits of five distinct segments emerged from the study. We have named them Active, Professing, Liturgical, Private, and Cultural Christians.

The article then went on to say “three critical issues emerged” for church leadership as a result of the survey. They were…

• The local church is no longer considered the only outlet for spiritual growth.
• Churches must develop relational- and community-oriented outreach.
• Lay people have to be better equipped to be God’s ambassador.

I think these are three issues we must regularly address.

There’s nothing worse than a long delay between a two-part series, albeit you’re not refreshing the home page every hour in suspense of part 2. In part one, I summarized Christianity Today’s recent article about the new, “cutting edge evangelism. I now want to give a brief assessment of it.

1. Evangelism methods are often controversial and continually being revised. This is just the reality we live in. Billy Graham is nearing the end of his life and thousands, maybe millions, of people have been affected by his ministry. But his methods weren’t sheltered from criticisms and controversies. The same could be said of the endless list of personal evangelism tracts and methods. There may be many reasons why criticism and controversy is inherent to evangelism methodology. For example, it can be attributed partly to the fact that Scripture just isn’t very specific about how one ought to fulfill the Great Commission. The command is very clear but the method isn’t. The apostles’ example is descriptive but not entirely prescriptive. Therefore, we should not be surprised by this article. I’m not saying the new trend is right or wrong. I’m just saying that given the pattern of the last half century and the lack of Scripture’s specificity then one ought not be taken aback by evangelism that would be called “new” and “cutting edge.”

2. Church planting and church reform should go hand-in-hand. This article never talks about church reform per se, but it does mention the difference between “established” and “newly planted churches. ” Here’s the logic: According to the research, most churches stop looking out after about 15 years; thus, they stop growing. Church plants, however, are looking out; thus, they are growing at a faster rate. Churches, therefore, need to plant churches in order to reach out. The article then went on to describe the similarities between domestic planting and overseas planting.

Well, I’m all for planting churches. But what about the thousands of dwindling churches that are planted but need reforming and reviving? What about the thousands of seemingly unattractive churches that have buildings and membership but need strong leadership and biblical preaching to become once again a bright light? Can those churches be a means of “cutting edge” evangelism? I think they should be and by God’s grace can be.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a false assumption that church reform is to the exclusion of evangelism. In other words, reform looks “in” and planting looks “out.” When in reality, reform looks inward and outward. Just take expositional preaching, the most essential component of reform, as an example.

Expositional preaching reorients a church’s worldview, priorities, purpose, and the list could go on. The Holy Spirit transforms lives through the preaching of God’s word. That transformation causes churches and Christians to be “salt” and “light.” In addition, they mature in brotherly love so that all men know they are Christ’s disciples by their love for one another.

I’ve been meaning to note an article by Christianity Today that was published about a month ago. Due to busyness I’m just now getting time to comment on it. It’s entitled “Go and Plant Churches of All Peoples” by Tim Stafford. Let me briefly summarize.

Mention the word “evangelism” and what comes to mind? Fifty years ago it would be evangelism crusades such as the Billy Graham Crusades. Thirty years ago programs like “Evangelism Explosion” and “Four Spiritual Laws” would come to mind in personal evangelism. Well, that was fifty and thirty years ago. Today there are fewer and fewer crusades and many churches are still teaching personal evangelism. But the new “cutting edge” evangelism is church planting.

This new or, depending on your perspective, old form of evangelism stems from a few things. First, many churches with younger leadership are frustrated with the lack of growth from current methodologies. Second, church planting networks like Acts 29 Network are rethinking biblical evangelism and its methods. They see church planting as essential to the local church’s nature. Third, researchers have found a trend that new churches are growing at a faster conversion rate than older churches. The trend is for churches to look “inward” instead of “outward” after about 15 years. Whereas church plants have to look outward in order to survive.

And yet church planting doesn’t look the same as it did in the second half of the 20th century. Many church planters are targeting immigrants, “which means adjusting church traditions to diverse ethnic cultures.” Furthermore, it produces “niche audiences.” The SBC’s NAMB effort in California is a prime example. And this isn’t a manufacturing of diversity. It simply reflects the “neighborhood’s” changing nature. Emerging church plant efforts have been extremely successful because of their “unconventional” and “non-institutional spirit” and methodologies.

Church planters also have a different perspective than their predecessors. America is seen as a “mission field” with the same barriers as those overseas - “religion, language, tribe, caste, and socioeconomic status.” Church planters are learning from missionaries overseas and using their methods to penetrate the culture with the gospel and provide places for disciples to mature. Thus, planters are domestic missionaries with the “same sociological perspective” as their overseas counterparts.

In addition, they believe it’s a faulty assumption that the U.S. is a post-Christian nation. It’s half-Christian and half post-Christian. And these new “missionaries” are penetrating the “post-Christian pockets.” Although some new churches fail, all face the same “demographic” difficulties. And it’s here where the “entrepreneurial, independent, and stubborn personalities” that mark the “new” missionaries persevere in obedience to the Great Commission. Therefore, “a church that seeks to obey the Great Commission will keep sending out missionaries” even if that means “they never leave home.”

Bruce is right - be present! Be present! Be present! I know I’ve told this story a number of times but it’s routinely worth repeating.

Immediately following my acceptance into membership nearly 6 years ago, I was standing by the piano downstairs talking to Bruce and expressing my thankfulness and eagerness to be involved. He too was thankful and said something I’ll never forget. He said, “Your main ministry is the ministry of presence. There’s not much for you to actively do but to show up.” (Then he gave me that look like “Was that what you were expecting to hear?”) Mind you, the church was alot different then and the church’s future was contingent on such advice. But those words are timeless and transcend all contexts. You fight against unbelief and help others do the same as you regularly spur one another on to greater maturity in Christ. And you do that primarily by attending the church’s main gatherings together.

Brad’s last post was interesting and helpful. He is right that one rarely moves from belief to unbelief all at once. It is a series of many little steps. I read an essay by Nicholson Baker in his collection of essays entitled The Size of Thoughts that described well the process of changing one’s mind — it is many little changes of mind that culminate in one larger change . . .

In additional to Brad’s suggestions, I would add that being present with the church routinely is a great aid to preserving one’s faith. Also, it’s essential to pray that God would continue to give us the grace to believe. As Josh M. mentioned last night, we should all be like the father who cried out, “I believe, help my unbelief.”