Response to Church and Change

John Bauer (Church and Change) Clobbered by the Word

Bauer:
I've taken a few days before responding. Here goes.

With all due respect, the criticism of the CHARIS announcement articulated below is based on a definition which writer provides. Anyone can argue from their own presuppositions and definitions. Nowhere has CHARIS advocated "humanistic non-evangelical shortcuts." These words are themselves human contrivances. So in the five paragraphs following the "clearer definition," the writer has succeeded only in arriving at a conclusion based on a self-defined first premise.

I am not advocating the study of any "methods" or strategies outside of means of grace ministries. But to condemn all methods based on human reason creates a restriction that no WELS pastor could live with. I am assuming that every pastor who graduated from Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary took at least one course in homiletics. What is homiletics other than preaching methods, i.e., the use of human reason to interpret text, plan an outline, think of illustrations, etc? And when a pastor plans a worship service, doesn't he use certain human methods to organize the liturgy? Aren't there methods involved in selecting hymns? And in the practical realm, aren't decisions about whether or not to canvass a community, host a blood drive, place a worship service advertisement in the paper, start a day care center-- aren't these the utilization of human reason to make judgments about how a church makes its presence known in a community? Aren't they methods? Does that make them "humanistic?"

Unfortunately, many of these arguments end up in black and white distinctions. No one that I know is saying that conversion comes about by any other means than the means of grace. It is God the Holy Spirit working through word and sacrament. But the means and methods by which God's people reach out into their communities, make connections, establish relationships, serve others - - all so that the opportunity to proclaim the Word is obtained - that is what the symposium is about. Let's try another equally valid definition of "church growth methods" just for argumentation's sake. (And by the way, no where in the Symposium literature is there an indication that "church growth methods" are going to be examined or promoted.) Let's define church growth methodologies as "those plans, strategies, and actions which are aimed at equipping and mobilizing God's people to more directly share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with an unbelieving world in any and every circumstance and context so that more and more people may come to know Jesus as their Savior." I just made this up. But try the definition on for size and then see if the same conclusion of condemnation can be arrived at.

John Bauer
________________________________

Paul D. Lindhorst Does the Clobbering - Via the Word
From: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:church_and_change@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rev. Paul D
Lindhorst
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 10:40 PM
To: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [church_and_change] 3rd Annual Church Door Symposium


On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 19:27:57 -0600 "John Bauer"
writes:

The CHARIS Institute, Inc.
Announces its 3rd Annual
CHURCH DOOR SYMPOSIUM
"Effective Evangelistic Churches"
March 6 and 7, 2006
At Wisconsin Lutheran College

Much has been written by conservative Lutheran theologians which is critical of "church growth" methodologies. At the same time, utilization of practical strategies within "means of grace" ministries is a proper use of God-given reason and should be explored so that others can benefit from the knowledge and experience of churches which have been shown to be effective at sharing the gospel.

In my opinion, a clearer definition of true "Church Growth" methodology would be "Humanistic, non-evangelical short-cuts used to effect substantial numerical increases in attendance and membership" methodology.

Two questions: 1) How could one possibly benefit from the study of a methodology whose very essence is intrinsically founded on man's wisdom and not on God's powerful means of grace? 2) Therefore, why would one even attempt to incorporate such a humanistic methodology into their own means-of-grace ministry? The product of such a union would be (at best) a watered down means-of-grace ministry.

Allow me to loosely paraphrase 2 Cor. 6:14,15: Do not be yoked together with humanistic church growth vendors. For what do God's means of grace and humanistic church growth methodologies have in common? Or what fellowship can God's means of grace have with humanistic church growth? What harmony is there between God's means of grace and humanistic church growth?

Maybe Paul's "Keep away from them" warning ought to be considered here (and at other similarly proposed venues). Peter's warning may also be a beneficial addendum to Paul's: Why keep away from them? "[Because] your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." Be careful, your faith really isn't that strong, no matter how long you've been a believer or how often you read your Bible. Only the One in whom your faith is founded is strong - the One who builds us up alone through the truths of His Word, not through the humanistic, false teachings of the heterodox.

Consider this: Paul and Peter never went humanistic in their approach to ministry. They simply proclaimed to those inside and outside the Visible church the truths of God's law and gospel to all who would listen. By doing so, they continued their "on the job training" and their personal "getting to know the culture education." They then taught their sheep to do the same. That's Great Commission, evangelical, means of grace ministry.

I truly believe that if we'd spend our time doing the same, there wouldn't be this perceived need on the parts of so many of us to go and find "better" and "more effective" ways of doing (in our own corners of the world) what the Lord has already equipped us to do with the tools of His powerful Word and sacraments. I do understand that we all can and ought to learn and grow from fellow like-minded believers. Yet, let's continue to place our trust and confidence when it comes to the "effectiveness" of our ministries where it belongs - on our Lord Jesus and His powerful Word & sacraments, and not on "better, more effective ways" of "doing ministry." Remember, no "better, more effective way" has or will ever save anyone.

Paul D. Lindhorst