Friday, May 21, 2010

A Dream

I've been dreaming lately.

What if there was a church without services, but existed only in service? Purely the body of Christ giving of themselves in order to increase the quality of others' lives.
Here are my thoughts:

- How many wounds would that heal?
People who have been rejected on Sunday morning, at some point in their lives. We would have the opportunity to tell them, we are a church that doesn't hold services. And they would wonder how that is church. But we can show them that church is simply Christians living in service to others. Jesus came to serve, did he not? Did he ever 'hold services?'

- Jesus came to heal the sick.
Services tend to lend themselves to keeping the righteous right. What I am envisioning is getting down and dirty with the 'sick.' People who are really in desperate need of a healer. Children in downtown cities, whose parents are drunk, high or abusive. The homeless guy on the street that everyone thinks is crazy. The old man in the nursing home that has lost his mind. The really HARD work. Churches are relatively safe. They tend to stay out of the dirt. But really, what's the point in that?

- What is 'Community service' anyway?
I've always felt uncomfortable about putting 'community service' on a resume. In what way did I actually make a longterm difference in someone's life? A bakesale is not a community service to me. Picking up trash is not a community service. To actually SERVE a community, is something way deeper than that. I think the meaning of those words have been lost in all the resumes, applications, and advertisements.

- The first church.
What would they have said about what we call community service? What would they say about our churches? It's so convicting for me.

- The need for fellowship and unity.
I understand that a big chunk of this would be somewhat diminished in a church that doesn't hold services. BUT I think that the impact that we would make in NOT, might be more than the impact if we would. There would be ways and opportunities to unite, but it would not be such a huge part of 'church.'

This is all my thoughts bumping around in my head. And please don't take this to mean that I'm bashing all church services and churches that do them. BY NO MEANS! I believe they are of great importance! But I do not believe they are a necessary part of every church. I think our culture has made them such. I've been called to a life of 'church planting.' But what if that isn't what we all think it is? Something just squirms in me when I think of starting churches that are based around weekly services.

I would really appreciate all thoughts on this matter. Am I just being ridiculous?

3 comments:

Unknown said...

hey Izetta,
We've been blessed by a group of ladies who are doing exactly what you described. They are not replacing church or services, just supplementing. They are making a difference in our community.
In answer to your question -I think Jesus held services often. So many were attending and refused to leave that He felt the need to feed thousands of them.

Gerry Stoltzfoos said...

Izetta, Jason Fitch was just telling me how hard it is to maintain focus and direction while they are just meeting monthly. Group unity, and organization, and especially enough of that special time in the presence of God where He moves powerfully among his people. Turns out He likes family and likes family meetings, and a lot of His cool stuff gets done there- like physical and emotional healings, and recruiting of new (work) team members and stuff.

Lastly (always wanted to use cool terms like 'lastly'), we do it this way because the early church did. Our example of church comes from Acts where "they met weekly in the Temple AND from house to house".

I think your vision of church is right on- it is about service. The weekend services are "team meetings".

Unknown said...

Funny..I was directed to your blog by the very Jason Fitch which Pastor Gerry Stoltzfoos mentioned in his post! I believe there is a move of the Holy Spirit for exactly what your talking about. It's not "anti-attractional church model", but it's not "church as we know it". It's the "go and be" versus the "come and see" and I do agree there HAS to be a balance of both. There of course will be resistance from all kinds of corners on this, as I think some will see this as an attack, albeit a subtle one, on a church model which has proven effective for reaching the lost. I think it needs to be conveyed in such a way as to "supplement" the church whose primary focus is on the weekend service, rather than replacing it. Like it or not, most churches' primary and main focus is the weekend. "Come and experience God and encounter the Holy Spirit". And that's great and awesome!! I'm a product of that model so I know it works..but what if? Would love to connect on Facebook or via email (b_crews@bellsouth.net) and discuss further. We are plugged into an AWESOME local church which we plan to remain a part of, but are also moving forward with a church model similar to what you shared in your blog. Great discussion and THANKS Jason for pointing me here!!