I’ve struggled with how exactly I wanted to put these ideas
into words this week; but here goes nothing. The church is not a business. Here's why that is important.
Throughout the church’s history, Christians have gotten very
attached to various organizational models, to the point of believing that one
or another is divinely mandated, to the point of going to war over opposing
models. Now, in the U.S. we don’t tend to get dogmatic about church government;
but we can get vehemently pragmatic about it. We can assume that the model we’re
used to, the one we’ve seen all around us, is the only one that will work; that
we need it. But that’s not true.
I think that it should be unsurprising that a capitalist
entrepreneurial society such as America should produce a church that runs itself
on the basic template of a business. In the Nazarene church, our council of
elders is called a board, and the lead pastor is the chairman. We have accountants
(sometimes accounting departments) that keep track of our budgets. We tailor
our church’s atmosphere and image to appeal to target demographics. We have
advertisements, billboards and commercials to try to sell our religious wares
to potential customers. In the medieval church, though, in a society of
patriarchy and feudalism, the church operated as a kingdom. In other types of
societies the church takes other forms and that’s ok.
I think, though, that this pattern should awaken us to a
potential problem. The monarchical pattern that the medieval church followed
was a natural fit considering its geo-temporal context; but it also had
significant problems. And because its members were surrounded by this
monarchical, patriarchal model of social organization throughout their lives,
it was difficult for them to see those problems before they became so
destructive that they ruptured the church. They forgot that, although the
church is a Kingdom, it is not a Kingdom of this world, but a Kingdom breaking
into this world. I believe that we are in danger of swallowing the capitalistic
business model of social organization because it is what we see all around us;
we assume that it is necessary, but we aren’t sufficiently removed from
ourselves to readily see its weaknesses. We forget that, although the church
may benefit from business like practices, the church is not a business.
Two really aspects of the business world that can be
abhorrently destructive in the church are competition and profit. In business,
competition is healthy because it restricts market prices and ensures the
quality of goods and services. In the church, however, competition between
churches can lead to ugly, ugly relationships between congregations. I have
actually seen advertisements in which a particular congregation was actively
trying to lure Christians away from other churches, touting their own strengths
and disparaging the weaknesses of other congregations. The church is not a
business; it is a body; and while it is healthy to ruthlessly compete in the
world of business, it is not at all healthy for a body to war upon itself.
In business, you must have capital to survive. Businesses
exist to make money, and they cannot operate without a healthy flow of cash,
both incoming and outgoing, to keep the economic gears whirring. The church,
however, is not a business. It does not exist to make money, it does not
produce a saleable product, and it does not, therefore, need any kind of steady
income to keep its spiritual gears working. The church needs the Spirit of
Christ. We must have compassion, generosity, commitment, holiness, faith, hope,
and above all, love. These don’t cost a dime.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t
invest in buildings, projectors, lights, heating and a/c, books, pamphlets,
media, production etc. Money is a resource, and I believe that God wants us to
be good stewards of the resources He gives us; but, we must remember that money
is only a resource among others, and if the flow of money suddenly dried up
tomorrow, the church would go on. Unlike businesses, churches can thrive in a
state of poverty.
We need to remember who we are; and we need to remember what
it is that really makes us the church. I think it would even be healthy to
investigate new models of church government and organization; models that might
serve to uncover the weaknesses of the capitalistic church; models that may be
able to coexist with, partner with, and alleviate the weaknesses of the capitalistic
church.
Next week, I intend to talk more about what makes the church
the church. In the meantime, do you have any ideas for organizational models
for the American church? What might be some alternatives to running the church
like a business?
A different model would be that every one in the church had to support themselves with outside jobs. Kind of like missionaries that aren't supported by the church and have to rely on jobs to fulfil their mission.
ReplyDeleteDecisions would be made by elders and the elders would have to be nominated and approved of by the whole body of Christ. An elder could only serve for a finite period of time say, say three to five years. New elders would rotate in every year and some would leave to provide continuity.
Of course in the Methodist church there is the model of itineracy.
In the last few years I have been in Pentecostal churches, Christian churches, Non-Denominational churches, Luthern, Methodist, Anglican, and other Nazarene churches. Wasn't looking for a different church, just playing all kinds of different music. Kind of seemed like an itinerant musician. End result, I learned a lot about the way other churches operate and how they use music to lead Worship. What a blessing that has been. In the end it really isn't about music, but love and compassion and the best model that supports those two things.
R Kelsey
Mormon churches do that; no paid ministers at the local level; not sure if the higher ups are paid or not.
DeleteBTW we miss your drums Rick; Joey can keep a beat but he's not you, and since he's on drums I'm on the bass now I'm certainly no Joey.