“He is also head of the
body, the church; and He is the beginning, the
first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come
to have first place in everything.” Colossians 1:18
Growing the Visible Church
Prior to the Reformation the Roman Catholic Church did
not distinguish between the visible and invisible church.
Salvation was considered to be found within the church; Rome
with its papacy was considered “the church.” Failure to
make a proper distinction between the visible and invisible
church led to horrible practices, before the Reformation and
after -- on both sides of the division. Let us look at one
example of what happens when expanding the visible church by
any means available is viewed as “building Christ’s church.”
In 770 AD Christendom had suffered greatly. The former
Christian strongholds of northern Egypt and the Near East
had been over run by Islam. The pagan Saxons of Germany
despised Christianity. They murdered the missionaries sent
to them and were enemies of the Franks. At this point in
history Charlemagne arose as the great king of the Franks.
Through a bloody, thirty year series of wars he subjugated
the Saxons and forced them to convert to Christianity.7
Historian Justo Gonzalez writes, “Charlemagne resolved to
drown the rebellion in blood and in the waters of baptism.
Those who proved intractable were slaughtered. The rest
were forced to accept baptism.”8 In 800 Pope Leo
II crowned Charlemagne the “emperor” in a move to revive the
Roman Empire.9
Charlemagne’s policy of forced conversions (he also
forced tithing to the church through civil law10)
became a new way to enlarge the visible church. The
practice continued for many centuries; but as grim as this
sounds, the result was positive. The Saxons actually became
civilized and eventually became accustomed to Christian
culture. Thus Christianity became established in a
previously pagan land.
Although no one today is likely to endorse such a policy,
it would be possible to rationalize it historically. For
example, prior to their “conversion,” the Saxons were savage
marauders committed to pagan gods. They killed the
missionaries sent to them. After Charlemagne’s conquest,
the Saxons were forced to follow the teachings of
Christianity. The Capitulary for Saxony, required,
under the penalty of death, respect for the church and its
buildings, tithing, the keeping of Lent, the keeping of the
Lord’s Day, baptism, and other Christian duties.11
Eventually this led to a better situation than they had
under pagan war lords, because they were in the visible
church. In their new situation there was, however dim, the
light of the gospel and some were likely truly converted.
Thus, for centuries to come, Saxons had a more civilized
existence with better rule of law and as much Christian
light as the medieval Roman church had to offer. It could
be argued that souls were added to the Kingdom because of
Charlemagne’s campaign. Yet what Charlemagne did was
repulsive and wicked.
Why do I share this bit of history? I do so to underscore
the problem of a certain type of thinking. The idea is that
“we” are the Christians and this is the church. Those
outside of “us” are pagans and in pagan darkness (nowadays
we call them “unchurched”). Since what we have is a good
thing, the more of “them” that we can get into the visible
church with “us” the better; Christianity is being spread.
Once people join the visible church (however dim the light
of the gospel might be in a given visible church), some will
likely be converted. The rest will live better “Christian”
lives, influenced by Christian ethics and teachings. Their
children will be raised in the church rather than in the
pagan world. As “Christendom” grows everyone is better off.
The Church Growth Movement
This is precisely the thinking of the church growth
movement and its modern founder Robert Schuller. Schuller
is famous for saying that his Crystal Cathedral is a last
stop for people who had given up on religion and otherwise
would have no religion. He established his Institute for
Successful Church Leadership in 1970. His website says this
about his Institute: “Alumni include Bill Hybels, John
Maxwell, Bishop Charles Blake, Rick Warren, Walt Kallestad,
Kirbyjon Caldwell, and many, many others who found the
fundamental principles of success at our sessions .... and
the rest is church history!”12 He continues, “The
students outran the master and I'm proud of them - and you
can do it, too!”
The success that Schuller and his followers have found is
the ability to get people to join the visible church without
being confronted with “negative” things like the wrath of
God against sin and the need for the blood atonement.
The key idea in the church growth movement founded by
Robert Schuller is to maximize the visible church by using
proven business marketing strategies. Forcing people into
the church at sword point has been abandoned long ago.
Charlemagne’s strategy is no longer viable. Now leaders
entice people into the visible church using the business
model that works so well for secular corporations. These
strategies include organizational models that provide focus,
efficiency, outcome based feedback, and “synergy of
energy.” Most important, however, is maximizing the
organization’s ability to find and keep satisfied customers
(people willing to join the visible church).
Before I explain how this works, I want to reiterate the
rationale behind it. As with the Saxons in Charlemagne’s
day, there are “unchurched” people who lack exposure to
Christianity (other than what the popular culture or media
might provide). These people would be better off in church,
(especially an evangelical church) than outside of the
church; that is axiomatic. But, these people are willing to
join the church unless they see a need to join. It is the
job of the religious corporation (church) to convince such
religious consumers that they have a need and that the
corporation in question can best fulfill it. This is what
marketing is about; its goal is satisfied customers. The
Crystal Cathedral is filled with satisfied customers and has
been for decades.
Let us take that particular church as an example and
think about our categories of the visible and invisible
church. Luther said that there was some invisible church
even in Roman Catholicism. Very likely some became part of
the invisible church after Charlemagne forced them into the
visible one. God is merciful and if some light of the truth
of Christ and His work is there, some will believe in spite
of the fact that the light is diffused through a translucent
window. I would argue that some people have likely met
Christ at the Crystal Cathedral since Schuller occasionally
invites an evangelical as a guest speaker or allows a
testimony from someone who does know the Lord. Also, the
hymns they sing may have enough of the gospel for someone to
believe.
Taking this analysis further, let us consider Schuller’s
followers like Bill Hybels and Rick Warren. Both of them
are more evangelical than Schuller. Their terminology often
includes parts of the gospel. This being the case, by God’s
grace and mercy, there are likely some conversions through
their approach. So, in their churches, there likely exists
an invisible church. Perhaps there are many true Christians
within.
This, however, does not justify the theory that one ought
to use whatever means work best to grow the visible church
simply because people are better off “churched” and some may
actually be saved. That rationale assumes that Christ has
not told us what the church is to be and do. It assumes
that we have the liberty to adopt any plan that gets people
to come to the visible church and stay there. I deny that
we have that liberty. It opens the door to unacceptable
options.
The Efficient, Market Driven Church
Those churches that have adopted Schuller’s strategy (and
others like it) are committed to using the latest proven
systems to gather the largest possible group. The system
that works the best is one that is focused, efficient, and
seeks measurable results (out-come based). Rick Warren uses
these principles in his book, The Purpose Driven Church.13
In this approach a mission statement is absolutely
essential. Everything the church does has to be justified
vis-à-vis the mission statement. This is how corporations
have learned to keep every aspect of their operation focused
and working with “synergy of energy.”14 This
model of operation has proven itself to be far superior to
previous ones. The defining mission statement, according to
Rick Warren must be stated in terms of results.15
The mission statement (Warren uses the term “purpose”) is
necessary to produce focus and eliminate programs or
processes that are not contributing to the stated mission.
Warren says, “A narrow mission is a clear mission.”16
Warren also says, “Make it measurable.”17 This
is the idea of being “outcome based.” If the outcome is not
being achieved, then the hindrances must be identified and
removed.
The outcome that such churches seek is a growing visible
church with dedicated, committed members who work in unity
to achieve the mission of the church. The church must be
portrayed to the unchurched as desirable and likely to meet
their needs in order to gain a maximum number of new
members. Rick Warren suggests that since unbelievers are
not looking for truth, something else needs to be offered.18
Warren says, “While most unbelievers aren’t looking for
truth, they are looking for relief.”19
Therefore he teaches pastors to teach only what people see
as benefiting their needs. He claims that Jesus used the
approach of meeting their “felt needs,”20 and
“Jesus was a life-application preacher.”21
Here we must ask a question. Is that why, when Jesus
meet the “felt needs” of the crowd in John 6, that He later
confronted them with the need for a blood atonement which
resulted in the crowd leaving and refusing to follow Jesus?22
Jesus told Pilate that He came to bear witness to the truth,
an answer that seemed irrelevant to Pilate.23
What sinner ever saw a “need” for a crucified Jewish Messiah
without first having been confronted with their sin and the
need for atonement? Churches that exist to maximize the size
and efficiency of the visible church are forced to change
the gospel because the gospel is a narrow gate with few
entering.
In the efficient, market driven church people come in
because the church is appealing to them; and they get
motivated and committed because of the excitement and unity
that exists around the church’s mission statement. People
are asked to make commitments to the church and promise to
support the church’s programs.24 People enjoy
being a part of a committed community, unified, working
together, and achieving measurable results. The ability to
make that happen is the key to the success of the religious
corporation.
The unity of the church, in this contemporary model, is
determined by the mission statement. Every member must
agree to put his or her effort fully into achieving the
stated purpose of the church. Evangelical versions of this
approach use Biblical concepts in their statement. To gain
this unity of purpose the pastor has to become a “vision
caster.” This means selling his plan and getting everyone
excited about it. Rick Warren says that the purpose
statement must be continually repeated. He says, “Once you
have defined the purposes of your church, you must
continually clarify and communicate to everyone in your
congregation.”25 This helps create the “synergy
of energy” that makes the combined talents and enthusiasm of
a group of people multiply in effectiveness. The resultant
excitement is contagious as the group grows and sees the
measurable outcome of their mission happen before their
eyes. This process certainly works and is not physically
coercive like Charlemagne’s.26
Rick Warren demands unity of every member and requires
that they sign a covenant in which they promise unity.27
They are led through a series of classes that require
entering covenants.28 These are designed to
create deeper commitment. People who do not support the
unity of the church are warned and disciplined. This is
Warren’s interpretation of how he sees the Bible’s teaching
on dealing with “divisive” people: “They are to . . . warn
those who are argumentative, plead for harmony and unity,
rebuke those who are disrespectful of leadership, and remove
divisive people from church if they ignore two warnings.”29
This will help us understand how solid Christian people who
are not accused of sin or heresy are being removed from
churches. We will now compare how a Biblically defined
church differs from a corporate mission defined church in
how various aspects of the life of the church are handled.
Contrasts Between a Biblical Church and Seeker Church
Let us consider the topic that was just raised – church
discipline. The Lord spoke about this in Matthew 18:
And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in
private; if he listens to you, you have won your
brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or
two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three
witnesses every fact may be confirmed. And if he
refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if
he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to
you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer. (Matthew
18:15-17)
Elsewhere the Bible teaches to remove unrepentant sinners
from fellowship (for example 1Corinthians 5). In a
Biblically defined church, unrepentant sin breaks
fellowship. In Matthew 18 Jesus taught about how important
every believer is to Him, particularly those who were
“little ones” who might be overlooked. They are so
important that the ninety sheep would be left behind to find
the straying one (Matthew 18:12). The key concern is
the salvation of every one whom the Lord has brought to
Himself: “Thus it is not the will of your Father who is
in heaven that one of these little ones perish” (Matthew
18:14; note that “little ones” in context are believers
– Matthew 18:6).
In churches that adopt the new model of corporate
efficiency through a mission statement and a system that
produces “synergy of energy” to reach the desired outcome,
this process is much different. The difference explains why
solid Christians who are not being accused of unrepentant
sin are being disfellowshipped. The “synergy of energy” is
only possible when every member is pulling together to
achieve the stated mission of the corporation. People are
confronted and removed who insist on doing things in ways
not consistent with the corporate mission statement.
Inasmuch as the mission statement is not the gospel or the
whole counsel of God, it is a truncated version of
Christianity. Those who feel strongly that certain Biblical
commands (like correcting false teachers or preaching about
the wrath of God against sin) should be followed are monkey
wrenches in the gears of the smoothly oiled corporate
machine. They have to go.
Failing to blindly follow misguided church leadership is
not what Matthew 18 is all about. In the context, the
disciples were arguing about who was the greatest, and Jesus
took a little child to make an object lesson. The “little
ones” were believers who had no great status in the minds of
others. They are to be treated with the utmost love and
concern, even though as one straggling “lamb” they seem
insignificant. What we have instead, in the new paradigm
churches, are faithful “little ones” being booted for not
supporting the corporate dreams of those who deem themselves
important. This is a total reversal of what Jesus taught.
Unity of What?
Unity is a Biblical concept. But again, there is a huge
difference in the concept of unity in a Biblically defined
church and the new Purpose Driven Church. In the Bible, the
goal is the unity of the faith: “until we all attain to
the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which
belongs to the fulness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:13).
The faith is the content of the gospel, including the
entirety of the teaching as given by Christ and His
Apostles: “Beloved, while I was making every effort to
write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity
to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the
faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude
1:3). One cannot decide anything about what unity is to
be preserved without first deciding what “the faith” is.
For example, at the time of the Reformation, Luther was
considered a heretic, a schismatic whose efforts were
directed against the unity of the church. From the
perspective of Rome, he was. However, that assumes that the
Roman church and her practices were truly in accord with the
gospel and the teachings of Christ and His Apostles. Luther
believed that they were not and that to find the unity of
the faith, churches needed to be established based on the
true means of grace. Both Luther and Calvin taught that
true churches were those where the Word was purely taught
and the sacraments were kept according to the Lord’s
commandment. It is impossible to decide what constitutes a
schismatic (one who causes divisions) without first deciding
what constitutes a valid church!
Let us again consider Jude, where we were told to contend
for the faith:
But you, beloved, ought to remember the words that
were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that they were saying to you, “In the last time
there shall be mockers, following after their own
ungodly lusts.” These are the ones who cause divisions,
worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit. (Jude
1:17-19)
According to this, the divisions are caused by
world-minded people whose lusts indicate that they are not
truly regenerate. They are departing from the faith that
was delivered by Christ and His Apostles.
Elsewhere we see the same thing: “Now I urge you,
brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and
hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and
turn away from them” (Romans 16:17). Notice that
division is that which is contrary to the apostolic
teaching. Here is another example:
If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does
not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,
he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a
morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes
about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive
language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between
men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who
suppose that godliness is a means of gain (1Timothy
6:3-5).
Unity cannot be preserved when a clear Biblical
understanding of sound doctrine is absent. The unity of the
faith is not the same as the unity of a religious
corporation. Luther brought us closer to the unity of the
faith (because he brought the church closer to sound
doctrine), even though he appeared at the time to be a
schismatic. Religious corporations that exist to meet the
needs of the maximum numbers of religious consumers move us
away from the unity of the faith because preserving sound
doctrine is not in their stated mission.
Let us consider “unity” as defined by the efficient,
seeker oriented religious corporation. As already
discussed, this model of church demands unity based on its
mission statement and leadership. People who do not fit the
plan must go. It is not necessary to prove someone a
heretic or gross sinner to remove them from “fellowship.”
In this system, they are removed for failing to promote the
needs and goals of the religious corporation. In a secular
corporation, that would be reasonable, but not in the
church.
A secular corporation can determine its marketing goals,
mission, and protocol, and legitimately remove those who
refuse to cooperate with the corporate mission statement.
But is this valid with the Church? The Bible defines the
church and the doctrines of Christ and His apostles
determine its unity. Church leaders who decide to truncate
the Biblical definition for the sake of expediency and
corporate success have no right to remove godly Christians
for the “sin” of not being in unity with their man-made
mission statement. They have no Biblical authority to do
this.
Likewise Christians are pressured into entering man-made
“covenants” that Rick Warren and others like him devise to
insure that no dissenter can exist in their midst. This
“covenant” becomes the test of unity and fellowship rather
than “the faith once for delivered to the saints.” They
achieve the unity of the religious corporation at the
expense of the unity of the faith. This is wrong!
The Message of the Church
Jesus told his apostles what was to be the message of the
church: “teaching them to observe all that I commanded
you” (Matthew 28:20a). He did not say, “teach
them those parts of my message that they think are relevant
to their felt needs”! In the Luke account of the Great
Commission Jesus said this: “and that repentance for
forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in His name to all
the nations, beginning from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47).
A Biblically defined church preaches the gospel, including
the need for repentance and proclaims the whole counsel of
God as Paul did. Everything Jesus taught, including that
which was written by His authoritative apostles in the New
Testament, is to be taught. People who attend Biblically
defined churches should soon become fully Biblically
literate and able to defend the faith cogently. They should
be so well trained in the truth of Scriptures that they have
discernment (Hebrews 5:14).
In the new seeker paradigm churches the message is
tailored to appeal to the largest possible audience. The
goal is to build the visible church to be as large as it can
get. Therefore, pastors lay aside those parts of the New
Testament that are not deemed desirable or relevant by
potential religious consumers. Evangelicals who adopt the
Robert Schuler inspired version of creating a religious
corporation do not deny any important doctrines. They just
do not confess them publicly. They believe in a literal
hell, they just do not preach it from the pulpit. They
believe in the wrath of God against sin and the need for the
blood atonement, but that is left out of the pulpit as
well. Doctrine is privatized. It is relegated to a
“statement of faith” on a website or made available
elsewhere in case someone actually cares about such things.
In the new paradigm churches the orthodox “statement of
faith” contains truths that the pastors do not care enough
about to preach to their own congregations or to sinners.
However, should someone in a discernment ministry challenge
them about their teaching, they trot out their boiler plate
orthodoxy to deflect criticism. What they fail to realize
is that the many mainline protestant denominations that left
orthodoxy during the modernist takeover of the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries kept their orthodox statements
of faith intact. They had no time for such foolish
doctrines such as the virgin birth; but why needlessly start
a fight by trying to change denominational confessions that
were hundreds of years old? What is preached from the pulpit
is a much better test of what is truly believed than a
statement of faith.
Conclusion
Peter said this: “obtaining as the outcome of your
faith the salvation of your souls” (1Peter 1:9).
The “outcome based” corporate management churches judge
their success vis-à-vis their mission statement based on
measurable outcome. The only outcome they can measure very
accurately is the number of people joining the visible
church. The invisible church cannot be measured because it
cannot be seen. The Biblically defined church seeks to
nurture and grow the invisible church through the means of
grace. Though we cannot know for sure who the elect are, we
know for sure what means God uses to call people to Himself
and sanctify them. If we faithfully provide those means,
God will use them to nurture His flock which was purchased
by the blood of Christ. The size of the visible church is
not an important issue, but the existence and well being of
the invisible one surely is.
The redefined church of the church growth movement has
mostly ignored the matter of the invisible church. Like
Rome and her benefactor Charlemagne, they use the best means
available at the time to make the visible church as big as
possible, even if the light of the truth is so dim that it
is with difficulty anyone would be saved or sanctified. If
happy religious consumers living better lives than they had
outside of the church is the test of validity, then these
huge and rapidly growing churches must be right. However, I
do not believe there is anything in the New Testament that
validates seeking to maximize the visible church by means
that tend to strangle the invisible one.
Consider the inspired words of Paul: “Pay close
attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in
these things; for as you do this you will insure salvation
both for yourself and for those who hear you” (1Timothy
4:16). That is how you insure that there is a growing
invisible church enrolled in heaven. Consider what Jesus
told Peter: “Feed My sheep” (see John 21:15-17).
Shall we obey God or shall we drink of the elixir of
corporate success?
End Notes
- Martin Luther as cited by C. F. W. Walther,
Church and Ministry, (Saint Louis: Concordia, 1987
edition) 94.
- “Germany.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2004.
Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 3 Dec. 2004
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=58088.
- Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of
Christianity Vol. 1, (San Francisco: HarperCollins,
1984) 267.
- Ibid. 266.
-
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14741b.htm
-
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/carol-saxony.html
-
http://www.crystalcathedral.org/rhsi/rhsi.about.html
- Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Church,
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995).
- Rick Warren’s website, Pastors.com, explains
how “synergy of energy” is important in his type of
church:
http://www.pastors.com/articles/SevenTransformation.asp
Peter Drucker, the business guru is mentioned favorably.
- Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 107.
- Ibid. 100.
- Ibid. 101.
- Ibid. 226.
- Ibid.
- Ibid. 227.
- Ibid. 230.
- See the entirety of John chapter 6. The
gospels disprove Warren’s theory. It is not surprising
he sees things this way since he was trained by Robert
Schuller who interprets Jesus’ teaching the same way
“The Be Happy Attitudes.”
- John 18:37.
- Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 130,
131.
- Ibid. 112.
- For example, Charlemagne’s Capitulary for
Saxony enforced tithing through civil law; op. cit.;
www.fordham.edu;
Rick Warren requires people to sign a “growth covenant”
which requires tithing for those who are committing to
his church; Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 54.
The former coerced tithing, the later entices people to
commit to it so as to participate in the “covenant” of
the visible church.
- Warren, The Purpose Driven Life,
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002) 167.
- Warren, Purpose Driven Church, 130.
- Warren, Purpose Driven Life, 166.
Copyright © 1992-2005 Twin City
Fellowship
Please
read the rest the of this much-needed message -- along
with the endnotes -- at
http://www.twincityfellowship.com/cic/articles/issue88.htm
Other articles by Bob DeWaay:
Faulty Premises
of the Church Growth Movement
“Church Health
Award” from Rick Warren or Jesus Christ?
Bob DeWaay is
the Pastor of
Twin City Fellowship, a
non-denominational evangelical Church in Minneapolis, MN:
"We are a
body of believers who attempt to live our Christian
faith according to Acts 2:42 by devoting ourselves to
prayer, fellowship, searching the Scriptures, and the
Lord’s Supper. Our mission is to equip the saints for the work of
ministry and to reach the lost with the Gospel of Jesus
Christ. We do this through expository preaching, study
of the Scriptures, publications, our website and
neighborhood outreaches."