ISSUE 30 / JULY_ AUG 2020
A UATLHT OE RR / H AAURTVHEOYR // JA EURT RH YO RM . I R E L A N D / K A Y L A P I E R C E W
The COVID-19 crisis that has engulfed the world in recent months temporarily closed church doors and upended the way we meet, worship, give and serve. In the midst of that, the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis resulted in widespread protests across the nation against racism and injustice. As pastors lead their congregations through these difficult times, many have asked anew an important question: What, precisely, is the mission of the Church? In the end, this may prove to be one of the positive outcomes of the struggles that have come to define 2020 — a Church that has thought more deeply and more critically about the nature of its calling. We have become accustomed to defining “church” by programs, facilities and leaders. People may choose a home church because it has a good children’s ministry or because the pastor preaches in an engaging way. Or perhaps they feel connected to a particular small group experience that makes them feel valued and encouraged. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of these things — except they have the potential to make us think about the church in terms of our own needs and desires. This can cause us to ground our understanding of the church not in Scripture, but in cultural norms and personal preferences, or in individuals with dynamic personalities. In short, the things we value in a church can easily become more about us than about God’s plans and purposes. In their book, Good Faith, David Kinnaman and Gabe Lyons put it this way: There is a tremendous amount of individualism in today’s society, and that’s reflected in the church too. Millions of Christians have grafted New Age dogma onto their spiritual person. When we peel back the layers, we find that many Christians are using the way of Jesus to pursue the way of self. … While we wring our hands about secularism spreading through culture, a majority of churchgoing Christians have embraced corrupt, me-centered theology. In virtually every area of life, our culture encourages us to consider what’s in it for us. However, we should think of the Church primarily in terms of what we have to offer
Christ Community Crisis the world. The Church exists for the world, but this truth often gets left behind in our
hyper-individualized church approaches. Remember, it was for the sake of the world that Jesus came (John 3:16), and it is for the sake of the world that He calls us together
and sends us out. Jesus came to seek and to save the lost, not coddle the already found.
Perhaps this current crisis will push us toward realizing a less selfish version of our-
selves. If danger lurks in understanding the Church primarily in terms of our own likes and dislikes, how do we avoid this pitfall? Some seek to define the Church by what
it does — especially preaching, service and community. Scholars refer to these as the kerygmatic, diaconic and koinoniac functions of the Church, respectively. However, a church that defines itself by its activities can easily become engulfed in busyness while still not having a clear understanding of why it does all those things. Activity does not equal effectiveness. Furthermore, churches can place too much emphasis on doing and not enough on being. We can be deeply engaged in compassionate projects all around the world but unable to get along with the person who sits next to us every Sunday, or with co-workers whose politics and values differ from our own. We can become masters of long-distance forms of compassion while remaining compassionless toward