02
Orbiting the Conventional Church
Posted under Church, appropriate church, conventional church, conversation, creative, institutions, orbit, orbiting the church by FPeatrossA friend at Starbucks on Saturday. Four or five couples at Bob Evans on Sunday. This is as close as it gets to “church.” The idea is most representative of what the early Christians did two millennium ago. They spent time together, ate together and shared together, Hence they knew each other well.
This is what our little group of Jesus followers prefers; meaningful relationships outside the rigid structures of America’s skewed understanding of church. Before I go on, I need to tell you that we all still attend the Sunday assemble. We just no longer do “church work” as defined by the institution. We’re not willing to fall into the trappings of traditional church. And how do we keep from being sucked back in? As Gordon MacKenzie, says, “You go into orbit.”
Have you got a minute? Good. Because I want introduce you to the concept of orbiting. Orbiting is responsible creativity that energetically explores and operates beyond the gravity of church models, patterns, accepted norms, and contemporary standards while remaining connected to the spirit of what western culture has come to define as church.
To enter orbit around the “contemporary-traditional-church” is to find a place of balance where you benefit from the resources of the organization without becoming entombed in the institution. How do you enter orbit? By seizing the best course of action for turning one’s vision into a reality while avoiding the pallid path of “church appropriateness.” You’re ready for all this, right? Good. I’ll go then.
To be of optimum value to the “appropriate church” endeavor, you have to invest enough individuality to counteract the drag of the “appropriate church,” but not so much that you escape the pull altogether. I want to hover just beyond the gravitational pull of the “appropriate church’s” programs, ministries and premeditated Sunday morning worship. Through the measured assertion of my own uniqueness I’m reestablishing a dynamic relationship with the appropriate church. I find its gravitational drag an asset that keeps me from floating out into the overwhelming nothingness of what is embryonic, emerging and still evolving. Yet I must be carefully not to allow that same gravity to suck me into the church trichobezoar, or I’ll find myself in a different kind of nothingness. The nothingness of normalcy made stagnant by the contemporary consumer’s “appropriate church.” Orbiting the appropriate and normal is the only place where you can tap your one-of-a-kind magic, your limitless creativity.
[...] Peatross again, on Orbiting the Conventional Church: Have you got a minute? Good. Because I want introduce you to the concept of orbiting. Orbiting is [...]
I like space, and space stuff. I think this is a model that works for many people. It has been around for quite a while though. Most churches have had a whole asteroid belt of people circling the church, meteoring in on a program or two before they return to the nether regions for the bulk of their existence.
My experience is that orbiting bodies add little to the church. If those bodies are actually really excited about God and what He is doing in their life, and allow that joyful enthusiasm to show in the larger body like the moon reflecting the Sonlight on earth, then there is some benefit. Otherwise, to stay close enough to benefit without any commitment to or responsibility for, seems more like a parasitic relationship. Instead of trying to orbit the harsh environs of a Mercury or the frozen ones of Pluto, search for where your heart is warmed by an earth. Don’t be satisfied by only half connecting. DOn’t be satisfied to be on the outside looking in, but dive into the atmosphere where there is friction and fire, but also air and experience.
I think God would rather you move on to a place where you can connect (or start your own). The warning in Revelations 3 comes to mind.
Who is going to reach the children?
You’re looking through the prism of the institutional church. I use to be a minister, shepherd, and a deacon but I’ve trading all that in to become a spiritual explorer exploring with the people Jesus misses the most. I now have more non-christian friends than christian…and it’s all for Christ. Not parasitic. Not church-centric. But Christ-centric.
So you are coming from a place of strength, and it is a ministry for you. Someone with your background and training can navigate the asteroid belt relatively confidently. Most people need to connect to a body like Ephesians talks about, especially ones that haven’t had all the Bible stories growing up and everything is new. May God use you greatly to reveal Himself through you to the people He has called you to.
The church IS Christ-centric. Maybe you have just been to lousy churches, but the whole purpose of the church is to help people become more like Christ as they support one another. The church is to equip. The church is to grow together. If the traditional church isn’t for you, great! That’s why I said it is better then to go find another one, a non-traditional church where you have some accountability and out of which you can use your gifts and strengths. Maybe it is a small house church, or 5 guys you meet at Starbucks, whatever. Just be careful about knocking the :traditional” church when it is doing much good around the world. Most “traditional” churches know their shortcomings and are working to be more real and authentic. As an orbiter, you are not part of that process, and that is a choice. And I know you know you are part of the “universal” church as a Christian. If you see your non-traditional church orbiting around the traditional one, great! We are all one in Jesus anyways!
I understand where you are coming from, but must admit it raises some questions in my mind. I tend to agree with Steve Grove, although parasitic seems a little harsh. I guess I wonder what the institutional church might be like if everyone took the orbiting role? Who would you then be orbiting around or what would you be orbiting around? You seem to want to enjoy whatever benefit the institutional church might provide while not making any personal investment into that from which you benefit. It is as if you are saying to your brothers and sisters in Christ who are doing the church programs, “thanks, I will enjoy your service to me but I don’t plan on serving you.”
I hope I am not coming across as harshly critical, I am just wondering how you reconcile these things.
I use to be at church every time the doors were open. At one time I was on the payroll of a church staff. I use to participate in worship. Committee’s, ministry leader. etc. No longer.I still assemble every Sunday morning. But my involvement is with a core group of Christians (4-5 couples). We eat together 2-3 times a week. We play together. We are close. We know each other well.
Again I assemble every Sunday but without participation. I save my energies for ministry outside the 4 walls of a church bldg. I have more non-Christian friends than Christian. They all know me well, and I know them well.
Believe me when I say it is impossible to articulate the concept of a spiritual explorer, sometimes guide in a weblog post. But if interested I have a complete article here
Read George Barna’s book Revolution [link]
Read the book UNchristian
[link]
I also have authored a book Missio Dei : in the crisis of christianity that fully explains the missional concept. If you’re interested you can purchase Missio Dei at amazon. Click on the book located on the right sidebar and it will take you there.
The Christian Chronicle reviews my book in the Feb issue (due out any day).
I suggest we all read wide and read deep.
If we look at the aggregate body of unchurched adults…
“Perhaps the most obvious observation is that most unchurched people are not being pursued by anyone.”
George Barna; Rechurching the Unchurched
The gospels record 132 contacts Jesus had with people. Six were in the temple, four in the synagogues, and 122 were out with the people in the mainstream of life. In this new millennium the call has changed from ‘come-to-church’ to ‘come-to-Christ.’
Hokey, you’ll see by my name that I am at least related to Steve (it’s much more than that. Wink wink, nudge, nudge).
So, I guess that makes me the pastor’s wife.
Whatever.
I’m not exactly on the cheerleading team at U of Church.
So, anyway, here’s the question I have about the orbit model deal-e-o.
K, so you’re out there right on the OUTside. You’re talking to the - well, I’ll leave out the labels. What did you call them? Jesusless people? That’ll do.
K, so off you are there ministering to the Jesusless people. This is a good thing. I agree with it. Not that it’s important if I agree with it or not. Just saying.
K, so, what on earth do you do with a Jesusless person who then, because of your authentic conversations, becomes a Jesus person?
You can’t really risk having too many of them hang around you. That could start a church.
You can’t really send them off to the local church - because church is bad - or inadequate. or whatever.
I’m just picturing these poor souls being flung into outer space.
One of the issues that continues to come up, almost invariably, among the people Jesus’ misses is their distrust of institutions and especially Xians. Many have told me stories and given examples of their experiences. From what I have seen and heard and from the research I’ve read many believe it could take a generation to overcome the evangelism of the 1980s and 1990s. Fortunately salvation is a process. What happens early on in a relationship and throughout a relationship is as important as the final consumating act that brings a person to Christ. I have the patience for that and I’m willing to give as much (I should say more) time as I use to give for sermon prep. week end and week out; 52 weeks a year. And if they don’t come to Christ never mind, I still did the right thing. I have no agenda …except to behave in a way that they’ll see a different kind of Christian. Most churches are not seeing conversions now (I have the stats if you’d like to see them).Generally, what we’re seeing across America is more swelling than actual growth. Crop rotation.
So ur question assumes that conversion happens at a much faster pace than it actually does. This is another problem and it discourages me that this kind of thinking prevails among fundy Xians.
I don’t have the time or patience to type and type and type and neither am I naive enough to believe that someone who is embedded in the system will want to understand (there’s a lot to lose). I’ll say it again, if you’re interested read something outside your comfort zone. I left a number of links to articles and books in the post above.
FYI–there’s a revolution flying under your radar.
I think I understand where you are coming from and what your efforts and intentions are directed toward and I really do appreciate your writing about it here. I have been reading up on other ways of “doing church” and don’t consider myself a “fundy.” I came into church life after being raised in a non-christian home and environment. I see that the institutional church is becoming less and less effective at actually reaching the lost and discipling them and I am seeking some answers, but I am not ready to throw the baby out with the bath water. Nevertheless, I am grateful that you are not simply a church “dropout” but seem to be someone who is being intentionally missional. In that you have my support and prayers and my hopes that God uses your life and ministry to those who are not followers of Christ for His glory and their good.
If you will be patient with me for a moment let me take another run at my question, but do it from a different angle - Why must you remain in “orbit” around the institutional church to do what you are doing? Are you of the feeling that the institutional church will not embrace what you are doing or is it that you are afraid that getting too close to the institutional church will affect you in a way that it will stop you from doing what you are doing? I take it from what you wrote that it is the latter - ie. you are choosing to hold the institution at arms length because you don’t believe you can embrace both the institution and the ministry you are doing at the same time.
I had a look at the books you recommend. They are all in my library and I’ve read them, and others as well, including “I Sold My Soul on E-bay” (Hemant Mehta) and others. I haven’t read your book. I saw the title and thought it was an oldie from Hank Hanegraaff.
But you need to understand that just because I’m working to improve something you no longer have any use for doesn’t mean I don’t know what’s going on. I don’t have my head in the sand by any means. Not even close.
You say my question implies a certain ignorance. I’m thinking your conclusions about what other people think may come closer to over the top judgmental than you might care to be. I’m not pleased when people try to stick their labels on my lapel. I’m not embedded in the church and I have nothing to lose by walking away from it if that’s what God told me to do. I’d do it in a heartbeat.
You have no idea what my comfort zone is, but I’m very sure you would be surprised.
You’ve judged me by what you think I should be based on what you perceive is my position in a church. That is reductionist thinking. You believe I haven’t read the books you’ve read. You’re wrong. I’ve read those, and others. I’ve read much of the same research you have, and others (I have access to University data bases which I use regularly).
Exploring is important, but I don’t choose to explore the way you are exploring. And I don’t judge you the way you have judged me. I asked what I did because I want you to think about the model to its furthest logical extent.
I thought you would have an answer - not an accusation.
I’m sorry your only response to someone who is asking questions is to throw up your hands and say “You just can’t understand.”
I was hoping for an interesting exchange.
Add A Comment