"What Is Happening to Us" revisited

[marc]

I wonder if some segments of the brotherhood haven't become "a people without a vision."

Pax.

Isn't this the same question being asked throughout the Protestant world right now?

Would Joe Beam's model still hold true if you replaced "Church of Christ" with "Baptist" or "Methodist" or some other name?[/color]

[tidbit]

Isn't this the same question being asked throughout the Protestant world right now?

And I don't think the question is limited to protestantism.  From what I understand, the Catholic Churches of Europe are empty.

[Jimbob]

According to a friend in France, empty is an understatement.  I also remember Lynn Anderson talking about meeting a man who makes a mint off selling old church furniture stripped from empty churches in the UK to restaurants for decor.  

The West has been in the Post-Christian Era for quite a while, but the church (in the broader sense) has been in one bad case of denial and, istm, let things get worse than it should have before waking up and reacting.  Some don't know how to react, so they just pull the curtains down and pretend the train's still moving.

[janine]

The only Baptist I'm super-concerned about learning from is John.

[Mere Nick]

http://www.shipoffools.com/Mystery/index.html

This is an ongoing reporting of visits to churches, primarily in the UK.  Some congregations seem to be doing ok.  I've also read some about how Africans are doing missionary work in Europe and now have some pretty big churches there, especially in the UK.

[Bon Voyage]

Would Joe Beam's mode still hold true if you replaced "Church of Christ" with "Baptist" or "Methodist" or some other name?

I really don't know that I could answer yes in the circles I have been in, at least not to the level that Beam portrays.  It might have something to do with not believing we are the true, literal institutional church of Christ.[/color]

[Jimbob]

http://www.shipoffools.com/Mystery/index.html

This is an ongoing reporting of visits to churches, primarily in the UK.  Some congregations seem to be doing ok.  I've also read some about how Africans are doing missionary work in Europe and now have some pretty big churches there, especially in the UK.

True, but they're still a minor drop in the bucket when taken in the picture of the UK population.  You can find booming churches in Manhattan, too (Jim Cymbala's, for example), but in light of the population, and past Christian:non-Christian ratios, it's all waaaaay down from the past.[/color]

[winky]

The real growth in Christianity has moved out of the Westernized cultures (U.S., Europe) and into Latin America and Africa. It's a big shift.

[Jimbob]

Yep, and that actually excites me.  The Latin & African churches seem to have been able to better balance zeal & emotion with truth, something the Westernized churches struggle to do, often choosing one over the other.

[tidbit]

I wonder if ACU is doing anything to cater to the hispanic population--if not from Hispanic Americans, then from Latin America generally.  

If someone has any special knowledge about ACU, I would appreciate their answer.

Thank you, someone.  :;):

[Mere Nick]

http://www.shipoffools.com/Mystery/index.html

This is an ongoing reporting of visits to churches, primarily in the UK.  Some congregations seem to be doing ok.  I've also read some about how Africans are doing missionary work in Europe and now have some pretty big churches there, especially in the UK.

True, but they're still a minor drop in the bucket when taken in the picture of the UK population.  You can find booming churches in Manhattan, too (Jim Cymbala's, for example), but in light of the population, and past Christian:non-Christian ratios, it's all waaaaay down from the past.[/color]

The numbers are down from decades past, that's true.  But according to some of the reports I've read, the problem MAY be overstated.

Some of the reports are from what appear to be very active churches.

[Jimbob]

I'm not downplaying what is happening in the UK (or anywhere else, for that matter).  I guess what I'm saying is that we often say that this or that church/fellowship is growing, so there must not really be a problem.  To me, that's denial.  Growth in pockets doesn't negate the problems of the whole.  It's kind of like saying that because my canker sore cleared up I don't have to worry about my blood pressure anymore.  

There, was I clear as mud?

[Jimbob]

btw, it might not sound like it from this thread, but I'm a very optimistic person....just not optimistic at the expense of facts.

[boringoldguy]

I wonder if ACU is doing anything to cater to the hispanic population--if not from Hispanic Americans, then from Latin America generally.  

If someone has any special knowledge about ACU, I would appreciate their answer.

Thank you, someone.  :;):

As best I can tell,  they're not doing anything at all.
When my son graduated about a year ago,  I didn't see more than 5 or 6 brown faces in the crowd.

There's this young woman who grew up in our congregation - her parents still attend.   She's about 3 years older than my boy.    She worked for me for a about a year after she graduated high school and then went off to ACU.    

Anyway,   this girl is not only bright, friendly and good-natured;  you never saw a more beautiful girl in your life.   I'm not kidding.

Her experience wasn't good -  she said she never felt welcomed.    Most amazing to me,   not a single guy ever asked her out.  I couldn't figure out whether they were blind or stupid or whether inter-racial dating is still a big no-no for them.   But I was amazed.      I know that if the age difference had been just a little bit less,  I'd have been encouraging my son to take her out.

[winky]

I'm not entirely sure if that's what Tidbit was asking, but what BOG is describing (while it is, definitely, an issue of its own) is not what I was referring to in my original comment. I'm not talking about hispanics here in the U.S. but those in countries in the southern hemisphere, for example.

The primary way I have seen ACU reacting to this shift, theologically, is by moving from a solely mission-minded approach to an approach of partnership -- learning from the Christians there, rather than trying to teach at them. ACU, I think, sees a big part of its role as being that of helping educate church leaders. Now that there are a lot of Christians (in some cases more than in the U.S.!), our role (in the U.S.) may be more along the lines of helping them grow and mature in their newfound faith. For instance, ACU is helping train faculty members at the Baxter Institute in Honduras (a CoC Bible school). Their dean has graduated from ACU's Graduate School of Theology and two other faculty members are in progress, last I heard.

ACU also has a very strong partnership with Heritage Christian College in Ghana, West Africa. ACU Bible professors travel there each summer and sometimes for short terms in the winter to teach classes there, to help them get their accreditation. In a few years, there are plans to offer a full ACU master's degree entirely in Ghana. And as with Baxter, several HCC faculty are currently at ACU getting graduate degrees as we speak.

A Bible student anywhere around the globe can take up to 18 hours from ACU's GST online, and more courses are being added (online) in the next couple of years. Already, students from New Zealand, Japan, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Mexico, Uganda, and parts of Europe have taken GST courses online.

In addition to Ghana, ACU professors have taught summer courses in Nairobi and Kenya.

ACU's missions folks are making an attempt to send out more multi-national missions team, trying to include natives from the region.

Another result of this shift is that there is more of a focus on the U.S. (and Europe) as mission fields. This is taking place both outside the U.S. and within -- we are seeing missionaries from Africa come here, and we are seeing an increased emphasis on domestic church planting/missions in the U.S.

Here's an interesting stat for ya:
In the last 15 years, the number of missionaries going out from North America and Europe had a 12 percent increase. Missionaries from the developing world saw a 200 percent increase.

OK, sorry for the book. Tidbit, you knew better than to ask that. :p

[Mere Nick]

btw, it might not sound like it from this thread, but I'm a very optimistic person....just not optimistic at the expense of facts.

If I notice your canker sore is cleared up, that wouldn't mean I'm ignoring facts, would it?

[Jimbob]

Nah, but I'd wonder why you're looking. :p

[Jimbob]

btw, I wasn't implying you were ignoring facts, I was just explaining that my attitude isn't as negative as it sounds in this thread.

[Mere Nick]

Nah, but I'd wonder why you're looking. :p

Folks look at car wrecks, too, don't they?

From looking at the church attendance stats in the UK, it is obvious that the numbers have been declining over the past few decades.  However, after looking at Mystery Worshipper, there are some congregations that seem to be doing quite well.  Kinda makes a guy wonder why that is.

[tidbit]

OK, sorry for the book. Tidbit, you knew better than to ask that. :p

Thanks for the info, Wendy.  I appreciate the efforts ACU is making to become (as I believe they say) a 'world-class' university.  I kind of changed the subject, and was wondering whether ACU had taken steps to diversify the domestic student body, specifically to be more welcoming to hispanics.  In light of the populational and cultural shift in Texas and the southwest, I think it would be good for ACU to lead the brotherhood by recruiting more hispanic faculty members, staff and students.   As it is, the CoC in America is not reflecting the racial diversity of society at large.

BOG's post sheds quite a bit of light on the situation.

[winky]

I kind of changed the subject, and was wondering whether ACU had taken steps to diversify the domestic student body, specifically to be more welcoming to hispanics.  In light of the populational and cultural shift in Texas and the southwest, I think it would be good for ACU to lead the brotherhood by recruiting more hispanic faculty members, staff and students.   As it is, the CoC in America is not reflecting the racial diversity of society at large.

I agree. I know ACU has increased their emphasis on multi-culturalism in the last five years or so. There is an Office of Student Multicultural Enrichment, a full-time multi-cultural student life coordinator and a full-time multi-cultural recruiter.

For what it's worth, this past school year, ACU had 200 international students, out of about 4,780 students total. 18 percent of the student body is non-white. Six percent are Hispanic.

Other CoC schools:

(These stats are from a year ago.)

Harding had about 151 international students. 10 percent of the student body was non-white, one percent Hispanic.

OCU had about 12 percent of the student body non-white, two percent Hispanic. (Don't have info on their int'l students)

DLU (Lipscomb) has about two percent international (26 students). Eight percent of the student body was non-white, one percent Hispanic.

Lubbock Christian, a considerably smaller school, has impressive diversity stats! 21 percent non-white, 14 percent Hispanic. Only one percent international, however.

According to U.S. News & World Report, 17 percent or higher non-white is considered a diverse campus.

[Jimbob]

Way to go, LCU, on drawing such a diverse crowd. :)

[tidbit]

For what it's worth, this past school year, ACU had 200 international students, out of about 4,780 students total. 18 percent of the student body is non-white. Six percent are Hispanic.

Not too bad.

[Skip]

Having read the whole thread, I'll pick on topics hit upon early in the thread...

I will note in passing that anyone who has looked at coC history in the post-Civil War period to the split of 1906 will see that the coC of the late 1900's and into the 2000's is "history repeating itself". IM is still an issue, and instead of Missionary Societies there are women's roles and worship styles questions. The coC has inherited the women's role and worship style questions from greater Protestantism, and the coC as a movement is too theologically shallow (IMO, anyway) to deal with it any better than the rest. Perhaps the coC is too conservative to become embroiled in the homosexual issues of this day, but I wouldn't count on it.

I'll be blunt: Ignorance of the scriptures is problem number one.

Think of it this way -- it's like you're converted from speaking English to, say, Swahili.
Now can you really become fluent at Swahili listening in classes on Sunday AM, Sunday PM, and Wednesday PM -- roughly 4 hours a week?
Can reading about Swahili rather than actually diligently studying the textbook bring you to fluency?

In the same way, in my experience, Christians don't radically modify their behavior when they become Christians. They tolerate.
They don't study the Bible diligently and regularly. Often they read devotional books and allow their opinions and positions to be formed by inputs other than the Bible. Somehow the "quick answer" from a commentary is better than patiently studying, meditating, and praying (when the question may linger unaswered for a time).


Another root problem with the coC, and Western / American Christianity in general is, IMO, primarily cultural -- on two levels.

First of all, "church life" and "real life" are separated. Need I say more?

Second, culture is seen as "real", and church / Christianity as a pipe dream. No one can really attain that or understand that or really live that way. This is illustrated by the gap between the older generation and the younger generation. Each generation is basing the church upon the standards of the current culture. One needs look no further that the issues of celibacy (Catholic) women's roles and homosexuality (Protestantism) to see this in operation upon the churches.

Finally, the perversion of society with private in-home entertainment beginning with VCR tapes and progressing to pay cable and internet access has brought decadence into homes that at one time was restricted to the red light district. To pick on men, it is much different to drive and park and enter into a "gentlemen's club" than it is to click over to a porn Internet site in a private room of your own home.
IMO, secret sin is paralyzing the church to a far greater extent than in previous generations.

[s1n4m1n]

I'll be blunt: Ignorance of the scriptures is problem number one.

Think of it this way -- it's like you're converted from speaking English to, say, Swahili.
Now can you really become fluent at Swahili listening in classes on Sunday AM, Sunday PM, and Wednesday PM -- roughly 4 hours a week?
Can reading about Swahili rather than actually diligently studying the textbook bring you to fluency?

Maybe a bigger problem is just a lack of desire to practice Christianity, instead of just knowing it. Personally, I think 4 or 5 hours a week is plenty of time to get to know the Faith. I learned calculus in 3 hours a week of class time and 4 hours a week in homework time. I would think that at about 5 hours a week a person could have a relatively thorough knowledge of the Faith (with citations from the New Testament) in about 6 months. Of course, that should be the beginning.

Ken[/color]

[Jimbob]

I think we're "learning the faith" every moment we're awake, by putting into practice the lessons learned in those four hours.  Life's a lab.

"But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil."  Hebrews 5:14 ESV

[s1n4m1n]

I think we're "learning the faith" every moment we're awake, by putting into practice the lessons learned in those four hours.  Life's a lab.

"But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil."  Hebrews 5:14 ESV

That's what I was trying to get at, but you said it better.

Ken

[Skip]

I would not disagree; there is benefit -- but IMO "church-only" Bible study time falls far short of what is needed.

I have an unfortunate feeling (from years of interacting with Christians) that in the "lab" of life, many Christians don't use the textbook, don't don the safety goggles, don't know what is in the beakers and can't tell which substances are good and which are harmful.

I used to mark the passages read in church with a special mark in my Bible. Try it sometime; you may be surprised at the end of a year to find how little of the Bible is actually used in 4 hours of church a week.

[Jimbob]

I understand what you're saying, Skip, and don't necessarily disagree.  However, I do wonder sometimes if the RM has left us with the idea that study, more than application, is the goal of teaching in the church.  Look, for example, at the Sermon on the Mount.  Was it a call to study, or a call for examination and action?  We tend to emphasize "study to shew thyself approved" as though study is an end, and not the means to an end.**

Don't misunderstand, I'm certainly not downplaying the need for study, personal or corporate, but I'm wondering how all those brothers and sisters of old who had no copy of the Word at home were still able to be shaped by it so dramatically.  More especially, I'm wondering why they were shaped, it sometimes seems, more than those of us who have so many resources and times to study.  I'm thinking we're dealing with a  heart problem of another sort, I guess.  It's not our lack of study, but our lack of desire to be shaped by it, no matter how much or little we open the Book (much, again, like the S.K. quote Connie brought).

---------
** I think of things like this when discussions come up about translations.  "Study to shew thyself approved" in the KJV gives quite a different impression than "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved" in the ESV.  One conveys an idea of gaining knowledge, the other one of gaining character.  That's a big difference.

[Skip]

Jmg,

We may be talking around each other here.

I see study, meditation on the Word, contemplation, and memorization in the sense of the examples of David in the Psalms or Jesus in the temptation or in discussions with the wisest scriptural scholars of the day.

They knew the Word, and they lived it.
They could not have lived the Word and applied it without knowing it and thinking it through.
They could not have fully known God without His Word.
The relationship with God takes time and effort above and beyond pew-sitting.
Yet uninformed and misdirected effort is wasted -- one must be directed by God (His Word) or one is beating the air.

[s1n4m1n]

Skip,

So your complaining about people not reading the Bible or giving enough attention or care in meditation of it. All I can say it has always been like that. I seem to remember reading St. John Chrysostom complaining about the exact same thing, and that was 1600 years ago.

I don't know what goes on in the bigger churches but in our little church Bible classes about 80% of our classes are just studying Scriptures. The other 20% is topical like prayer, role of elders, etc.

If that's what causes splits in churches then were doomed to split.

Ken

[boringoldguy]

Back to the original focus of the argument:

Here's an example of what's happening to us -

A (somewhat) elderly friend of ours recently got a packet from ACU (her alma mater) attempting to hit her up for money.  (I'm guessing it was actually the Alumni Association, not the university itself.)

She responded that she didn't think they should have given Max Lucado a prize and so she wasn't going to send them any money until they explained just why they had done it.

They responded with a letter telling her that was just fine,  they'd take her off her mailing list and she would no longer receive any communications about the alumni activities, etc, etc. (I wonder if this counts as in informal letter of disfellowship?)

Now, to be fair,  I've only heard one side of this,  and haven't seen any of the letters.

On the other hand,  this lady is quite bright,  not a rigid or absolutist personality,  and would probably even consider herself to somewhat toward the more liberal "grace-centered" spectrum of the brotherhood.

But both ends of the spectrum have made agreement (or disagreement) with Lucado into a litmus test or an issue over which to choose up sides.

What astonishes me is that,  his writings are so insipid as to defy belief.  It's a real marvel that someone so uninteresting could become so polarizing.

[s1n4m1n]

What astonishes me is that,  his writings are so insipid as to defy belief.  It's a real marvel that someone so uninteresting could become so polarizing.

Perhaps he is the churches of Christ red hefer* that we will dance around in praise of the god of disunity. Then we can sacrifice him and be on our seperate merry ways!

Ken

*If I remember correctly the red hefer is sign to orthodox Jews that the end it near.[/color]

[winky]

OK, who might have guessed that I'd have two cents to throw in on this one?:p

Just for what it's worth...

It is not the university's policy, nor have I been aware of any instances of, removing people from communication without their explicit request. From what I understand, almost all of the (negative) communication ACU received about Max Lucado included (after a long tirade) a request to be removed from any future university mailings. I have never been aware of any attempt to remove people simply because they disagreed with us on this issue or any other. I feel quite sure there are probably faculty or board members who might have disagreed with ACU's decision to honor Max. Obviously they weren't "disfellowshipped" or anything of the sort. I'd really like to go ahead and quash the rumor that anyone who doesn't like Max is "disfellowshipped" from ACU. That's a rumor I'd rather not have floating around, if it's all the same to you! :D

I mean, think about it. Would a university really stop asking people for money without a specific request to do so??? :;):

If she did not ask to be removed from communication by the university, and still received that response, I would say it was a mistake or a misunderstanding. An exception, not the rule.

Also, the Alumni Association generally doesn't ask for money. They tell you about events and ACU news and ways you can be involved and resources available to you. It's generally safe to open mail from them! The president or the Development Office is who asks for the $$$$.

Now, I do think that there are certain CoC issues that tend to become litmus tests. Although I don't think BOG's example is the best one, I think the point can still be made. For some, Max is a litmus test (on both sides!). For some, it's role of women or praise teams or baptism.

I've even found myself guilty  when I first started posting on this message board of assuming a  person's positions on a wide variety of issues based on their stance on one particular issue.

I bet Skip can speak to that -- how many times have people assumed he is against instrumental music??

[Lee Freeman]

I continued getting requests from International Bible College for contributions long after I was disfellowshipped. It never bothered me-I simply ignored them. Finally they stopped sending them. I probably should've asked to be removed from their mailing list but never got around to doing it for some reason.

For the record I appreciate Max Lucado's giving Churches of Christ a more positive image than we had heretofore with many people. A lot of folks only knew us as an exclusivist, contentious, dogmatic group who liked to argue for baptism and against IM. Partly through Max's books many people realize that not all Churches of Christ are like that. Imagine books by a Church of Christ author as bestsellers in "denominational" bookstores!  Who'd have thought it ten years ago?

His books are useful to a certain segment of people. Personally I prefer CS Lewis, Fr. St. Augustine, Benedict Groeschel, GK Chesterton, Dorothy Sayers or Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but I do like some of Max's stuff, and if other people benefit from it that's great.

I certainly appreciate him being one of the talking heads when Larry King does a show on some controversial religious issue or other, as Lucado usually offers a reasoned, well-thought-out, well-articulated, sensible and above all biblical, response.

Pax.