Some of you will not marry. Statistically, this is becoming more and more the case. The age at which people are entering into their first marriage is steadily rising (now near 30) along with the high divorce rate and lowering marriage rate mean that in 2007 for the first time since millions of men left widows during WWII, single adults have become the majority, 51.5 percent of the adult population. Particularly, many of you women will not marry. It’s a simple matter of supply and demand. As I said last week, throughout university and graduate school (the time people are most likely to select a mate), roughly 57% of the people you will meet will be women. Even if you were to go to a large church with many singles, close to 60% of North American churchgoers are women - a gap that widens among twenty-somethings. What that means in your generation is that many of your female friends will settle for a man who either falls below your standard of education and ambition, or they will fall in love with ambitious unbelievers because they couldn’t find a good man in the church. Interestingly, in Mainland China, the situation is reversed, for the one-child policy along with selective birth control has created “bachelor bomb” in which unmarried men between 20 and 44 already outnumber their single female counterparts 2 to 1. So ladies – there are good men in the world, they are just all in China. So, some of you will not marry. Dads and moms, some of your kids will not marry. Christians, some of your friends will not marry. Church, some of our own and some of our visitors will not marry.
Today we’re going to shift our focus to men. There’s a shortage of good men in the world. You don’t believe me? Ask the experts.
- TED TALK: The Demise of Guys: http://www.ted.com/talks/zimchallenge.html
- “Boys Adrift”
- If you don’t believe the experts, ask the single women. Last November the Atlantic Magazine ran an Article “All the Single Ladies”, in which author Kate Bolick argued that “recent years have seen an explosion of male joblessness and a steep decline in men’s life prospects that have disrupted the “romantic market” in ways that narrow a marriage-minded woman’s options: increasingly, her choice is between deadbeats (whose numbers are rising) and playboys (whose power is growing).”
- I went to the park yesterday, met a 23-year old single mom who recently moved to Ottawa. The dad’s nowhere to be found, she’s putting herself through school with a one-year old, taking out loans to house herself and her kids. Tough story. Then she tells me that her 25 year-old brother’s been crashing on her couch for 4 months, eating her food that she’s going to have to pay back with her school loans, playing video games all day, continually telling her that he’ll go get a job, but making no tangible moves toward it. And he’s staying with her because her older brother moved back into her mom’s basement, so he had to go.
Over the next month or so we’re going to drill down deeper into this idea of what it means for us as a church to foster this orientation: to be a benefactor community that engages the city through our good works. So where do we start? It’s a big question isn’t it? You want to change the world and transform society – where do you begin?
Moms. We need to start with moms.
If you were to visit the study of American President Thomas Jefferson in the newly constructed White House during the early years of his presidency at the beginning of the 19th century, you might be pleased to see a well-worn, and obviously poured over Bible prominently displayed on his desk. However, if you were to be so bold as to open Jefferson’s Bible, you might be shocked at what you found between the covers. During those years, Jefferson had engaged himself in a project to re-craft the Bible in his own image. He took a razor to its pages, rearranging the Gospel narratives, removing entire sections, and even re-writing some passages to give the “correct” reading. Jefferson did this because he believed that the ethical and philosophical teachings of Jesus had been obscured by the supernatural and, he thought, superstitious stories about Jesus. He sought to remove any reference to miracles, to the deity of Christ, to resurrection power, to the Holy Spirit – and be left with the pure ethical teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Obviously, followers of Jesus have always taken issue with Jefferson’s approach, for once we set ourselves up as the final authority as to what or what isn’t proper to God, we come out with a God that looks very much like ourselves and a Bible that no longer challenges us beyond ourselves.
My point in telling this story is not to deride those who edit out the power and deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. My point in telling this story is to ask whether we in the modern church unwittingly do the same thing. Jefferson edited out the supernatural to leave the ethics – do we do the opposite? Have we taken our razors out and left behind a virtue-less faith? We glory in our correct doctrines, but do our hearts and our hands lag behind?
Because Jesus didn’t stop there. Let me ask you something: now understanding the diversity of people and backgrounds of those who followed Jesus, wouldn’t it be something spectacular if from out of this rag-tag bunch of hermits, tax collectors and zealots a consistent approach to seeking the welfare of the city emerged? If you threw Jesus into a group of people who couldn’t agree about anything, and they came out of their experience with Jesus with such a one-minded approach to seeking the welfare of the city that within a few hundred years they had infiltrated every city of the Empire. Historian Rodney Stark has directly connected the growth of Christianity with the care and concerned they showed one another and to the city. Stark cites the non-Christian Emperor Julian who attributed the growth of the Christian movement to their approach to seeking the welfare of the city: “I think that when the poor happened to be neglected and overlooked by the priests, the impious Galileans [Christians] observed this and devoted themselves to benevolence … The impious Galileans support not only their poor, but ours as well, everyone can see that our people lack aid from us.”
When I was in university a group of us would go down to High Street in downtown Columbus, Ohio and talk about Jesus with the people down there. To get a little context, High Street is a little like the Byward Market are here, close to the university, center of town, lots of bars, lots of people on the street. So we’d talk about Jesus and sometimes people would be interested about learning more, and sometimes they’d want to check out a Christian Church – the only problem was that we couldn’t find a good church in the area to send them to. We looked and looked, then found one, just over the bridge – walking distance to the place where we shared with people. I checked out there doctrinal statement online – looked good, so Jean and I and a couple of friends went to visit them. We sat through their service that Sunday morning. It was easy to notice that they were very traditional and everyone had very grey hair, but that’s fine – would they be welcoming of the students and street people we’d send them? We talked to the pastor after the service, and I am not sure if I have ever been as disappointed with a Christian in my life as I was when he told me that it would probably be better if we didn’t send those type of people to his church. Keep in mind that theirs was the only gospel preaching church for miles around the inner city core. This was his answer: “We don’t think we’d be a good fit for them. Even though we’re located right downtown, we think of ourselves as more of a country church that just happens to be located in the middle of the city.” I was a bit upset. Ok, very upset. How can a church be so disconnected of the community around it to the point that they would say, please don’t send people to us?
We’re actually going to be moving fairly quickly this morning. Last week we spent most of our time defending and defining the concept of a church as the Family of Families. We’re not a business, not a political organization, not an entertainment complex, but a family. We defended this logically and scripturally.
Today, we’re going to focus more on implications. Particularly, we’re going to ask the question, “If the church is a family, then how do we get along as a family?”
If any of you come from broken families or families that were less than ideal, you know that this is important, even perhaps the more important question. For there are dysfunctional families, and there are dysfunctional churches. And here’s why this is so important – very rarely (although it does happen) does someone’s experience within a dysfunctional family turn them off to the concept of family in general. For example, it is rare that someone would say I hated my dad, so now I believe that the concept of fatherhood itself is erroneous. It does happen, but it is rare. However, I meet people quite often who had a been experience in a church and now believe that the concept of Jesus is erroneous. So it’s not only important to believe and understand the church as a family, but also to act like one – and not just any family, but a harmonious family that glorifies God.
How a person functions as a member of a church is determined to a great extant the person’s images of what a church is.
If the church is understood as . . . then a good member . . .
• Country Club participates, pays his dues, invites guests
• Corporation makes a profit, attends meetings, protects image
• Spiritual Co-op gives in order to get, does his share
• Lecture Series listens, takes notes, attends
• Theater is on time, dresses appropriately, is a critic
• Counseling Centre is open and honest, comes to get needs met
• Political Activist Group supports the cause, debates outsiders, raises funds
The question before us is whether there is a Biblically prescribed model of what the church should look like that will inform how we are to view our responsibilities and the nature of our participation within it.
Read Acts 13:1-3, 14:19-28
Intro: OCBC was planted as a church in the spring of 1976 to reach Mandarin-speaking immigrants in the Ottawa region. Over the years, God has blessed our congregation with people and resources to continue serving as a light to this community. In the nineteen eighties, our English congregation was added to minister to the Canadian-born children of those immigrants. Today, our Mandarin and English congregations strive to work together as one family to establish believers in the Gospel.
Being an ethnic church is not without its struggles. In a presentation given at the Association of North American Chinese Evangelical Free Churches (ANACEFC) Conference in 2009, Keynote Speaker John Auxier of Trinity Western University delivered a message outlining an ominous life-cycle he observed through his research of Chinese and other immigrant churches.
Phase 1: The Missional Phase: This is the initial phase of the immigrant church, usually occurring during a time of booming immigration. The church serves as a place for these displaced immigrants to connect with others who share their cultural background. In this stage, the focus of the church is external. Evangelism thrives. Outreach drives the church and is contagious, for as the church engages itself in mission, it sees people coming to the Lord, which encourage it onward in mission.
Phase 2: The Maintenance Phase: Sooner or later, however, immigration slows. Because there are less people to reach, evangelistic attempts become less fruitful, and missional activities diminish. It’s during this time that the focus turns inward, on maintaining what has been established. Programs turn inwards. It is also during this time that English Congregations are added, generally first as children’s or youth ministries to minister to the second generation.
Phase 3: The Monument Phase: During this phase, the first generation who started the church is now aging. Generation 1.5 (those first generation immigrants who were not part of the first wave) struggles to please everyone, wanting to please the elder generation, while concerned about their Canadian-born kids. And the kids? Most of the second generation leaves the church after the age of 25. The younger generation has no vision for reaching their generation for Christ through the church, so the ones who seek to reach out do so through other organizations. A survival mentality develops; people are so scared to further damage the church that innovation becomes very difficult. In this sensitive environment, church politics becomes more and more of a problem.
Phase 4: The Mortuary Phase: Most churches, upon getting to this stage go down one of these paths.
1) Over several generations, the church will become transformed into an English-speaking congregation with a Chinese heritage.
2) Over several generations, the church will shrink to the point of closing its doors.
We believe that neither scenario is attractive to us. As long as Chinese immigration into Ottawa remains at substantial level, our church must continue to shine as a beacon to new immigrants looking for a home. At the same time, our children and young people need to be part of a church in which they can envision a future for themselves, retaining their ties to their families and community while also branching out as members of the broader Canadian society. In some ethnic churches, these divergent goals have been perceived as being antithetical to one another, leading to conflict within and loss of unity in mission, yet we believe that it is possible a find in the scriptures a common vision and strategy that can unite a diverse church such as our in one mission.
Two Congregations, One Mission
The missionary teams sent out in the book of Acts did not go out aimlessly into the world, but went out with a clear mission. Acts chapter 13 and 14 give the clearest synopsis of this mission, from the sending out of the missionaries to their return at Antioch. At the end of this account Luke writes a very interesting phrase, in Acts 14:26. He writes, “they sailed to Antioch where they had been commended to the grace of God for the work which thy had fulfilled.” It’s this last phrase that is most important to us. When these missionaries went out into the world, they were given a work to do, a task which they were complete that was clear enough so that when they came home, they could say, we did it. So what was their task? We can quickly summarize their strategy found in chapters 13-14, in what has been referred to as “The Pauline Cycle”.
1) Evangelize Strategic Cities: Interestingly, we do not see the apostolic teams planting churches in every city. Instead they focused on key cities, strategic places for God’s kingdom. When they got there they made contacts and shared the gospel of Jesus Christ with those who would listen.
2) Established Believers into Local Churches: The pattern again and again throughout the New Testament is that believers were to be baptized and accepted into the local church. While baptism is an initiation into the body life, it is only the beginning of the establishment process. In verse 22 you see Paul strengthening the believers, encouraging them in their faith, and teaching them about life as a member of Christ’s body.
3) Entrust to Faithful Leaders: Paul did not stay long in the churches he planted – Ephesus was his longest stay of three years. But in the short time he spent in the churches he has very busy training men to be capable leaders to guard and guide the church after he moved on (see verse 23).
4) We must understand that this is not the end of the cycle! In fact, if the cycle were to end there, the church that was planted would be a phase #2 maintenance church. Yet this is not the case of the New Testament churches, and this is vital to us to understand. You see, the Antioch church that sent Paul was not the originator of the Pauline Cycle. They themselves had been planted by the Jerusalem church and as they were evangelized, and established and had leaders appointed, they continued the cycle geographically sending Paul and his team out. However, the church must not only keep the cycle geographically, but also across generations. This is seen most clearly in 2 Timothy 2:2, in which Paul instructed his protégé Timothy, In this passage Paul refers to four generations. The church needs to be replanted in every generation. The cycle must continue for everyone who comes into the church, whether they walk in here off a plane from China, or are born in the church.
This final arrow makes all of the difference between a church being a phase 1 or a phase 2 or 3 church. It gives purpose to everything we do in the church. For in order for the cycle to continue, we must be continually evangelizing, continually engaging our culture with the gospel, continually establishing new converts in the faith, continually raising up and training leaders, and continually sending some people out to continue the cycle geographically while keeping others in to continue the cycle generationally.
The Pauline Cycle gives us a clear mission as we seek to become a phase #1 church again. It brings unity to both of our congregations as we both seek to labour in the same vision, even as the outworking of that mission will look very different given the cultural context of each congregation.
Questions:
1) Why do you think there is often such tension within intergenerational or multi-cultural churches?
2) How does a focus on the mission of the church alleviate some of the potential tension?
3) What is required from those further along in the Pauline Cycle in terms of their relationship to those less established?
4) Where do you see OCBC as being strong in our establishment of people along the Pauline Cycle? Where do you us as still needing to grow up?
5) Where do you see yourself as fitting into the Pauline Cycle of OCBC?
Project: Write a half-page reflection on where you see yourself fitting into the Pauline Cycle at OCBC. How could you build into people less established? Through what means could you possibly become more established yourself?
This section of Nehemiah is devoted to detailing the schemes hatched against Nehemiah as the wall was nearing completion. In this section, Nehemiah describes the personal attacks he faced as he attempted to do God’s work. This sets chapter 6 apart from the intimidation of chapter 2, which was broadly directed against all of the people working on the wall. This is a very personal chapter, and it reminds me of something that I read in the book “The christian in Full Armour” by the Puritan William Gurnell. That is, Christianity is not for cowards. Some people view Christianity or the religious impulse as a crutch – something for the weak or the cowardly who can’t cut it in life without the belief in a safety net God. Let this chapter remind us that it takes courage to be a Christian. It takes courage to pray, to say, “Lord, have your will.” Who is braver, the person who thinks they are so in control of their own life that they never leave their comfort zone, or the person who comes to God and prays, “Lord, have your way” no matter where that takes me or what it causes me to do? Who is braver, the person who lives at the level of the world with its comforts and sins, or the person who through the power of the Spirit and the leading of the word does battle against the flesh? Who is braver, the person who never stands up for Jesus, the person who looks wise in the eyes of this world, or the person whose faith in Christ leads them to live differently and to look like fools in the eyes of this world. You can be safe and cowardly, or you can live for Christ. Nehemiah lived for God’s glory, and this was no safe thing.