Purpose Driven into the ground, and how conflict in the church is creating Cynics...

What does conflict in the church do to us? How does it affect us as believers? How does it affect the way we view others?

Conflict in the church is inevitable. We know that because we are sinners, and by necessity where you find sinners you find conflict. It happens and we know that. Being relatively young I have not suffered the damage of biting conflict first-hand. My experience with conflict within the church is limited to several small occasions where most of the conflict mainly existed in my own sinful heart. However, I have seen friends and family members go through it in their respective church contexts.

In today's Wall Street Journal there is an interesting article about one of the most prevalent movements within churches today. It cites the "Purpose Driven Church" model as causing some major division among American evangelicals. The article specifically deals with one church in Iuka, MS where a member of the deacon board was removed due to his disagreement with the direction the church was moving. The article showed that this was no small problem and noted other churches where similar things had happened.

It also mentioned how the "Purpose Driven" model is propagated. In seminars and classes pastors are taught how to initiate the change needed to grow the church. Pastors are told to entrust your plans about organizational change to very few people. They are also taught that when you do begin making changes that "all the forces of hell are going to come at you at you when you wake up that church." This was said by Glen Sartain who teaches at these conferences and seminars.

In another section the article sheds some light on how these church leaders are taught to deal with opposition to the new church model. The pastors are urged to speak to "critical members" in leadership and if they do not agree and do not stop objecting then "help" them leave. Also, once they have left the church the pastor needs to call their new minister and suggest that these people be barred from taking any leadership role in this new church.

I may be the only one here, but this information makes me very uncomfortable. First, I am saddened that I had to find this information in the Wall Street Journal without hearing about it in some other venue first. Second, as someone who is hoping to one day serve in church ministry I cannot see this as a valid attitude when seeking to bring about reform or change in the church. We certainly are a stiff necked people but I am not sure I see disagreement over a model for growth as grounds for church discipline.

It is my prayer for the church that we would find common ground at the foot of the cross of Christ. We may differ on important points of doctrine and what it means to be the church and we may even find reasons that we cannot fellowship with other believers with whom we share many beliefs. However, this model of growth is an issue hardly worth splitting a church over. There has to be a more excellent way of dealing with these disagreements other than "helping" people out of our churches.

This leads me to my second point. (yes I know, it's a long post)

Dr. David Gushee has a great article about how conflict in the church sometimes creates cynics out of believers. Specifically, Gushee points to an overuse of God-talk as the reason for this. He makes a good point. How many times in your own life have you heard a pastor or church leader explain away conflict with glazed over God-talk.

Gushee gives the example of a pastor who is miserable, and is exhausted with all the personality conflicts. Now this pastor never cites these as his reasons for leaving. What he says is always shrouded in the spiritual speak that we are all so used to. Why can he not share his heart on the matter? Why can he not say that he is confused? Why can he not say that the battles and power struggles within the church have exhausted his mind, body, and soul?

By glossing over these conflicts the church is kept from growing past its own serious faults, and not to mention the next pastor or leader will inevitably have to deal with the same things and ad naseum. We have recorded for us in Scripture conflicts between Paul and Barnabas, and Paul and Peter. The issue between Paul and Barnabas over John Mark was big enough that they eventually went their own ways.

I think this idea of not glossing over the truth in conflict is important because it leads to true growth. It leads to Christian people dealing with their own sinful pride and having to repent and deal with others who may not believe exactly like them. In some ways this is a better church growth model because it deals growing people to maturity rather than focusing on the inflation of numerical growth alone.

So as we move forward in our own church contexts remember that when you have sinners you are going to have conflict. But remember how Paul highlights the primacy of love in all we do. We should love the brothers over any model or any method that comes about. We should love the church because Christ gave himself for her. As we seek to be agents of reform in our churches we must not forget the importance of being agents of Christ's love. Resign any desire to assert yourself or your own power. Instead submit yourselves in service to the church and pray that God would grant the increase and bring about real revival and true reformation.

Love the church!