WORLDmag.com | Community | Blog Archive

Religion, WorldMagBlog Print

Click to Print

Include Comments

Doing vs. being

14 Comments

Written by Kristin Chapman

December 12, 7:01 AM

Radio host John Young recently encountered a group of people eagerly passing out snacks and hot cocoa on an Atlanta street. The individuals wore T-shirts imprinted with the slogan, “The Church Has Left the Building.”

Surprisingly, the church name wasn’t on the shirt. No plug. No quotas being met. No guilt being given in the form of “we fed you now come visit us.” That a church would simply want to serve-without any apparent effort to self-promote-is rare, indeed, in our culture today.

Young writes, “Too often it seems that professing Christians are more busy doing church rather than being the church to our communities.” What do you think of his assessment? Has your church “left the building,” and if so, how?

Topic: Religion, WorldMagBlog

Keywords: church

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Email a friend

RSS 2.0

back to top14 Comments to “Doing vs. being”

BY EYG 12.12.07 AT 7:35 AM

Great topic.
One of my favorite pastors, an elderly man whom I looked up to, answered a question for me.

“How do you keep from backsliding?”

His answer: “Stay in the word, stay in prayer, stay in fellowship and keep busy for the kingdom. If you’re moving and doing, you won’t have the time or inclination to backslide.”

I love that these Christians were less about populating their church and more about populating Heaven. I love that they were more concerned about the purity of the church in general. May this be an exciting, fruitful walk for these.
Report comment to moderator
BY kBells 12.12.07 AT 7:52 AM

The Church’s first obligation is to spread the Gospel. We are also obligated to care for those in need. Which is this?
Report comment to moderator
BY Chas 12.12.07 AT 9:02 AM

Interesting slogan. Your first, momentary, reaction is “Which building”, and I imagine some who don’t understand never get beyond that. It likely also raises some questions. It didn’t say they were passing out snacks & cocoa to homeless, but to “people”. In downtown Atlanta, most of the people they encounter are from East Point or Marietta and are not prospects for their church.

Our church often leaves the building with several mission trips and local “projects inasmuch”. But, as opposed to Northern Virginia, most people in Henderson County are connected to a church of some sort.
Report comment to moderator
BY kBells 12.12.07 AT 9:13 AM

I guess I just don’t understand how inviting people to church is a bad thing.
Report comment to moderator
BY DC Lawyer 12.12.07 AT 9:32 AM

Great idea. Cool slogan.
Report comment to moderator
BY Pauline 12.12.07 AT 9:37 AM

KBells,
Of course inviting people to church is not a bad thing. But when the only interaction people have with church people is to be invited to church or being witnessed to, it’s easy to see how they would think that church people are only interested in them as potential converts.

I am reminded of what Jesus said about giving to people who can’t repay you, and inviting over those who won’t invite you over in return. A lot of people have the impression that Christians are only interested in them if they are going to get something in return – such as attending church. What this group is trying to do – and I have no idea how well the message is coming across (but success isn’t always the measure of whether something is worth doing, anyway)- is letting people know that they are interested in giving without getting anything back, even visitors to church. And that you don’t have to be obviously needy for them to give to you either.
Report comment to moderator
BY Joel Mark 12.12.07 AT 9:45 AM

Pauline wrote; “A lot of people have the impression that Christians are only interested in them if they are going to get something in return.”

In some cases, this happens simply because the motives of Christians are being blatantly misjudged.

In some cases, some Christians do have ulterior motives.

In either case, it is no reason for Christians to pull back from invitig people to their church families with open hearts and open arms (not that you are claiming they shouldn’t).

Also, there is nothing wrong with loving people in ways wherein a church invitation may not arise.
Report comment to moderator
BY Joel Mark 12.12.07 AT 9:47 AM

Good theology does not feed any gap between being and doing.
Report comment to moderator
BY Joel Mark 12.12.07 AT 9:52 AM

Promoting your church is not self-promotion (as John Young presumed in his quote above). The Christian church belongs to Jesus Christ, not ourselves.
Report comment to moderator
BY Kwerna 12.12.07 AT 10:57 AM

Still not sure what the point of the outreach was. Was it to cheer general passersby with Christmassy goodwill? If for the homeless, is cocoa and a snack lastingly meaningful, as opposed to an organized program? Often we feel good about ourselves by being vending machines…

I would assume the people who got a treat asked who the folks dispensing them were and were witnessed to or invited to church. If not, what was the point of giving them something to chew on but not the Bread of Life?
Report comment to moderator
BY kBells 12.12.07 AT 11:13 AM

Also, in a racially mixed city in the South like Atlanta, not being invited to the church could be perceived as, not being invited.
Report comment to moderator
BY KevinB 12.12.07 AT 11:48 AM

My church has done this a couple of times in winter on the University of Michigan campus (really cold!), but without messages on t-shirts.

I haven’t had a chance to participate yet, but I hear that lots of people want to know who we are and why we’re doing it. The answer is that we are followers of Jesus Christ sharing his love with them. That leads to opportunities to share the gospel.

I think we keep invitation to church pretty low-key because we don’t want Jesus’ invitation to follow him to be equated with an invitation to our church.
Report comment to moderator
BY Kwerna 12.13.07 AT 1:45 AM

“I think we keep invitation to church pretty low-key because we don’t want Jesus’ invitation to follow him to be equated with an invitation to our church.”

Isn’t that kind of a silly false modesty? Whose church SHOULD they start with? If all churches–who are the blessed company of all faithful people (as I happen to believe) are part of the Church universal, for goodness’ sake get them into a local body, even if it’s your own.
Report comment to moderator
BY EYG 12.13.07 AT 7:06 AM

Nothing is wrong with promoting your church, or inviting people to church.

But, that’s not what this was about. This was about promoting the church, any believing church. They were benefiting all local churches.
Report comment to moderator