Comments on: What’s Boston Legal got to do with Church? http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/ Thu, 08 May 2008 07:59:32 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Rebecca Gane http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-144 Rebecca Gane Wed, 07 May 2008 11:13:24 +0000 http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-144 I don't have any problem with the statement "the church belongs to Jesus, not to the individual congregation members" from a theological perspective, but I wonder if ownership, or lack thereof, is one of the reasons the church might not be growing. As we all know, we get excited about things that belong to us - I've just been to home group and friends of mine are pretty darn excited about their new baby. They want to share her, they want us to admire her and play with her etc etc. Something happens to us when we have a strong sense of ownership. From my observation, it seems that many corps are 'owned' by a small group of people, AKA leadership team/corps council etc. The buildings, vision, plans, details of what's happening in the church matters to them, seemingly more than to the average congregant on a Sunday. Ownership = Investment. If this is true, then perhaps we should be searching out ways for increasing ownership to be had by increasing numbers of church members. If people feel a strong sense of ownership of the church and therefore an excitement about what is going on, perhaps they will be more likely to want to share that. But it's not just about church, is it? It comes back to our personal faith. So perhaps if it's an ownership issue, then do we have integral ownership of our faith? Is it so foundational to who we are that we not only WANT to share it, but NEED to share it? Undoubtedly a combined ownership of faith and church would make powerful evangelism. I don’t have any problem with the statement “the church belongs to Jesus, not to the individual congregation members” from a theological perspective, but I wonder if ownership, or lack thereof, is one of the reasons the church might not be growing. As we all know, we get excited about things that belong to us – I’ve just been to home group and friends of mine are pretty darn excited about their new baby. They want to share her, they want us to admire her and play with her etc etc. Something happens to us when we have a strong sense of ownership. From my observation, it seems that many corps are ‘owned’ by a small group of people, AKA leadership team/corps council etc. The buildings, vision, plans, details of what’s happening in the church matters to them, seemingly more than to the average congregant on a Sunday. Ownership = Investment. If this is true, then perhaps we should be searching out ways for increasing ownership to be had by increasing numbers of church members. If people feel a strong sense of ownership of the church and therefore an excitement about what is going on, perhaps they will be more likely to want to share that. But it’s not just about church, is it? It comes back to our personal faith. So perhaps if it’s an ownership issue, then do we have integral ownership of our faith? Is it so foundational to who we are that we not only WANT to share it, but NEED to share it? Undoubtedly a combined ownership of faith and church would make powerful evangelism.

]]> By: Mark http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-143 Mark Wed, 07 May 2008 10:13:16 +0000 http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-143 Quote is from an article I read earlier this week (URL is included) "It means that an organization, a church let's say, that was considered to be the best of the best at one point in time is likely to lose most of its advantage when there's a massive historical change or, as Barker puts it, paradigm shift. If that organization doesn't take the changes seriously and ask what they mean and make suitable adjustments, it will find itself losing ground, maybe going out of existence. In fact, it's not just suitable adjustments, it may mean total reinvention." To read the full article look here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2008/001/21.88.html Quote is from an article I read earlier this week (URL is included)

“It means that an organization, a church let’s say, that was considered to be the best of the best at one point in time is likely to lose most of its advantage when there’s a massive historical change or, as Barker puts it, paradigm shift. If that organization doesn’t take the changes seriously and ask what they mean and make suitable adjustments, it will find itself losing ground, maybe going out of existence. In fact, it’s not just suitable adjustments, it may mean total reinvention.”

To read the full article look here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2008/001/21.88.html

]]> By: Gavin Knight http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-142 Gavin Knight Wed, 07 May 2008 07:55:28 +0000 http://shroedernz.wordpress.com/2008/05/07/whats-boston-legal-got-to-do-with-church/#comment-142 good post exactly why "bringing people into a relationship with God" has been the core value at the centre of SAJ since before inception ... and the measuring stick we apply to (almost!) everything good post

exactly why “bringing people into a relationship with God” has been the core value at the centre of SAJ since before inception … and the measuring stick we apply to (almost!) everything

]]>