RJS

"Bill Hybels is the founding pastor of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, the largest church in America, and chairman of the board of the Willow Creek Association"

<a href="http://www.gospelcom.net/growingleadership/leadershipedge/leadership_summit_seminar.htm" target="_blank">The Leadership Centre Willow Creek Canada</a>

just FYI

[Edited to fix URL - BJM]

[ September 11, 2002: Message edited by: Bree ]</p>

sakrilege

Like a mini-sect or local shism?


There's another term I'm not familiar with, congregationalist.

[ September 12, 2002: Message edited by: sakrilege ]</p>

HelenM

I guess it is then - thanks for the quote, RJS

Have you been to a service there? I've been, two or three times. There are lots of things I like about them. They are very unusual among conservative Christian churches in giving women full co-leadership rights. And to be on staff there you have to agree that that's ok with you, according to what I've heard.

But maybe you don't agree with women being able to have any Christian leadership position that men can have

Helen

sakrilege

I don't understand this statement, please elaborate.

Thanks for the link, it is part of what I am trying to understand.


Susan

sakrilege

Have you been to many non-denominational churches? What aspects of the non-denominationals that denominations don't have appeal to you (or vice versa)?


Susan

HelenM

I haven't been to that many. I didn't seek them out especially; it so happened that when I moved to Chicago one was recommended to me as a 'good church' and so I went there and liked it and so I stayed there. I moved to the near suburbs some years later and sometime after that I switched to the church that had been recommended to me as the most like the one I had been attending in the city - another non-denominational church.

The advantage of being part of a denomination would be accountability - that one church can't get off on some extreme tangent without the central authority saying something - or so I'd think. I don't really know much about them to be honest since I've never attended a denominational church regularly.

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable in a small non-denominational church for that reason - because one strong personality in leadership would dominate too much. Both churches I've been to in the US are quite large (over 1000 people on Sunday mornings) and have pastoral teams rather than one person who is totally in charge. (And the pastors are accountable to a elder board made up of lay church members the congregation elects)

Being in a large church means there's a diversity of people there (even in a conservative church ) and they have the resources to have lots of different ministries. I think I might have a hard time feeling that I could fit in in a small church where there was less diversity...

Even though they aren't part of a denomination, the leaders and members of churches like the two I've been at and other local like-minded Christian institutions tend to know each other so informally there is a sense of these churches being part of a larger 'group' which would be all the Chicagoland evangelical Christians - or all the US ones - or even all the ones worldwide. Although, of course people who live near each other will see each other more, when there are local events that conservative Christians want to attend, etc. There is a strong sense of commonality between conservative Christians regardless of whether they go to the same church or not, I would say.

I'm not sure whether that really answers your question - part of the reason is that I didn't strongly choose 'against' denominational churches so it's not as if I have a list of disadvantages of them - as perceived by me - that caused me to choose a non-denominational church.

Helen

HelenM

Susan I'm not sure what he said is true...

But anyway, "Pentecostal" is characterized by a church where people believe in speaking in tongues is a supernatural gift from God that is normative for Christians to have; they also believe that God will heal people miraculously of illness if they pray with enough faith.

There tends to be a mindset of, God wants to solve your problems miraculously if you'll but ask Him in faith (so it's your fault for not having enough faith if He doesn't answer those prayers - this is a belief that I really don't like - it's very condemning!!!)

Whereas non-Pentecostal conservative Christian churches tend to focus more on - you can't twist God's arm to solve your problems but what you can expect is that He loves you and anything difficult He's allowed in your life is for a reason; by all means pray for Him to change what's difficult but realize that sometimes what He will do is strengthen you to deal with it rather than take it away...

This is a typical difference I've observed but doubtless there are exceptions. I definitely prefer the approach that doesn't set an expectation of God taking everyone's problems away unless they fail to have enough faith...I think that doesn't at all fit with reality.

Christians at churches where they aren't led to expect that, will have a much easier time when they find that despite their prayers, their suffering/difficult circumstances continue. They will look for ways in which God is helping them bear what their going through rather than blame themselves for a lack of faith.

If/when you feel ready to ask you can probably determine which approach the church takes, which the people you know go to. Does it emphasize acceptance of difficult circumstances as "working together for good" or does it emphasize "pray and believe and God will fix your life if you do"

Anyway maybe this is a bit of a simplistic stereotype, but I hope it helps you a bit with seeing two main ways in which conservative Christians approach life...in which bad things continue to happen to good people, as it were...

(Of course most people here would have a different reason for why prayers aren't always answered )

Helen

RJS

Never been there. Been to similar. And I have no problem with the women's roles (notwithstanding I was raised Catholic )

For the person asking about Pentecostal and my comment that "non-denominational" usually is unrelated....The doctrinal views of the Pentecostal Church reflect the view that speaking in tongues is the initial sign of receiving the Holy Spirit and therefore the services include such activities. Might you be confusing Pentecostal with "generally more charismatic" such as hand holding, hand waving, contemporary music, alter calls, laying on of hands, crying, etc?

I think you will find many of the charismatic activities at non-denominational churches, but would likely find someone speaking in tongues ushered out the side door

HelenM

Originally posted by RJS:

Might you be confusing Pentecostal with "generally more charismatic" such as hand holding, hand waving, contemporary music, alter calls, laying on of hands, crying, etc?

I'd have to take these one at a time, RJS.

Three of my church's four services have contemporary music.

I'd put that together with hand holding and hand waving.

Pentecostal comes from Pentecost, which for Christians is the time the Holy Spirit was sent. The sending of the Holy Spirit, according to the Bible, was accompanied by miraculous signs, especially speaking in tongues.

Charismatic is from the Greek word "charis" which means gift - and in this context it means gifts given by the Holy Spirit. Specifically 'supernatural, sign' gifts such as gifts of speaking in tongues and healing and miracles.

So I'd say the meanings are more linked than you suppose.

Contemporary worship music really is a separate issue.

So is how emotional people are at services and how demonstrative.

But the general format of Charismatic/Pentecostal services needs to allow for the spontaneous speaking of tongues if someone is moved by the spirit to do so.

So their services are less structured for that reason. You can't schedule that in. My entire church service is scheduled down to the minute every week. I kid you not

It has to be because there are only 15 mins between each service so to end one late would mess up the next one.

And besides - this is something I learned from an extremely structured parachurch organization I was in for quite a while - it's not fair to everyone else if one person takes extra time - they will either make everyone else stay later or take someone else's time away. It's actually very selfish for one person to mess with everyone else's time.

I should add - if there's a 'group consensus' - as in some churches, evidently, that people don't mind whether the service is one or three hours, then fine. Take whatever time you are led to take.

But when everyone is sharing the same 60 minutes it's not appropriate for one person to take more than is pre-agreed. If they do I'd say that has more to do with ego than the Holy Spirit...

I think you will find many of the charismatic activities at non-denominational churches, but would likely find someone speaking in tongues ushered out the side door

That's not my experience...and as I tried to explain, with all due respect, I'm not sure you really understand what "Charismatic" means, based on what you said. The word has a clear derivation and meaning. I think it started being used in the 60s or 70s when there was a revival of interest in the 'miraculous' gifts of the Holy Spirit. Pentecostal is an earlier word referring to a similar emphasis in a church. But I'm sure there are some nuances relating to each word that probably aren't worth trying to figure out, for most people.

Anyway, evidently your experience of non-denominational churches has not encompassed all of what's out there.

love in Christ
Helen

RJS

You are probably right - I use it incorrectly.