Abusus Non Tollit Usum

While studying at Wheaton College I learned a quote that has helped to clarify my vision on a lot of things, that quote in Latin is Abusus Non Tollit Usum, or as translated by Dr. Jerry Root, 'The Abuse Does Not Nullify the Proper Use.'

Recently I had the opportunity to have a long conversation with someone who had grown up in a church, but because of the generation and culture he grew up in, shunned all organized religion. As we talked, it was clear that he had a very negative view of the Church, while holding a very positive view of Jesus.

He was apparently quite challenged when I pushed back by affirming that the church was a God made organism, and not a man-made institution. The Church's charter, mission and backing all come from the Lord.

The Church, despite its trappings of buildings and leadership structures, at its very core is people--and the Church is made up of broken, sinful people, at varying stages of sanctification and maturity in the faith. It often reflects the brokeness of the people rather than the abiding Spirit of the Lord. Understanding this has helped me to have a lot of grace and and patience for the Church.

God loves the Church, Jesus died for the Church, and part of His plan for the Church is that it, like a family, have leaders--Jesus demonstrated the servant leadership he desires to see in his Church, and appointed Apostles. The Apostle Paul gave instructions for local churches to appoint elders and to maintain regular times of fellowship and instruction.

Leadership has been abused in the Church, the freedom and flexibility of the New Testament Church has often been replaced with man-made traditions and rituals; but all of these various abuses are not an adequate reason to quit the Church altogether; in fact, they are quite the opposite, they are challenges to lean in more.

Just like an individual, the Church needs to be sanctified--there are various ways that people have attempted to go about this in Church history; sometimes it has been bloody and at others it has been beautiful. But I have been challenged, that if I really want to see the Church begin reflecting the Glory and Character of God, than it has to start with me.

The Church certainly has its problems, and it is easy to point at external issues as the source of those problems; but as an sojourning community, an outpost of the Kingdom of Heaven, the Church is an alien to this world. We need to recapture that alien character not by separating from the world, or putting up higher walls, but by living as sojourners ourselves, by being transformed the power of the Gospel--that can only truly happen in community with other Christians.

Missions and Unity; We are Better Together

Missions has a long history of promoting unity among Christians. The oldest Baptist denominations for example were organized to send missionaries. What was difficult for a single church to do, support and send long-term missionaries, was possible in partnership with other like-minded churches and Christians. Unfortunately, denominations, which I believe are capable of significant good in the cause of advancing the Kingdom through church planting and missions are often seen as divisive rather than unifying in their nature.

As a missionary, I have more than one ministry. I have a ministry that God has called me to among the unreached people of Japan--to plant the Gospel, churches and make disciples among them. In addition to this mission though, God has given me a second, equally urgent missions. That mission is to call Western churches and believers to unity in the cause of Christ among the Nations!

Very few churches are capable of sending missionaries themselves--there are thousands of churches throughout the USA and Canada that have less than 100 members. These churches are no less called to missions than churches of a 1000, that have million dollar budgets and designated missions pastors. In fact, from what I have found, the average person in a smaller church is much more interested in missions than a person in a larger church.

However, without thoughtful cooperation, it wouldn't be possible for a small church to intentionally send missionaries. They may be able to support a few parachurch missionaries that show up at their doors, and send their youth group to Mexico every few years, but that isn't the level of engagement in the advance of the Kingdom that God calls us to.

Denominations exist, and have existed primarily to plant churches and send missionaries. The Baptist General Conference, who I serve with, was formed from like-minded Swedish Baptist Churches with a desire to work together to send missionaries--in fact, it was the call, "53 Missionaries by 1953!" that became the rallying cry that unified the Baptist General Conference, Converge Worldwide as one denomination in the mid 1940's!

I have a ministry to diverse churches, inside and outside of my denomination. I have a message for them: we can do more together than we can do individually!

Even if a church is large and prosperous enough to send missionaries without cooperating with any other churches, is that really edifying to the body? I have been to a half dozen large churches that have a reputation (which is often indicative of reality) of not playing well with others. Rather than sending missionaries through their denomination, or even through parachurch organizations, they send them themselves. In effect, they are re-inventing the wheel in order to maintain control over their missionaries.

More than one of these churches is in decline, and visiting with the missions pastor I have heard that they are having a hard time being faithful to the commitments that they had already made. This to me is a tad ironic--when they were prosperous growing churches they stopped cooperating with others and took the entire burden (and blessing) of sending missionaries on themselves--and when the economy, or changing demorgraphics, or a retiring pastor affected the health of their church, they began to doubt the commitments they had made.

Had these churches instead continued to send their missionaries through a denomination, or a parachurch orgnaization, and insisted that they spread out the burden (and blessing) of their support to other churches and Christian individuals, the health of a single church wouldn't be putting the ministry of these missionaries in jeopardy.

Unity in missions promotes health in both small churches and large. I have the opportunity to cast this vision among the churches that I visit--that we are better together than we are individually.

We Are All Ethnic

Have you ever noticed how churches for non-whites are called ethnic churches? Ethnic churches, ethnic ministries, ethnic initiatives--these expressions are becoming increasingly common among American Evangelical leaders--many of whom are white.

Beautiful Diversity

There's just one problem with this terminology--we're all ethnic. Ethnic churches are just churches! In fact, a predominantly Caucasian church is an ethnic church!

What is really happening here is an us-and-them dichotomy. The Caucasian leadership within a denomination is normative and by corollary, Caucasian churches are normative, but the others are not--they are ethnic. This is very insensitive! By labeling predominantly Black, Latin/Hispanic or Asian churches as ethnic, their legitimacy and significance is diminished.

One reality that this terminology points to is the fact that the leadership in many Christian organizations and churches lack diversity! Intentionally seeking diversity in the leadership of our organizations would be a healthy move for the Evangelic church and would do a lot to break down this dichotomy between Caucasian churches and the larger body of Christ.

How can we better talk about this issue without it becoming divisive?