Paul, in speaking of the charismata (spiritual gifts) said "let all things be done decently and in order." What I am wondering is "did Paul have the same definition of order that we have today." Think about it. Two thousand years have passed since Paul penned those words under the inspiration and authority of Holy Spirit. Don't you think that the order in Corinth may have been a little different than the order in present day United States?
Believe it or not but order does have a kind of relativity to it that hinges upon the context of the situation. Things such as geography, culture, language, time limits, etc. all have an influence on how we define order. Practically speaking, all one has to do is join a bunch of different families of different cultures for dinner and just watch how they interact. What for one family may be chaos for another family may be the normal order of interaction.
“Order” is not fixed, but is dependent upon a given situation. To discover the proper order in any situation one must first have an intimate understanding of it. If I were to walk “cold turkey” into a business meeting with my job and presume to start setting things in order (according to my predetermined assumptions) by telling people what to do and how to do them I would most certainly be mocked, and a few people would probably get angry with me.
This is why I find it somewhat troublesome and comical when non-charismatics visit a charismatic church. They often have a different experience of order. One that is usually very unfamiliar with the Charismatic position. Without even knowing it, some dismiss the entire experience at the expense of wanting to preserve the order they have always known. It is an easy thing to judge that with which we are unfamiliar.
In asking what order is some may be tempted to just use whatever definitions the dictionary gives. I advise against it for the moment because even dictionaries are the products of cultural constructions. Meaning that dictionaries weren’t created in vacuums but were created by people like you and I who are in culture.
If anybody is interested in dialoging, I ask “what you think Order really is?” What is your experience of Order and how should the Church exercise order? In my opinion the Church has abused the word/practice. What is your opinion?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Nice post bro. I like it. Especially the part: "dictionaries were not created in vaccums." That is definitely the quote of the day.
In sofware development, decent and "in order" means that code is organized into clear, functional groups, and then arrayed like a story - the code should tell a story about what the groups of code accomplish. Nothing should happen that isn't part of the story. It should be done so that any other programmer can open the code file and quickly understand the program's purpose, methodology, and potential.
In church, I think it should be such that everything has a clear function, which can be identified readily upon walking in. If speaking in tongues, then let it have an obvious meaning to the service or at least let there be an obvious public organization that shows "Praying in tongues for personal edification right now is encouraged." I.e., one group of people shouldn't be singing a song, and 15 people are running around like loose farm animals, and 10 other people are in the back jumping around with flags, while yet another person is standing in the corner blowing a trumpet made from a ram's horn and shouting obligatory verses from the Bible. There should be an obvious unity to things.
Where there is no apparent function for something, there cannot be any sense of order.
If the function of the service, at a time, is corporate worship through singing, than whatever impedes that is disorderly. Even if its someone's individual worship through singing. If it is someone speaking such that everyone is supposed to hear, than whatever impedes either speaking or hearing is disorderly. If the current function of the service is laying on of hands for people to recieve the Holy Spirit or miraculous ministry, than whoever impedes that, by any means - even ideals of "order," is being disorderly.
I say that everything is appropriate within its own time and space, and the pastor has the authority as to what is orderly at any given time - based on having some useful, corporately appreciable function in mind.
Hey Daniel, thanks for posting my brother. I agree in large part with what you have said here, there are a few things though that I am a little uncertain about. Hopefully I can come to a greater conclusion in the days to come as I pursue this idea further-especially in the relationship of order and unity. Your comments are very valuable.
If I am understanding you correctly the order you have defined in the context of a church service is such that there needs to be a perfect unity in all that is done within the service. What I am wondering though is whether or not the congregation can appear to look disorderly from the outside looking in but actually be orderly from the inside out. Whose definition of order are we using? The definition of the outsider or the insider? If we seek to define it as being something completely objective that the insider and outsider will define as being equally orderly then it seems to me that we compromise to much for the sake of orderliness as a virtue rather than a means to an end.
You Wrote: “Where there is no apparent function for something, there cannot be any sense of order.”
I agree with you here almost completely but I have my fears about it. Who decides whether or not it has an apparent function? I know you said the pastor should have the authority but what if he is wrong? I think that is one of the reasons so many churches are spiritually dead—because every time something happens in their services that they think has no apparent function they stifle it. Rather than wanting to maintain a perfect order we want to maintain perfect control of things. And instead of allowing Holy Spirit to lead and guide us we fall into the temptation to control the order of the service. This leads to the movement of the flesh rather than the Spirit.
Unity doesn’t necessarily mean uniformity.
I wasn't there, so I can only say it is my understanding that the way we "do" church is a model that goes back at least 2500 years to Ezra's establishment of the synagogue. There were local buildings in which the believers met, organized very much like most of our sanctuaries today--platform and pulpit front and center for speaking, seating area out there. A general order of service was followed, including prescribed prayers and Scripture readings by assigned individuals. Then one of the designated teachers would teach and there would be a discussion. Most churches still do things basically this same way today.
That said, Paul was writing in a church context that was probably not all that different from what you might experience today in a truly charismatic/pentecostal church, and he was addressing problems from that church that aren't really all that unfamiliar in those kinds of churches today.
When he wrote about decency and order, he was specifically addressing the three chapter discourse on the gifts of the Spirit and how they were to operate in the context of the local body. Here are Paul's general rules:
1) All the gifts are beneficial to the body.
2) Love must govern the exercise of all gifts.
3) The speaking gifts should be exercised to the benefit of all in a congregational setting.
4) Tongues should always be interpreted (or at least explained...I'm looking at the Greek, which I don't speak, but that could put an interesting spin on tongues in public worship).
5) Corporate worship is about contribution from the congregation; let each one who has something to say say it, but let it all be said to encourage and edify the body.
6) No more than three messages in tonuges, and they should all be interpreted.
7) No more than three prophets speak, and the body should judge what has been said.
8) If someone has something to say from the Lord while you are still speaking, you should stop and give them a chance.
9) Each one should do their thing in turn.
10) Don't let anyone be disruptive.
Now as to the meaning of order in our current context. Paul never says the Corinthians should stop exercising the gifts when the uninformed or unbelievers are present. But he does say what we do should be interpreted/explained, and that everything we do should be done for the benefit of all.
As one who has been "in charge" during the moving of the Spirit, let me say that I prefer to let the Spirit do what the Spirit wants to do, encourging people in their gifts, but also being led by the Spirit to direct the course of the flow if He is leading me.
However, too often I have seen errors on the sides of both freedom and order. Some are too quick to move on from a message in tongues or a prophecy with a "Praise the Lord, wasn't that nice. We have a few announcements..." Others would rather it appear that no one is in charge, so anything goes, which often produces false doctrine and demonstrations of flesh rather than Spirit. There must be balance.
As far as order, I think Paul's model and instructions are still pretty good for us today.
Some great discussion here after a great post William.
Surely there are some "ground-rules" to help govern us, but let freedom reign in the edification of the body through the love of Christ in His gifts.
Often the difficulty is - how to maintain good order (and keep going in it) when someone comes in the flesh and disrupts it.
William,
My most conclusive answer ever, to all of your questions, and all of my comments:
I dunno man... that's a tough one.
I guess in trying to point the issue to the idea of "function" or functionality, it really just changes the name of the problem; doesn't really give a solution. Its the same issue.
All in all, I think that what is rightly "in order" will probably appear disorderly from the outside, and I don't think that is a failure of the church.
You know me... I love spirit-filled services. I wish church were a little less talk and a lot more action. I do think unity is key though.
Maybe this is too ambiguous of a problem to be addressed at this scope: maybe this has to be addressed per congregation, per service, per leader. Not sure... Its like trying to answer the question "What are people supposed to do?" where the only answer is "What they are supposed to." because the question is too ambiguous to have any meaning. Maybe this question of "order" doesn't take on any meaning until it is asked on a specific day, in a specific place.
William, I think I would agree with Daniel's assessment that "order" must be determined in the context of the congregation, service & leader. One thing I would like to say though--I definitely think we should not determine our "order" based on outsiders coming in. Paul does indeed say, "If the uninformed or the unbeleiver comes in, they will say, 'what is this?'", but he didn't say it as if it was a bad thing. I can remember stories told by people who came in to "see the show" and left there changed by the power that was at work in those wild services! I'm believing for it to happen again.
To all of you, I say “thank you” for taking the time to read and comment. All of your comments are valuable.
Casey: “However, too often I have seen errors on the sides of both freedom and order. Some are too quick to move on from a message in tongues or a prophecy with a "Praise the Lord, wasn't that nice. We have a few announcements..." Others would rather it appear that no one is in charge, so anything goes, which often produces false doctrine and demonstrations of flesh rather than Spirit. There must be balance.”
Balance is the key my brother. And I think that the real thing (Spirit led balance) can only be found in Scripture and fervent prayer.
Ryan: “Often the difficulty is - how to maintain good order (and keep going in it) when someone comes in the flesh and disrupts it.”
What you have said Ryan is right on. It is a natural human temptation to want to fight flesh with flesh, fist for fist, tooth for tooth. In speaking from my own experiences, whenever I have seen people in the flesh disrupt a move of God I have always prayed that God would give those in charge the wisdom in how to address the issue. Some handled it in wisdom and grace and others did horrible.
Daniel and Casey: “Maybe this is too ambiguous of a problem to be addressed at this scope: maybe this has to be addressed per congregation, per service, per leader. Not sure... Its like trying to answer the question "What are people supposed to do?" where the only answer is "What they are supposed to." because the question is too ambiguous to have any meaning. Maybe this question of "order" doesn't take on any meaning until it is asked on a specific day, in a specific place.”
Order as interpreted and understood in context is exactly what I am getting at.
Allow me to give a brief summary through a conversation that happened today while at work for why I am raising this question of “order.” While I was walking through HEB on my way to the bank I saw a friend of mine that works there. We said hi to each other and I happened to ask him about his church and where it is that they have been meeting for services. He told me that they currently meet in a school but are moving into a gymnasium. And to that fact I responded with a little bit of Charismatic humor “Sounds like you guys are going to be having a bunch more room to jump, dance, and run around in when praising the Lord.” Ironically his response was (and he has not read my blog) “Remember William, all things must be done in order.” But “Can’t one run, dance, and jump in an orderly fashion before the Lord?” His answer “Such actions would be outside order. They would just be silly. That is stuff you see in the world.” Interesting how we have a very foreign idea of what order is all about.
I have another well respected pastor friend who tells me that if people want to dance, cry, lay down, or dance in church they must always go to the back of the building for to do any of that up front at any time would be a cause for distraction, disorder, and showing off. I disagree.
I have many more thoughts to share about the idea and practice of order but I am going to post them in Part II.
Post a Comment