One mouth, two ears

Funny thing about us humans... we can communicate but oftentimes we don't. We front and appear to be listening while mentally preparing our rebuttal statements. I bet there's a term for people talking AT each other instead of TO each other. Perhaps communication dysfunction, or correspondence retardation, or mouth/ear/brain disorder. I don’t know.

What I do know is that I observe this phenomenon all the time. The usual suspects are political “discussions” or “debates.” In this sphere, Republicans label Democrats as baby killers and Democrats berate Republicans as “imperialists” with no compassion for the poor. Libertarians, don’t enter the “conversation” because they are “apathetic” and just want everyone to get along.

As of late, I’ve observed this phenomenon in another arena, namely church methodology/ecclesiology. As many of you know, Shayla and I are venturing out on a journey that we believe God has called us on. This journey includes no longer being a paid pastor of an institutional church, getting another job, living on mission and starting house churches. The conversations I’ve been having with some have been painfully predictable. Institutional church Christian: “How are you going to do leadership? Who will run it? What about doctrinal purity? You’re going to meet in a house? When will you get a building? House churches just don’t make sense to me.” House church Christian: “Institutional church is so regimented and full of consumers. Worship at an institutional church is entertainment. Where are the relationships? Money is used on salaries and staff not the kingdom.”

The truth is, both models are just that, models. They are not right or wrong. Each one has inherent strengths and weaknesses. House churches struggle to be on mission and outward focused as much as institutional churches. Consumerism is rampant in both. IC has program consumers, HC has relationship consumers. Both have leadership issues. Both have problems. Both also have tremendous plusses as well.
IC (particularly mega churches) have major resources in land, buildings and funds. These assets can be capitalized on for mission in the community as co-work centers, soup kitchens, food banks, meeting rooms, education and training centers, recreational facilities, etc. For a great example check out Hope For New York sponsored by Redeemer Presbyterian. On the other hand, house churches can utilize their small size to quickly adapt and plant more quickly and more efficiently. Since leadership responsibility is small in terms of numbers, the pool of potential leaders of churches is increased significantly. The end result is quicker multiplication and viral growth. HC’s also tend to have shorter assimilation processes for unbelievers to become friends and family of the local body.

The bottom line is that everything has pros and cons. Everything. We would be wise to heed the proverbial saying… God gave us one mouth and two ears for a reason. We as the body of Christ should be especially conscious of this truth. Jesus, help us to listen to you by listening to each other!