{ 2008 08 05 }

WANTED: Local Church, Will Relocate - Further Explanation

I’ve had time to reflect since the previous post WANTED: Local Church, Will Relocate. In addition, some very valid and commonly heard concerns about what I’ve proposed were brought up in a comment. After reviewing my options, I decided I should do some further explanation in a separate article.

I once explained to a brother my views on how a church should be local by using the analogy of the family. The church is referred to by God in the Scriptures as the household of God (Ephesians 2:19), and we are all brothers and sisters in that one family. In our Father’s house there are many mansions (John 14:2), and I believe it is acceptable to think of this as referring to many local churches. Therefore I believe that the local church is meant to be a visible example of a close-knit family under the headship of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I asked this brother the question: “Just because a teenage daughter owns and drives an automobile, does that mean that she should be allowed to live several miles away because it is easy for her to regularly gather together with her family, now that we have modern transportation?” The answer is obvious. There would be something seriously wrong with a family that used the excuse of modern transportation and communications to justify scattering themselves across the landscape. The same goes for the local church.

The three-block figure (”several blocks”) was one mentioned for a very small church of less than ten heads of household, and comes from my experience here in Rayville, where it is a reality. I have been greatly blessed by the experience of living within a few blocks of my true family (Matthew 12:50), and have seen countless good reasons come to the surface for why God wanted this to be so.

One of the most important lessons learned from this experience is just how much the foundations have been destroyed in this nation, specifically the ones that teach us how to relate to each other in a Christ honoring and respectful way. Gather some Christians together in such an experiment for a few years, and you’ll find out how quickly we abandon God’s Word about how to relate to each other in problems, differences and offenses. This is where the “tire meets the pavement” as far as restoration of the church to a place of dominance in our nation: God will heal our land when we learn once again how to honor Christ and His Word in proper relationship with Him and each other.

In modern times, Christians have seen how many of these local church “experiments” have not worked out, and have thrown the baby out with the bath water. But to these I say what Theodore Roosevelt said: “The only one who never makes mistakes is the one who never does anything.” Before we critique the failings of those who are seeking to come together and live in close covenant community according to the Word of God, let us consider whether or not we ourselves are doing anything substantive to seek the ideal that God has for us. This is how we find out what areas we need to work on, by trying something. The true value of our “baby steps” in obeying Him is that when we fall, He picks us up, brushes us off, and restores us to try again, which proves to us all the more that He loves us and wants us to be blessed and prosper. After all, reproofs of instruction are the way of life (Proverbs 6:23).

In my proposal, the distances mentioned do not include all of the lands that are available to be worked by the members of the church. The several block figure is in reference to where they live and have their homes, not the entire amount of workable land. The historical model of Christian colonies is that the church building is in the center of the community, with the member’s houses around it in the town or village, and the land that is worked and used surrounding that, sometimes also including “commons.” Here is a drawing I’ve made of this model, found in reality and various similar forms in countless places and times in history:

Larger View

Keep in mind that not all the members of the church or community will be farming and working the land. The common reaction to what I’ve shared in the previous post comes mostly from a limited definition of “agrarian.” Most today when they hear this term think only of agriculture, and do not realize that the community is agriculture based, but not limited to those vocations. As I’ve explained, we must include service to God in many other needs of culture, economics, government and society. A pastor does not require more than a small amount of land, and although his family may work a garden, his calling is elsewhere than larger scale production of food. The same goes for many of the other vocations necessary in an agrarian community: they don’t all need larger tracts of land.

In the comment to the previous post a five-acre figure is mentioned as being “… to produce food for the family and for sale…” Not all members of an agrarian community support themselves by selling food. Instead, they offer other products and services as needed by the community and in this way ultimately obtain the food they may not have time to produce. In fact, there are many family callings wherein it would be perfectly acceptable for the provider of these products and services to do no gardening or farming at all! We are not all called to be farmers, and my vision for an agrarian community or church is not one where all the households do the same thing.

It is possible for a church plant (or colony) to buy contiguous tracts of land for the purpose of creating such a community, even today! Historically, this has happened many times. One example that I’m very familiar with is the settlement of the Holland, Michigan area led by Albertus van Raalte in 1846. He went ahead of the settlers and bought up large tracts of land, and initially they all settled close together in the middle of the thousands of acres purchased. After the beginning period this Dutch Reformed settlement developed into several churches and towns over a larger area. But they started very small and very close together. That is where I think we are in this nation today: we must begin very small, and let God bless it into something bigger as we are faithful.

For those interested in reading more about Van Raalte and what he accomplished, I highly recommend that you start your studies with an enjoyable historical fiction book that is good for children as well, entitled “A Land I Will Show Thee” by Marian A. Schoolland. There are more scholarly books written about the Dutch settlements in Michigan (and Iowa), but there are none more heart stirring and enjoyable to read than Schoolland’s. BTW, there is a sawmill featured in the story that they had to build three times, and this has endeared the book to me all the more! (Some of you may know I own part interest in a sawmill.) If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

The crux of the matter to consider in my mind at this point is not how much land we should be spread across for the model Christian community and church. This will vary widely, as in places and times the Godly community has thrived very well spread out over hundreds of square miles. The question to ask is not how much distance there can be between us, but how much influence the church will have in an area where they are heavily outnumbered by unbelievers and those of little or different persuasion. If the population density is very high, the church will have to be very close together in order to be the dominant influence in a smaller area. Here in Rayville, and in order to be able to someday find a majority on the village council, if God would so bless, we chose to settle within the village limits and in a relatively small area.

Here is a photographic example of a church community in the wide-open spaces of the prairie that did not have to be compacted into a small area:

Larger View

I apologize that I do not know the name of the church or community. Perhaps someone that sees this will recognize it, and let me know. The pictures were taken just off Highway 14 between New Raymer and Sterling, Colorado, on July 28, 2008. Zooming out, we find the cemetery that was most likely used by the members of the church:

Larger View

And turning to the right, the name of the cemetery and a larger view of the emptiness of the surroundings:

Larger View

Notice the dates. This was a time in our nation when for the most part what I’ve been saying about the local church was still considered normal and didn’t have to be said.

The point made by the photographs is that there isn’t a lot of competition for dominating influence in that community and so a few believers can spread way out.

As for my desires for a local church, it has been said to me that “… I don’t see how one is going to accomplish what you desire.” To me, it isn’t what is practical, realistic or possible with men. The concern we should have is “What is God’s will?” For whatever He calls us to He makes provision to accomplish. However, we must have faith that it is possible, indeed, ordained of God to be inevitable. Van Raalte knew this truth, as what he attempted and accomplished defied all possible prior estimations of what was practical or realistic.

If we limit what we are willing to attempt in service to God to what we believe we have the strength and power to accomplish, we limit God, who owns the cattle on a thousand hills. Let us instead examine and consider what it is that God would like to accomplish in His omnipotence, for the glory of His name and the Lord Jesus Christ. With men, these things are impossible, but with God, all things are possible.

Submitted in hopes for the glory of God and the restoration of the dominion of our Lord Jesus Christ in the church.

Jeffrey Alan Klute
Rayville, Missouri

 

Posted by Jeffrey on Tuesday, August 5th, 2008, at 7:49 pm, and filed under Economics, Photography, Theology.

Follow any responses to this entry with the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can post a comment, or trackback from your site.