If people do not properly implement the local church, it is not the fault of the local church concept. If a cook fails to properly follow a recipe, it is not the fault of the recipe if the dish does not taste right. The Scripture defines what the church should be. It is not the fault of the church if the recipe is not being followed.

Those who are dissatisfied with the church are discontent with a poor substitute, not the real thing. At other times in history believers have been dissatisfied with circumstances in the local church. This frustration and disappointment has served to bring revival and reformation as believers move closer to the New Testament model.

Could the Revolutionary trend Barna has identified be the early stage of a new revival or reformation in the church? Historically, it is common for believers to become dissatisfied with existing conditions in the organized church that are inconsistent with the NT ideal. When this occurs we first see efforts to adjust and correct the errant practice. Invariably, leaders of this “revolution” are raised up from within the existing church (often from obscurity) and call for reform. When the course correction is resisted, the leaders of the reform movement eventually are forced to separate from the existing structure.

For a while it appears that the separatists are radicals who oppose the “church.” But in reality they are opposing the practices that have developed in the structure of the church that have moved the church off course or hinder its progress.

As others hear the message of the reformer, they will go through a similar process of reform and attempt to correct the existing structure. If this fails, they too will become separatists and join the ranks of the reform movement. Eventually, these reformers form new congregations and develop a new structure that emphasizes the ideals that birthed their separation.

Elements of this progression can be witnessed throughout the history of the church, even at its very birth. John the Baptist was one such reformer. His call to repentance produced a following that prepared the way for the coming of Christ. Of course, Jesus brought much more than reformation to the existing religious practice, but the effects on the organized structure are very similar.

The followers of Christ first attempted to incorporate the teachings of Christ within the organized Jewish faith. Initially, there was good progress, but eventually resistance developed and the new movement was forced to separate. In fact, they became the “called out” assembly–the Church. The missionary efforts of the Apostle Paul followed a similar pattern.

In later centuries other separatists followed this familiar practice. The Novatians, Donatists, and others in the ancient church challenged popular errors that had crept into the organized structure. Eventually, the points of disagreement became so sharp they separated from the larger movement, much of which devolved into the Roman Catholic Church.

It is important to understand, throughout the Middle Ages groups of faithful believers existed separate from the Catholic Church. John Wycliffe and others prepared the way for Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation.

The Holy Club, established by John and Charles Wesley, was a reaction to the stale formalism of the existing organized churches. The Methodist churches developed from this movement that emphasized holiness and Christian ideals.

Even the revivals of the Great Awakenings in America show the marks of reform and revolution. These revival preachers were met with varying degrees of acceptance and rejection by the established churches. In their wake new churches were organized. As the old denominations departed from the NT ideals, new groups emerged to carry on the ancient faith.

One such example is the Free Will Baptist movement. Benjamin Randall disagreed with the Congregational Church and was forced to separate from the organized denomination that populated New England. For a while he preached in the open fields to those who would listen. In time, new churches were established and a new denomination was born.

The second Great Awakening in America followed the first by 100 years. Many have hoped that a third would take place in the next century. It is later than anticipated, but it may finally be upon us. If this reformation follows the historical pattern, new churches will be birthed, some existing churches will be revitalized, and some churches will fade away.

Barna has identified the emphasis of the new reformation, but perhaps he misinterprets the meaning of the separation. The organized local church will not become insignificant, it will just be different.

This is perhaps the first time in history we have had such freedom of travel and such proliferation of information to be able to witness the micro-development of a Reformation or Great Awakening as it happens. Historians have identified previous events after the fact. Barna’s research may be showing us what it looks like while it is taking place.

The Revolutionary separatists will likely follow the same pattern as their ancestral counterparts. Some are working within the local church, some are outside the structure of a local church–but only until there is a sufficient assembly to form a new local church.

While we agree that Jesus calls us to Be the Church, the only way to fulfill the New Testament example is through a local gathering of believers. The ordaining of elders, commissioning of missionaries, shepherding the flock, discipline of erring members–these practices cannot be accomplished without some kind of organized structure. Throughout Acts and the epistles we see local gatherings of believers. They gathered together on the first day of the week. That is the norm.

We should avoid the tendency to identify the American church as The Church, as if what happens here defines all of Christianity. American churches have had a significant role in world evangelism, but only for this time and place. The story of the Christian Church is much older than America and will continue regardless of what happens in this country.

If every church on this continent closed tomorrow the Church of Jesus Christ, including local gatherings of believers, will remain somewhere until Jesus returns.

Some responsibilities just can’t be delegated. We may call others along side to help us get the work done, but we can’t just give the job to someone else. Such is the case with teaching children about God. God gave that duty to parents. Parents should not think they can bring their children to the church and let the “professionals” do it. It has to be lived before them at home.

As youth workers, we must avoid the temptation to take over the parental responsibility. Our job is to help equip parents to accomplish their God-given duty to teach their children. It is fine to help fill the gaps, but don’t try to take their place.

This is a philosophical shift from youth ministry of the past. Rather than focus on ministry with and for students, we need to take a whole-family approach. The greatest impact a youth worker can have in a young person’s life would be bringing the parents to a right relationship with God, doing things His way.

That’s the idea behind the D6 Conference–equipping leaders to equip parents to accomplish God’s plan. Check it out at D6conference.com. For significant savings, don’t miss the very early registration, which ends Februry 2.

www.d6family.com/d6conference

View Larger Map

George Barna

John Trent

Fred Stoeker

Mark this date on your calendar–September 23-25, 2009. You will want to be at this event.