IS CHURCH A BUSINESS?

 Among other things, a church is a registered organization. Like businesses, churches have organizational structures, which may include leadership roles. The roles are a part of a hierarchical system for decision-making and accountability. Churches also need to manage finances effectively. Sources of income need to be accounted for and managed responsibly.

Both churches and businesses engage in planning, organizing events, managing facilities and providing services. Some churches run community events, similar to how businesses offer products and services. Like businesses, churches must comply with legal and regulatory requirements, such as tax and employment laws. As registered legal bodies, churches often need to maintain records, file reports and manage liabilities.

However, there are primary differences between church and business. For instance, the primary mission of a church is spiritual, focusing on worship, teaching, fellowship and evangelism. Its purpose is to fulfill religious and spiritual needs, promote faith and support spiritual growth. Unlike churches, businesses are typically profit-driven, aiming to generate revenue and provide goods and services to customers.

Businesses are driven by market demands, competition, and the goal of maximizing financial profits. Churches on the other hand are motivated by religious beliefs, values and the desire to serve God and the community. Unlike business enterprises, church members are often seen as part of a spiritual family, with a sense of belonging and shared faith.

Churches operate as non-profit organizations, reinvesting any surplus funds into their mission and community activities. Unlike businesses who report to boards and stakeholders, churches account to their members, especially regarding financial matters and leadership decisions. In offering a service, churches prioritize compassion, and community support, often providing charitable services without expecting anything in return.

As an institution, churches provide more opportunities for volunteerism than any other institution. In addition, churches facilitate more philanthropy than any other organization. Within our communities, there is no other organization that is as inter-generational as the church. In some church congregations, members can be identified as persons who were dedicated as infants and experienced conversion, baptism and marriage.

As a business, the church is managed more like a family business than a public corporation. As a family business, churches operate with “the family first philosophy”. This places emphasis on the needs of the family over what others view as the more productive approach of a corporation. In a recent newspaper article, my Jamaican friend, Dr Lawrence  Nicholson, contended that “the family-first philosophy places a premium on having and maintaining a healthy family network and keeping the family together”. In seeking to maintain a healthy family network, family enterprises often are deprived of maximizing the benefits that stem from a more business-like approach.

Is it possible that churches can suffer a similar fate? They are unable to achieve maximum results because they avoid a more business-like approach to ministry. Far too often, churches seek to appease congregants and suppress vision planning. Vision for growth is stymied because mission philosophies are too insular. Some ignore the changing dynamics necessary to reach contemporary generations for Christ. To their detriment, some churches even believe that they are committed to the unchanging message and method of the New Testament.

It took COVID to convince some churches that there is a difference between the message and methods of delivering that message. Since COVID, some churches have found more efficient ways to handle communion, receive offerings and utilize technology. Even more user-friendly ways have been found in conducting liturgy. Some churches now engage professional services to assist with promotion and counseling.

As a business, churches must take a serious look at ministry outcomes. As stewards of God’s resources, we cannot ignore improving our human resources. Our people need to be trained to ensure better outcomes in discipleship. Churches that are serious about outcome-based ministry are witnessing increase in conversions and baptisms. On the other hand, many churches use their resources to “guard the flock”. Such protective strategies result in declining church growth and poor use of resources.

Even a cursory reading of the book of Acts would indicate that church growth mattered. In recording the events about the Day of Pentecost, Luke stated, “… about 3,000 were added to their number…” (Acts 2:41). Like someone providing progress reports, Luke later indicated that “… many who heard the message believed, and the number of men grew to about 5,000” (Acts 4:4). And again, “… the number of disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of priests became obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7).

In spite of the challenging circumstances under which they operated, Christians in the Early Church found creative ways to ensure that they maximized their resources to increase measurable outcomes. The same should be said of strategies in churches and para-churches today.

SUBMISSION AND SACRIFICE IN MARRIAGE

 

Even within Christian marriages, many are repulsed by the word submission. They believe the idea of submission is to condone abusive behavior. The perception is to see the idea as subjugating and relegating women to an inferior place in a marriage. From my studies, I would agree that many women continue to be subjected to despicable abuse, under the guise of being submissive. However, that understanding of abuse is because of ignorance. A proper understanding of submission in Christian marriages is totally different.

The idea of submission in marriage comes from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians – “Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:22). Interestingly, the word “submit” in this verse, does not appear in the original Greek text. However, the absence of the word, does not mean the absence of the idea. The idea comes from the previous verse – “submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21). So the context justifies the inclusion of the word in English translations.

The word “submit” appears as a participle in the original text. As a participle, it is linked to a main verb. Actually, it is the last of four participles that are linked to the main verb. The main verb appears in verse 18 – “… be filled/controlled with the Spirit…”. Paul’s argument is simple, when one is controlled by the Holy Spirit, that encounter is displayed in four areas of our lives. He identifies each area with following participles:

1) … speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit;

2) … singing and making melody from your heart to the Lord;

3) … giving thanks to God the Father for everything…; and

4) … submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.

That is the context from which Paul instructs women to submit to their own husbands. Initially, there is a submitting to each other. Functionally, there is a submitting to one’s husband, “as you do to the Lord”. Paul contends that the function is a part of God’s order, and he teaches what that order should look like in the following verse – “Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything” (Ephesians 5:24).

But what does it mean for the church to submit to Christ? It means that the universal church acknowledges her relationship with Christ. A relationship characterized by recognizing His authority, obedience to His teachings, dependence on His provision,  alignment with desires and trust in His leadership. The church’s submissive response to that relationship is expressed in worship, discipleship, community life and mission.

Paul is arguing that the same attitude that guides the church’s response to Christ, that same attitude should guide a woman’s response to her husband. That attitude incorporates respect, admiration, support and deference for her husband. Like with the church to Christ, this attitude is a response to values and virtues that elevate. In order for a response to be authentic, it must be voluntary. It cannot be demanded. If demanded, a response would then be forced and cannot be genuine.

Paul then turns to husbands and instructs them to “… love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her…” (Ephesians 5:25). The word Paul uses, is the most noble of the Greek words for love. It is not a romantic or sexual word. The word is characterized by empathy and selflessness. The original word used here is an act of one’s will. It is an intentional choice that one makes to desire the best for another. It is a willingness to sacrifice pride, one’s reputation or even one’s perceived rights. Any expression of this love requires a sacrifice. It requires the husband to put his needs and well-being of the wife above his own interests.

Just as Christ’s love for the church is expected to have a purifying and nurturing effect, a husband’s love is expected to do the same for his wife. In other words, a husband’s contribution should set the tone for positive virtues and values in his marriage. In order to express His love for the church, Christ gave His life for the church. Similarly, husbands are expected to love their wives just as much as they love themselves.

The fact that this kind of information seems foreign to our thinking, it is not because the Bible is outdated, rather, it is because our society has moved away from a biblical understanding of marriage. Unfortunately, many in the church have also moved away from that understanding. The outcome of this drift is evident in the dysfunctional marriages seen in our churches today.

Paul was correct – “… this is (marriage) a profound mystery” (Ephesians 5:32). Paul saw marriage as a picture of the relationship between Jesus Christ and the church. It is in light of that reality, we must ask the question, what kind of picture am I painting with my marriage? As others look at my marriage, do they get a good idea of the relationship between Christ and His church?

 

 

MEMORIES OF OUR FATHERS

 

Today, Father’s Day, my wife and I found ourselves reflecting on the impact our fathers had on our lives. We were raised on two different islands in the Caribbean, in a variety of different circumstances. However, we had one thing in common – we were influenced by men who cared.

As a child in Trinidad, I recalled accompanying my dad on an early morning business trip. He was to receive payment for constructing a horse-drawn cart. Although he had an appointment, the wealthy client took enough time to visibly ignore my father. My father was obviously humiliated as he returned to the car where I witnessed everything. Dad was emotionally crushed. However, he never attempted to compete with the undignified behavior of his client. He probably thought it was more important to model meekness before his twelve-year old son than to engage in despicable behavior.  

Even as a child, my wife’s Jamaican step grandfather would respectfully call her Miss Launa. On Sunday mornings he would take her to church on his bicycle. The five-mile journey included a hill. She recalls being placed on the bar of the bike as he pushed her up the hill. At times that church deacon would remove his black woolen jacket before entering the modest sanctuary. Little did my wife know that the Ira D. Sankey songs she learned at that church would shape her life. One of the songs that brought that six-year-old to tears was “I’ll Be Somewhere Listening to my Name”.

For me, May 26, 1963, was historic. It was in Trinidad on that quiet Sunday afternoon, my Dad piloted my journey of faith. He and Mom had just completed a series of discipleship interviews. I interrupted their closing procedures to announce my faith commitment. Dad picked-up that my intended announcement was more the quest of a seeker. I could still see the sides of his large Bible resting on his crossed legs. Mom got into a familiar posture, chin on chest, while she prayed. Sixty-one years later, I can confirm that God is still in the transformation business. That decision to become a Christ-follower has affected my career, life-companion, worldview and friendships.

Launa and I cannot stop talking about the care of our fathers. The care was both for us, the immediate family and the community. Launa’s Dada owned land in rural Jamaica. He planted every fruit tree imaginable. He owned and slaughtered animals. The truth is, Launa had a fruitful upbringing. It was Dada’s caring spirit that pulled him out of bed on September 01, 1957. For several hours he was helping the hundreds of passengers on the Kendal train crash. He assisted in sorting the bodies of some of the 175 persons who died in Jamaica’s worst transport accident.

We were both humbled with the generosity of my Dad in Trinidad. Fifty-one years ago we got married in Jamaica and moved to Trinidad to serve in Christian ministry. My Dad anticipated the housing challenges we would be facing as a young couple in ministry. On arrival in Trinidad we were offered a two-bedroom apartment. That generous display of thoughtfulness continues to benefit us. As expressed in our recent memoir, that home became a balm for many who were in pain and a place of rest for travelers.

Because of the godly leadership provided, neither of us could ever imagine taking stolen goods home. Although our Dads were not known for their intellectual ability, you could not want more principled and godly men. We still chuckle when we recall an event in Trinidad. My Dad was introducing Launa to an old friend. We heard him say, “meet my daughter and son-in-law”. Yes, it was a slip of the tongue, but it was a reflection of his heart. He received Launa as his own daughter.

What are your memories of the father-figures in your life? Or, you might want to grapple with my question for this year’s Father’s Day, “what memories am I leaving with those I influence as a father-figure”? In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul was on target when he admonished fathers to bring up their children “in the training and instruction of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). Happy Father’s Day!

IS THE BIBLE ON TRIAL?

 Finland is generally considered one of the freest countries in the world. Finland’s Constitution guarantees the freedom of expression for “everyone,” which protects the rights of all people “to express, disseminate and receive information, opinions and other communications without prior prevention by anyone.”

Freedom House, an organization that measures political rights and civil liberties, gave Finland a perfect 100 out of 100 “freedom score” in 2022. The score suggests, Finland is even freer than the United States, which Freedom House scored an 83 out of 100.

 

But despite these lofty promises, Finnish officials are blatantly attacking free speech. Alliance Defending Freedom believes that there is no clearer example of this fact than the actions taken by the country’s own Prosecutor General against Dr Päivi Räsänen.

 

Dr Päivi Räsänen is a medical doctor and elected official in Finland. She has served as a member of the Finnish Parliament since 1995, and she was the chair of the Christian Democratic Party from 2004-2015. In addition, Dr Räsänen served as Minister of the Interior from 2011 to 2015. She has five children and 11 grandchildren, and her Christian faith is a large part of her life.

 

Dr Räsänen is a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland. In 2019, she posted a tweet questioning her church’s official partnership with the LGBT event “Pride 2019,” including a picture of some Bible verses. But this simple expression of her beliefs soon caused Dr Räsänen to face criminal charges.

 

As a result of her post questioning her church’s promotion of an LGBT event, Dr Räsänen was accused of “hate speech.” Even though the tweet remains published on X (Twitter), because it did not violate the platform’s own “hate speech” rules, Finland’s Prosecutor General started pursuing criminal charges against Dr Räsänen.

 

A few months after the tweet was posted, authorities opened an investigation into whether it constituted a crime of “ethnic agitation.” Section 10 of the Criminal Code of Finland says a person can be charged with “agitation against a minority group” if they spread “an expression of opinion or another message where a certain group is threatened, defamed or insulted on the basis of its race, skin color, birth status, national or ethnic origin, religion or belief, sexual orientation or disability or a comparable basis.”

 

Three days after authorities opened an investigation into the tweet, the prosecutor general requested investigations into a pamphlet Dr Räsänen had written in 2004 regarding her church’s teaching on human sexuality. This investigation also led to a criminal charge against the Rev. Dr Juhana Pohjola, chairman of the International Lutheran Council, for publishing the pamphlet.

 

In April 2021, Finland’s prosecutor general brought three criminal charges against Dr Räsänen—one for the 2004 pamphlet, one for the 2019 tweet, and a third for engaging in a debate about human sexuality on a 2019 live radio debate. In a unanimous ruling in March 2022, a court dismissed all charges against them. The court found in the ruling that it was “not for the district court to interpret biblical concepts,” and it ordered the prosecution to pay more than 60,000 Euros in legal costs. But Finland’s prosecutor general did not allow the case to end there.

 

The prosecutor general appealed the district court’s decision, and on Nov. 14, 2023, the Helsinki Court of Appeal issued its ruling in Dr Räsänen’s case. Just like the district court, the court of appeal unanimously acquitted her and the bishop of all the criminal charges brought against them.

 

Sadly, even after two unanimous rulings, the prosecutor general has still refused to respect the free speech rights of Dr Räsänen and Bishop Pohjola, and in January 2024 appealed to the Finnish Supreme Court. In April, the court agreed to hear the case.

 

I fully agree with Alliance Defending Freedom in saying that “free speech is an integral part of any democratic society. Everyone should be free to express their own beliefs without fear of government punishment or censorship.” However, while Finland claims to protect free speech, it prosecuted two of its citizens simply for sharing their beliefs. Speech will not be free in Finland until prosecutors stop using vague allegations of “hate speech” to target citizens for peacefully voicing their beliefs. According to the Finnish Prosecutor to the Christians charged, “… you can keep your Bibles, just don’t say you believe what it says”. Say what? It sounds as though it is the Bible on trial.

 

In America, concerns are arising regarding Christian prosecution and persecution as many believers and faith leaders are seeking clarity on the situation. The land known for its foundational principle of religious freedom now faces a complex reality where expressions of faith are occasionally met with opposition, legal challenges, or social pressures.

 

In attempting to deal with the issue of violence in Jamaica, the National Violence Prevention Commission recommended to the government “a total ban” on corporal punishment. Prime Minister Andrew Holness believes corporal punishment is tantamount to a violent means of disciplining children – “… it is a violation of the person-hood of the child.”

 

How should we view that approach in light of Proverbs 22:15 – “A youngster’s heart is filled with foolishness, but physical discipline will drive it far away” (New Living Translation). Although considered as corporal punishment, responsible physical discipline by loving parents must be encouraged and not maligned.