Sunday, March 01, 2009

A personal debate in public

I thought I'd expand one of the paragraphs in the previous post a bit since I've received a few offline comments about it and writing things down helps order thoughts and people's opinions are very important in such things too. Opinions? Perhaps not the right word - people's wisdom is better I think.

So.

  1. I think it is important (and in many instances explicitly scriptural) for Christians to meet together because...Fellowship is good. Spending time with people on the same journey, though at many different points, is a seriously necessary thing to do. Some of that time can be formal (corporate worship, bible studies etc) but some (most?) needs to be relational. It needs to be about getting to know people and having genuine relationships with them that lead to accountability, honesty, true support...
  2. People need to worship together. Le Welsh will know who I'm talking of when I mention a chap who once said "sometimes it takes me a full half hour after I wake up in the morning before I start truly worshipping God" (or something along those lines). Well, sometimes it takes me the whole day. And the next day. And the next. If I did not have times of corporate worship giving me a good kick up the backside (yes, sometimes they can give a bad kick up the backside too) I might quickly lose all ability to worship God. Except perhaps those glorious moments of blue skies/trees/mountains/birdsong/rivers...I think and hope that I would always feel drawn to my creator and saviour in those contexts.
  3. We need to learn. Yes, there is an abundance of Christian material (not least the bible!) out there from which we can gain knowledge and understanding of God in private but I do not think we can take away what comes from learning together, discussing with others, hearing directly from people wiser than ourselves. We need to come together to be taught. On our own we can pick and choose too much and start creating the God we want to exist rather than continuing to be created by the God that does exist.
  4. Communion. I think perhaps in contemporary times this is not as obvious as it would have been thirty or forty years ago. Because we are in a major backlash against tradition and formality and ritual (some of which is good) we may have lost sight of the fact that communion is scriptural - it is just some of the trappings of it that perhaps are not. Communion can certainly be part of a meal with friends. It can certainly be taken out of "the church" but it does require Christians together to do it.

Next come the things that I think are vital to our Christian lives but don't necessarily have to be done together.

  1. Love. Kind of like point one above but not so much about the growing/discipling fellowship above, more about the outward looking, how we treat the world aspect. It is impossible to sustain that love with God and how we keep ourselves "fuelled" or "topped up" or "on track" with God may indeed bring us back to point one above.
  2. Justice/Social Action/Call it what you may. An offshoot of love but a more active one. We're all different. For some this will be a serious money challenge, for others a serious prayer challenge, for others a serious get off your backside and be my hands challenge.
  3. Stewardship. More of the same in a way. Taking good care of what we have in the widest possible context. Environmental issues are utterly mainstream now but they are utterly Christian too.

So.
I know there are many shapes of church now. There are traditional (in the broadest sense - to encompass all that meet in a building on a Sunday morning and have something more or less akin to the hymn sandwich style of my childhood) churches. There are mainstream non-traditional (like our local Vineyard that meet not on a Sunday and structure things differently but are part of a fairly well known, fairly widespread organisation). There are new style house churches. There are churches that meet in pubs, clubs, shoe shops (that is possibly the best of the ones I've read about). There are groups of friends that meet up to encourage their faith.
The thing is, with any of these "new" styles of church (by coincidence, I've just taken a break from writing and popped over to Simon's blog which contains thoughts on newness.) when they become successful or popular, they are going to find that they need a bigger building or a purpose built building or that in fact Sundays really are the most convenient time to meet... They are going to find that they do and say the same thing every week, creating liturgy all over again. They may find that they go on loving and acting in the world in a more upfront out there sort of way than their predecessors but they are going to start looking awfully similar.
Because of that, I have always felt it better to try to change the churches that already exist and help people (myself at the top of the list of people to help) change their habits, change what they desire from church, change their outlook, rather than dash off and create a new church from scratch that is going to hit all the same problems in a year, five years, ten years, twenty years. As someone put it recently about the church I'm currently affiliated with "They were all young twenty years ago and doing amazing things. Now they're all writing books about the things they did then." The church is relatively new despite being in one of the oldest buildings in an old city. They've gone from big ideals and newness to big ideals and familiarity. This is not a criticism, it is what happens. But I'm bored of it. Is this just my problem? Do I need to face a time of discipline to get through it and come out the other side? Do I need to fight along the way and use my dissatisfaction to create change? Do I need to depart all together and try one of these new fangled systems of church?
I've just deleted a whole other paragraph because I think that is enough thoughts for one day. I could go on for a long while with related thoughts and ideas but I'll stop here for now. I would love to hear what you have to say, by comment, by email, by phone, face to face... When I've thought some more (and maybe had some feedback), I'll perhaps post round two! In the mean time, I'm going to do something that I've been considering for a while and email Traidcraft to ask about fairtrade wool...

4 comments:

doctor/woman said...

I'm so sorry to hear you're finding church tough at the moment. I'm also sorry to realise I don't even know which church you eventually settled on going to. I think any church can be difficult, because they're all composed of fallible humans who fall into comfortable ruts.

Personally I have some reservations about "new ways of doing church", mostly because I strongly believe that God founded the church, loves the church and destines it to be His bride...

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless." Ephesians 5:27

However, my main beef is not with people who meet in a different place or at a different time or in a smaller group that works for them. That still encompasses all your things to be gained from meeting together. The ones that scare me a bit are the free flow "emerging church" social network type churches, where they never meet together in a planned way, but
just hang out at each others houses and sometimes pray. Ok that may not be a very fair description - I've not been part of one. Two reasons why these bother me:
"Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching."Hebrews 10:25
and also, the fact that these churches are so easily just a bunch of like minded friends, and for church to truly display God's glory it should show the barriers broken down between different people who wouldn't normally even speak to each other. However, I'm aware that lots and lots of "traditional" churches, (including mine, although it's gradually getting better) do tend to be made up of the same types of people who get on cosily together.

That's my two pence worth - I don't know whether it helps at all with your dilemna though. Sorry, and sorry that this is an excessively long comment.

Amy said...

I am going to read this post properly at work later. I'm sure it has a lot of stuff that I need in it at the moment. I so remember that comment and thinking: it can take me weeks! Remember how inspired/amazed/depressed it made us feel! ;) x
Word verification: wiggrot - such a good word!

doctor/woman said...

btw - i didn't mean to sound dogmatic and judgemental. mr me thinks maybe i did.

AdventuringJen said...

d/w - part of the source of this post is that we are still not utterly settled in a church - we are having a three month trial with one which I am currently finding pretty bad but see the potential for it all coming good before the three months is up!
I started and failed to finish a book on the emerging church but my concern (that may have been answered later in the book) was the total lack of structure which means that fellowship is probably going pretty well but the other three things I think necessary from meeting together...but perhaps those concerns would have been answered later in the book!!
You did not sound dogmatic or judgemental, don't worry. I think we mostly mean the same thing perhaps with different linguistics. xxx
welshy - I'm waiting for more!!! ;)
xxx