Church (the institution) is a pain. Systemic abuse I've been known to call it. I've been recently discussing this with two others. One is a church minister in another town, working effectively within the structures. One is a friend in another church who's struggling with the internal conflicts and constraints. For myself, I've been in that latter place for awhile. In our discussions I think we're all circling the same stone statue and describing it in the words of our unique experiences. We actually have a good idea of what should be - and we're struggling with the imperfections. This suggests that the our wrestling with church is a more matter of finding God's perspective on our personal issue for what organization should be in my life. If we have no organization (we're de-organized?), that puts us into a mode of solo activity and any cooperation that happens is simply opportunistic and ad hoc. So, while we all carry a measure of solo responsibility, we are really made for relationship -- and isn't that what church is supposed to be? One has to step aside from only talking about our complaints of a broken institution (because anything human is incomplete), put aside (but not ignore) the systemic abuses, be wise as serpents and innocent as doves, and examine our created relational nature in the context of our unique God-positioned place. Easy to say. Functioning in our created purpose requires humility -- I know that's a no-brainer (even if it doesn't happen much). Yet humility by my definition is "to not be more than I am, and equally importantly to not be less than I am, which together presupposes I know what I am." So here I'm simply trying here to rethink this church-thing as a lay person working from first principles:
So, to be completely pragmatic, how do I actually apply this to the lay person's experience of church? I have a few options: a) walk away from Christianity (the Dalek approach - "you will be exterminated"), b) drink the Kool-aid (the Borg approach - "you will be assimilated"), c) be passive (the all-too-common approach) d) go solo (the Star Wars approach - we're playing "Hans Solo"?), e) engage from the inside (the "infiltrator's" approach, but not subversively), f) go independent (a response which I admit to finding attractive) Options (a)-(c) are problematic. Option (d) is not what we are created to be. Option (e) is where many of us end up as (as I currently am) and which works to varying degrees, depending on the proximity of disruptive systemic failures. This also has very real (sometimes surmountable) barriers with notable degrees of frustration, both from the system directly and from the apathy and resistance of the people in the system, all compounded by my own imperfections. Option (f) is a territory that's exciting and adventurous, yet fraught with the dangers of heresy and ego, bedeviled by practical and logistical challenges and limits. If successful, in time it creates a new system, because in seeking community (our innate desire) we inevitably involve more and more broken people which organically creates a broken system. It's interesting that Jesus railed against the institution, but never walked away from the institution. So, where does this leave me? Either I go solo (not a God-willed path, I believe), or I engage in some level of institution, be it one that I am / will be instrumental in forming, or one already established. That is the choice open to me. Absent any clear direction from God, I don't think there is a right or wrong about doing either (its "planned freedom"). The call as a Christian is to be engaged in the totality of discipleship; that is, be both a disciple and a teacher. For that is what it means to be in community traveling together on the arrow of time; at any one time we may act with different emphases on being the disciple or being the teacher, but never as only disciple or only teacher - for to be a learner is to also be a doer, and to be a doer necessitates being a learner. So my question becomes: at my stage of life, is the disciple or teacher my most dominant external role? And where then can I, in the grace of God (bearing in mind the definition of grace), best "be community" with the skills, desires, and talents that God has made in me. For the last 5+ years it has mostly been my church; teaching, leading worship, strategic planning, etc., during which time I've equally grown as a disciple in so many ways. But I can see a time in the future when this situation may change. I've a strong desire to engage with post-Christendom society to find a natural language that communicates Christ in a way unlike what one finds in church. I'm deeply frustrated by apathy in the church. Yet I also yearn for more and deeper collective worship (in the fullest sense of the word). I'm hungry for a community context to be what I think God may be leading me toward. It might emerge where I am if the systemic issues are addressed, but equally it may emerge through new external opportunities in addition to, or in place of the current system. My minister friend: he's found a context within the system where he can explore with freedom what God created him to be and do (do-be-do-...) My other friend: He's in the grip of a changing context, and the dust will have to settle before one can clearly see. Me: I'm anticipatory for myself ... for seasons change between times and places. So ends my day!
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Why?
Probably the best therapy is to express yourself. Why do you think psychiatrists make you lie on the couch and talk, while all they do is murmur "hmmm", "uhuh", or "go on"? Archives
May 2017
|