I am hoping that summer will allow me a more regular schedule of blogging. During the few days break between spring classes and summer classes, I did a blog remodel which I suppose is kind of silly since most people read on readers.
A couple of weeks ago there was quite a buzz about the “Sunday’s Coming” Movie Trailer from North Point.
Around that same time, Kevin DeYoung said:
“We need to put to rest the mantra: we don’t go to church, we are the church.”
My friend, Bill Kinnon responded:
Umm, “we don’t go to church, we are the church” isn’t a mantra nor is it sloganeering – it’s actually the truth, Kevin. “Going to church” rather than “being the church” is one of the defining problems of the Church in the West.
So, here is my question:
If the people of your church were to show up on Sunday morning, and “the show” were canceled for the morning, would they know what to do?
Their response in that moment would indicate the level of understanding of being the church.
Fortunately Linda I don’t go to a church building and its alligned organisation, nor do I try and be trendy by just ‘being church’ The sooner followers of Yeshua let church mania die the better. The ecclesia ( group or mob) in the Greek is just a collection of individuals who help each other out and claim to be Yeshua’s followers.After that the religious politics is just a game and usually a power play. I really believe that we Western Christians need a good dose of individualism to exorcise the ‘church’ demon. Most of us have never gone through personal individuation, swopping our parents for church and its authorities. The paradox is that only when we have individuated Yeshua followers can we ever hope to have a true faith community – namely the whole of mankind.Sorry if the thoughts sound a bit far out but all this church talk at times gets extremely boring. By the way in Northern Ireland my friends would probably go home ,have an extra ‘quiet time’ and then get the chicken in the oven for an earlier lunch!! By the way fellow commentators please don’t reply to my comment by patronisingly claiming that I have been deeply hurt by church and am speaking out of my unrepentant anger. I have in the past but not now thankfully!! Every blessing The Prodigal Prophet
Charlie,
When “being the church” becomes something that we try to do, it does become distorted. However, as christians, we have shown very little imagination for connecting relationally without defaulting to familiar structures and tasks.
If our regular “meeting” were canceled, my friends would probably go have a beer…and the conversation would be remarkably similar to what would have occurred at the meeting anyway.
No, your thoughts don’t sound far out to me, and yes, I understand being patronized about one’s thoughts about church.
Really insightful comments. Scandalous to many, of course… yet so insightful. I especially like this articulation: “The paradox is that only when we have individuated Yeshua followers can we ever hope to have a true faith community.” So true, yet so often overlooked.
My thought is being the church really does encompass more than going somewhere, listening to something and saying a few hellos. Same with “being the church”. It requires interaction on a spiritual level with other believers in unity where God is invited into the conversation, prayer, worship, etc. Something happens when we do that. “Where the spirit of the Lord is there is freedom”. “Where two or three are gathered in my name…”
I find that when Christians get together without some kind of leadership in a spiritual direction, it just stays on a surface or temporal level.
If we think we can “be the church” without some kind of spiritual interaction with others we are fooling ourselves….not to mention seriously missing out on the spiritual edification that comes with corporate worship and fellowship. Sadly though, it’s often missed when we merely “go to church”
Ruth,
I agree. I think our imagination must go beyond how we meet together to perhaps discover what our relationship is to one another when those relationship aren’t directed.
The group I fellowship with meets on Sunday mornings in a bagel shop. We don’t “do church” the usual way. We usually spend time talking about what God has done in us the past week, pray for awhile, and then talk about a passage in Scripture. Not a preaching session, it’s more of a teaching/discussion time. There’s been a couple of times where very few have shown up, and we simply hang out together, talk about our lives, and encourage one another – without the teaching/discussion.
Fred,
It sounds like a change in routine wouldn’t throw off your practice of one-anothering.
I am not sure what you mean by “the show,” do you mean that everything that happens at church is just a “show?”
Or, do you mean all the high-tech videos and worship?
When my church comes to worship we worship, nothing is a show.
What is worship Ken? What is the differnce between what your ‘church’ does and community hymn or chorus singing? Does everyone present worship or only the fervent few? Just wondering, having been a worship leader myself in a previous lifetime. I certainly knew how to work a crowd and get a group dynamic going as does any good performer.
Ouch! But how true. In my former life I played drums for my church worship band, and I know that for me, as much as it could be, it was sincere. There is no doubt that we practiced and discussed the order of songs, and how the segue would be done, in order to achieve the desired reaction from the congregation. I have no doubt that some people in that environment do worship from a sincere heart, as did I to the best of my understanding. For a majority of people, however, it was strictly an emotional experience, as evidenced by the widespread laughter and guffawing that occurred when the laughter movement came through. I always wondered why the Lord didn’t touch me that way…how sad, but how thankful I am that I didn’t get the laughter, or I may never have escaped organized religion. But I digress.
My point is that, now that I have found personal communion with the Lord, and with fellow Christians, in a true, biblical fashion, the worship experience is vastly different, in a manner I just can’t describe. It’s so…..real. So….wonderful!
I guess I meant the stage portion of the service. I suppose the level of engagement and participation by those attending would determine whether they experience it as a show or as worship.
My question was intended to highlight the degree of dependence placed upon the organized program. Dependence and passivity are not true of every organized service or gathering. However, I think it is a good question to ask ourselves.
I like that saying “one-anothering”. There should be an official Church of One-Anothering.
The trouble is Ruth someone would eventually dominate and mutuality would disappear – the mechanics of being part of a group Christian or not. Sad but true.
Charlie,
I think in most situations the first response of the group would be to look for someone to tell them what to do, as you said, the mechanics of any organized group. It is also a sign of not being accustomed to mutually edifying and encouraging one another.
I agree Linda that this is the first stage in any group and unfortunately some groups stay like that. Stage two, if ever reached, is when a group tries to be mutual – this may or not succeed for a time. My experience and the mimetic theory of Rene Girard seem to suggest that eventually the members will latch onto the person or persons with the greatest level of desire. Their desire becomes the group members desire and so are adopted by the group as the model. This is clearly dangerous for both the model and his new mimetic disciples and will eventually end in broken relationships and the final act of scapegoating – a very religious act indeed. I’d suggest a reading of Girard would help all groups avoid the pitfalls of such group dynamics. I’ve lived through this process as described in my book The Prodigal Prophet ( see http://www.authonomy.com). My hope is that my story can help young believers from falling into the unconscious gravity of such inter-personal desire.
Unfortunately the earth has been too long without a widespread corporate expression of Christ. Because of that, we really don’t know exactly “how it should look”. What we do know, however, is that there is to be one. From my experience the Lord may use believers to start works to facilitate the building of community, and it may be an individual believer. Although it is the tendency for man to want to take pre-eminence (or give pre-eminence), it is up to the person or people that are leading in the initial stages to not allow that to happen. Where the hearts and intentions of the people are pure, the Holy Spirit will build The Body. I agree with your earlier comment, which initially caught me off guard, that there may need to be an initial “individuation” before a believer can function well in a community environment, but I suspect it may depend on the believer. I for one had to have about an 8 year period with minimal fellowship with other believers before the Lord began to knit me with likeminded individuals to begin forming a community.
Pingback: The Assembling of the Church | The show must go on?
very good question for my institutionnal church friends
Linda,
I’ve found this subject very difficult to discuss with folks (though from my perspective it really is cut-and-dried ;o) ) because of all the commonly held assumptions about “church” which have accrued since the close of the 1st century (at least). Ignatius led the “going to church” charge with his “do nothing without your bishop” cry and “development” (read– “departure”) has marched on ever since. Yes, I know Ignatius was responding to a trend and particularly to the perceived need to squelch heresey, but I suspect the cure has been worse than the disease.
DeYoung and Kluck continue to ride the same freight train and to keep it chugging down the tracks by shoveling a little more coal in the firebox while trying their best to enlist more firemen.
As to your question…
The people of “our church” know that “the show” is not something they watch others do, but that they/we are the demonstration and evidence of the mystery of God “which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.” We know that does not mean “one or two of you”, but that it really means youall as in “all you all”.
Attempting to say something good about DeYoung and Kluck…
Much of their perspective is a reaction to what they perceive as a total disregard for any structure. They may have some legitimate concern in that, but their solutions are simply more of the same old “developments” promulgated since Ignatius’ ride to Rome.
It is fine to encourage some organic development of structure/form that assist and aids the already present life of a group of Believers, but the purpose of life and vitality is NOT to perpetuate or serve the structure. Some structure/form is a reality of people associating together–in whatever place or circumstance that association occurs. The argument is never about structure vs. no structure, but rather about necessary vs. unnecessary structure. For the most part only those involved can make that determination.
Linda, just me, but I liked the old look of the site mobetta. ;o) Glad you’re still posting.
Tom
the very way to see if a teaching is useful and genuine for the real life is to look at what happen when the teacher leaves.
See what happened with the Philippians and the Thessalonicians: Paul stayed their maybe 2 weeks (max), and he had to leave. But even in this difficult context, those church grew very well, as we can see in the letters Paul sent to them.
I have to fight against my own cynical tendencies in trying to answer your question. It’s often in these times of crisis that the church rediscovers its true purpose and resilience. I would rather want to be pleasantly shocked and surprised than predict too quickly that everyone would just go home or not know what to do next.