The Primary Unit of the Christian Faith II
I thought the previous post
by this title may have drawn a little more engagement as it quite is a radical position to hold – that ‘we’ is more important than ‘me’.
That as a Christ follower I cannot with integrity, exist independent of committed Christian community. More than that however, within that community there is a healthy practice of mutual submission to one another as we seek to follow Jesus. Translation = I am willing to let others have real input into shaping my life and future and sometimes I will submit to their opinions over and above my own.
Its a dangerous place to be isn’t it?
If we genuinely allow communities like these to develop then we are really seeking a different way to live. We are consciously allowing community to be prioritised over individuality. I think I probably fear the danger of abusive community more than the danger of stupid individuality. But I still think this is the direction the gospel calls us in.
There simply is no future in a faith that tries to exist outside of committed Christian community. By that I mean more than catching up with friends for dinner. That is simply what it says – catching up with friends – and its good – but its not enough. Community needs to be much more diverse than that. Surely it will include people I don’t like and who don’t like me. Surely it will involve ongoing commitment to each other when we would rather not be involved.
I think there is both beauty and danger in the Pete Ward’s “Liquid Church’ concept. The beauty is that church is defined much less rigidly – as a verb rather than a noun even – as the gathering of believers in any form. But the problem is that it panders to the consumer in us (something Ward doesn’t see as an issue) and means that we can do church at our leisure, or with only the people we like.
In the newer expressions of church this idea is the one that concerns me the most – that we can do away with a regular ongoing commitment to one another and replace it with a convenient engagement with those we get on with at a time and frequency that works for us.
For those who tell me they are between churches or just haven’t found somewhere to suit them – I do understand – really – because there are plenty of sick churches out there – but at the same time I find myself saying ‘Oh well – looks like you’ll need to be part of a community that doesn’t suit you.’
And the individualist in us says ‘I don’t think so…’
I have occasionally pondered what I would do if Upstream folded and we were left on our own here. I imagine it would be a case of simply heading down to one of the local churches and joining them in some way. It would not likely be my first preference, but the other choice would be ‘waiting until something developed that suited me’. I would rather throw my lot in with a group of people and find a way to work together, than go it alone and wait until something more to my ‘liking’ emerged.
Fernando has some good reflections on the same topic over here entitled “is it possible to be a post-congregational baptist?” where he struggles with his own journey at the moment.
Yes, maybe I’ll have to be part of a community that doesn’t suit me. That’s more or less where I find myself now, and I’ve been through resenting the fact, pretending I’m not really there, etc. The problem with those kinds of attitudes is that you never get to the point of letting others shape your life, as you say. The problem for those of us shaped by consumerism is that we want to pick and choose the people who can speak into our lives; we aren’t likely to accept that from the bunch of folks who don’t seem to quite suit me. It’s hard to break that mindset, but I think that’s the challenge for many of us, myself included.
Comment by Maria — May 17, 2008 @ 11:30 pm