Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Church?!
1. Church for people who aren’t into church
This statement has been the slogan since day one of The Meeting House community back in 1986. There are 2 different types of ‘church’s’ in this statement: the church people aren’t into, and the church we are truly called to be (my take).
I’ll start with the Church that people aren’t into. What comes to mind? It is what the church is regrettably mostly known for: religious, money taking, self preserving, guilt and shame, prejudice, dogmatic, angry, punishment, a building, a bible. The list goes on but you can fill in your own impression. It is not all bad of course, but it means crossing many social and sub cultural barriers before you can get the ‘goods’. You belong and prove yourself worthy of those goods once you look like, talk like, pay like, and think like the group of people of this particular expression.
At best this people group will try to attract others into their sub culture by promising the good news. It will have many programs and events for people to dedicate themselves to and the upkeep of the places and programs in essence will need the new people they are trying to attract.
The other ‘church’ term is maybe not as understood but much more powerful. It is a group of people who are given the name church because of the person of Christ. IT is a relational term first that involves an inward process of transformation. That transformation speaks of the growing attributes of God revealing Himself in and through the people. Attributes like peace, love, forgiveness, joy and generosity that are shown in real tangible ways to people who are suffering, alone, financially struggling, abused and poor. It is a people not restricted to space, events or time slots in a week but are called to be active in every moment, place and situation. The people called church are sent into the world and the only ‘attractional’ thing about them is Christ in them (not relying on buildings, events and catchy methods).
So what can that look like? Ideally at the Meeting House we believe the power of a group of people who support and cultivate the fullness of Christ in each other will change their city –we call it Home Church. We have talked again and again about what it means to have Home Church and the intentional community relationships there to be an entry point into our community at large. Nice ideal, however how do you start? I have seen people enter Home Churches in Brampton who knew nothing about the Meeting House, Bruxy or our services yet they knew people who knew them, supported them and did life together as neighbours. When the neighbours saw Christ working they asked more questions and wanted to check out what was going on. They had an easier time going to someone’s home with their friend to learn more about what compels them.
Getting close to people and intentionally building relationships was the first practice.
I find new thoughts can come when we take a look at our beginnings. It is true for an individual as much as it is for us as community.
Feedback?
15:55 Posted in Church Life | Permalink | Comments (1) | Email this
Comments
There may be two different versions of the first "Church" referred to in the slogan. One is the ideal church regularly promoted by Bruxy and the leadership, which includes things like living simply, loving freely, giving generously, and telling the world about Jesus. The other is the reality of The Meeting House. I am not in a position to say whether or how much the difference might be and I don't mean this in a judgmental way, but it could be that we have some great ideas and a great vision but have some work to do in realizing this vision.
I think every church in North America and perhaps in the West has a tremendous challenge in promoting their ideas and practices in a culture where materialism and independence are accepted, promoted and desired, particularly as the things we are promoting are very counter-cultural. Unfortunately, materialism and independence are very evident among Christians in the West and are not limited to the broader culture.
At a meeting of the Africa Learning Teams last weekend, someone made the point that most Africans experience far more and better community than we do in the West. Here is a prime example of where we can learn from our African brothers and sisters. I suspect that much of this has to do with our pursuit of wealth, our busy schedules, and our desire for independence.
Pursuit of Wealth
Unlike many of our African brothers and sisters, we have the opportunity to pursue significant material wealth. Many of us live in large homes which require significant resources (time and money) for ongoing maintenance and/or renovating/decorating. In my parent's generation, most families had one spouse working full-time outside the home and the other attending to matters of the home. The one full-time salary was often enough to allow a family to purchase a home. As more families switched to two working spouses, there was more disposable income available and I believe the price of housing increased, with the result that it probably takes the same percentage of a family's income to own a home, the difference being that now it requires two people working full-time rather than one. It seems to me that families have lost something in the process. I often wonder what would happen if the current or next generation refused to "play this game" and decided that they would make do on the equivalent of one full-time salary. I suspect that as less disposable income was available to purchase houses, the price of housing would drop accordingly.
Unlike many of our African brothers and sisters and immigrants who come to Canada, we have moved from the extended family living together (grandparents, parents and children) to the nuclear family, who often move great distances away from their extended family in order to land a higher paying job. Is this an exercise of our independence and what have we lost in the process? Extended families could provide support, encouragement and assistance as well as share the costs of living when they are living under one roof or at least in the same geographical community. Also, many people are prepared to commute long distances to work, which adds stress to an already busy schedule.
I think we are seeing somewhat of a reversal of this process as children are no longer moving out of home as early as they once did and are staying with their parents until their late 20s and sometimes even mid-30s. Much of this is for economic reasons but if such families can adapt to living together, there may be "family" or "community" benefits as well.
Busy Schedules
Relationships require time. This is true between spouses, parents and children, friends, a relationship with God and in communities generally. In my parent's generation, people showed up at each other's home without an invitation and without notice and this was widely accepted. Today, it seems almost a social faux pas to show up at someone's house unannounced. Busyness is a big killer of relationship and community.
Desire for Independence
This culturally embedded phenomenon makes relationships difficult and discourages people from seeking help from each other and doing life together.
I think The Meeting House is doing a great job in teaching and promoting living simply (in terms of materialism and time), other-centeredness, service, loving freely, giving generously, telling the world about Jesus, etc.. However, is there a gap between our preaching and our practice? I agree with you that getting close to people and intentionally building relationships is a good first step, and that Home Church is a place where these things can be put into practice. Are we ready to be radically counter-cultural in these areas?
Posted by: terrence | Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Post a comment