Part II
Part III
The other day, Wayne Jacobsen wrote 'Is Deconstruction Enough?' where he recounts being asked if his life mission is simply to deconstruct Sunday church attendance. His response was beautiful; here are some excerpts. (The emphasis is mine.)
So then the problem with reproduction in postmodern/missional/emerging church is simple. It is still trying to reproduce a model that doesn't work. It is saying that we can create a better sequel, we can reproduce something that is similar enough that people will still call it church, but different enough that it isn't the same manifestation of as "church as we know it". However, eventually it will become just a tired reproduction of the same old same old because the motivation is the same. We still feel we need to have "church". We can call it whatever we want and we can light candles and sing original songs and meet in a pub, but in the end it's still church; and something we're doing because we're supposed to do it. We seem afraid of moving outside the bounds of this thing called "church". We feel a person ought to attend a specific church, on a weekly basis, and that a church service should consist of certain things."The reason church life grows stale is because we’re looking for institutional solutions, not relational ones. If we equip people to live loved of God and live as lovers of people, the church will spring up all around us. It probably won’t be contained in a specific meeting or building but will grow wild and free and bear fruit in the interconnection, collaboration, cooperation and submission of brothers and sisters who are being changed by Jesus. That can look like a hundred different things. But once I begin to describe some of those things, I know our tendency as humans to prefer replicating a model to following the Head! We love to construct things, not build up people.
"I am convinced that’s the process we are in. Having another model to shift to will only shift the problem into a new shell. We’ve got 2000 years of church history to say that can’t work. And I’m happy to help on all sides of that process as Jesus gives me grace."
OK so I'm making an overarching generalization. I know there are some who do not fall into this category. I'm saying that the common theme is simple...we think we need church. We desire it, we aim for it, and we recreate it in various forms. But it's still church. The innate desire to organize cannot be avoided. It is what and how we organize that can be a problem. Maybe it's the difference between being intentional and controlling.
What happens when there is no more church? When we find ourselves outside all of the parameters that are normally considered to be church?
Wayne Jacobsen calls it "Living outside the box of organized religion."
I know that curls some hair, and so be it, but I also know it's a mighty wind for some of us, moving us on to something new.
I find my self trapped in a vicious cycle. I think Jacobsen is right that we try to find institutional solutions rather than relational ones. The church has to be relational- period.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that even if I were to find a relational version of organized church, I'd be too afraid to honestly take part. I've learned (with help mind you) not to trust anybody in the organized church. So I don't. I'm still in it, but it isn't church for me because it isn't relational. And it won't be because I won't let down my guard. It's too risky.
So I find friends outside the IC whom I can trust. But I'm not sure that's church.
Well- After only half a cup of coffee I've rambled and probably not made a bit of sense. But-- come to think of it-- that in itself is an accurate representation of where I stand with the "church".
Hmmm, intersting stuff. Of all the people on the web who have been most helpful in helping me along to "see", better, it's been Wayne J.
ReplyDeleteIt is a mighty wind, isn't it? Even though it scares the hell out of me :) Because the end result of it is a group of people coming together open-heartedly to love each other ... and, well, is there not anything more vulnerablefying and totally scary than that? It means death.
I guess that's why we wrap up ourselves in fig leaves of "doing" church, of crafting ourselves out roles, because we are all of us a total bunch of utter control freaks until we get cracked open by the Lurvemeister (and even then, we still like to run back to freaky control because we don't know how to love and it scares us. At least, this is my experience).
LOL @ Cindy. I admire you for still attending somewhere like that. I have become far too crusty to even bother!! :) But I wonder if it is not easier to find friends outside a place so committed to institutionalised thinking - not because the people inside are less trustworthy, but because it becomes more difficult to open up and be real in that environment. Or at least, that's what I've found. Seems to me that the most trustworthy people are the ones with the least agendas, the smallest egos and the biggest hearts and unfortunately they don't seem to be on display in those settings in great abundance :(
Cindy - I hear you about trust. It's a big problem for me, too. I think it has a lot to do with what we feel is our level of freedom to be honest with people we are relational with. For whatever reason, in real life community we do tend to be somewhat guarded for fear of not being accepted, because we really have to put ourselves out somewhere.
ReplyDeleteOnline we can be ourselves and people can take it or leave it and we don't care. We don't know these people...and by the time we DO know them and care about them, we know they know the "real" us and so we trust them with that.
Sue - I do think we feel there is a level of expectation at "church" in any tangible form that there isn't in any other kind of relationship/community. I don't know the way out of that...other than starting our own things...
ReplyDeleteWhat happens. We find God. Not a church.
ReplyDeleteNate - Yes. I hope.
ReplyDelete