The church these days is grappling with a massive departure in the ranks, a steady migration away from organised faith, toward a viral growth in western society in far less structured means of spiritual practice. Podcasts and livestreaming services have replaced the more traditional practice of churchgoing. People are connecting differently than ever before.
Spiritual entrepreneur, Rich Robinson in Red Skies, put it this way:
“Much of the church world has grown cold and old; institutional and narrow; combative and competitive. Leadership is often isolated, pragmatic, program-driven, and platform-based. We tend to lack kingdom imagination or deep, theological, and thoughtful reflection; and the underlying competition among our different tribes leaves us with an absence of collaborative discovery, a lack of leaders learning from one another.”[1]
A plethora of commentators concede that the church is at a crossroads.
There’s nothing new in this sort of commentary. Indeed, what’s most predictable is outlined in a mishmash of the polarising mix of definitive visions—which might all prove to be wrong—juxtaposed with the confusion that underpins every change before it occurs.
And if we could find one word to define what change is, we might choose the word culture. The church is undergoing culture change.
~
Allow me to add my voice to the mix.
Whatever the church is becoming, let’s hope it’s becoming more like its Founder, and the way the church would’ve been under his leadership 2,000 years ago. The only difference is, we have his spiritual presence with us rather than his physical presence.
We have certainly grown tired in this day of the CEO leader who, in some ways points people to Jesus, but unfortunately is also revered a lot like Jesus. Droves have left the fold because this love affair the church has had with a secularised model of growth and leadership has not only proved ineffective, it’s caused so much harm because it draws out the narcissist leader, and the narcissist leader is often required to prop up a narcissistic institutional culture.
I like to think that church culture in the coming day will be like Robinson says, “The genius is not in the room. The genius IS the room.”[2] Paradoxically, the only leader worth revering is the leader who constantly reveres the group and other individuals fairly and consistently. The only character trait worth revering is humility, but this is a much-confused concept, because I’ve seen leaders who are full of pride whose mentors saw as humble. Go figure.
The humble leader needs no formal mantle. And perhaps a new version of leadership is one based in group leadership, where gifts within the group are differentiated, and no single person alone holds the keys to the kingdom.
~
Even in Jesus’ day, and especially in Jesus’ day, the Jesus movement did not exist in and of itself for itself. The Jesus movement has always existed for others and for the sake of the world. Every Jesus movement has its core tenet in that which is external to itself.
Notwithstanding this vision for the mission, there is also an intrinsic Venn-diagram core mutual inclusivity the church has with its responsibilities for those it draws to itself.
Yes, that’s right, given that the purpose of the church is to draw people to it, what the church does for people is not just about external activities, but it’s also equally about safe internal activities too. While the external is about service, the internal is about comfort.
Especially given the recent history of the church, where many bear the battle scars of having been exploited and abused whether secretly or overtly, where many have rightly questioned certain outrageous institutional requirements, where many have walked away in disgust, and many have been traumatised by what they’ve seen and experienced, there is a new day and a new opportunity to practice being the church—which may be nothing any of us have seen.
~
A vision for the future of the church could be based in the words comfort and service.
Let’s look at comfort as the prime objective, and service as the prime vehicle.
We have a big problem with the word comfort, because we see it through a western lens. We don’t often see comfort through a biblical lens. Comfort is not the absence of pain; it is very much something we’re to feel despite the pain. Comfort is what God wants to give us (Isaiah 40:1). Biblical comfort is the absolute opposite to the comfort of convenience many people in western societies covet. Biblical comfort is always about providing sanctuary amid pain. In a world where trauma is piled atop trauma, where there is no common and global approach to ministering a helpful therapy, there is a golden opportunity for the church to engage in a mission to “save” people from their despair, as a way of giving them access to their salvation—the true abundant life of Jesus welling up to eternal life in the here-and-now.
Diane Langberg PhD says, “Trauma is the mission field of our time.”[3] Langberg believes we could tap into that mission field that is ‘white with need’ simply by looking out for those who are suffering in this life, because where there’s suffering, there’s trauma. The concepts of suffering and trauma are intimately connected.
We also have the same problem of misunderstanding the concept of service. Service is so heavily reliant on motivation—“the why”—and we could argue that our motive has been skewed. True service requires a heart that can’t fake its motive. This is because service is a long-haul activity. Those who truly serve do so because they want to and are called to it.
Importantly, what motivates service best is not what we will get out of it, but who we do it for, for the pleasure we give God in serving without goal for utilitarian gain. Again, this can’t be faked, and it’s those we serve who are best positioned to judge our motives. This puts the servant in a vulnerable position, which is how it should be. When the effectiveness of the service I give you is totally determined by you, then and only then am I truly serving.
This is what true Christianity teaches all of us if we have been drawn into the Spirit.
We need to debunk all the wrong thinking and priorities of the past whilst being humble enough to accept that whatever we think and prioritise, apart from God, will be flawed.
We need to get rid of the search to grow the church, in order to let Christ do that for us, if it be divine will; if it isn’t, what business do we have meddling with it? We need to get rid of this incessant drive to convert people to a fake faith of “say this prayer and it’s done.” We need to get churches out of the business model of managing people and programs. We even need to get out of our love affair with principles of leadership which only serve to elevate leaders’ pride and separate the church from its mission. We need to depart from all duplicity. How on earth does an institution that relies on heaven descend to the depths of hell for its morality? Child sexual abuse in the church! Nothing more needs to be said. Add to this the need to completely repent from all kinds of trauma that we, as a church, have engaged in and executed over the decades in living memory. There’s no place for a church that cannot own the harms it’s done.
It should seem obvious at this juncture the sorts of activities that we should be engaging in.
Those activities that are an inherent service to humanity. Activities that can only ever be a blessing. Activities that involve living into the example of God rather than spruiking about it. Activities that are assuredly safe for allcomers.
~
Now we come to “the how.” “The how” is always vexed in that confusing state of knowing a vision but not knowing how to hit the ground with it.
How do we minister comfort through the means of service, whereby both comfort and service are deeply nuanced in new ways none of us have a grasp on yet? Only through God.
How do we become an army mobilised to bring Christ’s relief to the millions needing divine care? Only through God.
How do we transcend our prevailing culture where an expression of rock-concert worship has become an idol in itself? Only through God.
How do we overcome our fear for treading into the space of trauma, where we have been conditioned to accept that it is a professional-only field? Only through God.
I’m sure I’m only scratching the surface when it comes to these questions.
All I know is that ministering in trauma is simpler than we think if we are not trying to be something clever and do something spiritual. If our only weapon is empathy, the capacity to listen, the willingness to bear a struggle, we can serve those who simply need the comfort of human connection. Akin to being the provision of mental health first aid, doing only what was within the capability of the average caring person is enough for many people to commence and continue their healing journey.
When we debunk every inclination to proffer theological opinions, when we check our biases, when we repent each moment and refuse to judge in any way, we’re a powerful human force for God’s good.
Christian life is more about the heart than what’s in the head. We have a mission in being the church in this day by dropping pretence to evangelise become instruments for serving.
It’s for comfort that we, as the church, exists in this day.
[1] L. Rowland Smith (Eds), Red Skies: 10 Essential Conversations Exploring Our Future as the Church. Wyoming, 100 Movements, 2022. p. 149.
[2] L. Rowland Smith (Eds), Red Skies: 10 Essential Conversations Exploring Our Future as the Church. Wyoming, 100 Movements, 2022. p. 169.
[3] Philip Monroe, Must Read: Diane Langberg on “Trauma as a Mission Field” in Musings of a Christian Psychologist – June 20, 2011. https://philipmonroe.com/2011/06/20/must-read-diane-langberg-on-trauma-as-a-mission-field/ Retrieved 18 June 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment