What is the church?
Have you ever paused to think how strange a thing church is? Over the weekend, I found myself trying to explain the concept to someone without much experience of a Christian community before. These were some of my attempts in a long rambling conversation that spanned a few hours in a pub.
We’re an open-ended experiment testing the words of Jesus.
We’re an alternative society based not on money or beauty or usefulness, but on grace, on God’s free gift.
We’re a community who recognise the need to continually confess our failures, repent of them and forgive one another if we are to live together in anything more than polite superficiality.
We’re a global peace network suspicious of both bland globalisation and violent tribalism.
We’re a bunch of people who find it impossible to not talk about God. And who find it impossible to talk about God without speaking of Jesus. And who find it impossible to talk about God without ending up talking to God, often with laughter or tears.
Posts
9 comments:
byron--
that's a nice understanding of
'church.' would that more churches felt this was the 'mission statement.'
scott
I'm a little uncomfortable that these all sound like expressions of human intentionality. Shouldn't at least one of them speak of a group that God has brought together? For mutual edification, to proclaim the gospel, to bring him glory etc?
Anthony - I meant to say that this wasn't an attempt to be exhaustive, but were attempts to capture the imagination of my interlocutor. I agree, of course, about the importance of divine initiative and power. I was attempting to express that in the second claim (based on God's grace). The final claim was meant to imply a centre outside ourselves, that we find it impossible to not speak of God. I also thought about saying something along these lines, but we never got to it (and hadn't quite worked out how to put it: "We're the echoes of God speaking in Jesus, the impact crater of the Jesus-meteorite".
Scott - what did you like about it? Were you referring to one of the statements in particular?
Oops - I was doing a lot of 'attempting' in that first comment...
byron--
'we're an open-ended experiment, testing the words of jesus.' i hear 'do you think this will work?' 'i don't know, let's try it!' i hear praxy over doxy. i hear permission to make mistakes in great intentions and energetic actions in response to injustices and callings.
'we're a community who recognise the need to continually confess our failures, repent of them and forgive one another if we are to live together in anything more than polite superficiality.' i hear teshuvah in the wake of monumental injustices created by trying the open-ended experiment. i hear 'hot peace,' a peace of collaboration, mutual prosperity, busy relationships. i hear 'every single person' as the answer to jesus' question, 'who is my neighbor?'
and, as an agnostic, i hear actions, rich just, relationship-filled, collaborative actions, speaking louder than words. i hear relationships that count more in the weighing than god-dogmas.
and, as a suspicious atheist, i appreciate your suspicion of bland globalisation and violent tribalism, and share it with you.
that's what i like about it.
peace--
scott
Scott - thanks for your explanation. I appreciate your taking the time to engage on this.
'we're an open-ended experiment, testing the words of jesus.' i hear 'do you think this will work?' 'i don't know, let's try it!' i hear praxy over doxy. i hear permission to make mistakes in great intentions and energetic actions in response to injustices and callings.
I think praxy and doxy go together, rather than one trumping the other. Indeed, they are each aspects of the other. In the end, it is impossible to worship (doxy) without obedience (praxy) and vice versa. In fact, I believe the best way to maintain orthopraxis long term is orthodoxy. Again - and vice versa! But I hear what you're saying and agree that while good experiments involve careful thought, they also include permission to make mistakes and be pursued energetically.
i hear teshuvah in the wake of monumental injustices created by trying the open-ended experiment.
Totally - there's no other appropriate response.
i hear 'hot peace,' a peace of collaboration, mutual prosperity, busy relationships.
Yes! Peace is so much more than the absence of hostility, and indeed, sometimes being a peacemaker means bringing conflict to the surface so that it can be addressed.
i hear 'every single person' as the answer to jesus' question, 'who is my neighbor?'
Potentially yes, but I think that by calling us to love our neighbour, Jesus is trying to avoid the danger of a generalised "love of all" that avoids the specificity of this one here who needs my help. Or to put it in a contemporary slogan, "Think (love) global, act local", where local doesn't simply mean right where I am (though it includes this), but "in a localised manner", loving particular people in specific ways.
and, as an agnostic, i hear actions, rich just, relationship-filled, collaborative actions, speaking louder than words. i hear relationships that count more in the weighing than god-dogmas.
Yes! Though as a believer, god-dogmas (taken in the original neutral meaning, that is, received teachings about God) are not irrelevant to just, healing, loving relationships. In my experience, it is by going deeper into these traditional teachings (albeit with a critical eye) that I find a God seen in Jesus who knows how to pursue the creative possibilities of justice and reconciliation.
Thanks again for your thoughts and encouragement!
Grace & peace,
Byron
byron--
i could, in the blink of an eye, cme and 'doxy' a little, and 'praxy' a lot with you all, as a member of your church. but i warn you, the discussions at coffee hour hour would be... interesting.
scott
Why limit it to an hour? :-)
Post a Comment