Fellowship is the being together and communing with each other, so then if that is fellowship, why call it church??[2]
Having posted a successful Soapbox post earlier, I hadn't anticipated the firestorm of discussion amongst other blogs and (possibly) word of mouth. Having watched the general discussion unfold since that time, I thought it was about time I added in my thoughts to the rather volatile subject of "Church"; namely, What is Church? A word of caution: I believe that this is a rather volatile subject for many for a good reason, and while I believe that part of the argument over what church is has to do with culture, I think the greater slice of the pie goes to...tradition. And here is why I think that...
It is my firm conviction that Christianity is at a crossroads. Here at the beginnings of the twenty-first century, I believe that we are at an exciting point in theological development. In the last century, the world has changed in ways untold, at speeds previous generations would never have thought possible. The world has become more accessible, more open, more conversant than it ever has been, and technology is only going to further this process. Yet for many who live in this time, Church evokes thoughts of mustiness, dryness, boredom, and irrelevancy.
And yet, tradition is what seems to keep the system of church the way it is. We turn up, we sing songs, we sit down to listen to a message, we stand to sing more songs, we leave. Period. This seems to be what most people the world over do, Sunday in, Sunday out. And here's the point: because that's the way church has been done for the past two centuries, why change it? That's Tradition speaking.
Yet here's the paradox: I believe in church. I believe that over two thousand years ago, God revealed Himself in the person of Jesus Christ, and since his existence, the church was founded; not by the Petrine lineage; nor by clever structural systems. But founded by the fact that God became like us. The church - I believe - exists to proclaim all that Christ was and stood for.
That was then. What is it like now? We turn up, we sing songs, we listen to a message, we sing more songs, we leave. Instead of an equipping church, we seem to have, today, a comforting church. Instead of a courageous church, we seem to have a soft church. Go to any church building outside of the West, and we find that it is hazardous to one's health to profess faith in Christ. Go to any church in the West, and the primary aim of Christianity is to keep oneself safe. Do not do anything to hurt or upset the status quo. Do not upset tradition.
[1] See the blog "Its a Rant Jim But Not as We Know It Part II" - http://youraveragechristian.blogspot.com/
[2] ibid.
2 comments:
Crossroads- yes thats a great way of putting it. I think thats what i struggle with because the problem with metaphorical crossroads is that, unlike real crossroads, you cant go back.
So, the decision, if it is made by anyone, needs to be absolutly correct because we do only get one chance at it.
I too believe in church, i believe that christ is the saviour and that God is/has always had our best intentions in mind the whole time.
What i struggle with is the outside misconception of what church is.
Are we charged with changing that or do we leave it as is and just enjoy what we do as a community on a Sunday.
Who does the burden of proof belong to? because i believe that God can look after himself.
Indeed God can look after himself :) After all, he is a pretty darn big God...
Having said that, he has chosen us humans as his agents to bear his name and his character throughout the earth. That gives us some responsibility about how be best display the character of God. Including the medium of our Sunday gatherings.
Post a Comment