The Future of the Church? (3 of 4)

This is Part 3 of a four part series on the future of the church. If you haven’t yet, start with reading Part 1 and Part 2.

Part 3: Community

When I was a kid my best friend lived around the block from me and I would wander to his house almost every day and see if he was available to play. Of course on the days that he beat me to it and showed up on my doorstep I was saved the two hundred yard walk. The streets of my neighborhood growing up were filled with children. We often played baseball, basketball, street hockey and football in the streets. We rode our bikes for miles to gather in larger groups and organize bigger games in parks. None of it was “official” or sanctioned by any professional association. We had no coaches or referees. 

I remember my dad doing yard work and having a neighbor come out to start chatting. They would talk for quite some time and then he would get back to whatever he was doing. I would say that it was not uncommon to see adults sharing conversation and relationship as you went around any neighborhood.  Adults in our neighborhood used to also look after all the kids. If any of us were getting into something we weren’t supposed to be doing, we would get a talking to from any adult who happened to catch us. Usually they wouldn’t know our parents but if they did, you can be sure our parents would then know about our “activity”. There was a deep commitment to the community we lived in which was seen as something much more than a collection of personal property. The people mattered in a way that was top billing.

I am not sure about you but if you drive the neighborhoods around my house these days, this kind of community bustle is not as evident. Kids are not just playing outside. Adults are not just shooting the breeze in their front yards. Community has too often become something that is resigned to professionally organized activities, or carefully planned get togethers. Youth recreation leagues are a hot business. Kids are serious about their regimented practices and barely have enough time to just hang out. 

Social media has been a further development in the last fifteen years. People spend more and more of their time “connecting” or keeping in touch through a screen and a wall of pictures and text. Many psychological studies have explored how the reward centers of our brains are activated when we get more “likes” on our posts, or the stress reactions triggered when we encounter negative interactions on social media. We are re-wiring our brains into addiction to these superficial means of connection. I can only speak from my own experience and say that social media has added very little of value to my life but I feel the incredible negative effects almost every day. The idea of quitting it completely is not even on the table because I would miss out on too much or not be able to communicate the way that people communicate today. Like it or not, social media has taken on many of the communication roles that email did when it leapt onto the scene but is far more nefarious in confusing our natural needs of social interaction than email.

We are beginning to see some talk in popular culture about the effects of this way of living. Many tech czars of silicon valley have come out and said they won’t let their kids have a smart phone or go on social media because it is too unhealthy. I predict that in the coming years there will be a deep desire for real, healthy, in person relationship but people won’t know how to find it. This is an important thing for the Church to anticipate. When that day comes we will be poised among all others to offer real and healthy relationships like no other. This is the very core of the Christian existence because we were not saved to be lonely islands. We were reclaimed to be a part of God’s reconciled and reconciling community.

Two keys to reclaiming community in the Church

First, we will need to put a bigger emphasis on smaller group meetings. Relationship at the levels it will be needed just can’t happen in an auditorium full of 2000 people. Worshipping in larger groups will never go away and I believe is still an important aspect of the Christian life. These gatherings in larger setting have dominated the focus of Church life for a very long time but it has not always been that way. In the distant past and in rural areas today, regular smaller meetings are more normative and the larger gatherings were the rare occasion. People are so busy these days that I predict a shift like this will occur again. People will gather more frequently, in what we call “small groups” today, and less frequently in the larger settings. I don’t think this will be a function of intentionality as much as necessity. 

Churches in the USA have been experiencing attendance declines on Sunday mornings in our large group settings for some time now. When the need for community becomes more immediate, we will find that people are willing to commit to a weekly small group gathering over a larger Sunday morning gathering. When this happens, I think that the Church will need to be ready to make that shift. We will need to prepare ourselves to focus on what draws people into deeper relationships with each other for the growth of their faith. I see this as a positive shift. The deeper personal relationships formed in smaller settings will lead to deeper spiritual growth through accountability and mentorship. People will not be consumers of spirituality as has become habit for many on Sunday mornings. Jesus never commanded for us to gather and sit all facing one direction once a week listening to a sermon or singing songs. Are those things bad? No way! But they are not the only way to worship and are not the only way for community to happen.

Second, we will need to stop arguing about petty things. For too long the Church has allowed unimportant or secondary issues to divide us. We went from a religion with unity to one of incredible fractures and deep wounds. Some of these arguments were very important, to be sure, but I would argue that most were immaterial to the ability to live in faithfulness toward each other. Jesus gave his disciples a command near the end of his life. This command was connected directly to a result. 

“Love one another as I have loved you, by this the world will know that you are mine.”

John 13:15

Jesus did not love us when we got things right. No, he loved us while we were still sinners. He loved his disciples when they got things drastically wrong. He loved us when we were nailing him to a cross. He loved the early church when they were struggling over issues of circumcision and what to eat. He didn’t wait until we got it 100% right. That is kind of the point of our faith. We have far less tolerance for this kind of imperfection than God. God worked for millennia with a nation of people who continually seemed to get it wrong. He patiently guided them and kept them until his timing to save all humanity was reached. 

One of the forces tearing community apart today is the inability to disagree and yet still love and fellowship with those whom we disagree. Political divisions have created rifts in families and friendships that never should be. Disagreeing over scientific findings has split whole cultures in two. Disagreement should not be the end of relationship but an opportunity for forbearance and love the way Jesus showed. Even deeper than that, the incarnation should teach us that we can actually step into the shoes of those we disagree with and learn why they think the way they do. If the Church wants to be serious about building real relationships the way God intended them, we will have to learn how to handle disagreement in loving and fruitful ways rather than destructive and divisive ways.

What do you think the growing need for deeper community will mean for the Church? Do you think the Church can be an answer to that need? Is there another element to community that I haven’t thought of or mentioned? Leave a comment and let’s discuss.

Part 4 of this four part series is available to read now.

2 thoughts on “The Future of the Church? (3 of 4)

  1. Chris: I find it very hard to “walk in the shoes” of someone who believes that their race or ethnicity is superior to another and are willing to take action to maintain some economic, political, or other advantage over what is usually a minority position.

    That being said, I believe you are absolutely correct in saying it and I must try to see and understand what motives and reasons foster these beliefs and also I must acknowledge and listen to their explanations (and even rants). Anyone so convicted to their beliefs, has personal experiences that have shaped their attitudes and behaviors, often rooted deeply in personal identity and story (and often magnified by fear and/or pain). No conversation will be productive with anyone on either side of any issue unless all parties feel like they have been heard and their story acknowledged as valid (which it is!).

    We all have our story; our story defines us. When we reject someone else’s story, we are telling them in so many words; “You do not matter..” and you are also proclaiming that your story is truer than their story. Which is silly, isn’t it, since each story is our own personal movie and soundtrack of our lives that we play in our heads? We each own our stories since we create it a little every day!

    It is only after all parties feel that their story has been heard and affirmed, can conversations turn to issues that affect the future.

    Now, since I am hypothesizing that each story needs affirmed, that sounds like I am saying that each person is “right” to believe such things as, “I am better person or more deserving than that other person because I am white and they are black (or brown, or another sex, etc).” Civilization and the rules that define it set norms or ideals that we all strive to live by; if a personal belief is in contradiction with a norm, then we have a problem, don’t we? How we resolve these conflicts gets to the heart of my discussion above; it starts by listening and acknowledging the validity of a person’s story. It is only by listening and asking questions that one can get to the root of the storyline that has led to the belief that is in conflict with the norm. I will stop there and see if others care to discuss….

    1. Jesus both deeply criticized the religious leadership at times and was also found in their homes having dinner. Seeking to understand and treat with dignity those we disagree with is Christlike and I think it’s what you’re getting at. I think next week’s article will get to the root of that kind of thinking. I wasn’t particularly thinking of folks who have clearly immoral opinions like racism when I talked about not arguing over petty things. I am meaning things more like worship music style, semantics on theological concepts, color of carpets, etc. We divide over some fairly petty things often. There are some serious things that we can be tolerant of each other on as well, but I think we should call out behavior which demeans other humans and offers no grace. Those are the things Jesus seemed to rebuke the leadership of his day on often.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.