A Church without a church
August 29, 2007 by jonathanbrink
Bill Kinnon asks a provocative question in his post. (ht)
“We are The People formerly known as The Congregation. We have not stopped loving the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Nor do we avoid “the assembling of the saints.” We just don’t assemble under your supposed leadership. We meet in coffee shops, around dinner tables, in the parks and on the streets. We connect virtually across space and time - engaged in generative conversations - teaching and being taught.”
Do I have to be part of a traditional church structure to be part of the church? What I mean is, do I have to attend a church where there is a building to be part of the church? It’s provocative because I have been told several times in my life that the answer is “yes”. And the person telling me this was a well meaning person known as “the pastor”. But the comment reveals something about the assumption each of these pastors is making. Church happens inside the church building. And I don’t really fault them for this. It doesn’t take much to see that this is a historical thought process at work.
For abut 1700 years it has been the norm to meet in a “church building”. Buildings sometimes make a lot of sense to me. They provide great space for large assemblies. And looking through Scripture, Jesus consistently went to the synagogue to teach. This is an obvious fact.
Luke 4:44 - “And he kept on preaching in the synagogues of Judea.”
Luke 6:6 - “On another Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was there whose right hand was shriveled.”
Luke 13:10 - “On a Sabbath Jesus was teaching in one of the synagogues.”
But to assume that this was the only way ignores so much of his ministry. He also lived his life out amongst the people. And he also taught outside. To assume that a location was THE place that Jesus did church completely misunderstands his ministry. It assumes and supports the idea that our spiritual life happens within a building, and that out there is not as valid. When we go to church, we get turned on. When we leave church, we get turned off. Ticket punched. Sadly, this has become almost the norm. Facetiously, if this were true, we’d essentially live there. But seriously, it has the potential, and I would argue has supported the idea of a missionless community. Why go out into the world if church only exists in the building?
And this idea leads to a lot of questions. How much can I miss before I’m not actually, truly, completely doing church? And how long does that “missing too much” period last. Is it subjective, meaning, if I serve as an usher do I get more misses than someone who doesn’t? And what happens if my sister’s dog gets hit by a car and she needs me on Sunday morning and that one time puts me over the limit. Am I always out? And then what do I have to do to get back in? Attend every service for the next month and Wednesday nights too?
To me, it seems like we’ve gotten the form mixed up with the function. The function, which is the redemption of all creation, has been replaced by “doing church”, which often looks more like movie-watching than anything. A bunch of people come in and sit passively, all looking in the same direction, hoping to be amused. So many people just waiting to be given something to do besides serving as an usher, or kid duty. We’re longing for something bigger than that. We want something that looks like God, not like us. Because our best forms are always pale reflections of our own brokenness and attempts at self-validation.
Why is it so hard to consider “the assembling of the saint” also as a gathering over a meal or coffee, as Bill contends. Some of my best ministry and growth has occurred at Peets. In fact, how cool would it be to have the whole church meet at a coffee shop one morning. Imagine that scene. I do know that the owner would be happy (as long as people were buying coffee, which is a whole other conversation). I have friends who are developing a house church and this is something they seriously wrestle with. Some who are attending ask when they are moving out of the house, into a “real” building, as though then they will be legitimate.
Is it possible that Missio Dei is larger than our current paradigms of church? Is it possible to see the world as He sees it, His glorious creation that He longs to redeem. And when we go out into the world, we are meeting up with people who are already His beloved creation and worth it. They just may not now it yet. And when we also gather in the places outside of the church, we have the potential to bring a little Shalom to the world around us. Church becomes something we are, not a place we go.
Your thoughts are appreciated.
Is it POSSIBLE that Missio Dei is larger than our current paradigms of church? I think it’s IMPERATIVE that it is. Just a quick example:
In your example of helping your sister on a Sunday instead of going to church, I would submit that helping your sister IS DOING CHURCH! Church is not about a corporate assembly, it’s about living out “love your neighbor as yourself” and all the “one another” passages. The building is just a convenient place to begin that process… not the litmus test for whether we are “doing church.”
I’m a pastor, so I like to see people “in church” on Sunday. But if I find they are out doing ministry, loving on people, etc. instead of being there on Sunday - I’m cool with that… no really, I am…
Carey,
By your response, I actually do believe you. How then do we find expressions that lead people to find Missio Dei in both places?
I believe that church can be good as it is a gathering of souls on a like mission to do their best, worship and praise, and find answers. It’s fun to sing together and to pray together. I have been to MANY different churches and enjoyed them all.
But I believe, too, that some churches are very “clicky” and leave out anyone who might have a differing opinion. Some preachers are not great at “teaching”, and truly……God is within us all, and I believe to love one another (where ever it may be) is the most important praise and worship we can do.
Helping a sick neighbor, offering a cold drink and sandwich to someone who is asking for food, LIVING the truth and not just talking about it.
I read my Bible, and occasionally I go to a study, but I believe it’s interpretation is personal to each person who opts to read it.
The human who lives what he believes is carrying his place
of worship with him, and praising God by loving others
Really enjoyed your post. Didn’t mean to be so lengthy in my comments.
Marsha,
I say bring on the comments. A guy I know is famous for saying, “It’s all commentary,” but what would life be like then without it.
http://www.austin-sparks.net/english/000433.html
Several thoughts:
Having abandoned regular church attendance for close to 10 years, I have to say that failing to meet with other believers is damning to one’s Christian experience, however you might want to define that term. A finger cut off from the body is useless. (Yes, it may be reattached, but that is another metaphor for a different time.)
A church is not the building, whether it be a cathedral, a house, the local coffee shop, or a certain tree you all meet at (which were my old church started meeting). What defines that structure, what qualifies that piece of ground as a church is what occurs there. I see three defining requirements: believers gathering for corporate worship; preaching of the Word; and administration of the sacrements. If those three things take place, then it is a “Christian gathering place” (aka: church).
I’m struggling with the term “doing church.” We need to look instead at “being the church.” And meeting together is just part of that being. Yes, it is a vital part, as I learned from absence, but that isn’t all we do.
Bob,
In your ten years out of the traditional church structure, did you continue to engage in relationships with others in the body?
And, what did you learn by walking away?
I did have relationships with other Christians. In fact, all of my friends that I regularly engaged with were Christians; all of whom were active in churches. That interaction however was not sufficient to constitute my being part of the body in that most of our times together were social. Looking back you might say I was a branch that needed prunning and so, God prunned me.
Lessons learned are many. Most important is to be part of a fellowship where there is corporate worship that leads you to private worship; where the Bible is preached and made relevant; and where the sarcaments are meaningful. I would say that if one of those three is missing, it is a time for serious reflection. Is the problem me or the gathering of believers to which I belong? Sometimes, it is the mix of the two, but unless I deal with me first, I’ll never deal with the other.
What a timely conversation!
I’ve been struggling with attending traditional Sunday morning church worship for months (years?) now. I get little out of it except to connect with friends. I would prefer to see these friends, however, without going to a building where I always feel rushed since we’re always trying to make service on-time. Our contact is often only just a quick hello.
My wife would contend though, that church service is not something I’m supposed to “get” something out of, but rather a time for me to “give” back to God by worshiping him. I ask then, why do I need to sit in a room with many people I don’t know, and fork over $1000 a month to pay their mortgage (when I have a hard enough time paying my own) to worship God?
An analogy I’ve recently applied is that the church is big inefficient government who wants all of my $ so they can spend it how they deem best. Wouldn’t I then be better off giving my $ directly to to charities I believe in, and thereby eliminating the middle-man, and subsequent waste?
I have to agree 100% with Rick here. I still attend a church but I am no longer giving over £XXX as my expected contribution. I give what I believe God has told me to give. I give elsewhere as and when I can.
My church is CofE and it filters the bulk of it’s income up to diocese. It also gives money to national/international charities. We don’t really have a say if we are happy to support these. Unfortunately after all these are paid there is then no money left to do local mission/outreach. If and when we engage in that we are then asked to contribute again.
Our parish share (money paid to diocese) increases year on year and we are currently in arrears with it. Is that really how the Church of God should operate?
On top of that our leaders want to build an extention to our building. Where will that money come from? Not from me.
Joe, our church is currently going through its yearly “money” talk and next week is the week on “percentage” giving. I wrote a post on this idea and some of its historical roots in the Medeival Church: http://mendingshift.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/when-what-we-believe-must-protect-what-we-have/ .
Some of us realize that they have to do this because of the religious system they operate in—which is fine. But we are trying to re-think of a system where 80-90% can go back into missional and redemptive purposes with the remaining % covering the very low operating costs.
I agree that “giving-tithing” is broken and needs to be redeemed—once more.
Hi Jonathan,
I work for a young movement of churches in the PC(USA) striving to become missional communities, and I love this post. May I re-publish it for our 10,000 newsletter readers with your permission?
Keep up the good reflections.
In Jesus,
Kristina