Those who deconstructing their previous Christian faith and moving toward reconstruction, or even thinking theoretically of what a reconstructed Christian faith would look like, can be sickened and cynical about Sunday services. Photo by Surface on Unsplash
I find it interesting that the topics on church life and how it should be constituted have so many parallels with the early days of the Shepherding Movement. There is much many could say about what went wrong, but what went right, was a rediscovery of the Kingdom of God, discipleship, small groups versus large gatherings, life together that went beyond a Sunday event, the need for pastors to have pastors, gifts that were meant to strengthen the body. Many churches eschewed Sunday morning meetings for small group or house meetings. Buildings for a time were an anathema. If you read the New Wine Magazines character was a central point of many of the teachings. There is much you can say that went sideways but to hear your questions in this most recent post, those questions and more were issues that leaders were grappling with in the 70’s and 80’s.
I think the Newbiggin quotes are spot on; I would hope people would read the words "revolutionary" and "radical renewal" with the depth from which I believe he wrote them. There are still many kind, sincere, Jesus-centered people in Evangelicalism, who are doing the best they can to follow him. Many of them are frustrated and hurting, as you've highlighted with this series, Scot.
Just a reminder to folks that the kinds of questions at the top of the OP were being asked even before Christianity became legal, and were the impetus for the monastic movement that started as early as the mid-200s AD. So all of this is nothing new. It does seem to have a new sort of "flavor", though.
The point about fellowship is absolutely right. Most people don't understand that the sibling relationship in the ancient world was more intense than simply the people with whom you grew up. In addition, my very favorite blogger, Fr Stephen Freeman (who studied Classics) says that "fellowship" is too weak a translation for <i>koinonia</i> - it should rather be "communion". This is a much deeper level than even solid friendship; it has connotations that are supposed to make you think of the connections within the body (as in Body of Christ). I think the lack of this kind of relationship among Christians reflects the wider loneliness endemic in our society now. Of course friendship is needed. We're so thirsty for it that we don't remember that we don't actually have to be "friends" with everyone in our parish/congregation, because being part of the communion, of the Body of Christ, as siblings in Christ, ties us even more closely. But yes, we do need friends, and the best of friendships should be people who share our "blood tie", if you will, with Christ - those with whom we worship.
Which leads to the last thing, but perhaps what stands out most to me about the OP. I don't agree that getting rid of Sunday services is the answer. There are important theological reasons that Christians meet on Sundays. However, a de-ritualized, de-sacramentalized gathering that is devoid of the Mystical and has no historical connection to faithful Christians through the ages is pretty thin gruel. For various reasons, most Evangelicals won't allow themselves to think outside the box of "if we just have the right teaching everything will fall into place", and tend to want to throw the Sunday-meeting baby out with the over-intellectualized bathwater. EOrthodoxy and other "high" churches with worship that involves the body and habitual practices that are meant to open people to the work of the Holy Spirit are also experiencing a net loss of members. Catechsis is necessary; there does have to be some explanation of what it all means, but even with that people leave.
But with the highest worship and the deepest, most meaningful and connected theology in Christianity, at least in the East (even with our problems, too) there's "something there" there.
I empathize with this angle of reconstructionism, yet am inclined to ask right at the outset: Must it be an either/or? Can we not (as this quoted teaching-pastor seems to have been) involved deeply in a community AND engage in periodic corporate worship that stretches the bounds of intimate fellowship?
Many angles to deconstruction and reconstruction. All of us carry responsibility for the problem, but for sake of space I will highlight just one.
I am concerned that many of us are set up for crises of various kinds due to the pervasive lack of candor among pastors. Pastors must regularly remind us that "community is not easy. It is hell." (HT to Hauerwas) Frederick Buechner says he only wants one main thing of his pastor: to tell it like it is. Buechner stopped going to church because he couldn't find a pastor that would consistently be honest and simply tell the truth.
Having experienced and moving through your Friendship to Fellowship observation I find that only in this kind of confidence and knowing can one feel the boldness to make iron sharpening statements that are actually beneficial. It’s the kind of ground that mature listening develops in and leadership grows in. And I believe without the basis of this culture in a church of any size you will not experience regularly in any large church setting the community and belonging that some churches as observed might be fostering.
I find it interesting that the topics on church life and how it should be constituted have so many parallels with the early days of the Shepherding Movement. There is much many could say about what went wrong, but what went right, was a rediscovery of the Kingdom of God, discipleship, small groups versus large gatherings, life together that went beyond a Sunday event, the need for pastors to have pastors, gifts that were meant to strengthen the body. Many churches eschewed Sunday morning meetings for small group or house meetings. Buildings for a time were an anathema. If you read the New Wine Magazines character was a central point of many of the teachings. There is much you can say that went sideways but to hear your questions in this most recent post, those questions and more were issues that leaders were grappling with in the 70’s and 80’s.
I think the Newbiggin quotes are spot on; I would hope people would read the words "revolutionary" and "radical renewal" with the depth from which I believe he wrote them. There are still many kind, sincere, Jesus-centered people in Evangelicalism, who are doing the best they can to follow him. Many of them are frustrated and hurting, as you've highlighted with this series, Scot.
Just a reminder to folks that the kinds of questions at the top of the OP were being asked even before Christianity became legal, and were the impetus for the monastic movement that started as early as the mid-200s AD. So all of this is nothing new. It does seem to have a new sort of "flavor", though.
The point about fellowship is absolutely right. Most people don't understand that the sibling relationship in the ancient world was more intense than simply the people with whom you grew up. In addition, my very favorite blogger, Fr Stephen Freeman (who studied Classics) says that "fellowship" is too weak a translation for <i>koinonia</i> - it should rather be "communion". This is a much deeper level than even solid friendship; it has connotations that are supposed to make you think of the connections within the body (as in Body of Christ). I think the lack of this kind of relationship among Christians reflects the wider loneliness endemic in our society now. Of course friendship is needed. We're so thirsty for it that we don't remember that we don't actually have to be "friends" with everyone in our parish/congregation, because being part of the communion, of the Body of Christ, as siblings in Christ, ties us even more closely. But yes, we do need friends, and the best of friendships should be people who share our "blood tie", if you will, with Christ - those with whom we worship.
Which leads to the last thing, but perhaps what stands out most to me about the OP. I don't agree that getting rid of Sunday services is the answer. There are important theological reasons that Christians meet on Sundays. However, a de-ritualized, de-sacramentalized gathering that is devoid of the Mystical and has no historical connection to faithful Christians through the ages is pretty thin gruel. For various reasons, most Evangelicals won't allow themselves to think outside the box of "if we just have the right teaching everything will fall into place", and tend to want to throw the Sunday-meeting baby out with the over-intellectualized bathwater. EOrthodoxy and other "high" churches with worship that involves the body and habitual practices that are meant to open people to the work of the Holy Spirit are also experiencing a net loss of members. Catechsis is necessary; there does have to be some explanation of what it all means, but even with that people leave.
But with the highest worship and the deepest, most meaningful and connected theology in Christianity, at least in the East (even with our problems, too) there's "something there" there.
Dana
I empathize with this angle of reconstructionism, yet am inclined to ask right at the outset: Must it be an either/or? Can we not (as this quoted teaching-pastor seems to have been) involved deeply in a community AND engage in periodic corporate worship that stretches the bounds of intimate fellowship?
Many angles to deconstruction and reconstruction. All of us carry responsibility for the problem, but for sake of space I will highlight just one.
I am concerned that many of us are set up for crises of various kinds due to the pervasive lack of candor among pastors. Pastors must regularly remind us that "community is not easy. It is hell." (HT to Hauerwas) Frederick Buechner says he only wants one main thing of his pastor: to tell it like it is. Buechner stopped going to church because he couldn't find a pastor that would consistently be honest and simply tell the truth.
Having experienced and moving through your Friendship to Fellowship observation I find that only in this kind of confidence and knowing can one feel the boldness to make iron sharpening statements that are actually beneficial. It’s the kind of ground that mature listening develops in and leadership grows in. And I believe without the basis of this culture in a church of any size you will not experience regularly in any large church setting the community and belonging that some churches as observed might be fostering.