Showing posts with label de-churched. Show all posts
Showing posts with label de-churched. Show all posts

Thursday, May 14, 2015

FROM ZEALOUS ADVOCATE TO RELUCTANT ATTENDEE TO DELIBERATE ABSENTEE

"From zealous advocate to reluctant attendee to deliberate absentee."

Someone other than me threaded these descriptors to illustrate the evolution of the unaffiliated Christian. In a series of prior posts I have tested terms like 'de-churched' and 're-churched' to describe the believer voluntarily disassociated from the local church. The expression tracks the emotional and convictional movement of a person who has been enthusiastically involved in local church ministries and over time for reasons irrelevant to this comment, begins to attend sporadically, declines service opportunities, reduces the tithe/offering in order to support ministries outside the church. Then one day, after consideration, this person stays away from church, never to return.

A point that some of my readers make, is that community/family/body of Christ and a consequent accountability is essential to the corporate entity that we have together become as new creations. We are all called to holiness. One of the ways by which this transformation predictably occurs is by being transparent and answerable within a localized gathering of other believers, some of whom are approved to shepherd and care for us. The concern in part may be that the unaffiliated Christian without this mutual accountability may spiritually depreciate.

The concern is valid. What will the unaffiliated Christian do to remain a zealous promoter of the gospel, filled with the Spirit, pure, godly. Can this health status be maintained unaccompanied? Why don't you tell me. A married couple can cheer lead one another. Even they do better in the company of other Christians. Some readers say this is the way God intended for his church to function in the world to emit light and to flavour companions. I suppose that is church.

Monday, May 4, 2015

MAYBE THE TERM 'DE-CHURCHED' IS UNSUITABLE

Today, I have repackaged several insightful points written by respondents to my earlier post. Those points infer that the terms 'de-churched' or 'no longer churched' are unsuitable expressions to apply to a person who has made a difficult decision to no longer attend church. I am unsure what term fits the Christian who no longer attends church, yet loves God, reads the Bible, shares faith with others, hangs our with other believers at occasional events or studies or house parties, displays the fruit of the Spirit and serves other people. Perhaps there is no need for a term, since that Christian is doing everything that God expects of a follower of Christ who is a member of the Church.

Okay, she was a founding member of the church when it met in a school, gave her money, energy and time to help build the church with seating for 300 people, but she became disillusioned by prevailing models of church, and left her church, choosing not to attend a church any more, but she is still an integral member of the Church.

We use the same term 'church' to denote several dissimilar concepts, the local congregation, the people of God worldwide, the institutional church, and the church building. That may lead to unfortunate assumptions about people. Leaving a local congregation is not synonymous with leaving the Church. No longer attending the 10 am Sunday worship service is not synonymous with leaving the Church. Available programs and meetings at specific times on specific days do not define 'Church.’

Church life as we experience it institutionally today has been shaped by paradigms developed since the apostles obeyed Jesus to carry the good news into the world. Church has taken on organization and constitution, bylaws, governance, ritual, schedules, property, programs, departments, technology, specialists and debt. It is possible that those of us who are most heavily invested in and committed to Christian gospel, and service and church, innocently, unknowingly accept what is and continue to interpret church primarily in terms of the building. "Come to church this Sunday," the sign says. "We missed you at church last week," friends say. "The church construction costs will be $18 million dollars," That is the largest church in the city.

I am pleased that my pastors deliberately remind us each Sunday, "good morning church." There is a consciousness that the church has gathered and when we have worshipped God and enjoyed one another, the church leaves the building. Then back to the diligent believer who decides no longer to attend church. Our opinion must be that a member of the Church has left a specific building but continues as a member of the Church, God's Church.

I am still bothered by a couple of things. I appeal for understanding for the person who is done with church. Yet it is clear that church implies community/fellowship, and that is one thing this person is leaving behind. What will this person do for community? The person may claim that 10am on Sunday with 300 people hardly felt like community or family in an intimate sense. Being associated with the church's small group ministry offers a more predictable community experience. One would think that for the values and benefits of the Christian family of God need to occur somehow for the person leaves church. Another matter that bothers me, is the need for a personal plan of how spiritual strength and health and growth is to be nurtured if it is outside the context of the organized church. That must surely have to be considered, otherwise the departure seems selfish and futile.