The Church
and the Fiddler on the Roof.
by Tim Suttle
On Sunday at h.k10 we explored the metaphor of the Fiddler on the Roof. In this old Broadway musical, the proud Jewish father struggles when each of his 5 daughters come to ask his blessing for their marriage. As he tries to decide whether or not to bless the union, he actually considers what this will do to their family…will it change them? enhance them? ruin them? He is really trying to balance TRADITION with RELEVANCE.
This is not unlike what the church is asked to do. We must deal with the question: “How do we balance the traditions of our heritage/scripture with the need to be relevant to our current culture without breaking continuity with historic Christianity?” If we fall too far toward traditions and begin to embrace them merely for tradition’s sake, we fall into traditionalism & no longer embody the kingdom ideal. If we fall too far toward relevance, then we break continuity and start a brand new religion. How can we balance?
This question is made even more important by the realization that we live in a time of great change. We explored Phyllis Tickle’s claim that we are in a great transition which is just one in a long succession of transitions which come every 500 years:
- Reformation (1500 AD)
- Great Schism (1054 AD)
- Fall of Rome & Monasticism born (476 AD)
- Time of Christ (33 AD)
- Babylonian Captivity of the Jews (550 BCE)
- End of Judges/beginning of Dynasty (1030 BCE)
Her point is that we are living at the end of an old era and the beginning of a new one. In this new era we’re considering the old models of church which we’ve inherited.
The Reformation gave us the view of church as “a place where certain things happen.” This view brought with it some baggage. First, it created the expectation that church will be a “vendor of religious goods & services.” In this model parishioners become consumers, pastors become professionals, and members become volunteers who are deployed to meet consumer needs much like a workforce. Second, it forced churches to compete in the marketplace with the primary focus being brand loyalty and acquiring market share.
The Enlightenment gave us a view of church which was dominated by “Reason.” This view also brought with it some baggage. First, faith became largely a rational thing. Second, faith became largely a personal thing. Thirdly, it required faith to stand up to “reason” as the only legitimate way of “knowing.”
The Church Today is splintered and divided almost equally between Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Mainline Denominations, and Liturgicals, each offering different ideas about what it means to be a church. We talked about the possibility that in the biblical teaching about the Kingdom of God, we might actually find one unifying theme.
Jurgen Moltmann teaches us that the church doesn’t have a mission, but Christ has a mission. It is the mission of Christ which calls the church into existence. Our mission is to follow Christ in pursuit of the kingdom of God. We learn from Darrell Guder three ways which we might do this:
BEING: the church can represent the kingdom of God in its community. The first job of the church, says Stanley Hauerwas, is to simply be the church. The church is to embody the reign of God before a watching world. In doing this the effects of the reformation are counteracted. Church is not seen as a place where certain things happen, but a people called to the mission of Christ who embody the reign and rule of Christ.
DOING: the church can represent the kingdom of God as its servant. In our times this might looks very different in differing contexts. In America, it will look less and less like imposing our moral will onto the social fabric and more and more like the church giving tangible experiences of the reign and rule of God through compassion, mercy and justice. This offsets the Enlightenment idea that religion is private & merely rational by proving that the truth can be incarnational.
SPEAKING: the church can represent the Kingdom of God as its messenger. By embracing the catholic nature of our faith and uniting by the proclamation that Jesus instituted the kingdom of God and that all are invited to join, the church can actually speak with one voice. This offsets the dis-unity and the current splintered factions which dominate the church.
This is not unlike what the church is asked to do. We must deal with the question: “How do we balance the traditions of our heritage/scripture with the need to be relevant to our current culture without breaking continuity with historic Christianity?” If we fall too far toward traditions and begin to embrace them merely for tradition’s sake, we fall into traditionalism & no longer embody the kingdom ideal. If we fall too far toward relevance, then we break continuity and start a brand new religion. How can we balance?
This question is made even more important by the realization that we live in a time of great change. We explored Phyllis Tickle’s claim that we are in a great transition which is just one in a long succession of transitions which come every 500 years:
- Reformation (1500 AD)
- Great Schism (1054 AD)
- Fall of Rome & Monasticism born (476 AD)
- Time of Christ (33 AD)
- Babylonian Captivity of the Jews (550 BCE)
- End of Judges/beginning of Dynasty (1030 BCE)
Her point is that we are living at the end of an old era and the beginning of a new one. In this new era we’re considering the old models of church which we’ve inherited.
The Reformation gave us the view of church as “a place where certain things happen.” This view brought with it some baggage. First, it created the expectation that church will be a “vendor of religious goods & services.” In this model parishioners become consumers, pastors become professionals, and members become volunteers who are deployed to meet consumer needs much like a workforce. Second, it forced churches to compete in the marketplace with the primary focus being brand loyalty and acquiring market share.
The Enlightenment gave us a view of church which was dominated by “Reason.” This view also brought with it some baggage. First, faith became largely a rational thing. Second, faith became largely a personal thing. Thirdly, it required faith to stand up to “reason” as the only legitimate way of “knowing.”
The Church Today is splintered and divided almost equally between Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Mainline Denominations, and Liturgicals, each offering different ideas about what it means to be a church. We talked about the possibility that in the biblical teaching about the Kingdom of God, we might actually find one unifying theme.
Jurgen Moltmann teaches us that the church doesn’t have a mission, but Christ has a mission. It is the mission of Christ which calls the church into existence. Our mission is to follow Christ in pursuit of the kingdom of God. We learn from Darrell Guder three ways which we might do this:
BEING: the church can represent the kingdom of God in its community. The first job of the church, says Stanley Hauerwas, is to simply be the church. The church is to embody the reign of God before a watching world. In doing this the effects of the reformation are counteracted. Church is not seen as a place where certain things happen, but a people called to the mission of Christ who embody the reign and rule of Christ.
DOING: the church can represent the kingdom of God as its servant. In our times this might looks very different in differing contexts. In America, it will look less and less like imposing our moral will onto the social fabric and more and more like the church giving tangible experiences of the reign and rule of God through compassion, mercy and justice. This offsets the Enlightenment idea that religion is private & merely rational by proving that the truth can be incarnational.
SPEAKING: the church can represent the Kingdom of God as its messenger. By embracing the catholic nature of our faith and uniting by the proclamation that Jesus instituted the kingdom of God and that all are invited to join, the church can actually speak with one voice. This offsets the dis-unity and the current splintered factions which dominate the church.
7 comments:
Tim, nice job sunday morning. I know there are people who do not care about history or context as much as you and I, but it was a very good overview of the important events that have made us who we are. I really enjoyed thinking about all the baggage we have inherited from our culture and history that are in no way an extension of the church and Christ's mission. It is good for us to be reminded of the need to filter cultural elements we have inherited in even our 'christian' heritage that are more a reflection of the world than that of Christ.
Nice work...thanks.
I know that I share your love of context, but I think we also share an urgency about it. The baggage isn't anything to be afraid of. In fact it's liberating to hear those sort of realizations, no matter where they come from.
It's like struggling with some sort of chronic pain for years and not knowing where the pain comes from. Then finally one day you find a doctor who can say "Oh, here's your problem." Knowing the source of the pain is liberating. Fixing the problem is always a little scary, but having no idea why you are in pain is scary.
I think that this can be a very healthy conversation, but nothing poses more hope to me than to understand our place in history.
Sorry Tim, I love you and think you have a tremendous amount to add to our church, but I thought sunday was too academic and a little boring. I am sure i am in the minority, but thought I would mention it as constructive feedback. From bill's comments I see how you might enjoy that approach, but it was a little too much for me.
c'mon now...you can't take a shot like that and not sign your name! I'm sitting here with Kevin & we're laughing out loud. I'm always insecure about being too dry and boring.
I'm sure my approach is a little boring to some, maybe all. I'm still learning. Most of my teaching experience has been in other types of venues besides a Sunday morning service. There I'm still a bit of a novice. So I totally embrace the reality that I have a long way to go as a public speaker. Especially at keeping people interested.
However, I don't want the form of the talk to totally dominate here. Boring or not, academic or not, a lot was presented which is of substance in our conversation. The issues concerning the nature and purpose of the church will often be complicated. Somebody will have to dig in deep. I'll always default toward that setting. But, please don't feel like you are obligated to go there as well to be part of the conversation! Not all of this should be dry, it should be incarnational...relevant.
Yeah man!
-t
You have two differing opinions on Sunday - now I am going to give you a third. I think it was wonderful information. I think it is very relevent to our church.... but...(there's always a but in there...) way too much information for me to try and dissect in one morning. I would have loved to have seen it as a two or three week series. This would have given it to me in smaller pieces to stop and think and understand a little better before we moved on to the next thing. But that is probably just one of my quirks. Short attention span.
Tim,
I obviously did not hear the sermon but will be listening online when it comes up. I click with your style and think it's sad that people so often want information about God that is "easy to digest." Part of the beauty of God is the mystery of his nature. While we are not supposed to understand everything about God, he has given us brains to try. I say bring on the more intellectual ideas that challenge us to think in a deeper way.
I like Bill's comment regarding "all the baggage we have inherited from our culture and history that are in no way an extension of the church and Christ's mission." What a true statement! It seems that the American church is pretty far away from what Christ spent time on while on earth especially in the areas of spending money, equality, and social justice.
This blog is a great idea!
Okay, solitary confinement I can handle, but please, not Royals baseball. I totally agree that discussing who we are called to be as a church is so important.
I embrace the idea of becoming a church who serves the community more than just being a Sunday service church. Please don't get me wrong, Sunday service is very important, but I feel the need not only personally but together as a community that we need to become humble servants to the community in which we live. I'm not sure how to do that, but I would love to wrestle through that & figure out how we can accomplish that together.
For His Glory,
Karen de la Durantaye
Post a Comment