Ever tried to get a bunch of friends to come out for a meal using email? I suggest that you try this as an experiment. Send an email to six or eight friends and suggest that you get together for a meal. Once you'e managed to find a day and time you can all agree on (and this will be a major exercise in itself if you're like me) the discussion comes down to the question of what kind of food to consume. This is where the fun really start and is the place where the parallels with choosing a new church fellowship really begin as the various opinions come to the fore.
Very quickly the people form themselves into groups:
A wants want Chinese food,
B wants want Indian,
C only eats English stuff
D wants Italian
E doesn't really care, they are happy with whatever is in front of them.
This is where it gets to be fun as some will be willing to modify their taste and switch from Chinese to Indian or Indian to Pizza and so the real fun continues until some drop out or others sacrifice their choice and come along just to be part of the gathering without really caring or considering what's going to be dished up.
The same is true when we decide to move church and it isn't as easy as saying, "Well I'm an Anglican so I'll move to another Anglican church and all will be well." We have four churches in our parish and each is the same in terms of the label (C of E) and yet is as different as it would be were we to have a sign outside offering Indian, Chinese, Italian or English cuisines.
I know a pentecostal church where the pastor appears to be dispensationalist, not believing in things of the Spirit or God talking or acting through us today. I know another where the Word is subsidiary to the experience of the Spirit and yet another where the church has no problems with many of the issues of lifestyle, choice and attitude that trouble so many other Christians.
Anglican might mean high church and 'bells and smells', genuflecting and the like; it could mean robed choirs and BCP, perhaps guitars and worship groups and no robes at all. The theology could be orthodox in that the members believe the traditional Christian things and abhor all the liberal stuff, then again it could be liberal and have a wacky mad priest who's supportive of homosexuality and wants to rewrite the Bible for today's people. It could be middle of the road and extremely straight (in every sense) or perhaps more charismatic than any of the pentecostal or charismatic fellowship on offer in the area.
If you're going to choose a new venue for worship you need to decide upon the cuisine you fancy and this means deciding what you believe and what, in this collection of beliefs, is important to you.
I'll leave us all a bit of time to think and then perhaps we can decide what really matters to us and whether we've nailed it or missed a few elements.
4 comments:
I think that the approach of individual churches differ so much, you can anticipate finding something different, whichever option you choose.
Within the RC Church, you literally get what comes out of the tin, no 99 heinz choices there. It is all of a one.
The Anglican church embraces all of those you described, depending where you go - and I think that the Anglican Fudge of accommodating every tradition is worthwhile and viable, unless you dilute your theology and the scriptural basis for what we believe to much.
I feel that accepting that 'anything goes' is a cop out from both authority and discipleship - yes, we need to interpret the bible in the context of current society, but the Gospels have survived 2000 years and their story remains relevant to all of us today.
So what do we do in a Post-Modern society? 'hunker down and wait for things to change' or go out of our safe buildings and engage with people where they live, work and play today? I feel that the latter option is the only viable one, if the Body of Christ is to survive as a vibrant, Godlike community in the future.
God is Great, God is Patient, God is capable of changing us and when he is ready, he will. But it is up to us to break the ground for him.
"a wacky mad priest"? May I offer a discussion between Olivia O'Leary and two priests in the latest edition of 'Between Ourselves' on BBC iplayer as a contribution to this debate? It has been broadcast twice now, including last night on Radio 4.
Excellent stuff - thanks for comments UKV and I'll go and have a look at that vide now (before the Crem queues start forming for the day).
Thanks both,
V
Had a listen - going to have some toast and respond to other emails and try to quickly dash off thoughts from broadcast.
Neither fitted the wacky mad priest image as previously mentioned by another reader (who was also a woman) and was referred to in today's post. then again, no one (except her) probably could.
She came, made changes, made a point, left the ministry and achieved nothing positive - always a danger when we seek to make a point I guess.
Still, very sad regardless :(
Post a Comment