Tuesday, May 09, 2006

 

Can You Call Yourself A "Christian" Apart From The Church?

This may be the key question raised by George Barna's Revolution. Barna would. of course, argue that his revolutionaries are not apart from the church, but that they are redefining church.

In a purely sociological sense, I think he is right, he does not present a vision that eliminates church, but rather he reimagines church not as an institution, but as a network. This is a huge sociological change that is revolutionizing all sorts of institutions. We are seeing networked bloggers bring traditional journalistic institutions to their knees. Work-at-home types are transforming the nature of business. This is just two examples.

The key issue is, does this change work for the church? Jollyblogger makes one very devestating argument in pointing out that networks serve the individual, the individual does not necessarily serve the network, and that this is not a biblical model. I think David is right about this, and I want to take it just a step further.

The very essence of Christian faith is submission - submission of the self to God. Networks, as opposed to institutions, require no submission. By their very nature, members come and go, step up or don't. When you are operating in a network and a member does not step up, you don't go find out what the issue is, you just find someone else who will, meaning the member is not held accountable and has not submitted.

Say you put a little "teeth" (rules of some sort) into the network, now you have taken the first step to institutionalization and it won't be long before things will fall apart, or a full-fledged institution will be born. Institutionalization is, if there is to be any submission, or any accountability, an inevitability.

Let's go back to my assertion that submission is the essence of Christianity. The submission is to God, not to some institution, so why is the institutional inevitable? Simple, because people are God's chosen instruments on earth.

Direct experiences of God are rare. We most often experience God in the life of other Christians; therefore, part of our submission to God is submitting to others.
Phil 2:3-8 - Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Now, none of this changes the fact that institutions generally, sometimes I think inevitably, corrupt and that we may need to alter our point of submission. But if we are to submit and such makes institutionalization inevitable, should not our efforts be turned to fighting the corruption in the instituions and not merely leaving them?

To call ourselves Christians we must submit to God. We experience God in others, thus we must submit to other Christians. Such submission inevitably lead to institutionalization. Thus anyone that calls themselves "Christian," apart from institutional affiliation, is a Christian in a most tepid and unsatisfactory sense. I guess they can call themselves "Christians" if they want, but anybody can label themselves just about anything, it does not make it so.

Cross posted at How To Be A Christian And Still Go To Church

Related Tags: , , , ,

|

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Site Feed

Blogotional

eXTReMe Tracker

Blogarama - The Blog Directory