This is the first of a series of blog posts where I’ll look at why there’s an emerging church. With each issue, I’ll include a look at the practical matter of church structure and how it relates to the issue.
Knowledge
The way people view knowledge has changed. There is a questioning of what we can know and how much we can know it.
For some, the answer is to remain steadfast and declare what they believe. For others, declaring nothing absolute is the answer. These are two opposite extremes, and we all fit somewhere on a continuum between the two.
The growing number of people coming closer to a more relativist position find themselves unhappy with a church where absolutes are proclaimed from the pulpit. Differing forms of teaching and preaching have emerged as a result of the culture’s shift in regards to knowledge.
Structure Analysis
Churches centering their weekly meetings on a teaching time will have difficulty communicating the ideas of their faith to those on the more relative side of the continuum. Even if the content of the teaching would appeal to this audience, the prominent position of teaching will hinder understanding. In short, teaching that you don’t know it all but still centering your weekly meetings around your teaching sends conflicting messages.
Changing the methods of teaching can help some, but if teaching is the central focus of your weekly meeting, and thus the perceived focus of your entire church community, you will not be effective at establishing a community for this growing group of people.
A structure which places activity over mental exercises will be one in which this group will thrive in their faith.
And more importantly, they will learn more about their faith as they live it out in community. There’s a place for teaching, but it isn’t seen as the major activity of the church.
Another issue regarding structure and knowledge is the professional clergy. Having a pastoral staff who are professionals – it’s their job to do church work – makes it difficult to attract those on the more extreme end of the continuum. Words from the pros will be taken at such a high value in the community, that many would find it difficult to fit in if they disagree with the ideas of the pros. Even if the pros don’t mind the disagreements, the non-pros will feel out of place in the community.
I’m not saying that the main factor in determining church structure lies in the comfort level of a group of persons. It is necessary, however, to understand how people react to our structures. Then we can decide if the structure needs changing, or if we need to find ways to help people adapt to our structure.
“many would find it difficult to fit in if they disagree with the ideas of the pros.”
I agree 100% with that statement! I’m fairly active in my church (musician and youth leader) and I find that makes it even more difficult to ask questions, let alone disagree with the “pros”. In the context of our youth group, I’m the one that is supposed to have the answers.
I feel like I have some hidden side of me that I’m not allowed to show on Thursdays and Sundays.
Mike
October 31st, 2005
[...] Core Issue #1 – Knowledge [...]
A Different Perspective » Core Issue #2 - Why There’s an Emerging Church
December 10th, 2005
[...] This is very similar to my Core Issue #1 post, so the structural analysis is much the same. If you haven’t read that, I reccommend you give that a look. [...]
A Different Perspective » Core Issue #3 - Why There’s an Emerging Church
December 10th, 2005
See my blog for questions regarding this post.
Danny
December 16th, 2005
Danny asked some questions I answered on his blog. I’m reposting my comment on his blog here:
First off, you got the link right but the name wrong… it’s Alan Hartung…
Okay, I address some of your concerns, I think, in some of the other core issues posts. There are five now at A Different Perspective.
But to give you a more direct response, and to try to give a couple shots at the questions you’ve been asking for a long time… here goes.
“Is the switch to relativist thinking a good thing?”
That depends on whether you’re talking about the philosophical version of relativism or the way it works out practically in culture. Practically, the culture is shifting towards a more perspectival approach. The perspectival emphasizes the impossibility of understanding something completely from a limited perspective.
I think this is a good thing, because it’s accurate. Problems occur when the approach is taken to the extreme and the conclusion becomes you can’t really know anything at all. The church can and should shift from its rigid stance of objectivity (which is a fallacy) to a perspectival approach.
It would be bad to embrace true relativism, but what is practiced in the beliefs of the culture is not true relativism. It’s perspectivism.
“How would we change the church is such a way that activity is valued over teaching? When would this be going to far to the point where teaching takes a back seat to service?”
As I suggested in the original post and also in my podcast (War on the Sermon), removing teaching as the central activity of the church would be a huge step in valuing activity.
To your second question, I’m struggling to find the right words. I guess I’ll just ask a simple question. Can you read the gospels and believe that Jesus would think teaching is more important than serving?
I think the Church has gone too far in valuing teaching over service. It’s time to correct that. Good teaching, in fact, would instruct us to serve and that is more valuable than having everything “right.”
Again, I deal with clergy issues in later core issues posts. I would say the clergy definitely needs reformed. I question the numerous staff positions many churches have. When there are pros doing the job, individual parts of the body don’t see why they should do it…
On a final note, you should learn how to use trackbacks. You’ll get better traffic back then just a comment on a blog saying check out my post for comments. I’m not sure how they work in blogger, or I’d tell ya.
Thanks for engaging this issue on your blog. I hope APU is as good or better of an experience for you as it was for me. Tell Yarchin I said hello…
Alan
December 16th, 2005