The Church Is Not A Community

For sometime now I have heard that many are tired of being in a church with so many divisions or so many points of disagreement. This fatigue has provoked some to inquire or even leave the Church in order to be with other “like-minded” Christians. The virtues of being with “like-minded” believers is argued for in many places such as the book the Benedict Option to caucus groups such as the Wesleyan Covenant Association (WCA).

There is nothing wrong with being with like minded people. It is good to be with like-minded people as it gives a peace and comfort knowing that I am not alone. The defining characteristic of a like-minded group is that the group is held together by what they have.

There is a name for a group of people who are together because of what they have. It is called a community. A community is a group of people who belong to one another because of something they all have or hold in common. The Benedict Option and WCA advocate the creation of like-minded communities. This seems innocuous enough. Like I said above, like-minded communities have many benefits.

The problem is that when we take the idea of community into the Church because the Church is not supposed to be a community.

In a very basic sense, a community does not fundamentally challenge one another to change because to do so would threaten the communities very existence. If members of the community change, then the community may not all hold the same thing in common. If members of my bowling community started to dislike bowling, then the bowling community would politely ask those members to leave and not come back. Because what makes the bowling community the bowling community is the shared loved of bowling. If some members of the community no longer like bowling, then group may not be all “like-minded”.

Additionally, at the core, communities are groups that are motivated by purity. If there is anyone in the group that is not of “like-mind” then they cannot be a member of the community because a community is only possible if the entire group is of like mind. There is little appreciation for the one who is not like the community (impure). The community that has some members who deviate from the communities norm, are asked to leave. In fact asking the “other” to leave is considered graceful. I cannot imagine being asked to leave the community is grace-filled, but communities that hold the same ideas as the reason for existence are convinced that this is graceful.

Peter Rollins makes a point in this 90 second clip in which he talks about a community and a communion. He reminds the viewer that the community is gathered by what they have or what they share. But a communion is gathered around a lack or by something the group does not have. For instance, Alcohol Anonymous (AA) is a group that gathers around a shared lack (ex: lack of alcohol) and loss (ex: loss of control). The group is made not on what they achieve or what they have done, but on what they each lack and/or loss.

Each Sunday, Christians around the world gather together to share in the sacrament sometimes called Communion. It is the sacred meal in which calls to mind the time that God in Christ ritualized the death of God on the cross.

The death of God is terrifying. It is the ultimate lack. It is the thing that so many of us (self included) refuse to accept because it is too much to consider that the eternal and all powerful God would enter death - even temporarily. The church is a gathering of people who recognize we have lack (sometimes we call it sin).

The church, each week, gathers together not because we all are of “like-mind” or all hold the same thing. The core of the Church gathers together because of what we lack. We gather because we lack forgiveness, mercy, and grace toward ourselves and others. Like Jesus said, we do not know what we are doing and we lack the way to go. We are in need of God because the communion of the church knows it is not God.

The Church is much too sacred and important to be a community. The Church is a communion.

Being Angry Is Too Much Fun

“Of the Seven Deadly Sins, anger is possibly the most fun. To lick your wounds, to smack your lips over grievances long past, to roll over your tongue the prospect of bitter confrontations still to come, to savor to the last toothsome morsel both the pain you are given and the pain you are giving back--in many ways it is a feast fit for a king. The chief drawback is that what you are wolfing down is yourself. The skeleton at the feast is you.”

These poetic words from Frederick Buechner speak deeply to our time.

To my UMC siblings: Christ knew that we are prone to cannibalize ourselves or our neighbor and so let us call to mind that Christ offers the atoning substitution of himself. To be sure we are called to feast at the banquet table. And we are called to feast to be filled. Christ offers himself so that we do not consume others or ourselves.

Be aware of the angry prophets of grievance who set a table and invite you to a feast promising that they, or their version of Church, will be the place you will satiated.

Chances Are Your Using Tough Love Wrong

Visual depiction of how we think of tough love.

I live in Texas and in Texas we have a culture of being tough. We pride ourselves on being full of grit, dirt and a pick up truck. And so in Texas we use a phrase that maybe you have heard or use yourself - tough love.

You may be thinking, “Jason, I thought that I read somewhere that love was patient and kind. It is something that is not envious or boastful. I though love was not proud, dishonoring, self-seeking or eastly angered. I thought love keeps no record of wrongs or delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. I thought love always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres and never fails. How can love be tough?”

Well my friend, you must not have grown up in Texas. We like our love like we like our jerky - tough and salty.

Most often, the phrase “tough love” is used in one of two situations. First, and maybe most commonly, is in regards to parenting. Parents who are strict disciplinarians talk about extending tough love to their child. So punishments like spanking, grounding, removing privileges' and/or adding labor or chores might be considered tough love. There is a too many parenting articles on this sort of parenting style that I do not need to toss my two cents in on this.

The second way tough love is used is when you have to tell someone that may be difficult to say, but it will be tough for the other to hear. The idea behind this is that there is some sort of “truth” the one extending “tough love” is bringing to the attention to the receiver of the tough love. There may be tears or anger, but that is what makes it tough to hear. Tough love.

As a Texan, I am a big fan of tough love. In fact, I think that Jesus was an honorary Texan because I think he too placed a premium on tough love. But I believe that even my fellow Texans are using tough love wrong.

The way that tough love is practiced is that it is the “other” who will have a tough time. The toughness is externalized to the one extending love. And this is where tough love is misunderstood.

When we are in conflict with someone who we really think is going the wrong way. When someone betrays us, spits in our face, runs away, wishes us dead, or is heading the wrong way - Christ says we are still to love them.

And loving “them” is really, really tough.

Because they are jerks and sinners. They are stubborn and unrepentive. They are defiant and self-centered. They don’t care about how their actions impact others and they are so narcissistic they really believe the world is all about them. It is tough to love “those” people.

And this is why I think that God in Christ practices tough love. Even as Christ hung on the cross, he extended compassion and forgiveness.

That is tough like a Texan.

That is tough love.