« Back to blog

The Church is a Mess, But Jesus is Our Peace



Twitter Facebook Email More...

Earlier this week, I wrote about the need for an ontological understanding of the church, one that views the church for what it is, not for what it does. I mentioned a number of problems that arise from a functional understanding of the church. But there is an additional problem worth noting. When we attempt to define or measure the church functionally, we try our best to disguise the fact that all the people in the church are still sinners.

Naturally, we don't altogether mask this – you can't escape something as blatant as Romans 3:23 – but we make a concerted effort to downplay reality. What is that reality? It is simply that the church is a mess. We don't like the fact that nobody has it all together. We don't like it when we get hurt in church because church is supposed to be a place where everything is good and peaceful. We don't like the fact that living the Christian life is really, really difficult and so we (sometimes unconsciously) draw up a set of standards for what we think Christians should be like that make a lot of concessions to our culture because then it is easier to make it look like we have it all together, and as a bonus, outsiders will feel more welcome when they are among us. We want to justify the idea that 'Jesus makes everything better,' and we need to create that illusion in order to make it believable.

Needless to say, a lot of Christians don't want to be honest about the state of the church. I quoted a small portion of N.T. Wright's, Small Faith – Great God, the other day where he noted that Christians often want to walk by sight instead of by faith. We want the perfect church, and when we don't see it, we think we have failed. We then think we need to concede the fact that we are all a bunch of hypocrites, nevermind that most people just want us to be real and to stop creating a façade that masks who we really are. But because we want to avoid being honest, we respond in a number of different ways, as Eugene Peterson notes in Practice Resurrection:

A lot of [people] seem to have no idea what is going on. What they see is chaos: hostility, injury, brokenness, church fights, church sleaze, church grandstanding, religious wars. Many of them find a place in the bleachers with a few other likeminded people and make do with what they find there. They survive by ignoring what they find confusing and disorienting. They remove their attention from what is taking place on the field (in the congregation, in the denomination). They do pray together, study together, socialize together. Life in the bleachers isn't all that bad.

There are other people who are so disturbed by what they perceive as chaos on the playing field that they decide to 'do something about it.' They want a game that looks like a game, a church that looks like a church, where no one gets hurt and everything is orderly and stays in place. They understand church as something they need to take charge of. And of course, there are a great many people who just walk out and look for a game that they are already familiar with or go home and turn on the television where they can satisfy, if you can call it that, their religious needs by picking a brand without dealing personally with either God or people.

The point is that willful ignorance, creating alternative realities, or abandonment are not the answers to the mess we see when we look at the church. As Wright said in the short quote I posted the other day, we walk by faith. We are not going to get this right all on our own. Peterson again:

I don't think we have to make any apologies that church is not conspicuously prominent as a place of peace... The church in its deepest being, as it is in itself, the ontological church comprises a vast company of men and women in all stages of maturity: crawling infants and squalling babies, awkward and inpulsive adolescents, harassed and fatigued parents, and occasional holy men and holy women who have it all together. All of us who understand and practice peace in the company of Jesus, who is our peace, have a lot of maturing to do. About the time we are becoming mature (if we ever do), we find that we have brought another generation into the world that has to go through the whole process once again. Humankind does not mature all at once. And so peace is constantly in the making, and also constantly at risk.

...When anyone looks at church as a performance, whether from inside our outside, mostly what they see is skinned knees and sprained ankles, awkward, bungled attempts at keeping the peace. But we also know that at the source and center of church, Jesus is our peace. And so we don't quit.

Jesus is our peace. When we try to 'fix' the church with our own solutions or try to cover up who we really are, we hurt ourselves, we cease to bear witness to the transforming power of the gospel, and we block the way for true peace in our churches. Being honest about who we are and putting our faith in Jesus, embracing the new life we have in him, is the first step we need to take. True peace comes only through Jesus, the source and life of the church.

| Viewed
times | Favorited 0 times
Filed under:        

4 Comments

Feb 22, 2011
Geoff Hall said...
Hi Jake,
I'm a tad concerned about your ontological church being full of sinners!

I think much of the problem nowadays is that the 'church' emphasises sin over righteousness. To say that the church is full of sinners, is for me an ontological sin itself. We are saints, we are a new creation, living in Paul's terms, a resurrection life. "So, if you are serious about living this new resurrection life with Christ, act like it. Pursue the things over which Christ presides."

However, the church institution needs to remind us of our unworthiness, to develop our dependence on the institution and a mediate forgiveness (the church replacing Christ, perhaps). We are presented with few authentic and credible witnesses, because the church doesn't know how to nurture the resurrection life of the 'new creation'. The ekklesia of guilt, rather than righteousness? With that kind of focus we cultivate our own cultural impotence, for guilt constrains us and we can never stick our head over the church parapet.

The current ontology of the church has replaced community (body) with institution (administration, glass, concrete and steel). The emphasis is on message setting us free, rather than Christ, because Christ is not so easily managed in our committees.

Your emphasis on 'concessions to our culture' infers a defensive posture, which suggests we have lost sight of our call from God to be stewards of 'all Creation' and not just the bits we are happy with, or that we can control!

Peace,

Geoff

Feb 23, 2011
Jake Belder said...
Geoff, thanks for the comment. Let me offer a few clarifications. I would, first, qualify what I mean when I say that the church is full of sinners. I agree with you that we are saints, having been raised to new life in Christ (as per Colossians 3). But we haven't achieved the fullness of our resurrection life yet, and so we still struggle with sin. I think maybe I took it for granted that people would understand what I meant by that.

I don't think I would agree with your critique of the institutional church. Perhaps that was case during the medieval era, but I wouldn't go so far to say that the church is actively seeking to develop our dependence on it.

When I refer to concessions to the culture, I'm speaking of things like consumerism or individualism. I absolutely believe that Christians are to be stewards of all aspects of God's good creation.

Hope these clarifications help!

Feb 24, 2011
Geoff Hall said...
Hi Jake,
Thanks for the clarification.

I think language is important. My concern is that the default in this piece is 'sin'! Whilst we yes struggle with this, it cannot be the focus. The focus has to be Christ, as the rest of those early verses in Colossians 3 would suggest. ("See things from His perspective")

Dependency is not a medieval problem. The church institution has taught for some time about a reliance on 'anointed' ministry, things do to be successful, prosperous etc. We enrol on programmes, follow prescriptive methods of ensuring success, righteousness. This has in the Christian formed a dependence on the institution. It has replaced community in its fullest sense of the body of Christ, with a building and an administered sense of grace.

Language is important. As a writer valuing language comes first in written communication, that is the same for any artist, loving the medium, wanting to express something well, revelling in the joy of its creation, the journey it takes you on. Whilst my work may not achieve fulness, I cannot be focused on what it may have been. If I have done my utmost to be faithful to God's call in the story I'm telling, there is no condemnation in me for not being Shakespeare or TS Eliot! The journey is about getting better, growing and maturing, not worrying about the old man I used to be. I cannot see what I do not know and I cannot know what I do not see. God will fill in the gaps, but if I focus on what I think I'm not doing, then I'll never write again, I will lose my effectiveness as a writer.

Many of us have been marginalised by the 'church' because of our artistic gifts. This is so because of a presumption that the arts are a fallen part of Creation, or that all we are after is fame and fortune. Whilst you may think this is just hyperbole, (polarising for the sake of argument) some of us have lived this life for quite a while now, so it's not a theory, it's a well-worn pair of shoes.

Cultural impotence in part is due to our busy-ness within the church institution, where every initiative has to be owned and sanctified by it. It then ends up being burdened with institutional sub-cultural language which does not translate meaningfully in the larger world outside of this monolithic creation! We are so busy feeding this sub-cultural domain, that we have no time to tend to the rest of the garden. That for me is a form of dependency (now, in this day and age) and is not limited to medieval times. The theological language and forms of worship may have changed, but the problem is still the same.

Peace,

Geoff

Feb 25, 2011
Jake Belder said...
Geoff, I understand more where you're coming from now. I agree with a lot of what you're saying here. Again, I think I'm a bit more sympathetic to the institutional church than you are, but your points about the church's often-pragmatic approach to things are very true. I'm also very aware and sympathetic to the plea of artists and the church's failure to appreciate and value art in all its forms, and though I'm not really an artist myself, I know a few who have felt the same way.

Thanks, as always, for the comment. I checked out your website, good stuff there!

Leave a comment...