In America’s Midwest, the latest trend in home architecture is the development of residential "communities," subdivisions with hundreds of homes. The names given to these developments may imply that a community exists, but in reality the names just aid the developer in distinguishing between subdivisions!
From living within a mile radius of at least five of these developments, I’ve observed that rarely (if ever) do the inhabitants of each house interact with others in their "community" or even their neighbors.
This strikes me as being one of the ramifications of the current/postmodern understanding of culture, and perhaps in a broader sense, anthropology. In "Self Consciousness: An Alternative Anthropology of Identity," Anthony Cohen writes…
"Constituted by society and made competent by culture, individuals make their worlds through their acts of perception and interpretation. The external world is filtered through and, in the process, remade, by the self. It is in this sense that the self is the centre and the premise of the individual’s world."
In response to Cohen’s reflections, the late Stanley Grenz asserts in "Beyond Foundationalism" that this self-focus "has led to the realization that our culture is two sided: simultaneously public and private, "out there" and "in here.""
In conversation with the facilitator of the local emerging church cohorts group (in West Michigan… click here for more), the issue of mission came up. We were chatting about all the new housing developments in our area and about a new "Christian Community" housing development that is being built specifically for Christian senior citizens — somewhat similar to Jerry Falwell’s attempt in Virginia.
David W. Henderson writes, "Churches and neighborhoods are more often locations through which we pass than places where we live and forge deep, meaningful relationships."
All of this leaves me with three questions. Your input is welcomed!
1. How does the emergent church - and the Church in general, for that matter - go about reaching the "self" side of culture?
2. Where does the church belong? In the "out there" public realm, or the "in here" private realm of culture?
3. How do we reach the "in here" of our culture — our subdivisions, housing complexes, etc. — without being too invasive (door to door evangelism, etc.)?
<
Re: Private/public domains -- where does the church belong
Good observations. For my two cents, it seems that all of these observations, however valid, stem from fear. People gravitate to communities, however small or large, of like people out of fear. Gated communities exist due to fear of attack, although more often it is also the desire (and fear) to avoid contact with people who are “different.” We don’t want to deal with those of a different culture, race, religion, economic background, etc. Sure, we can say that we live where it is safe and secure-I don’t argue with that-yet how often have you heard the phrase “there goes the neighborhood” when someone who isn’t like “us” moves into the community? This is really what these “Christian communities” are. Just little gated places to keep the residents from having to grapple with the real callings of Christ. In answer to the comment by Henderson about “churches and communities are locations we pass through” I would argue that the root is still fear. Deep relationships open us up to the possibility of pain, so fear of pain keeps us moving. Yes, we are a mobile culture, but even where the residents have been in place for years we find a lack of “meaningful relationships.” So, to answer your questions, my thoughts are
1. To reach the self side of culture we (Christians) must first show the willingness to move past the fear of deep relationships with all people, including those not like “us.”
2. I guess if the church is a stand-alone entity, then this question makes sense to me. It seems though that the “church” is already in the public realm and private realm. We are the church, not that group on Sunday (or Saturday, or whenever).
3. Live there. Make friends there. Live your faith transparently but don’t broadcast it.
Well, maybe more than two cents—four maybe?
Brian
Re: Private/public domains -- where does the church belong
Relationally, the church should dissolve the boundary between private and public domains. The church is relationships. We are discussing this relational theology in a separate thread (Theology of Relational Development), but I think Brian hit the nail on the head - fear.
Commercialism thrives on fear while community thrives on trust. Gates communities, self-serve gas, etc - they are all symptoms of a culture too afraid to trust one another.
Consider it from this point of view - prior to the development of the television, people were our primary means of entertainment. Neighborhood barbecues, block parties, county fairs, community theater - they thrived because people wanted to go somewhere and be with other people. The presence of passive entertainment gave people opportunity to remove themselves from this communal enjoyment and experience private pleasure.
Add to this the fact that television also brought bad news into our homes. We discovered that there are people like kidnappers, hijackers, rapists, etc - and we developed a communal fixation with avoiding these people. But how do we avoid them? By distancing ourselves from everyone.
Now think about this. How often do we stand in a public place next to another human being and think about talking to that person but fail to do so? Why? Because we have a relational fear that person might be a bad person. And what is a bad person? We don’t even really know. We fear an idea. The reality is that the person we don’t talk to doesn’t talk to us for the same reason.