I don’t mean earth-shattering news headline things but thoughts that are shaping Dayspring Church at the present time. We are trying to learn to be risk takers but tentative at the same time, taking seriously our poor vision which won’t get total laser correction until the perfect kingdom arrives.
COMMUNITY
This is an outline for a talk about Dayspring Church’s values in this area which we have not addressed for more than a year. It will bring us in line with our missional values and focus on a “perfect green” spirituality (The perfect green metaphor came from Mark Scandrette and Reimagine but I can’t find the explanation anywhere now. I’ll post on it at some time. The outline develops our existing stuff on community which summarises as Kingdom Community: caring and nurturing, challenging and honest, broad and inclusive, outward and diverse. I can email the earlier notes if you like.
A Sense of Community
When we talk about community in church life we are normally thinking about things like:
· Feeling cared for
· Meeting outside meetings
· Having a social network within the church
· A sense of family
All of those are things we value but they put the focus on us and our needs.
The community for me
In church life—particularly in an average size church like Dayspring, the potential for being disappointed is high. There are rarely enough people to listen to me, never enough people like me who I can develop deep friendships with and never enough people to meet my needs.
We would all buy into a church that cares for its members, is made up of people who are very similar in age social class and aspiration, where there are children for yours to play with, where you have friends who share with you deeply and never make you feel guilty or uncomfortable, where there is always somebody to step in if you need help, where you and your family feel safe and secure. But, what if this kind of church is not the kind that God wants to build.
Me for the community
What if that isn’t the kind of community which the church is good at—or even that the church is supposed to be good at?
What if the church is to be a community of people who are different from one another rather than similar, who are challenging and honest as well as caring and nurturing, who are inclusive and broad and who are always looking outward rather than inward?
What if our idea of Christian community needs to be re-calibrated?
Building community in a different way
What if closeness is the result of about sharing a dangerous vision for the forevers of other people rather than having people like yourself to huddle and cuddle with?
What if deep relationships are built by serving the community together on Sunday morning rather than eating candlelight dinners with people who are a middle image of me and mine?
What if kingdom community is built, not in an environment where our children meet with others who are as well mannered as they are, but among the lost, the least and the lowest?
Kingdom Community
Our classbound, consumeristic, captive community is grounded in a context of security, safety, protection and nurture whereas kingdom community develops in a context of adventure, risk, ordeal and being out on the edge. It isn’t hard to see how that quality of relationship is greater when we look outwards and its an intensely biblical way of looking at things. [Explanation of ordeal faced by young tribesman to bond them into community]
The great stories of the Bible are those where people faced risk, adventure and trouble—living on the edge. It was in the rough times that most miracles occurred and truth was revealed. It was while looking outward that a community of love and trust was built. Green pastures and still waters are only community building if they are experienced in the valley of death with the lion and the bear prowling around. [Dramatised reading of Heb 11 interrupted by “me and mine” type questions.]
And our Families
Of course people say some are too wounded, too vulnerable to be shaped by such a context. How do our children find the nurture they need? Sure, they are held within our love just as we are held within the love of God but how are we shaping our children’s lives with the gospel unless they see us outside our comfort zones. [Clip from Finding Nemo]
Life in an aquarium is ideal for tropical fish but how often do their proud owners come down in the morning to find that some small change in the environment has wiped them all out. So it is with our families. Facing challenges, not having things go right, sometimes having to wait in a queue for their parents because there are other people who need them more; these things make our kids tougher and show them what its like to follow Jesus.
Notes
These notes draw heavily from Alan Hirsch’s book, The Forgotten Ways.
Have enjoyed your comments, and agree that our/my focus needs to be on sharing the love of God with others, rather than having good friendships that meet my needs.
That was the essence for me as a Mish Kid, mostly joining in with what my parents were doing, rather than having opportunity to play with children my own age. At times it hurt and if i’m honest still does a little now and then, but i’ve had to learn that relationships are a gift from God. When you have them enjoy and appreciate them, when you don’t, don’t back away from people and become reclusive, rather say God what are you calling me to do at this time.
I would say that my experiences as a child being involved with my parents, has given me the desire to be involved in God’s Kingdom and gave me opportunity at an early age to see God at work and to be involved in bringing his love to people
Dave can you check Kingdom Community section there’s a th missing from an “e”. Cheers
Comment by Marion Sims — Thursday, 10 May, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
What if community was like being in an adopted family where diversity was accepted and differences were embraced.
What if community was like a family whose individuals were so secure in firm caring relationships that they could love others, particularly those outside of the community and could perhaps even take risks when forming more challenging relationships.
What if communities like families included fun activities just so people learnt to laugh together and later learnt to share a range of deeper emotions.
What if a community worked together and ate together like a family, so they had time to talk as well as serve.
What if a community like a family, was vulnerable enough to hug, to share spiritual insights and to guide each other in challenging directions.
What if a community used a range of ways of growing, changing, adapting rather than limiting themselves to organised activities.
Comment by chiquita — Wednesday, 30 May, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
Thanks for the comments, Chiquita.
What you say sounds great and a lot like the stuff I wrote up in a booklet about shared life back in the last century. We added in shared finances and mutual accountability too, to push us back to those heady days of the Jerusalem church.
In fact it all sounds heavenly–and we will probably have to wait until we get there for it to achieve the sort of ideal levels you describe.. The problem we found is that the kind of ‘me and mine’ community you describe was OK insofar as it went but was hugely self centred—a bit like family life—and when we got to look harder at the NT record it looks as though they didn’t really excel at the kind of things you are prioritising either.
One other thing, you seem to assume that people take a long time to make deep relationships. I can understand that with those who have suffered with a lot of rejection. But most of us find it quite easy to be open and make friends. Sure we get hurt. But we bounce back and do it all over again.
By the way you didn’t comment on the communitas idea. What do you think of that.
Comment by davehalls — Thursday, 7 June, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
It does sound heavenly but I am a realist, who chooses to aim high.
I described a community which would use its strengths and weakness, to reach out to those outside of the church community – nothing self-centred about that!
It’s a shame that you see the God-given concept of family, as self-centred. We try to bring people into our family rather than exclude them, which has brought forth encouraging responses, from a range of people.
Strangely the NT record shows the they didn’t excel at a lot of things, but that doesn’t mean we should stop trying to get it right.
Interesting that you interpreted the word “later” – which I believe means some time afterwards- as “long term”. Then after this, you go on to assume that all rejected people find it less difficult to be open, make friends, get hurt and bounce back -than yourself. I believe in a God who goes way beyond physical healing and enables the rejected to receive healing, so that this wound can become an incredible strength when building deep, lasting relationships, in a hurting world.
I didn’t comment on communitas as I have no idea what the word means. My spell checker was a bit confused, as well!
Comment by Chiquita — Tuesday, 12 June, 2007 @ 7:38 pm
Whoops- I didn’t use the word communitas in my initial post but that’s the idea of ‘me for community’. See the Frost link and join the world of Google for 432,000 hits!
I take your point on the NT. But I am not sure that community –as-I invite the people I choose into my house–is something they even aspired to.
I love all your stuff on inclusiveness, I’m just saying with lots of others that the whole intentional community thing in the house churches became a bit of a dead end! We actually felt we were doing better than other people because we had more people circulating around our homes. It really did become a mark of spiritual development when you pushed down a wall or two so you could get a bigger dining table. Nice. But it really didn’t have that much effect on the world outside.
I like my friend, Steve Clifford’s, comment. ‘Nuclear family should come with a health warning’. Family probably needs some defining–clan, tribe–all that stuff to work out what kind of concept God gave. (We can go there if you like). Not sure it was much like the ones we get today. Jesus got a bit sarky about some aspects. See Mk 3:31-34.
Glad you get compliments on family life. So do loads of us–but that just don’t prove nothing!
I don’t disagree that rejection is healable–that’s one of the reasons I’m in the business I am. I was just saying a lot of people I see all round me have the sharing, vulnerability, risk-taking stuff going down anyway. My point there was that the heavily intentional stuff may not always be necessary.
Keep the comments coming. Anybody else want to join in? Blogs are brilliant places to get misinterpreted!
Comment by davehalls — Tuesday, 12 June, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
“By the way you didn’t comment on the communitas idea. What do you think of that.”
Found at the end of your response to my initial comment on your blog!!!
Comment by Chiquita — Tuesday, 12 June, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
See what I mean about misunderstanding. I have edited my comment to make sense and give a bit more background to the house church scene. Incidentally, there’s a lot of stuff out there from the 1970s which makes the case of community.
Comment by davehalls — Tuesday, 12 June, 2007 @ 9:07 pm