Reimagining Church : whom do we serve?

These are notes and, more importantly, questions drawn from a Church on the Margins discussion on 28 May 2020. The key questions Whom do we serve?

How is the Church being missed today?

At Pentecost there were three important facets:

Inclusion, of Gentiles and Jews, of women and men; but who defines the boundaries today? Do we welcome, not merely accept or even tolerate the LGBTQ community, what of those disabled (and not just physically)

Margins, for those on the margins were not only able to speak but were heard. The voice of the migrant is often lost in the noise of the privileged.

Language: God didn’t speak the language of the Hebrews, nor Aramaic but the languages of those on the margins. Do we?

What can we learn from our own community?
Will we ask them?

Some responses from an online church, with more than 5000 followers, already demonstrated that, in their case, Twitter was a fertile and welcoming ground for those who were disabled. The language heard from some mainstream traditional churches is that there is insufficient money and time to accommodate everybody – despite the Equality Act.

Some rural churches found that the community missed the focal meeting point, as the building offered permanence, an institutional symbol in the history of their town.

The Online services may have observed an increase in the number of people attending, but some would question whether they were an hour’s service or an online community where spirituality was evident.

One metaphor was of elasticity. We need to be careful that the elastic band around this new form of church today doesn’t return, when released, to its shape it was before.

What dreams might we have for the Church today?

Some sought a liquid church, one that would meld and flow to accommodate those who expressed a desire to participate in common interests. Fluid was key word.

Whether that be with the environment, climate change including XR, LGBTQ, creative writing and/or mindfulness, the reason for providing such a resource was not to “reach out and pull them back into the safety of the sanctuary”. The phrase of Churched, DeChurched and UnChurched may not now be the language of the community; moreover, it may be considered rude and insensitive. Those who may not wish to associate with traditional church today, may still have a faith but prefer to be fluid in their attendance of activities – not seeking formal membership.

The first Pentecost Christians weren’t card-carrying members either.

Lastly there was an interesting discussion relating to Doughnut Economics. This aspect of a perspective from societal politics towards church is quite a jump but one that is gaining favour from a number of people.

Whom do we serve?

The bottom line, other than “elastic fluid doughnuts”, was one in which people sought an inclusive community who would:

Listen well, love lots,
Be real, be authentic
Walking alongside each other

but without the agenda of “bums on seats”

What are your thoughts?