Church Drunk Love

Check out my Christian Parenting Blog right here.





What happens when an environemnt good for some things to grow is, at the same time, toxic for others to grow?

For example, palm trees don't do so well in Minnesota (or any cold region). Or, alcoholics don't do well in bars.

When there is a problem, most people's initial response is to assign blame, decide on a winnder, and try to fit everything else into that model. If palm trees don't grow in Minnesota, then there must either be a problem with palm trees or Minnesota. If someone who has a weakness for alcohol, they must be flawed, or else alcohol itself is evil. So, then the hunt is on to figure who is right, who is wrong, and how to decisively determine this with empirical evidence.

This "who's to blame?" response is natural, but is not actually helpful. It's a tool of the modern era that is power-centered, hierarchical, and oppressive.

Although you could go on forever trying to determine who is to blame, even if you could find the answer to the question, pursuing that answer completely misses the point. It's not that the environment is necessarily evil, nor is it that the object in the environment is necessarily evil either, but rather the combination can be said to have poor results.

Let me transfer this dynamic to church life. Some people thrive in large megachurches. They take comfort in large numbers, in well-oiled programs, slick marketing, and so forth. However, some people just drown in this mass of bodies, the feeling of personal smallness, in the massive amounts of energy it requires to keep the Queen Mary afloat.

So, is the problem with megachurches or with "weak" people?

Let's jump over to the other metaphor. What if megachurch is the bar the person who gets drawn toward too much alcohol (too much church) should never go? What if this person is too easily drawn into church pride, frantic activity, perfectionism, etc that it drains the soul of its love and energy and spirit? What this person really craves is a small community of loving people - sips of "church" not gulps.

I really like the part of the emergent order that says, "We are committed to honor and serve the church in all its forms... rather than favoring some forms of the church and critiquing or rejecting others." There is room for megachurches, for house churches, for denominations, for all kinds of churches in the church.

The effective result of affirming the church in all of its forms is affirming people in all of their forms. There is no one right way to do church for all people, but there is a church form that is more suitable for certain person types. And if there is a person for whom no church structure is a fit, then more new churches need to be planted.

To cram a person into a church type that does not help, but actually causes damage to them is not at all what Jesus had in mind for the church. Forms are unavoidable, but declaring that one form is best for all people is completely avoidable.

We need every possible variety of church because there are so many kinds of people. That is why the era of cookie cutter churches is over. New churches in the emerging culture are opening the door to people for whom church has been toxic. Oh yes!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you want to learn more about this kind of deep ecclesiology, go get a book calld, "A Generous Orthodoxy," by Brian McLaren and also begin reading the Tall Skinny Kiwi's series beginning here.