Over at Restless Wanderings, Bruce has a most interesting post entitled "Does the Church Matter?" In said post, he discusses the fact that many small churches are increasingly suffering from low attendance and he asks the question of why churches in this position don't merge.
In this same vein, the pastor of Church A doesn't think the pastor at Church B puts enough emphasis on one thing, while the pastor at Church B knows the pastor at Church A has it all wrong about another thing. So, they smile at each other at the weekly Lion's Club meeting, while knowing in their heart of hearts that only their brand of their shared religion is the true one.
So why don’t Churches merge? Why don’t they join hands with another congregation in advancing the kingdom of their God? Surely, the most important thing is doing God’s work in the community? The answer (s) to these questions reveals to me the sad, sordid reality of many Churches.I think these are all viable reasons, but in my opinion (as I noted in the comments section), there is one other key reason:
Small Churches don’t merge together for many reasons:
* They don’t want to lose their building
* They don’t want to lose their pastor
* They don’t want to lose power
* They don’t want to lose control
* They don’t want to lose the checkbook
For me, I believe the reason that churches don’t merge is because Christians really don’t trust each other. Each church thinks they have found the ultimate truth and they don’t trust that any other church has.I find it ironic and a bit amusing that, while a lot of stress is placed on the fact that the Christian faith represents a large family, this family doesn't seem to like each other very well. They act like a disgruntled group at a family reunion. Aunt Judy won't sit next to cousin Nathan because he farts all the time and father Jim has utter contempt for his wife's sister and her kids.
Anytime two or more groups decide to come together as one, all sides need to do a bit of compromising. But how can a church that possesses the “ultimate truth” compromise? That would be tantamount to turning their backs on all they believe!!
In this same vein, the pastor of Church A doesn't think the pastor at Church B puts enough emphasis on one thing, while the pastor at Church B knows the pastor at Church A has it all wrong about another thing. So, they smile at each other at the weekly Lion's Club meeting, while knowing in their heart of hearts that only their brand of their shared religion is the true one.
There is probably a lot of truth to your statement. It would perhaps be a lot better if they changed their outlook into embracing a multi-polar religosity, where there are different dialects of truth and no "ultimate truth" can be known to any one man.
ReplyDeleteChurnches become small when they don't fill the real need of community. A churches' doors need to be open other times than Sunday mornings. Our local church at least has a preschool -- but it could do more, be open for the older latchkey kids, be open for people with problems to come in nd talk to someone, etc. I don't see why they close the other six days of the week.
ReplyDeleteSuecae,
ReplyDeleteIf it was multi-faceted, it wouldn't be 'ol time Christianity. :)
Donna,
Some churches do have a lot of programs. What it comes down to is money and volunteers. As many churches grow smaller, they find themselves in short supply of both.
Trey,
ReplyDeleteGood point.
Churches have a lot of strife. So much of it is unneeded, petty, and counterproductive.
I only pastored one Church I would have described as "peaceful."
Bruce
Schism is just the natural development in the Christian chruch, it seems, like the branching of a tree. Every decade or so, there is talk of reunification of Anglicans and Romans...but there are just some points on which they will NEVER agree (usally about sex and authority), and the schism just continues (certainly on the Anglican side.)
ReplyDelete