From little c to Big C church...

Yesterday I wrote a review of George Barna's Revolution. Many fear that Barna dismisses the need for local churches. I don't know if Barna goes that far. What Barna dismantles are particular sociological expressions of church -- those of American congregationalism, rather than particular gatherings of believers. “Revolutionaries realize --- sometimes very reluctantly – that the core issue isn’t whether or not one is involved in a local church, but whether or not one is connected to the body of believers in the pursuit of godliness and worship." Barna writes that one needs to be connected to a body of believers in the pursuit of God, he doesn't say where and when, and his readers find that worrisome.

Technorati Tags: church, George Barna, globalization, modernity

Barna writes about small "c" church and big "C" church. "You see, it is not about church. It’s about the Church – that is, the people who actively participate in the intentional advancement of God’s kingdom in partnership with the Holy Spirit and other believers." Small “c” church represents those local believers with whom we seek to follow Christ together face-to-face, and big “C” church are those faceless
others with whom we follow Christ. Barna is right, the church has made a shift from small “c” to big “C”, however, not in absolute terms.

Barna seems to say we are either small "c" Christians or big "C" Christians. Instead, I see Christians on a spectrum with little "c" on the left end and big "C" on the right. The whole scale equals our participation in church. For the last few hundred years, be have continued to shift to the right on the scale. How so? I will list a few recent examples.

Many functions of local churches have been displaced by global “C” influences. Witness the many who download sermons from Rob Bell. Do these sermons function as ancillary activities for  these listeners, or do they significantly form them spiritually? Do we learn more about the faith from our pastor's sermon or from theological books or online communities? The same goes with music – is our primary musical expression of worship in the Sunday meeting, or do we connect with God through many other sources? For many, itunes functions as worship leader. In terms of community, do we experience community within our “official” local church, or do we share connections with many others, including friendships, occasional gatherings, and online conversations? Indeed, we are formed by the many activities of which we are a part – and our connections of church are global and go beyond the  'brick and mortar' of Sunday morning.

Modernity stretches space so that more of our lives are connected to those with whom we do not share a face-to-face relationship. The church has stretched as well, so that much of how we pursue God works within relationships transcends local church walls. Many Christians seem afraid to acknowledge this.

Barna summarizes his ideas with …"the Revolution is about recognizing that we are not called to go to church. We are called to be the Church.” Indeed, Christians need other believers in order to
be a sign, to point to, and our best days, to be a foretaste of the coming kingdom. Christians continue Jesus' mission in diverse ways, both locally and globally, through face-to-face and faceless
commitments. To call one 'real' church and the other secondary belittles the significance of the global body of Christ. Just as modernity stretches space, we need to stretch our thinking on what it
means to be the church in a globalized era.

Comments

[JR Rozko]

Although I can concur with everything Ryan is saying here, I am gonna go ahead and chime as one of those people who does think Barna went too far.

I offered a review of this book last year which you can find here - http://lifeasmission.com/blog/archives/130

Here's 1 paragraph from my post that encapsulate how I think he went too far...

"More than anywhere else, he loses me when he says, 'So if you are a Revolutionary, it is becasue you have sensed and responded to God’s calling to be such an imitator of Christ. It is not the church’s responsibility to make you into this mold. You are responsible for who you are…it is a covenant you make with God alone.'" - from pg. 70.

Notice how many times he mentions "you"? To me this signifies Barna's all too un-theological adoption of a personal sort of spirituality whereby individuals, quite apart from the life of a Christian community committed to sharing life and engaging in mission together, are responsible for their own relationship with God. Regrdless of how many different sources might be influencing our spiritual journey, there can be no substitute for the spiritual maturity which stems from living as a pat of a community committed to following Jesus in its life and mission together.

[Ryan]

JR -- agreed -- by signing on to the global nature of the church, I was not signing on to the individualism implied in Barna's work...

[zane anderson]

Barna doesn't dismiss the local church at all. Even though his book was subtitled something about finding faith beyond the church walls, he later ascertained (on his website) that 80% of the Revolutionaries were still connected to traditional churches.

Godspeed!

[David]

I attend what some have called a "seeker friendly" church. First, let me say that I grew up with the "do's and don'ts" type and I don't want to go back to that.

However, the basics of God's word was taught unlike today's "contemporary relavent messages" which are so watered down one hardly recognizes it to be a gospel message or lesson. I feel like I'm back at work listening to a sales presentation which has been rehearsed over and over. The scripture says the church has been given various offices for "the perfecting of the saints". I don't see it happening in my church. Lots of programs, yes, but if it effective long term?

I am convinced that many come for the beat of the music. In most cases, the songs do not uplift or magnify the name of Christ. The songs have no depth.

I love the great hymns and the scripure choruses that came in the '70's because they are rooted in the word of God and personal experiences. Our church doesn't blend the old with the new.

An acquaintance of my said, "I like our church because I'm never made to feel guilty". No, I don't want to be hammered every Sunday morning but little is said about the redemptive work of Christ and very little opportunity to accept Christ.

I'm also concerned about the lack of reverence in the place of worship. Often I feel like I'm at a rock concert, sporting event, picnic. The casualness that has crept in is alarming. No, I don't wear a three piece suit to church but neither do go any less than I would go to my office before I retired.

I do wonder where all this is going. All I know is that my wife and I get more from certain TV programs than we do in our seeker friendly church...and that's sad.

[Donald Joseph Wilkins]

Good review, definately an important topic.

I have a quick comment / question (Socratic Comment).

Does Barna actually say that? I understand that Barna emphasized taking personal ownership for your life and it being your responsibility, not someone else's, for you to committ to living the unconventional life that God calls us to.

But is this the same thing as Barna suggesting that we should try and live that out alone?? Surely not. Those are two different things. Further, Barna quite clearly, as Ryan, you cover in your review, emphasies the importance of community (deep friendship / companionship with other believers, a life of service / others focus, and generosity.)

Ask Barna and I'd bet he'd quickly tell you, he did not intend for you to walk away with an impression to the contrary.

Just a quick thought.

[Bart Breen]

Just chiming in with the observation that Barna answers many of the questions that some are raising with regard to how he views the Institutional Church in Pagan Christianity by George Barna and Frank Viola.

The corallary to that work Reimagining Church, is by Frank Viola alone, but I think it can fairly be said to reflect some of Barna's thinking as well.

I can understand the difficulty in grappling with some of these things given a Seminary's reliance upon the institutional church and the majority of students preparing for some form of formal clergy position or role.

However in all three works, (the two cited above and Barna's Revolution) I didn't see or sense that it was presented as an absolute that one couldn't or shouldn't attend or work within the organization. I think what some are responding so strongly against and extending out beyond what was said, is that it is not required that one work within the context of an organized local church or denomination and further that a large and increasing number are chosing to leave or not to come in the first place.

That's highly threatening to those who have confused the organization with the organism and especially threatening to those who draw their security and livelihood from that organization to any degree whether fiscally, physically, spiritually or psychologically. I know. I've been there.