4/7InkzHVUEQeEdU9vpc1tikzEhChrKmPfvXI-FSDBrBQ

Church dialog

Transforming Trends in the Modern World-3

medium_32325828TREND 3
The need for an authentic story as the number of sources increases.

Here’s where a Church hierarchy can still play an important role.

Since the beginning of the Church there were offshoots of Christianity to deal with. Separate groups of followers had a different story to tell. Much of early Church history is about deciding exactly which group is telling the most authentic story.

Early leaders looked for sources with the most direct connections with Christ. They sought to verify connections. That’s how we arrived at today’s approved Bible, which isn’t about to change soon. Nevertheless, scholars with the help of archeologists still find new texts to add to our knowledge of the early Church.

For example, most Protestant churches teach very little from the Apocrypha. Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions include these books.

The challenge for today’s Church is that the Church is accustomed to dictating what the true story is. They will now have to live in a world that challenges their authority.

That’s most easily done in an atmosphere of open dialog. Dialog is easy in today’s world, but the Church needs to be where the people are—and it’s not in church on Sunday morning.

The Church is inexperienced at open dialog. How much dialog really happens at Synod Assemblies or Church-wide Assemblies? They are pretty well orchestrated to limit dialog.

Frequently, dialog is open in the Church only on approved topics and only up to a point. The cast of players is hand-chosen and properly vetted.

The parameters of the dialog are likely to be narrow and the results are likely to be predictable. Their discussions may be published, but few will read them. The people in the pew know their input is not particularly welcome. Why bother? The dialog was taking place so that we could all be told what to think and believe.

Yet it was never more important. The Scriptures can be easily distorted for selfish purposes. Every 10-year-old holds in his or her hands tools more powerful than ever before in history.

The telling of the story is often a tool of charismatic people who crave control, power or are following any number of dangerous urges. This is how cults gain traction. Cults can be big movements. They can exist in little congregations. They can be led by outsiders. They can be led by church leaders.

The Church won’t be able to check this if they aren’t part of the dialog. When they abandon churches—waiting for them to die, they open the door to all kinds of potential bad teaching.

It may seem insignificant. After all, they are waiting for churches to die. What does it matter?

But the damage can be devastating—even life-threatening. The stories of loving parents following the lead of faith healers right until their child (or children) die regularly make the news. So, too, the stories of innocent youth lured into inappropriate situations.

The Church needs to address this on every level. The story must be told nationally and internationally, regionally and in every neighborhood congregation. Every congregation must (and can) be part of the ongoing dialog of faith.

Faith is a delicate thing. Handle carefully.

photo credit: mnadi via photopin cc

The Church’s Missing Silver Bullet—Dialog

The Church Is Ill-prepared for the 21st Century

The Church is coming kicking and screaming into the Digital Age.

It carries historical baggage that is making the journey very difficult—and is causing the Church to miss out on tremendous opportunity.

The Church is entering the Social Media Age with a long tradition of one-way dialog.

Most of us know that by definition “dialog” is two-way.

But the Church does not know this. That’s why it seems perfectly natural for a pope to Tweet to his followers but announce before clicking “Enter” on his first message that he has no intention of following.

Church leaders tend to think that when they are standing in the pulpit they are engaging their listeners. That’s their idea of dialog.

Church leaders tend to extend the pulpit to all other interaction with congregations. Meetings and Assemblies are carefully managed.

Ridiculously short time restrictions prevent dialog.

There is a vetting process for who will engage in church dialog. Clergy get first access. Lay people with a proven track record of support for clergy get second place. There is no third place.

In our region and denomination, it was the custom of our present and last bishop to bypass the elected leaders of a congregation and request to speak to the whole congregation. Request is not the right word—demand is more accurate.

The strategy sounds so open and democratic. It is in fact manipulative.

It is disrespectful to the elected leaders who know the congregation’s issues the best and are elected to represent the interests of the congregation—the whole congregation.

It engages congregational members with less knowledge of issues and various levels of commitment to the total mission of a congregation. As they view the disrespect shown for the congregation’s leaders, they are appropriately fearful of speaking out.

Dialog is shut down.

Church leaders are fooled into thinking they have led people. They have intimidated people.

What might happen if the church leaders came to congregational leaders with one simple question—How can we help?

What might happen if they then sat back and listened?

It may be the single most important step in achieving transformation.

This has never been easier or more possible—however unlikely.

The Church needs to buy a pair of listening ears. They are rare but not expensive.