Bože!

Thanks to Lyngine for forwarding this rather interesting article from Newsweek to me. Lisa Miller (the article’s author) writes that a recent Pew Forum study shows that 7 percent of Americans worship in small groups in house churches rather than attending larger gatherings/congregational settings.

The article goes on to explore some of the reasons – the era of the mega church is over, one size does not fit all when it comes to worship & spirituality, and the rigid institutionalism of “traditional” denomonations distracts and deterrs the faithful.

What was interesting to me however, from an OC/IC perspective is the analogy between mega-church and micro-church and big brand beer, and micro-breweries. A bit flimsy at first but lets think about the branding ideas, the backround imagery for a moment. When you think micro-brewery, you think small, local producer, you think quality, traditional manufacturing but quirky enough to bend a bit here, and be flexible there.

Hmmm . . . perhaps this is not such a bad analogy aferall. Perhaps this is a decent working image set for an indie community to use to draw up an outreach plan for 2010?

Thanks to Siobhan, we’ve got this rather neat article on indie folk in CO.

This morning’s rounds turned up two curious pieces of news.

Firstly, FaithLab reports that Daniel Akin, the president of the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary  wants Baptists to have more babies – in order to numerically overwhelm the growing Muslim population in the US. Europe – he suggests, will be taken over by “the Muslims” without a shot being fired because “white” people are not having babies. It’s merely a matter of simple mathematics – he argues. Ummmmm, yeah. . . . no, not so much. It is however, a matter of oversimplification, racism, and a misguided belief that quantity equals quality. There are too many impoverished children in the US as it is (check here and here), too many children and teens go unloved, and undervalued. As I understand the Gospels Jesus taught us to value one another, to invest in real relationships, and to be hospitable to the stranger because in the “space” in between those interactions is where we meet God “in the flesh”. We ought not to care about their particular faith tradition – rather we ought to “be” Christ for them and relieve their suffering. Pushing for more babies in a society that has very real problems providing safe, healthy, balanced lives for the one’s it already has is grossly irresponsible.

Secondly, the Barna Group has released a survey that has some interesting numbers – which might be useful for OC/IC communities. Here are the ones which grabbed my attention:

• 75% of Americans believe that God is “motivating” them to seek communion with him through new methods and experiences.
• 64% are completely open to pursuing faith in an environment that differs from a “typical church”.
• 50% are bored with the “typical” church experience
• 71% are likely to develop their religious beliefs on their own – rather than accepting the slate of a particular church.

These figures would appear to support a position that I’ve been promoting here for over a year now, and that is that more and more people are using the internet to explore their faith; eschewing to one degree or another “traditional” worship settings and experiences. This means that OC/IC communities MUST have a thoughtful, creative, active on-line presence if we are to bring our frequently “alternative” experiences and methods of being church, being community to those seeking to engage with their faith in new ways. I should add here that such efforts would probably be more effective if we strive to not mimic the efforts, and style of “Big Tent” churches but develop our own methods highlighting the creativity and talent of our individual communities and missions.

The survey also raises interesting questions about our methods of outreach on the ground. That is, how are we sharing our story, our way of faith, in the flesh, with the people we meet? How are we going out to meet them? Are we simply repeating the methods of the churches many of us originated in; if so what might we do differently? Maybe, we could make the whole process easier and just have babies?
Finally, I’m writing this from the UK – the home of the modern heathen – so I’m sitting here wondering – what would the numbers look like if Barna did the same survey here?

This series of three short posts by Bp. Alan Wilson (Anglican) is well worth reading and sitting with. We talk alot both here, and amongst ourselves in other places about the longevity of OC/IC communities – what it means to be “in community” and how we can re-vision some of our ideas about being ekklesia in our context.

Using Benedictine ideas, Bp. Alan explores “obedience” and “stability” placing them at the heart of the life of a community. Have a read – then come back and share your thoughts and ideas.

Back in the 90’s there was a marked shift in religious life and thinking in the US. This lead many in the indie movement to speculate that this would bring more members into OC/IC communities. But did it – really? My experience was that it really made no difference at all – but perhaps this was due to the nature of where I was (DC) and the demographics of the people who came to our local parish.

The other question of course was did we really want disaffected Episcopalians, and Roman Catholics swelling the ranks of OC/IC communities? Again, experience suggests, that no, we did not, largely because we were not, at that time, strong enough in our own self identification to be able to not be overwhelmed by the psychological and spiritual baggage that this group presents when shifting denominational allegiance.

Over the past three weeks there have been a number of articles and studies released suggesting that religious belief, and denominational loyalty have suffered over the past decade in the US. I live in the UK where there is almost no Christianity to speak of – and what there is, is increasingly frightening in its radicalism and narrow mindedness. A number of articles have been even more “apocalyptic” speculating that within the next decade we will see the collapse of evangelical/protestant Christianity in the US, and an acceleration of splintering and radicalisation of the remnants of the faith there.

Not wanting to sound like the circling vultures I’m sitting here wondering how this might affect our communities? There is a suggestion in these studies, and earlier ones that the indie movement is seeing an upsurge of growth over the past ten years. A quick survey of the indie presence in my old stomping grounds in the states, while un-scientific to be sure, suggests this is true. There is also an increased probability of negative affects – just as in the shift observed 10 years ago, we might be overcome by issues and identifications of “other” traditions, which are incompatible with our own. Are we ready; are we stronger now in our sense of self-identification and “worth” than we were a decade ago? If not – what can we do collaboratively now, to lay the foundations for a better future?

I’ve stumbled across two articles this week related to Ekklesia 2.0 (a long running topic here) which are worth a read – and I hope, some discussion. The first is from Christian Today reporting on a recent meeting on “Web Church” such as St. Pixels a project of the Methodist Church in Britain, and iChurch a project of the Anglican diocese of Oxford, that actively bring people together for prayer, fellowship, discussion and study online. Meeting participants discussed familiar challenges such as difficult participants, time commitments, and community cohesiveness. They also explored issues of effectiveness of the project (which we’ve talked about here to some extent). The second article comes from Newsweek and picks up an important thread that we’ve talked about here, and that participants of the Web Church meeting raised, that is, about the “embodiment” of church – thus, touching on ideas of sacramentality.

Two years ago our community experimented with a bi-weekly evening prayer via SKYPE. It was a great experience that brought members together scattered across two continents for prayer and fellowship. Our project also empowered individual members to explore new ways of contributing to the life of the wider community by taking on roles of organising the gathering and/or the discussion afterward. Other OC/IC communities such as the ICCC have recently embarked on similar projects.

It is fair to say that the online assembly, when done well, is sacrament. I do think that there will always be an important need for a live embodied presence of the assembly. Baptism, eucharist, ordination, marriage, adelphopoeisis, these are the core rites of the church, and always serve as a reminder of the intimate, interpersonal connection we share as the “body” of Christ in the World. It seems to me that they cannot be effectively, or validly imparted on line.

Web Church does raise some interesting questions about the awareness of being sacramental, about being community, and about the incarnality of being the ekklesia. What do you think about Web Church? Is it merely an outreach tool? Can it become (as it is for some already) an exclusive experience of “being church”?

There has been a small flood of articles on “conversion” in today’s religious news round-up. The two that caught my eye are a BBC report (here) on the Church of England’s consideration of a motion re-emphasising its explicit aim of converting people to Christianity; and Andrew Brown’s post (here on Guardian CIFBelief) reflecting on “evangelisation” in relation to the CofE motion. In his post Brown makes a rather thought-provoking observation:

In practice, though, conversion is hardly ever about intellectual conviction, whether it is to or away from Christianity, though it does seem to be more often intellectual when it is to atheism. But it is overwhelmingly about joining a tribe or a people and about shifting affections and allegiances rather than ideas. Conversion to Christianity or to Islam results when people find a tribe or a family they want to belong to; and it is worth noticing that the kinds of religions that concentrate most on conversion also simplify their doctrines as much as possible.

I love this quote, from an Imam interviewed for the BBC piece: “Any religion that believes it’s going to bring tangible benefits – peace, satisfaction and understanding in this life and the next – would like to share that.” Yes absolutely.

What I find curious though is that in our OC/IC context you don’t often see a discussion of outreach outside of the internal conversation of the local community – why? Could it be that all pervasive sense of isolation many congregations and projects feel? Maybe it is grounded in the thick layers of mistrust that have accumulated within the movement over the past few decades? Perhaps it is because so many of our “members” are ashamed or embarrassed about their links to the movement – “let’s just keep this quiet, amongst ourselves shall we”?

Let me throw open the door here and ask – what does your local community do to introduce people to the idea of OC/IC community? What challenges have you encountered? What did you do to overcome them (or better – which ones would you like some ideas on)?

Last week Lyngine commented: “I’m leaning towards the idea that it may hinge on teaching/helping individual clergy and laity to cultivate a strong, grounded spiritual life and how to sustain that as an OC/IC priest or lay person in the midst of isolation—ministry then flows from that—-if the strong spiritual/religious grounding isn’t there or can’t be sustained, then the rest of it falls apart anyway.”

Cultivating a living grounded spiritual life is, I agree an essential element of stability. I think it falls into that category of “this is what we do as a sacramental community” (emphasis on community). There are some elements of this that are I think worth unpacking – the phrase is deceptively short and simple. What is the spiritual life? What does it do? What does it express about our theology? How does it influence our praxis?

Where this gets really interesting is when we begin reflecting on the inherited language, images, and practices we bring to our new life in an OC/IC community. How often do we individually and collectively sit and ask: is this practice, custom, point of theology, a living example of an OC/IC ethos – or do we do it/keep it because it is “known” and “comfortable”?

I’m not suggesting that we re-invent the wheel here. What I am suggesting is that we are happily free to keep those ideas and practices that cultivate our living spirituality and nurture our identity as OC/IC folk, while leaving the baggage, dead weights, and plain nutty rubbish outside. Indeed, sometimes, it is necessary to pick up a broom and sweep away these things.

The caveat of course is that this process of pruning can only be effective in the context of a well informed, connected community. Too often it seems to me, this essential element is missing – so what ought to be an exercise in cultivating positive results, actually leads to strife, and dissolution.

A solution would be to, as a collective effort, cultivate scholarship, and to draw upon those resources in the local, and wider OC/IC community. This again is another step towards breaking down that terrible wall of isolation many communities, and individuals feel and observe.

Stability within our communities is and has always been a challenge, created in part by small group dynamics. The vast majority of OC/IC projects have 20 people or less. This means that unless a higher proportion of the assembly is “committed” to the project – any minor fluctuation in say membership or even attendance can be demoralising. Congregations in the Big Tent Churches average between 75 and 50 members (there are notable exceptions) which means that a smaller proportion of their membership needs to get their hands dirty for the whole project to maintain a stable momentum, and not experience negative effects caused by fluctuations in membership and attendance.

How do we overcome this challenge of group dynamics? One answer is to grow the community. However, large communities are not the norm within our tradition – and most of us like it that way. We’ve been discussing (here) ideas of identity over the past few weeks, and I think that there is a connection between stability in our movement and what we see as the defining marks of our identity (perhaps the topic of another post).

If a higher proportion of members and participants strongly identify with the OC/IC “brand” (both locally, and on the wider stage) then it seems there is a real possibility of a project surviving and thriving in the face of the challenges presented by fluctuations in attendance and membership. If on the other hand a higher proportion of members and participants are actually incomers (this community is merely convenient) the result can create real challenges for the project and it might not successfully adapt.

My community in DC (which had 15 regulars and an odd handful of intermittent attendees) literally died when I went to study in the UK for 5 months. I thought everything was in place for them to carry on as usual without me – they had a deacon, a priest was only 15 min away if they needed him, they had access to the worship space, and they knew what to do. I even thought that my absence would encourage them to explore new directions and fresh ideas. The community was unable to adapt to a brief, planned absence, of one member, and fell apart.

Take this problem in a different direction. How often do members (not participants or incomers) move away and begin a project in a new place? In my experience, unless they are in orders, never; and it is rare even when they are in orders. Why is this the case? Is it because our bishops and synods are unable or unwilling to support such projects? Do we not encourage them enough? One of my working theories has to do with the sense of isolation OC/IC clergy and communities “feel” living in our tradition – but that will have to wait for another post.

It would be helpful, for all of us, if we were to collaborate and explore ways that we – together can cultivate stability in our movement. The challenge of small group dynamics currently, un-necessarily “clips” any momentum a community or synod might develop.

Any ideas?

Making my morning rounds recently I’ve been struck by the number of essays, news items, and “other” that in one way or another touch on the idea of why religion matters to us, to the world around us. This morning, for example I read a discussion guide of Krista Tippet’s book Speaking of Faith: Why Religion Matters – and How to Talk About It. Not long ago in the Guardian’s belief section, one writers commented on how contemporary Christianity has lost its sense of purpose. The Pew Forum’s site on Religion and Public Life too – often touches on why religion matters – not only to its adherents, but also to the “Public Square”.

I have been asked on more than one occasion recently to answer the question – why does religion matter – or more spcifically, why does the church, “this church” matter? What does it “do”?

Having thought about it off and on over the past weeks and months – I am struck by one thing. Unlike most other traditions, whose adherants often have a particular style of answer: a vocabulary, a turn of phrase, a particular point of reference, as an OC/IC beleiver I find it is more challenging to answer the question.

How do you talk about your experience of faith, and the value of life in our community? What vocabulary do you find yourself using that you’ve also noticed other OC/IC folk using? What has been your experience of other people’s reactions to your sharing your religious experiences – discovering that it is completely out of the expected collection of traditions and denomonations?