Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Q: Can you build community?

A: Not if that's your only goal.

I want to post a bit more on the topic of community in church just to get my thoughts written down. The first thing I want to take on is the word "fellowship". In my last post I talked about not really understanding what that word really means. Actually, I was wrong. I think "fellowship" is one of the many (hundreds?) of code words that Christians use, and for most people the model that is exhibited by the church they attend is fellowship. It is what is meant by that word when they say it. When I asked if community in church was simply "Pot luck dinners and voters meetings? Charity drives and once-a-week gatherings?", the answer for most people is "Yes" and even more that is what they want it to be. Because unlike family or friends, you can close your life off to your "fellows" and simply treat them as a lightweight social club, interacting when you wish and ignoring them otherwise - they have nothing to do with your "real life", nor you theirs. The wonderful, transforming, communal excitement of the early church has warped into this bland mingling of bland people talking about bland things - a fraternal association without the benefit of drinking to help you like each other more.

A symptom that a church may have "scaled" beyond any simple sense of community is when it tries to build community through artificial programs aimed solely at that. For example, in our church we have "groups of eight". These are groups of four couples who then have dinner together once a month for a given period of time (four or five months - enough for a rotation through all the households) and then every six months or a year the groups re-form with new sets or permutation of couples. The idea is by these small groups sharing a monthly meal together outside of church that they would get to know each other more as people. This would be a great idea if it were organic - if four couples (or three, or two) met in church, liked each other, and chose to do it. But as an official, sanctioned program with a sponsoring board and notices in the bulletin it feels very much of the "now everybody get together and play nice" variety of forced interaction.

These kinds of programs smack of the corporate "team building" exercises many of you may have had to sit through. How effective are those, do you think? I can't think of a single one in my entire career where I walked out of it now friends with someone I wasn't when I went in. Because here's the deal - you go into the event, do the silly group exercises, laugh and have a good time, and then walk back out into the "real world" and that other guy is still a jerk on the job (or I am still the jerk - quite possible!). Perhaps these types of activities do work for some. I have a suspicion they work for extroverts, who, one will note, are exactly the people who don't need such things. But they don't work for me. In business I am just too jaded, cynical and observant to allow myself to think that an hour or two of some sort of "exercise" trumps the remaining 2,000 hours of a work year spent together and all that happens there. Now think about church, where most of us who are not paid church staff don't come close to spending 40 hours a week there. It is going to be doubly hard to build community then because not only is it being artificially constructed but the time allocated is much too small.

So, can there be community in church? Absolutely. But I don't think it comes from any attempt to build community. It comes from actually working on something together over a period of time, and it happens only to those people who are doing the work. In my prior post I talked about lifelong church members (of a specific congregation) vs. those who come into a church as an adult. The lifelong members have a true advantage simply because they've had that much more time. Time to grow up going to VBS or summer camps and mission trips together. Time to serve on boards together. Time to do charity work together. Time, time, time. Not programs. You can't just turn on the "Fellowship Faucet" and expect friendship and love to pour out. And even with all that time the "lifers" aren't going to be engaged with every single other person in the church. So how does a newcomer stand a chance?

Is there no place for programs? I think there still may be, but mostly aimed at making sure those invisible, unsexy members of the church, like shut-ins, are still visited and made to feel part of the community. And note - it isn't "community" that should be the focus then - it is the person. If your goal starting out is community you won't get it. If your goal is knowing, befriending and ultimately loving others, you may achieve some success there, but I don't see how it can ever be a real fellowship between all members, at least not in a medium-to-large church. If you want to experience that small churches are where it's at. Or maybe not. It comes down to it being plain hard to not just love each other as we are commanded, but to actually like each other, too. And that's especially hard at church where we don't expose our real selves anyway.

That's it for now. I am still rambling here, trying to process some of what I have been seeing and experiencing over the past few years. Comments welcome.

6 comments:

ccjjharmon said...

What is fellowship? - that is a good question. It does seem by default to be a lightweight social club unless you push for more... like you said though, you'll do that *if* you're an extrovert. I tend to go that way and do push for more. Sometimes I get it, sometimes not (but I usually continue to push).

I've never heard or thought in the way you describe "artificial programs" aimed at community, but my church I guess does just that. I've been told it's more or less random on assignment for those that we're interested. In my opinion though, this is somewhat organic - since it's really totally optional for anyone to come. Some can't make it sometimes and don't. There is some sort of guide on what the groups all talk about right now, but a little later on it will be totally up to each group.

I'm really into the idea of a small group. It *is* the church in my opinion. You got to do stuff together too. GOT TO. Something everyone would like. I want to do more of that, but we haven't yet been able to as much. Like just go and watch a movie sometime after group (a previous small group we were part of in Ohio did that, but the facilitator/lead guy was HUGELY into movies and we did that a few times by going to see a $1 movie showing at 10pm/midnight... totally nuts but really great). Not just fun stuff though - also serious stuff. We recently (well over a month ago actually) planned and served dinner at a local home for homeless recovering from the hospital. One get-together our main lead/facilitator was out and myself and the co-lead/facilitator got together to review the notes - and spent probably 3 hours just talking about all kinds of stuff. That is ***it** - the building block of fellowship. TIME.

Something I recently have been feeling "led" to do I had mentioned to group - primarily one person. I believe she's gung-ho the same way I am and will be joining me next time (you've read about it - it involves the homeless). But the rest of the group I *think* will help by getting together some items they don't need. I'd simply love it if our entire group would all go down to that park together, but actually if it were just those that *really* wanted to go - that probably really would be better, you know? I don't think it should be a required thing to do together - but only if you feel really called to it. Like going and being part of this "small group"...

Back to more of what you wrote - the introvert - what about them? I can specifically think of one person who I believe has said she wants to be part of a group, but for reasons I probably will never fully understand, hasn't gone. I've talked with her a bit, but really without getting together with her outside of the Sunday get-together where I only find myself having a few minutes to talk, I'll never know. But isn't it all about the person?? It's she extremely important!? I need to do that. Or someone.... too bad it's just way too easy to write it off just like I typed ("or someone"), isn't it?

We need more activities that are ad-hoc ... unplanned. You just call someone and make it happen. I still like the church-planned stuff like potluck dinners even though we've found them hard to talk with others since our kids are still little enough that we have to find them every few minutes :)

Jim said...

Chris,

I do think time together is the key. Time to hang out as well as to do "real mission". However, it comes down to this (and I think I will blog about this some more later) - am I willing to invest the real amount of time it is going to take? Because to do that means basically dividing my life into four things.

1) Family

2) Work

3) Church

4) Sleep

The above are not in the order of importance they should be, although I would note they are in some sense in "trump order" (family trumps all, work trumps church and sleep, etc.) We should all place God first in our lives, but I am not so sure that means placing CHURCH first. Not organized church, anyway. So, along with all the other issues fighting against developing true fellowship, the time we both agree is required is also demanded by other things in our lives. And also has demands on those with whom we want to spend that time and build that fellowship.

So then it becomes a multi-way scheduling problem, and ultimately we all give up and just schedule in Sunday mornings (or evenings in our case), and perhaps one or two other nights a week, and hey, let's throw in a board meeting and maybe a church work day once in a while and call it square.

Except it is not square - I feel like something is missing. I also don't know how to fix it. For one, I'm an introvert. :-) For another, I DO have family and work demands that have to be accounted for.

Thanks for commenting!

ccjjharmon said...

Jim - makes me go hmm. You make me think so much of my own thought processes and ways, but then you go out and say you're introverted. VERY interesting, especially since I was an extreme introvert for all of my childhood up til college when it all changed. I'd simply love to have a discussion with you sometime on that topic... but anyway:

Yes - scheduling that time sure does seem all but impossible. To heck with it though - I don't care. I'm sure sometimes (probably more like a lot of times), things may suffer. My work performance has suffered on occasion due to my family. I know my family has suffered on occasion due to what you call church (but to me may be helping out with church or just hanging/being with people that are part of our church). My trump order changes I guess. I try to be flexible about it and when I'm being told rather pointedly by my wife that I need to do less of x so I can do more of y, I try my best to do that. I really don't know if I will *ever* have a set-in-stone trump order (or priorities or responsibilities) that won't ever change.

I right now feel called to get involved with the homeless. That will no question in my mind take away my time with my family sometime over the weekend. Yeah - I could get them involved in it, but you know my kids are little (but I took my son anyway last weekend).

Sometimes I think the way I am doing all of this is just crazy and probably more hurting everyone. But everything worthwhile really requires time. I pray (but not even remotely close to enough) that I'm not overdoing it anywhere in particular. That the stuff I get involved in I can somehow involve or show my kids about it.

Let me give one example of spending time - we are going to have pizza and watch movies at a family's house we used to go to small group with for about a year tomorrow night. We have totally lost touch with them and haven't done anything with them now for the past year. By no means do I expect this to make it all like it was before, but to have time to really know what's been up in their lives and for us to tell them the same for us. We don't nearly get enough time to do this with other families.

I've felt so odd about that particular subject (connecting with others in the area that you can relate to) especially when you're new to the area that I've seriously pondered trying to start some sort of "Richmond newcomers group" where it's totally just a get-together of people that don't know anyone BUT want to get to know other people/families. Know religious/ethnic/marital status/kids-or-no-kids affiliation - just being able to meet and talk with others. Heck it really shouldn't be just for newcomers either.

We all need some sort of "community". But like you pointed out (which I agree with), you probably can't do something whose sole intent is to build community. I feel like this group idea I have is missing something - but I'm not sure what....

Jim said...

Chris,

When I talk about being introverted, I am using as a basis an article from "The Atlantic" magazine that I link to from time to time - it is here. His definition, which fits how I feel, is that introverts are NOT shy, at least not all introverts. Many can be talkative, comfortable in groups or speaking in front of people (I am), and so on. The real issue is whether being with others feels like it DRAINS energy from you (introvert) or GIVES you energy (extrovert), and hence whether you naturally seek out other people or seek out solitude. And for introverts that solitude becomes especially important after being around other people (because then we need to recharge). Go read the article and then come back and say whether you think you are an extrovert or an introvert.

I've taken my 11 year old to the mobile food pantry once to help and scheduling never worked out to take her again before that program ended but she really wanted to go back. She liked helping others. I think it is almost never too young to teach children that there are others less fortunate than them and that they can help. That said, I can see not wanting to take toddlers or small children along for the obvious reasons, one of which is that it takes your concentration off of the people you are there to serve because you have to watch out for your kids. OTOH, maybe the purpose of the kids is to help create community with the people you are helping! :-) But without taking them you can still get the kids involved - perhaps in bed or meal time prayers by having them remember the homeless and ask for help for them from God.

ccjjharmon said...

I completely forgot you're definition of introvert vs extrovert but do remember you writing about it before. You know when I read it then, I wasn't sure which I'd classify myself and I still don't know. After so long I do need to get my own time by myself so maybe I'm just a hidden introvert posing as an extrovert? Who knows.

Good points regarding kids. Yeah we've recently started praying together as a family (boy the kids sure do pray for some interesting things sometimes....) and we've started to try to show them some other things they can pray about. Right now they're very much on thanking God for x, y and z. I hope that sometime they may get that they can pray for God to help others too :) like my oldest daughter's bus driver who broke her leg (and as my daughter points out every time - her LEFT leg).

Jim said...

Chris,

Actually, I would say you're an extrovert because you said "After so long I do need to get my own time by myself". Well, I think everyone needs that. No, my point is that an introvert pretty much needs that time after every single interaction with others (family doesn't count). Even with close friends I need down time after time with them just to "recharge".

And yes, it is funny to hear what kids pray about. OTOH, their prayers are often way more real and direct. Then they get a bit older and start becoming ritualized. We have to slow our 11 year old from racing through the same things she says at dinner prayers every night, because while the people she is asking for help for are all in need, she's got it down to a "script" and just says it all as if the mere saying is the thing - a spell to be cast, not a conversation to be had. But we all fall into that trap, I think.