So, What To Do?: Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
So, What To Do?
Sometimes “church” is hard. Now, don’t get me wrong, I love the Church, but finding a church can be hard, especially as an Anglican. Culturally, theologically, temperamentally, I am an Anglican, but the Episcopal Church that I once knew is, in many ways, almost unrecognizable. I find, however, that I’m not alone. Many of my friends who are cradle Roman Catholics no longer feel comfortable in parish churches that were once a second home to their families. Changes in liturgy, social issues, the lack of a role for women and the crisis of abuse have all combined to make them feel like strangers in sanctuaries which once gave comfort. Mainline Lutherans and Presbyterians face aging congregations and similar divisive social issues. Many of the independent, Calvary Chapel type churches have faced their own challenges with pastoral abuse and changing demographics as well as cultural shifts in attitudes toward church participation by the lay rank and file.Â
For some, who feel the need to be engaged in at least a limited aspect in a faith community, the relative anonymity of the local mega-church is appealing. Others look to have their faith affirmed in the historic breakaways, such as Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or newly formed breakaway denominations such as the Anglican Church in North America. Yet, even in these breakaways, you can never be sure exactly what you might be walking into on any given Sunday. With ACNA you might encounter anything from an Anglo-Catholic Mass, to a 1928 Prayer Book service, to a Charismatic Vineyard-style gathering, or, to be honest, anything in between. It is also likely to be a fairly small church with a bi-vocational pastor/priest who may, or may not, know a great deal about Anglicanism. In a LCMS church you may hope for a straight forward Divine Service liturgy, but it is likewise possible that you will encounter a Contemporary Worship service replete with screens and a praise band. Â
Now we await developments in the United Methodist Church. While no one can predict exactly what will happen, one thing seems certain – what we once knew as the UMC, most likely, will no longer exist as a recognizable cohesive denomination. No church body seems to be immune to what is taking place. With about fifteen different church bodies under at least eight different jurisdictions, even the Orthodox in North America face challenges. While those challenges may be different from those outlined above, they are real nonetheless.
Needless to say, all of this is somewhat dismaying to the individual believer who simply wants to live out their faith in a community of believers. Moreover, it becomes more and more difficult as churches align themselves on one side or another of our current cultural divide. No, I don’t want to hear about Pride month when I go to church, but neither do I want to be subjected to an angry gay-bashing sermon (I would probably walk out if either occurred). As I settle into my seat, I really don’t want to hear that the current President is God’s gift to the nation, nor do I wish to hear that the Millennium will commence once there is a Democrat in the White House. (Indeed, if it were up to me, I’d remove the American flag from our sanctuaries, revoke the tax-exempt status of our churches and related properties, and have clergy cease to be state functionaries in performing marriages.) Â
So, what to do?
Well, there is always the Benedict Option proposed by Rod Dreher. His appropriation of the Benedictine categories of Order, Prayer and Work, Stability, Community, Hospitality and Balance certainly have an appeal. The withdrawal from the politics-obsessed nature of American society with the intent of preserving a “Christian culture” may be praiseworthy and, indeed, may provide a solution for some, but certainly not for all. Dreher readily admits that, “I am certain that there is no such thing as a perfect Ben Op community, and that each and every one of them will have struggled with similar problems.”
My thinking about this issue has taken me in a different direction. I don’t think it’s about withdrawal… I think it is about engagement.
We cannot replicate the past. We cannot replicate the monastic world of medieval Europe. Equally, we cannot replicate the Episcopal Church of decades past, or the Lutheran Church of decades past, or, indeed, even the Calvary Chapel of 1968. Any attempt to do so will result not in ministry but in the curatorial tasks of the keeper of a museum. What we can do, however, is bring the most valuable parts of that past into the present and, most importantly, into our own individual lives. It is not a great overarching plan that will give new life to a church, it is the combination of individual lives – yours and mine. Â
We need to model and we need to engage. I will use my own tradition by way of an example. I attend an Anglican church in which, until relatively recently, the Daily Office was largely unknown, even by the clergy. As a priest, I have said the Daily Office, morning and evening, for decades. Initially, after I discovered this, I was deeply offended. A vital part of what I considered to be a hallmark of Anglican identity was simply being ignored. So, what to do? For a time I considered curtailing my attendance, or going elsewhere. Instead, I began to talk casually about the importance of the Daily Office in the life of the priest and the parish. Nothing happened immediately, but through conversations and supplying some materials and encouragement, it began to change. The clergy began saying the Offices and encouraging others in the practice. Currently a simplified version of the Daily Office is posted on the church website. Now, is the church perfect? Absolutely not, much needs to happen, but something of value from the past has been added. Next we work on showing reverence to the altar… slowly…
I think we have come to a time in which we’re not likely to find that perfect church that suits all our needs and desires. Instead, we have to individually model in ourselves that which we wish the church to become. So, again using my own tradition, if you are drawn to Anglicanism you may find a wonderful Anglican church to attend… then again, you may not. What you can do, however, is to begin the journey yourself. The resources are there – the Daily Office, the Book of Common Prayer, practicing the the Lectio Divina… you might even find a mentor or two who will help you along the way. Might I add, this is not just the case for my tradition, the same could be said for all of the denominations and bodies I mentioned above. The important thing is to start the journey, modeling in yourself that which you wish to be as a believer and, perhaps, God willing, you’ll find others to walk alongside.
Such a good article, Duane.
As you all know, I adore my parish. But it’s not big on outreach. We had a convert attend for a while who kept complaining that we didn’t have a soup kitchen (he was thinking burritos) for the homeless people who camp out in the woods surrounding our Church. He called me up to complain. I said: “Yes, it would be very good if our parish did something positive for the people living around us, I agree. But in the meantime, as you pray for this, nothing is stopping you from helping the Salvation Army, just a few blocks away. They have a big kitchen, certified cooks, vans, etc. and offer free meals every day.” Well, he’d rather grumble. <— This is my first tendency as well, to grumble rather than doing what is already available for me to do. So what if our church doesn't pass out burritos in the park? Nothing's stopping us from volunteering for the Salvo Armo (my affectionate term for the Salvation Army) or Meals on Wheels or any of the dozens of charities in town. So Duane, I agree with your post: sure, a church or parish may not be perfect but work with what's there and model what you would like to see.
-Xenia
I think Mr. Grumble want to pass out burritos wrapped in paper stamped with a 3-bar cross.
If you as me, that’s pride, not concern for hungry. “Look, it is OUR CHURCH that is feeding the homeless! Everyone take notice!”
Xenia
Many thanks… it’s doing what we can, where we are. Moreover, it’s being honest – about our church, our denomination, the general state of things… Change for the good doesn’t take place until we acknowledge our own shortcomings and look for ways to move things forward.
I think the key going forward for the church is teaching a holistic faith that you live, not attend.
Good stuff, Duane…
Michael,
Many thanks and, yes, it’s living the life of the church as an individual and corporately…
Wondrous thoughts, in my view, Duane! I so appreciate that your engagement integrates conversation and invitation, rather than ultimatum. A lost art in today’s culture, secular and church.
Rick
Many thanks! Yes, ultimatums are easy, conversations take work…
There is much about the Benedict Option I find personally appealing; of greater appeal would be a community that lives in such a way that people at the opposite extremes of issues would figure out how to love each other. Politically liberals and conservatives, egalitarians and complementarians, Calvinists and non-Calvinists,for example, rather than withdrawing from or denying strongly held views could practice generosity toward one another and live together in Christian community.
Rick
Believe it or not, that was once the case in many places. I did some of my training at an Episcopal church in Grosse Pointe, Michigan. Members of the congregation included Democrats and Republicans – including a former Democratic Governor and a former Republican Lt. Governor. Apart from them, I couldn’t tell you the political leanings of really anyone else… it simply was not discussed! While it was a “centrist” congregation theologically, there were folk on both sides of that line. That sort of place today, would be much harder to find…
Duane, I think my parish is like that too. I don’t know what people think about politics (with a few exceptions) because (with that one exception) no one talks about it much.
I know the people who came from the Soviet Union hate socialism in any form an who blames them.
I suspect most of them are more politically conservative than I am and I suspect I am socially more conservative than some of them. To be honest, half of them seem more interested in Russian politics than US politics and I can’t really parse the Russian situation very well because I don’t know who to believe.
Xenia,
I think you represent well the kind of Christianity Duane and I discuss offline.
You attend on Sunday…but you start every day with the prayers of the Orthodox and your faith is entwined throughout all you do.
Anglicanism and Catholicism have the same disciplines…and I think those disciplines will be what carries the church forward…
Michael
“Anglicanism and Catholicism have the same disciplines…and I think those disciplines will be what carries the church forward…”
Only if those disciplines are not forgotten or relegated to “the past’…
I was staying with some mega-church type evangelicals last month and these guys don’t even ask the blessing before meals. I asked “why not?” and they looked sheepish and said “yeah, we probably ought to do that.” It’s just not part of that culture anymore.
“and I think those disciplines will be what carries the church forward…”
Do you guys foresee a major revival among your traditions, or a huge drop-off in American Christianity (numerically speaking).
Josh
Barring an Act of God, I fear that we are going the way of Western Europe. The denominations are going down at various rates of speed. Evangelicals, in my opinion, will face a reckoning after the Trump years. Additionally, the “boomers” will be gone or in assisted living. I think it will be a totally different landscape.
. (Indeed, if it were up to me, I’d remove the American flag from our sanctuaries, revoke the tax-exempt status of our churches and related properties, and have clergy cease to be state functionaries in performing marriages.)  <<<
Fist bump, bro hug
Duane, I agree regarding nationalistic symbols and state functions in the church. Historically, I think the church functions best in a prophetic role, and outsider role, rather than as a chaplain role in society.
I am more optimistic, perhaps, than others regarding what the church will look like in a couple of generations. I think that orthopraxy (even if they are unfamiliar with the word) is more important to the younger generation, at least from what I observe among students that I teach in a secular context. The meanness that accompanies certain doctrinal systems that are authoritarian in nature is less palatable to them than it is to us ‘olders’ who are more tolerant of contradiction between belief and practice, or perhaps are just worn out. I am not confident that numbers will hold, the church may indeed grow much smaller in future generations in America, but I think the church will look and act more like Jesus. That is my belief–I am sticking to it. I think also that future generations will move toward a more liturgical structure, with a purposeful diminishment of pulpit personalities.
I could be very wrong…but I have hope!
Rick
You give me hope! May your tribe increase…
Duane,
This was v encouraging.
This is very helpful advice given the turmoil in the North American Anglican world. The latter seems to ring of Martin Thornton, if you’ve read anything by him.
Arthur,
To bring Martin Thornton into the discussion is high praise indeed! I’ve been rethinking his remnant theology of late (and his work on spiritual formation). I think both areas have value in our current circumstances…
Kinda tough here in the South finding a good, solid church. Can’t throw a rock without hitting a KJV-only or an IFB church. Very few mainline churches. Many churches here that focus too much on our money (the Prosperity Gospel ones), and just a few too many churches where President Trump exalted a bit more than Jesus. Wife and I are not “shopping” for a church or “church-hopping” BTW. We do have a church home, but it took quite a while to find. And no, our church is far from perfect.
Dan
Great that you have a church home… it’s much more difficult these days to find one.
Thanks Duane!
You missed Dreher’s point of outreach and you aren’t all that different from his points there, but where he hopes to inspire by giving several examples you only give your own. It’s a good one: actually practice what we’ve been given.
I’m a recent Lutheran (2000) and in the NALc so I didn’t grow up with Luther’s catechism but with the Westminster shorter. Compared to that I thought Luther’s was simplistic and ignored it until I took a class and attended a conference this Spring where the catechism was quotes lovingly and the response “what does this mean?” was said in the more urgent German, “Was is das?” So whether you have a criticism or a new technique, the best thing is (as you say) to spread the influence of the gospel person to person.
Beth
Yes, I originally had other examples, but “word limits” rule on a blog! Appreciate your comment…