“May You Live In Interesting Times”: Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
“May You Live In Interesting Times”
There was a time when Church history taught us to see today’s Church in its right place. It was a time when we could say with conviction that, “The Church does not forget”. What was meant by this was that we confidently expected the Church to carry the wisdom of past centuries forward to not only the present, but to future generations as well. We had reason for such confidence. Once we could see Church life, from the outward form of a church building, to the inward form of a church service or liturgy. We could hear it in familiar prayers, the cadence of scripture being read and the contents of hymnals being sung. We experienced this life in concert with leadership from a trained and generally well educated ministry.
Now, this is not to say that the Church was static. It was not an heirloom carefully cosseted and protected from any change. Any unbiased reading of Church history will show that the Church did not shun change when sensible reasons dictated adjustments which did not compromise the central core of the Church’s mission and message. This is to say that to be conscious of historical continuity and our debt to the past does not mean being rigidly conservative and averse to progress. Indeed, I would argue that it is an intimate acquaintance with history that enables us to differentiate between essentials and non-essentials in times of change. It allows us to see our own Church life as being a part of something greater and integrated into the great communion of Christian life of centuries past, present and future.
This was the narrative that held sway for much of the modern era, but it is a narrative that now, I believe, is rapidly slipping away.
In our current situation, rather than saying “The Church does not forget” it sometimes seems more appropriate to say “The Church does not remember”. Indeed, in much of the American Church in particular, we have become either hostile toward history (especially that which we don’t agree with) or, increasingly, ahistorical. As the rising generations abandon their participation in any sort of Church life, aging congregations (along with their aging leadership) are not concerned with the past or the future, as much as with survival in the present. Outward forms, such as church buildings, and inward forms, such as church services or liturgies, are fluid and often viewed mainly in pragmatic terms of multi-use convenience and being “seeker friendly”. Scripture, at least, still seems to be honored, although hymnals (remember those) have given way to catchy choruses and large drop down screens. Meanwhile, multiple seminaries have closed or become, largely, non-residential thereby curtailing the process of spiritual formation as a normative part of ministerial education. All of this, of course, is not to mention the effects of Covid and the impact of “virtual Church” services offered online.
Sometimes I remember the old so-called Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times”.
Clearly matters concerning the Church are in flux. For much of the last twenty-five years, if you wanted to be hired by a church, all you had to do was convince the call committee that you could “bring young people into the church”. As that did not happen in most cases, now you have to convince the call committee that you can keep the church open for their lifetime. Additionally, there may be a political litmus test.
There are, of course, those who are now considering what it would mean for the Church to be largely, or even exclusively, varied online communities of faith. For eucharistic centered believers, this obviously creates issues. Even baptism becomes problematic, not to mention marriage, confirmation and all the rest. It would even redefine, at least to some extent, what we mean by the word “fellowship”. Perhaps, however, it can be done. Yet, the more relevant question might be, should it be done? The digital world was once viewed by the church as a tool. What is the price if it becomes our sole or overarching reality?
While I personally would desire a return to a model of the Church rooted in history, one that “does not forget” I begin to wonder if we have already passed a point of no return and what that may mean…
In my little corner of evangelicalism (of which I possess some discomfort), church history is viewed quite selectively. If certain people or movements from the past don’t fit a certain perspective of Christianity, then they are ignored, discarded or derided. In doing this, great amounts of spiritual riches are left untouched.
PH
I think that has become the situation both inside and outside evangelicalism…
My wife has a friend she walks with. Her friend, age 65, goes to a local mega-church. She had never heard of Francis of Assisi. My wife gave her a copy of Martyrs Prayers. She knew of no one in the book apart from Stephen in the Book of Acts…
As technology advances and viruses rage on, the challenge of what constitutes church is going to be a major question.
How do sacramental churches function in a cyber space?
Can they?
The coming generations are all mobile and used to cyber communication…and may end up preferring online gathering to real gathering.
Or, perhaps, we end up with “two tiered” congregations – those online and those actually present. Many churches are close to that at present…
True…my group hasn’t met in person for two years and I’m wondering when it will be safe to do so…
As services have gone online, one in three have dropped out…
https://www.barna.com/research/new-sunday-morning-part-2/
We tend to have a Western European take on church history with buildings, hymnals, established holidays honored by the central government…but other countries may show us how to “do church” as we go into the future. When I was in Colombia, many church startup in Colombia bought a house as their first meeting place because that was what was available. When space was maxed up, another house might be a bought in a different neighborhood, a school might be built, and if there was vacant land, it could be bought up and a building put there. Independent churches in China meet in homes to avoid government scrutiny. We could be looking at a hybrid model of part online/part building, or churches where multiple congregations from different traditions meet during the week. In Silicon Valley, many church building host several, often multilingual, congregations during any given week.
I hope we never lose the online platform that developed during the pandemic. I know it’s not the best for many people, but I am able to attend a Bible study due to Zoom. Nothing on the church schedule fit my evening schedule, but this one did. My own local church absorbed a number of new people into the congregation because we consistently offered high quality online services (including children’s activities) during the quarantine period. I know it’s hard to keep that kind of momentum up, but it happened.
Christ promised to build His church in Matthew 16. We may not always be very good at it, but He did leave us the church until He comes again. If we as His people truly seek Him, I believe He will show us the way.
Linn
“I hope we never lose the online platform that developed during the pandemic.”
I think it is here to stay in one form or another, the question is how do we incorporate it as a new reality in our life as the church? I think we still have some issues to sort out…
How can you REALLY “do church” and be everything the Bible (New Testament) calls us to be as a church if it’s NOT in person?
I’m not talking about a few months of shut down over covid or persecution in China
My perspective: African international students who are here and abandon in-person services because it’s not as good as what they are used to so they just watch their home church online.
It’s an interesting compare-and-contrast as we talk about US nationalism and evangelicalism here.
JTK
If church is an extension of the Incarnation, it seems to me there must be some “physical” aspect…
Duane,
I totally agree! It can be for good or ill (just like radio or television have been for churches), and we need to sort it out. However, it does have some really good uses, maybe more for small groups than for large gatherings. But, if I can’t go (which has happened to me often enough due to my long history of hip surgeries), I would much rather be able to attend my own church online than a different one. I don’t think we will get rid of online services, but we can certainly improve them.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2022/january/church-switch-turnover-leave-covid-pandemic.html?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_campaign=Once%20a%20day_2022-01-19_08:30:00&utm_content=5575
An interesting CT article on how online church may be currently affecting church attendance.
Linn
Many thanks for this… if nothing else, it indicates a new landscape.