The Church as Community
Rev. Chris Neilson
Sept. 30, 2007
I didn’t
want to shoot down all your visions of church as family and leave you hanging
there. It’s still important to have a
feeling of family in our lives, and sometimes our family of origin or birth
family is simply too dysfunctional to meet our needs. Creating our own intentional families is very
important. My friend Bea Morris wrote
these words to me in a letter recently as she attended the death of a friend,
that she considered family.
She writes, “Again, the
notion of "family" crept into my mind when Claudia called me a little
after 9 pm last night, to let me know that "Joanie's at peace, now."
How we construct, make definitive and absolute, the term, "family."
From my observational perch in this, and many other deaths - and in the oft
long slow process of death (as in AIDS) - "family" has many
understandings not a part of that which is traditionally understood.
The love of a few friends
from childhood, some later adulthood friends, people who come to understand and
love through work, and some introduced by other friends all become part of that
web of caring and unconditional love. And, hence, "family."
When the blood family cannot
or will not be there, that which is not blood substitutes. Is not a transfusion
the giving of something which is not "kin", yet becomes mingled with
our own substance and ultimately part of ourselves? Something which sustains
our life?”[1]
Bea works
with many isolated populations; Gay and
lesbian people, people with AIDS, and she herself is adopted, and has struggled
to find family when the biological family is absent. We do need to have places
in our lives where we can create these families.
And I do
see this happening in the church. We
come to church and feel connected to others with struggles like ours. We form relationships that are close and
meaningful. This is all a desired part
of a church community.
But it is
just a part. The church as family as a
whole entity will fail. It will die a
slow death, losing its connection to the larger world. It will become insular, hierarchical,
dysfunctional, sexist and homogenous. I
wanted to offer you an alternative vision.
Marie Fortune has a
suggestion:
…An
alternative model for healthy congregational life would be that of community as
distinct from family. Community life is also based on values of respect,
mutuality, compassion, and care, but with a lesser degree of intimacy. Using
this model, the expectations for emotional…intimacy would be lessened and the
opportunity to question authority or unethical behavior of church leaders would
be more readily available.[2]
The
original Latin word is communitas:
meaning fellowship, partnership. In the dictionary, community is defined as a
group of people in the same locality sharing the same government; those with
common interests; sharing, participation, fellowship, partnership; interaction,
interdependence. In short, community is more like we Unitarian Universalists
are, or perhaps, like we should be.
To be in
community, we do not have to live close together, or be related by kinship or
even by shared beliefs – which is lucky for Unitarian Universalists.
Responsibilities are held in common, with shared leadership, diversity, and
inclusivity as high values. In community, we come together, share hopes and
dreams, care for each other with compassion and mutual respect, work together
for change, and strive together towards mutual goals.
Community
satisfies our deep human need for connection without suffocating us or raising
unrealistic or inappropriate expectations. In community we are able to
challenge and confront one another in love when the behavior of individuals
threatens the health of the community as a whole. In community we do not keep
damaging secrets or tolerate the intolerable. In true community, we neither
smother nor exclude.
Community
works best when authority is shared- we as members have always decided how to
run our churches. Family churches tend
to be informal and unstructured to their detriment. Alice Blair Wesley says, “the informal church
organization only looks free; it is actually rigidly hierarchical and
authoritarian.”[3] When our democratic process is used to
organize and structure the churches needs and programs, the vision of the
church is likely to move forward to the wishes of the whole, and not just the
few. We can buy a church if it is the
will of the majority, and not be stopped just because a few oppose. We can take meaningful stands in the
community on issues of great concern, and not feel compelled to silence if they
don’t represent every single member. In
family churches, the few call the shots for the many. This violates our covenant as a free church. We may scream bloody murder when outside
influences try to control and dictate our business, but fail to confront the
hierarchies in our own community that hold us back.
In a true
community church there are multiple family units that are living and breathing
units. New members are added, new groups
are formed. The family groups are not
static or closed systems, which alienate or exclude. There are no demands that each person must be
all things to every person. We form a
few close relationships, but the church as a whole is a safe place with some
distance and boundaries. The church is
not a family, but there are multiple intentionally created families contained
within it. As a whole we focus on the
larger we, and the community beyond us of which we are a part. We keep the bigger picture in our focus, as
we strive to create better communities and a more peaceful world.
Under the
best of circumstances, Unitarian Universalist churches should strive for
community as their goal and model – and not a family, not a club, not a place
where anything goes because everybody is free – but real community, covenanted
with each person who is encouraged to grow spiritually, contribute to the
well-being of the whole, and held accountable for their behavior.
Alice Blair
Wesley states the task of the free church in these terms: “as loving God and loving one another so well
that in their own study and discussion in the free church, the members might
learn together the divine will of the loving God for the whole society insofar
as that will relates to justice, peace and reasonable laws. And if so, the members would be called,
compelled, bound to proclaim it and try to bring it to bear in their whole
society.”[4]
That’s what
I want for you, me, and all of us Unitarian Universalists. A community of people, filled with the
presence of a loving God, called to promote peace, justice and equity.
I want us
to be a loving and caring community who embrace the concerns of those who
gather with us and those beyond us.
And I want
us to be the faith of the free. A church
of democratic process, where each voice is welcomed and affirmed. Where each decision is supported by shared
responsibility.
In the
search for this ideal community, may we celebrate the steps we have taken,
honor the mistakes of the past, and recreate and recommit ourselves anew as we
prepare for our future.
[1] Morris, Bea personal email 2007
[2] Fortune, Marie Is Nothing Sacred Harper San Francisco, 1989
[3] Wesley, Alice Blair. Our Covenant: The Lay and Liberal Doctrine of the church: The Spirit of our Covenant 2000-01 Minns Lecture Meadvillle-Lombard Theological Press, 2002 pg. 15.
[4] Wesley, Alice Blair. Our
Covenant: The Lay and Liberal Doctrine
of the church: The Spirit of our
Covenant 2000-01 Minns Lecture Meadvillle-Lombard Theological Press, 2002
pg. 20.