Every church makes a fuss about recruiting new members in the Church Family. We've all heard someone say "We're all growing older, who's going to replace us when we are gone?" The prevailing assumption appears to be that new members are needed to preserve the church as it is today - or for those who don't like what the church has become - the church as they like to think it used to be. it is possibly the wrong question. it assumes that today's church - or yesterday's church - is the perfect and final expression of what church should be.
Would this be a better question? "What kind of church will people want to belong to say, in 50 years?" Go back in time, if you can. Television was in its infancy, no mobile phones or home computers, the internet had not been invented, video games hadn't appeared. Most people didn't have cars, telephones, fridge-freezers or even foreign holidays. There was no professional sport on Sundays. In many places there was no amateur sporting events organised, retail outlets were not open. On Sunday "church" was the only game being played, but today it is just one of many alternatives. When people wake up on Sunday mornings, they make choices of what to do with their Sundays.
Now fast forward 50 years. What kind of choices will people have on Sunday morning - that is if Sunday exists in 50 years time? There may not be an answer to this question, but no doubt there will be some directions. It is a sure thing that people will have many choices. As, over the future years, change accelerates, we may be connected directly into each other's thoughts, even be able to transport ourselves to a different location, even to another time. Sounds very much Science Fiction - but it will certainly be possible through virtual reality on computers.
Unless religious institutions of all faiths - be they Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu for example - can offer something which is distinctly different from the many choices available, they will most likely suffer attrition. all of the faiths are at risk of becoming religious cults and ritualize the past, and make claim into the future. People will gather together and seek personal intimacy which they cannot get electronically - a willingness to share the deepest core of who they are without fear of ridicule or rejection. Sadly, this appears to happen better on electronic networks than it does in most churches.
When all talk is done, we will still want the solace of shared liturgies and rituals. a shared commitment to a common vision closer than even a family. A sureness of power which is greater than the sum of all our individual parts, and a feeling of togetherness collectively, to its demands. (If I'm right) if that's the church of the future, we should seriously consider creating now. Not just preserving buildings and denominational labels.
(These are the thoughts of Ralph Milton, a Canadian minister in British Columbia, Canada)
As you read this article what do you think? Is he right in what he writes or is there some disagreement?
Comments
Post a Comment