Right, this blog is actually a response to Dawn’s and the comments written. I hope people don’t mind me using the inspiration. (I would like to make it known as I don’t really know what I am about to say- I roll with the punches of my own instinct- that any ‘aggressive’ response is never personal just passionate).
Anyway, the point was made that to be fully integrated into church we need to go to or be part of more than just congregation and the ‘importance’ of cell groups as part of that.
A quote to start if I may (hope you don’t mind Dawn)
"In order to fully grow as a Christian, you need to be surrounded by like-minded people to learn and develop. Congregation does not allow you to do that to the full extent."
Kirsty developed this point “I think that they run the risk of being 'less effective' Christians unless they have some other spiritual input which is more personal than 'congregation'.”
To be fair to my muses the point was raised that ‘cell’ is not distinctly house group but being involved with friends and in relationships with people who ‘get you’.
First question, why are congregational Christians assumed not be involved?
I feel that human nature is one of judgement. I value myself or rate myself in life over and above or under those examples of people I see. My friendships and relationships develop closely with people who I have a common bond, who share my ideas on spirituality/politics/relationship/all or one of the above. As bloggers all, we share an urge to communicate, to be heard, understood and responded to. This is not a bad thing. We have extroverted natures. (In a Jungian understanding). Not everyone does. Some people are doers. Introverted; they seek to remain out of the limelight. To do what is needed without being praised. They are the unsung heroes that make communities work whilst the praise goes to those who are happy to shout. We don’t ‘know’ them. They are the people who aren’t our best friends. Who don’t go to cell groups and aren’t the ones asked to do the important jobs. Maybe no one asks them to do anything at all. And because we don’t, and because they don’t, we risk assuming that they are somehow behind, lacking, uneffective. As Kirsty pointed out, “I guess this is as much my problem as others in that I don't talk to enough people in church that are not part of my 'intimate group of friends.'” Yet, our lives do not stop and start on Sundays. Christianity is not about congregation or cell. It is helpful, useful. People grow and develop. But surely a nobler faith is that which doesn’t sit around esoterically but lives exoterically. As Rowan Willams says in his book (very good book) Silence and Honey cakes “The soul is not capable of transforming itself… it needs the impossible, unpredictable human beings we encounter daily, in and out of the church. Only in this setting do we become truly holy- in a way entirely unique to each one of us.” Am I loosing you? I'm loosing myself.
I think that my point, in essence, is quite simple really and two fold-
Firstly, don’t assume you know. We rarely do.
Secondly, maybe, just maybe, we have created these cell groups in the first place because our ‘congregation’ was lacking and nobody could think of an easier way to do it. To make congregation into family, where all are valued and are safe, where those who kneel and those who jump are both equally needed and praised, where ‘songs of fellowship’ and the ‘songbook’ are not two sides of civil war, where those who talk about their feelings and those who just live them through are both accepted and recognised for their effectiveness. Maybe doing that was just too hard. Don’t get me wrong, cell isn’t wrong or unfair, or exclusive (well, not theoretically, but people are just people) but it isn’t the be all and end all either. These people that write books on how church should be don’t go to our church. So yes, maybe helpful, but not gospel. Formula’s on how church should be done are a load of *&%£ when push comes to shove.
“We need to recognise the danger of looking for the ideal church community and instead ask how I pledge my body to the Christian community I am actually with…sooner or later you will have to confront the challenge of being pledged to an uncomfortable reality- and how to cope with that inner restlessness which constantly suggests what look like simpler solutions, avoiding the difficult route of changing myself.”
11 comments:
- At 8:33 AM Liz said...
-
Really beautifully put Becks - I am totally humbled. I know that wasn't your objective , but I am!
However, I will still stand by my last comment on D's blog - it does all come down to vulnerability. However analytical we are, feelings are important to us and we react accordingly.
I said to someone ONLY yesterday - 'when you walk into your Church it really shouldn't feel like a war zone - but it so often does'
All of us, doers and thinkers need to think about practising humility more.
( was going to say - need to practise humility more - but really didn't want to come across as judgemental) - At 12:53 PM Dawn said...
-
My (maybe first of many) comment:
'First question, why are congregational Christians assumed not be involved?' (quote form Bec)
Neither Kirsty's comment, nor my comment insinutated this at all-it was not about involvement, it was about growth.
Our thoughts considered the opportunity to 'grow spiritually' in a congregation.
On a Sunday, I attend to Worship. I also attend to learn from the various aspects that the worship involves, whether that be story, sermon, bible reading., singing..whatever.
However, this is simply not enough. I need water to live. This would not be enough, although it may work to an extent (i'm not going to try it!) I also need food, exercise, love. Isn't this how our spiritual life is. We can do one thing, but to do more would be more effective.
I will be back! - At 2:46 PM Becks said...
-
Dawn, Sorry. I didnt mean to make it sound like that is what you think or had written. But i believe that as much as church isnt about involvement we or should I say, I have found myself assuming certain things about peoples growth because of their involvement. I really should re read my stuff more but i say before i think very often. I do agree that more than one spiritual outlet encourages growth, definately, but we (or again) I assume that 'thinking' things are spiritual and 'doing' things arent therefore i limit my own opportunities for growth and how i see others growing too. Hope that makes things make more sense!
- At 3:39 PM RichardB said...
-
In his book 'The 2nd Reformation' Bill Beckham refers to the Two-Winged church: Large group celebration and Small group community. He says (quote) 'Using both wings the church could both soar into the heavens, entering into his presence, and do his will all over the earth.'
Focussing on Congregation and Cell for a moment, I suggest these are places where we experience the Transcendence of God (congregation) and the Immanence of God (cell). Both are complimentary and one without the other leaves us incomplete.
My observation is that occasionally we experience the immanence of God in congregation, but not usually. Likewise we occasionally experience the transcednece of God in the smaller group, but not usually.
They are complimentary ways of worshipping God who reveals himself in different ways.
The view from 'outside' the church means that songs such as 'From a Distance' (a few years ago)reinforce the view of a Transcendent God revealed in congregational worship. Where, I wonder, does the not-yet Christian discover him in intimacy? - At 3:46 PM Unknown said...
-
Hmm, I think that brings up an interesting point about whether we can get the same sort of growth by 'doing' things around the church, as we can through discussion. Maybe we can grow just as much spiritually by getting actively involved in say serving, or organising, or cleaning around the church as we can from going to a cell. Maybe. Although I don't really see how. I think if you have a close group of friends who do chat about spiritual things, then that can serve as a kind of cell group, (which I guess is what you were saying earlier Becks), as long as that group of friends really do discuss the Bible and faith. My reasons for not seeing how 'involvement' is a good replacement for cell is simply that 'involvement' doesn't suggest getting back to the Bible, and studying it, and knowing what it is saying and how it appies to our lives. I think this is massively important for any spiritual growth, (but I also happen to think that other kinds of involvment such as serving are just as important, and really both aspects should be present).
Not that I think that people can't grow spiritually by not doing 'thinking' things. I know not everyone is a 'thinker', but I do think that if we don't do the 'thinking' and only do the 'doing' then we will miss out on a vital aspect of growth of a different type than we can get from our service.
With regard to cell being an intimate group who can give support and friendship etc, then yes, I think that kind of support can come from other sources - not necessarily cell. But if people are feeling discluded and feel like people are being exclusive - maybe that ius just because through cells, (or other sources), these people have become close, (understandably). So if they want that same sort of involvement then why not come to a cell?
(Hope this all makes sense, I have confused myself a bit!)
Ooh, also, Liz, how would you define humility? - At 4:33 PM Matthew said...
-
I don't totally know where I stand on this argument but I feel that there are good points being raised all over the place. Ultimately I feel that 'Church' is just one aspect of our day-to-day Christian lives...and Church doesn't necessarily mean being in a church *a congregational church or a cell church as defined in Acts 2* but being involved in constant fellowship.
Now - I really hope this makes sense but I agree with Dawn that we need many aspects to our spiritual life, like food, exercise, shelter, love, etc...the basic human needs we have, defined by Maslow, we need in our spiritual walk and Paul talks a lot about that throughout his letters, specifically when he talks about the Armour of God.
Paul also warns us against being homo-spiritual (all your time with Christian fellowship) and hetero-spiritual (none of your time with Christian fellowship) and this is where I am afraid I might get myself and others confused. We need to constantly surround ourselves with Church (the fellowship of the believers) yet stay open to the call for evangilism, specifically as our Christian walk progresses and we grow in our exercise, strength, love, food, shelter, etc...
Does that make sense?
I hope so.
And in response to Liz's comment - humility is key in maintaining a healthy and balanced Christian walk. (I sound like a breakfast commercial.)
Anyways - that's all I gotta say for now.
Take care becks.
Missing you from Canada. - At 5:47 PM Becks said...
-
Ooo.. i've obviously got my mo-jo back. Look at all my lovely comments! lol. I think in a way that you are all trying to say the say things. That we need intimacy in our journey- either in cell or friendships or as Matt put it just Christian Fellowship. I get what you are saying Richard about the transcendent vs the immanent..I had never really thought of it like that before and i do see why small groups (in whatever form) would be important for that but in my own personal experience being in congregation is quite regularly an immanent experience so maybe that is why i struggled with the idea before.
Kirsty, i get what you mean about 'doin' and 'thinking' and one not being a replacement for the other. I do get your point too about being excluded because they dont join but that is a swings and roundabout kinda point. People will be scared to butt in so the group just gets closer. Its so difficult to call. - At 8:59 PM Liz said...
-
I guess I'm mainly a 'doer', one of my profiles shows that I'm a kinesthetic activist -so acting on that should I be bothered about members of our congregation who have questions/concerns/judgements about cell? Should we put something in place to give them an opportunity to explore how they feel or not? I just feel bothered that there are folks who feel uncomfortable for whatever reason about intimate groups, confusing them for cliques etc.
Rambling now; I think I'm a humble person, but I know I'm confident in my role within the church, so that might be confused for pride by those folks that don't really know me so well.
Thats all for now.
Hi Matthew and welcome back Rich! - At 12:04 PM Becks said...
-
Liz, i would never have said that you were a prideful person so never worry. I do think that you have a point about putting something in place for these people. I think one of the problems is that it is 'bigged' up in the army therefore people dont want to raise concerns or judgements worried that doing so will cause them to be outcasted or forced into something they are not comfortable with. Yes, cell should be an option but by, for example, aligning the meetings with cell topics do we isolate people even further!
- At 1:20 PM Unknown said...
-
Or does it mean that they can be involved without having to 'be involved'?
- At 12:47 PM Anonymous said...
-
Keep up the good work.
