[1], and I realized that it is sorely lacking the virtues that it once had. In that book, the views of King, Jr., concerning the Church were that it needed to be more active in its community in all things. The role of the pastor/priest/what-have-you was more than preaching from a pulpit, he says. It is more than preaching a faith and shaking hands at the door, not to see the congregation for another week. The role of the head of a church was and is to be, in my words, the ambassador of the church.Yet this is not the case, at least in the majority of the United States. I have heard leaders of churches lament that those seeking to become leaders of the faith are dwindling in number; I have heard of congregations being merged, as the leaders simply did not have the time between their duties in the pulpit and their duties away from it. Taking as neutral a point of view as I believe I am capable of, I wondered why this is. I wondered, off and on, for many years, and the words of King, Jr., gave me my answer. That answer is that the community does not know who the members of the churches are. The leaders preach from the pulpit, then are notably absent away from it. What community-outreach programs that exist are few and short-reaching.
I believe that if a community--if an individual--is going to make the decision whether or not to join a specific church or even any church, that community and individual must know the church, and that can only happen if its leaders are known. For many reasons, the leaders of the churches stay behind the doors of their sanctuaries. For many reasons, they are rarely seen outside of the walls of their church. These reasons, in some areas of the country, may entail fear. Churches are not accepted in some areas, and that lack of acceptance makes itself known in intolerance, or downright action against the building and those who dwell within it. These reasons also entail the lack of knowledge in how to reach out to a world it doesn't understand--and make no mistake, those that dwell within a church's walls rarely understand those that do not.
Again, taking as unbiased a view as I am capable of, I say that this lack of understanding exists, and I say it exists because of paradigm. The leaders of the churches have certain paradigms, and those who do not accept the church have other paradigms. For too long, people on both sides--people holding a Bible and people wanting nothing to do with it--have realized that they do not understand the "other side" but are content to leave it at that. This complacency has manifested in an air of ignorance on all sides, and this is, I believe, one of the roots of the matter.
Many may disagree with the generalities of a certain branch of Christianity, and that is fine. Healthy, rational discourse and debate is a treasure to be enjoyed whenever possible--but no discourse can exist where there is no meeting of separate views. I believe that if the church is truly desirous of understanding, of being understood, then it must take the first step. I believe that if any community met the leaders of its churches, even if their paradigms are not in-line with Christianity, a dialogue will be opened and respect will be given and received. The atheist and the devout can stand together, respectfully disagreeing on views but accepting one another as individuals.
There are many ways a church can "reach out" to its community, and show--with the utmost respect--how their views tie into the world around them while at the same time getting to know the community on an individual basis as well as, often, simply having fun. I believe that in an atmosphere where people are joyful and relaxed, those who disagree with each other the strongest will at the least be able to speak with calmness and ration.
One idea I had was a movie night. Show modern movies, or movies that are widely considered to be epics, or those that are at the least still enjoyed decades after their release. For example, four movie nights, each showing a movie from the Alien Quadrilogy. Yes, it is violent, and yes, the characters profane--but it is fiction. I believe that if the leaders of the church allow even such movies as these in an attempt to connect to their communities, understanding that such profanities and violence is fiction and nothing more, and while of course recommending strongly for age limits, that another line of communication can be opened. And in the first movie, Alien, after it was watched, there could be a discussion about what people thought about it. I believe that Biblical allegories and analogies should not be at first brought up; instead, more general dialogue should be had, with all participants speaking their minds openly and with respect for others. I also believe that a Biblical discussion should be optional, not mandatory. Give an overview of what is to be discussed, and ask that the participants join in, but it should not be demanded. If people wish to just come and watch a movie in company of potential friends, this should be allowed and accepted with grace, a smile, and a sincere wish that they will return, if at least to watch another movie.
Once the Biblical discussion started, there could be analogies made to Ripley as a flawed human being overcoming the unknown and unknowable demon with naught but determination and faith. Just as Ripley had to face a demon whose very existence was to kill and create mayhem, analogies could be made as to the plight of Biblical figures of note. Then examples could be made of how such analogies applied to modern life.
Above all, the leaders of the churches must take stances and positions on topics of all kinds. What this reverend or that pastor feels about an issue is important, for his views will guide his preachings, and as such it behooves the leader to let the community and individual have at least an idea of what to expect during sermons. They must, I believe, not merely take a stance, but also explain it. Using the Bible as a reason without further explanation is meaningless. Verses must be cited and interpretations given--and the leader must be open to discussion on those views. The leader must be willing to sit down and discuss, even debate, what brought them to the view they hold. If they can express such reasoning, even if it isn't agreed with, it will usually be respected. Saying, "The Bible tells me so" and leaving it at that isn't good enough; more to the point, it makes they who would say such a thing seem a fool, incapable of or unwilling to look deeper into the views they hold.
I also believe that Bible groups must be held, but not hidden away in someone's living room, or in the back room of a local Christian bookstore. They must be held in public, when allowed, quietly and openly allowing others to join in--even if it's just to sit quietly and listen.
I do not believe that these would be radical changes for any church, nor do I believe that they would entail radical shifts in the leaders' views. All it would take is initiative, inner drive, and--most importantly--respect for the community and its members. I also believe that such a thing can happen, and I hope it does, not so everyone can be homogenized under one banner of faith but so that understanding can be had by knowledge exchanged. I have faith that, even if men and women disagree, they will have more respect for the "other side", and that respect will only bring the goal of total harmony all the closer. For that is a dream worth striving for--men and women of all faiths and nationalities coming together and sharing ideologies, beliefs, in an atmosphere of mutual respect and acceptance. That is a goal worth working for at nearly any cost to the self.
I even believe that it can happen. However, both sides must take steps forward. Even so, I believe it will happen, and I for one am glad. As rich and diverse as this world is, it would be a true joy indeed to learn about other cultures and beliefs in such a setting of peaceful debate. I can see such a day coming, and only hope I personally witness it.
[1]: I don't mean to not include other religions; Christianity is what I know best, and the faith that King, Jr., held to so that's what he talked about. As such, that's what I was thinking about. For other beliefs, I sincerely believe that my ideas can and most definitely should be adapted so that they, too, can reach out to their community and let the members know more about them.
No comments:
Post a Comment