when you can’t afford to drive to church
September 9th, 2005 by Andy
Andrew Jones brought this idea to my attention recently. I can’t help but think the combination of high gas prices and environmental impact is another compelling reason to think ultra-local about communities of faith.
Chris and I originally where drawn towards a geographically focused community because we think that things like community and mission will be easier if a lot of us live in the neighborhoods around the building. I’d never really thought about the impact of thousands of cars driving from all corners of a city to gather in one huge building on our environment. It makes you think… One dream we have for our community is that we would take creation care very seriously. What do you think? Is this a legitimate concern? I’m not sure yet but, it’s really making me think this week. What about you?
subscribe to posts, or
I know when I was living down in Hamilton I would regulary drive anywhere from 40-45 min to the church I was attending. I didn’t think too much of the gas I was using, but my time was still valuable. I can’t imagine now going too far outside the neighborhood to attend a church especially considering the price of fuel. In my experience living closer to church meant I could get more involved too, meaning the relationships were closer (and real, not the acquantince type friendships).
Since one the reasons we were put were is to take care of the earth I think having a church in a place where people can easily gather and maybe use other forms of locamotion, suck as walking, is a big step in keeping the community clean. However I don’t do very well in this department and find myself driving to the local grocery store when it may only take me 5 minutes to walk there. How about all of you out there?
Comment by Michael — September 9, 2005 @ 2:26 pm
Well then I guess the question is, what is geographically focused for a church? I mean Jill and I could go to the church 2 blocks from our house where we would sit with a bunch of old blue haired people, listen to the organ, sing from a hymnal and get in a good nap. But I would much rather prefer to drive 15-20 minutes to be able to praise and worship God in an environment that fits my style of life with people I can relate to. But after driving that far, am I now out of that churches “geographically focused community”? I agree that we should be good stewards of the Earth but also believe that we should not choose a church based on location alone. I guess that leaves me wondering how far is too far to drive for church?
Comment by Chris P — September 13, 2005 @ 6:20 pm
For me, the question is not so much about how far or drawing lines. It’s more of a question of how we see and think of church. If the closest church that we feel a connection to and which we can follow God in the way of Jesus is 20 minutes away… what if we could have a conversation about planting a church closer? Or maybe larger churches could be made up of geographically focused missional communities (a certain large church in the area is currently giving this a shot). I don’t know… I’m just starting to wonder about the movement toward ultra-local lifestyles and whether fuel prices and environment will encourage it? Good word though CP, never will one idea or method fit all!
Comment by Andy — September 13, 2005 @ 10:51 pm
To me, this leads into the question of what church is and has become to people…
In an “ideal” sense I think church should focus on Evangelism, Edifcation (teaching/ learning), Worship, and Community (along with other aspects that I’m sure I’m missing…). The strengths and focuses of “non-geographically focused churches” are edification and worship, but the community and evangelism aspects aren’t as doing well as they could be. When I imagine a “geographically focused church,” I imagine that Community will naturally be an amazing strength and focus. Also, the stength of the community will, in turn, be a catalyst to evangelism with in that community. Plus, worship and edification will be focused on with equal passion.
The problem -as CP pointed out- is that there aren’t many “geographically focused churches.” But maybe the whole issue with gas prices might open up people’s minds to the idea of a “geographically focused church.”
Comment by Ben — September 18, 2005 @ 2:46 pm
I just received the mailer for “The Branch Church” and, out of curiosity, have just now come to my computer to see what “The Branch” is.
I was a bit suprised to see a New Age “Yin-Yang” symbol. I was also disappointed that I could find no doctrinal standards posted. This causes me to wonder if the “Yin-Yang” symbol is not mere coincidence as it is my understanding that emerging churches tend to distance themselves from historical confessions of doctrine.
I was also a bit put-off by the emphasis of a “New Community”. I was born and raised in the church and faithfully attend to this day. As a member of a specific congregation in the Grand Rapids area, I still recognize that I am a member of the Church of Christ -Invisible. In my traditional church upbringing I have been taught that we are part of the UNIVERSAL Body of Christ. This was, in fact, stressed. Now, I suspect that your intention was not to be divisive by suggesting to be a “New” community over and against the universal, apastolic and catholic Church of history, but that is how it might come accross.
With that in mind I read with dismay “Chris P’s” comment above about “a bunch of old blue haired people”. Chris P ought to be ashamed to refer to his brothers and sisters in Christ in such a derogatory manner.
Sadly, I see this as the predominant attitude of those who seek out the “e” churches. In stead of submitting with our fellow believers to the risen Christ, the emphasis is on “an environment that fits my style of life with people I can relate to”.
Comment by Eric — December 10, 2005 @ 11:43 am
Eric,
I want to thank you for taking the time to leave a comment! At the same time, I’d like to clarify a couple of things that your comment raises. While the yin-yang symbol is not a “new age” symbol, we do not have the yin-yang symbol here on our site. If you look closer, and perhaps reading the description would help too, you’ll see that it’s merely a water drop. I personally designed the image in question and it was not my intention to make it look like the ancient chinese symbol. I do however admit that after others have pointed it out, it indeed does look a bit like it. But, i still like the image and it’s significance to us is well described.
Also, I hope that you’ll take a moment to understand the medium which you are reading and commenting on. This is not a centralized, “autorized personnel only” method of communication. People are free to comment as the choose (including you). I appreciate hearing from everyone, but I hope that everyone’s comments won’t necessarily be attributed to me or the others who comment.
Lastly, while we have not included a doctrinal statement on our website at this time, I think that if you read what we have included and continue to post, you’ll get clear understanding that we love Jesus and others and at the same time have very real roots and foundations in the historical creeds and beliefs of our faith. Personally I hope that the world will know that we are Jesus followers by our love, not our doctrinal statements.
Comment by Andy — December 16, 2005 @ 10:13 am
Andy,
Thanks for the time you took for responding.
Regarding the New-Age/Yin-Yang issue. Through your Wikipedia link, you are correct that the Yin-Yang symbol is taken from Toaism. However, you are incorrect when claiming that the Yin-Yang symbol “is not a ‘new age’ symbol”. It most certainly is. The “New Age” movement, as I am sure you know, is actually not “new” at all. It is simply re-packaged pagan philosophy from the Far East. Furthermore, the New Age movement does not merely encompass a narrow aspect of Eastern philosophy. A general web search gave me the following definition:
In other words, while Taoism is not to be identified as “New Age”, one could say that the “New Age” movement involves Taoism. Or, as an article on wikipedia says:
It can be easy, then, to see how the Yin-Yang symbol has become associated with the New Age movement. If you still disagree, you need only do a “google” image search for “New Age Symbol” and you will find a Yin-Yang symbol.
Even more interesting is the fact that the Yin-Yang symbol itself has “morphed” into several similar renditions, as this link will show. So, it would not be a suprise if I was not the only person who identified your “water” graphic with the “Yin-Yang” symbol.
What makes matters more complicated is the fact that your “Visions and Values” section contains graphics that represent “Wind”, “Water”, “Earth” and “Fire”. And, of course, these are also well known New Age symbols as this New Age Website attests.
Now, I have spent some time spelling out the above information for a purpose a bit greater than to prove that I am right and you are wrong. Think about it this way: What kind of message are you presenting by including known New Age symbolism with the absence of any concrete doctrinal statement?
In regard to your contention that your blog is an open forum -I realize that. However, it is all to common to find those involved with the emerging church movement to be rather judgmental and condescending towards fellow believers in Jesus Christ. Why did it take me -a traditional church guy- to make a note of that? Why were you not the first to condemn these comments? It is your blog, afterall, and I just happened to find it the day I posted my comments.
And, finally, in regard to your position that your “love” as opposed to “doctrinal statements” will identify you as Jesus followers to the world. By that statement, you have identified yourself with Liberal Christianity over against orthodox, historical Christianity.
Wikipedia defines Liberal Christianity in almost the same you have identified your church:
In that context, perhaps it would be important for you to be clear to the readers of your blog in agreeing with the historical Christian church that we are saved only through our faith in the risen Jesus Christ as our only Lord and Savior. Will you also make that profession with the Church of the ages?
Or, is this “New Community” your are advertising unwilling to make that stand?
In Christ,
Eric
SDG
Comment by Eric — December 16, 2005 @ 4:37 pm
Eric,
You make some good points. I believe I have some of the same concerns you raised. When I looked at the website, I specifically looked to see what the branch’s beliefs were. I couldn’t find anything that helped me. At all. I read in the reponse that there may be one at some time. Until I can learn more about this new emerging church’s beliefs, I wouldn’t even think about attending.
My first impression of the water drop was that it was a yin-yang symbol.
Comment by Dave — December 17, 2005 @ 6:54 am
a couple of comments…
It is not my intention that the water graphic represent the yin-yang symbol (perhaps when i get a sec I’ll rework the design to avoid the confusion). Neither do we wish to be lumped with any spiritual or philisophical movement except that of the tradition of the Christian faith. We are certainly willing to take a stand for the core tenets of our faith (I’ll post soon on this), but would you not also agree that some theological issues are more marginal and less easy to clarify than others? Perhaps not. There are some questions that seem hard to answer and I’m ok with that. If someone else comes up with different answers to these questions, I’m ok with that.
And by elevating love for one another above doctrinal statements, I was hoping to identify us not with an arbitrary label but with the one we follow (see here and here and here).
please don’t misunderstand me… I don’t intend to dismiss the importance of careful thought and well informed belief systems. We are trying to build relationships with people that don’t know anything about doctrinal statements and could really care less what makes a lutheran different than a calvinist. I do, however, think that Jesus has a good point when he claims that the world will know that we are his disciples by our love for one another. And, that it matters very much to people who don’t follow Jesus if we actually take this point seriously.
Anyways, this is the kind of conversation that I love to have over a cup of coffee, ya know? So, if you (Eric) or anyone else for that matter want to take me up on it. I’ll buy the coffee, seriously. Just shoot me an email: andy -AT- thebranchonline.org. I’m going to close the comments for this post simply because this seems an inefficient way to carry on a converstion. Thanks again for thoughtful posts!
Have a blessed Christmas everyone!
Comment by Andy — December 20, 2005 @ 12:44 pm