For starters, the Greek word for church - 'ekklesia' – really simply means ‘congregation’, ‘assembly’, or ‘gathering’. In another words, based on word meaning, the church really means God’s gathering, or God’s mob (as what one of my former doctrine lecturers liked to term it). The idea of coming together, of assembling together is central to the idea of church. This concept is seen in the writings of Australian theologian Broughton Knox. I quote him (at length):
"[...] the Old Testament assembly or church was a physical gathering of all the people of God, in the presence of God, first at Mount Sinai, and then later at Jerusalem. In the New Testament, [...] the idea is spiritualized. Jesus builds his church as he said, but it is a spiritual gathering around himself in the spiritual world of heaven. [...] We are participa
nts in the group or gathering around God’s throne which Christ is forming in the presence of God. This is the basic use in the New Testament of the word ‘church’. It describes a spiritual relationship which is a spiritual experience. Now being in a gathering means being in fellowship together for the purpose for which gathering is formed. [...] Fellowship, if it is to be expressed between ourselves while we still remain in the body in this physical world, must involve meeting. [...] So that being in the heavenly church, that is to say, being in fellowship with God and one another through the gospel, involves being in fellowship with one another in a physical visible assembly or meeting." (From ‘The Church’ in D. Broughton Knox Selected Works: Volume II – Church and Ministry (ed. Kirsten Birkett; Kingsford: Matthias Media, 2003), 19-22)For Dr. Knox, as much as the idea of gathering has been ‘spiritualized’ in the New Testament to refer to the spiritual gathering of believers around God’s throne, such a gathering must still express itself in local, physical geographical assemblies or gatherings.
Another theologian who follows suit in holding onto this idea of assembly or gathering as a key defining factor of church is Miroslav Volf. After a helpful chapter discussing on the definition of ecclesiology, he states:
"Every congregation that assembles around the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord in order to profess faith in him publicly in pluriform fashion, including through baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and which is open to all churches of God and to all human beings, is a church in the full sense of the word, since Christ promised to be present in it through his Spirit as the first fruits of the gathering of the whole people of God in the eschatological reign of God." (From After our Likeness: The Church as the Image of the Trinity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 158)
John Webster also has a place for assembly and gathering in the definition of church, but nuances his argument slightly to ground ecclesiology in the divine perfection of God – the perfection of life which first and foremost exists within the Godhead in Himself, but which is ‘turned out’ towards his creatures. He defines church as ‘the communion of saints, the assembly of those whom God has consecrated for fellowship with himself through his works of election, reconciliation and consummation’ (‘The Church and the Perfection of God’ in The Community of the Word: Toward an Evangelical Ecclesiology (Ed. Mark Husbands & Daniel Treier; Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 78). In another words, Webster seeks to explicate the doctrine of church through the twin notions of election and holiness. “What is gained in this way is the retention of a sense of God’s perfection, and thus of the distinction of the church from God, a distinction which is the primary condition for fellowship.” (Ibid., 89)
To summarise – my investigation so far has led me down the path of seeing the central definition of church as a gathering of God’s people by God himself according to His purposes of election of us and holiness for us. This gathering happens as a spiritual reality which is expressed through the physical and local gathering of congregations.
So far so good. The next question is – what is the place of ‘community’ in all this (‘community’ here referring to the network of relationships that happen within the different members of the congregation or gathering)? And here is where my biggest (and in fact only) concern about Total Church comes in. In their dual emphasis on ‘gospel’ and ‘community’ as the two key principles for how we ‘do church’, it almost comes across that ‘community’ lies as a central factor in the definition of church. For starters, a formal definition of ‘church’ is missing in the book – it seems like Tim and Steve assume that the readers knows what church is. The danger of missing such a formal definition is that it pretty much leaves the definition to be filled out by the contents of the book – regardless of whether that is how Tim and Steve meant for church to be defined. At certain points in the book, it almost comes across that the identity of the Christian is bound up in the identity of the church – or more precisely – in the Christian’s identification with the church in its community life.
In fact, I’m not the first to have raised these issues. Tony Payne, alongside with Simon Flinders, and Steve Timmis have had an extended discussion over email on this question (See http://matthiasmedia.com.au/briefing/library/5219). More than anything else, we can thank Tony, Simon, and Steve for showing us how a charitable discussion over issues should be conducted. I will not rehearse the arguments here. My own conclusion is that while ‘community’ should be kept out of the definition of church, and in that sense, the definition of church should focus on the concept of gathering through the electing and sanctifying work of God; community, nevertheless, is an important, central and necessary implication of that gathering. In another words
, community is not accidental to the church but incidental. In another words, there is a distinction – though a fine one. The main reason for me stating things this way is pastoral: Suppose one pastors a church where there isn’t really a vibrant community within that gathering or assembly, i.e. the people in the church tend to see themselves more as ‘individuals’ rather than as ‘individuals-in-community’. With a definition of church where community is central, I might be tempted to think that this assembly might not really be ‘church’. But with the definition where community is not part of the definition of church but a necessary implication of the idea of church, I can still be assured that this assembly is still a church – it’s still God’s gathering of His people. It’s still Him electing and sanctifying His people. But with me understanding ‘community’ as a central and necessary implication of church or this gathering, at the same time, I will be encouraged to challenge the members on our community life – and here, in this aspect, we have much to thank Tim and Steve for the many stimulating ideas they have provided us with.Overall, while this post might come across to some as being overly pedantic, I hope more than anything else, it has showed us the importance of definitions – how we define s
omething will in turn influence how we see things on the ground. By remembering that God’s electing and sanctifying work expressed through the gathering of His people stands at the center of definition of church, it will help us to rightly focus our eyes on God even as we belong to our different congregations and gatherings. But by remembering that community is a necessary and central implication of such a gathering, it might spur us on in our love for one another, such that the world might look at us and say, “See... how much they love one another!”(Photos are taken from 25 years at 25 Adam Road, and are used purely for aesthetical purposes only)
No comments:
Post a Comment