Community in Mourning

Last time I wrote about how excessive boundaries are limiting discipleship and the effect on church community. It soon became apparent that this issue goes even deeper than that. Hence the revisit.

Keep in mind that Biblical times were mostly an agricultural-based society. You depended upon the whole community to ensure survival. The concept of community was not even something they had to think about consciously. So it was important to be transparent about our troubles, so the community knew where support was needed to maintain the tribe. This was the norm for thousands of years.

This did not change until the Industrial Revolution. This created the opportunity to be more independent and ultimately more isolated as a result. This trend has only escalated with advancing technology. This is what led to the perceived need for privacy, and the downfall of community has been a side effect. I dare say this has even led us to shame sorrow, and rush people through their mourning. Making people feel all alone in their pain. Let’s look at the main perceived criticisms of public troubles to determine whether they are founded. 

The first being seeking only provision, not solutions. Galatians 6:1-6 indicates that church support is about a hand up when needed, not a permanent crutch. So that they can be the one to give support next time. The original pay it forward. As well as a sign of healthy community. There will always be those who seem to be forever in need, yet never reciprocate. Despite only taking, they always seem to have the least too. An obvious lack of blessing is seen here. This is where our fear lies; not in how it harms the community dynamic, but how it affects us. I dare say we have all been exploited through our charitable acts. Leading us to qualify our support first, or just deny everyone to be certain. Forgetting that grace does not work that way. If they themselves establish a questionable pattern that hurts the community, then we should reconsider how we support them. But let’s not judge everyone by what someone else did. Give people the benefit of the doubt until they earn that doubt. Giving with the right motives is our main concern; what they do with them is on them. People even exploited Jesus' generosity too. He never let that stop him, but unlike us, he had nothing to lose. (John 6:25-27)

Another criticism is that they are only seeking attention. Well, of course they are. They are thirsty for human connection within a dysfunctional community. Maybe we should address the obvious ills of our community, instead of shaming the one who is an obvious symptom of the problem. Then maybe they wouldn’t have to seek it in such shallow and self-destructive ways, as social media seems to be enabling right now. Are we effectively kicking people while they are down when criticizing the lonely and sorrowful for being vulnerable in their sadness? It’s gotten to the point where many are denying themselves their basic and necessary need for human connection because community has become so toxic and self-centered. When no connection seems better than the risks of unhealthy connection. Then we obviously have a very serious problem. The church should be combating this, not enabling it.

First Corinthians 12 is a passage that we tend to only look at through the lens of spiritual gifts. Yet often fail to recognize how it also has a dimension of church community. Verses 25 and 26 in particular.

“so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.”

Do we really have equal concern for one another? Or do we value some more than others? Or always put self first? Do we genuinely rejoice and suffer together? Or do we envy others’ accomplishments? Do we come together as a community to assist the aching parts? Or is suffering treated shamefully, and kept private as a result? Let’s face it, much of our desire for privacy tends to take root in fear of judgment. Much like the Pharisees, we tend to treat sinners as bad people who should be scorned. Yet, Jesus treated sinners as people in need. (Matt. 9:12) Not that I’m saying suffering is a sin in itself, just that a dysfunctional community tends to treat it that way.

Still, behind much of our sin that leads to suffering is a genuine need or wound. In our impatience, or perhaps feelings of isolation, we take the quick painkiller approach. Which becomes far less effective over time, and self-destructive in the long term. Permanent healing requires facing and owning the issue. It requires being vulnerable. It may even require the support of discipleship. But even that will do us no good if our fellow church members only whitewashed their plank, rather than deal with it. Since they had to face it all alone themselves.

We as the church need to start cultivating a true community of discipleship again. That means setting aside the culture of shame and condemnation for those who don’t maintain the mere illusion of community by whitewashing their pain. So we can start promoting an environment of grace, healing, and support within the community once again.

The Visual PARABLEist

Community of Boundaries

The other day, a retired minister told me how his denomination had adopted “boundary training” for their ministers in the nineties. This discouraged ministers from getting too familiar with their members. This really got me thinking.

To explain, let me tell you a story. While I was at a certain church. I worked under many different ministers in the nearly 20 years that I was there. Most of them had some sort of big push towards outreach. Yet nearly every one of them hit the same wall. There was this overwhelming reluctance to do so by nearly everyone. I’m sure there were many reasons for this. But a good broad explanation is that they didn’t want to get wrapped up in the messy lives of those outside the church. I recall one person in particular asking, “Why are you so focused on people outside the church, when the people here are in need?” Yet the ministers in question never wanted to take a step back and deal with those internal obstacles first. Ultimately, that would require getting involved in the messy lives of the church members, ironically enough. Maybe it wasn’t a simple matter of not wanting to teach by example as I assumed. Instead, they had been instructed not to, due to boundaries. Perhaps that’s even part of the reason why there was this repeated push; they knew they couldn’t. Hard to say since most have moved on; I will ask if I get the chance.

While I understand the intent behind this training. But are they aware of the huge hindrance to discipleship this has become? Has it only made the church powerless, and ultimately unhelpful? Focusing more on defining and assuring people where they are already at. Not rolling up those proverbial sleeves to get them to the next level of ever-increasing glory. That church I mentioned is no more, by the way.

This may be a sign of community as a whole breaking down, because It’s not just the church being affected by this. This so-called "dating crisis" has women asking, "Why don’t men approach anymore?" Never considering that our boundary-laden culture makes it difficult to act natural anymore. So the most damaged people are the ones setting the bar to a highly sensitive level. They can be very loud and public when their boundaries get crossed too.

Think of it this way: we all have front doors, and many of us lock them. Good people wouldn’t even approach the door without reason, and wouldn’t even check if it was locked unless there was already an invite and an established relationship. Good strangers always knock first. Bad people wouldn’t care if it was locked if there was something they wanted to take from you. My point is: the laws of attraction may cause us to part our boundaries like the Red Sea for certain people, but it’s only the bad ones that will take advantage. So our use of boundaries in dating is often inconsistent and applied backwards. Leading to more boundaries to protect our new wounds.

One thing I think we tend to not understand about the symptom of so many boundaries is this. If you grow up in a toxic environment, then your social skills are not about giving and receiving love. They are more about dealing with difficult, abusive, and neglectful people. I dare say we are even getting to the point where they outnumber the securely attached. Such people don’t respond to sincere love like a cup of cold water on a hot day. They respond with caution and suspicion. While we always assume our coping mechanisms are perfectly rational, we also assume the way other people manage their wounds is out of line. When they are likely both just as unhealthy. All because we assume our good intentions are obvious. When nothing is obvious in a world full of manipulation and passive aggressiveness. It’s a messy issue that requires more than mere boundaries to deal with. In many cases, we put up boundaries to avoid dealing with issues that need attention. 

Do we as disciples care enough to look past people’s behaviour and consider the scars behind their actions? Are we patient enough to build the trust to break down these barriers? Are we courageous enough to face our own wounds and let Jesus deal with them, so we will be better equipped to deal with hurting people ourselves? Or are we just going to hide our wounds behind the boundary of a whitewashed heart? Only to teach others to adopt the same surface-level righteousness. Will you allow the institution of the church, as well as society as a whole, to fade away like a shadow as we grow further apart in our failing community? It’s something we should all think about.

The Visual PARABLEist