Working at a small church has it's good points and it's hard (I didn't want to call them bad) points. I think it is also easy for a seminary student to try to project many things upon the situation that would most likely end up hurting the church. But here are some thoughts that have been running through my head lately.
I said something in class last year about the difference between chaplaincy and ministry, and I want to re-apply that inside the greater context of the local church. This is also a response to how I used to think that church planting was the way to go for younger ministers.
I serve a great little church. I work with the youth, teach the married sunday school class (called "the pairs and spare's), teach from the pulpit when needed, and serve in a variety of other tasks. Theologically, I am not in the most comfortable place, but I realize that it is worth more for me to be serving than to be picky and not give help when it is so needed. The congregation has been in existence for over 150 years, and has been in the same building since the early 1850's. The longevity that is a part of the community is something that is very important to the people.
With this kind of history, I think it would be dangerous to come in and try to re-configure everything that is going on, but the need for change should still be recognized. The hard part is finding the middle point between progressive church polity and where the congregation would feel comfortable. The American ecclesiology that I think really makes the biggest difference is that practiced by more established pseudo-emerging congregations like Ecclesia in Houston and Solomons Porch in the Twin Cities 1. But there is a huge difference between these "Hip" urban meccas and the small town central Kentucky community is which I serve.
There is also a huge age difference. How can a minister in the early part of his adult life (let's say 25-35) find a common ground with a crowd that is retired and is generally content with how "safe" their church is? By safe, I mean comfortable, and that is where the chaplaincy analogy comes into play. For the most part, the minister/pastor is serving in a role that is focused more on the needs of the people, and being the primary evangelist than acting as the catalyst for leadership and kingdom growth.
How can a young minister come in and apply his/her seminary training using the praxis that is developing in relation to the 21st century and post-modernity and still be relevant to a congregation that remembers the Cuban Missile Crisis. What relationship does this church have with it's greater community and how can the church begin to live a gosple life out amongst the people
So this is the beginning of the question. I am excited about fleshing these things out here. I do want to say that I am happy with where I am and what I am doing, and I can see God in my Church. I guess this is more of a theological springboard than a critique of my current situation. I also don't think this is a time to analyze the validity of post-modernism and it's relation to ministry.
________________
1. Both of these being established worshiping bodies with a history of impact. I picked these two in order to separate from the mass of "churches" that have a 2-3 year lifespan that never get into a regenerative state.
Recent Comments