There's no question
that there has been a fundamental shift in the worldview of Western
culture. We are no longer a modern
society, but what we have become is difficult to define. The best handle that we've been able to
attach to it is "postmodern",
a title that will undoubtedly change once we arrive at a destination and
can stop describing what we are not. As
part of this cultural shift, the church has experienced a change in its role in
our society. In modernity, the church
maintained an influential role in our culture.
But now, like society, the church is in the midst of an identity
crisis.
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0LFeROVQ_UTDZXARw9VebgxZ1-w3g4WmLo9vnMWN5GngfXbb8YonyDe6H9xnYsgrmlK2vR9s5-xJPa-s8hH0qL4A2E2nm_Rc_ZvOa7WSd9LCDtUv2CMMGltaubwwGEU0I9mvMKOk20paT/s320/Church+-+Boarded+up.jpg)
The most prevalent
view of the current situation of the church in America is captured by referring
to our culture as "post-church."
Unfortunately, that term is defined as widely as it is used. For some it means that the church has lost
its place of influence in our culture.
For others it means that the institutional church, especially the
mainline denominations, are as good as gone even though they will continue to exist for some time.
Taken to its logical end, some use the term to describe the church as
being in its death throes as it approaches an inevitable extinction. Trends, statistics, surveys, etc. are
frequently cited to support and promote one or another of these definitions of
post-church. Whichever of these
definitions we end up settling on, we should be asking ourselves why we're
planting churches if we truly are a post-church culture.
Thankfully, post-church does not
accurately describe the current religious landscape of America. With thousands of churches in communities
throughout our nation, we obviously are not post-church as a culture. Yes, there has been serious decline in
membership, in attendance, in financial
support, and in the church's influence in American society, but these losses do
not equate to being post-church. Instead
they reflect the reality that we as a culture are post-churched.
Understanding the
difference between being a post-church culture or a post-churched culture is
critically important to church planting.
If we truly are a post-church culture, planting churches would be a
pointless waste of resources. What
purpose would more churches serve in a culture that has no use for
churches? It would make as much sense as producing 8-track tape players in our digital age.
No matter how many features you added to the player, how well you
marketed the benefits of 8-track over MP3, or disparaged the social and
economic consequences of digital media, the culture has moved on and will not
ever return to the 8-track platform. We
are truly a post-8-track culture. So, if we
are genuinely a post-church culture, planting churches, even vastly
"improved" and wonderfully marketed churches, is pointless. And, logically, those arguing for planting of
"culturally relevant" churches are to be pitied most of all in a
post-church culture.
Fortunately, we are
not a post-church culture, but a post-churched culture. This term captures the reality that a
majority of Americans are not churched.
Some of the non-churched were once churched, but have left the church
for one reason or another. Others, an
increasing majority, have never been churched.
Once we see that the loss of the church's influence in our society is
not a direct result of our culture's worldview shifting from modernism but is a
function of the decreased participation in the church by a steadily increasing
majority of Americans -- that we are a post-churched, not a post-church, culture
-- we can go about the task of planting churches that effectively engage the
non-churched through Word and Sacrament ministry which transcends all cultures
and cultural shifts.
No comments:
Post a Comment