Escaping from the Three B’s

Are too many American churches (that is congregations who worship in a consecrated building) ruled by the Three B’s?

Do the people within them need to escape from the throttle of the Three B’s?

If you are interested in the answer, please read on!

By the kindness of the Rector of St Luke’s Seattle, I attended a Conference on “Generous Orthodoxy” in Seattle in the first week of November 2005. About 400 people were there and they were mostly from non-denominational groups. In fact many of them had apparently left denominational churches (from Catholic to Pentecostal) in order to discover who is Jesus and to practice what Christianity and the local church (meaning people rather than building) are really and truly all about. Their focus appears to be on Jesus, on a simple spirituality to know God through Jesus, and on loving the neighbor through local community outreach. Their creed is what they have come to call “generous orthodoxy” which is nothing to do with the dogma of the Early Church! Rather, it is a readiness to embrace insights and practices from the wide variety of Christian traditions of devotion and spirituality that have existed and still exist in the USA. To affirm all rather than to defend one and to be generous to one another and especially to the needy and disadvantaged locally. The expression “generous orthodoxy” is from the title of a recent book by Brian MacLaren, who is a key person/mentor in this movement.

One female minister (who with her husband pastors one of these local non-denominational churches that does not own property) described her “journey” from the stress of the three B’s to the liberation of the three C’s. In her denominational church where she was a clergy-person she had to think continually about the BUDGET (and the weekly collection and covenants), the BUILDING PROGRAM (whether new facilities or maintaining the existing ones) and BUTTS on seats (how many people attended?). On Sunday evening and Monday morning she was regularly “stressed out.” Instead of looking to Jesus and loving God and the neighbor, she was bound to the Three B’s and their out-workings and this was bondage.

Now that she has left this bondage she is able to focus on and count other things such as Connections, Collaboration and Conversation. Now the church is people who are connected to the neighborhood where they meet, who are able to collaborate with any others in specific projects long or short term, and engage in dialogue and conversation with people of all kinds about God and love and anything else, without the pressure to seek to make them disciples and church members right away!

The point about this “generous orthodoxy movement” is that it seeks to be non-judgmental, to be practical rather than cerebral, to emphasize actions more than words, and thus to be a very mixed bag in terms of the great variety of local experiments at being “the real church” of people who love Jesus. Right now it seems to be generating a lot of interest amongst younger, caring Christians.

Running parallel to this “generous orthodoxy” movement is another which has been very recently described by George Barna in his book, Revolution (Tyndale House), He describes a related but different phenomenon of a small but growing number of evangelicals who are not satisfied with the quality of Christian vision, character and vision being taught and commended in the majority of the evangelical churches (congregations with hold buildings). They are desirous of a fuller and deeper Christian life and consecration and they are forming a variety of kinds of associations, groupings and fellowships to foster this. And most of them are under 45 and are devoted family people.

Both movements are found either outside or only very loosely attached to the many evangelical denominations and institutions of the USA. And there is obviously some overlap between them for neither is organized from a center and thus at the local level one group may easily see itself as belonging to both, indeed of seeing the two as but one general phenomenon. Both seem to have consciously recognized the power of post-modernity and the culture it creates, with the intention to work creatively within it. However, those described by Barna seem to be more specifically committed to biblical themes of personal holiness and consecration at home and work than those embracing “generous orthodoxy.” At the same time, the latter seem more specifically committed to practical action on behalf of the poor and disadvantaged, not abroad, but in their patch.

Whether either or both movements will be around in a decade is a question I cannot answer. However, my suspicion is that the high day of the evangelical church growth movement is ended and this movement is slowing down. It is slowing down because there is a significant, growing yearning for growth in maturity of faith, hope and love rather than a one-sided emphasis on growth in numbers (Butts in seats!). The small “church” of 100 members even 50 members or less is becoming attractive again – a fellowship which has a definite mission within the locality wherein it is placed, a mission more than evangelism, a mission of service to and within the local communities, especially to the needy therein.

We know that the average size of Anglican/Episcopal churches in the USA is well below a hundred. Regrettably so often these churches are so overcome by two of the B’s – the Budget and the Building – that they do not have sufficient energy left to go after more Butts for seats. [And those evangelicals which do go after more Butts tend to make the entry of converts into the church rather easy, if for no other reason than that the internal standards are not high to start with!]

Maybe these liturgical congregations with buildings can learn from the two movements described above without actually joining them! That is, to place growth in maturity in Christ and love of the neighbor in local practical ways as high priorities and thereby embrace the C’s – to make new connections in the neighborhood and community, to collaborate with people of like mind, and to have wider and deeper conversation with a widening circle. Certainly they must avoid being tired and stressed out by the B’s.

November 4, 2005 petertoon@msn.com