Too Political?
Recently I had a discussion with a friend about churches being too political. So it started me thinking about what is meant by that. I automatically agreed when he said it, but I also wanted to think about why that is often the case. I also wanted to think about whether or not that was just a perception issue.
I think that we all become political at a very young age. When we are taught to "share" what we have is the exact moment that we are introduced into politics. My kids are always playing political games with each other. They do favors for one another in exchange for other favors later. They try to remind each other of a higher ethic as long as it is used to get their way. No one wants to think of what is right whenever they get in trouble. Its only when they want something that the appeal to what is right is ever put forth. Quite often my kids remind me "to share" my money or my dessert.
Sharing and negotiating go hand in hand even though the principles that guide them are different. Sharing is about being kind and selfless, negotiating is about reaching an agreement that is win-win. I have noticed that church politics is often about negotiating and not about sharing. The reason for that is because of the finite resources the church has to share. So in the end deals are made, agreements are defined, and commitments are honored. This is a more democratic style of operation.
A church doesn't have to operate this way. It can be more authoritarian. All decisions could be made by a central authority figure. This would not allow for any variations in how things were done. A church would run alot like a company. Every would follow single file.
Unfortunately the same thing would happen in both methods of operation. Those who have the most influence would dominate. In a democratic system the most influential simply attract more followers and then they decide for the whole church. In an autoritarian operation the people who have the best relationshipt with the boss would also get their way.
I believe that a church should be led and not managed. It shouldn't be controlled by one central figure, but instead be a reflection of the one and only central figure who is Christ. Special power or status shouldn't be granted to people because of who they are or who they know. The true faithful don't look for such power anyway. They are merely looking to contribute. A church can't adequately operate under a democratic or authoritarian style. It has to be a balance of both. Certain issues can be handled among the members that are involved, but other issues should be handled by the leader of the church. All church members should hold each other accountable anyway. Politics doesn't have to be ugly. It doesn't have to be a struggle. It can be profitable if the people engaged in it don't selfish motives. They should all be working together for the benefit of God's commission.
I think that we all become political at a very young age. When we are taught to "share" what we have is the exact moment that we are introduced into politics. My kids are always playing political games with each other. They do favors for one another in exchange for other favors later. They try to remind each other of a higher ethic as long as it is used to get their way. No one wants to think of what is right whenever they get in trouble. Its only when they want something that the appeal to what is right is ever put forth. Quite often my kids remind me "to share" my money or my dessert.
Sharing and negotiating go hand in hand even though the principles that guide them are different. Sharing is about being kind and selfless, negotiating is about reaching an agreement that is win-win. I have noticed that church politics is often about negotiating and not about sharing. The reason for that is because of the finite resources the church has to share. So in the end deals are made, agreements are defined, and commitments are honored. This is a more democratic style of operation.
A church doesn't have to operate this way. It can be more authoritarian. All decisions could be made by a central authority figure. This would not allow for any variations in how things were done. A church would run alot like a company. Every would follow single file.
Unfortunately the same thing would happen in both methods of operation. Those who have the most influence would dominate. In a democratic system the most influential simply attract more followers and then they decide for the whole church. In an autoritarian operation the people who have the best relationshipt with the boss would also get their way.
I believe that a church should be led and not managed. It shouldn't be controlled by one central figure, but instead be a reflection of the one and only central figure who is Christ. Special power or status shouldn't be granted to people because of who they are or who they know. The true faithful don't look for such power anyway. They are merely looking to contribute. A church can't adequately operate under a democratic or authoritarian style. It has to be a balance of both. Certain issues can be handled among the members that are involved, but other issues should be handled by the leader of the church. All church members should hold each other accountable anyway. Politics doesn't have to be ugly. It doesn't have to be a struggle. It can be profitable if the people engaged in it don't selfish motives. They should all be working together for the benefit of God's commission.
posted by Ben at 5:48 AM
3 Comments:
Main Entry: pol•i•tics javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?politi11.wav=politics') javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?politi11.wav=politics')
Pronunciation: 'pä-l&-"tiks
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
Etymology: Greek politika, from neuter plural of politikos political
1 a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government
2 : political actions, practices, or policies
3 a : political affairs or business; especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government) b : political life especially as a principal activity or profession c : political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices
4 : the political opinions or sympathies of a person
5 a : the total complex of relations between people living in society b : relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view (office politics)
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=politics&x=9&y=9
I think 5a of the definiton of politics is at the very center of what you are discussing here. And yes, it is very complex.
Eurospiker, sounds like you've been misjudged by your church without a chance for defending yourself. Maybe they looked at your nosering and thought you were a junkie or something. Well don't look at a church sign and assume it's a bad place without actually attending and giving the members a chance to explain why they aren't all horrible people...
Truth:
The young are heard, but they aren't always agreed with. Older people are usually respected more, but they aren't always believed to be right. How you look doesn't make you who you are, but who you are is often reflected in how you look. Churches compete with each other even when their goals are the same. Recklessly offending people annoys them and accomplshes nothing, but doing what is right usually offends someone.
Post a Comment
<< Home