When I was little, I never recall my parents telling me not to talk to strangers, although we did get the "Stranger Danger" talk at primary school. This instilled a knowledge of the necessity to scream loudly if anyone so much as offers you a lolly. After all, you would never know if accepting it would lead to you waking up in an ice-bath with a note thanking you for the kidney (or worse).
But lollies and "Stranger Danger" and so on aside, I've always found that conversations with strangers can be quite interesting. Some have been occasionally deeply odd, but for the most part fun.
There's something unusual, yet fascinating, about conversations that run to practically an hour long with a semi-stranger before you introduce youselves. The conversation I had on the weekend with said semi-stranger started out with the weather lately and tourism, moved to the planning potential for the local area, then through to politics, the treatment of David Hicks and Mohamed Haneef, our hopes for a change of government come the election, back to the local area and then religion (you're not meant to talk politics or religion with friends, apparently, let alone strangers, but hey, why not break with convention I say!).
And religion is where it got interesting.
Let me explain the back story as best I can. If you could just cue the soft-focus, Raoul? Thank-you...
There's a long history of religious involvement in the local area, although in recent decades that has declined, with businesses that had been run by one of the denominations in the local area closing. That happened about a decade or so ago, I believe, although I'm not entirely sure of the dates or the reasons for the closures (only moved here a couple years ago). However, in conversations with people around the area in the past, I've picked up on there being a lot of resentment about the businesses closing. It seems like the decisions were rushed, people lost jobs with short notice and although it was some time ago, there's a lot of hurt still felt by people.
Previously this topic had only come up with people who had actually been employed by the businesses or were members of the church. I'd not actually discussed it with someone who was looking at it through "external" eyes, if that makes sense, and didn't approach it with the biases of being involved in one way or another.
Apparently the resentment isn't just felt by people involved. There's still a fair amount residual resentment in the community. It meant that other businesses lost trade and closed or ran at a loss when people moved away, house prices were down, incomes disappeared, etc, and it took time to build it up again to where it is today (which is thriving, really, and with a housing market where entry-level housing costs have increased by 40% in the past 18 months).
However, this isn't my point. It's just the background to something that I don't entirely understand myself (you can stop the soft-focus now, Raoul!).
What I found fascinating in the conversation, yet also rather sad, is the way in which churches acting corporately can disappoint and hurt people who aren't members or employed by them, but those in the communities around. And then churches wonder why people are hesitant to get involved with them or flat-out dislike them. There are already lots of people out there who dislike church anyway. And an amazing number who think Christians are hypocritical jerks, utter w***ers or *whatever totally creative swearword you can come up with and insert in this space* (yet who often have friends who are Christians).
It's almost like there's an expectation that instead of doing good in the long-run, there's going to be more disappointment. Due to the way human nature is, I suppose I'm used to the concept of church people being hurt by others within churches/church administration or those who don't attend church being put off religion due to their experiences with unpleasant individuals from one denomination or the other (should we be used to that? Hmmm). But when it came to considering how churches as a corporate structure could have a strong negative impact on people not personally involved with them, it was sort of new territory - perhaps because you sort of think of church admin being removed from the vast majority of people's daily lives.
It made me wonder how churches can respond when someone feels that way. It would just seem ironic and completely trite to suggest God loves them and cares about them when churches so often haven't shown that. How is the damage done meant to be repaired? Can it be? Should churches as corporate beings be exploring relationships, thoughts and perceptions outside of what they believe to be their immediate sphere of impact (ie: church members, those with close ties)? What more do churches have to know about public relations that they currently don't? How can churches go about reconnecting with communities?
Hmm...
10 comments:
Being the kinda christian I am I don't usually actually tell people I am a christian, from my community involvement (limited though it is) I found people steared clear of me if they knew straight off the bat I was a christian. Instead I try and maintain what I believe are christian behavours and show them christianity. Then when they do ask me and find out; they aren't shocked horrified and appalled. (Ok some still are but compared to most of them I am still the golden haired child)
I think Church's need to be a littl more like that. They focus so much on the long distance scope and over seas problems they don't see the effect they are having in their near by. I have heard so many times that the church is there to 'save' the unsaved just like Jesus did. But didn't he first heal, comfort and love his near by before he saved us? He wanted us to be healthy happy and content and then we realised how much we needed him for what he has done for us...
This is only a simple me point of view possibly doctrinly incorect.
Somehow I wonder whether the guy would have talked about the issue with me if he'd known I was a Christian or something... But maybe he would have. I guess I tend to have the same approach as you do with it, rather than telling everyone, thumping a few people over the head with a Bible and trying to steer them toward the nearest church.
Plus there seems often so much hypocrisy when it comes to what some Christians say and do not matching up at all, too, that I think the world in general has become rather jaded to it all.
But anyways... I really, really like your comment about healing, comforting and loving people and agree with it being what Jesus did in the vast majority of cases. Sometimes I wonder whether churches are frightened of that, almost, though.
It's almost as if building relationships is passed over for the attempted quick-fix. You go out, evangelise, get a few people converted and hurrah for semi-instant results. That instead of building friendships, taking care of others, helping them, letting them make the decision about whether or not they want to become a Christian or have God in their lives.
That said, I don't think people should start friendships looking to convert others. It's like that "Missionary Dating" rubbish, which seems more like conning people than building friendships/relationships/whatever with them.
Hmm... I have noticed that if you ever ask a christian how does their 'religion' help those around them, it is always, this organization within the church does this and that one does that... Never is it something they actually do. someone else is doing it else where.
maybe I should write something about my view of God coming to heal, comfort and love sometime... I guess it is somethign I feel passionate about; but no idea what I would do with it
Hmm, with some it's that way. But there are a lot of people out there who live their faith and try to do a lot for their community. Sometimes I think also that people don't always think their actions have influence - they see the churches as being the influential things, with their actions just being part of everyday life.
But then there are people who think just going to church each week is where their Christian duty begins and ends.
Writing that would be good! I can use it if you want to share it once written.
hmm this is true. Churches do have such a dinamic range of people; I suppose this is why they function so well. Yet it is the the few loud stupid ones that make us look and feel bad about ourselves as a group
Hmm, churches do often have a broad range of people, but I think they function at their best when God's doing the leading (you often get people in churches who want to do the leading and never mind what God has to say about the matter... yikes).
Perhaps God not leading things ties in with churches and church administration who have had negative impacts on those around them. The way child abuse within a number of denominations has been dealt with would be something covered by that - God is very obviously and clearly not leading there when priests or ministers are just moved to new areas rather than disciplined (guess that example springs to mind with the recent payments being made to victims of abuse from the Catholic church in America, with multi-million dollar payments).
Perhaps when personal agendas rule out over God's agendas, that's when problems start to creep in... Although that said, not all of God's decisions, laws, etc will make everyone happy all of the time. And we were made with free will after all, in order to make our own decisions. But still... Hmm.
Hmm... this is true. I think when God is in charge, things will go in the right direction. There will be mishaps a long the way we are human after all. But yes it is a very disapointing thing that peoples descressions (particularily those in high rank) are kinda of covered over and said person is just moved else where. I realise we want to keep it in the 'family' but doing this will only injure more people than help them. Is the turning off of so many people wanting to be one of us; worth hiding someone's errors especially when they are sometimes so greavious.
Yeah, mistakes can't be avoided due to that whole being human thing :) But probably can be learned from.
Error things do need to be dealt with, but there's Christian ways for dealing with things, too. So it sort of all needs to be balanced and just and fair and it's probably really rather difficult, come to think of it. Plus forgiveness... Easier said than done sometimes!
When errors/problems have the potential to be harmful or dangerous to others, there needs to be something done about them, though.
hmm; I suppose it is a nice little tight rope we have to walk sometimes and I guess everyone would probably do it slightly differnet.
But stuff like child molestation shouldn't be kept hidden. It is somethign everyone veiws badly and it needs to be adressed by the wider comunity for everyones childs protection
Mmm, and there's no failsafe method for every situation. Every situation will present its own challenges and there's probably a fair amount of importance in being able to be flexible and work through things in order to ensure the best possible result for all involved.
And yeah, I agree. Never understood why organisations, whether they're church ones or not, would sweep child abuse under the mat and pretend it hasn't happened.
Post a Comment