Why Does God Need the Church?

Theologian Gerhard Lohfink asks a provocative question: “Does God need the church?”  In his book titled with that question, he answers with a resounding “yes!”  The church, he argues, is essential to God’s mission and work in the world.  But for those of us sitting in many churches on Sunday morning it is hard to see how God might need us.  We look around at our half empty pews and we see a dying church, an aging congregation.  Then we go to a vestry meeting and look at our church budget where we find that the grand buildings that were once witnesses to our success as a church are too expensive to maintain.  In such a place, we must ask with doubt, does God really need the church?

Some try to answer God’s need for the church by turning the church into things that seem more relevant to what they see as God’s need.  What God really needs is a production studio and so we try to turn the church into one.  What God really needs are more young families in the church; so we do every fun-filled activity for young families that we can.  What God really needs is to be more relevant; so we try to dress up what we do with video projectors, rock bands, and coffee shops.  If God needs the church then we will become the church that God needs, we think. 

This tendency is not all bad.  I love good coffee at church and I certainly see a place for video in the work of telling the story of God, but none of these things seem to get at what God really needs when God needs the church.  More often than not, our efforts in church are simply attempts to sure up the church as an institution rather than answering God’s need.  What we need to realize is that the buildings, the ecclesial bodies, the liturgies, the hierarchies, the bishops, the priests, the laity, the budgets, etc, etc, etc, are only valuable as parts of the church in so far as they are fulfilling the mission of God.  And though I claim no direct revelation on this matter, I think that with any reading of scripture and listening to the tradition it is clear that God’s mission is not nice services for nice people in nice buildings.

So what is God’s mission?  The themes of God’s mission seem clear: love, reconciliation and resurrection.  Framed within a narrative we could say that God who created the world out of love is working to reconcile all creation to that love, a work that that requires resurrection to undo the death that has entered the world.  If the church is going to be a part of this work, then we must become a people that learn together the practice of love, reconciliation and resurrection.

Still we are more than simply a practice community.  We are, as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians, “the body of Christ and individually members of it” (12:27).  This makes the fact that God needs the church more clear as we see that with Christ’s ascension we become the incarnation of God on earth.  Such a reality makes the old dying Constantinian Christendom seem pale and uninspired.  We are called to be God’s real presence in the world—this is a radical and amazing call for a group of people.

How all this works itself out practically comes through two forms of church—the church as icon and the church as dojo.  An icon is an image that sparks the imagination to move beyond the image and see God.  This is opposed to the idol which is an image that tries to contain the presence of the divine and box it into human forms.  In the church as icon our liturgies and rites all serve the purpose of showing us the God that is beyond the particular liturgy or practice.  Baptism is a kind of icon as is the Eucharist.  We run into trouble when we have such profound experiences of the divine through these icons that we limit God to their particular images—at that point we have an idol.  Much of Western Christian history has been a path of creating idols of icons.  I believe that much of the current demise of the church and religion is nothing more than a clearing away of these idols so that we can once again have icons.

When Jesus told the people of his day that to see him is to see the Father (John 14:7) he was laying out what was supposed to be true of any icon.  As Christ’s body on earth in the here and now, the church should be able to say the same thing, “if you have seen us you have seen God.” Sadly, many of us in the church would rather the world not look at us, or at least those who are supposedly in this same body with us.

To fulfill the role of icons we must obey the call of Christ to discipleship—a process in which we aim to become like Christ through living out his teachings and practicing the spiritual disciplines Jesus himself practiced.  This is where the church as dojo comes in.  A dojo is a practice community within martial arts—it is the place where adherents to a specific form come together to learn how to be better practitioners, both from each other and from recognized masters of the form.  Mark Scandrette, in his beautiful book Practicing the Way of Jesus, has suggested that what we need to do as church is to become “Jesus Dojos.”  As Jesus Dojos we would become communities in which we practice becoming more Christlike together.

In such a context leadership within the church would serve in functions of both coaching and facilitation.  The authority of leaders would not come as much from any specific certification—seminary degree, ordination—but more so from the leaders ability as a practitioner of the Jesus way.  This doesn’t mean that these leaders will be perfect in this practice or even the best at being Christlike in the church, but it does mean that church leaders must be respectably good at being Christlike and have the ability to teach others to be just as good or better.

I work out regularly in a Crossfit gym and I see this kind of dynamic at play with the trainers there.  In workouts we are frequently asked to do very difficult and technically challenging exercises.  I would never do them if I didn’t trust that it was going to be of benefit to me.  Why do I trust that these exercises will make me fitter, stronger, faster?  Because the coaches at the gym are very fit and strong and fast.  They clearly know how to get where I want to go.  Sure they have a lot of book knowledge of physiology and nutrition, but they also have a demonstrated practical knowledge of how to become very fit.  

The same goes for the church.  In our age we can’t rest on titles and old roles.  In all likelihood people coming into a church are going to have little respect for an ordained person as such.  What matters is that we are good at Christianity, that we know how to pray, that we readily confess our wrongs, and that we practice humility.  Our churches must spark our visions toward God and show others how to practice the way of Jesus.

Imagine a church where, after a few months of regularly attending, you are able to recognize that you are less angry than you used to be.  Imagine a church that shows you how to forgive the person who hurt you most profoundly.  Imagine a church that measures your love of God as Dorothy Day did hers, by how much you love the person you love least.  Imagine a church that loves you for who you are, away from all of the facades of the self, and teaches you how to love.  That is the kind of church I want to be a part of.

About Ragan Sutterfield

Ragan Sutterfield is a writer and Episcopal seminarian sojourning from his native Arkansas in Alexandria, Virginia. He is the author of Cultivating Reality: How the Soil Might Save Us, Farming as a Spiritual Discipline and a contributor to the book Sacred Acts: How churches are working to protect the Earth’s climate. Ragan’s articles and essays have appeared in a variety of magazines including Triathlete, The Oxford American, and Books & Culture. He works to live the good life with his wife Emily and daughter Lillian.

  • mike h

    Thank you for this. I’ve long thought that the idea of ‘Yeshua-do’ was a far better way of doing church than the ‘unscrew the top of their heads and pour in information’ way that embodies most churches. I appreciate the thought you’ve put into this and I intend to use it, if that’s ok.

  • http://angiespoint@blogspot.com Angie VanDeMerwe

    “Feelings” drive us….and they are dependent on our brains in the sensations that come to the forefront when we are faced with things that are abhorrent to us. This is a natural human response. We divide ourselves by these distinctive “feelings”, which are culturally conditioned. When the “conditioning” has been over a lifetime, then, it is improbably that there will be cooperation toward reconciling things that have been accepted and rejected. It is a matter of the person’s will to determine that such “conditioning” will be overcome, which won’t happen without the person being convinced of a reason. And reasons are based on “self-interest” of one kind or another.

    “God” does not need the Church, but some people seem to need the Church and “God”. It is a type of “co-dependency” where the member looses their “life” for the institution of the Church. I think it is irrational, but some people think this is “important”, “necessary”, “valuable”, because they do believe that “God” exists and that accountability is important. But, the accountability is not to oneself, or one’s preferred organization, but to “God”s mission” as is super-imposed by the Church.

  • http://www.spiritualsidekick.com Tom

    I just “discovered” you this morning as I was scrolling over some #ec13 tweets. I think your dad, Ken, had a connection at 2BC in Little Rock where I served for 11 years. Anyway, I love what I’ve read so far. You are wise beyond your years. It’s taken me 50 some-odd years to find my voice in the shifting tides of the emerging church. Keep up the great work. I plan to keep reading. Peace.

  • Phineas Marr

    Ragan, your post appeared on Facebook via another group I read regularly there. I had just got done saying to myself, “I’ve really had it with the commercial aspects of church life, ” when I encountered your article. To say the least, it sums up things I have been thinking for 25 years of pastoral ministry. The metaphors of icons and dojo are excellent. It is the presence of younger folks such as yourself that give me a great deal of hope for the future of the community of faith.

  • Pingback: Rector’s Address: “The Dream” by Wesley Frensdorff – Conversion of St. Paul (tr.) – January 27, 2013That Which We Have Heard & Known | That Which We Have Heard & Known()

  • rumitoid

    If the truth became becoming instead of having it with articles of belief, I feel the Church God desires would manifest itself. Making the studying of scripture and having the right doctrines the soundness of our faith has undermined what faith is all about: good works for the lost and needy. Knowing chapter and verse is to the mind having what those chapter and verses proclaim. This is natural to all of us. If the emphasis could somehow be shifted from knowing to becoming as the more accurate expression of our faith, and effective dsiciplines for this process employed, new life would come to the Church.

    In AA, the member who maintains the understanding that following the discipline of the program is a daily reprieve in a perpetual life and death state of existence, sustained by continually surrendering to the care of God in all their affairs, is an enthusiastic servant to others. This usually starts with a fear of returning to the misery, pain, hopelessness, and ruin of alcohol, which for the new Christian would be similar to the death of sin. Yet as the member faithfully follows the discipline and their lot improves, the fear gradually fades to gratitude and a profound appreciation for being of useful service. Tell the alcoholic he or she is saved (cured), and the necessary “dying to self” becomes unnecessary.