I’m becoming far less comfortable with making statements about “The Church.” I’m realizing that I just don’t have the capacity to hold together, in my mind, the enormity of the word. In fact, the smartest, wisest and most invested women and men I know delicately and humbly approach the term “The Church” and rarely to level some sweeping criticism.
Thoughts like “Christians think this” or “The Church needs to stop doing that” will always be true insofar as the sample it points at includes, because of its enormity, some Christians who do think that and perhaps whole Church communities of people who are doing something that ought not be done. But it also misses just as many.
So, perhaps it is more accurate and responsible to talk about our church rather than talking about the monolithic, faceless thing called “The Church.” Perhaps it is more honoring and even effective to talk about men and women we actually know instead of the blob of nameless automatons we often men when we speak of “The Church.”
Speaking about the people and communities we have knowledge of comes with the possibility and responsibility of actually affecting change in the area we’re so willing to critique… and I would suggest that’s where the rubber meets the road. What if the filter through which we ran our critique of any people was whether or not we had not only knowledge of but influence among that people? Isn’t most of what happens outside of that mostly complaining?
Certainly there are exceptions, but I’m trying to apply this filter to more of the way I critique my world and particularly “The Church.”







