In the previous two weeks we have discussed a working definition for urban tribes, as well as what the Bible and church history believe about topics those in urban tribes are concerned with. During this week, we will look further at the last two steps of Gordon’s Lynch’s model by entering into a “mutually exclusive conversation,” asking questions of both perspectives and looking to see what new insights might be gained through our theological reflection of Urban Tribes.
Mutually Critical Conversation
Single Life
Urban tribes are made up solely of single individuals. By existing in their current form, urban tribes reinforce that it is okay to for an individual to be single for a majority of their life, if not for their whole life. Within current society, this is not something that many in the Church are willing to be okay with. But singleness should not be viewed as a middle ground between what was and what is to come, as both urban tribes and those in the Church view singleness. The Church, as well as urban tribes, needs to understand, as Paul did, that singleness is just as much of a call on someone’s life as marriage is. A life of singleness is a viable option, and should be respected within our current culture.
Within urban tribes, singleness has become a way to serve self-interests through the purchasing of material objects and/or participating in a self-gratifying community. Rather, Saint Paul argues that one is called to singleness in order to better serve Christ. The apostle even takes it as far as to state that an unmarried person can be concerned about the Lord’s affairs, or how to please the Lord, but a married person is concerned about the affairs of this world, or how to please their mate, meaning that their interests are divided (1 Cor. 7:32-34). Therefore singleness is not to be taken advantage of for one’s personal gain, but instead for the gain of the Kingdom, in the same way all people have been called.
Family
Urban tribes are calling the Church to redefine families based on a tribal idea, rather than a traditional view of family, such as the nuclear family. Single people cannot gravitate toward this definition of family because they do not fit into its constraints and usually their experience with the nuclear family was not good. Urban tribe members have made an important statement, that family is not limited to those in your bloodline, it also includes those who care for you, who you care for, and those who help to define you. In fact, this definition is very similar to the examples of family provided in the Bible. The main thing lacking from an urban tribe member’s definition of family is that it rarely includes any who are non-single people. Within the Biblical view of family all members of culture are included: single people, as well as those in couples, mothers, fathers, children, teens, and the elderly.
The Community
Urban Tribes challenge the current definition of family, crying out, community can no longer be defined as it is within American Christian Churches, as a group of individuals who gather in a church building once a week. The institutional Church needs to hear what urban tribes are saying and redefine community as a group of friends and/or family who live in community together. Within urban tribes one’s community supports who a person is and what they are about in order to help them find their own calling or meaning in life. Community is not about the roles that a person plays, but about how individuals work together to love and support each other. It is a persons community that connects them to the city they are living in. Single individuals are important to communities and should not be shunned away from them.
However, the Church can challenge urban tribes to be a part of heterogeneous and homogenous groups. Scripturally and theologically speaking, singles should be allowed to participate within a community where they are able to connect with others who are going through similar experiences, as well as be a vital part of communities that are not only made up of other singles. It is important that singles, families, the elderly, children, and teens dwell together in community, just as they did in the early Church. Families and the elderly can provide support that singles need in order to mature in life, while singles can help to provide mentoring to children and teens, as well as to provide support and encouragement to the elderly and those who are married. The Church can help communities such as urban tribes see that God should be the binding force between all who dwell in community together. As this binding force, God brings people together as a representative community, exemplifying love that God brings together a community in such a way that they become a representation of who God is.
Dating and Marriage
One mantra heard within the urban tribe community is that it is important to be careful about who one marries. Many urban tribe members have seen their parents’ marriages fail and are very cautious when considering giving themselves away in marriage. This might raise the question for Christians; to whether or not they need to become more cautious about whom they marry. Those in Urban Tribes might wonder why the divorce rate of Christians is the same as those who do not identify themselves as Christians, especially when the Bible views marriage as a lifetime commitment between two people. At the same time this conversation could be reversed, the Biblical view of marriage as a commitment between two people can also serve as a conversation piece within urban tribes, directing members toward the covenantal relationship between Christ and his Church. This type of relationship can also point urban tribe members toward the covenantal relationship between Christ and his Church. With this covenant in mind, one could pointing out that divorce exists because it is a part of the sin and depravity that exists within the world, further bringing clarity to why this has become such a cultural phenomenon within current society.
New Insights for the Church
The church in America can no longer look down on singleness if it wants to survive in today’s culture. Due to the rise of “never-marrieds” and single families, the church must open its doors to singles in a different way. Singleness needs to be viewed in light of Paul’s theology, as a calling given by God to individuals, much in the same way that marriage is. Single and college bible studies are no longer enough, and we cannot afford to separate singles from families and families from singles; the church must find a way to incorporate singles into the larger body.
The topic of community is much of the basis of discussion between urban tribes and the Church. For many, the America Christian Church community is understood as a group of individuals who meet in a building once a week, while within urban tribes community is defined as groups of singles who live together in an urban city during a time of transition between what was and what will come. Neither of these definitions of community are sufficient; community should be defined as the family of God. We can no longer allow ourselves to be defined as only individuals but should allow ourselves to be defined first and foremost by God, and then by our relationship with others. This type of community should reflect our identity in Christ; with singles, traditional families, and children united under God.
Challenging the “traditional” definition of family is essential due to the rise of broken marriages and families. Urban tribes, as well as early Church definitions of family, call today’s Church to see that blood is not the only thing that makes people family; rather any in need may be called family. At the same time, the church cannot afford to completely do away with our traditional views of family because they still play a part in our community and self-awareness; for instance, a child without a father may continue to desire a “father-figure.” Instead, there needs to be a redefinition of family that allows for traditional typology, with a broader working definition, allowing others to fulfill needed typologies, while also allowing singleness to be a viable option. (Notice I did not use the word “roles,” as to assume that traditional gender roles are in need of protection, but that is a conversation for another time).
Christian communities should mirror urban tribes in providing family-like guidance in dating relationships, as well as approving of dating partners. At the same time, churches should find ways to support singles if they do not decide to marry or date. Marriage should not just be viewed as something to be achieved, like a promotion to the next step in life. Marriage should be seen as a calling in life, just as singleness is a calling. Marriage is more than just the start of a new family, it is a representation of the relationship that Christ shares with his Church; like Christ and his Church, the two individuals become one.
Conclusion
On a personal note, as I approach my wedding date, I will be leaving behind a community of single friends who have supported me thus far and joining the leagues of the marrieds. As I move closer to this date I cannot help but think about what I have learned over the past few years of single life that has and will continue to benefit the Church. I have been in a world that many in the Church view as foreign, and I am a part of a generation and a culture that is changing the sociological make-up of our country; if the Church does not open their eyes to the change that is going on in current culture, thousands of singles will be left behind. Cultural items, such as urban tribes, have much to bring to the table of theological dialogues; urban tribes show us much about community, single life, families, dating, and marriage that the Church needs to learn from. At the same time, the Church also has much to offer to those who live in the urban tribe community. The Church holds the keys to the Kingdom of God, and to a life where people are called to find their true identities within something greater than their communities, or their selves, rather in God.
No comments:
Post a Comment