Read parts one and two of this essay.

This is the longest section because I have found it the most difficult to articulate. In America, where “family values” are coveted by every social class and political party, it isn’t easy to see why family might not be an inherent good. Nonetheless, the fourth argument against community in American culture is…

4) The priority of family. At first glance, family appears to be an ally of community. And in many ways, it is. Families are fundamental building blocks of community involvement and networking. People who are strongly invested in families are often also invested in community. Like a community, families connect individuals to a social network outside of themselves. They therefore play a similar role in the individual’s life.

In this similiarity, however, lies the danger. Because a family can look so much like a community, and because family life promotes so many of the same values as community life, family and community are often viewed interchangeably. This is a mistake. The two should be viewed as distinct. In fact, the family can frequently be the enemy of community.

What I am trying to say here must be carefully nuanced, because I don’t want to imply that family is never beneficial to community life. The clearest example of the distinction between community and family, however, might be seen in a person who converts from the religion of his family (or the non-religion of his family) to another religion. At the heart of religion, or at least, at the heart of the Christian religion, is community. (More on this in future posts.) Joining the community life of the new religion will almost certainly require breaking away from full membership in family life.

For example, a man from a Christian family who becomes Jewish may no longer observe Christmas and Easter. He may choose to respect his family and celebrate with family traditions, but his heart will not move in unity with that of his family as it once did. Or, more radically, he may come to see these traditions as antithetical to his new beliefs, and wholely reject everything about his family traditions. The man’s true “home” is now found with his religious community. He is, ultimately, an outsider to his family, and his family are outsiders to his community.

Even when one’s family and one’s community are mostly in sync, family can become the enemy of true community. The family is an extension of the self, so pride and selfishness are ongoing threats. In many cultures, family clans dominate social life. The families of Romeo and Juliet don’t seem to be that different from one another. Yet, family pride – genetic pride – consumes lives and destroys community. How many churches have been damaged by a pastor’s desire to “pass down” the pulpit to his son, as if a church is a family business? How many pastor’s children have been scarred because their parents failed to negotiate the treacherous channel between family and community?

Imagine a religious order – ostensibly a community of faith dedicated to common values – but one to which several sets of siblings happen to belong. There may be many situations in which those siblings are asked to choose between family and community. If family is chosen often enough, then the community will splinter. This tension can be seen in the Gospels, when James and John (brothers) argue about who among the disciples will be greatest. Fortunately, the brothers among the disciples (not only James and John, but also Peter and Andrew) placed their community and the mission of God above family loyalties.

There are pockets of America where family is considered “sacred.” Given the tensions between family and community, I don’t think it should be surprising that, in these are same pockets, newcomers often have difficulty in making a home, and ethnic or racial tensions are often high. “Family values” do not necessarily include hospitality, justice, righteousness, or even love, the marks of true community.

Posted in Life Together | No Comments »

Americans, by and large, do not live as if community is a major aspect of their lives. Why not?

Read part one of “The Argument Against Community.”

3) The priority of the individual. The individual, after all, is what America is all about. It doesn’t matter where you come from, who your parents are, what your social class at birth was. The American dream is that you can make yourself into whatever you want. If something isn’t working for you, drop it and try something else.

Much of the power of community, however, comes from its demand upon the individual to submit his or her personal needs to those of the community. For example, a monastery is defined by its “rule.” If each monk were to take the freedom to choose when and how he would observe the rule, the monastery would quickly lose its distinctiveness from the world around it. The monastic order would dissolve into a collection of unhappy individuals.

American culture has made individualism a virtue, to the point where many supposed Christians say without a second thought, “God would want me to be happy” – a statement without precedent in Christian scripture or theology – as an argument for their individualistic decisions. True community asks that an individual be ready at any moment to reject his happiness for the sake of the group. Many Americans call that a fool’s game. The same men who weep at the sacrifices of firefighters or soldiers begin looking for an escape hatch when called to sacrifice their personal happiness for that of their family, town, or country.

Next, the final argument against community, the priority of the family.

Posted in Life Together | No Comments »

In future posts, I will be explaining why I feel that community is so vital for Christians, particularly in America, and exploring important aspects of community life. It occurs to me, however, that most Americans, even most American Christians, do not view community – whether religious or secular – as central to their lives. Why not?

1) “Religion is a private affair.” It is an American axiom that one does not discuss religion or politics in polite company. The mix of the First Amendment, freedom of religion, and our culture’s view of tolerance as an important virtue have created a climate in which one’s personal religious beliefs are literally no one else’s business. Compulsary church attendance, which was common in Europe and in colonial America, seems radical and almost totalitarian to contemporary Americans. I doubt our Founding Fathers would have envisioned that their goal of religious freedom would have one day resulted in a culture in which individuals create “salad bar” religions, combining favorable bits from Christianity, Buddhism, and whatever other spiritual tradition happens to be available.

For people not actively involved in a religious community, their deepest held beliefs are often formed in isolation from other people. The common language, common context, and even common biases of any human community are difficult for the individual to enter, even more so when religion is viewed as private and therefore is not openly discussed. The beliefs of a community must first be passed through our private lens before we can trust those other individuals, and our individual beliefs pass judgment over communal beliefs. By viewing religion as private, a wall is built between our individual selves and any community we come into contact with.

2) Religion as an op-ed position. The irony of America’s view of religion as private is that religion is also viewed as an op-ed position: a series of positions or arguments which can be promoted, opposed, agreed upon, or disagreed with. Some people possess a literal list of theological positions with which one must agree in order to be a “true believer.” Religion, rather than being the worship of God or even some sort of personal development, is an exercise of opinion and argument.

Communities, in this mindset, are puzzles to be deciphered. Do their beliefs align with mine? How many points do they get right? How many do they get wrong? This is not a process that ends easily. At first contact with a community, and with each subsequent contact, the individual stands ready to oppose the community’s position. For some individuals, this may even be seen as a “holy” role, such as that of Elijah or John the Baptist, holding up the light of truth in a world of darkness. Like those saints of old, these individuals are lonely prophets, who wonder why the blind laugh so much and feast.

Next, the priority of the individual and the priority of the family.

Posted in Life Together, The Church in America | No Comments »