Individual Entry: Open Source Christianity
« Books 2008/10/12 | Main | location, location, location »

If you read this blog, PLEASE sign in to my guest book on frappr. No personally identifying information is needed, so this is risk-free. Just provide a name (even a nickname), your zip code, and any statement you want to make ("hi" is sufficient).

If you want to know more about me, click here.

October 15, 2008

Faith : Open Source Christianity

A short explanation of geekdom followed by what I hope is a relevant observation.

Most companies that produce software carefully guard the source code for their applications from prying eyes. This however has a downside that relatively few people get to look for bugs in the code. The engineer who writes the software obvious tries to write bug-free code, and often the company requires a “code review” where a handful of the engineer’s peers formally review the code looking for problems. Occasionally someone within the company might spot a problem when they are looking at the code for other reasons. The bottom line is that very few eyes ever have a change to look at the code, and the result is often very buggy software getting released to customers.

In the last couple of decades an alternative approach has started to gain ground – the “Open Source” movement. The idea is that the engineers publish their source code on the web for everyone to see (or at least anyone who wants to look), and provides some means for people to suggest improvements to the code. The result is that for the larger Open Source projects, hundreds of engineers are looking at each line of code trying to improve it.

Of course with hundreds of people trying to make changes, the threat of chaos is always present, not to mention that every idea someone has to improve a piece of code is equally valuable. So most Open Source projects have a small number of “Gatekeepers” who decide which changes make it into the product and which are set aside.

More recently, the Open Source approach is being used for things other than software. Wikipedia, for instance, is an encyclopedia whose “source” is open for anyone to edit. Of course some people make changes as jokes or deliberate misrepresentation, but there is a cadre of people who monitor Wikipedia for such changes and remove them.

So where am I going with all this?

I’ve been chatting with some “emergent/emerging church” people lately and I realized part of what they are looking for is a more “Open Source” model of Christianity. Too many institutional churches have a small group of “professionals” (pastors, priests, etc.) who maintain control over all aspects of the faith. What the emergent/emerging folks are looking for is an open model where every believer has a say in what the church is.

What’s more, I believe there is a core of truth in what they are looking for. I have written many times here that I believe that it was God’s intent that every Christian be responsible for “doing the work of the ministry” and that those who “lead” are really there to serve everyone else and enable them to be successful in their ministries. Even in the context of meetings of the church, I believe God meant for everyone to have a chance to share what they feel God placed on their hearts as opposed to the usual model where most of the people watch a few professional Christians perform on a stage.

I even think that part of God’s reason for this is much the same reason behind Open Source Software – more people individually listening to God make it less likely that there will be errors. Individuals fail, and when that individual is the Pastor of your typical institutional church, many people can be led astray. However if everyone is encouraged to listen to God and share, then people can raise questions when they see something that seems wrong.

Or Not.

The problem I see with many (but not all) segments of the emergent/emerging church movements is that in their desire to hear all voices, they tend to create a Christianity of Consensus, which is not always God’s Christianity. It is the Christianity that the majority of people want it to be, with all of the sharp edges rounded off and hard surfaces padded. What I have learned from my walk with Jesus is that real Christianity has some real challenges that are uncomfortable – things I certainly would prefer were not true about my faith. There are things God asks His followers to do that are hard, that demand we change, that put us at odds with the surrounding culture. If we allow the majority to define our faith, too many people would prefer to have a version of Christianity that is much easier than God intended. As a result, it will lose its identity, its benefits, and its impact.

What the emergent/emerging church movement lacks is some mechanism equivalent to the Gatekeepers used by Open Source software, or the diligent editors of Wikipedia. People who are trusted to say “I know you’d all like Christianity to be like that; but here’s what it says in the Bible. . .” Unfortunately that kind of role is exactly the kind of authority they are trying to avoid; and they are not entirely wrong in fearing it. I don't have all of the answers on this. I'm not sure how to avoid a Christianity of Consensus without swinging too far the other direction; but some balanced answer is needed.

Posted by Steven at October 15, 2008 05:00 AM

Comments

Posted by: janbergs at October 15, 2008 05:56 AM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? YesNo

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)