dissertation

66
communitas and structure to build community, rather than simply rely on spontaneous or
ideological communitas alone. 229
In sum, the type of ideological communitas that Hirsch pleads for, may be compelling
in terms of its vision, but unlikely to be feasible in the long term. According to anthropologist
Paul Hiebert, “One cannot live in it for long without beginning to transform it
into community.” 230
2.5.3.2 A Theological View on Community
The vision of the emerging-missional church as communitas is relevant, but still not a fully
articulated theological vision of what a Christian community is. Stanley Grenz attempts
to contribute something to this end. In doing so, he assumes that “perhaps the
central ecclesiological question in the postmodern context,” is this: In what sense – if
any – is the church a community? 231
In answering this question, Grenz first asks what the definitive characteristics of functioning
communities are according to contemporary sociologists. Since this may be
helpful in discussions within the EMC about what community actually is, we will follow
his outline, which consists of three points. 232
First, a community consists of a group of people who are conscious that they share a
similar frame of reference. Second, operative in all communities is a group focus that
evokes a shared sense of group identity among the members. This group identity is
fostered in part by the belief that the participants are engaged in a common task and
have a shared interest. Third, a community has a ‘person focus’ that balances its group
orientation. Insofar as its members draw their personal identity from the community,
the group is a crucial factor in molding its participants.
This third aspect leads – for the purposes of church and ecclesiology – to the central
function of community: its role in identity formation. Here we touch on a crucial point,
because what we notice in contemporary expressions of (postmodern) community, varying
from Burning Man or neo-pagan circles to consumption communities, is that the
seeking individual is in fact still more central than the community itself – they are
‘communities lite’. 233 For example, the ethos and general character of contemporary British
Paganism encompasses “an attitude of epistemological and reflexive individualism
within a context of loose ‘togetherness’ and informal organization.” 234
229
Note that this is the advice that James Gilmore, in “Divine Appointments,” 52, gives to Burning Man –
and it is appropriate for the EMC well. See also Starkloff, “Church as Structure and Communitas...”.
230
Hiebert, Anthropological Reflections on Missiological Issues, 170.
231
Grenz, “Ecclesiology,” 257.
232
Ibid., 253-254.
233
‘Communities lite’ are dynamic and flexible but also temporary, superficial and based on individual
choice. See on this term, figuring in a rich discussion of koinonia, community, and parallels with the concept
of social capital, Rein Brouwer, Geloven in gemeenschap. Het verhaal van een protestantse geloofsgemeenschap [Believing
in community: The story of a protestant faith community] (Kampen: Kok, 2009), 90-91.
234
Hope & Jones, “Locating Contemporary British Paganism as Late Modern Culture,” 352.