A friend of mine recently stopped going to church because he found it to be a health hazard. It was not life-giving, it sapped his energies and he realised that he’d been attending out of loyalty for some time.

Many in my generation, the Baby Boomers, have made the same decision and quietly left the church. Some continue to explore faith; others don’t.

The direction of mission is usually said to be outwards. Mission is primarily the ‘sentness’ of the church in its engagement with the world beyond the church. Our task is to co-operate with God’s purposes to transform the world so that it experiences the Good News and lives life abundantly in God’s ways.

But if this is our task, there is a sense in which our mission includes the transformation of the church as well. Though we identify as followers of Jesus we are a ‘work in progress’. There is yet more reconciliation to be experienced, yet more justice to be sought within the church and yet more joy to seep into our depths.

So as well as sharing our faith in relevant ways in the world, we obviously need to further explore faith in relevant ways in the church. Otherwise people may flock in the front door and then leave through the back door.

They may not even flock in the front door, of course. If churches are health hazards there is unlikely to be a rush to join them. As the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said, ‘I might believe in the Redeemer if his followers looked more redeemed’. And Mahatma Gandhi said, ‘If it weren’t for Christians, I’d be a Christian’.

Many outside the church look at the teachings of Jesus and wonder how we got the church. I sometimes share the same bewilderment. Doesn’t anyone else see the absurdity of discussing poverty relief at a meeting in an archbishop’s palace, for example? (At least Dom Helder Camara did.)

Is it possible that God’s upside down kingdom needs to felt more in the church as well as in the world?

OK, let’s agree the church needs serious reform. But how does an unhealthy church engage in a mission to the church? How does a group that needs healing heal itself?

I won’t pretend to be either healed or the healer. In words attributed to Billy Graham, if I ever find and join a perfect church it won’t be perfect any more.

The answer lies, perhaps, in focusing on our relationship to the divine healer, Jesus Christ. Maybe our focus on reforming existing churches is misplaced. It may be a period when we should abandon many of the structures that served us well in the past but are now weighing us down. Could we explore again what it means simply to live in God’s ways in daily life?

How would it free us if we were to conclude that God doesn’t want Christians (those who identify with a religion called Christianity), only Jesus-followers (those who commit themselves to living the way Jesus did)?

What difference would it make, I wonder, to stop talking in terms of churches (buildings, clubs, meetings and permanent groups) and instead to talk about ‘gatherings’ (the New Testament word for church)?

I’m sure this would lead to Jesus-followers wanting to gather, and new structures would inevitably form. But hopefully they would emerge to serve the purposes of the Jesus-followers, enabling them to care about others and engage in the world with a sense of purpose.

Fewer top-heavy structures may help adventurers in the Spirit to be open to the new ways of God. At least for a while.

Travelling light is the way Jesus chose to live. It allows for a flexible response in a rapidly changing society. It allows us to relate person-to-person more because we’re in meetings less. It encourages us to stay alert and find what gives life on an ordinary daily basis, in our homes and in our work places.

Shirley Murray has put it well in a recent hymn:

Faith has set us on a journey
Past the landmarks that we know,
Taking risks with no insurance
But the Word that tells us ‘Go!’

Is it possible that the structures of the church are the landmarks that we know?

Ross Langmead