Community as key building block for fostering faithful presence

James Davison Hunter, in his Essay III moves into the more constructive part of his book, namely the formulation of his “Faithful Presence Within” paradigm for engaging culture. One of the building blocks of his theology of faithful presence is the Christian community and the role it plays in the spiritual formation process.

Hunter believes that Christians are called to “give expression to the redemptive work of God in all of their lives” (226). However, what has been missing in the Christian community,  

“is a leadership that comprehends the nature of these challenges [“difference” and “dissolution”] and offers a vision of formation adequate to the task of discipling the church and its members for a time such as ours. By misreading the nature of the times and by focus in so much energy and resources on politics, those who have claimed the mantel of leadership have fixed attention on secondary and tertiary problems and false solutions” (226).

Hunter then turns to the importance of community by stating, “In formation, it is the culture and the community that gives shape and expression to it that is the key.” (227) He then goes on to acknowledge that it is no longer “natural” for Christian communities to provide such a formation because of the cultural pressures. Thus, communities need to be intentional to create a space where this type of formation can take place.

Part of the hallmarks of this community is the “hope for which it longs and the ideals to which it strives – is the vision of shalom” (228). Believers, individuals and the community, are called “to conform to Christ and embody within every part of their lives, the shalom of God.”(229-230). This is the intentionality that communities need to create the space to provide the spiritual formation that helps the community and individuals live towards this shalom in whichever context God has placed them.

Earlier Hunter has argued that pluralism undermines what Peter Berger refers to as “plausibility structures.” He writes,

“For Berger, ‘there is a direct relation between the cohesion of institutions and the subjective cohesiveness of beliefs, values and worldviews.’ It is true that there are religious virtuosi who maintain strong beliefs on their own with little or no social support but these individuals are rare. Most of us, however, need the reinforcement that social institutions provide to believe coherently and live with integrity. There is a sociological truth, then, to the statement extra ecclesiam nulla salus; ‘there is no salvation outside of the church.’ Strong and coherent beliefs require strong institutions enveloping those who aspire to believe.” (202)

This insight bolsters the argument for the significance community plays in equipping the people of God to engage their culture through the “Faithful Presence Within” paradigm.

            In several constructive theological proposals that I have read the Christian community plays a key role in realizing whatever is proposed. In my church experience I have seldom been part of a Christian community that has been able to create space for the type of spiritual formation Hunter calls for. However, just because these types of Christian communities are not the norm does not mean that we should not strife for them. I believe that one of the main challenges and tasks for Christian leadership today is to work out how we can create spaces in our churches that foster this type of missional engagement with the world.