Building Biblical Communities
On Saturday, December 1, 2012, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher murdered his longtime girlfriend Kasandra Perkins. He then drove to the Chiefs’ stadium where he committed suicide in front of his head coach and general manager [1]. The next day, during a post-game press-conference, Chiefs quarterback Brady Quinn stated:
We live in a society of social networks, with Twitter pages and Facebook, and that’s fine, but we have contact with our work associates, our family, our friends, and it seems like half the time we are more preoccupied with our phone and other things going on instead of the actual relationships that we have right in front of us. Hopefully, people can learn from this and try to actually help if someone is battling something deeper on the inside than what they are revealing on a day-to-day basis [2].
Felicia Song has described this phenomenon as “a growing insensitivity to actual surroundings and community” or “being psychically far away” [3]. The appeal of social media outlets is to bring distant people closer together. While this is a fine desire, can social media paradoxically distance us from those physically close to us? By no means is social media inherently wrong. In some cases, it is even quite helpful—sharing photos and important information with distant family and friends, for example.
Nevertheless, what does a biblical model of online and physical communities look like? In answering this question I propose to address the topic of community specifically through the book of Proverbs. In so doing we’ll consider (1) the growth of online communities; (2) a biblical model of community; and (3) how our communities, online and physical, measure up.
The Growth of Online “Communities”
During the 1990’s many debated about the possible cultural effects of the Internet. Some claimed that mankind’s ability to learn and share information would explode, while others believed it would produce a world of isolated zombies. Neither of these predictions quite hit the mark.
Certainly the amount of information transmitted by the Internet has been gargantuan, though much of it is trivial news and social updates. Since much of the information consumed on the Internet is low in quality, comparatively little actual learning results.
While Internet optimists didn’t get all they hoped for, Internet pessimists didn’t see their worst fears realized either. Though society was forced to adjust to new cyber realities, masses of people weren’t holed up in their apartments living their lives vicariously online. However, the advent of the mobile Internet device (particularly phones and tablets) has changed things dramatically.
The ability to access the Internet and check the updated status of our social networks at a whim has ironically brought us closer to realizing the fears of social isolation. While we connect with people across the nation, we all too often ignore those across the dinner table.
“But is this social distance such a bad thing?” you may ask. It certainly can’t be ideal. Proverbs gives us great insight concerning community, physical and online: how they should function and of what they should consist.
What Community Should Be
a. Diversity
“Whoever closes his ear to the cry of the poor will himself call out and not be answered” (Prov. 21:13).
Physical communities are naturally diverse. Differing ages, races, religions, socio-economic levels, and interests are all usually present. This means the social outcasts we might normally avoid should be included within our communities.
To be sure, we can choose with whom we will and won’t interact in our physical communities, though such decisions have definite repercussions. However, a serious danger of online communities is the ease of such exclusion—at the mere click of a button. We can closely monitor people of interest, while ignoring the difficult. As a last resort, we might even “defriend” them. While this is often convenient, it isn’t good. God has called us to minister to the ignored and downtrodden, after all.
Additionally, the very fact that these social networks are online limits “community” possibilities. The elderly, very young, and impoverished are often excluded from these societies—the very groups society has marginalized God calls us to engage.
Proverbs 21:13 indicates that ignoring the poor has serious consequences. Part of being in a God-centered community means reaching out to the outcasts and needy. Ignoring their cries, whether in-person or online, is sinful. Practically, perhaps it would be wise to unplug for a while and ask our neighbor to dinner; or use social media to interact with those who are difficult with real concern for them, rather than to gawk at their latest triumph in oddity.
b. Supportive
“Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise” (Prov. 13:20).
In addition to reaching out to the isolated and outcast in our community, we are also to draw wisdom from those in it. In the beginning God assessed that “it [was] not good for man to be alone” (Gen. 2:18). Man was created with a deep and abiding need for interpersonal relationships.
This need arises from God’s very image. G. K. Chesterton points out that God’s triune nature shows He is a communal being: “to us God Himself is a society” [4]. Thus we too are communal creatures. Is this need for community being met in-person and online?
Social networks produce massive amounts of benign daily information. That doesn’t necessarily build community though. Real community requires more than knowing all the minute details in a person’s life. It requires daily interaction and involvement.
It is in this daily interaction that we can draw wisdom from the wise and impart wisdom to those who need counsel. Working through problems communally eases the burden of weighty decisions and gives a much broader perspective to the day’s issues.
More importantly, Christians are called to support one another. John Chrysostom remarked, “Such ought the faithful to be. Neither fear, nor threats, nor disgrace, should deter them from assisting one another, standing by them and succoring them as in war” [5]. By walking through difficulties together we give and receive comfort, encouragement, and wisdom.
Applying this principle in-person can be difficult, and even more so online. For one, putting truly deep needs online for all to see is unwise, thus greatly limiting support online. Even in private messages, it’s difficult to appropriately convey serious thoughts.
The form itself is not ideal since it’s tailored for quick, short bursts of information. Communication loses the important details of voice inflection, facial expression, and the natural rhythms of conversation entailed in human interaction. Giving support is best done in daily life and physical interaction.
c. Deterrent to Sin
“How I have hated instruction! And my heart spurned reproof…I was almost in utter ruin in the midst of the assembly and congregation” (Prov. 5:12, 14).
In addition to being a source of support, biblical communities are deterrents to sin. Of course, in our physical communities, public shame is less debilitating than in previous generations. However, in online communities it has all but disappeared, which likely results from online anonymity and a lack of serious repercussions. Whitney Phillips, lecturer on digital culture at NYU, comments that bad behavior online is an “amplification” of actual behavior in the physical world [6].
The loss of shame in-person or online is not good. And while much of this results from our pluralistic, individualistic society, the anonymity of our online profiles and homogenous online communities also plays a significant role.
Because members of our online communities are hand-selected, the restrictions that such communities can place on sin are often minimal. And if our chosen community should choose to stand against us, we can easily find a more accepting community. While this is certainly possible in physical communities also, it’s much more difficult. Online communities are joined and abandoned with relative ease compared to the emotional, physical, and financial toll of exchanging physical communities. But if we have hand-picked our community, why would we think they would want to curb our sinful desires?
In the physical communities in which God has placed us, however, the members are often more diversified. In such communities we are forced to consider other’s opinions and views. For instance, ever notice that young people often adjust their conversation simply because an elder person is nearby? Inadvertently their mere presence has acted as a force of change—and usually for the good. While physical communities are capable of being remade, it is much more difficult than simply defriending a few icons.
Conclusion
All of this brings us back to our original question: Are our physical and online communities what they should be? Are social media outlets evil? By no means! They can bring us closer to those far away—sharing family photos, milestone updates, and cheap communication. However, they are no substitute for physical communities. And we must be wary of their transformation of our physical communities. Ultimately, are our physical and online communities biblical?
_______________________________________
[1] Found at, http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/belcher-threatened-shoot-girlfriend-police-article-1.1223122 on March 19, 2013.
[2] Brady Quinn as quoted in Cindy Boren’s article for the Washington Post website December 3, 2012. Found at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/early-lead/wp/2012/12/03/brady-quinn-on-jovan-belcher-tragedy-an-eloquent-moment-for-chiefs-qb/ on February 28, 2013.
[3] Felicia Wu Song, from a lecture given at Cornell University April 10, 2012. Found at, http://www.cornell.edu/video/?videoID=2020 on March 19, 2013.
[4] G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (New York: Doubleday, 1990), 135.
[5] John Chrysostom, Philip Schaff ed. Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers: First Series Volume 13 Homilies on Timothy, “Homily 3” (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994), 484.
[6] From a November 2012 appearance on NPR’s On Point with Tom Ashbrook at: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2012/11/06/internet-trolls.
April 1, 2013
I wonder at the title *Building Biblical Communities* when so many extra-biblical footnotes are referenced.
I have met some very narcissistic professing christians who claim that they “don’t need all those books, they just need their bibles and Jesus in their hearts.” The problem is that the “Jesus in their hearts” is more like a small child’s “invisible friend” who is always on their side whenever their is a conflict with others than the Jesus most of us encounter from biblical Revelation.
It is not only individuals who can become trapped in their narcissism, disordered communities that have become dysfunctional collectives also exist and they often use biblical proof texts to enforce their authoritarianism.
First World churches are hemorraghing members due to:
1. Dogmatic absolutism
2. Self-righteous judgmentalism
3. Sectarian triumphalism
All three of these narcissistic attitudes are often more likely to be encouraged than challenged in our formal religious institutions.
Liberal mainline churches have replaced the Gospel with secular humanism cloaked in god-words and the Gospel ethic with a 60’s political agenda.
Conservative Evangelical church members often worship a trinitarian idol of God, Church and Country instead of the Holy Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Their churches teach the civic virtues of the Protestant work ethic instead of the theological virtues of faith, hope and love and embrace a 50’s political agenda instead of the teachings of Jesus. Why do so many conservative christians cling to the Decalogue while ignoring the Beatitudes that call for a change of heart, not just a change of behavior?
Professing christians who think that our Nation’s future depends on the election of either Democratic or Republican candidates, and there were many who emerged from their political closets this past Presidential election cycle, are not only heretical, they are apostate, IMO. And yet, from most pulpits there was only silence and often even encouragement to believe and act in this manner.
April 1, 2013
Carol,
Thank you for your readership and comments. You seem to have two main concerns about this particular post: 1. A lack of biblical references. 2. Disregard for extra-biblical resources.
1. We of the Helwys Society Forum usually cite biblical passages within the text of our articles. I have based each segment on passages of Scripture, and reference others within each segment. However, my references were by no means meant to be exhaustive. My primary concern was to instigate thinking about a biblical approach to community, especially within the context of the book of Proverbs.
2. I referenced several extra-biblical sources that run the gambit of Christian history. John Chrysostom, G.K. Chesterton, Felicia Wu Song, and Whitney Phillips were only the sources that made it into this piece. There are many more sources including Jonathon Edwards, Andrew Murray, and Ken Meyers among others that informed my thinking about community but unfortunately had to be left out to maintain clarity and conciseness.
Certainly, we all need to examine ourselves and our approach to community. Many unbiblical forms of community exist today and always have. Our responsibility is simply to gently and lovingly instruct and affect the communities that God has blessed us with. Thanks again for your continued readership.
April 1, 2013
Actually, it is not the lack of biblical references that “concerned” me but the title “Building Biblical Communities.”
Spiritual Communities, I know and uniquely Christian Spiritual Communities I know; but what is a “Biblical Community”? Especially when the references cited are extra-biblical.
I personally don’t think “building a biblical community” is a very practical goal. The Apostolic churches consisted of first generation, primarily adult Christians who met informally in neighborhood house churches and expected the immanent return of Jesus to establish God’s Kingdom on earth. It was not until the later texts that we see the realization beginning to dawn that perhaps there should be more thought given to a more long term preservation of the faith. As you know, the only “bible” that the early Christians had was the OT because they were writing the NT with their own stories. I can’t remember when the NT canon was finally accepted, Luther had no qualms about suggesting omitting James and Revelations as late as the 16th century.
So I suppose what I am questioning is the use of the term “biblical community” for a uniquely Christian spiritual community. I have had some experience [not good] with fundamentalist bibliolatry, that I believe had confused Christ the Living Word with Scripture, the written Word. I have also had some experience [also not good] with Churchianity or ecclesiolatry. Many members of a local Missouri Synod Lutheran Church that I attended were more interested in making pilgrimages to Germany to walk in Martin Luther’s footsteps than they were in going to the Holy Land to walk where Jesus had walked.
As an adult convert from a humanistic secular perspective, I see many practices in the ecclesiastical subculture which have tended to elevate means of grace to objects of faith.
The writings of Orthodox theologian Georges Florovsky have helped me sort out the Eastern Church’s approach to the the relationship between Scripture, Church and Tradition:
http://www.bulgarian-orthodox-church.org/rr/lode/florovsky1.pdf
The confusion of Tradition with traditionalism by the Protestant Reformers and the introduction of a radical opposition between the two seems to have resulted in a loss of the Church’s wisdom Tradition acquired during the time following the Apostolic era until the 16th century. Most Catholics have heard of the Patristic Writings, but they don’t read them and most Protestants haven’t hever heard of them.
“Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. Tradition lives in conversation with the past, while remembering where we are and when we are and that it is we who have to decide.
Traditionalism supposes that nothing should ever be done for the first time, so all that is needed to solve any problem is to arrive at the supposedly unanimous testimony of this homogenized tradition.” –Jaroslav Pelikan
The sacred history of redemption is still going on. It is now the history of the Church that is the Body of Christ. The Spirit-Comforter is already abiding in the Church. No complete system of Christian faith is yet possible, for the Church is still on her pilgrimage. And the Bible is kept by the Church as a book of history to remind believers of the dynamic nature of the divine revelation, “at sundry times and in divers manners.” ~Georges V. Florovsky, Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View
Four Walls Separating Us from the New Testament
Four crises separate Western Christians on the one hand from the New Testament writers and Eastern Christians on the other. If we understand these crises and the effects they had, we can attempt to “roll them back” in our minds and understand the New Testament more clearly.
The New Testament is in Greek, which has a large philosophical vocabulary that Latin lacks. Ecumenical councils used Greek as the working language; then they made an official translation into Latin for use in the West. Many of the most heated debates were about which Latin words best conveyed the meaning of the Greek resolution they had already agreed on. Because Greek philosophical concepts had to be translated into Latin legal concepts, theology in the West took on the character of codified law after the West lost Greek. To this day, Orthodox theologians reason like rabbis, while western theologians reason like lawyers.
Pelagianism
Augustine accused Pelagius of teaching salvation by works
Western Christians are obsessed with not being saved by works
Western Christians deemphasize ascetic disciplines and exercises
Spirituality becomes a set of mental acts
Salvation is rescue from hell, rather than transformation into glory
Determinism enters some parts of western theology from Manichaeism through Augustine
Scholasticism
Theology moved from the monastery to the university
Western theology is an intellectual discipline rather than a mystical pursuit
Western theology is over-systematized
Western Theology is systematized, based on a legal model rather than a philosophical model
Western theologians debate like lawyers, not like rabbis
Reformation
Catholic reformers were excommunicated and formed Protestant churches
Western churches become guarantors of theological schools of thought
Western church membership is often contingent on fine points of doctrine
Some western Christians believe that definite beliefs are incompatible with tolerance
The atmosphere arose in which anyone could start a church
The legal model for western theology intensifies despite the rediscovery of the East
Enlightenment
Philosophers founded empirical sciences
Western theologians attempt to apply empiricism to theology
Western theologians agonize over the existence of God
Western theologians lose, deemphasize, neglect, marginalize, or explain away the supernatural
Western theologians no longer have coherent answers for many practical religious questions
Western churches outsource the treatment of religious problems to secular therapists
East and West
West
Western Christians are obsessed with not being saved by works
Western Christians deemphasize ascetic disciplines and exercises
Spirituality becomes a set of mental acts
Salvation is rescue from hell
The emphasis is on the cross
Determinism enters some parts of western Christian theology
East
Works express faith, faith gives birth to works
Eastern Christians engage in fasting and other spiritual disciplines
Spirituality involves both mind and body
Salvation is transformation into glory
The emphasis is on resurrection and transformation
Determinism never entered Christian theology
West
Western theology is primarily an intellectual discipline by professors
Western theology is over-systematized
Western theology is based on a legal model
Western theologians debate like lawyers
East
Eastern theology is primarily a mystical pursuit by monastics
Eastern theology is not as strictly systematized; for example, the number of sacraments is not set and is not controversial
Eastern theology is based on a philosophical model
Eastern theologians debate like rabbis
West
Western churches became guarantors of theological schools of thought
Western church membership is often contingent on fine points of doctrine
Some western Christians believe that definite beliefs are incompatible with tolerance
The atmosphere arose in which anyone could start a church
East
Eastern theology, while holding more strictly than western theology on basic dogmas, is tolerant of differences of opinions on finer points
Eastern church membership is contingent on commitment and behavior
Eastern Christians have no difficulty maintaining definite beliefs while remaining tolerant.
There was nothing corresponding to the Protestant Reformation and there is no proliferation of sects within the mainstream
West
Western Christians see a dichotomy of spirit and matter
Western theologians attempt to apply empiricism to theology
Western theologians agonize over the existence of God
Western theologians have lost, deemphasized, neglected, marginalized, or explained away the supernatural and miraculous
Western theologians no longer have coherent answers for many practical religious questions (such as during bereavement)
Western churches outsource the treatment of religious problems, such as bereavement, to secular therapists
East
Eastern Christians see a dichotomy of God and creation
Eastern theologians are largely unaffected by modernism
Eastern theologians do not agonize over the existence of God
Eastern theologians systematize the transcendent, the miraculous, and the mystical into their theology, without a concept of ‘supernatural’
Eastern theologians have coherent and helpful answers for most practical spiritual problems (such as during bereavement)
Eastern clergy, monastics, and lay experts have resources for spiritual direction, moral direction, and Eastern clergy, monastics, and lay experts have resources for spiritual direction, moral direction, and bereavement counseling; thus they do not outsource religious problems to secular experts.
April 2, 2013
Carol,
Thanks again for your participation on our forum. I realize that the three primary divisions within Christendom—namely, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, and Roman Catholic (as well as the various sub-groups within each)—differ on their precise theology of Scripture. As for me, I am a Protestant of the Classical Arminian Baptist variety. And that perspective is represented in my article.
To specify, I use the adjective biblical to denote objects that are directed by the Bible. So, by “biblical community,” I intend to convey the idea of a community directed by the Bible. Thus, while I appreciate your viewpoint, we will simply have to agree to disagree.
Besides that, that really isn’t the primary issue I wish to emphasize through my article. Whether we use the term biblical or spiritual or something else even, my primary point is God-honoring community. Certainly, we Christians will never reach perfect community on this side of heaven/new earth, but I believe we should strive toward it, and I believe we should engage our communities in ways that are as godly as possible. I believe as a Classical Arminian Baptist that the best way to determine what is most pleasing to God is by reading the Bible, where He has revealed Himself and His Son.
Again, whatever our disagreements, I hope we all seek to build community between and among ourselves and others in those ways that most please God. Thanks again for your readership and engagement.
April 2, 2013
There is not as much difference between my biblical hermeneutic and the “Classical Arminian variety as I experience with the Classical Reformed and Lutheran doctrine on “the bondage of the will” to use the title of Luther’s book on the subject.
After reading the Scriptures in three different translations, I am convinced that the Traditional synergistic perspective of the Church, both Eastern Orthodox and Latin/Catholic, is correct rather than the very late 16th century monergistic Protestant teaching is correct. Although the Reformers were Augustinian they certainly did not follow Augustine in this matter:
“He who created us without our help will not save us without our consent.” ~Saint Augustine
“God provides the wind, but man must raise the sails.” –St. Augustine
It seems to me that the Reformation “Solas” are the result of radically dualistic thinking that are not even logical. Opposing the Bible to Tradition makes no sense, since the NT canon is the resulted from the evolution of a Jewish sect’s uniquely Christian Tradition. It has left Protestantism with an obsessive quest for the “historical Jesus” and a loss of the cosmic “Christ of faith.”
I understand Faith to be the human response to the Divine initiative of Grace, neither of which makes sense to me when separated and made to stand “Alone.” In fact, ISTM, “Grace Alone” appears as a kind of stealth pantheism to me that demands the annihilation rather than the healing of our humanity as a condition for reconciliation with God. Where is the meaning of the Mystery of the Incarnation in such a dogmatic system? I agree with the Catholic Counter-Reformation criticism that “the Imputation of Christ’s Righteousness” is a legal fiction. IMO, it is responsible for the creation of “cheap grace” that makes spiritual transformation an eschatological hope rather than a conversion process that begins at the moment faith begins to cooperate with Grace. A Religious Tradition that only offers “Justification” with no hope for transformation this side of the grave will has little chance of competing with other Religious Traditions that offer a potential for a meaningful life change. “Pie in the sky when you die bye and bye” just isn’t going to cut it with contemporary spiritual seekers.
Needless to say, my first six years in a Classical Reformation “biblical community” were not easy. I even had a bible thrown it me by a peer layperson after I shared my interpretation of a text in an adult bible study class. Although the Scriptures still serve me as a means of Grace for theological and spiritual guidance, I have little desire to belong to a “Biblical Community.” Many of my more Liberal/Progressive Christian friends have turned away from the Bible and are using the Gnostic Gospels [which, IMO, are not without insight,but are are inferior to the canonical Scriptures] for their theological/spiritual formation and as a devotional resource. I think that may be an over-reaction to the abusive bible-thumping aggression of the Moral Majority/Religious Right fundamentalists. I have even seen a bumper sticker that read “Live your life so that the Westboro Baptist Church will picket your funeral.” It is acceptable to be a “person of faith” in our secular culture, but identifying oneself as a “christian” usually evokes a negative response. I’m afraid the right-wing political populism and anti-intellectualism of the Bible Belt fundamentalists has trashed our brand and and proven to be more of an impediment than an inducement to a faith which claims the Bible as its primary source document.
My 25 years as a member of a uniquely Christian spiritual community under the care of the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer (Redemptorists), a contemplative Roman Catholic Order, at St. Mary’s convinced me that “institutionalization” need not result in the loss or diminishment of faith. However, after moving from MD to NC, I have been unable to find another local church that is not much more than a nominally religious middle class social club.
The local Catholic Church is pre-conciliar and it only took two visits for me to realize that it wouldn’t work for me. Having been raised in a secular culture where I was encouraged to question everything, including my own intial pre-suppostions, “Pray, pay and obey” is not my style.
Since I am BOTH spiritual AND religious, I have become an “active non-member” of St. Peter’s Episcopal Church. There are many mature christians there, but, for some reason, what happened at St. Mary’s is not happening at the communal level at St. Peters. Perhaps it is cultural. The Episcopal Church is WASP and St. Mary’s is mostly an Irish/Italian parish, two cultures which are much more communitarian, less individualistic than our mainline Anglo/American society.
Anyway, to get back to the theological issue of freedom of the will, one of my favorite quotes came not from a serious theological source, but from a book by a rather heterodox mystic:
“I used to believe we do not have free will. But then I realized that we do indeed have free will as far as the will to try to make things happen. However, of all the things we try to make happen, the ones that actually do happen, that is God’s will. So, ultimately, your free will is worthless.” ~Jessica Maxwell, quoting the *Mystic Golfer* in Roll Around Heaven
The human intellect has its limitations and there are some things that we can know truly, but never exhaustively. Omniscience is a Divine, not a human attribute. Dogmatic absolutism is the result of the syncratic embrace of gnostic religion and the Enlightenment rationalistic heresy that the miseries of man are caused solely by ignorance.
Lay Episcopalian church historian Phyllis Tickle has speculated that the Church goes through a crisis about every 500 years, during which it critically re-examines its teaching on faith and practice and that we are now in the midst of just such a prophetic cycle. She uses the symbol of the “New Rose”, Luther’s symbol, to represent her theory. Many of my friends who have left the Church, but not the faith, refer to their spiritual experience as a “wilderness wandering.” They have lost all confidence in the theological/spiritual formation they received from the institutional church and are living on blind trust/faith, not blind fideism and finding it more challenging than comforting; but also more meaningful than anything they experienced in their local church.
“(American Christianity) is more Petrine than Johannean; more like busy Martha than like the pensive Mary, sitting at the feet of Jesus. It expands more in breadth than in depth. It is often carried on like a secular business, and in a mechanical or utilitarian spirit. It lacks the beautiful enamel of deep fervor and heartiness, the true mysticism, an appreciation of history and the Church; it wants (i.e. “lacks”) the substratum of a profound and spiritual theology; and under the mask of orthodoxy it not infrequently conceals, without intending or knowing it, the tendency to abstract intellectualism and superficial rationalism. This is especially evident in the doctrine of the church and of the sacraments, and in the meagerness of the worship… (wherein) nothing is left but preaching, free prayer, and singing.”–Philip Schaff, a Swiss theologian, analyzing American Christianity for a German audience in 1854.
“In the beginning the church was a fellowship of men and women centering on the living Christ. Then the church moved to Greece where it became a philosophy. Then it moved to Rome where it became an institution. Next, it moved to Europe , where it became a culture. And, finally, it moved to America where it became an enterprise.” –Richard Halverson, former chaplain of the United States Senate
“In a rare interview in 1967 with Thomas McDonnell, [Thomas] Merton pronounced that the great crisis in the church is a crisis of authority precipitated because the church, as institution and organization, has overshadowed the reality of the church as a community of persons united in love and in Christ. He now charged that obedience and conformity with the impersonal corporation-church are a fact in the life of Christians. ‘The Church is preached as a communion, but is run in fact as a collectivity, and even as a totalitarian collectivity.'”~ George Kilcourse, ACE OF FREEDOMS: Thomas Merton’s Christ, Notre Dame Press, 1993