The world of football, is one that I am fairly familiar with, being a bit of a football buff meself. In the world of football, I would say the most important person is the manager.
Players can come and players can go, it is the manager who is responsible for selecting the team, for selecting the style of play and to a large extent for choosing the character of the club itself. The manager is very important. Although it is the players that play the game that determines the scores, it is the manager who is the motivator of the players, he is the one that chooses who comes to the club, he instils confidence, he instructs, he knows what he wants.
In the world of football, however, it’s not unusual for his position to be under pressure for one reason or the other. The board might be restless with results, the players may turn against him, he may prove unpopular with the fans and so the manager can find himself soon on the dole queue (where you’re unemployed for those who don’t know). Conversely if you’re successful at a smaller club, this might bring attention to larger clubs who may want that manager to leave and bring success to the club. Again pressure is brought on the club. So the question of loyalty is brought up. Fans of the club bemoan the lack of it, and its rarity.
In a consumer culture the same issue crops up in a different way as first a company pitches a product in the hope that the consumer will buy it, and buy into the company themselves and prove to be loyal to them for the foreseeable future. To do so they update the product, or bring in a new one in. Meanwhile competitors look to steal the consumer away with a better offer as helped by other loyal customers with their testimonies to the goodness of the product. Although it’s not as explicit as the football scenario, there is a question again of loyalty. Whereas in time past the transfer of goods was indelibly linked to personal relationships, now the large companies and businesses have in marketing sought to make it more personal, but in actuality have eliminated that personal touch, yet still would love to have that personal loyalty.
I am wondering if the same has been applied to the world of Christianity. I wonder if doctrines, denominations, personalities and organisations who proclaim Jesus as Lord are looking for get people to join them because they have a better product to offer and once they have joined loyalty is implicitly expected and the failure to do so brings about rejection and alienation. When I say I wonder that, I don’t genuinely have no idea what the case could be. I’m just saying I wonder as that is the case, how healthy that is? How does that show the Church to be different from the world?
It’s a given that there are different varieties and flavours of Christianity, sadly it’s also a given that some of these take their distinctives very seriously to the point of virtually excluding others as having a valid contribution to make to faith. How righteous is that? What’s the point in shaping people to fit a brand, rather than equipping people to passionately pursue being shaped into Christ’ image?
There is no doubt that God is looking for faithfulness from his people. It is certainly important to have a community of faith to which you hold yourself accountable, but more importantly to which you know you belong as a part of the family. In all this, is it necessarily requiring a stringent, exclusive commitment to a brand, or a style?
(Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash)
For His Name’s Sake
Shalom
dmcd
Life With CD 