China has a huge Christian community and that is apparently so to all. However, the social influence generated by the community appears to be too far less than its size, to which we have to give a good reflection.
In the post-pandemic era, to China and even the world, the economic decline has made Christianity temporarily lose its vitality. However, we must be clear that it is Christianity as a church collective that has lost its vitality. It is due to the decline of economic support that they have been constrained in missionary work, media, and social activities. Consequently, they are unable to function and propagate. However, it is not so with lay believers.
Up to now, Christianity entering our field of vision is Christianity as a whole religion or church body, or a certain church group. We believe that it is their activities that function as a symbol of either the vitality or decline of Christianity.
The same is true of the whole Christian history. Christian history textbooks record theologians who founded theological frameworks, or apologists who fought off pagan attacks, and church leaders who established large churches. This gives us an impression that Christianity is theirs - the Christianity of theologians, apologists, missionaries, or church leaders. They brought the glory of Christianity and created today's Christianity.
However, if we cast aside this view for a while and search in the details of history deeply inside Christianity, we will find that those lay believers who created history have always been ignored.
In the church-based view of Christian history, the concept of lay believers has always been rejected. It stemmed from the collectivist concept under the Christian monotheistic system. This feature began with Judaism. Faced with the disintegration of their own country during the period of great exiles, Jews must have melted the danger of individualism with the idea of collectivism so as to prevent the nation from being assimilated by different cultures. Therefore, the emergence of collectivism was constructed in the background of a defensive environment and mentality.
So the same is true of Christian collectivism. Christianity has been excluded since its spontaneous birth, so it is understandable that they adopted collectivism to defend against the erosion of pagan cultures. However, after Christianity had been nationalized, it lost its enemies and collectivism still prevailed, forming a hierarchical structure in which the Pope was at the top of the pyramid. At this time, the maintenance power of collectivism did not come from the persecution faced by Christianity but from the maintenance of power by the monks. In order to eliminate the threat of individualism to the authority of papal monks, we must continue to maintain Christian collectivism in a high-pressure way. This collectivism, in order to maintain authority, has been running through the history of Christianity until today.
Today, a large number of lay believers are exerting their strengths in all walks of life, changing society and the world. However, because they are not engaged in Christian religious undertakings, they are not recognized by the church.
After being struck by the pandemic, the church, as the main body of Christian activities, has lost its previous passion due to lack of economic support. At this time, the blow to the church does not mean that Christians are hit likewise. As a matter of fact, as individual members of Christianity, the lay believers are much less hit than the church in this pandemic tide. Because believers are scattered as individuals and have their own material foundation whereas the church must rely on economic dedication, so when the economy goes down, the church will receive less income. For ordinary believers, the impact is really very small.
Then, when Christianity encounters setbacks and the activities of the church are limited, should we consider exerting the power of lay believers at this time? Obviously, it is imperative to release the strengths of lay believers, but there are several obstacles that need to be overcome.
The first obstacle is the internal church barrier. Ordinary believers are bound by church collectivism within its walls and their strengths cannot reach out of the walls. Their faith manifestation can mainly take the form of religious ceremonies within its walls.
Secondly, it is the barrier generated by the leaders. The minister is the actual controller of a church. The controlling is the main source of income for the minister to make a living, so it is very important to maintain his or her authority. Sometimes, they also express their desire to let lay believers participate in society, but this kind of participation still cannot go beyond the control of the minister, with the expected outcome of a better effect but of less influence. If the intended effect is not good, the minister will appear to be less authoritative, and if the social influence is great, the authority of the minister will be threatened.
The third obstacle is the utilitarian mentality within religion. There are many activities and ways for lay believers to participate in social contributions, but at present the mentality of lay believers who participate in society is utilitarian. That is, no matter what social activities you do, you must put on your Christian cross. If you do a good thing and do not leave a track of your Christian cross, it is equivalent to not doing it. This utilitarian thinking has seriously hindered the enthusiasm of ordinary Christians for social participation and limited their forms of social participation.
This requires lay believers to participate in society and break through the three barriers. First, believers should liberate themselves from the church and truly put themselves in the name of Jesus - knowing that they work for the glory of God, not for the glory of the church. Secondly, it is to form a fellowship of independent lay believers to avoid the control of the minister. The third point is to break the narrow concept of religion and participate in society in a sociable way.
- Translated by Charlie Li
观点| 教会释放平信徒力量会遇到的三个障碍
中国有着庞大的基督教群体，这是有目共睹的事实，然而基督教所产生的社会影响力，却与基督教如此的规模相去甚远，这不能不让我们反思。
疫情之后的中国乃至世界，经济的下滑让基督教也暂时失去活力。但是我们必须清楚的一点是，失去活力的是作为教会集体存在的基督教，他们因为经济支持的下滑，从而在宣教、媒体、社会活动上受到掣肘，从而没有能力举办活动和宣传。而不是平信徒。
迄今为止，进入我们视野的基督教皆是作为宗教或者教会整体的基督教，或者某一个作为群体的教会。我们认为他们的活动，才是基督教兴旺或者衰退的标记。
整个基督教历史同样如此，基督教历史教科书上记载的，是那些创立了神学架构的神学家，或者击退异教攻击的护教家，以及建立大型教会的教会领袖。这就给我们一个印象，基督教是他们的，是神学家、护教家、宣教家或者教会领袖的基督教，他们带来了基督教的辉煌，他们创造了今天的基督教。
然而，如果我们暂时甩开这个观点，把眼睛沉浸到历史的细节中去，把眼睛放到基督教的内部去，我们会发现，那些创造历史的平信徒一直被我们忽略。
在教会本位的基督教历史观中，平信徒这个概念一直是被排斥的，这源于基督教一神论系统下的集体主义观念。这一特征，自犹太教开始。犹太人面对大流散时期，自己国家破碎的情况，必须以集体主义的理念来消融掉个体主义的危险，以防止民族被异文化同化的悲剧。因此，集体主义的产生，是在防御性环境和心态的背景下建构的。
那么基督教的集体主义，同样也是如此。基督教自发诞生开始，就处在被排斥的状态中，因此他们采取集体主义，以防御异教文化的侵蚀，这无可厚非。但是到了国教化之后，基督教失去了敌人，集体主义依然盛行，形成教皇处于塔尖的等级结构，这个时候集体主义的维护动力，不是来自于基督教面对的迫害，而是僧侣阶层出于对权势的维护。为了消灭个体主义对教皇僧侣阶层权威的威胁，必须以高压的方式来继续维护基督教的集体主义。这种为了维持权威而来的集体主义，一直贯穿了基督教的历史，直到今天。
在今天，大量的平信徒在社会的各行各业发挥着自己的力量，改变着社会和世界。但是他们因为从事的不是基督教宗教事业，而不被教会注意。
在疫情打几下，因为经济后援的乏力，让作为基督教活动主体的教会失去了往日的激情。那么这个时候，教会受到的打击并不代表基督徒也同样受到打击。实际上，平信徒作为基督教的个体成员，在这场疫情大潮中，受到打击要比教会轻得多。因为信徒作为个体是分散的，拥有自己的物质基础，而教会必须依赖于经济的奉献，这样当经济下行的时候，教会收到的奉献就会减少。对于平信徒个体来说，受到的影响确实十分微小的。
那么在基督教遇到挫折的当下，教会的活动受限，这个时候是不是要考虑释放平信徒的力量呢？显然，释放平信徒的力量，是势在必行，但是这要克服几个障碍。
一是教会障碍。平信徒被教会集体主义束缚在教会围墙之内，他们的力量无法走出围墙，他们的信仰表达只能以围墙内的宗教仪式为主要形式。
二是传道人障碍。传道人是教会的实际控制人，这个教会是传道人赖以生存的经济收入主要来源，因此维护自己的权威就变得十分重要。他们有时候也会表现出让平信徒信徒参与社会的愿望，但是这种参与社会的活动，却依然逃不出传道人的控制范围，那就是效果要好，影响要小。如果效果不好，那就没办法向其它信徒交代，如果社会影响大了，那么传道人权威就受到威胁。
三是言必谈宗教的功利主义心态。平信徒参与社会贡献的活动内容和方式很多，但是当下教会平信徒参与社会的心态，却是功利性的。那就是不论做什么社会活动，一定要打着基督教的十字架，如果你做了一件好事，没有写下基督教的十字架，那就相当于没做。这种功利思维严重阻碍了基督教平信徒的社会参与热情，也限制了他们参与社会的形式。
这就要求平信徒参与社会，要冲破三个关口。一个是从教会里解放出来，把自己真正归在耶稣名下，为上帝荣耀而活动，不是为了教会的荣耀而活动。一个是组建独立的平信徒的团契，避开传道人的控制。第三就是打破宗教的狭窄观念，以社会的方式参与社会。
https://www.christiantimes.cn/news/34527/%E8%A7%82%E7%82%B9%E4%B8%A8%E6%95%99%E4%BC%9A%E9%87%8A%E6%94%BE%E5%B9%B3%E4%BF%A1%E5%BE%92%E5%8A%9B%E9%87%8F%E4%BC%9A%E9%81%87%E5%88%B0%E7%9A%84%E4%B8%89%E4%B8%AA%E9%9A%9C%E7%A2%8D
观点| 教会释放平信徒力量会遇到的三个障碍
China has a huge Christian community and that is apparently so to all. However, the social influence generated by the community appears to be too far less than its size, to which we have to give a good reflection.
In the post-pandemic era, to China and even the world, the economic decline has made Christianity temporarily lose its vitality. However, we must be clear that it is Christianity as a church collective that has lost its vitality. It is due to the decline of economic support that they have been constrained in missionary work, media, and social activities. Consequently, they are unable to function and propagate. However, it is not so with lay believers.
Up to now, Christianity entering our field of vision is Christianity as a whole religion or church body, or a certain church group. We believe that it is their activities that function as a symbol of either the vitality or decline of Christianity.
The same is true of the whole Christian history. Christian history textbooks record theologians who founded theological frameworks, or apologists who fought off pagan attacks, and church leaders who established large churches. This gives us an impression that Christianity is theirs - the Christianity of theologians, apologists, missionaries, or church leaders. They brought the glory of Christianity and created today's Christianity.
However, if we cast aside this view for a while and search in the details of history deeply inside Christianity, we will find that those lay believers who created history have always been ignored.
In the church-based view of Christian history, the concept of lay believers has always been rejected. It stemmed from the collectivist concept under the Christian monotheistic system. This feature began with Judaism. Faced with the disintegration of their own country during the period of great exiles, Jews must have melted the danger of individualism with the idea of collectivism so as to prevent the nation from being assimilated by different cultures. Therefore, the emergence of collectivism was constructed in the background of a defensive environment and mentality.
So the same is true of Christian collectivism. Christianity has been excluded since its spontaneous birth, so it is understandable that they adopted collectivism to defend against the erosion of pagan cultures. However, after Christianity had been nationalized, it lost its enemies and collectivism still prevailed, forming a hierarchical structure in which the Pope was at the top of the pyramid. At this time, the maintenance power of collectivism did not come from the persecution faced by Christianity but from the maintenance of power by the monks. In order to eliminate the threat of individualism to the authority of papal monks, we must continue to maintain Christian collectivism in a high-pressure way. This collectivism, in order to maintain authority, has been running through the history of Christianity until today.
Today, a large number of lay believers are exerting their strengths in all walks of life, changing society and the world. However, because they are not engaged in Christian religious undertakings, they are not recognized by the church.
After being struck by the pandemic, the church, as the main body of Christian activities, has lost its previous passion due to lack of economic support. At this time, the blow to the church does not mean that Christians are hit likewise. As a matter of fact, as individual members of Christianity, the lay believers are much less hit than the church in this pandemic tide. Because believers are scattered as individuals and have their own material foundation whereas the church must rely on economic dedication, so when the economy goes down, the church will receive less income. For ordinary believers, the impact is really very small.
Then, when Christianity encounters setbacks and the activities of the church are limited, should we consider exerting the power of lay believers at this time? Obviously, it is imperative to release the strengths of lay believers, but there are several obstacles that need to be overcome.
The first obstacle is the internal church barrier. Ordinary believers are bound by church collectivism within its walls and their strengths cannot reach out of the walls. Their faith manifestation can mainly take the form of religious ceremonies within its walls.
Secondly, it is the barrier generated by the leaders. The minister is the actual controller of a church. The controlling is the main source of income for the minister to make a living, so it is very important to maintain his or her authority. Sometimes, they also express their desire to let lay believers participate in society, but this kind of participation still cannot go beyond the control of the minister, with the expected outcome of a better effect but of less influence. If the intended effect is not good, the minister will appear to be less authoritative, and if the social influence is great, the authority of the minister will be threatened.
The third obstacle is the utilitarian mentality within religion. There are many activities and ways for lay believers to participate in social contributions, but at present the mentality of lay believers who participate in society is utilitarian. That is, no matter what social activities you do, you must put on your Christian cross. If you do a good thing and do not leave a track of your Christian cross, it is equivalent to not doing it. This utilitarian thinking has seriously hindered the enthusiasm of ordinary Christians for social participation and limited their forms of social participation.
This requires lay believers to participate in society and break through the three barriers. First, believers should liberate themselves from the church and truly put themselves in the name of Jesus - knowing that they work for the glory of God, not for the glory of the church. Secondly, it is to form a fellowship of independent lay believers to avoid the control of the minister. The third point is to break the narrow concept of religion and participate in society in a sociable way.
- Translated by Charlie Li
Viewpoint: Three Obstacles the Church Will Encounter When Exerting the Power of the Laity
