From: eje@irenaeus.mlo.dec.com (Eric James Ewanco)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Cell Group Churches -- contrasted with "normal" churches
Date: 10 Oct 92 06:33:16 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <Oct.9.05.23.29.1992.15193@geneva.rutgers.edu>, conan@durban.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe) writes:

> I have been following the recent postings about "cell-group churches" with
> some interest--a year or so ago someone unsuccessfully tried to convince me
> that this was the future of the Catholic Church.  Therefore, I thought I
> would make some more skeptical comments about.  These comments are strictly
> from a Catholic perspective; they may have no bearing for evangelical
> Protestants.

My charismatic Catholic young adults prayer group is implementing cell groups.
Of course this is different from a parish doing it.  They learned it from a
parish in Florida.

> Unfortunately, I have never been in a parish which has adopted this model,
> so I cannot comment on it first hand.  However, what I have read and what I
> have heard (mostly while serving on a Diocesan planning committee) has left
> me unimpressed.  First, I found the exclusivity of the proponents somewhat
> unsettling.  Since small groups are a new paradigm of church organization,
> and not "just another program", they demand the complete attention of the
> parish to the apparent exclusion of anything else.  I really got the sense
> as I read Fr. Baranowski's book that the parishes he organized adopted the
> attitude that if you didn't like small groups you could go elsewhere.  He
> talks at one point about interviewing new parishoners and I got the sense
> that they were going through an "approval process".  Since Catholic parishes
> are organized geographically and, more importantly, are facets of a
> universal Church, this approach strikes me as parochial in the pejorative
> sense (no pun intended).

I agree that the attitude that everyone must participate is a little extreme.
Unfortunately, our church is in such terrible, awful shape that there are
many people who have no interest in getting involved, who only come to Mass
because they think it will save them from going to Hell, and just many people
who do not live Christian lives.  It's no wonder that that parish you mention
only had a 25% success rate.  The kind of people who usually attend Catholic
churches just aren't capable of living the cell group life.

I think that if a parish started it, it should make it optional and not
pressure people to join -- instead it should build up the people in the cell
groups, disciple them and let them be lights to the rest of the parish.  Then
more people would come in, and people would be evangelized.  Forget the people
who never respond to the call.

But even then, you might fall into the attitude that anyone who doesn't join
a cell group is not a committed Catholic Christian.  It may be largely true
<grin>  but it's definitely an unhealthy attitude.  I was involved in a
covenanted charismatic Christian community (predominately Catholic) and the
attitude was, if you don't want to join the community, that's fine, you just
aren't at 'that point' in your Christian walk, thus implying that anyone who
really followed the Lord would recognize that they should join _this_ 
community, and anyone who didn't just wasn't spiritual enough.  I loved the
community, and I enjoyed being in it, but it's not for everyone, not even for
every committed Christian, not even for every Saint.

> Further, while in the best of all possible worlds I would like all Catholics
> to be deeply commited Christians, I realize that there are always going to
> be degrees of commitment, and I want a Church which is open enough to
> minister to the marginal.  Speaking from my own experience: when I returned
> to the Church during college, all I wanted to do was slip into a back pew; a
> heavy handed attempt to get me "involved" would have only driven me away
> again.  As time went on I became more open to the need for community and the
> various parishes I belonged to readily opened up to me when I was ready for
> them.  Nobody ever demanded an "all or nothing" commitment that small groups
> seem to require.

True, but I think we should also evangelize the apathetic, and encourage
them to greater commitment to their faith.  But I agree that an all or 
nothing commitment, especially an attitude that "either you join a small
group or you're not a member of this parish", is not healthy.

> I think that this problem is fairly pervasive, though I have only seen it
> hinted at.  At one point in his book, Fr. Baranowski conceded that in a
> parish he had been working with for _10_ years, they had gotten 25% of the
> parishoners to join small groups.  Turn this figure around: after 10 years
> three-quarters of the parishoners were not involved in this all encompassing
> paradigm.

Like I mentioned, given the sad state of Catholics in this world, this is not
surprising.  I would be surprised if 25% of members of a given parish really
had a significant commitment to Christ and the faith at all.

> Second, the Catholic church is a sacramental church: as _Lumen Gentium_
> said, the Eucharist is the "font and apex" of our communal life.  Yet every
> description of small groups I have seen seems to downplay their role.  The
> most outrageous proposal I heard (again while on a Diocesan planning
> committee) was to close all the parish churches in a certain area of
> Oakland, and reorganize everyone into small groups.  While perhaps
> unintentional, this plan seemed to indicate that small groups would
> eliminate the need to come together for the sacraments.

This is DEFINITELY a bad result!  we must never forsake the community or the
sacraments, and here we would do well _not_ to emulate the Protestants, for
our emphasis is different.  This does not mean that we can't use cell groups,
it means that they cannot be our focus.

> To close: please note the caveats which stud this post.  If anyone out there
> has had positive experiences with small groups in a Catholic parish, I would
> be interested in hearing about them.  My mind is not completely closed--I'm
> merely skeptical.

> Yours in Christ,

> David Cruz-Uribe, SFO

I rather like the implementation of cell groups in my charismatic group. 
Since it is by nature a group of like-minded people, filled with committed
Christians, it works better.  The first day I came to the meeting, they just
happened to be having small group meetings, and I was immediately assigned to
a group, and it made a great impression on me.  I really enjoy it.

Of course, I'm a community rat and I've had mongo experience with this stuff
and I eat it up.  I was looking for something like this, and when I found it
I liked it.  In community I was part of a "men's group" which was one of a
few small groups in the community, and behaved roughly like a "cell".  For 
someone else, it may be disconcerting.

Eric
--
/===========================================================================\
| Eric Ewanco - Software Engineer   For the rash and outrageous opinions ex-|
| Digital Equipment, Maynard MA     pressed herein I alone am responsible;  |
| ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com        they do not belong to DIGITAL(TM).      |
\==========================- 2 Th 2:15 -====================================/
    "...[T]he greatest and most ancient Church known to all, founded and
    organized at Rome by [] Peter and Paul, [is] that Church which has the
    tradition and faith which comes down to us after having been announced
    to men by the Apostles.  For with this Church, because of its superior
    origin, all Churches must agree ...  and it is in her that the
    faithful everywhere have maintained the Apostolic tradition."
       -- St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, c. 180 A.D., 3,3,3.