‘Indirect Rejection’: More Frightening Than Atheism
In his book Basic Christianity, John Stott offers an intriguing observation: while modern people are hostile toward the church, they maintain an “indirect” attitude toward Jesus Christ. People nod in agreement with the love and sacrifice Jesus spoke of, yet they cast a cold eye on the “vessel” that holds those values—the institutional church.
Many say, “I like the teachings of Jesus, but the institutional nature of the church is suffocating.” However, a fundamental question arises: Is what we truly oppose the “institution” itself? Or is it something “else” that the institution has failed to embrace?
The Anxiety of Freedom and the Dual Nature of Institutions
Human beings are paradoxical creatures. We cry out for the freedom to be left alone, yet we find ourselves helpless when faced with absolute freedom devoid of rules or boundaries. As the philosopher Erich Fromm suggested, humans sometimes cannot bear the weight of freedom and seek a place to be bound once again.
Therefore, it is a stretch to conclude that people oppose the church simply because of “institutional oppression.” In fact, humans instinctively crave structure and a sense of belonging. What we are truly pushing away is not the “order” of the institution, but the “rigidity” that sets in like a fossil when that order loses its vitality. It is the rules devoid of love, administration devoid of life, and hierarchies curdled into authoritarianism that make us recoil.
What We Truly Reject is the Disconnect in ‘Attributes’
If we look closely at the arrows of criticism aimed at the church, they are pointed not at the system, but at “people” and “attitudes.” People are weary of the exclusivity and hypocrisy of the church; they do not necessarily loathe the framework of faith itself.
Jesus appeared by cracking the old religious systems of his time, yet he simultaneously created a new order: the community of disciples. The reason people take an indirect approach to Jesus is because of the “authenticity” he displayed. Conversely, the point at which today’s church is criticized is when that authenticity becomes buried under the weight of the institution. The hypocrisy of “not living as one speaks” and the self-righteousness of “only we are right” make the institutional shell look all the more hideous.
Waiting for ‘Life’ to Fill the Vessel of Institution
Ultimately, the issue is not “whether an institution exists or not.” It is “for what purpose does that institution exist?” Humans are never strong enough to maintain their convictions alone; we still need communities and systems to hold one another up.
The real reason we feel a repulsion toward the institutional may not be because it restricts our freedom, but because we cannot see the “face of Jesus” we expected to find within it. Institutions originally exist to protect the essence. If the institution is obscuring that essence, our task is not to destroy the system, but to breathe life back into it.
We are still searching for the way. While admitting our weakness in handling total freedom, we dream of resting within a healthy system where vibrant love flows. What we are waiting for is not perfect disorder, but a warm order governed by love.
If you enjoyed this piece:
Explore the “Character Creation Complete” collection
Discover more from the Abstract collection
Leave a Reply