Calvin Synod Herald, 2016 (117. évfolyam, 1-12. szám)

2016-07-01 / 7-8. szám

CALVIN SYNOD HERALD

7

In spite of the fact that the members do not even know what the Bible (or our confessions) says about the Communion, they rose up to protect the “Hungarian Reformed” tradition (which is not the a “tradition” but only the “way” how it has been done in that particular church). But what is even more tragic, the liturgical questions are not the most debated ones in the churches. The same members would protect the “Hungarian Reformed” tradition of how to run the kitchen even more vehemently. This is not something particular to us. Many times when different religious groups try to protect their “orthodoxy” they only guard the social practices of the times when they were originated (or from their most formative times). Even more tragically, it also means that a new member (who has not grown up in that church) will never be in equal status with the old members. After a while they become “long-time visitors.” Thus “gaining new members” is lacking from the church’s vocabulary.

Another example of this l'art pour Tart philosophy in church life is the question of the role of the pastor. As a member of the Church and Ministry Committee, I am more and more concerned about this issue. It seems to me that the pastor in these days is not a necessary constituent of the church (and church life), but an optional luxury. Less and less churches can “afford” to have a pastor. And even the churches who still can afford one, try to make her/him more affordable. The salaries are not growing with the rising prices, or if they do, not yearly, but maybe once in a decade. Budget is cut on the pastor’s health insurance, logging, and whatever it is possible. Bottom line, the church tries to save money, and thus keep the doors open, via cutting back on the “not necessary” expenses (in this case the pastor). The point is that the pastor is dispensable. Again, 1 only use issues here which are typical for all churches, but if we go down to local level, we find even more examples to this kind of approach to how to run the church.

This l’art pour l'art attitude can be justified in the word of art, but never in the church of Jesus Christ. This approach effected even our value system. The most important value determination is how much one is utilizable for the church, and not how much one grows spiritually. This kind of approach cultivated a “spirituality” in which the heart of the church is not Christ or the Word of God, but the kitchen; and the glory does not go to God, but to the building (in Hungarian we call our churches “templom [-temple]” which actually refers to the building and not the Christian community).

Possible outcomes

After this quick overview of past and present let us now turn to the possible future. We can use the same premise, that is, the fact that most of our churches are called “Hungarian Reformed Church.” Above I did not share what 1 think about this title. To be honest, I have mixed feelings. The one feeling which I am going to share here can be illustrated by a

real life experience. When I lived in Hungary, I always went to the same mechanic for checkup on my car. They had a huge sign on the wall stating that “In this machine shop we are dedicated to give you: 1-excellent, 2-cheap, and 3-fast service.” But if one went closer, one discovered a fine print beneath the sign stating: “You can pick two from the above three.” It meant that the service will be either “excellent and cheap—but not fast,” or “cheap and fast—but not excellent,” or “excellent and fast—but not cheap.” I use this analogy to express my feelings about the possible future of a Hungarian Reformed Church (with slight alterations of course). I feel that we cannot keep all these three, that is “Hungarian,” “Reformed,” and “Church,” in the same way we have been done in the past, if we want to survive as a religious body. I also want to mention here that I am aware of the fact, that there are churches in our Synod which have a different “kind” of name. Maybe they do not even focus on cultural hospitability as the main character of the church. Yet, they are not different in the fact that they are also struggling. What we are facing here in the US today is not just the decline of the so called “immigrant” churches, but all of the denominational churches per se. But after much consideration I believe that in many stances the same factors play in those churches too, and thus they face with the same kind of outcomes. So what are the options before us?

First option: The given church can focus on the “Hungarian-Reformed” identity. It means that there is no need to change anything. I already described this above. Keep the costumes (which are erroneously called “tradition”), and focus on cultural activates which helpfully will generate enough income to keep the doors open. In this case the church will lose its “church” identity (i.e., being a “church” which is also the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ). To put it another way, in this scenario, the community will lose its religious identity. It does not mean that all of the religious elements will be left behind, but they will be only secondary elements compared to the national-cultural elements. In this case the pastor is only present to help to fulfill the religious part (mostly when it comes to Communion, twice or thrice a year—Christmas, Easter, and New Bread). This is why more and more of our churches even do not have a regular pastor (and they do not feel it necessary to have one either). Religion is needed as long as it emphasizes the cultural element. Here we need to highlight the fact that the Hungarian Reformed Church is a very significant part of the Hungarian cultural landscape. One mark of this role is that it is still called the “Hungarian” Reformed Church. As a counterexample we can mention that the German Reformed Church changed its name after the Second World War to Reformed Church in Germany. I do not want to go into details why the German reformed find this change necessary, but I do want to say that the history (and cultural-political engage^ «=>