Kierkegaardian Covid Christianity

We are beginning to consider how we might structure our return to the church building after lockdown. It’s possible the government may allow “public gatherings” in July. So, we’re thinking through social distancing and hygiene, with reduced numbers at multiple services. But while there is an economic pressure, pushing people to return to work as soon as possible, church has a different ethos. We can afford to take our time, to be safe, caring for people not profits.

However, while some are keen to meet physically, instead of virtually, others are not. A few may have got out of the “habit” of meeting, becoming used to passive inactivity (He. 10.25). Others are understandably cautious about the risk to their health; the virus has not gone anywhere. Our current discomfort with crowds, in society as a whole, will probably affect Christians’ comfort zones as well. Then more prosaic matters also intrude: the Congestion Zone has been extended to weekends, so anyone travelling to church by car, will have to pay £15; and many will also be uncomfortable using public transport, where social distancing is difficult to maintain.  

So we may find a substantial number won’t come back, at least initially. We can still offer them continuing online resources: online services, weekly e-newsletter, daily bible readings, virtual small groups, and regular phone calls. But the fact is many may drift, and sink into the miasma of postmodern, urban, anonymity. What can we do to feed the sheep, who are out of the sheepfold, when we’re not able to chase them, like the Good Shepherd?  

Hence we find ourselves in a Kierkegaardian moment. Kierkegaard railed against the conformity of Danish state Christianity, advocating each individual should make their own decision to follow and grow in Christ. It’s not an exact parallel; this a situation of enforced separation, where we are all now accidentally ‘separated brethren’ (to mis-use the Catholic Church’s phrase for us sectarians). Today individuals need to take responsibility for their own faith and growth in discipleship. People are forced to search for their own spiritual resources; probably online, from the plethora of preachers, webinars, and blogs, available there.

Some already did this, supplementing the ministry of their local church, with other perspectives. One couple I know, regularly avail themselves of the two Kenneths, Copeland and Hagin. Prosperity teachers, whose teaching would be anathema in their evangelical Baptist church. In contrast, I know others, who look to silent contemplative prayer, for a depth not found in their charismatic fellowship. Our predicament is therefore likely to exacerbate the splintering of Christianity even further. The pick’n’mix postmodern approach to spirituality, will be accentuated. A unified theological and spiritual perspective, under the teaching ministry of a local pastorate, will be even more difficult to establish.   

This has a positive aspect, because some will be encouraged to look after their own spiritual growth – some unlikely candidates are even actually reading ‘books’! But it could also facilitate the subjectivisation of Christianity, into our own private spiritual solipsisms.