Can we continue to ‘do church’ in the same that we have done it for the past 1600 years? Or has the landscape we now occupy in Western Europe changed so much that we have to look again at our practices and change? My answer to the first question is ‘no’ and to the second ‘yes’. Christian faith and culture has become marginalised; far from being a dominant force able to shape society in our own image, we have become one minority group among many. And we have to respond to this change.

We could, of course, attach ourselves – as many of us have done – to those churches that have a buzz about them; churches that are growing, are ‘culturally relevant’, and work hard at producing programmes that are attractive. But to what extent are even these ‘successful’ churches really bucking the trend? And within them there are an increasing number who feel that all they do is a less formal version of traditional church life. The alternative is to truly seek fresh ways of being church (note the change in verb there – from ‘doing’ to ‘being’). One author who has been looking at this whole area is Stuart Murray in his volume Post-Christendom (Paternoster, 2004. Reprinted 2008). Over the next few weeks I want to post a series of articles on this book and suggest that there is here something we can use to guide us in an unfamiliar landscape.

Murray begins by claiming that within a few short decades Christians in Western Europe will be living among a people who have no knowledge whatsoever of the Christian story nor of church life and practice; where we can longer claim to be living in a ‘Christian society’. Whilst we are not there yet, we do have to prepare ourselves for this eventuality. ‘Post-Christendom is coming and we cannot continue as if Christendom will endure forever’ (page 3).

So what is ‘post-Christendom: it is being church on the margins of society instead of the centre; it is being a minority; it is being in a culture that is alien to us and where we no longer feel at home – in contrast to a culture which we shaped; it is being one group among many in a plural society, not enjoying the privileges of the past; it is exercising influence rather than exerting control; it is being in a mission within a contested environment rather than maintaining the status quo (20).

It is important to note that far from regretting the demise of Christendom Murray is celebrating the fact that the landscape has changed. In suggesting a way forward he also critiques the way things were – how church became dominant through using power, status, wealth, even violence and corruption. He identifies those groups throughout the ages who did not approve of how the church was being shaped and who paid a heavy price for calling for reform.

What Murray does not do is offer a blueprint of what a post-Christendom church should look like, simply because he doesn’t have one. ‘We have not been this way before’ and we will have to rely on the Holy Spirit to guide us.

Anyone fancy joining me on the journey?