"The Office" as an Ecclesiastical Allegory

My wife and I have become addicted to the NBC hit show The Office. I admit, it took both of us a little while to figure out what everyone found so funny, but once we did we couldn't get enough of it. The new season just kicked off this past Thursday, and we can't wait to see the antics that unfold.

Like many in the Christian fold, I diligently try to be an able exegete of the cultural realities around us (although, I must admit humbly that I fall short when compared with Eric Park. http://www.chcumc.com/weblog/eric/ Read his post on Prince, especially the last hilarious paragraph. But I digress...)

Anyway, lately I've been noticing some pretty interesting parallels between the situation in The Office and the situation in much of the Christian Church today. I'm sure that some of what I write will come off as offensive, but I ask you to take my comments, not as an attempt to degrade the Church and those who work in it (since I'm one of them), but as a voice of deep love for it and a concern for its future. Here are some allegorized interpretations of some aspects of The Office:

DUNDER-MIFFLIN: A New York-based paper company whose best days are in the past. It has branch offices in Scranton and elsewhere, and does try diligently to add personal service in providing individuals and businesses with its product. However, it is dealing two new realities: First, most people are buying paper at mega-marts like Staples and OfficeMax because it is cheaper and because Staples and OfficeMax offer a smorgasbord of alternatives; second, paper is less in demand than it was in the past, because computers and other technology have rendered paper usage largely obsolete in areas where it was once a necessary commodity.

Does this sound a little bit like the American Church? Are we dealing with the reality that many people no longer want our product (our Message)? Or how about the reality that "successful" churches are those "mega-Churches" which are able to offer the Message at a "cheaper price" (i.e. less is demanded in terms of real discipleship)?

"CORPORATE": On the TV series, we rarely see the true executives of Dunder-Mifflin (known as "Corporate" by the characters), and their positions seem to have little effect on the day-to-day business of the Scranton branch. Their current vision for the company seems to be one of "status-quo maintenance" - keep marketing our product the way we always have, downsize and make cuts wherever we can, be the authority figures that we are. But nowhere do we see them attempting to think creatively about adapting to the new reality described above, no vision for new marketing strategies or even changing their product to meet new needs. Just holding onto the status quo and maintain the corporation...even as sales go down and less money comes in, even if we are no longer providing a meaningful service to the public.

How about many churches today? Do we see executive leadership engaged in a "maintenance mentality" when they should be challenging pastors and lay ministers to engage creatively in new types of ministry and in presenting the Gospel in different ways? Has the "corporation" of church become the highest value, even when declining numbers is evidence that its current structure may not be the most effective way to provide meaningful service to the world? When the Church in other parts of the world is growing, evangelizing, Spirit-driven and Christ-centered, has the American Church become so infected with a "corporate" mentality that it has little power to think outside the box and engage the new culture in a meaningful way?

"MICHAEL SCOTT" - The regional manager for the Scranton branch of Dunder-Mifflin (flawlessly portrayed by Steve Carrell). As a salesman, Michael was one of Dunder-Mifflin's best; he was truly gifted to connect with people and successfully market the product. But for reasons unknown, Corporate promoted him to his current administrative position for which he has no skills or passion. As an administrator he does not hold the employees accountable to high standards of productivity and performance; instead he throws parties to boost their spirits and create and atmosphere of "camaraderie" (which fail miserably most of the time). He hates making unpopular decisions or taking a stand on anything which might offend someone. In his administrative incompetence and failed attempts to be "popular" with his staff, however, he is unwittingly even more offensive.

When we're really honest, I think we can admit that at both the local and denominational levels, there are many people in administrative positions who should not be there. These men and women are surely gifted in many ways, as all believers are, but as individuals called upon to provide visionary leadership for the Body they are failing. They seem more interested in keeping everyone happy and creating an atmosphere of "camaraderie," when what might be called for is real prophetic provocation which (while offensive) might be just the thing to stir the ashes and create a fresh blaze. This is especially necessary in theological areas, where so many Church administrators are failing to take a stand on basic biblical issues for fear that they may offend someone. But it is also necessary in the area of church commitment and discipleship, in which we allow people to get away with the "bare mininum" in terms of their active participation, rather than making it clear that Christianity is not, so to speak, a "spectator sport."

Let me just reiterate what I wrote above: I make these observations not with the purpose of being offensive, but with a deep love and concern for where the Church of Jesus Christ is and where it is headed. When I look at this "ecclesiastical allegory" of The Office, it is a mirror in which I see myself as much as anyone else.

I think I will put the rest of my observations in a sequel post, because for right now, this thing has gotten long enough. (Don't say it, Michael...)