Sharing vs. doing

Where do liberal churches get our models for small group dynamics? In the liberal churches I have worked in (six, so far), I have seen two primary models for understanding small groups.

There’s the older model of the church as a constellation of committees, classes, social services groups, and other groups whose main goal is doing something, usually doing something practical. This older model dates from the late 19th C. and the first half of the 20th C., and is related to concepts of the church as a part of civic space, a subset of democracy, a voluntary association. Call this the “doing model” of small groups: you’re called to volunteer your time to do something to make the world better.

Then there’s a newer model of small groups as support groups, consciousness-raising groups, sharing groups, and other groups whose main goal is personal development, which is assumed to take place most effectively in a small group which has developed a high level of trust. This newer model dates from the 1960’s and 1970’s, and is related to group techniques developed by second wave feminism, the human potential movement, self-help groups, and the other experiments in group work that flourished in those two decades. Call this the “sharing model” of small groups: you’re called to share your personal growth and development with a small trusted group.

I’d have to say that the “sharing model” dominates each of the liberal churches I’ve served. Persons are often encouraged to share deeply, to “bare their souls,” in various small group settings. The “sharing model” has even affected large groups: a new liturgical element, “candles of joy and concern,” has been added to the worship service in many Unitarian Universalist churches, wherein members of the congregation are invited to stand and share something personal with the entire congregation; there may be a perfunctory request for prayers or “good thoughts,” but what really happens is sharing without comment or action from anyone else, which is typical of the “sharing model.”

Even in larger liberal churches, where there simply isn’t time for all the “candles of joy and concern,” you will often see a time in the worship service where anyone who wishes may come forward and light a candle in silence. Here again, the emphasis is on sharing: the person lighting the candle is simply sharing that something is on his or her mind. In the older “doing model,” there would have been a pastoral prayer in place of this candle-lighting ritual; the pastoral prayer was more oriented towards “doing,” though, because it would ask the congregation to pray for others, or it would ask for God’s assistance.

The difference between the “sharing model” and the “doing model” is primarily one of theological emphasis. In the “sharing model,” persons are assumed to be essentially self-sufficient, or if persons are dependent on God it is because they have a direct relationship with God neither mediated through others, nor taking place in a covenantal community. In the “doing model,” persons are assumed to be responsible for taking care of others, probably before they take care of themselves.

Obviously, this is all subject to debate. But so far, does what I’m saying ring true for you — or not?

In Part II — sharing vs. caring.