社區型基督教會提供社會服務的脈絡與因素：以深坑地區的四間教會為例

Abstract

基督宗教信仰與教會組織影響了現代社會福利體系的發展，其教義內涵也包含了許多支持信徒投入社會服務的觀念與倫理教導。在當今台灣社會中，亦有不少基督教會於所處社區中提供社會服務，參與課後照顧、兒少休閒與教育、急難與清寒救助、弱勢家庭關懷與親職培力、老人服務等事工，成為社區照顧的夥伴。本研究旨在探討社區型教會參與社會服務的社區脈絡，以及支持服務發展的因素與條件，研究範圍為新北市深坑地區，接受訪談的包括活石基督教會、深坑喜樂教會、中國聖道會信行堂土庫教會與深坑基督教會錫安堂等四間教會。研究發現，深坑是個以傳統民間信仰為主的地區，在台北都會擴張的過程中，人口持續移入，有些家庭在適應生活變遷的過程中面臨挑戰，也有些家庭忙於勞動需要兒少照顧資源，教會藉由課輔班提供兒少密集的陪伴，滿足了家庭的需求，參與社會服務也有助於教會與居民建立關係，也淡化了屬於外來團體的色彩，漸漸融入社區。 本文將所研究的教會依對社會服務參與的情形分為「積極參與」和「自然散發」兩種類型。積極參與型的教會，尤其在兒少與家庭服務方面，是學校、鄰里與地方社政部門的好夥伴，影響其積極投入服務因素包含：服務延續自教會成立前就已存在的社區事工、受到教會界相關思潮動員與資源支持、成員擁有相關專長與背景、具備人力動員的能力與策略、服務過程中受到信仰的鼓舞、個人相關的生命議題，以及藉由家長的身分與學校建立關係等；而並未獲得充分因素支持的教會，則採取將關愛精神自然散發的路線，以會友及鄰居親友為主要服務對象。 基於本研究之發現，對於實務與政策上提出三點建議：一、教會在服務提供之外，若欲進一步與社區產生連結，可以嘗試參與地方發展取向之社區工作；二、教會的宣教目標與服務目標能夠從認知上就更加整合，去除矛盾與互斥，地方政府與社區組織在尋找服務夥伴時也能更開放地看待教會；三、對於願意參與社會服務的教會，政策制定上與在地夥伴關係建構上，應尤其協助在地需求評估與在地參與，使教會的服務更能滿足社區所需，並充實地方發展之社會資本。

In history, Christianity plays an important role in the development of social welfare system. Its theology contains abundant concepts and ethics related to social services. In modern Taiwan society, many local churches provide social services for children, teenagers, the elderly, families, and the poor. Their participation in social services make them more than buildings where rituals take place. These churches become partners of community care. Present research’s objective is to explore the community context and factors of churches’ participation in social services. Four churches in Senkeng, New Taipei City were interviewed. They are Livingstones Church, Joy Church, Tuku Church, and Zion Church. It was found that social services work as bridge between churches and the community, especially in an area where most people are affiliated with folk beliefs. Furthermore, churches’ after-school service meets many families’ need. Because of the rapid development of Shenkeng area, certain long-time residents have difficulties adapting to the changing life, and some commuter residents hardly balance work and family. Two types of churches, “active participants” and the “not-a-must”, are recognized according to their social service tendencies. The active participants’ efforts are important providers of services to children, teenagers and their families, and they won appreciation from schools and community organizations. On the contrary, churches of the second type seldom regard social service program necessary. They practice service and care mainly for members and their family. A list of factors were identified supportive to churches’ role in social services including voluntary social services derived from community ministries prior to the church’s establishment, inspiration and support from evangelical institutions, members with related backgrounds and skills, abilities and strategies to mobilize human resource, religious motivation and interpretation, church leaders’ personal issues which are similar to service users, and involvement in schools as parents. Based on the research findings, three suggestions are made for churches, community, and local government. First, churches have the potential of participating in locality development beyond service provision. Second, churches may consider the meaning and practice of evangelization so that conflict between preaching and serving can be resolved. Last, government officials and community organizations can take churches as partners with an open mind. It would be beneficial to support churches’ deep involvement in community by enhancing their rational assessment of local needs and developing local partnership.