Tired Of Shallow, Hip Christianity?

[rick]

Conclusion:

Music as Admonishment

Christian music is also to admonish. The Greek word for admonish means, "to warn, to counsel, to correct." A proper role of the church’s music is to go beyond teaching to the application of that instruction. Music should point out danger, call us to attention, advise us on how to make proper choices. Most Christian music, hymn or chorus, is sadly weak in this regard, but not so the Jewish "hymnal" — the book of Psalms. Psalms is loaded with this very type of admonishment. Perhaps a return to a steady diet of singing the Psalms (as is still practiced in some circles) would be a wise move for those interested in allowing music to fulfill its biblical purpose. Having said that we would quickly add that the Psalms, as wonderful as they are, are nevertheless limited to Old Testament truth and thus alone could not provide a balanced musical diet for the New Testament saint.
Speaking of the Psalms, it is time to note that Colossians 3:16 tells us that we are to teach and admonish one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. I have heard this explained a number of ways but perhaps the most helpful was to learn that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament used often and quoted by Jesus and the apostles) labeled the 150 psalms alternatively as "psalms" or "hymns" or "spiritual songs" (Payton, p. 191). This is almost beyond question the backdrop of Paul’s statement in Colossians. If so, a thorough study of how the Psalms teach and admonish might be the most profitable undertaking that Christian music leaders could do. At the very least we will discover that the Psalms not only major on praising God but do so in the context of truth in a messy world. The Psalms deal with almost every conceivable circumstance in life but do so through the lens of God and His marvelous works. What could serve as a better guide for our ministry in music today?

"Whatever else Paul’s admonition means, even a loose reading indicates that our worship music must regularly touch the entire superstructure of Christian doctrine" (Payton, p. 194). If this is true, and I believe it to be, then we must examine not only what our music says (and teaches) but also what it does not say. If songs played over Christian radio is any indication it would appear that the prominent theme in Christian music at the present time is that of God as "felt-need" meeter. If we are lonely, sad, hurting, disappointed or empty, come to Jesus who will comfort and fix what hurts. Depending on how it is presented there is truth in what these songs convey. Christ does comfort us and meet our true needs, especially that of righteousness. He calls us to the throne of grace to receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need (Hebrews 4:16). So there is nothing wrong with singing of God’s helping hand in times of pain and concern. But there is something wrong with doing so at the expense of other essential doctrines. God is more than a comforter. The Scriptures teach more than a handful of themes. The whole counsel of God needs to be explored not only in our preaching but in our singing as well. Some of these themes will not play well with modern audiences, but they didn’t play well with ancient ones either. When the author of Hebrews wanted to explain the Melchizedekian priesthood of Christ to his readers he knew he had a problem, they had grown dull of hearing and could no longer digest solid theology (Hebrews 5:11-14). So what did he do? After a lengthy admonishment (5:11-6:20) he plowed ahead anyway (chapters 7-10). They would have surely rather read a treatise on how God would make them feel better than about the life and significance of Melchizedek, but what they needed was an understanding of Melchizedek — and that is what he gave them. We would do well to pay attention to this pattern.

What Should We Do?

If we are serious about our Christian music being more than entertainment there are numerous things we could do, recognizing of course that we will probably be swimming up stream against the fads of the moment. After all, many Christians have listened to numerous hours of Christian radio, have attended Christian concerts, have been playing CDs recorded by professional Christian artists, and they are coming to church services expecting all of this to be duplicated on Sunday morning.

First, we could evaluate all the music we sing in our churches. Does it teach solid theology? Does it admonish us to correct living? Does it worship God in truth? Does it aid in the process of allowing the Word to dwell in us richly? The latter phrase means, by the way, that by study, meditation and application of the Word, it richly becomes at home in our lives. It has become a part of us. Does our music facilitate this process? Payton suggests we ask ourselves the following questions each Sunday, "Did the music ministry today cause the word of Christ to dwell in us richly? Did we teach and admonish one another with gratitude in our hearts to God for Christ’s finished work on the cross" (Payton, p. 203)? This would be a worthy exercise.

Second, we must train our churches concerning this whole area of entertainment. Appetites can be developed. We must not cave in to the world’s way of thinking. Entertainment has its place, but that place is not center stage in the life and worship of Christ’s church. The fact that the churches, which have mastered the art of entertainment, are growing by leaps and bounds, should elicit repulsion, not imitation, from those who understand the Scriptures.

Third, we could study with great profit the Psalms to discover how music is to be used to accomplish its biblically mandated goal.

Fourth, we need to teach our children good Christian music within the context of the church. They have the rest of their week to listen to whatever music they and/or their parents choose, but when they come to worship God corporately we must expose them to psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, that will aid in the word of Christ dwelling in them richly. They may not immediately like the tunes or the lyrics, but where else are they going to learn this great body of music if not in our churches?

Conclusion

Passion and emotionalism are often, and easily, confused in the modern church. The Christian life runs the full range of emotions; joy, peace, delight, love, sorrow, grief, concern, etc. Ours is a faith not only of the head but also of the heart. As a result it is right and proper to desire spiritual experience. The problem is that many Christians cannot tell the difference between enthusiasm for God and manipulation of the moment. Entertainment can look strangely like worship; fun can masquerade as joy; fleshly excitement can be perceived as Divine encounter.

Part of our problem today is that out of the free-love (I.e. drugs, sex) revolution of the 1960s has sprung an insatiable desire for experience. Experience has mounted the throne and barks out orders to a doting constituency that has lost patience in a world that does not make sense. If we cannot understand life, if in fact life makes no sense, at least we can enjoy ourselves. If it feels good, it may not be right, but it is better than nothing.

Unfortunately this attitude (coined postmodernism by those who like to coin phrases) has crept into the church. Christians too want an experience that makes them feel good. So dominating has this desire become that truth is increasingly taking a back seat to a good time.

What should we do? First, we should be ever mindful that the[objective] Word is our authority not [our subjective] experience. True delight in God should emerge from biblical truth. Next we should take a good look at the Psalms. There we find the writers absolutely in love with and excited about God. Psalm 36:7-9 for example reads, How precious is Thy lovingkindness O God! And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of They wings, they drink their fill of the abundance of Thy house; and Thou dost give them to drink of the river of Thy delights. For with Thee is the fountain of life; In Thy light we see light. Here is a man (David) finding great joy in his Lord. He is not wrapped up in the side issues; he is not drumming up feelings; he is not being whipped into a mood. He is simply reflecting on his God and his heart can hardly contain what it views. This is the spiritual experience we should crave.

by Gary E. Gilley, Pastor-Teacher

[rick]

"The Delusion of ‘Cool’ Christianity"

by Andrew Strom.

Before I start to write on this rather controversial subject, I just want to say a little about myself and my own background. I am by no means a closed-minded or ‘conservative’ Christian. In fact, I am convinced that radical measures are needed to bring today’s church into the kind of state that will truly impact the world and bring glory to God. I not only believe in the desperate need for true repentance and Revival in the church, but also of a thorough ‘Reformation’, so that today’s church might become the kind of threat to the devil that she was always meant to be. I am a modern musician myself, and believe that the original message of the gospel really must be made "relevant" to each new generation.

However, having said all of this, I must also add that I have become deeply concerned in recent times, that much of what we call "relevance" in the church today, is really little more than ‘hip’ worldliness, compromise, and a desperate attempt to impress the world on it’s own shallow, hedonistic terms, rather than anything Godly. It is obviously no longer ‘positive’ enough (in the modern TV-marketing sense of the word) to emphasise the cross, deep repentance, holiness, "death to self" and all the other meaty elements of basic Christianity which the New Testament emphasises again and again. And so we change everything even the very essence of the gospel itself) to fit the spirit of the age in which we live. Tell me, does this sound like God to you? Or is this yet another form of convenient compromise, like all the others that have enslaved and bound the church in recent times?

As history clearly shows, if the devil cannot bind or deceive the church by pushing her to extremes in one direction, then he will gladly push her as far as he can the opposite way. If he cannot bind her with legalism and spiritual pride, then perhaps he will have more success in pushing her to "hyper-liberty"-type extremes (the casting off of restraint, soulish excesses, spiritual "license", etc). It is my belief that this is exactly what has occurred in the Western church over the last ten years or so (particularly in Charismatic circles). The dangers of legalism, heavy pastoral domination, and spiritual pride have been so thoroughly exposed in much of this branch of Christendom, that there has arisen the opposite danger. (Which is just as deadly, as history clearly demonstrates).

It is my belief that in recent years, because of their fear of legalism and pastoral domination, many of today’s Christian leaders have essentially reacted against the old ‘straight-laced’ style of Christian leadership, and have instead gone right over to the other extreme (i.e. they have become over-accommodating and completely anti-authoritarian, wanting to be seen as modern, open-minded, `hip’, and dynamic. Thus "authority" has become a dirty word). As always, this has created a huge "absence" of real authority in the church, which the devil has been quick to exploit. Fruits of this modern "cool" Christianity are: Worldliness, rebellion, compromise, soulishness, carnality, etc.

The Scripture, "they sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play" has, in recent years, become very applicable to large sections of the modern church. Many of our young people in particular have never known anything else but a kind of shallow, "good times" Christianity. They can often be found `raging it up large’ at modern youth events and concerts, not because they are just so `passionate’ in their deep worship of God, but rather because they really enjoy riding the shallow "buzz" of the music, etc.

Let me be very clear here: This whole "cool" thing comes from the `spirit of this world’, not from God.

And it is not just the youth who have succumbed to this shallow "partying" spirit. Many of the older ones have now also given themselves over to it. Anyone who objects to this "party-time" emphasis in the church is soon labelled sneeringly as being `legalistic’ or judgmental. Like the youth of the sixties, we are now being told to just `let go’, to "yield" to the impulses we receive, etc. We are told that in doing so, we are breaking free from tradition and religion. In actual fact, what we are doing is giving ourselves over, lock, stock and barrel to `Jezebel’, to do with as she pleases. (Remember that I write this as a fairly `liberated’ modern musician myself. I am not at all "anti" most Rock music or youth culture, but I am certainly against the kind of shallow `casting off of restraint’ that we are seeing in today’s churches. This can only ever lead to deep deception).

It was Pentecostal pioneer Frank Bartleman who lamented, concerning the early Pentecostal movement: "As the movement began to apostatise platforms were built higher, coat tails were worn longer, choirs were organised, and string bands came into existence to `jazz’ the people. The kings came back once more, to their thrones, restored to sovereignty. We were no longer `brethren’. Then the divisions multiplied..." And as Samuel Chadwick has so insightfully stated: "A religion of mere emotion and sensationalism is the most terrible of all curses that can come upon any people." It had actually been prophesied in the 1906 `Azusa Street’ Revival that: "In the last days three things will happen in the great Pentecostal Movement: 1) There will be an overemphasis on power, rather than on righteousness; 2) there will be an overemphasis on praise, to a God they no longer pray to; 3) there will be an overemphasis on the gifts of the Spirit - rather than on the Lordship of Christ."

As I have said, today much of this error is flooding into the church under the guise of "relevance". In the name of `relevance’ we are rushing around desperately trying to make our music "cool" and our leadership style "cool" and our gospel "cool" and our youth events "cool", etc, etc,- all in an effort to attract the world on it’s own terms. Let me say again: None of this is of God at all. It relies almost entirely on the `arm of the flesh’.
It is really nothing less than worldliness, compromise and rebellion in a new and very subtle (yet deadly) form.

Instead of "holier than thou", it seems like we are now expected to be "cooler than thou". Our whole effort is aimed at proving to the world that Christianity is just as cool, just as much shallow fun, just as much of a party, as the world has to offer. And so, to prove all this, we have to entertain and entertain and entertain. We feel we have to become just like the world, in order to impress the world on it’s own terms. Thus, we now need to be seen in fashionable (or better-still, `hip’ or alternative) clothes. And our youth events become an excuse for a "party". And our presentations become entertaining multi-media extravaganzas. All in an effort to equal or "out-cool" the world. (Which is why you now see `stage-diving’, etc, at our youth concerts - matching the world on it’s own mindless, hedonistic terms. "Lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God"). Like I said, cool pride, worldliness and rebellion - all in the name of "relevance". JUST LIKE THE WORLD IN EVERY SENSE. Does this sound like God to you?

As Jesus Himself said: "If you were of the world, the world would love it’s own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (John 15:19). And as the apostle John wrote: "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him" (1 John 2:15). The apostle James likewise wrote: "Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore, whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God" (James 4:4).

This whole "cool Christianity" thing is the complete opposite of the true gospel. The true gospel message involves "denying self, taking up the cross, and following Jesus." But this new gospel of `cool’ says, in essence, "indulge yourself, enjoy it all, look cool, be cool (-carnal human pride in all it’s `look at me’ glory),[what would happen if the choir had to be in the rear?] and have God as well!" The true cross of Jesus speaks death to self, death to hype, death to pride and worldly `cool’, death to loving pleasures more than God. This is why the true gospel and the true message of the cross have always been "foolishness" to carnal man. They speak the OPPOSITE of worldliness - in fact, DEATH to the world! Surely today’s Christians can see the difference? (`Cool’ is just another name for "pride", after all). I am convinced that what today’s youth need is a CHALLENGE worth giving their lives for, not merely another round of mindless `entertainment’.

The fact is, I am a great believer in "relevance" myself. But it must be a relevance that PREACHES THE ORIGINAL GOSPEL WITH IT’S ORIGINAL UNCOMPROMISING MESSAGE, using modern means. In other words, the gospel must remain as cross- centred, as convicting and as radical in it’s demands as it was in the beginning, but the means of transmitting it may change (though never merely for the sake of being `cool’). I actually believe that God is going to greatly use the secular media (including the TV networks) to spread news of what He is doing right around the world in the coming Revival. And neither do I mind a certain amount of being "all things to all men" in order to reach the lost (after all, Jesus Himself came as a poor man preaching to the poor). But if our motive for this is to enjoy appearing cool or `hip’/alternative, or to appeal to the "God is fun" brigade, then we have gone way too far, and our bowing to the `spirit of this world’ will greatly distort the message that we bring.

I hope you can see that I am by no means advocating some kind of strict, cloistered, "joy-less" Christianity, or a return to the dark days of conformist conservatism in the church. What I am, in fact, advocating is a vibrant, relevant brand of the ORIGINAL NEW TESTAMENT FAITH - updated for the 21st Century, but full of the essence of everything that made the early church what it was. This is clearly the only way that we are ever going to impact this present generation with the life-giving power of the cross of Jesus Christ.

I believe that the Christianity that is coming will be truly `liberated’ and yet completely unpretentious and down-to-earth (rather than `hip’-cool or `party’-fun). It will be a gritty, street-level faith - truly `in the world but not of it’ - reaching out to the "man on the street", and utterly glorifying to God.

Probably more than at any time in history, we have a crying need today for searching, convicting `repentance’ preaching [who would dare do that and lose most of the crowd?]in the churches. The Laodicean church is in desperate need of some good, old-fashioned `Revival’ preaching on "sin, righteousness and judgement"[we would go out of business if we did that] (John 16:8). This is why I believe that Revival and Reformation are now so urgent. I do not believe that God can live with a compromised Laodicean church. There can be little doubt that He is about to take drastic action (as He has done many times in the past).

Today’s church should be on her knees, begging God for forgiveness, not "partying up large". But again we hear her cry: "I am rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing." Sick, selfish, lukewarm church,- do you not care that God has promised to "spew" you out of His mouth? (Rev 3:16).

As the apostle Peter declared, the time has surely now come for judgement to "begin at the house of God" (1 Peter 4:17).

Copyright © Andrew Strom, 1996. Please feel free to photocopy.

[rick]

One current and prevalent view of the hip and happenin' church is that "doing church" should be something that is different every Sunday. These folks are actually trying to raise the excitement and entertainment bar higher and higher every Sunday. That's got to be absolutely exhausting for any staff of a mega-church or of a mega-church wannabe. Which new circus act can we come up with so that we don't dare do the same thing every Sunday? Remove the organ and piano and make a stage with high-tech lighting and a first-class speaker system. Forget the liturgical approach of the ancient church, it's too boring. We've got to keep these folks excited and grow, grow, grow! I've already seen motorcycles being driven down the aisle in the sanctuary a few years ago and was told there were fireworks in the same sanctuary one time. Mark my words - someday, if it hasn't already happened, we will see high-wire and elephants in the church. Let's have a good time. Yeehaw!

[rick]

Another "method" for raising funds in a church which I think follows the seed-faith strategy and is absolutely shameful in my view, and I have heard this in an evangelical church I attended once, and which also demonstrates how commercial and worldly the church has become in employing contemporary business "marketing" techniques (which they don't even realize they are doing) is this:

They desire to get more money for the church so the pastor says, "Please just tithe for the next month (or two or three, whatever). And if you aren't completely blessed or satisfied during that time, we will give you a money-back guarantee."

Frightening indeed! What happened to God loves a cheerful giver? Do we give to get? That's focusing on greed, not thankfulness. And the old guilt trip sermon on giving gets tired as well. We should not give out of a sense of obligation. I rarely gave to the particular church when they tried that kind of manipulation. I gave my treasures elsewhere. And the giving I do now to the church is much more and motivated by of a sense of thankfulness for what God did for me - the last one to have deserved anything good from God given what I have done in my life. Yet, He has always blessed me and my family despite that. Amazing grace! I understand better when Scripture proclaims that God justifies the wicked; Jesus did not come for the healthy but for the sick. Sadly, many folks seem to think they don't need a Savior and think that they are basically good people. In my view, if you haven't come to realize your own depravity on a daily basis, you haven't really understood why we needed the Christ in the first place. And if you haven't understood this, Jesus is merely an example, a therapist, an ethical model. No, He is much more than that! Eternal life flows from His body and blood.

[rick]

• “Evangelicalism, now much absorbed by the arts and tricks of marketing, is simply not very serious anymore.” That is the judgment of David F. Wells of Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in a new book, Above All Earthly Pow'rs (Eerdmans). Forget about the poetic spelling of “powers” in the title; this is a book of considerable interest. More than half of it is devoted to an overview of the last several decades of sociological writing about religion and modernity, with major attention to the work of Peter L. Berger, and laced with a theological critique indebted chiefly to Karl Barth. The last third of the book is a devastating polemic against the evangelical “megachurch” phenomenon, with its pandering to “seekers” in search of a vaguely spiritual uplift devoid of concern for truth or serious discipleship. The panderers, writes Wells, claim to be winning souls for Christ, but in fact the number of “born again” Christians is static. They are really engaged in niche marketing by selling spiritual entertainment that, by comparison, makes Bonhoeffer’s “cheap grace” look like the way of the Cross. Wells writes: “This is probably the first time that Christian people anywhere in the West have thought that ecclesiastical architecture is, in principle, offensive, that religious symbols, such as crosses, should be banned from churches, that pulpits should be abandoned, that hymns should be abolished, that pews should be sent to the garbage dump, and that pianos and organs should be removed. All of this has been happening on the forefront of this movement. This is probably the first time, too, that churchgoers have wanted their buildings to be mistaken for corporate headquarters or country clubs.”

• There are exquisite ironies here. In The Kingdom of God in America (1937), H. Richard Niebuhr famously summarized the gospel of Protestant liberalism: “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.” That is, mutatis mutandis, pretty much how David Wells describes the gospel on offer at the evangelical supermarkets. From my limited knowledge of that world, much of his indictment has the ring of truth. Certainly, a movement that sells entertainment and the experience of spiritual “highs” to the neglect of the doctrinal, devotional, intellectual, and artistic traditions of historic Christianity will strike others, Christians and non-Christians alike, as “not very serious.” At the same time, it must be said that the evangelicalism criticized by David Wells is hardly the whole of all the worlds of evangelicalism in this country.

[rick]

Sunday, August 13, 2006
True Church Growth

"Church Growth about Change, not bigger numbers"
Originally appeared in Charleston, SC's "Post and Courier
SUNDAY, AUGUST 06, 2006

“Grand opening.” When we see such an advertisement for a store, we think low prices—bargains. More likely than not, we don’t think about the flip-side. When retailers advertise for these and other special events, their eye is almost solely on the bottom line. Let’s get the most people we can in here in order to maximize sales. Every person through the door represents a certain percent chance of a sale, and therefore a certain percentage of today’s income. The math is fairly simple: a product people want plus the people who want it equals growth (profit, then ordering more, then selling more).

This plan works great for capitalism, but it is a disastrous scheme and a horrible ‘model’ for Christianity. The Christian faith is not a commodity, though there is a ruthless effort from within—of all places—to make it so. Models and methods for “explosive church growth” and “true community” are as overstocked as every American diet craze. Here today, gone tomorrow. Self-professed experts, who have little, if any, connection to the ancient church, offer their solutions to propel your church into the 21st century, for a nice price.

Everything is marketed, packaged, niched, and for sale. A now-dated example is the Prayer of Jabez, a ‘prayer’ never ever prayed by Christians in 2000 years, which was all the rage packaged as a book and fiercely marketed with options such as “Jabez Study Bible”, “Jabez Journal”, “Jabez for women”, “Jabez prayer shawl” (yes, really), Jabez pencils, notebooks, bracelets, small group studies, videos, etc. Where is Jabez now?

Nearly every facet of “American Christianity” takes this approach. The “radical” new concept. The book. The study guide. The video. The tie-in bibles, notebooks, bumper stickers, bible covers, key chains, and dvds for men, women, children, teens, many special interest groups. The list has no end. And it is all exported, like any consumable. And then, like the so-called rapture (also not a part of bona fide Christian teaching from the beginning): whoosh! It’s gone, making room for the next one.

Nor, in the history of Christianity, is the Faith about getting massive numbers of people through the doors to make a simple ‘faith commitment’. Yes, it is true, that “thousands” were added to their number in single instances, as recorded, for example, in the Acts of the Apostles. The Orthodox Churches can tell us the names of many of them who went on to be burned, tortured, beheaded, beaten, and otherwise brutalized and put to death for their faith. They are our family members. But trust me, in the first three centuries, few, if any, ‘became a Christian’ because of peer pressure or because it fit in with their particular social scene. Christianity was a life or death decision then, these martyrs choosing temporal death for eternal life.

Church growth always includes increased numbers, but is likewise coupled with a deep, significant spiritual struggle and change. The teachings of the Church expressed in the writings of the New Testament call for a casting off of “the old man” and the putting on of Christ. No more lying, cheating, stealing, fornication, apathy, greed. No more lust, idolatry, personal interpretations of sacred teachings, gluttony, divorce. This is not moralism, by any means. This metanoia—repentance or change of mind—is not so much about certain behaviors (though outwardly that is the case). It is rather conformity to the likeness of God in Jesus Christ. This was the same call in the first century, the fourth century, the fourteenth century, and still is today.

But what happened when the Faith became fashionable (read ‘legal’)? Until the 4th century Christianity was illegal. But with the Edict of Milan, the Emperor Constantine called for an end to the persecution against Christians, and here is what happened: entrance into the Church became more difficult. More difficult. Conversions that seemed to have happened in a moment in the Acts of the Apostles were now lengthened to 3 years. Why so long? So people could learn the teachings of the Church and begin to rearrange their lives and ‘lifestyles’ to conform to Christ and His commandments. This helped to establish bona fide church growth in an age when many had all the comforts of the day. They practiced and showed the members of the church their living commitment to lay down their lives at least figuratively (if not literally like their martyr forbearers) by serving those in every kind of need and in so doing, radiating the holy light of Jesus Christ from the inside of their existence, outward.

And what about today? If the early Christians took growth not only as a long-term process, but one which had to be proven by a visible, concrete, regular, and often significant life-change, why do we treat it as if it is something that can be bought in a video package, and completed in a 40-day or 15 session course? The divorce rate among self-professed Christians already speaks volumes about our commitment to this radical life of faith—not to mention all of the other ways in which contemporary, American Christianity looks no different from American religious-less existence.

On the whole, while there may be more warm bodies in the sanctuary on Sunday morning (or whenever people serve services these days), we must ask ourselves, “Am I presently and at all times laying down my life for the love of God and neighbor?” If the answer is no—and mostly this is the answer—then it is time to repent, again, to start anew, and to lay my life down now. Otherwise, I’m just filling a pew in the church. A warm statistic. But the Lord does not call for quantities and sums of people (though very specifically, according to Ezekiel, He desires the death of no one, but that all should turn and live). He also had some hard words related to lukewarm faith (see Revelation 3:15ff). Rather, He calls us each to repentance and return; He calls for broken hearts and changed lives.

Church growth, ultimately, is about holy lives. We are not made holy in a flash or a moment. The ever present image of the vine and the gardener comes to mind. An acorn does not magically spring from a speck to a great oak overnight. Rather, the soil must be cultivated and fertilized. The seed must be planted. It must be watered and cared for. The new growth must be checked for disease and pruned. This takes time, and it is painful. But it is the only way. In fact, it is The Way, and has been from the beginning. If we truly desire to be Christian, and involved in the growth of the Holy Church, best we return to the writings and ways of those who paved the way. We must avoid at all costs the winds and tides of contemporary schemes and models. Then hopefully, in the end, we each might be welcomed into the fullness of the Kingdom of God with the words, “Well done, my good and faithful servant.”

Fr. John Parker is the Priest-in-charge of Holy Ascension Orthodox Church in I’On. He can be reached at 843-881-5010 or by email at [e-mail].

[rick]

Chhttp://economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5323597&no_jw_tran=1&no_na_tran=1urches as businesses


Jesus, CEO
Dec 20th 2005 | SOUTH BARRINGTON, ILLINOIS, HOUSTON, TEXAS AND WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition

America's most successful churches are modelling themselves on businesses
World Picture
VISIT Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, an upscale exurb of Chicago, and you are confronted with a puzzle. Where in God's name is the church? Willow Creek has every amenity you can imagine, from food courts to basketball courts, from cafes to video screens, not to mention enough parking spaces for around 4,000 cars. But look for steeples and stained glass, let alone crosses and altars, and you look in vain. Surely this is a slice of corporate America rather than religious America?

The corporate theme is not just a matter of appearances. Willow Creek has a mission statement (“to turn irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Jesus Christ”) and a management team, a seven-step strategy and a set of ten core values. The church employs two MBAs—one from Harvard and one from Stanford—and boasts a consulting arm. It has even been given the ultimate business accolade: it is the subject of a Harvard Business School case-study.

Willow Creek is just one of a growing number of evangelical churches that borrow techniques from the corporate world. Forget those local worthies who help with the vicar's coffee mornings and arrange flowers. American churches have started dubbing their senior functionaries CEOs and COOs. (North Point Community Church in Alpharetta, Georgia, even has a director of service programming. Can Chief Theological Officers be far behind?) And forget about parish meetings in which people bat about random ideas on how to keep the church going. America is spawning an industry of faith-based consultancies. John Jackson, the senior pastor of Carson Valley Christian Centre, a “high-impact” church in Minden, Nevada, has taken to describing himself as a “PastorPreneur” and has published a book with that title.

Willow Creek is based on the same principle as all successful businesses: putting the customer first. Back in 1975 the church's founder, Bill Hybels, conducted an informal survey of suburban Chicagoans, asking them why they did not go to church, and then crafted his services accordingly. He removed overtly religious images such as the cross and stained glass. He jazzed up services with videos, drama and contemporary music. And he tried to address people's practical problems in his sermons.

An emphasis on user-friendliness continues to pervade the church. Mr Hybels's staff try to view their church through the eyes of newcomers (or “seekers” as they are dubbed). This means dedicating themselves to “total service excellence”. The grounds—“the path of first impressions”—are kept impeccably, with the lawns mown and the car park perfectly organised. It means being welcoming without being over-the-top (“evangophobia” is a big worry). And it means having lots of “hooks” that help to attach seekers to the church.

Willow Creek has dozens of affinity groups for everyone from motor-cycle enthusiasts to weight-watchers. The church provides social services, from counselling for drunks and sex-addicts to providing help with transport. It has a “cars ministry” which repairs donated vehicles and gives them to needy people. “Cars”, of course, stands for “Christian auto-repairmen serving”. The church also lays on entertainment, from sports to video-areas.

Willow Creek is particularly careful to ensure that everything is suitably tailored for different age-groups. The church provides child-care for thousands of children every weekend: this started out as a necessity (parents will not come if their children are not taken care of) but has become a hook in its own right (parents can relax at the service while children are royally entertained). The church also has a youth auditorium. Willow Creek's adolescent members have taken over a hall, tearing up the carpet to expose the concrete floors, painting the whole thing black and littering video-screens all over the place.

Mr Hybels's emphasis on user-friendliness is now commonplace in the Evangelical world. Rick Warren is a fifth-generation Southern Baptist who was raised in a faith that is both austere and emotional. But when he moved to Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Southern California, he realised that Baptist staples like altar calls—in which worshippers come to the front of the church and accept Jesus—would not go down well with his prosperous and laid-back congregation. So he packaged himself as a relaxed Californian: bearded and open-shirted, he served up a diet of contemporary music and self-help tips.

In their pursuit of “total service excellence” America's pastorpreneurs do not just preach on Sundays and deal with the traditional “hatch, match and dispatch” rites of passage. They keep their buildings open seven days a week, from dawn to dusk, and deliver a truly catholic array of services. Some mega-church complexes house banks, pharmacies and schools. Counselling and guidance groups are routine. So are children's ministries.

The Second Baptist Church, in Houston, Texas, has a huge football pitch. The Phoenix First Assembly of God has a medical-equipment lending closet. The World Changers Ministry in Georgia offers help preparing for tests, filling out tax forms and buying houses (it even has a network of mortgage brokers and real-estate agents). Lakewood Church, also in Houston, puts on one of its Sunday services en español. Carson Valley Christian Centre (motto: “friends helping friends follow Christ”) offered sermons on how to slay the “Goliaths” of procrastination, resentment, anxiety, temptation and loneliness. It also offers classes in martial arts: “the Christian warrior way”.

This emphasis on customer-service is producing a predictable result: growth. John Vaughan, a consultant who specialises in mega-churches, argues that 2005 has been a landmark year. This was the first time an American church passed the 30,000-a-week attendance mark (it was Lakewood, which earlier this year moved into its new home in Houston's Compaq Center). It was also the first time that 1,000 churches counted as mega-churches (broadly, you qualify if 2,000 or more people attend). Willow Creek has seating for 7,200 (comfortable chairs, not wooden pews). The fastest-growing church in the country, Without Walls in Tampa, Florida, added 4,330 new members in the past year alone.

WPN

Let there be lightingThis sort of rapid growth brings all sorts of advantages. The most obvious is that it lets churches put on extravaganzas. Willow Creek regularly invites celebrities such as Randy Travis, a country singer, or Lisa Beamer, the widow of Todd Beamer (a hero on one of the hijacked aircraft on September 11th). Lakewood has a 500-strong choir. Westlink Christian Church put on an outdoor display of extreme sports that includes skate-boarders jumping over a fire to illustrate salvation.

Growth also allows pastorpreneurs—empowered by a combination of large cash flows and economies of scale—to exploit every available channel to get their message across. Joel Osteen, the chief pastor of Lakewood, has a television-ministry, which reaches 7m people around the world, and a best-selling book, “Your Best Life Now”. Rick Warren's “The Purpose-Driven Life” has sold more than 25m copies and spawned a follow-up industry of books, tapes, courses and CDs, including a selection of songs. Bishop T.D. Jakes, the chief pastor of The Potters House, reaches 260 prisons a week via satellite.

Most successful churches are humming with technology. Willow Creek sports four video-editing suites. World Changers Ministries has a music studio and a record label. The Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Texas, employs a chief technology officer (and spends 15% of its $30m annual budget on technology). Worshippers in such churches do not have to worry about finding their place in the hymn book or that they will catch cold. Computers project the words of the hymns onto huge screens, and the temperature is perfectly controlled.

But this rapid growth brings problems in its wake too—problems that usually end up forcing churches to become yet more business-like and management-obsessed. The most obvious challenge is managing size. You cannot just muddle through if you have an annual income of $55m (like Lakewood in 2004) or employ 450 full- and part-time staff (like Willow Creek). Such establishments need to set up a management structure with finance departments and even human-resources departments. They also need to start thinking—like Mr Hybels—about the relationship between the religious leadership and the management team.

Another problem is subtler: how do you speak directly to individual parishioners when you have a church the size of a stadium? Some mega-churches have begun to see members drift away in search of more intimate organisations. And many mega-preachers worry that they are producing a flock who regard religion as nothing more than spectacle. So they have begun to adopt techniques that allow churches to be both big and small at once.

One ruse is to break the congregation into small groups. Most big churches ask members of their congregation to join clutches of eight-to-ten people with something in common (age or marital status, for example). A second is to segment the religious market. Willow Creek has two very different services. The Sunday one for new “seekers” is designed to exhibit the Christian faith in a “relevant and non-threatening way”. Willow Creek estimates that over half of the people who come to its Sunday services would otherwise be “unchurched”. The Wednesday service for people who are committed to Christianity is designed to deepen their faith.

A third technique is to set up satellite churches—a form of religious franchising. Willow Creek has set up several satellite churches in the Chicago area so that nobody has to travel more than 50 miles. Life Church has franchised five campuses in Oklahoma, two in Arizona and one in Texas.

Growth in religious organisations is proving just as addictive as it is in corporate ones, and successful churches are reaching deep into business theory to feed their habit. They use strategic planning and strategic “visions” to make sure they know where they are headed.

ImagestateThese pastorpreneurs are committed not just to applying good management techniques to their own organisations but also to spreading them to others. This is, after all, the world of evangelism. Willow Creek has a consulting arm, the Willow Creek Association, that has more than 11,500 member churches. It puts on leadership events for more than 100,000 people a year (guest speakers have included Jim Collins, a business guru, and Bill Clinton) and earns almost $20m a year. Rick Warren likens his “purpose-driven formula” to an Intel operating chip that can be inserted into the motherboard of any church—and points out that there are more than 30,000 “purpose-driven” churches. Mr Warren has also set up a website, pastors.com, that gives 100,000 pastors access to e-mail forums, prayer sites and pre-cooked sermons, including over 20-years-worth of Mr Warren's own.

Indeed, in a nice reversal businesses have also started to learn from the churches. The late Peter Drucker pointed out that these churches have several lessons to teach mainline businesses. They are excellent at motivating their employees and volunteers, and at transforming volunteers from well-meaning amateurs into disciplined professionals. The best churches (like some of the most notorious cults) have discovered the secret of low-cost and self-sustaining growth: transforming seekers into evangelicals who will then go out and recruit more seekers.

The Lord helps those who help themselves
There is no shortage of criticisms of these fast-growing churches. One is that they represent the Disneyfication of religion. Forget about the agony and ecstasy of faith. Willow Creek and its sort are said to serve up nothing more challenging than Christianity Lite— a bland and sanitised creed that is about as dramatic as the average shopping mall.

Another criticism is that these churches are not really in the religion business but in the self-help trade. Mr Osteen and his equivalents preach reassuring sermons to “victors not victims”, who can learn to be “rich, healthy and trouble free”. God, after all, “wants you to achieve your personal best”. The result is a wash: rather than making America more Christian, the mega-churches have simply succeeded in making Christianity more American.

Moreover, it is a wash that is extraordinary good for the pastorpreneurs themselves, who prosper by preaching the gospel of prosperity. The wonderfully named Creflo Dollar, chief pastor of World Changers Church International in Georgia, drives a Rolls-Royce and travels in a Gulfstream jet. Joyce Meyer, who promises that God rewards people with his blessings, counts among her own blessings a $2m home and a $10m jet.

Yet three things can be said in the mega-churches' defence. The first is that they are simply responding to demand. Their target audience consists of baby-boomers who left the church in adolescence, who do not feel comfortable with overt displays of religiosity, who dread turning into their parents, and who apply the same consumerist mentality to spiritual life as they do to everything else. The mega-churches are using the tools of American society to spread religion where it would not otherwise exist.

The second line of defence is that they are simply adding to a menu of choices. There is no shortage of churches that offer more traditional fare—from Greek Orthodox to conservative Catholic. The third defence is more subtle: these churches are much less Disneyfied than they appear. They may be soft on the surface, but they are hard on the inside. The people at Lakewood believe that “the entire Bible is inspired by God, without error”. Cuddly old Rick Warren believes that “heaven and hell are real places” and that “Jesus is coming again”. You may start out in the figurative hell of a Disney theme-park, but you end up with the real thing.

The other common criticisms of the mega-churches—and the marriage of religion and business that they embody—are practical. One is that the mega-churches are a passing fad, doomed to be destroyed by a combination of elephantiasis and scandal. Another is that they are an idiosyncratic product of red-state America: amusing to look at, but irrelevant to the rest of the world. Again, neither argument is entirely convincing.

The marriage of religion and business has deep roots in American history. Itinerant Methodist preachers from Francis Asbury (1745-1816) onwards addressed camp meetings of thousands of people, and often borrowed marketing techniques from business. Aimee Semple McPherson, one of America's first radio Evangelists, built a church for 5,300 people in Los Angeles in 1923. (She had none of Mr Hybels's worries about religious symbolism: she topped her church with an illuminated rotating cross that could be seen 50 miles away.) And the gospel of self-help and prosperity is as American as apple pie. In his 1925 bestseller, “The Man Nobody Knows”, Bruce Barton, an adman turned evangelist, pictured Jesus as a savvy executive who “picked up twelve men from the bottom ranks of business and forged them into an organisation that conquered the world”. His parables were “the most powerful advertisements of all time”.

The mega-churches are also on the march well beyond red-state America. America has an impressive track record of exporting its religious innovations. Pentecostalism, which was invented in a Kansas bible college in 1901, currently has well over 100m adherents around the world. Even Mormonism, that most idiosyncratically American of religious faiths, has 6.7m followers outside the United States. There is no reason to think that the latest style of marriage between religion and business is an exception. Rick Warren has inserted his “purpose-driven operating chip” into churches in 120 countries around the world. He and his congregation have also set themselves the goal of eradicating poverty in Africa. The Willow Creek Association has 4,700 member churches abroad; a meeting in the staid English town of Cheltenham recently attracted almost 3,000 people. The merger between business and religion has been fabulously successful in America. Now it is starting to do battle with the “evangephobia” that marks so much of the rest of the world.

[rick]

Study: Christian Teens Theologically Shallow
By AFA Journal
April 28, 2005

(AgapePress) - Results from a recent survey conducted by a North Carolina researcher reveal that the majority of America's youth believe in God, yet there is a shallowness in their religious knowledge, and they have difficulty expressing their faith.

Christian Smith, a sociologist at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, led 133 researchers and consultants in conducting a project that involved telephone surveys of 3,370 English- and Spanish-speaking Americans and face-to-face interviews with 267 of the participants -- all ages 13 to 17. Protracted funding will allow the researchers to track these young people through 2007.

Thus far, telephone surveys reveal that young people have a broad fondness for religion, although their religious knowledge is labeled as "meager, nebulous and often fallacious" as found through the personal interview portion of the study.

In other words, teens were unable to coherently express their beliefs and the impact of faith on their lives. In addition, many participants appeared so separated from the traditions of their faith that they viewed God as a feel-good problem solver who merely existed for that purpose. There were no indications of an absolute, truth-based theology among the teens.

"God is something like a combination Divine Butler and Cosmic Therapist who is available when needed," Smith wrote in his new book titled Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers, co-authored with Melinda Lundquist Denton.

Smith credits parental tendencies of Baby Boomers, poor educational and youth programs, and responsibilities and activities that vie for teenagers' time as reasons for their skewed view of the Almighty.

Source:
Study: Christian Teens Theologically Shallow, American Family Association

[rick]

Megachurches 'shallow in theology'
From correspondents in Porto Alegre, Brazil
Reuters
22 February, 2006

THE head of the World Council of Churches has expressed concern about the spread of megachurches around the world, such as Hillsong in Sydney, saying they could lead to a Christianity that is "two miles long and one inch deep".

The WCC General Secretary Samuel Kobia said megachurches - huge Protestant churches with charismatic pastors, lively music and other services - mostly ran on a business model to make worshippers feel good and were shallow in their theology.

Megachurches, which pack in thousands for rousing Sunday worship services, are popular in suburbs in the United States. Most are evangelical or Pentecostal, with few or no ties to mainline churches such as the Lutherans or Episcopalians.

Mr Kobia said the megachurch movement, which is not represented in the mostly mainline Protestant or Orthodox World Council of Churches, broke down borders among denominations with a populist message.

"It has no depth, in most cases, theologically speaking, and has no appeal for any commitment," the Kenyan Methodist said at the WCC world assembly in this Brazilian city.

The megachurches simply wanted individuals to feel good about themselves, he said.

"It's a church being organised on corporate logic. That can be quite dangerous if we are not very careful, because this may become a Christianity which I describe as 'two miles long and one inch deep'."

Reverend Geoff Tunnicliffe, international director of the 400 million member World Evangelical Alliance, said at the assembly that "historical and deeply-felt issues" separated them from other branches of Christianity.

The largest US megachurches attract some 20,000 worshippers every Sunday. Abroad, megachurches have also sprouted up in Australia, South Korea, Britain, Canada, and other countries.

According to a report by the Hartford Institute for Religion Research, there were 1210 US churches drawing more than 2000 worshipers, the official minimum for a megachurch. That was double the number in 2000.

The WCC groups nearly 350 Protestant and Orthodox churches that mostly broke away from the Roman Catholic Church in the Great Schism of 1054 or in the 16th century Reformation.

Source:
Megachurches 'shallow in theology', NEWS.com.au

[rick]

James R. Edwards:

• The Church must risk faithfulness to its Lord rather than acceptance by its culture;

• The Church must instruct its members in the content of the faith, train them for witness and service, and discipline them when necessary rather than accept membership at any price;

• The Church must proclaim with boldness the gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ, and free itself from pandering to narcissism, indulgence, and the cult of self-help;

• The Church must risk the naming of sin—social as well as personal—as the first and essential step to forgiveness, change, and wholeness;

• The Church must reclaim the pastoral office as the preaching office of biblical exposition, and free it from its captivity to managerial and psychological stereotypes;

• The Church must risk both the teaching and practicing of a responsible sexual ethic—faithfulness in marriage or abstinence outside—in a culture of rampant sexual immorality, confusion, and destructiveness;

• The Church must become an advocate of life from the womb to the grave, confronting rather than complying with the evils of abortion, euthanasia, racism, poverty, abuse, and militarism;

• The Church must proclaim that freedom comes not from an obsession with rights but from a call to responsibility on behalf of others; within the community of faith as well as beyond it;

• The Church must ground its existence in the sole lordship of Jesus Christ, apart from which this world—and our lives in it—are lost.

[rick]

Mall Christianity touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-06-014-v
Gillis J. Harp on Seeker Sensitivity & Cultural Captivity

Recently, I came across a booklet produced by a nearby congregation popular with some of my students. Inside the back cover are printed its “Founding Principles”:

First, every person deserves the right to hear the true story about Jesus Christ.

It’s a sin to bore people with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

You have to earn the right to be heard.

The logic behind the principles, and the “seeker sensitive” movement of which this church is a part, is persuasive on one level. If the unchurched are put off by the trappings of Christianity, dispense with the nonessentials: pews, hymns, even corporate prayer. If we live in an entertainment-focused culture, build sanctuaries to resemble the inside of the local Cineplex. If well-heeled suburbanites flock to shopping malls, make the local church like a mall, complete with food court.

In some respects, the movement is a well-intentioned reaction to the manifold ineffectiveness of the Protestant mainline churches in the suburbs. Many churches have in the past unwittingly erected all sorts of barriers to genuine seekers. Just discovering a particular church’s service schedule can often be a major challenge. And try to enter a Protestant church on a weekday; getting inside the Pentagon is easier. I sometimes wonder, if thousands of the unchurched suddenly decided to visit their local church, could they find it, and if they found it, could they get in?

But are the nearby congregation’s founding principles the way to bring them in? Notably, the principles invoke no formal doctrinal position, confession, or creed. Instead, the principles that presumably underlie and shape this congregation’s ministry are simply three short, pragmatic assertions. The priority of evangelism is clearly central to their self-definition, but their definition of evangelism appears grounded less in a doctrine of what the Evangel is than in pragmatic considerations of how to get people in the door.

Let us look at the principles in order.

Rights & Duties

“Every person deserves the right to hear the true story about Jesus Christ.” Setting aside the redundant wording of “deserve the right” (do all people actually possess this alleged right to hear the gospel, or do they deserve to have such a right but do not in fact possess it?), the first principle uses the sort of “rights” language that owes more to the eighteenth-century Enlightenment or to contemporary entitlement culture than to the Bible. Scripture speaks much about duties and responsibilities, but little about rights.

Significantly, the few times the Bible mentions rights, it is either referring to God or to believers who possess a particular right as a gift from God. Paul, for instance, speaks of God having the right to do what he deems best for his creation: “Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?” (Rom. 9:21). In another case, he speaks of his rights as an apostle (1 Cor. 9:4–5).

When the notion is applied to human beings, it is clear that the Bible is referring to the redeemed who have certain rights as gracious gifts from God. The Apostle John, for example, explains: “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12).

I assume here that the authors of the principles mean to assert simply that people deserve to hear the gospel. From a classical Evangelical position, this is still an extraordinary statement. Although it is certainly the church’s high calling to extend the free offer of the gospel, nowhere does Holy Writ assert that fallen man has any right to hear it. Indeed, as Paul makes clear in the opening chapters of Romans, natural man already stands condemned (Rom. 1:18—2:16).

Traditionally, Evangelicals have followed the Bible’s teaching that what human beings actually deserve is condemnation. The Prophet Isaiah declares that “all our righteous acts are like filthy rags” (64:6); Christ says that even when we have done everything we have been told to do, we “should say, ‘We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty’”(Luke 17:10). Of course, Scripture teaches that God is love and that he wants all to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4), but this is because he is merciful and loving, not because we sinners deserve anything except condemnation.

The language of this first principle testifies to the influence of therapeutic concerns (such as self-esteem) rather than biblical categories among contemporary Evangelicals. Under the new model, humanity’s plight is that we aren’t getting what we deserve. By contrast, classical Protestantism declared that our plight is that we will (without a Savior) get what we deserve (i.e., punishment). The former approach focuses on what we are “owed” and fails to challenge our human self-absorption. Indeed, such a message may actually serve to inoculate seekers against the radically different message of the authentic gospel.

The Offensive Cross

The second founding principle invokes traditional theological terminology (i.e., “sin”), yet it indicts not the unchurched but (at least by implication) conventional churches for not presenting the gospel in terms sufficiently exciting. The terminology here owes much to secular marketing strategies. This congregation’s founding pastor explains elsewhere in the booklet that non-Christians complain that they do not attend church largely because it’s boring.

The story of God’s dealings with Israel is a thrilling one, and our Christian pilgrimage can often be exciting (although being consistently obedient is not always exciting), and it is a shame when the church offers the greatest story in a dull and lifeless way. Certainly it is prudent to present the gospel in a thoughtful and engaging fashion; there is no reason for the message to be lackluster or for the church to give needless offense.

But should the pragmatic concern of making the Christian message exciting to non-Christians be a founding principle? Whatever happened to “the offense of the cross” (Galatians 5:11)? When non-Christians tell us that they don’t go to church because it is boring, this does tell us something revealing about our culture. Yet should the church uncritically accept the diagnosis of fallen men and women?

We need to ask deeper questions. Don’t we in fact like what is not good for us? Is it not part of the appeal of sin that our fallen natures find it exciting? Is not Paul’s warning to Timothy regarding people’s “itchy ears” applicable here (2 Tim. 4:3)? Did Paul then counsel Timothy to scratch that itch? Understanding how the unchurched are thinking is important; letting them set the church’s agenda is dangerous.

Exciting News

The third principle asserts that the church must gain the respect and acceptance of the world in order to “earn the right to be heard.” Once again, it is unclear whether the right asserted is a genuine human right that the church must accept or simply a right that most non-Christians assume. Everyone would probably agree that the church’s solidarity with “all sorts and conditions of men,” as the Book of Common Prayer puts it, can give her message greater credibility—though its concern for and solidarity with the poor and oppressed are more often stressed in Scripture than entertaining bored suburbanites.

There is, in fact, no biblical warrant for turning Sunday worship into an evangelistic meeting (though there may well be evangelistic elements within the liturgy). This transformation of the main Sunday service actually began in the early nineteenth century. It was evangelists like Charles Grandison Finney and his successors who turned church worship into a revival meeting. In some respects, “seeker sensitive” advocates are simply extending the logic of this earlier innovation.

They are extending with considerable creativity and characteristic American energy this Arminian, market-driven model. Finney spoke about the need for what he termed “excitements.” What many American Evangelicals have discovered is that the old excitements no longer work; they have acquired churchy associations in the wider culture, and thus new excitements are needed. The oral culture of the nineteenth century could accommodate long lectures, but postmodern seekers have notoriously short attention spans. Victorian folk wanted earnest Evangelical didacticism; contemporary seekers want entertainment.

The New Testament Church did not, however, show this confusion about either the nature of evangelism or its proper setting. It did not provide “excitements,” other than the excitement of the Good News. In the New Testament, the ecclesia gathered together on the first day of the week to hear the Word of God, for corporate prayer (“the prayers”), and for the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42 and 20:7). Significantly, none of the evangelistic preaching in Acts occurs within the context of the church gathered for Sunday worship.

To be sure, the early Church was involved in aggressive evangelism, but it kept the gathering on Sunday for the edification of the faithful and for God’s covenant people to praise their covenant God. In the fourth century, Gregory Nazianzus warned that if the preacher “would please the multitude, he must adapt himself to their taste, and entertain them amusingly in church.” When this happened, he observed, “what belonged to the theatre was brought into the church.”

Naturally, these sort of wrong-headed assumptions about the gospel and Christian worship are reflected in the preaching and teaching of such congregations. The church cited above is independent (like many such congregations, it carefully avoids any denominational identification), but its approach has had a wide influence even among mainline congregations seeking some escape from their declining numbers. This past Easter, I visited an Episcopal parish that has sought to implement some of this model. Although its worship service would have been dismissed as irredeemably churchy by many “seeker sensitive” leaders, it was clear that the kind of assumptions examined above were having a profound impact on the message heard on Sunday after Sunday from this parish’s gothic pulpit.

Put simply, if one’s focus is on generating “excitements,” if one’s primary concern is numerical growth, one will not preach as a traditional Evangelical. If one is primarily seeking to address the felt needs of attendees, one will not say a word about sin and the Cross. The Easter morning sermon we heard was clearly designed to appeal to Yuppie “seekers.” The rector told his well-dressed congregation that they were obviously gifted and skilled at many things. Their manifest abilities had brought them success, but something was missing. They needed now to rise to the next level. They could experience greater personal fulfillment with Jesus.

Sin was mentioned only once (rather obliquely) at the end of the address. Despite the occasion (i.e., Easter Sunday), there was, notably, no mention of the Cross. Although this parish would certainly have identified itself as Evangelical, there was no reference to the burden or wages of sin; there was no mention of the need for a substitute to take the punishment our sins deserve. In essence, the gospel had been transformed into a motivational talk: “You are pretty good now, but you can be better with Jesus.”

Such an unscriptural message is the natural product of such unsound founding principles. While their motives are laudable, their presuppositions are deeply flawed. American pragmatism has erased the previously central themes of sin and redemption—central because they are the realities about which sinful men and women need to hear. Many such congregations have proven to be effective in reaching the unchurched, but with what are they reaching them?

Gillis J. Harp is Professor of History at Grove City College in Pennsylvania and the author of Brahmin Prophet: Phillips Brooks & the Path of Liberal Protestantism (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003). Although his background is evangelical Anglican, he and his family are currently worshipping in a congregation of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

[rick]

God help us!

Church group finds religion in 'The Simpsons'

OGDEN DUNES: Bible study analyzes show to find religious messages

BY CHAS REILLY
[e-mail]
219.762.1397, ext. 2223

This story ran on nwitimes.com on Thursday, December 21, 2006 1:04 AM CST

OGDEN DUNES | Ogden Dunes Community Church members may have chuckled a few times Wednesday night when watching an episode of "The Simpsons," but watching the show meant more to them than a few laughs.

The church has a Bible study that meets Wednesday nights and discusses the ways "The Simpsons" relates to the Bible.

"I was struck by how much theology is embedded in 'The Simpsons,'" the Rev. Robert Leach said.

Leach said he enjoys watching "The Simpsons," and always has wanted to have a class to analyze spiritual issues in the show.

"You've got to find sacred in the secular," Leach said.

During the class, members watched an episode of the show where Bart might get held back in school, and he prays for an extra day to study for an upcoming test.

Bart's prayers were answered in the episode, and he ended up getting a good enough grade to pass his class.

After the episode, members broke up into groups and discussed prayer, and found they could sympathize with Bart in the episode.

"You see how (religion) relates to real people in a context of humor," a church member said.

For more information on Ogden Dunes Community Church, visit www.ogdenduneschurch.org or call [phone].

[rick]

Damian J. Ference writes:(From First Thingswww.firstthings.com/)

Not so long ago, Weekend America aired a story on National Public Radio about a fairly new community known as the Church of Brunch.www.churchofbrunch.blogspot.com/ Flannery O’Connor would have appreciated it. In typical NPR fashion, the piece immediately drew me in, as the narrator began telling the story of a congregation of believers and atheists that leaves religion, deities, and dogma at the door and gather for a non-god-centered Sunday ceremony.

Services begin an hour before noon as the community joins in song in order to stir fire into the hearts of the non-faithful. Any song will do so long as it is inspirational, nonreligious, and has the potential to invoke full, conscious, and active participation on the part of the assembly.

On the day NPR was visiting, Cat Stevens’ classic hit from Harold and Maude, “Sing Out,” was being playfully strummed on a single guitar while what sounded like a dozen or so voices filled the air with a spirit that found itself somewhere between a campfire sing-a-long and a Steubenville Youth Conference.

Since this is an entirely nonreligious gathering, the Torah, the Qur’an, and the Bible are deemed offensive, but there is always a place for inspirational and thought-provoking readings. Whether from Shakespeare, Kerouac, or Sexton, any and all can touch the human heart in some way and remind hearers that they are alive and that something has happened, something is happening, or something will probably happen in the future. And if anyone in the assembly feels called to offer some reflections on the reading, such contributions are most welcome and appreciated.

Quiet contemplation comes next. After hearing the word and allowing it to be broken open within the community, silence is needed to allow the word to penetrate the hearts of the non-faithful. Of course, as with any Sunday service, silence is easy for some and difficult for others, but, in the end, the community is better off after three or four minutes of quiet.

Finally, the community is just about ready to approach the table of fellowship—but not until they first raise their heads and join together in a Johnny Cash number. Seeing that his most recent albums have been coated in religious imagery and metaphor, reaching back into the vault and flat-picking a hearty version of “Folsom Prison Blue” is deemed more appropriate. After the song, there is the traditional sign of peace, and then it’s time to break bread.

There’s nothing like singing “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die,” sharing a sign of peace, and then sitting down to a vegan potluck with your brothers and sisters in Brunch.

In 1952, Flannery O’Connor wrote her first novel, Wise Blood, and presented to the literary world the haunting character of Hazel Motes. Repelled by the blind street preacher, Asa Hawkes, and his Free Church of Christ, Motes decides to start up h is own congregation: The Church of Christ Without Christ.

In his first preaching attempt, Hazel Motes does not make a call for repentance or conversion but rather asks his small congregation to remove their blinders and see Jesus for the sham that he is. Motes pontificates: “I want to tell you people something. Maybe you think you’re not clean because you don’t believe. Well, you are clean, let me tell you that. Every one of you people are clean and let me tell you why if you think it’s because of Jesus Christ Crucified you’re wrong. I don’t say he wasn’t crucified but I say it wasn’t for you. Listenhere, I’m a preacher myself and I preach the truth.”

After listening to the piece about the Church of Brunch on NPR, I couldn’t help but think of Hazel Motes and his Church of Christ Without Christ. I couldn’t help but think of congregants leaving their dogma at the door in light of Flannery O’Connor’s insight: “For me a dogma is only a gateway to contemplation and is an instrument of freedom and not restriction.” I couldn’t help but think that something was terribly wrong here, even if on the surface all seemed well.

O’Connor employed strikingly violent and grotesque characters in her fiction because she felt that it was only through exaggeration of her characters’ sinfulness that her readers’ eyes would be open to the truth of humanity’s desperate need for redemption and salvation. For O’Connor, at the end of the day, there were only two options for the way life was to be lived: for God and for ourselves.

The Rev. Damian J. Ference is a priest of the Diocese of Cleveland. He is an associate pastor at Saint Mary Church in Hudson, Ohio, and teaches ethics at Borromeo Seminary in Wickliffe, Ohio.