A Gathering of All Believers?

Last night I wrote about my theory that the church is not effective in large part because of its divisions, that this ineffectiveness and division leave many people wandering and doing what seems best to them and that in order to counter this the church needs to reconsider its basic conception of itself. Today, I want to discuss a bit further what would/will need to happen for us to overcome our divisions and create more effective churches.

A month or so ago, I was involved in a discussion in the comment boxes over at Jesus Creed where regular commenter (and sometimes fill-in blogger) RJS said this:

I am an evangelical Christian and a scholar – but – I would not teach at an evangelical Christian institution with a restrictive statement of faith beyond essentials, even a statement of faith with which I currently agree. I am also ambivalent about church membership in any restrictive denominational church, despite the fact that I think we must affiliate in local congregations. We are called to be part of the body of Christ – the Church.

Attaching much importance to nonessentials sets a bar for Christian fellowship beyond Christian faith. I think that this has at least three, and probably more, truly negative impacts.

(1) It divides Christians, despite the fact that we are called to unity.

(2) It leads many to an unhealthy ironic faith (borrowing Scot’s term) where one may not really believe that to which one gives nominal assent.

(3) It prevents many of us from ever feeling truly secure in Christian fellowship.”

I have thought about this quite a bit since reading it a couple of weeks ago. Can we Christians simply decide that anyone who is willing to affirm the early church creeds (Apostle’s/Nicene Creed) belongs in full fellowship with us? Continue reading “A Gathering of All Believers?”

American Dreams

The Barna Group just put out the results of a survey of Americans asking about their ideal life. According to the findings, over 75% of us view the following things as “very important” parts of our ideal life:

Have good health (85%)

Living with a high degree of integrity (85%)

Having one marriage partner for life (80%)

Having a clear purpose for living (77%)

Having a close relationship with God (75%)

Having close personal friends (74%)

More than half of Americans also listed “having a comfortable lifestyle (mentioned by 70%), having a satisfying sex life with their marriage partner (66%), having children (66%), living close to family and relatives(63%), being deeply committed to the Christian faith (59%), and making a difference in the world (56%).” At the bottom of the list were achieving fame or public recognition (7%), owning the latest household technology/electronics (11%), owning a large home (18%), working in a high paying job (28%), traveling the world for pleasure (28%).

I can’t help but think when I see something like this that there is a large gap between what people say they want and what they are actually doing with their lives. On one hand, it could be that it’s so easy to say the “right” things to a poll taker. OTOH, I wonder if a big part of the problem is that while people want the right things, they do not have the tools or know-how needed to actually live them out. This is my personal theory.

It reminds me of a question I asked a bunch of people I know a couple of months back: “Do you think that most people want to be good people and are willing to put in the work it would take for them to be good people?” Continue reading “American Dreams”

Wandering Souls and the Divided Church

Those of you who are interested in such things have no doubt heard about the latest Pew survey on Religion in America which was released last week. It shows an America which is deeply religious yet growing ever more open to other faith traditions and less and less dogmatic about their own. In particular, there is a lot of fluidity to people’s beliefs. 44% say that they have switched religions, denominations or gained or dropped faith in their lifetime. The mainline Protestant denominations are continuing their downward spiral while non-denominational churches continue to show modest gains. One of the studies co-authors, John Green, says, “It will become increasingly difficult to find people who share a love for distinct doctrine . . . firm beliefs and firm organizations are increasingly a thing of the past.”

Reaction to the findings have been mixed. Cardinal Francis George says that rampant individualism which leads people to “trust only their own spiritual experience” means that they are unwilling to follow church teachings. Eric Zorn at the Chicago Tribune lauded the supposed humility of Americans which “leads to tolerance, understanding and attitudes that promote true freedom of conscience in a multicultural world”. Others, like Erin Manning at Crunchy Cons lament “cafeteria-style religiosity that lets them accept what’s individually pleasing and reject anything that isn’t”. I think that John Green probably gets it most right when he says, “”Just because they don’t want to believe that there’s only one way to salvation doesn’t meant that they don’t take their religion very seriously.”

So what is going on here? No doubt there are a lot of complicated things at work which I could go on and on about. However, the one thing which I think many commentators aren’t fully understanding but which I think is probably the most influential development in American Christianity today is the death spiral of denominations. And not just denominations, but the death of any sort of faith in the value of denominational distinctives.

Now, to be clear, I don’t think that denominations are simply going to disappear. However, what I do think is happening and will continue to happen is that the teachings which separate one denomination from the next will become increasingly irrelevant. If you attend the local Presbyterian Church and you move, you may check out the nearest Presbyterian Church in your new town. However, if the pastor is creepy, the people unfriendly and the services dull as dirt, you probably won’t feel any compunction about visiting the Lutheran Church down the street to see what they have going on. The differences in teachings on creeds, baptisms and ordination probably won’t matter much to you unless you find that you want to do something that they don’t allow. The question this begs is whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.

There is the argument that an unwillingness to affirm and submit to the authority of a particular church is a sign of individualism run amok and cafeteria style Christianity. However, I think that is an argument which often doesn’t hold up in the real world. First of all, statistics tend to show that the churches which are showing growth are those which are more rigorous in their teachings and which often offer a strong sense of belonging. Meanwhile, the mainline churches which are depopulating the fastest are those which have moved towards an “anything goes” ethos which asks next to nothing of their members in terms of their personal beliefs, morality and loyalty to the group. Also, if you actually talk with people who have changed churches you hear complaints about nasty pastors, bad music, unfriendly cliquish people, management problems, a lack of community, etc. From my experience you rarely hear anyone say, “well, the pastor gave a sermon on sexual purity and I decided that I didn’t want to be sexually pure, so I left.” I’m sure it happens, but to be perfectly frank, most people are failing so badly at the hard teachings of personal morality that the pews would be empty if if was common practice to abandon churches which taught strong personal morality. Really, I would wager that any church which was able to offer the support needed for its members to live out a life transformed by Christ, including resisting the temptations of our culture’s moral free-fall, would be quite successful.

It can be tempting to blame the people, who are almost universally behaving in ways which are anathema to Christian teachings after all, for taking the wrong approach to church. However, I think that the real problem lies with a church which is so divided over everything from infant baptism to speaking in tongues to gay ordination and creationism that it is unable to play its essential role in supporting its people who are trying to function as people of God in a hostile environment. Many people have come to the conclusion that the church is divided over issues which are largely irrelevant to their faith walk, but without any other option, they do tend to end up as wanders simply doing what seems best to themselves. Continue reading “Wandering Souls and the Divided Church”

Our Suffering and the Cross

Over at Jesus Creed, a regular comment box writer who goes by RJS has been doing a series of posts on a book called The Reason for God.  It has been a great series, but for whatever reason, today’s installment particularly struck me.  It discusses Chapter 13 of the book, which is The (True) Story of the Cross.  IMO, there is a tendency on the part of evangelical Christians to view the cross as simply a matter of forgiven sins and little else.  OTOH, there is a tendency in some progressive circles to see the cross as foolishness – almost an embarrassingly outdated myth.  While of course, I agree much more with the evangelical view of the cross, it seems to me that it actually reduces the cross to frame it as simply a quid pro quo for our sins.  In the discussion at Jesus Creed, RJS presents part of what the book has to say in regards to the issue of sacrificial/substitutional nature of Jesus’ death on the cross:

The Gospel of Christ – the good news – is wrapped up in the story of the cross. This story however causes a great deal of consternation in our western world. Why was sacrifice required? Why did Jesus die? Isn’t the appeasement of the wrath of God best classed as divine child abuse — a remnant of an older more primitive society? . . . Forgiveness always requires sacrifice. When we forgive we bear the consequence, the suffering, ourselves rather than demanding retribution. No one “just forgives” any grievous wrong. How much more then for God? God did not, then, inflict pain on someone else, but rather on the Cross absorbed the pain, violence, and evil of the world into himself.”

That last part is probably the best explanation of the sacrificial nature of the cross which I have read.  RJS, goes on to talk about how death on the cross also helped us to understand that God can identify with our pain, injustice and oppression.  In conclusion he asks: Continue reading “Our Suffering and the Cross”

In Search of the Perfect Curriculum – Help!

Ok, so I’ve decided to bite the bullet, pay the cash and invest in some actual curriculumn for my boys’ homeschooling for the next year. However, the problem is what curriculum. I’m not really interested in “school at home” type curriculum like A Beka. For kids my sons’ age (particularly the older one), I like the approach of The Well Trained Mind. However, as much … Continue reading In Search of the Perfect Curriculum – Help!