An Ideal Evangelicalism?
December 14, 2008 by iMonk
Somewhere in the previous orgy of comments I’ve had this week, someone asked me to write about “What do you see as the ideal evangelicalism?”
There is no ideal evangelicalism and there’s not going to be. It’s certainly not going to be ideal if I am the architect. So let’s not get out of hand here. I’m a blogger, which tells you about all you need to know on the subject of my credibility.
But that won’t stop me from answering the question in a slightly different form: “What would make for a much better evangelicalism?”
I promise the answers are going to be short.
1) Evangelicalism would be much better if it would admit that the Reformation and all subsequent divisions divided the one true church of Christ. None of those divisions created a new church or recreated the one, true church. All of Christianity today is the broken parts of what should be whole and entire.
2) Evangelicalism would be much better if it learned to see its own destructive, polluting entanglement in culture instead of trying to justify that entanglement as evangelism. Evangelicals have to live in culture, and I believe we should influence it, discern it and build admirable contributions to it, but the most essential attitude we should have toward it is to avoid the destructive, parasitic entanglements with culture that have sucked the life, power and distinctiveness from evangelicalism, especially in North America.
3) Evangelicalism would be better if it would admit and address its authority issue. Evangelicalism consists, to a large extent, of groups and individuals waving Bibles and shouting verses at one another. Evangelicals use terms like “Biblical Christianity” as if they could actually produce such a thing if asked. The assumption that our views are “based on the Bible” has produced a cacophony of contradictory, divisive and endless claims, counter-claims and wars. The evolution of evangelicalism seems destined to be toward the opposite poles of abandoning the concept of authority completely to the individual (usually the charismatic pastor) or creating an authoritarian hothouse where complete submission is obligatory to avoid exile or worse. Evangelicals have an authority problem. They will quite possibly never solve it as evangelicals, but they can make the situation considerably better by directly addressing the problems created in Protestantism and evangelicalism by our various approaches to authority and implementing serious measures to bring some coherence to the situation.
4) Evangelicalism would be better if it rid itself of every form of the prosperity Gospel and pursued spiritual formation and an imitation of Jesus that was consistent with what Jesus and the New Testament teach about money.
5) Evangelicalism would be better if it learned to see, in the various divisions of Christianity, the remaining diversity that once adorned the united church: liturgy, missions, evangelism, spiritual formation, theology, Biblical study, the work of the Holy Spirit, the power of the sacraments. Even if these divisions cannot be overcome, the visible remains of the once glorious body of Christ can still be seen and experienced, even in our broken condition. Evangelicalism should determine, like Merton said, to bring together in itself as many different aspects of the holistic church of Jesus as possible. As someone recently said, we are in a time when the basis of Christianity is being eroded in masse, yet we are still debating the issues of the 16th century divisions and ignoring how irrelevant these are to the world at large. I affirm with my own denomination the need for a Great Commission Resurgence, and it must encompass all Christian traditions, but especially evangelicalism.
6) Evangelicalism would be better if thousands of churches die and many thousands more are born via healthy church planting relationships.
7) Evangelicalism would be better if it brought out all of its riches of corporate worship and put them on display, rather than throwing out what seems old, selling out what seems out of fashion and denouncing what isn’t popular. Evangelicals have in the more ancient, broader, deeper, wider Christian tradition all those aspects and elements of worship that can not only end the worship wars, but bring the focus of worship clearly onto Christ being exalted in all things. Evangelicals are starving by the millions for Christ focused worship and gospel dominated spirituality, but at this crucial hour, we are determined to be trendy, innovative and to get more cars in the parking lot. A sad betrayal of all we know for the wisdom of the world. We’ll be very sorry in 20 years.
8. Evangelicals would be much better off if, as a movement, they had a common set of confessional/creedal/catechetical documents. Further, evangelicalism would be much better if it recognized a shared ordained ministry.
9) Evangelicals would be be much better off it they were poor and had to proceed, in every way, without the assumption that they can easily generate millions of dollars to do whatever they want to do. We need to embrace poverty for the sake of Christ, and repent of our idolatry of all things big, successful, wealthy and powerful. In the midst of this, we should repent of and renounce our dreams of political influence.
10) Evangelicals would be much better off if the Charismatic movement were to become a manistream part of every church, renewing and being renewed; giving and being nurtured itself. Christianity is not the dead, dry, dusty movement most of us see. It is alive with power and emotion; with human and divine energy. We should desire the full manifestation of the Holy Spirit and the continual empowering, freeing, healing, humbling work of the Spirit. Charismatic Christianity needs a Biblical/theological rescue, but mainstream evangelicalism desperately needs the spiritual movement that is at the heart of healthy third-wave and charismatic movements.
These ‘lively stones’ are scattered throughout the world. They attend public church services in hundreds of ‘churches’ (buildings,forests,houses, and so forth) in thousands of places…all over the Earth. What the world labels ‘the church’ and what God labels ‘the church’ are two very different bodies. The world’s church is unloving, unfaithful, teachers of false doctrines, participants in Jezebel’s lusts, and worshippers of the god of materialism. The majority belong to the world’s church and not to the Body of Christ…or so says the Word (broad is the way to destruction..and many will go..)
Heavy,heavy,heavy,,,’narrow is the Way that leads to life….and FEW will find it.’
“Because I was raised RC, I was very reluctant to make tight connections with anyone at church. I hated it when people greeted me at the door and wanted to hug.”
Boethius, I’d hug you (except yeah, we don’t *do* that kind of thing).
Yes, I too would want to run a mile if anyone came up to me with a big grin, a pump-handle handshake, and a “Hi, new friend! I’m Ned Flanders, and I want to make you really, really welcome to our little get-together!” at church. I read descriptions of hand-holding during the ‘Our Father’ in (some) American Masses, and it makes me go “Eek!” Suffice it to say I’m not touchy-feely, so I can’t get the reason why someone would make a decision on church attendance based on ‘not warm and friendly’.
But then, one person’s welcoming interest is another person’s poking their big nose into my affairs, so there you go.
“Martha, you need to go teach them how to submit to authority. They are too uppity.”
Teach ‘em obedience? Hoo, boy, you don’t know how lucky you are! I’ve often said, when hearing complaints of how intolerant and authoritarian Pope John Paul II was (especially from elements in American Catholicism) that it’s a good job I was never in the running for Pope, because I would have slapped an interdict on them, and if that didn’t bring ‘em to heel, I’d have declared them in schism and excommunicated the whole boiling of ‘em. By comparison the late (and indeed, the present) Holy Father was a pussycat
Martha, at the church my parents like, they do the hand-holding thing. Big church, holding slimy hands with hundreds of strangers: totally alienating. Hate that.
At the church I’ve been going to lately, there’s maybe 100 people any given Sunday, no hand-holding, but at the end of Mass you totally feel like you got a hug from somebody you like.
The following is a letter that was written in the North County Times newspaper by a ‘Christian’ living in Vista, CA. This letter prompted days of comments, all of them blasting Christians and siding with the ‘dog walker’. It’s little wonder we are all being painted as hypocrites.
___________________________________________________________
Residents putting dogs before church?
We had left the house and driven to a nearby intersection where we stopped to wait for the cross-traffic to clear. We were in our Sunday best. There was a woman dressed in typical sports casual at the same intersection holding two dogs, a scooper and a plastic bag to collect the droppings. I know that our church had mailed beautiful photographic invitations to every home in our area. I now know that, while I did not know her name, she must have received one of those cards.
For the short time we waited for the traffic to clear, we literally gazed at each other. She, in her sports casuals, and my wife and I, in our Sunday best. Without a word being spoken, we easily read each other’s minds. All three of us knew how we would utilize the next few hours. I now know that she had the memory of the invitational card and was embarrassed by the tools she carried.
During the rest of our drive, we saw eight dogs and their masters. Again, I know that every one of them did receive the same postcard because I can assume that the post office did their part. I would be interested in knowing how many placed doggie ahead of the invitation.
_____________________________________________________________
And Patrick Lynch, happy to see you again – Vox and all.
Martha:
Thanks for the laugh. You always make me laugh.
Patrick Lynch:
At the end of Mass you feel like you could hug somebody you like? Don’t you like all of them? Do you think church unity requires community?
Boethius, he means he feels like he got a hug from Jesus.
Sam Urfer:
Thank you for the clarification but …
Patrick Lynch:
You need to like all of your 100 parisheners. Now, your assignment for next Sunday’s mass is to hug at least five people after mass. Or at least, go to the mid-week bingo game and hug somebody there
Why the obsession with touchy-feely stuff, Boethius (FANTASTIC name, by the way)? That was my least favorite part of being an Evangelical, the fake and cloying expectations of smiling friendliness fostered by churches. A sense of community is important, but my experiences in Evangelical churches (Baptist, CMA, Calvary Chapel, etc.) were not really positive from a community point of view. Indeed, I feel a much greater and more legitimate sense of community at my Catholic parish where people don’t talk to each other in Mass than I ever did when being glad-handed at a Baptist service.
I’m with Sam.
I do like being quiet at church, and I prefer being quiet for awhile afterwards. I don’t really view the Mass as a part of my social life; it’s always been a time for something Else, for me.
Me personally, I need to give myself a while to unwind after Mass. I’ll buy myself a Yoo-hoo at the gas station and drive around for awhile. I prefer that ritual to having to wade through a sea of hand-shaking acquaintances on the way in and out the door. Since I don’t have to expect that every time I go to church, I feel like I get a chance to focus more on why I’m there.
Plus, people are friendlier with you if they know they don’t really have to be.
I have a big family so we all hold hands at the Our Father during Mass. It gives the kids a chance to give their siblings a good squeeze. There are times when I, like Patrick, like the quiet, but that just doesn’t happen with seven kids so…. I reserve that time for daily Mass when I can make it. I do like to harrass some of the parishioners after Mass though.
Martha: – No hugging in Ireland – then why do we wear “Kiss me I’m Irish” pins on Saint Paddy’s day here in the States?
Trailblazer: I guess it never occured to them that those dog walkers may have been Catholic and gone on Saturday night!
For those of you that have ever been through World Wide Marriage Encounter – the hugging thing is big – it took me, as a guy, some time to acclimate myself to this, and I still feel awkward – I think it’s a guy thing.
Sam Urfer:
I am not really into the hugging stuff. I was using humor. As a former RC, I rarely had any connection with people at mass. After converting, it was one of the most difficult things for me to adjust to, the “letting others from church into my life”, and of course, the whole hugging thing we do. I only brought it up to explain to Martha why so many Christians feel lost after losing their senior pastor. The community stuff is so much more intense outside of the RC church. I confess, I am still adjusting to it.
I understand, Boethius, coming from the opposite direction. I feel it is one of the stregnths of the Church that it isn’t dependent on being a social club. Of course, modern American Catholics can be very social in Mass these days, and I don’t really have a problem with that. But it is nice that I can walk into any parish, anywhere in the world, and worship the triune God without having to be friends with the congregants. Visiting an Evangelical church one isn’t a member of can be socially awkward, and often a surreal experience with cliques. The more “welcoming” they try to be, the more awkward it tends to end up.
I agree with every point made by Micheal, but ultimately who cares what I think anyway. Just one question, who has the authority to implement and impose these wonderful insights on the entire evangelical world? The fact that we all are questioning every point made, agreeing and disagreeing at times testifies of the universal impossibility of such a grand vision from coming fourth. Someone has to lead the others must follow. If we are leading ourselves we will only find unity with others we agree with, thus we are not following them but still following our own ideals, we just happen to agree.
Good post, iMonk.
I’ll comment on No. 10, about the charismatic movement.
It would benefit greatly from inclusion amongst all denoms across Protestantism, as well as within Orthodoxy and Catholicism.
I can’t speak to the Orthodox Church and for that matter Catholicism, but within Protestantism, too often the spiritual gifts are treated like the bastard child of the family. Sometimes blasted as not part of the family, more often ignored or treated as if dead, sometimes allowed but shunted to the back room. A few members embrace it, but many of those have somewhat strange views of it.
We, of course, harm ourselves by ignoring that bastard child, who is a gift to us from the Lord Himself.
Also, the charismatic movement is probably the one movement within Protestantism most needy of good, sound theology and scholarship (inclusion within the larger body would remedy that).