• love-never-fails-love-15165570-700-534

    Check this out!

    One of the frustrations of writing my poor, little blog is that sometimes I write something that I think could be really important to people and because of my tiny reach into the blogosphere, it passes by mostly unnoticed.  A couple of weeks ago I wrote an essay on what I called New Fundamentalism which was one of those posts.  See, over the years I have often been accused of not taking the bible seriously or treated as suspect by fundamentalist/conservative evangelical types.  They disapprove of my rejection of literal creationism or of the subordination of women or some such sacred cow.  But as anyone who has read the things I write here can tell, I take the bible very seriously.  I have devoted a ridiculous amount of time to study, prayer and research in my quest to understand the bible better.  The real problem, in my opinion, is that traditional fundamentalists take the wrong things literally.  So, I pulled out a list of often quoted but usually ignored verses which I proposed be taken literally by all believers, regardless of denomination or doctrine.  But, like a lot of what I write, it mostly disappeared into the vapor of cyberspace.

    I think that this matter is too important to allow it to just disappear like that without a bit of a fight.  So, I have created a page dedicated just to this list of fundamental bible verses.  It is called A New Fundamentalism.  All it consists of is the essay and list of scripture verses I posted earlier.  I’m simply looking for people to “Like” the essay and if they choose, pass the link around.  Perhaps in a few days, I will be able to put together a button for people to put on their own blog pages to link to the site.  I have also created a facebook page for the site that you can like and share with your friends.

    This isn’t an attempt to compete with or displace anything.  I really do think that the verses I collected represent an excellent starting point for anyone who is serious about their faith – from a homeschooling, creationism, complementarian fundamentalist Christian to a liberal miracle doubting, gay marriage supporting believer.  As for the rest, God holds truth.  We will continue to disagree about many things, but as one of the verses listed says, “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” – John 13:35.  At this point, the body of Christ is known for many things, but love is rarely at the top of the list.  And if love is not at the top of the list, then the world is right to wonder whose disciples we’re supposed to be.

    So, please head over to the New Fundamentalism site and check it out.  If you can abide by what is said there, like it, tweet it, share it!  But let’s try not to let these vital fundamentals of our faith disappear into cyberspace.

  • 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 »

  • 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 »

  • My quick take on the news

    After putting up 4 fairly long posts in less than 24 hours yesterday, I need to take some time to attend to the kiddies and my gardens. But I’d hate the leave my minions without their Upside Down World fix (that’s a joke, btw :) ). So I thought I’d pass on my take on a couple of recent news events which have been bugging me.

    1. Oil. Obviously oil costs too much. Obviously we need to find ways to cut back. Obviously what we are doing isn’t sustainable in the long term. However, the reality is that our best case scenario right now is to cut back and go through a transition period away from heavy dependence on oil. Which means that for the foreseeable future we will still need the stuff. So, it drives me nuts that we refuse to allow drilling and oil exploration either on or off shore in the USA. Now, I’m not saying we can become self-sufficient by drilling in the USA. However, the main protest against drilling seems to be environmental. Normally, I’m very sympathetic to environmental causes. However, do other oil producing countries not have environments? Are we to believe that Russia and Nigeria and Argentina are taking their oil from lifeless wastelands? Is the USA the only place on the planet where there is an environment worth preserving? Come on people! At least in the USA we can be assured that best practices will be used to protect the environment. Can we really have have any confidence that Gabon will do the same? It seems to me that from a global level, those who really want us to do the least amount of environmental damage possible would be trying to get oil production moved into the places like the USA. IMO, our current approach is silly and selfish.

    2. Scott McClellan, as you have surely heard, has written a tell-all book which repeats the same things every other book about the Bush administration has said (ie he’s an incurious baboon). What I have found amusing about this is the press reaction to the book. Now, I know that the press, having dealt with McClellan as press secretary don’t care for the man. However, they keep saying, “why didn’t he say anything when he was in office?” Yeah, I can see how that would have worked: “Thank you for coming today, ladies and gentlemen of the press. The president has asked me to tell you that things are going well in Iraq and we’re making adjustments on the ground as needed. However, I would personally like to add that the president is delusional and he was picking lint from between his toes during the morning briefing, so I doubt he has any real idea what’s going on. I’ll open the floor for questions now.”

    3. Kathleen Parker, the (I hate to say it) conservative columnist has apparently taken up the use of psychotropic drugs and is now acting as a propagandist for various white-power groups. If you were fortunate enough to miss it, Ms. Parker wrote a column about voters looking for a “full blooded American” to vote for. Continue reading »

  • Two Lists

    Brian McLaren spoke recently at a conference taking place at Willow Creek Community Church and shared something which I find fascinating. Back in the 1970s, McLaren volunteered as a youth minister. He asked the kids in the group to make a list of what the pressing issues at their churches were. They came up with things like contemporary worship music and speaking in tongues. Then he asked them to make a list of what the pressing issues facing the world were. Their list included typical 1970s concerns like nuclear war, communism and famine. McLaren points out that there was no overlap between the two lists. The problem as he saw it was that as he was leading young people to Christ, they would get drawn into the first list of concerns and become less and less involved in the issues of the wider world.

    I think that a lot has changed since the 1970s and churches are starting to do a better job of creating overlap between McLaren’s two lists. In fact, much ink has been spilled observing the rise of a new generation of evangelical leaders who are as interested in social justice and global warming as they are in gay marriage. However, I wonder how much overlap is going on at ground level in churches across the nation between church concerns and world concerns. If you walked into your church’s youth group today and asked the kids for their two lists, would there be overlap? Continue reading »