So says the Christian Science Monitor. See the article here. I've had a number of people seek my thoughts on this matter. So, I'll post what I sent in a note to a friend:
I’ve been hearing this alarm sound over the last decade in clarion blast. My reaction to this piece is as it has been to all those that have preceded it: some merit; more bunk.
My opinion (noting the author of the article ended with an admission that he was sharing his opinion based on his observations) is that there has been a shaking going on for the past decade or so. It started out, in my thinking, with the battle over the modernity/post-modernity shifts in thinking. Evangelicalism, by and large, refused to recognize the cultural shift and the changes it would necessitate in communicating the gospel. I won’t bother to give you the modernity/post modernity arguments again (although I’d chat with you about my observations any time), but would suggest that a small part of Evangelicalism bought the shift and began deconstructing their apologetics to adapt to the cultural changes. At the outset those folks were pragmatists—this program, these methods, this model and so on. Earliest of them were the “Seeker Sensitive” types. Then there were the innumerable small congregations that started going the way of the larger and more successful churches—i.e. Saddleback and Willow Creek Association churches. Evangelicals, meanwhile, continued to rattle their swords that these were nothing more than watering down the gospel and dumbing down discipleship.
About midway through this decade there was another wave of deconstruction—this one known as the Younger Evangelicals (or the Emerging Church, as some have labeled it). This group matched the Evangelical theology (initially… though there is more to be said about this) with a post-modernity cultural adaptation. They tried to bridge the gap between hardline Evangelicalism and the new millennium. The buzz word is/was: conversant. This group is/was conversant with the new millennium.
Of course to Evangelicals, these shifts amounted to nothing short of heresy. What? Preach the gospel in a tavern? Have a “Pub-Crawl” ministry? And so on. The next thing that happened was the extremists surface—the guys who are “ministering” in all sorts of extreme/ridiculous manners; preachers cussing during their sermons; and further deconstruction—does the Bible really teach hell? Really teach homosexuality is wrong? Really teach that sex outside of marriage is immoral? What about war? Politics? Whales? The earth, man!!! And so on. (Very similar path, actually, to the hippie movement in the late 60s and 70s if you think about it—started out w/best intentions to return to love and serving and then became from there all sorts of sillyness.)
Through it all, however, this is that part I referred to earlier as merit—genuine believers have been asking good questions again. Genuine congregations are starting to recognize that we believers have started to look and sound a lot more like Pharisees than Christ followers. People have started a Luther-era-like reformation struggle with their own traditions and traditional values. And I think this is a very good thing. I think it is much like other movements/waves that have rocked the Christian faith. And in the end, I have every confidence that the Bride of Christ will be better for it—not destroyed by it.
I do think these shifts will change the landscape. I don’t think it is to mega-churches though. I think it is more to smaller and even home churches. This is the way things are going around the globe. The western ideal of church might reshape a bit. I think it will be good because we will see a rebirth of mentoring and discipling (not in the way of assimilating people into little churchians, but into a deeper faith). I think we will (and have been) see more of an embrace of ancient methods. One term being used now is “Ancient/Future” faith. This is where the post-modern sojourner re-engages with his heritage in the faith. I see a ton of this in the 20-35 crowd right now at CCA. By the way, where I most strongly disagree with the article is concerning pragmatism. That’s what is dying where this generation is concerned. They don’t buy it, and will deconstruct everything en-route to embracing anything.
I think these shifts mean the death of living by the seven infamous church words, “we haven’t done it this way before” and a new excitement and relevance in our neighborhoods for the gospel.
I also think that these shifts mean the death of many congregations that aren’t pliable. But with those who change, there will also be those who stand firm in old Evangelicalism—claiming that the light is going out. In conclusion, I think the light that will be extinguished is simply the label Evangelical. It’s just about run its course.
What do you think? I'd love to hear your take.
Recent Comments