Thank you for sharing your experience! Neither Joel nor I are very familiar with mainline contexts in an experiential way, so it is helpful to hear feedback from that quarter.
For my part, I would contend that the weekly service is for the member. Evangelism is the work of congregants in their day to day lives in the City of Man or the purview of gifted evangelists. What might be gained by installing a recurring gospel regime in the pulpit is lost in the harvest of mature Christians who will, in obedience to Christ and by fruit of the Spirit, proclaim said gospel in the fertile soil of their witness and testimony to neighbors of all sorts.
In some ways, the mainline's intent was to incarnate Christ in just such a way and to not be Dives in the midst of social suffering, it's fault and failure stems from it deifying Adamic man, portraying salvation as primarily medicinal, and becoming complacent about sin in their own lives and those for whom they care (which are temptations peculiar to a psychological temperament many mainline Christians share, made worse by the fracture of Christianity along such lines in the guise of theological difference).
The answer is not to pick the lesser of two evils, although one does have to do so temporarily when making necessary and concrete choices about, say, where to worship Jesus on a given Sunday. No, the only permanent solution is to constantly reform the church. I take the Reformation as a given of my providentially chosen historical context (meaning I dont relitigate it as though the genie could be put back in the bottle), but I, like Luther, would seek to do everything in my power to reform rather than revolt. In the end, Luther became more mandate than man, but we should seek to emulate his reticence to burn down the building because the roof is leaking.
As far as children go, you and your wife (or just you; I'm not trying to assume anything) are the only sufficient witness to the gospel (people without parents can get it elsewhere, but people who have parents will look to them in a unique way). If they don't get it from you, a stranger's long, boring speech ain't gonna cut it, especially since they would be observing you ignore it. If you exemplify what you tell them about sin, repentance, sanctification, the fruit of the Spirit, and fruitfulness in making disciples, they will be better served by teaching that cultivates wisdom, faithfulness, and love.
To become a Christian is death, which is easy; to be a Christian is life, which is much harder. We much teach, train, and counsel with dilligence measured to the difficulty of the task, rather than the importance of the outcome. After all, we spend much more time, talent, and treasure teaching our children how to have manners than not to murder, and we are right to do so: murder is worse and, thus more importantto avoid,, but it is far less relevant a temptation than to be rude, careless, or inattentive to the good of others. Jesus taught that our souls are in more peril from the subtle, innocuous evil of our fallen nature than the heinous impieties we fear and outlaw.
This critique of Gospel™ reminds me of the contemporary critique of "Big Agriculture" or capitalism. Both the conservative and liberals are criticizing it. Say, the food pyramid came about to get more food to more people, so no one is starving anymore. But people are dying of a number of diseases linked to overconsumption of non-nutritious food. In a similar way, I think no one is starving for the very basics of the gospel. The Gospel trademark was a good way to multiply a lot of minimally nutritious teaching and make it profitable and stamped of approval, similar to something being USDA certified.
Also, we need a voiceover for this!! I need to hear King Laugh narrate.
I am so grateful for these essays. I couldn’t read them fast enough and intend to go back to them multiple times. Never has theology made me want to both laugh and cry so much!
After becoming a believer, I was a faithful churchgoer for about ten years. I was so excited to be part of the “body of Christ.” I slowly became aware of these exact patterns and suffered a lot of dysfunctional “leadership” as a result.
I reluctantly stopped attending a few years ago. Attending churches like this made me less loving, less powerful, more anxious and confused… I believe this kind of “discipleship” is not just disappointing or unfortunate but truly harmful. I’m still looking for a community that loves the way God loves.
My zeal for reform is borne out of love for the many brothers and sisters like you, wandering in the wilderness, so thank you for sharing!
My family has spent ten years in the desert looking, but God has lead us to a church that is much healthier this past year. It wasn't my doing, and I won't pretend that He always gives us such blessings, so I just want to encourage you to persevere in growing in love of God and neighbor, not giving in to cynicism or despondency. HE is faithful even when His servants aren't!
Thank you for this encouragement. Definitely feeling like a wilderness, which part of me feels awful for saying (there are so many churches and Christians around, who am I to call it that). But I'm happy to be in company with other sojourners, even if separated by time and space :)
Your humility and gratitude will serve you well along the way!
Almost every way I try to put this sounds half right, at best, but don't feel like where you go or don't go expresses tacit judgement. It's hard enough to bear one's own burdens and those of others that we need not attempt to bear second order burdens of anxiety about how our burdens might burden others.
I am honored to be on this same road with such goodly pilgrims!
“second order burdens of anxiety about how our burdens might burden others” 😂 very much what I’m on the path of releasing these days! Definitely allows for a lighter (maybe even sustainably tolerable) yoke.
The difference between critique and criticism is that criticsm’s only goal is to tear down and replace, whereas critique attempts to build up something into a better state. This was a very useful and helpful critique.
I happen to think that the underlying critique is that the American Protestant tradition changed theology into an act of knowledge instead of an act of faith. Faith is a virtue that brings a state of communion, whereas knowledge is a form of power that sets one above the thing that it studies. Knowledge is important, but it is something of a shadow virtue - it’s bad when it replaces the light virtues. (Knowing your wife means more than than knowing facts about her, but you also cannot truly know her without gaining facts along the way)
Sidenote: I tend to think of the Bible as the cornerstone of cosmology. It isn’t the whole foundation, but it sets the rest of the foundation in order. It gives us a story that fractals out and touches things that we experience. It is not an extended encyclopedia that gives us all the cosmological info we need.
I appreciated this one, a lot.
PS you can’t fault baptists for rebaptizing tho. It’s in the name. 😂
One of the funnier black comedy moments in the Reformation was when Magisterial Reformers drowned Anabaptists while saying, in paraphrase, "since you like to baptize so much, here's a third!"
Baptists are still a little cranky about it, but the historical record makes that understandable.
Anybody who doesn't agree with you about the nature of Scripture being more akin to a key than a blueprint has a lot of explaining to do about how long it took to get the cannon.
Jun 11·edited Jun 11Liked by Joel Carini, King Laugh
Good discussion. A friend of mine has made some of these complaints before (though not as many, and not as specific). His response is that he's contemplating moving to a Simple Church / house church. For my part, I don't think I really mind the expository model (in the context of a church that also gets together for Bible studies and community groups), except perhaps what you call "Every passage is the Gospel." In my mind, I call this "Every Sunday is Easter."
But then I grew up in a Mainline church that NEVER preached the Gospel, such that I didn't understand what the Gospel was, or what the whole deal was with Jesus, until college, despite having heard so many sermons. I think I'd rather my kids hear the Gospel too much rather than not enough, once they're old enough to sit with us for the sermon. You didn't really mention the Mainlines, but for those who have left the Mainlines (which at this moment in time is a LOT of churchgoing evangelicals), I don't think I'm unusual in having a very conscious desire for my church to not "go the way of the Mainlines."
There's also an issue in that in a growing church, the sermon needs to appeal to those who attend church seldom, and who might be visitors. There's a challenge in trying to appeal to both visitors and long-time members. Again, I think the way many churches do it is to make the sermon more visitor-friendly and have Bible studies, community groups, or small groups for members, which perhaps should be more directed towards the topics you mention.
It also seems that a lot of what you're discussing here implies a smaller church. The idea of audience response, for example (I'm assuming we're talking about more than an "Amen" from the back). Which takes me back again, to my friend and his idea of moving to a house church.
Thank you for sharing your experience! Neither Joel nor I are very familiar with mainline contexts in an experiential way, so it is helpful to hear feedback from that quarter.
For my part, I would contend that the weekly service is for the member. Evangelism is the work of congregants in their day to day lives in the City of Man or the purview of gifted evangelists. What might be gained by installing a recurring gospel regime in the pulpit is lost in the harvest of mature Christians who will, in obedience to Christ and by fruit of the Spirit, proclaim said gospel in the fertile soil of their witness and testimony to neighbors of all sorts.
In some ways, the mainline's intent was to incarnate Christ in just such a way and to not be Dives in the midst of social suffering, it's fault and failure stems from it deifying Adamic man, portraying salvation as primarily medicinal, and becoming complacent about sin in their own lives and those for whom they care (which are temptations peculiar to a psychological temperament many mainline Christians share, made worse by the fracture of Christianity along such lines in the guise of theological difference).
The answer is not to pick the lesser of two evils, although one does have to do so temporarily when making necessary and concrete choices about, say, where to worship Jesus on a given Sunday. No, the only permanent solution is to constantly reform the church. I take the Reformation as a given of my providentially chosen historical context (meaning I dont relitigate it as though the genie could be put back in the bottle), but I, like Luther, would seek to do everything in my power to reform rather than revolt. In the end, Luther became more mandate than man, but we should seek to emulate his reticence to burn down the building because the roof is leaking.
As far as children go, you and your wife (or just you; I'm not trying to assume anything) are the only sufficient witness to the gospel (people without parents can get it elsewhere, but people who have parents will look to them in a unique way). If they don't get it from you, a stranger's long, boring speech ain't gonna cut it, especially since they would be observing you ignore it. If you exemplify what you tell them about sin, repentance, sanctification, the fruit of the Spirit, and fruitfulness in making disciples, they will be better served by teaching that cultivates wisdom, faithfulness, and love.
To become a Christian is death, which is easy; to be a Christian is life, which is much harder. We much teach, train, and counsel with dilligence measured to the difficulty of the task, rather than the importance of the outcome. After all, we spend much more time, talent, and treasure teaching our children how to have manners than not to murder, and we are right to do so: murder is worse and, thus more importantto avoid,, but it is far less relevant a temptation than to be rude, careless, or inattentive to the good of others. Jesus taught that our souls are in more peril from the subtle, innocuous evil of our fallen nature than the heinous impieties we fear and outlaw.
This critique of Gospel™ reminds me of the contemporary critique of "Big Agriculture" or capitalism. Both the conservative and liberals are criticizing it. Say, the food pyramid came about to get more food to more people, so no one is starving anymore. But people are dying of a number of diseases linked to overconsumption of non-nutritious food. In a similar way, I think no one is starving for the very basics of the gospel. The Gospel trademark was a good way to multiply a lot of minimally nutritious teaching and make it profitable and stamped of approval, similar to something being USDA certified.
Also, we need a voiceover for this!! I need to hear King Laugh narrate.
I am so grateful for these essays. I couldn’t read them fast enough and intend to go back to them multiple times. Never has theology made me want to both laugh and cry so much!
After becoming a believer, I was a faithful churchgoer for about ten years. I was so excited to be part of the “body of Christ.” I slowly became aware of these exact patterns and suffered a lot of dysfunctional “leadership” as a result.
I reluctantly stopped attending a few years ago. Attending churches like this made me less loving, less powerful, more anxious and confused… I believe this kind of “discipleship” is not just disappointing or unfortunate but truly harmful. I’m still looking for a community that loves the way God loves.
My zeal for reform is borne out of love for the many brothers and sisters like you, wandering in the wilderness, so thank you for sharing!
My family has spent ten years in the desert looking, but God has lead us to a church that is much healthier this past year. It wasn't my doing, and I won't pretend that He always gives us such blessings, so I just want to encourage you to persevere in growing in love of God and neighbor, not giving in to cynicism or despondency. HE is faithful even when His servants aren't!
Thank you for this encouragement. Definitely feeling like a wilderness, which part of me feels awful for saying (there are so many churches and Christians around, who am I to call it that). But I'm happy to be in company with other sojourners, even if separated by time and space :)
Your humility and gratitude will serve you well along the way!
Almost every way I try to put this sounds half right, at best, but don't feel like where you go or don't go expresses tacit judgement. It's hard enough to bear one's own burdens and those of others that we need not attempt to bear second order burdens of anxiety about how our burdens might burden others.
I am honored to be on this same road with such goodly pilgrims!
“second order burdens of anxiety about how our burdens might burden others” 😂 very much what I’m on the path of releasing these days! Definitely allows for a lighter (maybe even sustainably tolerable) yoke.
The difference between critique and criticism is that criticsm’s only goal is to tear down and replace, whereas critique attempts to build up something into a better state. This was a very useful and helpful critique.
I happen to think that the underlying critique is that the American Protestant tradition changed theology into an act of knowledge instead of an act of faith. Faith is a virtue that brings a state of communion, whereas knowledge is a form of power that sets one above the thing that it studies. Knowledge is important, but it is something of a shadow virtue - it’s bad when it replaces the light virtues. (Knowing your wife means more than than knowing facts about her, but you also cannot truly know her without gaining facts along the way)
Sidenote: I tend to think of the Bible as the cornerstone of cosmology. It isn’t the whole foundation, but it sets the rest of the foundation in order. It gives us a story that fractals out and touches things that we experience. It is not an extended encyclopedia that gives us all the cosmological info we need.
I appreciated this one, a lot.
PS you can’t fault baptists for rebaptizing tho. It’s in the name. 😂
One of the funnier black comedy moments in the Reformation was when Magisterial Reformers drowned Anabaptists while saying, in paraphrase, "since you like to baptize so much, here's a third!"
Baptists are still a little cranky about it, but the historical record makes that understandable.
Anybody who doesn't agree with you about the nature of Scripture being more akin to a key than a blueprint has a lot of explaining to do about how long it took to get the cannon.
Good discussion. A friend of mine has made some of these complaints before (though not as many, and not as specific). His response is that he's contemplating moving to a Simple Church / house church. For my part, I don't think I really mind the expository model (in the context of a church that also gets together for Bible studies and community groups), except perhaps what you call "Every passage is the Gospel." In my mind, I call this "Every Sunday is Easter."
But then I grew up in a Mainline church that NEVER preached the Gospel, such that I didn't understand what the Gospel was, or what the whole deal was with Jesus, until college, despite having heard so many sermons. I think I'd rather my kids hear the Gospel too much rather than not enough, once they're old enough to sit with us for the sermon. You didn't really mention the Mainlines, but for those who have left the Mainlines (which at this moment in time is a LOT of churchgoing evangelicals), I don't think I'm unusual in having a very conscious desire for my church to not "go the way of the Mainlines."
There's also an issue in that in a growing church, the sermon needs to appeal to those who attend church seldom, and who might be visitors. There's a challenge in trying to appeal to both visitors and long-time members. Again, I think the way many churches do it is to make the sermon more visitor-friendly and have Bible studies, community groups, or small groups for members, which perhaps should be more directed towards the topics you mention.
It also seems that a lot of what you're discussing here implies a smaller church. The idea of audience response, for example (I'm assuming we're talking about more than an "Amen" from the back). Which takes me back again, to my friend and his idea of moving to a house church.
Thanks, Thomas! Just wanted to point out that King Laugh replied to you in a separate comment.
Sometimes my age and the vicissitudes of the app conspire to foil my attempts to respond. 🤪 Thanks, Joel!