A Great Article On The Perils of “Wannabe Cool” Christianity

Brett McCracken writing in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal warns of the perils of “wannabe cool” Christianity. He reports that as many as 70% of Protestants between the ages of 18-22 are “pouring out of their churches, never to return” because of trends that have Americanized Christianity’s congregations scrambling to stay ahead of the relevance curve and sustain the cool, hip, and relevant image that place gimmick above Gospel. He writes:

Statistics like these have created something of a mania in recent years, as baby-boomer evangelical leaders frantically assess what they have done wrong (why didn't megachurches work to attract youth in the long term?) and scramble to figure out a plan to keep young members engaged in the life of the church.

Increasingly, the "plan" has taken the form of a total image overhaul, where efforts are made to rebrand Christianity as hip, countercultural, relevant. As a result, in the early 2000s, we got something called "the emerging church"—a sort of postmodern stab at an evangelical reform movement. Perhaps because it was too "let's rethink everything" radical, it fizzled quickly. But the impulse behind it—to rehabilitate Christianity's image and make it "cool"—remains.

Mr. McCracken goes on to list several of the techniques that pop evangelicalism seems to use in attempt to be cool such as using Stephen Colbert or Lady Gaga references in sermons, screening R rated movies (this is especially prevalent during the summer months! And with the lack of quality movies coming out of Hollywood, or Vancouver for that matter, some congregations even have resorted to sermon series on movies that are up to five and six years old… which could be relevant I guess if you just woke up from a coma!), holding worship services at hip nightclubs, or having worship experiences at an iCampus where the participation is of a virtual nature.

Mr. McCracken also hits the emergent church’s postmodern, lets “rebrand” the church as an attempt to remake Christianity cool pretty hard and states the emergent movement has fizzled out. McCracken’s notes that the emergent movement’s ideas and impulses to “rehabilitate” Christianity are still alive and well even if the movement has fizzled out. I would argue with Mr. McCracken that the emergent church has fizzled out and say that it’s leaders, McLaren, Sweet, Bell, Pagitt Jones, Kimball (who the LCMS has invited to teach church workers who focus on youth ministry) and others are actually bigger than ever. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that the same practices (think Roman Catholic monastic practices from before the Protestant Reformation and desert father mysticism) encouraged and promoted by so many the emergent leaders are now being taught in evangelical and Anglican churches as well Lutheran churches in the LCMS! Just because the movement’s leaders keep moving the target doesn’t mean the movement’s dead or has fizzled out.

Mr. McCracken also points out that the most popular “and arguably the most unseemly” method of trying to stay “wannabe cool” is to just try to be as shocking as possible, with the most popular tactic being a focus on sex. Mr. McCracken is not exaggerating or using hyperbole to make his point! There is not a week that goes by where there isn’t a sermon series on sex supplanting the preaching of repentance and the forgiveness of sins. Don’t believe me or Mr. McCracken? Well then, just Google the words sex and sermon series and watch how many hits pop up! If you are so inclined to indulge in an adult beverage, you might just want to pour yourself a stiff one… you’ll see what I mean, trust me.

Mr. McCracken supports his argument by quoting author David Wells from his book “The Courage To Be Protestant”:

"The born-again, marketing church has calculated that unless it makes deep, serious cultural adaptations, it will go out of business, especially with the younger generations. What it has not considered carefully enough is that it may well be putting itself out of business with God.

"And the further irony, is that the younger generations who are less impressed by whiz-bang technology, who often see through what is slick and glitzy, and who have been on the receiving end of enough marketing to nauseate them, are as likely to walk away from these oh-so-relevant churches as to walk into them."

Mr. McCracken concludes his article:

If the evangelical Christian leadership thinks that "cool Christianity" is a sustainable path forward, they are severely mistaken. As a twentysomething, I can say with confidence that when it comes to church, we don't want cool as much as we want real.

If we are interested in Christianity in any sort of serious way, it is not because it's easy or trendy or popular. It's because Jesus himself is appealing, and what he says rings true. It's because the world we inhabit is utterly phony, ephemeral, narcissistic, image-obsessed and sex-drenched—and we want an alternative. It's not because we want more of the same.

So does Brett McCracken’s article word of warning of those of us who call ourselves confessing Lutherans? Oh heck yeah! As long as we keep looking to consultants and marketing gurus who tell us play secular music in our worship service so as to not scare away the unchurched seeker, put up billboards claiming to be from Satan that state he hates our goofy church, or fall victim to the “we need to talk about sex because nobody in the church ever talks about sex” bug that plague so many seeker sensitive churches in Americanized Christianity, then if we have any sense at all about us we had better hear Brett McCracken’s warning loud and clear.

The Festival Of The Blessing Of The Blessed Internet Ready Mobile Devices

The Times is reporting that in an effort to be all things to all people Canon David Parrott blessed laptops and cell phones placed on the altar of St Lawrence Jewry Church of London on Monday.

I looked in my Treasury of Daily Prayer this morning and I can’t find the Festival of the Blessing of the Blessed Internet Ready Mobile Devices anywhere.

What’s up with that? Have we conceded the tech savvy seeker demographic to the emergent church or the Unitarians. Don't we love the children of the iPod and netbook enough to provide the rubrics and rites necessary to reach out to them in a manner that is relevant? Are we so inward looking that we don’t include the Festival of the Blessing of the Blessed Internet Ready Mobile Devices in our devotional materials like TDP?

Thoughts On A Thesis Of Worship(?)

The following is what I sent to a friend of mine after he emailed me the Theses on Worship issued by the Council of Presidents and asked for my ever so humble opinion (I actually hadn’t seen them myself until Monday as I’ve been pretty busy with matters outside and off of the interweb):

While I have a love for theology I’m certainly not a trained theologian. I’m also by no means a wordsmith or anything approaching a good communicator. That being said; this document is a convoluted mess that a council of trained theologians should be embarrassed to issue! My thoughts on the thesis are as follows:

· We’ve surrendered the word worship to the evangelical view that worship is something that we do instead a Divine Service where it is God who gives His gifts.
· The liturgy is adiaphoria so we can each do what is right in our own eyes and anyone who says otherwise is only doing so to burden the souls who seek to experience God through their worship. In other words, AC XV 1 should be ignored and we amend AC XV to simply say all liturgy is a human tradition and therefore contrary to the Gospel. AC XXIV should also be amended to reflect the same.
· Our view of the Old testament is now equal to that of the Mormons where the liturgical rites that prefigure temple and synagogue worship were plan A and B and where overturned By Jesus and the apostles and are rightfully ignored and condemned. Our understanding of these rites as essential to understanding the vicarious atonement of Christ at Golgotha is as old fashioned as those dusty sixteenth century confessions and need to condemned.
· Worship is about you and community (read into this the emergent influence and undertones). Your calling is to expand your community so that more folks can understand that worship is about you and community.
· There can be true forms of worship just don’t tell me that there are wrong forms of worship because that will make me sad and I’ll accuse you of burdening my conscience.
· We should talk about the above until everyone agrees with us and can then claim unity.

Well, that’s my thoughts on this nonsensical drivel.

Pastor Klemet Preus also has some things to say about the thesis over at a post on Steadfast Lutherans.

What Kind Of Culture Are You Trying To Build?

I’m a little cranky after reading the latest article from the Reporter, official newspaper of the LC-MS, concerning young adult ministry. Hate to be a negative Nancy but ya’ll know how so persnickety I can get. Here’s the article:

Web site features Synod young adult ministry
A new Web site for young adult ministry in the Synod is up and running at http://www.lcmsyoungadultministry.org.

Sponsored by the Synod's seven-member Young Adult Ministry Advisory Committee, the site offers:
• monthly blog articles by young adults about their ministry, culture, and faith.
• information about servant opportunities, including the committee's first "LEAD" servant event, held May 31-June 5 in New Orleans.
• book reviews about young adult ministry and culture.
• twitter feeds on the activities of the advisory committee.
Jessica Bordeleau, a member of the committee, told Reporter that the group's two-pronged goal is "to enable congregations to build a culture where young adults are able to fully participate in the life of the church, and to enable young adults to become an integral part of the church community, living out their faith in a global context."
Bordeleau is coordinator for Lutheran Youth Fellowship and Young Adult Ministry with LCMS District and Congregational Services -- Youth Ministry.

A virtual note paper-clipped to the site's home page describes the advisory committee and its work, as follows:

"We are a movement of LCMS young adults reaching out to our peers with the love and light of Christ. We know that no top-down institutional program is going to impact the heart of a young adult like a community of believers living out the love of Christ in their daily interactions, ... ready, willing, and able to be servant leaders who point our friends, communities, and world to the love of Christ in relatable, relevant, real ways."

Posted July 29, 2009


First things first… reread Ms.Bordeleau’s comments; “to enable congregations to build a culture where young adults are able to fully participate in the life of the church, and to enable young adults to become an integral part of the church community, living out their faith in a global context."

How the heck do these folks suppose that young people are to become active participants in the life are the church? Is this something that even requires “building cultures” within congregations? How do any of us become active participants in a congregation whether young or aged? The Means of Grace!

Through the Means of Grace, through God’s properly preached Word and through His rightly administered Sacraments we become part of the community of believers past, present, and future. It is the community that always gathers around the voice of her Shepherd, Jesus Christ that should be held up as something to be imitated. Sadly as of late people that gather for Word and Sacrament are mocked as museum keepers only performing a maintenance ministry!

Think I’m just an angry blogger who just doesn't like change? Then read the book of Acts and see how the first Christians grew the Christ’s Church. Read how Peter and Paul created a culture of community by preaching the Gospel and the repentance of sins as commanded by Jesus himself. Read how Stephan did the same and was martyred for living out his faith, albeit deadly, context! Can anybody point me to a single passage of Scripture that states we need to build cultures so that youngsters (or oldsters for that matter!) can feel like they are a part of a community apart from the Means of Grace? Is the phrase “build cultures” even in the Bible? I know my knowledge of Greek is extremely limited and my knowledge of Hebrew is nonexistent so maybe I’m just missing some hidden meaning lost on slack jawed yoke like myself but I can’t find a single English translation that speaks of “building cultures” either! Apart from the Voice, an emergent translation that makes the NIV look like a modern day pedagogic masterpiece, there isn’t a single translation I can find that points to works outside the church; i.e. “faith in a global context."” as something to measured from inside the Church. Yes, the outside world will know Christians by their works but the faithful don’t count these works as their own but rather as fruits of faith. Big difference between the two views!

Which brings me to the second point; this has the emergent church’s theological fingerprints all over it. The emergents nearly always focus on acting within a global community to help the world become the paradise our Lord intended it to be. Of course this misses the problem of the fall into sin entirely as the root cause of the real problem plaguing humanity and if you fail to understand the problem, how the heck can anyone understand Christ’s gifts won at the cross. This is why emergents always point to works and community outside the church catholic!

Now, read the article again; what does the monthly blog feature; articles for young adults about their ministry, their culture, and their faith, information about servant opportunities that they can participate in, and book reviews about their ministry and their culture. Not a lot about Jesus in there is there? Sorta begs the question; exactly what kind culture do you suppose they are trying to build?

Today’s Desert Father Quote Of The Day

Today’s quote of the day comes from one of the desert fathers; Joseph of Panephysis:

Abba Lot went to see Abba Joseph and said to him, “Abba, as far as I can, I say my little office, I fast a little, I pray and meditate, I live in peace and, as far as I can, I purify my thoughts. What else can I do?”

Then the old man stood up and stretched his hands toward heaven. His fingers became like ten lamps of fire and he said to him, “If you want to, you can become all flame.”

–The Sayings of the Desert Fathers, Joseph of Panephysis 7

It’s important to remember that the LCMS has invited many an emergent leader to speak at conferences, symposium, and youth worker retreats to get their input on how to reach out to young people. While the emergent “narrative” is difficult to nail down, one of the distinguishing marks of many emergents is a desire to return to the ways of the desert fathers in an ancient future method of contemplative worship.

While the emergent rejection of the vapid mega church anthropocentrism which more closely resembles self help daytime talk shows, like Dr. Phil or Oprah, should certainly be applauded, sitting around votives talking about how the desert fathers help us understand our part in God’s narrative isn’t exactly edifying either.

It may be tempting to jump on the emergent bandwagon as we watch the pendulum swing away from the destruction wrought by the church growth movement of the last twenty years but if our eyes aren’t fixed on Christ and Him crucified we’re just falling for yet another destructive fad. Sometimes, the enemy of our enemy is still our enemy.

HT: SA

Starbucks Looking At LC-MS Initiatives?

While the LC-MS looks to Starbucks as the new gathering place of the hip faithful, have you ever wondered what it would look like if coffee shops looked more like what we have planned for youth ministers trying to be relevant and seeker sensitive? If so, watch the embedded video that I found over at Anthony Sacramone’s Strange Herring. His post was titled Starbucks as the Epitome of the Emerging Church. Or the Other Way Around. Yep, we can learn a lot from each other.

Dan Kimball Asks “What Would Luther Do?”

After attending a 'symposium" on the emerging church hosted by the youth ministry office of district and congregational services, Dan Kimball, author of They Like Jesus But Not The Church, asked these hypothetical questions:

In seriously pondering the scenario, with many younger Lutheran leaders at this symposium andseeing their energy and passion - what if a 29 year old young and zealous Martin Luther was alive today passionate about having young adults know Jesus and the gospel:

What would be the theological issues would be his concerns and what he would be
taking stands for (or against) in today's current theologically diverse landscape?

Would he write music as he did then using the cultural music genres of his day (he wrote
classic hymns such A Mighty Fortress is our God)? Would we see Martin Luther hip hop
worship songs? Or Martin Luther rock worship songs? Would he listen to mainly
contemporary Christian pop worship music on his iPod?

Would he find local pubs and as part of his ministry hold "Theology pubs" and drink beer
with people while discussing theological topics? (It is common knowledge he did like beer).

If Martin Luther was a youth pastor today, where would he be getting in trouble in his church? What changes would be want to make to the average church if he was a 29 year old young pastor going into the average church in today's culture?

Would Luther change the lay out of a church meeting place and take out the pews and when he preached he wouldn't want to preach from behind those large pulpits in some churches?

Would a 29 year old Luther wear a suit when preaching in today's culture? Would he ever wear a robe? Would he wear jeans in Sunday church meetings?

If he was a youth pastor, would he be on staff at John MacArthur's church? Would he cause trouble there or fit in there? Would be on staff at Mars Hill Seattle or Mars Hill Grand Rapids and fit in one of them? Where would he choose to go to seminary today?

Would Luther be taken seriously only being in his late 20's to make major change in
established churches today? Would his innovation and desire to make the changes
needed to communicate the gospel in our culture today be stifled and not listened to by
senior pastors and elders at the local church he would be serving at?

Would he stay in the Lutheran denomination?

Interesting things to ponder. We can never know what would happen and so much of today's
church world was shaped by some of his actions and challenges to the existing church of his
time. But trying to think of him alive today at age 29, and as a youth or young adult leader in a church - what would he do?

Now Mr. Kimball can ponder all he wants to, that’s fine and dandy with me. But wouldn’t it be nice to actually have an answer for these questions? Well, as Professor Farnsworth likes to say, “good news everyone!” we already have an answer. Reverend Larry Beane has a post that answers these questions for Mr. Dan Kimball and explaines how Dr. Luther handled an emergent leader of the reformation era; Andreas Karlstadt. If you are unfamiliar with how Luther dealt with Schwärmerei, you're in for a treat.

I was actually writing a post on this very subject to answer two anonymous commentors who thought the mission of the Church is more important than the message. Hint, hint, they cant be separated! Enjoy Pastor Beane’s history lesson and learn for yourself that there is absolutely nothing new that hasn’t been tried before.

(Luther dealt with this in his LETTER TO THE CHRISTIANS AT STRASSBURG IN OPPOSITION TO THE FANATIC SPIRIT. It took me a couple of weeks to find what I was looking for which is why my post is so late. All the better that somebody as learned as Pastor Beane got to the topic first!)

Emerging Without A Mirror

Dan Kimball, emergent church leader extraordinaire spoke a few days ago to those who want to wish lead our youth at a "Symposium" entitled "Emerging from what?: Exploring Ministry With Young Adults". (before anyone jumps down my throat, symposium is in quotation marks because that is how Dan Kimball described it, not me!) Kimball was invited by Terry Dittmer, who heads youth ministry for the LCMS, to help us understand why so many of our children leave the church the first chance they get to.

So, we turn to Kimball, the author of They Like Jesus But Not The Church, to help us maybe understand how we can look to the emergent church so as to become more attractive by being culturally relevant in today’s society and thereby retain youth. Of course, we don’t ask ourselves why, with mega churches like Willow Creek admitting that they are losing members after only three or so years because of spiritual starvation due to vapid preaching, would we chase after those who by their own admission, don’t like church.

Instead, we should be asking ourselves this; are we, just like the good folks up at Willow Creek, the ones to blame? I would say absolutely yes.

We run around and repeat to everyone the one verse everybody already knows John 3:16 “For god so love the world that He gave His only begotten son”, and then we stop. We ramble on about the great commission and the priesthood of all believers all the while failing to follow our Lord’s command “and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you.” We are so afraid to teach our children and our youth because we think they either they can’t understand or we think that they might actually have real faith and believe that which God has laid out in Scripture without challenging it like we learned to do in philosophy 101. We water down our theology to the point it’s barely recognizable as spiritual milk much less spiritual food. Why do we scratch our heads and wonder why youth leave when we treat them (and adults) as if they should always be spoon fed the theological equivalent of baby food?

We are afraid to teach them that we are all miserable sinful creatures that by ourselves have no hope of coming to any understanding of God. We are afraid to teach them that we deserve to die by Divine wrath, every one of us. And we are afraid to look at the cross as it shows us what we deserve, to be hung on the cursed tree. We remove Jesus from the cross of Good Friday to repress our own guilt and move right on to Easter and yell out “he is risen indeed” just loud enough for our neighbor to hear but not wanting to say why He was on the cross in the first place.

We make sure that we are “hip” enough to let these youth go off and discover for themselves what Christianity is. We give them song books that are so shallow and vapid even a Buddhist could sing the ditties. Why would we do this? It’s simple, because we tell ourselves real hymnody is just too hard to learn. We listen with heads in nodding agreement to parents who complain when we say Buddhist or atheists will not go to heaven because we don’t want lose an important member of the congregation over such a minor issue.

The reason we lose our youth is that we fail to properly catechize them, that is to say we fail to teach the catholic faith. That is why they leave. When we go out of our way to make ourselves no different than the culture, no matter what the reason (and I’ll hold my tongue here so I can get all you trolls who think that the mission is more important than the message, to stay on message) why would our youth stay? We go so far out of our way to make sure we reach and please everyone, we become a culture that is, by our own design and doing, separate from Christ’s Church. Why would anyone stay for that? They wouldn’t, and they don’t.

And what is our beloved Synod’s solution to retaining young people? We seek out people who don’t like church, and who want to culturally relevant. Well ain’t that just peachy. Lets not teach our youth, let’s follow Willow Creek and their newest mistake, and teach our youth to be self feeders who meditate on deep ponderings like the desert fathers, looking inward to their feelings like modern day Schwärmerei. We don’t need to look the emergent church, we need to take a long look in a mirror.

Move Along Folks, No Rage Here

Two nice individuals who commented on my Giving Emergents Equal Time post seem to believe that I was writing said post in a fit of rage. Nothing could be further from the truth (of course, thinking like an emergent, truth if fluid and irrelevant until properly discussed, so take that for what it’s worth).

If I was writing in a fit of rage I certainly would not have said “I certainly understand emergents rejecting most of what passes itself off as Christian these days. The whole “meeting them (the unchurched) where they are at” and “don’t talk to them about church stuff, we don’t want to scare them away” approach to evangelism makes us sound no different than the local glee club down the street.”

But where I think my two anonymous commenters go wrong is that they place the mission before the message. For many in our beloved synod, evangelism and the gospel can be separated as long as we are reaching out to the unchurched.

This explains how we can embrace those who understanding of what sin is and how we are brought to faith even though their view goes against Scripture and even though we have already spoken against these heresies in our confessions. As long as we are doing something, that the important thing.

What’s missing in the new love fest with the emergents is condemnation of their core belief that by our own will and through meditation, one can by his work and preparations come to faith and have an understanding of God. If this were possible, there’d be millions of Tibetan monks who would be Christian.

Scripture teaches us that faith is not some decision that we are able to make upon serious reflection. Faith only comes to us by grace externally. But even saying that wouldn’t be allowed in the emergent church because that is an absolute and absolutes aren’t allowed. To quote the father of the emergent church Brian McLaren: First of all, when we talk about faith, the word "faith" and the word "certainty," we've got a whole lot of problems there. What do we mean by "certainty"? If I could substitute the word "confidence," I'd say, yes, I think there are things we can be confident about, and those are the things we have to really work with”

I do believe that we should have a conversation with the emergent and that we should tell them that they are dead wrong and that they are leading people away from Christ. But that’s not what we are doing. Instead, we invite them to talk to a youth workers conference to help us understand how to retain youth.

That we invite people who think we can look inward to discover salvation should solicit rage. But with me it does not. It only brings sadness that we run after every fad we find instead of clinging to Christ where faith is sure, and yes, absolute.

Giving Emergents Equal Time?

HAVEN'T YOU EVER WONDERED WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO ALL THE YOUNG ADULTS IN YOUR CHURCH? WHERE HAVE THEY GONE? OR MAYBE THERE JUST AREN'T AS MANY? So how do we connect or reconnect with the post-high school and twenty-thirty-something? How do we reach out to them? YOUTH MINISTRY 2008 will explore the question of young adult ministry. Dr. Joel Lehenbauer, CTCR, will explore the nuances of the so called "emerging church" and what they mean for Lutherans. Dan Kimball, author of The Emerging Church: Vintage Christianity for Emerging Generations, will talk about this movement from the perspective of a practitioner. And Dr. Craig Oldenburg, adjunct faculty at Concordia University Nebraska, will facilitate conversations as to what it all means in reaching new generations for Christ. …You can read a review of Dan Kimball's new book, They Like Jesus But Not the Church by clicking here

Ok, I’ve had this sitting in my inbox for almost a month while trying to decide what exactly to do with it. I’m really at a loss as to how to respond without sounding like I’ve finally blown that last remaining gasket and gone moonbat crazy. That being said, I’ll give it a shot anyways.

First, let’s take a quick look at the review referenced at the end of the emailed paragraph by Rev. Terry Dittmer; as the Director of LCMS Youth Ministry Rev. Dittmer writes:

The new book from Dan Kimball, They Like Jesus But Not the Church, presents many helpful and challenging ideas related to reaching today’s young adult. Is it Lutheran? No. Is it theological? Not necessarily. Is it helpful? I believe it is.

Kimball begins by saying that church workers need to get out of our offices and into the coffee houses, brew houses and other places where young adults gather. For example, Kimball takes his laptop to Starbucks to write his sermons; as the opportunity arises, he engages in conversation with people who he encounters there – mostly young adults.

Where do I even start with that? Does being “helpful”, in spite of the fact that what Dan Kimball confesses is vastly different than what the church catholic and Lutherans specifically, validate and automatically give Kimball a opportunity to address those who would lead our youth? If the answer is yes, then why not invite Tom Cruise to speak on the topic of getting youth to read Scripture just because Scientology has reading programs? Xenu likes it when kids read so therefore it must be helpful and by default Xenu needs to speak, through his called and operating theatons, to our youth workers.

If inviting the vicar of Xenu sounds a little crazy, why in the world do we want to invite somebody who doesn’t like church and wants to start a whole new way to experience God?

Now, surely Rev. Dittmer doesn’t think that the new mission field we need to focus on is outside of the Divine Service does he? No of course not, that’s Kimball who that doesn’t like church. But wait, this is the same Rev. Dittmer who thought it was a good idea to send out in Youth Ministry E-Bulletin Special edition #3 the following:

MINISTRY SHAPES FAITH MORE THAN WORSHIP . . . If you want to influence a teenager's faith, have them serve meals to the homeless or do other hands-on service projects. "Involvement in community service is far more significant to the faith development of teens than involvement in worship," says Michael Sherr, one of the Baylor University researchers who conducted the study (Associated Baptist Press, February 8, 2007).

Wow, that sort of makes the puzzle a little bit clearer. I can certainly see why Rev. Dittmer might think Dan Kimball’s book might have something to say. With the inclusion of the study in the E-Bulletin and his review of the Kimball book I think we can honestly raise the question as to whether or not Rev. Dittmer “likes” the church or not. How the hell are we to put any good construction on the promotion of the promotion of experiential faith achieved outside of Church?

I don’t care if Dan Kimball likes the church or not, that point is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we are giving equal time to somebody who has rejected what Scripture and our Confessions have always stated Church is and where the Church can be found. Just because somebody thinks they discovered a new new way of doing things doesn’t mean they need to speak to a conference of youth workers. That would be like inviting somebody that thinks God is merely a Giant Spaghetti Monster to the conference. Would such a person be Lutheran? No! Is such a view theological? I’m gonna say no to that one as well. Is it helpful? No! Unless of course, you don’t like church and wish to start worshiping a new god at the local Olive Garden on Sunday morning.

But I’m getting off topic and probably need to veer back into this emergent church garbage.

The main reason for my hesitation is that the theologies of these emergent “church” folks are all over the map. The one thing that does seem to unite emergents is their rejection of all things modern and a desire to retreat to a more experiential communion with God outside of Word and Sacrament. What they seem to long for is a reimagined church that redefines Scriptures as relevant narratives with some eastern mysticism thrown in for effect. Meditation and fellowship with the community are the emergent’s pendulum swinging back to hit Protestantism squarely in the head as a response to the pathetic mega-church growth movement that so spiritually starved Americanized Christianity. Seeking to feed themselves, but not looking to Christ to feed them where He said He would, they are doomed to starve as well precisely because they are looking inwardly to themselves as a community.

I certainly understand emergents rejecting most of what passes itself off as Christian these days. The whole “meeting them (the unchurched) where they are at” and “don’t talk to them about church stuff, we don’t want to scare them away” approach to evangelism makes us sound no different than the local glee club down the street. But meeting in a Starbucks or remodeled warehouses with U2 blaring over the speakers as hymnody to talk about how the Jesus narrative fits in with your narrative is just as wrong.

Recently Bill Hybol’s, (from Willow Creek, the Mecca of all things church growth) admitted that all the slick marketing and vapid, fluffy preaching, that looked more like Oprah than it did anything church, didn’t keep people in the pews for more than a couple of years. As it turns out, Willow creek had conducted exit interviews and had known for years that people were leaving because they were spiritually starved. One would think that with that admission that we wouldn’t be jumping on yet another bandwagon. But sadly that seems not be the case. Apparently we are ready to climb into bed with another fad that rejects that we meet Jesus where He says he will meet us, in Word and in Sacrament! Trading fancy plasma TV’s for grunge meditation sessions ain’t going to work either.

When I first read the email my blood pressure spiked because of what I have to listen to in the mission meetings that I attend. All the pieces of a puzzle that I wasn’t looking for fell into place. I remembered all the talk of meeting in coffee shops and finding ways to congregate without walls. What I remember most was the utter lack of any mention of Christ and how he feeds his sheep.

I would propose that the young people that we are getting so upset over losing are leaving our churches for the exact same reason that the people leave Willow Creek, they’re hungry for spiritual food that we withhold from them. In an effort to not offend anyone, we are causing the same starvation that we now complain and gripe about. And leave it to our beloved synod seek a remedy for by looking to the emergent church types. Sorry, but trading khakis for ripped jeans, happy clappy for grunge, and feel good theology for eastern mysticism isn’t going to feed them the spiritual food they crave either. They long to hear the voice of their Shepard and what do we do? We give ‘em another fad. Oh joy.

At one time I would have thought that the emergent church was not even a blip on the radar screen. I now think otherwise. And unfortunately and sadly, our beloved synod agrees.