Expectations, Agenda, and Just Being A Christian

Chaplain Mike over at Internet Monk digs through the archives to find what he's been wanting to say.  His post is about agenda identification, and how he comes to the conclusion that it's OK to just be a Christian.

In my circles, very rarely did I hear the full-blown “God told me to do this” account that was more prevalent in charismatic or pentecostal churches. Still, that was the impression, even in our more theologically conservative groups. Whether it was defining a preaching series, implementing an element of worship that the pastor thought the church should practice, organizing an outreach program, expanding staff, building new facilities, using a certain method of teaching or training in the educational program or youth group, or designing the way the church should be overseen by its leaders, these ministers had a way of making it sound like these were directives from God himself. And the corollary to that, of course, was – if you are a truly dedicated, committed Christian, you will participate. 

Over and over again, I watched as the pastor’s agenda became the church’s agenda, because the pastor was able to persuade people that it was God’s agenda.

As some of the readers of this blog know, I am a fan of the San Francisco Giants baseball team.  Their colors are orange and black.  A promotion the team has put forth over the last several years in known as "Orange Friday."  Each Friday home game, the Giants wear orange jerseys and the fans are encouraged to wear orange articles of clothing or accessories.  Bright orange Afros, painted faces, you name it. 

While a good number of fans take part in this, many, like me, are content to dress just the way I would at any other game.  And even though I'm not much of a fan of these type of fads, I am content with thousands of other fans wearing orange.  Even though it is an official promotion, my lack of participation doesn't provoke others to wonder why I'm not participating in the way they are.  I've never been asked why, nor have I felt the expectation to wear orange.

Can the same be said of how our churches view our participation?  What if I use some other book on child rearing?  Or maybe none at all?  What if I never listen to sermons of the pastor's favorite preacher?  What if I want to have my kids with me in the service as opposed to in Sunday school?  What if I prefer to invite other people over to my house for lunch instead of signing up for the church program that places people on a list to come over to my house for lunch?  Is it OK to just be a Christian?  I hope so.

The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church

The Internet Monk website has long displayed a gadget linking to Rod Rosenbladt's The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church on his New Reformation Press site.  "The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church" is a message to those people who converted to Christianity once upon a time, but who have become either "sad" or "mad" because the church has presented them with an unattainable or impossible paradigm for living the Christian life.  Many people have been broken by their church and its teachings and might have even left the church altogether.  Rosenbladt's message is that these people aren't beyond hope, and gives some basics about the gospel that counter much of the problematic methodology out there.

It can be used by either those broken by the church or by people who disire to minister to them.  I only recently read/watched it, and I think it may be of some good use.  I've seen this link up for a long time now, and it used to cost a few dollars, which is the reason I never used it.  It is now free.  You can either watch it on the site or download an .mp3 or read it in .pdf format, or both as I did.  The video is about 47 minutes long and the PDF is just over 20 pages.  Check out Rod Rosenbladt's The Gospel For Those Broken By The Church.

Blog Spotlight Monday - Internet Monk

I am starting off this weekly series with a big name and one of my special and most influential blogs.  The late Michael Spencer's blog, Internet Monk, or iMonk as it's known.  Michael's subtitle captures a dominant flavor of what iMonk is all about: Dispatches from the Post-Evangelical Wilderness.  You see, Michael came to see over time that mainstream American evangelicalism had abandoned its roots, forsaken its essential doctrines and practices, and put anything and everything in its place - from wacky fads to aberrant teachings - to the detriment of its adherents.  More importantly, Michael noticed over time that the crisis within evangelicalism wreaked havoc with the faiths of professing Christians.  Many of these Christians reluctantly lived with their resulting stunted growth, left evangelicalism for other Christian traditions, left the church altogether, or even left the faith entirely.  His experience with teaching and pastoring helped him see these problems in a clear way, and saw himself as a "post-evangelical" who was living in a wilderness.  His was always a call to point out evangelicalism's problems and to give some measure of comfort to those who knew what the problems were but had no way to solve or act against them. 

Michael started his blog in the early days of internet technology which probably helped lead to its success.  His is one of the top Christian blogs on the net.  Michael enjoyed one of the most diverse audiences on the web, and the legions of commenters over the years bear that out.  He constantly looked to those who held other views and traditions to write for him at iMonk.  Many of evangelicalism's problems could be more easily seen from those outside the circles.  A few years ago, Michael announced that he had a book deal going and that he was going to write about his experiences with the church in a book to be titled Mere Churchianity, a takeoff of CS Lewis' book title Mere Christianity.  Late in 2009, he told his readers that something wasn't right with his health and later revealed that he had terminal cancer.  He passed in April of 2010, after completing his book but before its release.  He left the keeping of his website to several trusted friends, who have continued his legacy for almost a year now.  Although now most of the writing is done by Chaplain Mike Mercer, Jeff Dunn and others, plenty of classic Michael Spencer posts are re-posted to keep his spirit present.

I started reading iMonk after noticing many other blogs that referenced that site.  I admit that often I didn't know what the fuss was about.  I had trouble figuring him and his site out.  But over time, I began to see.  I started commenting occasionally, tossing myself into the huge conversations that erupted after each post.  It was frustrating for a long time and it seemed that I had little to contribute, and received few replies, even from Michael.  But I kept commenting.  Then one day in 2009, I received a personal email from some dude named Michael Spencer.  Well, whaddya know?  I know a guy named Michael Spencer, over at the Internet Monk blog!  What a coincidence.  Then I read the email.  It was from him.  True to the way he was, he made me an offer I couldn't refuse.  For the first time, I am posting his short email in its entirety here:

Steve,

I've been reading your work for a while and I'm a fan. I want you to know that if you ever have anything you'd like to occasionally submit at Internet Monk [dot] com, I'd like to publish it. I'd like to see you have a wider audience. You're a good writer and we're on the same page about a lot of evangelicalism.

If interested, let's talk.

peace

Michael Spencer

It was an opportunity I felt I simply could not pass up.  I managed to get only an introductory guest post to him, which he published in May of 2009, as personal and family problems related to the economy prevented me from putting the time and heart necessary to continue writing occasionally for him before his untimely death.  As I re-read my intro piece, I am struck that my views on certain things have changed or mellowed over even such a short period of time.  All in all, I am greatly thankful for his ministry and wholly endorse Michael Spencer's blog, Internet Monk.

Your Church Is Too Small - and - Mere Churchianity

I've written about how I wanted to review John Armstrong's Your Church Is Too Small and the posthumous publishing of Michael (the Internet Monk) Spencer's Mere Churchianity when I completed them.  Well, I completed them a few weeks ago, and I think that I will do more of a commentary of them than a review, if that makes sense.  I'm sure reviews are available elsewhere, and I definitely wanted to add my own comments.  I'm not sure I'll start these commentaries within the next few weeks, but they should be coming at some point.  Stay tuned.

Mere Churchianity Shipped

I received notice that my new copy of "Mere Churchianity" by Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, has been shipped. I can't wait to read this one, and I emailed Michael before his death that I would review it here on From the Pew. As soon as I read it, I will commence the review.

Two Books Added To The List

There are two books out (or close to being out) that I am looking forward to reading and blogging about. The authors of these books have had a relatively large impact on my thinking and views of Christianity.

The two books are Your Church Is Too Small by John Armstrong (already out), and Mere Churchianity by Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk (coming out in June).

Michael Spencer, aka Internet Monk, 1956-2010

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, has passed away. I'm over a day late in hearing the news as yesterday was a busy day with no internet surfing. I never met Michael, though he's one for whom I would have made the attempt if I were travelling to or near Kentucky. Michael had one of the top read Christian sites on the internet. He was brutally honest about his ideas and feelings about many topics, and wasn't hesitant in the least about stirring the pot that contained the evangelical status quo. He was always an advocate for the marginalized within Christianity; the misunderstood, the neglected, the smoldering wick, the bruised reed.

My journey with him started several years ago as I stumbled across his blog. He was linked to by a few others that I read. At first, I only checked him out occasionally, and often didn't know how to think about him. Some things resonated with me, others were a turn off. Somehow, my connections to his blog from others' links increased, and I became a regular reader.

Not too long afterward, I started commenting on his blog. His comment sections were alive with a cross section of views and opinions. Much sparring and many threads started, Michael often being the one who stirred the comment pot. What I noticed about my comments is that they were rarely replied to by others, and almost never by Michael himself. I felt like a "comment failure" there.

But then one day about a year ago, completely out of the blue, I received an email from Michael. He said he had been reading my work for a while and was a fan of mine. He invited me to submit, if I wished, occasionally to his blog, and he would publish it. He wanted me to have a wider audience, thought I was a good writer, and thought we were on the same page about much of evangelicalism. I created an intro post which he published, but personal issues kept me from putting the finishing touches on a second one. A few months later, Michael was diagnosed with cancer. Then only a few [much too] short months later, he was gone.

Sympathies and prayers to his wife Denise, and his family. I'm hoping in the future to glean from his blog's archives, and I'm certainly planning on getting Michael's soon to be released book, Mere Churchianity. Getting his book would also include reading it and blogging about it. May God rest Michael's soul.

Another iMonk Update; Dying And Knowing It

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, is discontinuing his chemotherapy and is now receiving help from a hospice. The family asks for prayer for Michael to pass with minimal pain and in peace.

We read or hear so often today about people who fight until the end, but not as often about people who accept death willingly, or even embracing it. Of course, there's nothing wrong with fighting for one's life and hoping for a miracle. But I have a good deal of respect - and even admiration - for the person who knows it's coming - soon - prepares for it, expects it, and can receive it. God bless you, Michael Spencer.

iMonk Update

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk has been given six months to a year to live, according to his wife, Denise, in a recent post. His cancer is too advanced and aggressive to expect a remission. He hasn't posted on his blog in a few months now, and I wonder whether he will again.

I must admit that I am fairly speechless about this revelation. I simply don't know what to say. I've never met Michael Spencer, but I have read his blog for several years, and commented there as I got to understand his message. We've had several email exchanges which surrounded a completely unexpected occasion. One day, there was a personal email in my inbox from Michael announcing that he had been reading my blog for a while and was a fan of my writing. He invited me to be a guest blogger at Internet Monk, posting something once a month or so. I was excited and deeply humbled at the same time.

I've only made one post there, as my own situation over this last year just hadn't seemed to allow that certain "groove" necessary for me to be in to write a second one. I started a few things, but never finished. So it is with a bitter reality - a shocking one - that I received the news. It's like I was on the cusp of entering somebody else's world, yet never making it quite in, then having that world close. Of course, my stake in the matter isn't what's the most important, it's just the only part of it that I've experienced.

I hope nothing but the best for the Spencer family, and short of "that miracle" that probably won't come, I know that he has family and friends that will be able to help him through to the end. Michael's writings have had a pronounced effect on my views of the evangelical church and its people, and I hope to highlight some of that here in the near future.

Individualism Both Allowed and Condemned - Re-Thinking Church Membership (Part 33)

In a recent post, Chaplain Mike Mercer (filling in for ailing Michael Spencer at the Internet Monk) asks some questions after reading evangelical megachurch pastor Rick Warren's article at the Christian Post, titled Following Jesus Means Belonging to a Local Congregation. After identifying Warren's thesis, "When we're called to follow Christ; we're also called to belong to the body of Christ," Mercer notes his idea that pastors today have as one of their biggest hurdles, "it is hard to convince people who attend church to commit themselves to the church family and become members."

Mercer then moves to Warren's placing of blame: '“today’s culture of independent individualism.” As a result, we have many “spiritual orphans who move from one church to another without any identity, accountability or commitment.”' Warren concludes his article with an exhortation:

We must remind those who fill our buildings each Sunday that joining the membership of a local church is the natural next step once they become a child of God. You become a Christian by committing yourself to Christ, but you become a church member by committing yourself to a specific group of believers. The first decision brings salvation; the second brings fellowship.

But then Mercer asks the following questions of Warren's argument:

■It seems, right from the start, that Warren is conceding the point that one can belong to Christ without being a member of the church. Membership in the church
is a second “step” in the Christian life—important but ultimately a matter of choice on the part of the individual Christian. Is this disjunction between belonging to Christ and being a member of the church biblically and theologically sound?
■To what extent is “independent individualism” not just a cultural problem, but also an outgrowth of the kind of gospel we preach and the kind of churches we create in evangelicalism?
■Couldn’t one logically conclude from this approach that, in the final analysis, for evangelicals the church, though important, is ultimately optional?

Mercer's last statement here has been a point of mine all along in this series. The "formal membership" systems that many churches construct ultimately place the duty of becoming members in the hands of the sheep. The two class system both allows the so-called individualistic non-member status to exist, and condemns it at the same time. If a house divided against itself cannot stand, what does this say about the membership system that many churches construct? I think it creates the very thing it is designed to prevent.

There is also the assumption that fully committed Christians who obey all the commands of God with regard to church and yet who have not signed on some dotted line somewhere are somehow deficient and neglectful of God's commands. Warren contradicts himself in his last statement. Committing yourself to a group of believers and joining the membership are two different things. One can do the former without doing the latter. But since membership is something that God does, and not we ourselves, members in God's eyes can be wrongly labeled non-members in man's eyes. This is the problem with the membership that so many men have created. Telling people that they're wrong by simply obeying God isn't going to get everybody to sign on the dotted line, and isn't a very good tactic.

Read the entire series here.

Part 32 ... Part 34

Internet Monk Update

As some of you may know, Michael Spencer (aka the Internet Monk) has been battling cancer. Today he posted an update on his condition. Pray for a complete recovery, and being able to make things work in the meantime.

Christmas Night Potpourri

Dedicated to my biggest Friday Night Potpourri fan, my sister-in-law, who can't bear a Saturday morning at the laptop without seeing a new posting:

• I got a lump of coal in my stocking this Christmas. From my mother-in-law. It was a Lump of Coal dark holiday stout. Mmmmm.
• Tons of kids around and about this holiday season; no major altercations. Double plus good.
• While driving in the car this week, our oldest noticed the bright red leaves of many silver maple trees have completely fallen off of one side of the tree and not the other. I noticed that too at the park while jogging. Wind? Sun?
• Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk (iMonk for short) is ill and has a possibility, as far as I can tell, of cancer. Please pray for him. My prayers are with Michael and his family. He asked me to be a guest blogger on his blog earlier this year, and with what we've been experiencing, I've only made one post. The more important thing is obvious.
• Jogging in the park yesterday in freezing weather, the grass was white with frost, and the Olympic size pool was giving off a huge plume of steam. People who swim in this weather are crazy. And probably have green hair.
• It was good to spend much more time this year with nieces and nephews than normal.
• What should I try to do for a living? Architecture is pretty dead, and my other job leads haven't materialized. Any serious suggestions are welcome.
• What Christmas is all about.

iMonk on The Evangelical Liturgy

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, is doing at least a 23 part series on evangelical liturgy. At the time of this post, he's at part 5. He's bringing years of observation and his own take to the table here. It will be interesting to me to hear this from somebody with a big past in Southern Baptist circles. He's had other influences too, but I see this already shaping up as at least a description of what standard evangelicals have done in church. Recommended reading.

Now Contributing to iMonk Blog

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk - or iMonk for short - has introduced me as an occasional contributor to his blog InternetMonk.com. Michael's blog is top rate and is one of the most read Christian blogs on the internet. He writes on very diverse and often controversial topics from a large expanse that he terms "the post-evangelical wilderness." His readers are even more diverse than his blog archives, as the comments sections attest.

It is both humbling and an honor to contribute to Michael's blog. If you're not already a regular reader of his, check him out more often.

Solomon and Luther: Don't Be Too Righteous

"Do not be excessively righteous, and do not be overly wise. Why should you ruin yourself?" -Ecclesiastes 7:16

Michael Spencer, the Internet Monk, writes a post around a quote of Martin Luther on the remedy for nagging legalisms that plague us. Luther's quote:

“Whenever the devil harasses you, seek the company of men or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. So when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to.” -Martin Luther

Adding CS Lewis into the mix, iMonk continues:

"But Lewis (and Luther) were especially aware of the spiritual dangers of trying to not sin. Yes…trying to not sin. Since encouraging people to try and not sin is a major occupation of confused evangelicalism, Luther sounds strange."

Indeed.

Internet Monk Link Added

I'm surprised I didn't already do this, but I'm adding a link to my blogroll for the Internet Monk, or iMonk for short. Michael Spencer is the Internet Monk, a "Southern Baptist" preacher, evangelist, thinker, apologist, etc. He lives in southern Kentucky. I put the term "Southern Baptist" in quotes because although he is a Southern Baptist, he often seriously questions many things that the SBC does and has become. I like him because he stirs the pot and even if I sharply disagree with him, at least he gets people thinking about things and welcomes differing views.

Re-Thinking Church Membership (Part 26) Christendom And A Dangerous Open-Door Church Policy

Racking my brain over the recent posts (here and here) made at Internet Monk regarding church membership, I'm going here to combine my thoughts with another concept I have yet to write about: the relationship of church to its surrounding culture. This might explain why so many churches today feel the need to resort to so many extra-biblical methods in constructing man-made church membership systems.

Hearkening back to parts 14, 15 and 17 of this series where I commented on Part 2 of Pulpit Magazine's article on church membership where elders at Grace Community Church admit that they don't know who to shepherd, I quote the following:

Elders can shepherd the people and give an account to God for their spiritual well-being only if they know who they are; they can provide oversight only if they know those for whom they are responsible; and they can fulfill their duty to shepherd the flock only if they know who is part of the flock and who is not.

My sense is that many church leaders are simply overwhelmed by the size of their congregations and feel the need to resort to methods that reduce their responsibility to smaller numbers. They make up extra-biblical requirements such as giving ascent to sectarian confessions or making covenants with each other (as if there were anything to covenant about that isn't already included in the New Covenant of Christ's blood). But, looking at several scenarios that describe a church's relation to its culture might shed some light.

Scenario 1: Small churches in a culture hostile to Christianity (such as the first several centuries A.D. in the Roman Empire, or behind Iron Curtain communism of the 20th century, or within communist China or North Korea today, or in any number of Muslim societies) tend to have "closed-door" policies and meet in secret out of fear of persecution. Secret symbols (such as the fish), or sayings are used to denote real Christians before meeting with them. Great care must be taken in not revealing the existence of church meetings simply out of concern for the lives or property of others. Church leaders know who are theirs to disciple, and they know them intimately.

Scenario 2: Churches that exist in societies that are dominated by Christianity, i.e. "Christendom" (such as the middle ages with the Roman church, many post-Reformation protestant regions, Puritan New England or the Antebellum South, or even many regions within America during its first several hundred years, or even the synagogues of ancient Israel) tend to have "open-door" policies and meet in buildings with open doors, completely accessible to the general public. Communities are made up of a majority of professing churchgoers, and everybody knows everybody else's business in general. There is little threat of "outsiders" entering in to cause persecution or other problems since everybody in the community is already "on the inside." Church leaders know who are theirs to disciple, and they know them intimately.

Scenario 3: Many churches today exist in a society increasingly disinterested in Christianity and increasingly hostile to the gospel of Christ. Yet they continue with an "open-door" policy. Communities are made up of wildly varying religious beliefs, and churches are infiltrated by all kinds of strange people with greater freedom of mobility and transient lifestyles. Anybody who is a spy for the government or a foreign religion or a pot-stirrer or divisive fool or atheist or unbeliever can enter the doors anonymously at any time and cause havoc. Church leaders struggle with knowing who are theirs to disciple, and fail as a result of having little legitimate control over their congregations. They complain quite a bit about declining spirituality and faithfulness in churches today, but really bring on their own problems by allowing it all in right through their open doors. They therefore resort to draconian legalisms to define what a disciple is. Real Christians who are real Christians can often fail to measure up to their definitions and exactments, and suffer as a result, and are often the ones blamed by frustrated church leaders for their own inability to deal with their flocks.

I'm wondering whether in today's religious climate churches that fit scenario 3 wouldn't be better off with a "closed-door" policy. Church meetings would be private affairs in private homes or buildings, and those who assemble would consist of only those that the shepherds are currently discipling. New converts would come via evangelists or by lay-ministering, but only those new converts would be invited to church meetings. Evangelism wouldn't happen in church to a great number of unbelievers, but out in the world. Church leaders would know who are theirs to disciple, and they would know them intimately.

Part 25 . . . . . . . . Part 27

Re-Thinking Church Membership (Part 25) Internet Monk Series

Michael Spencer, aka the Internet Monk, or iMonk for short, has started an at least two post series on church membership. His first post is an interview with Jonathan Leeman with 9 Marks Ministries. I am excited about his series, but am not holding my breath in expectation of something new and refreshing from the evangelical community.

Spencer states a basic concern for his series: "Is the concept of local church membership viable- even essential- today or should it be abandoned?"

My answer to his question would be this: The concept of local church membership as described by the bible is both viable and essential - today and always - and should never be abandoned, but the concept of "formal" church membership as put forth by many churches and their pastors today should be abandoned as quickly as possible.

Part 24 . . . . . . . . Part 26

That God Shaped Void

Every now and then I want to write on a very specific thing I've been thinking about, only to come across somebody else who does first. This in turn triggers my post. Today I came across a post from Michael Spencer, the Internet Monk (aka iMonk), about the idea of the God shaped void. I've heard it said a thousand times in preaching and teaching and in common Christiantalk that there's a God shaped hole in everyone's heart, and that unbelievers fill it with everything else except God. They sense the void, and are extremely unhappy with life. Their gluttonous appetite for superficial things leads them to mask their despair with vain materialism. What I didn't know was that the original idea supposedly came from St. Augustine. The iMonk's post contains a link to his older post on this.

A few months ago I started thinking about this, since I heard the God shaped hole thing somewhere, and I realized that in general, unbelievers were capable of being quite happy and fulfilled with life. Many of them don't live in despair and generally aren't clutching at anything and everything to try to add meaning to their lives. I also saw an unbeliever comment on a Christian's blog somewhere a few months ago about his unbelief or atheism (or whatever), and other Christians' replies to him that he was leading a meaningless life and was depressed about it. He replied with incredulity that others could possibly know this, and their reply was that he was lying to himself because they knew better!

The Scriptures say many things about men's hearts and thoughts, but they also say much about the happiness and contentment of nonbelievers. Luke 16 (the rich man and Lazarus) describes the rich man "gaily living in splendor every day." Gaily living? How was this man living gaily as opposed to in superficial pretense? David opines in Psalm 73 about his witnessing of the wicked being at ease and prospering while he himself is stricken and afflicted. There are many other examples of unbelievers finding joy in earthly things. They trust in money and fame and worldly achievements. Why is it thought that these things can't bring joy? It seems to me that often we don't try to understand those around us and simply rely upon some incomplete interpretation from our pet bible teachers. Unbelievers often see through this and discount our witness, while we think it's all their fault all along why they don't listen to us.