Idiocracy, mindless,whatever...

I recently posted about the Christian Church, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox, which New York City is refusing to allow to be rebuilt. I named the leadership of that City the Idiocracy. There is no such word I guess, but there should be. My spell checker goes nuts every time I type it. I think we all know that those in charge on Manhattan Island today have somehow let the stuff that is supposed to be between their ears leak out: at least that appears to be what has happened.

This is not news, this kind of thing happened before. (There must be something wrong with the water on the Island). Gates of Vienna told me about it this morning:

Past as Prologue, 55 years ago? — Elegant statue of Muhammad “quietly” removed from the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse on Madison Square, New York City in 1955, when seven feckless appellate judges, “encouraged” by the US State Department, needlessly submitted to Islamic supremacist dictates regarding “Tawsir,” or statuary.
*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Mindless, craven cultural relativism — sadly pervasive in 2010 — has led NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg to capitulate to Islamic supremacism and support the odious Ground Zero mosque projectof the cultural jihadist Imam Faisal Rauf, and his coterie. The rather witless Bloomberg, of course, cynically recasts his moral and intellectual cretinism as championing bedrock American values, notably freedom of religion. However, the ultimately self-destructive Islamic correctness we are witnessing vis a vis the Ground Zero mosque, may be an endemic phenomenon amongst Manhattan elites, dating back to at least 1955.

Ecclesiastes says: (Eccl 1:9) "...and there is no new thing under the Sun." And Edmund Burke said, "those who do not know history are destined to repeat it." So, as much as I hate to see it happening the Bible and Burke both confirm we are going to watch a Mosque be built where there should be a very large, prominent, Christian Cathedral. I think we have all gone nuts!

Concern for the Church

I visited Australia a couple of years ago. Other than the obvious difference in landscape one of the major differences I noticed was the apparent lack of churches. I didn't survey for numbers, but here in the states we seem to have as many churches as we do gas stations. It feels like there is one on every corner, not so in Australia. In fact, I noticed the difference in church numbers more readily there because there appeared to be so few in comparison.

Pastor, teacher, Rowland Croucher who is Australian, has written a good article (here) about the apparent demise of churches in Australia by beginning with some statistics from the states.

According to the latest set of figures for Baptists in the Garden State, not everything is rosy:

* Two thirds of our churches are plateaued
* Just nineteen churches accounted for more than half the baptisms last year “Six churches accounted for just on one third of the total baptisms
* More than 40% of our churches baptised no one
* We are more adept at roll revisions than roll additions

My own church seems to be in a unique situation considering the numbers above. We baptize new believers regularly, but our actual growth seems to be stagnating. For each new believer we loose one or two for various reasons. Part of this is due to economic conditions as folks must move for employment reasons, but I sense a larger part of the stagnation is due to "church-hopping." I know of several young families who have moved to nearby churches for no other reason than someone hurt their feelings. When that happens I wonder why it is we seem unable to bring these folks to Christian maturity. Life happens, people are people, feelings get hurt - get over it.

I'm beginning to wonder if there are not a lot more "goats" among the "sheep" than we care to admit. We don't like to think along these lines because we have so much invested in convincing new converts and older members as well, that all they have to do is believe without teaching them that that belief carries with it certain obligations to the One we believe in.

Croucher's article does not have the sense I have just given but I think in the back of his mind he might agree. He goes on to say;

What is even more concerning is the growing trend reported in many churches: as much as one third of the regulars will be absent on any given Sunday making communication difficult and continuity in preaching and teaching almost impossible. The point is that the local congregation is not seen as the place to be. Worship simply does not belong as a priority activity.

If "worship is not a priority" among a given congregation there is obviously something drastically wrong with our labeling as saved those who are really just looking for temporary relief from some immediate personal problem.

Perhaps we need to seriously consider actually reading what Scripture says about salvation and forget all the gimmicks that have been passed down to us the way "to win the lost."

The Shack - Again

One again the book The Shack seems to be on the minds of "Christians," or at least the minds of the Oprah-like spirituality seekers. P.J. Cockrell said this about it: "...its success proves not how much this country loves religion but how far from mainstream faith the nation’s aspirations have shifted."

I couldn't agree more. The sad part of this whole mess is how many I know of in my church who believe the book to be uplifting and good. Whatever happened to discernment?

Towzer On Doing Church

Sometimes I have problems with what I see in church. Apparently I'm not the only one. A.W. Towzer had this to say:

We of the nonliturgical churches tend to look with some disdain upon those churches that follow a carefully prescribed form of service, and certainly there must be a good deal in such services that has little or no meaning for the average participant—this not because it is carefully prescribed but because the average participant is what he is. But I have observed that our familiar impromptu service, planned by the leader twenty minutes before, often tends to follow a ragged and tired order almost as standardized as the mass. The liturgical service is at least beautiful; ours is often ugly. Theirs has been carefully worked out through the centuries to capture as much of beauty as possible and to preserve a spirit of reverence among the worshipers. Ours is often an off-the-cuff makeshift with nothing to recommend it. Its so-called liberty is often not liberty at all but sheer slovenliness.—God Tells the Man Who Cares.

From time to time I've mentioned to my church leadership that a more formal structured kind of Worship service might be more appropriate. Needless to say my suggestions have not been appreciated. Oh well, I'll keep trying. Who knows, perhaps someday others may agree.

Progressive Theology

I can't remember where I got this but it is appropriate for so much that goes on in "church" today.

Worshiping in Song

Pastor Doug Wilson's Church is Moscow, Idaho. Most people may know him from his televised debates with the atheist Christopher Hitchens. Pastor Wilson's church obviously loves to sing. Watch this video to see a church truly worshiping God through song. You can read about the setup by clicking here.

O Sing a New Song to the Lord from Daniel Foucachon on Vimeo.

Music and relevance

Dr. Gene Veith has made some very important comments about the state of music in the United States. Sorry to say, I fear his forray into this subject is too late. Even the conservative Baptist Church I attend, has allowed the camel, so to speak, to get his nose under the tent flap. We have gone to what is called "blended" worship. We sing the standard Baptist hymns with the exception of one song, each Sunday morning. That song/chorus is accompanied by a video and sound track, and is a modern style "chorus." Our music director does his best to keep these scripturally based, but as with anything commercial, there are some that might be a little off track. The purpose for our doing this is to give the "young people" something that is supposed to seem more relevant to them.

What Dr. Veith has suggested is something I have known but did not have the will to talk about. It is the fact that whether we realize it or not, we are contributing to the dumbing-down of our membership by getting involved in these culturally initiated attempts at relevance. God did not call us to be relevant. He called us to take the good news of the gospel to a world that would hate us for it. We can't take the world the gospel if we are so lazy we do not want to retain structural church content that has served "the Church" for centuries. Proverbs 1:21 says, "How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?"

Fools hate knowledge and it is no more evident than through the simplistic jingoes we now sing for choruses. Dr. Veith says:

But that artists have to scale back their talent in order to achieve commercial success is a sobering thought. It makes sense: Complex artistic performances–in whatever genre, including popular ones such as rock and country–will move us into the realm of “high culture.” It requires knowledge, experience, and taste for an audience to appreciate. “Pop culture” has to be simpler and more homogenized to appeal to a mass commercial audience.

"High culture...requires knowledge, experience and taste...." We do not help our young people by feeding them more of what they feed on 24/7 in the way of music. We feed our young and ourselves by singing, playing, and repeating psalms, hymns, and worship music written about God, not about what we are doing for God. Most of the choruses we sing are ditties telling God how we "feel," what "we" are doing in the way of worship, etc. Our focus in worship should be about what God has done, not what we have done or will do for Him.

Veith goes on to say, "...this strikes me as a dysfunction and as a violation of vocation." Dr. Veith is absolutely correct. It is a violation of vocation to capitulate to the desires of sinful men. Vocation (a word we use instead of calling) is God ordained, in that if we pursue our gifts in the way He desires, God will usually place us in a work situation that compliments us, and from which we will be better able to witness about Him. If we do not pursue our vocation using our gifts to the best of our abilities, we begin to lose the effectiveness God intended for us to have. Musicians, nor anyone else, should ever be required to give less than their best just for "comercial" success, or to "be relevant." This is especially true for people serving in church.

A good example of what happens when we try to be relevant, is people begin to shop for churches like they do shirts at the mall. Our church recently lost a couple because they "didn't like" the music. That we preach the gospel apparently doesn't matter to them. Their unspoken complaint is that we were not feeding their ego's and the "entertainment" we provided just didn't make them "feel" good.

Every Christian should make it a point, all day every day, to do whatever is necessary to gain just a little more knowledge, and perform his tasks just a little bit better. I can only imagine what kind of nation we would have today if Christians had been following that simple formula for the past 200+ years.

Whether music, preaching, teaching, or participating in Worship we should always and in everway give our best. After all, these endeavors are supposed to about God, and not about us.