iMonk on The Evangelical Circus

Posted byChaplainmikePosted iniMonk 101, Michael Spencer

“Evangelical” in the historic sense of the term—adhering to a faith that centers on Christ and the Gospel—the late Michael Spencer nevertheless became a “Post-Evangelical” with regard to the culture of evangelical practice, especially as it has developed in the U.S. Today we offer some incisive quotes from the Internet Monk on various aspects of what he called, “The Evangelical Circus.”

On Evangelical Media—

I think Jan Crouch’s hair is the darnest thing since the Tower of Babel. I think Benny Hinn is sincere, but probably unstable. I think T.D. Jakes is preaching gnosticism. TBN in general convinces me television is utterly incompatible with Christianity. Most Contemporary Christian music makes me wish I was wandering in the Antarctic wastes. A tour through the Christian fiction section of my local Christian bookseller reveals enough mediocrity to fill a small country. Christian radio, for the most part, makes NPR look downright intelligent. Evangelical cinema is bad- just plain bad. The best Christian movie ever made- Chariots of Fire- was produced by a Muslim.

Yep, those are my opinions, and as my dad used to say, all of them and fifty cents will get you a cup of coffee. These are my evangelical brethren, and in general, I think their product stinks. I know billions of evangelicals love this stuff, and always will. Evangelicals will soon be building amusement parks, world-wide satellite systems, movie studios and publishing conglomerates. But if the past is a predictor of the future, we’ll just be swimming in an ocean of tacky.

• From “If It Looks Like an Evangelical Skunk…”

On American “Gnosticism”—

…what is called American Christianity is actually some sort of American Gnosticism, a religion of direct human experience with God that has no need of the Bible, the Gospel or Christ and the Cross in the classically Christian sense. We are apparently such basically cool people, that we can get in touch with God our little ol’ selves if we just tune in the right way. Today, we have a Bible that is described as a “love letter,” a Gospel of manipulated and self-generated feelings and experiences (complete with band), and a Christ who is a whispy, feminized, dispenser of hugs and life management principles and no-cost/no discipleship salvation. Of course, this is the appropriate religion for people whose only actual concerns are feeling good about themselves and having it all without feeling guilty. Sinners seeking a remedy for the righteous wrath of God need not look into modern Christianity for any help.

• From “Singing Praise Choruses to the Barbarians at the Gate”

On Evangelicalism’s Hostility toward Confessionalism—

Confessionalism, as I’ll call my strange interest, stands in contrast to the prevailing mood in evangelicalism, which could best be called doctrinal invisibility. Contemporary Christians want to go high-profile in every conceivable way except in saying what they believe. In doctrinal matters, the best most can do is a kind of generic “Jesus is Lord-ism,” and the worst is to declare war on confessional Christians as divisive bigots harming the Body of Christ and driving away seekers. According to the latest reports, my team, though playing respectably, is not winning this contest, and soon we can expect evangelicals to anathematize anyone who insists we endorse the Apostle’s Creed.

…So Christian publishers will market a Joyce Meyer or a T.D. Jakes or a Tommy Tenney or a Rick Joyner or a Benny Hinn to all of evangelicalism with few clues that these teachers have doctrinal deficiencies that would have kept them far from the pulpit of most non-Pentecostal (and some Pentecostal) churches just a generation ago. Once these men have become best-sellers, then the commercial interests dub them as anointed by God and sent by the Spirit with messages all Christians must hear and honor. Those whom the Reformers would have excommunicated (or worse) have become the voices all evangelicalism must listen to. All because we have abandoned confessional Christianity and become “Know Nothings.”

[Church Growth Pragmatists have announced] that doctrine must be the lowest of low-profiles. Seekers don’t want doctrinal preaching. Keep it down in the education program basement for those theological types. Seekers don’t want to be discouraged over issues like morality or theology or church government or leadership. Seekers don’t like anyone being wrong. It all needs to be about a relationship. They want that unconditional love and no-commitment church membership. I can’t help but laugh when I hear that some CGP pastor is wrestling with what to do with all the cohabitating couples who want membership.

Suddenly everything is about attracting people. Worship, teaching, pastoral care, doctrine, church discipline- they have all taken a back seat to the CGP concerns of making people comfortable in church. As a former youth minister, I’ve seen where this is going. Give ’em what they want, and they will want more, until they finally go back out the door they came in.

• From “Those Know-Nothing Christians”

On Bad Theology behind Choosing a Church because of the Music—

Sometime in the last 5 years, the majority of evangelical Church-hunting Christians I know have made the decision about where to go to church based almost solely on music (or “worship” as they perversely call it.) The deciding vote is usually, “We like the worship.” Which means we like CCM, and we like the band, and we like the fact that going to a church service is kind of like a concert, the kids like the music, and it’s the same songs I hear on the radio.

…there is theology all over the place here, and it’s some of the most serious theological nonsense of the bunch.

Scripture hasn’t exactly left the church-shopper without a list to go by. Even with the divergent views on what Scripture teaches about the church, it’s clear that church government, leadership, the sacraments, preaching, teaching, discipleship, doctrine and church support of the family are all areas where scripture gives some guidance of importance to any of us who are picking a church. Yet, I am not aware of any way to read the Bible that places music in such an important place in church life.

Music is part of Christian worship and Christian art. We’re interested- as we ought to be—in how music participates in the life and worship of the church. But there is simply no way- in normal circumstances—to justify music as the deciding factor in church selection. To do so is to betray a consumerist mentality rather than a Biblical worldview.

Theology? The implication is that the Holy Spirit is leading in such a choice. Even more importantly, the message is that music is the important factor in Christian growth and discipleship. My Christian consumerist friends are quite certain that it’s what happens during the 45 minutes of music at their church that will make the greatest different in the life they lead during the following week.

That’s outrageously wrong, and I can’t imagine why evangelicals are tolerating it. The demotion of preaching and the elevation of music is an invasion of the church by a culture that wants less content, less authority and more experience and feeling. Post-modern apologists may make the case that preaching is passe’ (and some forms of it always will be) but preaching as a divinely sanctioned methodology has Biblical theology on its side.

• From “Looney Tunes”

On Being “In Love” with Jesus—

The times, they are a-changin’. We have gone from singing about the overwhelming, faithful, constant, covenant love of Jesus Christ for Christians, to singing about the most changeable, gullible and frothy of human emotions- romantic love. These days, our worship is full of announcing that we are “in love” with Jesus.

If the problem were simply music, I’d leave it alone. Better people than this writer have painfully noted the “God is my girlfriend” bent of modern praise and worship music. In fact, the brilliant people over at Lark News have taken us over the edge into the possibility that Wal-mart might have to ban certain Vineyard worship CDs in the future for their explicit lyrics. The satirical article says “The ground-breaking — some say risqué — album includes edgy worship songs such as “My Lover, My God,” “Touch Me All Over,” “Naked Before You,” “I’ll Do Anything You Want,” “Deeper” and “You Make Me Hot with Desire.” If you think that’s over the top, you aren’t listening to much CCM these days.

…Of course, this is not simply an aspect of church music. Romanticism has become a major aspect of all evangelical spirituality. People are now in a “love relationship” with God. The Bible is a “love letter” from God. The question before every Christian is “Have you fallen in love with Jesus?” Passion, intimacy, desire—these ambiguous terms are everywhere in evangelicalism. Sermons, books, retreats and the general tone of much evangelical Christianity have combined to present Jesus as lover as much as, if not more than, Lord. Our generation believes that romance is the secret to a happy life. Is it any wonder that Christianity is now packaged as romance?

…Romanticism cannot express the essence of the Christian life accurately or Biblically. Its usefulness as a way of describing the Christian life has been greatly exaggerated, and based mostly on a wrong reading of the Song of Solomon. The theme of the Bride of Christ is important in the New Testament, but it never resulted in expressions of romanticism in the life and worship of the church. Instead, images like the bride resulted in higher esteem for the church as a redeemed community, not a more personalized and emotional individual experience for the believer. Romanticism is not a significant Biblical expression of praise, certainly not worthy of becoming a regular part of our worship, prayer and communication of the Gospel. As understood and experienced today, romanticism is a flawed metaphor for delighting in and loving God. It is vastly inferior to scripture’s own description of love for God as seeking our joy in obedience to the Lord. “Come fall in love with Jesus,” is not an invitation to faith that we should endorse or repeat.

• From “In Love with Jesus?”

On Listening to Preaching from a Non-Christian’s Perspective—

Today I listened to the preacher in chapel. Really, really closely for a change.

It probably wasn’t a good idea. See, God is giving me a gift. I’m starting to hear sermons like non-Christians hear them. I’m starting to feel what they feel, and it’s disconcerting.

…The content of the message? I have to admit, listening to it as an unbeliever might, it was so irrelevant I can’t imagine why anyone would listen. It would make sense to Christians, but to anyone else? Would anyone else ever start to find it interesting or worth believing? It was just a way to spend time yacking. Logic, reality, honesty. Not on the radar screen. We’re talking about filler for the weakened mind, and nothing for the serious thinker or seeker.

The real point is always the same: You need to accept Jesus. You need to accept Jesus. Whatever the heck that means. Best I can tell, you tell the preacher that you accept Jesus, and they say you accept Jesus, and from then on you get to tell people that you accepted Jesus. Say some religious things, do some religious things and join the Jesus team. Be one of the bunch that is sitting there nodding.

Perhaps nothing stands out as much as the total submersion of every word and action in the sticky-sweet, sappy overtones of being RIGHT and “You better listen to the guy who is right.” Christians live in this so much they can’t see it. They make absurd, ridiculous, bizarre, almost insane, fairy-tail statements as if they are run of the mill.

…Is this the way it sounds most of the time? Are we really so insulated from real communication that we don’t realize how we come off?

• From “How We Sound to Those Who Don’t Believe”

62 thoughts on “iMonk on The Evangelical Circus”

  1. The use of propaganda is simply a way of talking to ourselves rather than listening to the real world.

    Michael had so many quotable moments. The above was one of them. Sometimes I wonder if after my death, there will be 4 or 5 sentences worth preserving and quoting. Michael seemed to ooze these things….

    Like

  2. The “Ronald Wilson Reagan = 666!” (gotta remember the exclamation point) had some interesting and funny timing. It first surfaced in 1981, right after Reagan’s first Inauguration. Evangelical Buzz since the Election was that Reagan was GOD’s Choice for President who Will Outlaw Abortion, Stop Those Gays and Commies, Restore Our Christian Nation, etc. Basically “One Of Us” rhetoric.

    Either at his Inaguration or shortly afterwards, Reagan said on public record that he was President of the ENTIRE United States, not any single faction or group within it.

    I saw the first “Ronald Wilson Reagan = 666!!!” reference (some sort of End Time Prophecy announcement poster) within a week of that statement going public.

    Like

  3. That’s one of those “It’s Funny Because It’s True” songs. I’m sure the situation in the song has happened enough times IRL that everyone knows somebody in that predicament, even indirectly. (Heard a variant of it just last week.)

    In the book Why Men Stop Going to Church, one of the chapters is about pitching Christ to women as a Cosmic Edward Cullen, the Perfect Boyfriend/Relationship/Husband, and how this (negatively) affects men. At the start of the chapter, the author quotes either a joke or a “weird-but-true” phone call from a man to his wife’s new pastor:

    “Pastor! My just wife left me for another man! His name is Jesus!”

    Like

  6. Forgot all about the rapture and that Ronald Wilson Reagan = 666, too. Guess that leaves me out of that rapture thing!

    Like

  7. While we’re in the irreverant mode, here’s her boyfriend’s take on being Number Two: the chorus from a song by Hayes Carll. They play this on our local community radio station (NOT Christian radio, although they do play a lot of gospel. And my wife hosts a jazz show there too).

    She left me for Jesus, and that just ain’t fair.
    She says that he’s perfect; how could I compare?
    She says I should find him and I’ll know peace at last.
    But if I ever find Jesus I’m kickin’ his ___.

    Available on youtube, but I’m not puttin’ up the link. I’m supposed to be among the elect.

    Like

  9. What do you mean, “die and go to heaven”, Suzanne?

    Don’t you know Christ Is Coming (tomorrow at the latest) and will Rapture us into Heaven without us ever having to die (or have anything bad happen to us personally)! It’s All Gonna Burn — Don’t Be Left Behind!!! “We might not have a 1978! Or even a 1977! Henry Kissenger = 666!”

    And while the Evangelicals are at their circus every Sunday, I’ll be partaking of the Body and Blood at Western-rite Mass. And trying to live whatever life I have left after the Evangelical locusts ate 10-15 years of it.

    Like

  10. For example, one can have a pastor who teaches that there is not a “trinity” but oneness theology but they can be against the most recent medical reform act. But if an another pastor teaches historic Christian faith that is both creedal and confessional but states that the same law is not anti-biblical, that pastor’s program may not remain on the radio.

    Ees Political Matter, Comrades.

    Many years ago, there was this non-fiction book by James Michener (?) titled Bridge at Andau, about the 1956 Hungarian Rebellion and its brutal crushing by the Russians. In one of the later parts of the book, Michener had an interview with some Hungarians who described what it was like to live under the Stalin-era Warsaw Pact. I don’t have the book any more, I can’t find the reference, but the description of living under Marxist-Leninist- Stalinist Progressive Political Consciousness reminded me of nothing so much as IMonk’s descriptions of Culture War Christianity. Only part I remember is “We Marched. Marched for the Rosenbergs. Marched against Imperialism. Marched against Reactionary Capitalism. Always Marching for the Revolution. Always Marching for the Cause.”

    Like

  11. When you live in an echo chamber, don’t be surprised when you start believing your own PR. All of it.

    Outside of TBN, I think this is what happened to Rush Limbaugh (and his wannabe clone Glenn Beck). Believed his own PR for so long he lost any and all sense of humor in the bargain. Reminds me of “the constant, consuming, humorless concentration upon self” Lewis wrote about in the preface to Screwtape Letters, though I’m not sure the context maps across.

    Like

  12. I frankly never have encountered the romantic view of Jesus in the Catholic Church (not that it might not exist in some places). Do you suppose it’s an offshoot of the “Jesus and me” approach in many evangelical churches?

    Probably. This is a latter-day form of Bridal Mysticism, and the “Jesus and Me and nobody else” approach fits right into the “One and Only” romance trope until Christ becomes a fantasy perfect lover in the model of Edward Cullen (sparkle sparkle) or the Hunk on the cover of a Harlequin.

    Anecdote: In the days of Larry Norman, I used to listen to Christian radio and early CCM. One stood out, though I can only remember fragments. It was a love song where a female vocalist was singing to her boyfriend — “You’ll always be My Number Two. Because JEESUS Is Number One in my life, so Second Place will have to do for you.” And it always rubbed me the wrong way.

    I mean, how does that differ from a wife who fulfills her sexual and emotional needs not with her husband but with Twilight, soap-opera hunks, and Harlequins? And how does THAT differ from a husband who neglects his wife to concentrate on porn-fantasy Perfection? (Paging Charlie Sheen and his “goddesses”…)

    Somehow “I came that you may have Life, and have it more abundantly” doesn’t quite translate to “I came that you might ignore living your life for a continuous fantasy version of Me.”

    Like

  13. I’m curious as to what Catholic readers here think about this given the experience and writings of great saints like Bernard of Clairvaux, John of the Cross, Catherine of Siena, etc.

    I think you’re talking about “Bridal Mysticism”, a type of meditation or testimony where “Bride of Christ” gets taken individually and expressed in highly-erotic language, AKA “Thrust me through with Your Divine Love! Fill me with Thy Holy Spirit as with child!”

    While this may have been valid for the visionaries and mystics who originated it, once such imagery gets passed down secondhand, entropy sets in and “Rule 34” (Whatever it is, somebody’s turned it into porn) can easily come into the picture. Until the only difference between Christ and Edward Cullen is Jesus is HAWTer and has the Shekinah Sparkles. But other than that, the same emotional pornography approach and “Perfect Porn Star” dynamic where the Ideal obscures the Reality.

    Like

  14. Hi PL,
    Thanks for replying.

    I was thinking more of what I’ve read in the writings of the saints I mentioned (Bernard, John, Catherine as well as Teresa of Avila and others). I agree that there’s a difference, but at the same time, there at least appear to be some similarities, particularly when there is talk about consolations or experiential blessings that at time border on the sensual. I don’t equate the two at all in my own mind, but I wondered honestly if Catholic friends looked askance at some of those ideas or not or had a clear way of explaining how they were different from the Romanticism described here.

    Thanks again.

    Like

  15. Never mind “You Spin Me Round Spin Me Round Round Jeesus Round Round.” I mean, South Park‘s CCM episode wasn’t a parody, it was a DOCUMENTARY.

    “It’s easy to write Christian Rock — Just take 20-year-old pop songs and substitute ‘Jesus!’ for ‘Ooooo! Baby!’ They’ll never know the difference!” — Cartman

    I observed another branch of this phenomenon during my disasters with Christian Dating Services in the Nineties, but it wasn’t until Twilight fandom reared its fangirl head that I was able to put a name to it: “JESUS IS MY EDWARD CULLEN — SPARKLE SPARKLE SPARKLE SQUEEEEEE!”

    And there’s a corollary to it — according to some Web commentaries, “Jesus-Is-My-Boyfriend” CCM is VERY popular in the Gay Community — “Where else can you hear a man sing breathlessly-passionate for another man?”

    Like

  16. “When all you have is a hammer…”

    Or it’s some sort of Displacement Behavior reaction to The Impossible.

    Some Christians – even close friends didn’t know what to say or do. Some evangelized me like I never heard the gospel.

    Sounds like they had only One Way to relate to (1) Christians (TM) and One Way to relate/react to (2) Heathen (TM), and you were (3). So they went into a completely-automatic response. Since you weren’t (1), you had to be (2). Cue the doubleplusduckspeak…

    Like

  17. You have either taken my name in vain or said it three times (like Beetlejuice), so here I am! Wooooooot!

    (P.S. My real name is Ken; that’s why I use “Headless Unicorn Guy” on the web — more unique.)

    First of all, most American Evangelicals are not too keen on NPR to begin with. (“Secular”, “Godless Liberal”, and all that.) Regular morning drive-time radio here in Los Angeles doesn’t like it too much either, but that’s probably a matter of style — they sometimes do NPR parodies where they speak entirely in a quiet cultured monotone. And Grand Theft Auto: Vice City had a hilarious parody of NPR in their in-game VCPR radio channel — extremely full of themselves, constantly polishing their haloes about being “noncommercial” while always grubbing for money from their listeners between talk shows whose combination of guests usually went Jerry Springer in the first ten seconds.

    And yes, Martha, Christian (TM) Radio is worse. There’s a reason why years ago in local fandom, “Christian (TM) = Crap.” It seems to be endemic to the Evangelical Establishment out here, barricaded behind the walls of its Thomas Kincade-styles fortress with its Christianized(TM) knockoffs of pop culture so it can enjoy pop culture without ever having to actually meet or know any of Those Heathens. And one of many reasons we’re out here wandering the Post-Evangelical Wilderness with IMonk as our Moses.

    Like

  18. I saw an online article from NPR a week ago that confused the Navy ship I’m on with a WWII aircraft carrier, said we were based out of somewhere we aren’t, and said we were subordinate to a Marine Corps unit that is in fact subordinate to OUR chain of command . . .

    Just sayin’.

    Like

  19. Speaking as just one Catholic, I think the Church’s view of the mystical union between Christ the Bridegroom and us as his bride is more profound than a “Jesus is my boyfriend” approach. In fact, I’m highly uncomfortable with that imagery, because to me it diminishes the real meaning of Jesus uniting with his bride, especially through the Eucharist.

    Catholics believe that the bread and wine become truly the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus – and is how we abide in him and he in us. The sacrament is one of the ways God perfects us and brings us into holiness – not so that we can have Jesus as a “lover,” but how we can learn what it is to love as he loves.

    I frankly never have encountered the romantic view of Jesus in the Catholic Church (not that it might not exist in some places). Do you suppose it’s an offshoot of the “Jesus and me” approach in many evangelical churches? Catholics seem to be much less individualistic and much more corporate in their worship, with a particular emphasis on the communion of saints as part of the larger body of Christ.

    My two Catholic cents.

    Like

  22. Love the bit about going to church and listening as a non-Christian. It seems nigh unto impossible most of the time to get any Christian to step outside himself/herself and see the church as others see it. They complain that Muslim schools exist only to indoctrinate Muslim children, but can’t understand that non-Christians think the same about Christian schools. They want other faiths, or non-faiths, to respect our Christian beliefs while they don’t see a problem with someone burning the Koran. I cringed when I heard a seminary student say he just could not fathom how anyone could be an Atheist. I look at all the Christian marketing garbage, and sigh, because Bible Man or some Jesus theme park really make us look ridiculous to the non-Christian.

    As far as confessionalism goes, I appreciate the focus on what Jesus did for us, as opposed to the Jesus as my BFF/Main Squeeze model, but it has its own issues, too. Often, Jesus is where the message stops. Jesus died, rose, you’re going to heaven, case closed. But there is a whole lotta livin’ to be done here on this earth, and the church needs to address that, too, which, in my experience, too many confessional churches avoid. Your life stinks? Don’t worry. You’ll die and go to heaven. No job? Don’t worry. You’ll die and go to heaven. Abuse? Addiction? Tragic death? Wayward children? Don’t worry. You’ll die and go to heaven. I’m overstating, I know, but the mindset tends toward not discussing practical matters, because, heaven forbid, that might be too evangelical. Which brings us full circle to the theme of much of this post–that the evangelical circus is something far too many people do not want to visit.

    Like

  23. Belated self-correction:
    I may not always agree with Chuck Colson, but he is usually thoughtful, and worth listening to.

    Like

  25. “Lovingly subversive”! I love that phrase. It actually sums up how Jesus could be perceived in his dealings with the Established Way of Doing Things!
    Such a helpful paragraph, this. Thank you!

    Like

  26. It seems to me that your difficulty is that you are looking at evangelical churches to get back to. Go to one of those much-maligned mainline Protestant churches and your chances of avoiding praise bands and power point is much higher. It isn’t zero, alas. Many mainline congregations act as if they were Evangelical, in hopes of bringing in the bodies. A few even succeed, God help them. But many other congregations have resisted the urge. Look around. My suggestion is to try the Lutherans or the Episcopalians, but this is my own bias.

    Like

  27. It was also a rhetorical misstep. If you are writing a piece about some topic other than politics, keep politics out of it. Toss in a “NPR is stupid!” or a “Sarah Palin is a nut case!” and your readers have to stop and think about this, rather than whatever it is you are actually writing about. Even those who agree with you are distracted from your point, while those who disagree with you are put off, and less likely to consider seriously your actual argument.

    I wonder if, as Michael progressed in his post-evangelical thinking, his politics changed, or if he learned not to talk about politics. As someone decidedly not in the “NPR is stupid!” crowd (or to the extent that I am, it is for very different reasons) I would like to think the former. But that could be mere self-congratulatory bias.

    Like

  28. I think there is a sort of Romanticism that can be expressed by the perichoresis that we are brought into in the Trinity, but I have a feeling this isn’t what Michael is reacting against. There are many modern worship songs that could be turned into an average pop song by substituting the word “baby” wherever the word “Jesus” is used. Heck, some modern worship songs could be pop songs without any substitution – the song “Draw Me Close to You” comes to mind immediately. “Draw me close to you, never let me go”… I hate that song so much.

    Like

  29. Thanks mike for posting these great lines by the imonk. However, I struggle with how to present these ideas in a loving gracious fashion to those who still put a lot of stock in the circus. I’ve posted articles like this on facebook for friends and family and invariably I get people who say “That’s judgmental – how do you or that author know that God isn’t using this or that? We should be building up not tearing down…” and so they totally dismiss it or attack it as heresy.
    I kind of see their point and might even respond similarly if my ‘way’ of doing church was under the gun. I do find myself being too critical at times, but at the same time I can’t escape the feeling that american evangelicalism has suffered severely from a lack of tough love quality control – which is why I love the imonk so much – he had the guts to stand up and say – “That sucks! It should not be that way in our churches. Why are we doing this?”

    Like

  30. With respect to Romanticism and the Song of Solomon, I’m curious as to what Catholic readers here think about this given the experience and writings of great saints like Bernard of Clairvaux, John of the Cross, Catherine of Siena, etc. Obviously, they put a lot of stock in the imagery in the Song of Solomon as a model for individual growth/perfection and at times even talked about “shocking” consolations they had when meditating or communing with Christ. Do Catholics see those examples as something different from the Romanticism described here? Something perhaps along the same lines but with more (or less?) restraint? Perhaps my characterization of the above saint’s writings is incorrect, but I ask because my basic understanding is such that my question seems at least worth asking. I actually don’t think they’re the same thing, but on the surface they might seem to be.

    Like

  31. I can understand your frustration…and I don’t have a silver bullet fix advise for you either. I don’t believe starting yet another church is the answer. All I can give you is an idea of what I’m doing now in my situation. The analogy I think of is that of being ‘married and committed’ to a less-than-perfect spouse – God has called me to stick with this group for the foreseeable future – so I will..

    1. try to find good things to wholeheartedly support.

    2. try to build relationships with people – rather than with the church’s system.

    3. look for ways to be lovingly subversive – and trying to prepare myself for possible conflicts and/or hurt/rejection and coming back despite what people think. In other words, I don’t care if the whole church denounces me as some emergent liberal nut – I’m going to come back through those doors anyway and I’m going to try to love/relate with them anyway – the only way their going to get rid of me is to physically pick me up and dump me out (This has not occurred yet and I can only say this is my intention – I know it would be incredibly difficult, maybe impossible to actually care out but I’m going to try…)

    4. live a life that shows I’m excited about the kingdom of God and following Jesus and loving others but that is clearly not dependent on the evangelical entertainments, fads and hype (I am far from being where I should be in this area – but I believe it’s the key. What better way to undermine circus evangelicalism than by showing you don’t need it to bring forth fruits in your life and others.)

    Blessings and you’re not alone.

    Like

  32. Christian radio is a theological wasteland for the most part. There is a theological minimalism that exists while they have a conservative social/political view. For example, one can have a pastor who teaches that there is not a “trinity” but oneness theology but they can be against the most recent medical reform act. But if an another pastor teaches historic Christian faith that is both creedal and confessional but states that the same law is not anti-biblical, that pastor’s program may not remain on the radio.

    How often does one hear programs such as “Issues, ETC.” or the “Whitehorse Inn”. The first is program is a strong Confessional Lutheran program while the second is a strong Reformed/Reformation program.

    Like

  34. am I correct that most of these posts are pre-“coming Evangelical collapse”? I started reading the Imonk after that article & loved his writings while he was in the “post-evangelical wilderness”, but his writings before that I sometimes struggle with. He seemed to think Confessionalism & Calvinism could/would save Evangelicalism before throwing that away for “Jesus-shaped Spirituality”. Still, I enjoy his passion in writing.

    Like

  36. I think I agree with the Imonk here. There is too much viewing God as a school girl crush. But I think this is more about getting Agape Love confused with Eros Love. Actually I believe God’s Love is beyond expression.
    Romanticism is a hard thing to define. I’ve seen worse done by reductionism in Evangelicalism than Romanticism. Really there is just too many isms all together 😉 .
    CS lewis, George MacDonald, GK Chesterton, & NT Wright were/are influenced by Romanticism. I think their Romanticism could help the Evangelical community. peace & LOVE.

    Like

  37. I love the way Michael expressed so clearly much of what I have tried to express, but how do we know we are not just grumpy?

    Like

  38. Oh Chuck can I ever relate. Have been a member of an Evangelical Mega Church for almost 25 years. I hardly recognize it anymore. Finally threw in the towel a month or so ago after years of struggling to “stay with it” as you say. Have been attending a Lutheran Church and although I don’t agree with some of what they believe we have one great commonality and that is a focus on The Cross. The Lord brought me back to the cross in 2008 and I have been “centered” since then. Last week at a Lenten Prayer Service the pastor said that he didn’t think that we really understand the cross in our own lives. What would it look like? Well, for instance, he said how about putting aside ego?! I almost fainted. ALL the evangelical community has been about is ego. Who has the largest church, largest parking lot, loudest music, most popular worship leader, most book sales and on and on. I hope you can find a church where they help you get centered on the cross also. It’s not popular but it is TRUTH. Read Randy Alcorn’s “Safely Home”. You will never be the same.

    Like

  39. “I think Benny Hinn is sincere.” Very magnanimous. TBN is downright scary. Talk about something turned in on itself and feeding it’s own insanity. Don’t get me started.

    Like

  40. Like many, I too am struggling to stay with it. The church that I attend is a cookie-cutter evan church in the Bible belt. 40 minutes of loud, kickin music, a quick prayer and offering, a video testimony to show how much God is at work here at *** church, and finally a 30 minute sermon on the latest “how to do” or “how to be.” In all honesty it’s all I can do to stick it out. I don’t like being this way but I have few choices in this area. There are hundreds of churches around us but they are almost all the same. Once again, I don’t like this.

    Like

  41. “Most Contemporary Christian music makes me wish I was wandering in the Antarctic wastes.”

    Micheal didn’t just have a way with words, he had the discernment to observe and the courage to declare that American Evangelicalism has no clothes. Being one of the first to do so must have taken an added measure of courage. I have many friends who have left the faith because such evangelical nonsense made it impossible to remain with any self-respect. Had there been an iMonk at the time, perhaps they would have held on and fought like many are doing here – holding even the feet of Al Mohler, Ken Ham, and John Piper to the fire.

    Like

  42. A great collection of Micheal’s pertinent passages on the current Evangelical Wilderness.

    I especially like this passage:

    “…Romanticism cannot express the essence of the Christian life accurately or Biblically. Its usefulness as a way of describing the Christian life has been greatly exaggerated, and based mostly on a wrong reading of the Song of Solomon. The theme of the Bride of Christ is important in the New Testament, but it never resulted in expressions of romanticism in the life and worship of the church. Instead, images like the bride resulted in higher esteem for the church as a redeemed community, not a more personalized and emotional individual experience for the believer. Romanticism is not a significant Biblical expression of praise, certainly not worthy of becoming a regular part of our worship, prayer and communication of the Gospel. As understood and experienced today, romanticism is a flawed metaphor for delighting in and loving God.

    Like

  43. Eagle – Many people deal with lust. And on many different levels too I might add!! It’s not just you.

    The beautiful thing about grace and freedom in Christ is that it doesn’t matter what “they” say about why we aren’t in church. God knows our heart and He is the one that matters. He’s just more quiet in His dealings with us than “they” are.

    Like

  45. Great stuff!! I would just be a little harder on Benny Hinn!!

    Hinn is a charlatan. He is a deceiver. A greedy, apostate, fake healer & Holy Ghost magician. Yet he is not alone in this role or religious business supported by gullible, itchy-eared sheeple. It is a sad commentary on the spiritual health of the uber-charismatic & Pentecostal camps that promote, endorse, permit, share the stage with, emulate, or simply ignore the foolishness being passed off as ‘of God’ today. And the American marketing machine+economic climate in North America keeps him & his type supported in an obscene lifestyle.

    Hinn is only one type of religious carnival promoter selling his special brand of snake oil. Todd Bentley tried to build his own carnival empire doing similar stunts. And the Crowder/Dunn mental hospital escapees on mystical drugs makes me wonder where the young people following those metaphysical clowns will end up. What about the uber-prophetic types? Or how about the self-appointed Apostles? And even within that group there are those that wish to elevate & claim themselves as uber-Chief Apostles. Say what???

    These are not just the ‘crazy uncle’ types within the greater family of God. These are the Pied Pipers of Hamelin leading astray those enticed by other gospels…

    It is at a critical phase here in America. Wolves in sheep’s clothing tickling ears of sheeple ‘looking’ for something magical, mystical, mysterious manifestations with total disregard for the gospel & its good news requirement of death to self…

    Lord, please Lord, have mercy… 😦

    Like

  46. I know exactly what you are alluding to. Christians only have one way to think and if something happens outside that line of thinking..it’s like a deer in the headlight. They are confounded and stopped in their tracks. I went thorugh a spiritual crisis after being a fundy for 10 years and came out more of an agnostic. Some Christians – even close friends didn’t know what to say or do. Some evangelized me like I never heard the gospel. I was like “Come on who are you kidding!!”

    Like

  48. And that’s why Rebekah agnostics like me who deal with lust don’t belong in a church. It’s why my gay Bible study leader moved to the NE to get as far away from the Midwest as possible. And the continued defense of this theology with people saying, “well the Bible says that he wants to sin which is why he leaves…” when in reality most don’t know my heart ultimately means that I won’t step into a church again. A wounded, broken person belongs in a church in the same way someone who is Jewish belongs in a Concentration Camp. Who are we kidding?

    Like

  49. Kenny, I think this speaks about what Michael had against Christian radio, not NPR. Assuming he wasn’t too keen on NPR at the time, this is pretty telling.

    For Martha, who still has no idea what we go through over here: YES, Christian radio is that bad. And NPR (National Public Radio, sometimes called National People’s Radio by the Right) is the closest thing we have to the BBC. In fact, their news is often from the BBC (Much as I love NPR, I would sooner call it National Petroleum—not People’s—Radio, judging by the ads that begin with “This program is made possible in part by a grant from…” ).

    Mike, this is quite a seditious collection of “Sayings from Chairman Michael”. Thanks!

    Now I’m waiting for Headless Unicorn Guy to check in…

    Like

  53. Church growth pragmatists…it’s in the beginning of the paragraph where the abbreviation is used, but not clearly connected with it.

    Like

  54. It’s always great reading when you let loose with Michael Spencer himself. I miss him.

    Maybe I missed something in there, but what is CGP? The only thing I can think of is Church of God of Prophecy, and I don’t think Michael was referring to that particular group.

    Like

  55. That question came to my mind as well. I find that NPR is generally more intelligent than most other radio, be it secular or Christian.

    Like

  56. Great stuff. I sure miss Michael’s voice and have appreciated the remembrances here this week. He hit the nail on the head much more often than most.

    Been looking to get back into church recently and went to a “new” service started by a friend at an evangelical church, supposedly different and aimed at people uncomfortable with evangelical church or burned out by it. I couldn’t see the difference. Praise band? check. Youthful worship leader with spontaneous shallow commentary? check. Powerpoint? check. Lots of repititious upbeat music performed? check. Zero liturgical elements? check. The sermon was fairly good, but I had to endure so much else to get to it I’m not sure it was worth it. Even a potluck afterward.

    I think sometimes evangelical can’t help it. They just dont’ know any other way to be.

    Like

  57. National Public Radio IS (!) “downright intelligent.”!!!
    Generally, Christian radio is, to put it mildly as one who loves understatement, somewhat less so.

    Like

  58. It was this type of article that drew me to the Boar’s Head Tavern and the Internet Monk several years ago. Michael was not afraid to cast stones — we all know he had many cast back at him — but sometimes the easiest targets are the ones closest to us. We all know weird, fanatical Christians. We may have ever been (or may still be) one. Miss you, Michael. Chaplain Mike, keep posting these old writings of Michael Spencer.

    Like

  59. “Christian radio, for the most part, makes NPR look downright intelligent. ”

    What did Michael have against NPR?

    Like

  60. I’ve recently begun to realize the extent to which gnosticism has infected Christianity in general, and evangelicalism in particular. It is, ultimately, the underlying issue behind our antipathy towards sound theology and the reason for CCM’s “Jesus is my girlfriend” dreck.

    Thank you, CM, for posting Michael’s insights on this valuable subject.

    Like

  61. I have to admit that I have had some difficulties with your column in the past, but your current choice of articles is right on. You start out comparing Jan Crouch’s hairdo to the Tower of Babel, and it just gets better and better.

    Like

Leave a comment