The coming evangelical collapse
What follows is an article from The Christian Science Monitor. It is adapted from a series of blog articles by Southern Baptist Michael Spencer. The articles appear in full form on his blog InternetMonk.com .
While my articles on the unbalanced and unbiblical shepherd dominated leadership culture with its toxic values come at the issue for a different perspective, Spencer is saying things very similar to what the Lord is saying to me.
When I found this stuff on Spencer's blog, I wrote an email to Evelyn and said, "This guy is saying what I'm seeing. The Charismatic-Pentecostal Christianity thing is what I'm working toward--small 'c'."
(More about that small 'c' at a later time.)
This was Evelyn's faithful and insightful reply: "I have felt this coming for a long time. I am not surprised nor am I concerned. What we have in America is not “church” but people playing at church. Remember, the communists caused the greatest underground group of growth in Christianity. God is in control of HIS church!"
Gang,
I believe that what Spencer says has a lot of truth in it. Evangelicalism--led by its Shepherd Mafia--is on its last legs. Spencer says, "Evangelicalism doesn't need a bailout. Much of it needs a funeral." He also says that the collapse of evangelicalism may be, in many ways, a good thing. He says, "Despite all of these challenges, it is impossible not to be hopeful."
But not hopeful for today's evangelicalism.
Evangelicalism is about to collapse. I believe that with all my heart. But, I am not sad, nor am I discouraged. The Lord is doing just fine. With all our failures in the Western Church, Christianity remains the fastest growing religion worldwide. Our little problems are not going to change that.
And, those of us who passionately seek the Spirit and eschew the traditional ways of the Shepherd Mafia will do just fine, hence Evelyn's enthusiasm.
But, in my opinion, the cGgc may very well be the among the first to go in the collapse. I'm on the ERC Renewal Commission. Scores of our 140 or so churches are teetering. Do they have ten years left? More than a few have no more than one to two. It would not surprise me to see a significant number no longer exist in ten years.
And, in terms of what matters to the Lord: Actual KINGDOM things, more than half of our churches are either dead or have only fleeting signs of life.
This is all the more reason for us to heed Fran's call and to get together and start preparing for the day when the CGGC is just a shell of its current self. Then we won't have to fight the Mafia. We'll have all the energy. We'll have the organization. We'll have the apostolic/prophetic leadership in place. We'll be ready to rebuild this part of the Kingdom from its ruins.
Yeah. What Spencer says fits what's going on in my neck of the woods.
Does he have to be correct about the future? Of course not. But, there will have to be repentance soon. The ways of the Shepherd Mafia are going to have be set aside and we are going to have to allow apostles and prophets to lead us.
We'll see...
-----------------------
Oneida, Ky. - We are on the verge – within 10 years – of a major collapse of evangelical Christianity. This breakdown will follow the deterioration of the mainline Protestant world and it will fundamentally alter the religious and cultural environment in the West.
Within two generations, evangelicalism will be a house deserted of half its occupants. (Between 25 and 35 percent of Americans today are Evangelicals.) In the "Protestant" 20th century, Evangelicals flourished. But they will soon be living in a very secular and religiously antagonistic 21st century.
This collapse will herald the arrival of an anti-Christian chapter of the post-Christian West. Intolerance of Christianity will rise to levels many of us have not believed possible in our lifetimes, and public policy will become hostile toward evangelical Christianity, seeing it as the opponent of the common good.
Millions of Evangelicals will quit. Thousands of ministries will end. Christian media will be reduced, if not eliminated. Many Christian schools will go into rapid decline. I'm convinced the grace and mission of God will reach to the ends of the earth. But the end of evangelicalism as we know it is close.
Why is this going to happen?
1. Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism. This will prove to be a very costly mistake. Evangelicals will increasingly be seen as a threat to cultural progress. Public leaders will consider us bad for America, bad for education, bad for children, and bad for society.
The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can't articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith.
2. We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we've spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it.
Our young people have deep beliefs about the culture war, but do not know why they should obey scripture, the essentials of theology, or the experience of spiritual discipline and community. Coming generations of Christians are going to be monumentally ignorant and unprepared for culture-wide pressures.
3. There are three kinds of evangelical churches today: consumer-driven megachurches, dying churches, and new churches whose future is fragile. Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.
4. Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself.
5. The confrontation between cultural secularism and the faith at the core of evangelical efforts to "do good" is rapidly approaching. We will soon see that the good Evangelicals want to do will be viewed as bad by so many, and much of that work will not be done. Look for ministries to take on a less and less distinctively Christian face in order to survive.
6. Even in areas where Evangelicals imagine themselves strong (like the Bible Belt), we will find a great inability to pass on to our children a vital evangelical confidence in the Bible and the importance of the faith.
7. The money will dry up.
What will be left?
•Expect evangelicalism to look more like the pragmatic, therapeutic, church-growth oriented megachurches that have defined success. Emphasis will shift from doctrine to relevance, motivation, and personal success – resulting in churches further compromised and weakened in their ability to pass on the faith.
•Two of the beneficiaries will be the Roman Catholic and Orthodox communions. Evangelicals have been entering these churches in recent decades and that trend will continue, with more efforts aimed at the "conversion" of Evangelicals to the Catholic and Orthodox traditions.
•A small band will work hard to rescue the movement from its demise through theological renewal. This is an attractive, innovative, and tireless community with outstanding media, publishing, and leadership development. Nonetheless, I believe the coming evangelical collapse will not result in a second reformation, though it may result in benefits for many churches and the beginnings of new churches.
•The emerging church will largely vanish from the evangelical landscape, becoming part of the small segment of progressive mainline Protestants that remain true to the liberal vision.
•Aggressively evangelistic fundamentalist churches will begin to disappear.
•Charismatic-Pentecostal Christianity will become the majority report in evangelicalism. Can this community withstand heresy, relativism, and confusion? To do so, it must make a priority of biblical authority, responsible leadership, and a reemergence of orthodoxy.
•Evangelicalism needs a "rescue mission" from the world Christian community. It is time for missionaries to come to America from Asia and Africa. Will they come? Will they be able to bring to our culture a more vital form of Christianity?
•Expect a fragmented response to the culture war. Some Evangelicals will work to create their own countercultures, rather than try to change the culture at large. Some will continue to see conservatism and Christianity through one lens and will engage the culture war much as before – a status quo the media will be all too happy to perpetuate. A significant number, however, may give up political engagement for a discipleship of deeper impact.
Is all of this a bad thing?
Evangelicalism doesn't need a bailout. Much of it needs a funeral. But what about what remains?
Is it a good thing that denominations are going to become largely irrelevant? Only if the networks that replace them are able to marshal resources, training, and vision to the mission field and into the planting and equipping of churches.
Is it a good thing that many marginal believers will depart? Possibly, if churches begin and continue the work of renewing serious church membership. We must change the conversation from the maintenance of traditional churches to developing new and culturally appropriate ones.
The ascendency of Charismatic-Pentecostal-influenced worship around the world can be a major positive for the evangelical movement if reformation can reach those churches and if it is joined with the calling, training, and mentoring of leaders. If American churches come under more of the influence of the movement of the Holy Spirit in Africa and Asia, this will be a good thing.
Will the evangelicalizing of Catholic and Orthodox communions be a good development? One can hope for greater unity and appreciation, but the history of these developments seems to be much more about a renewed vigor to "evangelize" Protestantism in the name of unity.
Will the coming collapse get Evangelicals past the pragmatism and shallowness that has brought about the loss of substance and power? Probably not. The purveyors of the evangelical circus will be in fine form, selling their wares as the promised solution to every church's problems. I expect the landscape of megachurch vacuity to be around for a very long time.
Will it shake lose the prosperity Gospel from its parasitical place on the evangelical body of Christ? Evidence from similar periods is not encouraging. American Christians seldom seem to be able to separate their theology from an overall idea of personal affluence and success.
The loss of their political clout may impel many Evangelicals to reconsider the wisdom of trying to create a "godly society." That doesn't mean they'll focus solely on saving souls, but the increasing concern will be how to keep secularism out of church, not stop it altogether. The integrity of the church as a countercultural movement with a message of "empire subversion" will increasingly replace a message of cultural and political entitlement.
Despite all of these challenges, it is impossible not to be hopeful. As one commenter has already said, "Christianity loves a crumbling empire."
We can rejoice that in the ruins, new forms of Christian vitality and ministry will be born. I expect to see a vital and growing house church movement. This cannot help but be good for an evangelicalism that has made buildings, numbers, and paid staff its drugs for half a century.
We need new evangelicalism that learns from the past and listens more carefully to what God says about being His people in the midst of a powerful, idolatrous culture.
I'm not a prophet. My view of evangelicalism is not authoritative or infallible. I am certainly wrong in some of these predictions. But is there anyone who is observing evangelicalism in these times who does not sense that the future of our movement holds many dangers and much potential?
• Michael Spencer is a writer and communicator living and working in a Christian community in Kentucky. He describes himself as "a postevangelical reformation Christian in search of a Jesus-shaped spirituality."
This essay is adapted from a series on his blog, InternetMonk.com .
9 Comments:
It's interesting to read Spencer's article, because I've been telling people for several years that evangelicalism is headed for fragmentation at the least, and possibly for shrinkage we can barely imagine at the moment.
I don't think we can control these forces of change-- they are bigger than us. What we can do is ask how we follow Jesus and portray Jesus ourselves, and in/through our churches. I just keep coming back to Hirsch's statement that the renewal of Christianity in our day will require a return to the primitive Christology of the early Christian movement. I'm tired of doctrines and institutions and narrow-minded "Christians"-- I want to follow Jesus, and help people become new men and women in him, rather than convert them to a religion Jesus didn't come to start.
My wife (Jane) was just reminding me last night of when we heard Lance Ford say, "Love Jesus and do what you want."
At first we were both a little unsure of what that might lead to. "Is there such a thing as too much grace," we wondered. But if you think about it, if you love Jesus, won't you be doing what he wants?
Perhaps the failure of the evangelical empire will lead us back to the simplicity of a gospel like that.
Personally, I think that would be a great slogan for our denomination: Love Jesus and do what you want! :)
Interesting article. I worry little about it. The chaff will burn off sooner or later. Mild persecution is good for the authenticity of the church.
My prediction is that it's the middle that will drop out of evangelicalism. While many 'mega-churches' are vacuous and catering to materialism, they are certainly not all this way. I think of Mars Hill (Mark Driscoll), Mars Hill Bible Church (Rob Bell) Newspring (Perry Noble) and many others. These are all megachurches and while the megachurch has its drawbacks, the megachurch is home to many sincere evangelicals and is reaching young adults like crazy.
I believe that some sort of much smaller, easily reproducible church networks will also grow.
Interestingly, I believe that both the megachurch and the organic networks are led by apostolic leaders (with somewhat different visions)
The churches that will face the biggest challenge are the 'small' to medium sized churches. (60-200) read: most of our churches.
I may be wrong...we'll have to wait and see.
bill (and spencer through you),
i'm very much with this article, especially,
2. We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we've spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it.
this is what i see tons of on college campuses. young Christians who have no idea what's going on or how to deal with issues Biblically because they aren't "being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine" (1 Tim. 4) that is at the heart of living in the Way. that's one of the reasons why the reformed resurgence is so big: it's the first taste that many young Christians have had of solid, exegetical teaching, and they love it because of the Spirit in them who wrote the Text being expounded upon.
fran, i'm confused. you say your tired of "doctrine"? isn't that just another word for teaching or systematic belief, which is what we hold to? if you mean assenting to intellectual knowledge without heart and life change, then i'm right with you; truth is meant to be lived out. but isn't good doctrine what we're commanded to teach (cf. Acts 20, 1 Tim. 4)?
dan h.,
i love the new slogan, and the understanding of wanting what Jesus wants when we really love Him. sounds great.
God bless you, brothers.
Walt… Can you picture Jesus sitting down and penning a statement of 18 fundamental truths? I do realize my statement about being tired of doctrine was cryptic, unexplained, and could be scary to some. And I am not opposed to some systematic expression of truths—I am Trinitarian, and hold to particular views concerning grace, etc. But I am also convinced that the post-reformation LOVE of doctrine is far more Greek and modern Enlightenment love than it is a Hebrew one… and I think the Hebrew thinking centered in the heart and expressed through the life, is more whole. I agree with what Walt said, that for many young Christians, the exegetical teaching of some of the newer reformed expressions is attractive because they have not previously been offered substantive biblical teaching. But if we don’t take them into a way of seeing that resonates with the way Jesus speaks of it, those young Christians, like many protestants before them, will find themselves with right beliefs but not the mysterious and profound life of God. I was reminded by one of my elders last night of Jesus’ words: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life” (John 5:39-40).
fran, i think we're on parallel, if not the same, line. it's easy to have a big head full of ideas, to know about God, but not the know God. i was wrestling through this with a friend recently, talking about what it means to "test yourself, to see if you are of the faith", to "make your calling and election sure", to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling". as he said it, "believing something in your heart will transform your actions, your life."
over and over i see Biblically that truth is meant to be lived out, and what you're talking about, "thinking centered in the heart and expressed through the life [being] more whole" is right on the mark with the idea of shalom; that wholeness and completeness that far surpasses our word, peace.
i want to be wary in our "postmodern" age of the strange idea that doctrine and theology are only the realm of dead orthodoxy, rather than the feul for worshiping God and living for Him. i see orthodoxy and orthopraxy and doxology as inseparable links in a chain, that right thinking leads to right living, which both lead to praising God. so pardon me if i jump a bit when you say you're tired of doctrine; i hear that too often in a much stronger sense, and that worries me.
Fran says,
"...I've been telling people for several years that evangelicalism is headed for fragmentation at the least, and possibly for shrinkage we can barely imagine at the moment.
"
I've been seeing it, too, for a long time but, honestly, I think I've been trying to hype myself into a state of denial.
Last night I began to muse over the question:
Is it accurate even to say that John Winebrenner was a Protestant?
And, as some of walt's earlier questions imply, there is good reason to think that John Winebrenner was not a Protestant.
To use walt's terms, Winebrenner's view of revelation can't really be described as sola scriptura. It was, more accurately solo scriptura.
Winebrenner's rejection of Baptism and the Lord's Supper as sacraments and his insistence that feet washing is a Scriptural ordinance place him outside of the Protestant box.
His emphasis on the necessity of a clearly defined moment of conversion to so great a degree that he argued that one didn't need to participate in the ordinances if he was born again does to sola fidei what his extreme emphasis on the authority of Scripture does to sola scriptura and turns it into solo fidei.
Asking the question another way:
If Winebrenner'd started his movement in the 1520s and not the 1820s would the Lutherans and Zwinglians have tried to hunt him down to burn him at the stake?
From what I can tell, he was more radical than the Anabaptists, who at least believed in Creeds. (Consider 1527's Schleitheim Articles)
So, yeah. He'd'a really seriously miffed the Protestants. They wouldn't have looked kindly on him.
In others words, there's very good reason to conclude that John Winebrenner was not a Protestant.
If that's true and Evangelicalism is merely Protestantism translated into 20th century modernism, then if we are Winebrennerian, we may not be Evangelical.
bill,
can you explain a little more what you mean by "His emphasis on the necessity of a clearly defined moment of conversion to so great a degree that he argued that one didn't need to participate in the ordinances if he was born again does to sola fidei what his extreme emphasis on the authority of Scripture does to sola scriptura and turns it into solo fidei."?
walt,
Just to let you know that you have a lot of good comments floating around on the blog that I have not responded to. I'm not sure if I'll ever catch up on everything that we're discussing.
In reference to the 'solo fidei' thing, there's a passage in Kern's book on Winebrenner that treats that part of Winebrenner's thinking. I'm diggin that up now. I'll have more on it later. For now, as I recall, Winebrenner strongly emphasized that there are three acts of worship commanded by Jesus and that they are ordinances, not sacraments but that all a person need do to be a disciple is be born again.
Winebrenner was very, very radical in more ways than one.
Give me some time, though, to develop a better informed statement. It's been decades since the last time I thought through this part of Winebrennerianism.
Post a Comment
<< Home